J · .

E R Z Y
l�O NI l�OWS I� I
.
,,..
��
 Modern Benoni

Four Pawns Attack

Jerzy Konikowski

English Translation

Paul Janicki

1987

Coraopolis, Pennsylvania

Chess Enterprises, Inc.

© Co p yri g h t 1987 by Chess Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved .

ISBN 0-931462-71-1

Editor: B. G. Dudley

Typesetting and Diagrams: Paul Janicki

Cover Design: E. F. Witalis, Jr.

Witalis-Burke Associates
Pittsburgh, PA
 PREPACE

The Modern Benoni i s a popul ar defens ive system , frequently

empl oyed in the contemporary tournament praxi s . I t is one of
the asymme t r i cal systems where both s i des have attacking and
counterattack ing opportuniti es at thei r disposal . Those char­
acter i s t i c s , in fact. are very appeal i ng to those p l ayers who
thrive on comb i nati onal and tacti cal mot ives .
The devel opment of thi s open i ng saw the cont r i butions of such
famous modern grandmasters as F i s cher , Tal , G l i gor i c , Korch­
noi , Najdorf , Ti 111Dan , Suet i n , Psakh i s and many other s . Thi s
open i ng i s al so part o f the opening repert o i r e of the r e ign ing
worl d champion Gary Kasparov ; h i s i mpres s i ve vi ctory over
Korchno i at the 1 982 O l ymp i ad in Lucerne is a memorabl e tr ib­
ute to thi s defens ive sys tem .

Modern Benoni : Pour Pawns Attack

1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 c5 3 d5 e6 4 Nc3 exd5 5 cxd5 d6
This p l an of development for Bl ack was ori ginal l y proposed by
the American grandmas ter Frank Marshal l at the New York tour­
naaent o f 1 9 2 7 . B l ack intends to r ap i d l y complete b is K i n;­
s ide devel opment ( g6 , Bg7 , and 0-0 ) , and then control Whi te s
central act i vi ties by pos t i ng h i s Rook on ea . Subsequent ly ,
depending on the further p l ay of h i s r i val , Bl ack w i l l coun­
terattack on the Queens i de o r i n the center , or l aunch a K i ng­
s i de assau l t .
White , i n turn, bas many di fferent s trategies ava i l able to
him; i ndeed, he d ictate s which system or var i a t i on wi l l be
empl oyed. For that reason , the proponents of the Modern Ben­
oni mus t be very f am i l i ar wi th al l the poss i bl e pl ans and
strategies .
In thi s volume the reader wi ll acquaint h i mself with a sharp
sys t em whi ch invo lve s a pawn storm in the center .
6 e4 g6 7 f4 1 ?

White has a spatial advantage i n the center , and presently

threatens the dangerous thrust e4-e5 , whi ch wi l l force h i s
riva l on the defens ive . However , Black has var i ous counterat­
tack i ng poss i b i l i t i es, even though he is required to proceed
very accurate l y . The modern open i ng theory assesses this at­
tack as l ead ing to comp l i cated and o f ten v i o lent play w i th
chances for both s i des . The autho r has based t h i s book on
actual tournament play, the analys i s of many d i s t i ngu i shed
adepts of t h i s topi c , as we l l as his own experi ences .
Dortmund 1987 Jerzy Konikowski ,
F I DE master
 TABLE 01' COHTBHTS

Preface 3

I ntroduct i on 5

Chapter 1 : l d4 Nf6 2 c4 c5 3 d5 e6 4 Nc3 exd5 5 cxd5 d6

6 e4 g6 7 f4 Bg7 8 e5 dxe5 6

Chapter 2 : l d4 Nf 6 2 c4 c5 3 d5 e6 4 Nc3 exd5 5 cxd5 d6

6 e4 g6 7 f4 Bg7 8 e5 Nfd7 11

Chapter 3 : l d4 Nf6 2 c4 c5 3 d5 e6 4 Nc3 exd5 5 cxd5 d6

6 e4 g6 7 f4 Bg7 8 Bb5+ Nfd7 17

Chapter 4 : l d4 Nf 6 2 c4 c5 3 d5 e6 4 Nc3 exd5 5 cxd5 d6

6 e4 g6 7 f4 Bg7 8 Bb5+ ( other repl i e s ) 31

Chapter 5 : l d 4 N f 6 2 c 4 c5 3 d 5 e6 4 N c 3 exd5 5 cxd5 d6

6 e4 g6 7 f4 Bg7 8 Nf3 0-0 9 Be2 Re8 35

Chapter 6: l d4 Nf6 2 c4 c5 3 d5 e6 4 Nc3 exd5 5 cxd5 d6

6 e4 g6 7 f4 Bg7 8 Nf3 0-0 9 Be2 44

Chapter 7 : Il l ustrat i ve Games 50

Game 1: Yuneyev - Varl a.mov , Leningrad 1982 50
Game 2: Barczay - Sauermann , correspondence 1 984 51
Game 3: Lacha - Yerman , correspondence 1 983 52
Game 4: Pjket - Horvath , Groningen 1984/85 53
Game 5 : Zai chik - Elves t, Tal l inn 1981 54
Game 6 : Tal - Vel imi rovic , Mos cow 1 982 55
Game 7: Bagi rov - Mal aniuk , Baku 1983 56
Game 8: Kouat l y - Hul ak , Tol uca 1 98 2 57
Game 9: Kasparov - Nunn , Lucerne 1 982 58
Game 1 0: Ree - Kul ak , Wijk aan Zee 1983 59
Game 1 1 : Kasparov - Ku ijpers , Dortmund 1 980 60
Game 1 2 : P . Littl ewood - Norwood , London 1 985 60
Game 1 3 : Vai ser - Be l ov , USSR 1 983 61
Gue 1 4: Rogers - Kr i s tiansen , Thessal oniki 1 984 62
Game 1 5 : Meduna - Sax , Bail e Herculane 1 982 64
Game 16: Chri s t i ansen - Ghitescu , Thessal oniki 1 984 65
Gue 17: Wi tkowski - Joks i c , Scauri Latina 1 98 1 65
Game 18: Opl - Age r , Ranshofen 1984 67
Game 1 9 : Hovde - S choppmeyer , correspondence 1983 68
Ga•e 2 0 : Kouat l y - Lobron , Rovi nj 1 980 68

Index of Var i ations 70


1 d4
2 c4
3 d5
4 Nc3
5 cxd5
6 e4
7 f4
This i s the critical position
of the system analyzed in
this volume. White can now
conduct his assault in three
di fferent ways , whi ch wi l l be
presented in the following
order:
Chapter 1: White p r o c eeds
with 8 e5, whi ch i s a l s o
known as the Mikenas Varia­
tion. In t h i s chapter Black
exchanges the c entral pawns
by 8 . dxe5, generally lead­
. .
ing to difficult pos i ti o n s as
White can util i z e his c e ntral
pawn mass.
Chapter 2 : In reply to 8 e5
Black immediately retre at s
h i s Knight by 8 . . Nfd7. .
line of p l ay d e m ons trates
DfTRODUCTIOH
Nf6 that Whi t e ' s forcin� play is
c5 not devoid of r isk in view of
e6 the vulnerable p osit i o n of
exd5 his K i n g .
d6 Chapter 3: Whi te disrupts the
g6 natural coordination of the
8g7 Black pieces and prepares the
the•atic t hrust e4-e5 by 8
Bb5+. This continuation,
pioneered by the Soviet
grandmaster Taimanov, is
partic u l ar ly co ..on in •odern
praxis and Black's 8 .. Nfd7,
.
which is p res ented in this
chapter , is the best reply.
Chapter f: As a continuation
of the theme involving 8
Bb5+, this chapter deals with
Black's l e s s popular r eplies .
Chapter 5: 8 Nf3 o-o 9 Be2
overlaps with the Four Pawns
Attack in the King's Indian
Defense, but the pawn struc­
ture and the m i ddleg ame
char a c ter s uggest that this
po s i t i on i s better suited for
an analys i s within the
framework of the Modern Ben ­
oni. . 9. Re8, Black's •ost
.
co11111on rep ly i s presented
,
in this ch apter .
Chapter 6 : A follow-up on
the pos i ti on analyzed in
Chapte r 5, whereas Black
refrains fro• the popular
rep l y 9... R e8 .
Chapter 7: This is a collec­
tion of twenty •odern games
fro• •aster practice, de•on­
strating the applicable open­
i ng play pri nciples and stra­
This tegies which were out l i ned in
the previous chapters .
 CHAPTER ONE
1 d4 Nf6
2 c4 c5
3 d5 e6
4 Nc3 exd5
5 cxd5 d6
6 e4
7 f4 rg7
8 e5
Other moves at Whi te's d i s ­
posal a r e 8 Bb5+ ( Chap ter
3-4 ) and 8 Nf3 ( Cha pt er 5-6) .
8 dxe5
8 .. . Nfd7 , whi ch i s equa l l y
common , w i l l b e presented i n
Chapter 2 .
9 f.xe5 Nfd7
Aga i n s t 9 . . . Qe7 M i kenas pro­
poses 10 Nf3 0-0 11 Bg5 h6 1 2
Bxf6 Bxf6 13 d6 Qe6 14 Qd5
Bxe5 15 Nxe5 ( 1 5 Qxe6? Bxc3+ )
15 . . . Re8 1 6 0-0-0 Qxe5 1 7
Bc4 , when Whi te has the upper
hand.
Simi lar l y , 9...Ng4 10 Bb5+
Kf8 11 e 6 is unp l e asant for
B lack .
9 . . . Nh5 , on the other hand,
aft er the further 1 0 Bb5+ Bd7
( Intere s t i ng is 10 . . . Kf8? 11
Nf3 Bg4 12 0-0 Bxe5? 1 3 Nxe5!
Bxdl 14 Bh6+ Kg8 15 Nxf7 ! Qe7
16 d6 Qxf7 17 Bc4 and Wh i t e
wins ) transposes to a var i a­
t i on ana l yzed in Chapter 4
Secti on B .
10 e6 fxe6
11 d.xe6
11 Nf3? , witnessed in the
game Carenkov - Kapengut ,
Minsk 1 9 8 1 , i s i nferi o r , as
11 . . . 0-0 12 dxe6 Qe 7 13 Be2
Nb6 1 4 Bg5 Qxe6 1 5 0-0 Nc6 1 6
Nb5 Rb8 f ound Black w i th an
extra pawn .
The ensui ng sharp pos i t i on
favors Whi te , which has been
demonstrated t i me and again
i n tournament praxi s . It is
true that the e6-pawn often­
t imes falls , but Whi t e ' s lead
in deve l opment and the activ­
i ty of his p i eces wi l l f u l l y
compensate the sma l l materi a l
def i c i t .
Black now has the followi ng
conti nuat i ons at h i s d i sposal :
A: 11. . . Qe7
B: 11. .. QM+
c: 1 1 ...Bxc3+
D : 1 1 . . . Nf6
Addi t i onal ly , there a re sev­
eral moves whi ch l ack prac­
t i cal app l i cat i on . On 11 . . .
Nf8 Mikenas s ugge s t s 12 Nb5
Qxd l + 1 3 Kxdl Nxe6 1 4 Bc4 Na6
(14 ... Nc6 15 Bxe6 Bxe6 1 6
Nc7+ Ke 7 1 7 Nxa8 Rxa8 gives
Black enough for the Ex­
change , but Whi t e can avoi d
th i s by play i ng 15 Nf3 ) 1 5
Nf3 and Whi te , b y threate n i n g
16 Re l , s e i zes the i nit i a ­
t i ve .
An i ntere s t i ng pos s i b i l i ty i s
11 . .. Ne51? , f or example , 1 2
Qxd8+ Kxd8 13 Bg5+ Kc7 !
( 1 3 . . . Ke8? loses to 1 4 Nd5)
14 Nd5 + Kc6 15 Ne7+ Kc7 1 6
Nxc8 Rxc8 ! ( Avo iding 16 . ..
Kxc8? 1 7 0-0-0 Nbc6 1 8 g3 Nd4
19 Bh3 Nf5 20 Ne2 h 6 21 Bf4
Re8 2 2 Bxf 5 gxf 5 23 Rd5 Rxe6
24 Rxc5+ Rc6 25 Rxc6+ Nxc6 26
Rdl , whi ch is advantageous
for Wh i te ) 1 7 0-0-0 Nbc6 with
a good game for B lack .
Whi t e , however, can dev i at e
f rom this l i ne with 1 2 Be3 ! ? ,
when both 1 2 . . . Bxe6 13 Bxc5

and 12.. . Qxdl+ 13 Rxdl Bxe6
14 Nb5 offer hi• good pros­
pects.
A: 11 Qe 7
12 Nd5 1
The gaae takes on a different
character after 12 Be2!?:
a) 12...Nf6 13 Bf4 Bxe6
(13. .. Qxe61? also co•es into
consideration since 14 Nb5
0-0 15 Nc7 Qe4 gives Black a
lot of counterplay. Hence
White must avert this by
playing 14 Nf31 with active
play for the pawn) 14 Bd6 Qd8
15 Qa4+ Kf7 16 Rdl Nbd7 17
Nf3 h6 18 0-0 Bf8 19 Ne4!
wi t h a decisive attack on
Black's King (Kampenus -
Kirillov, Riga 1955).
b) 12...Nb6 13 Bf4 Bxe6 14
Nf3 Bc4 15 0-0 Bxe2 16 Nxe2
0-0 (Kapengut believes that
after 16 ...Nc6 17 Rel 0-0 18
Bd6 Qe3+ 19 Khl Rfe8 20 Nf4
Qf2 White has yet to prove
the soundness of his pawn
sacrifice. However, instead
of 1 7 Rel, White has the pow­
erful 17 Bg51 with good at­
tacking prospects after both
17 . Qd7 18 Qb3 and 17. .. Bf6
• .
18 Bx f 6 Qxf6 19 Nfd4!) 17
Bd6 Qe3+ 18 Khl Rd8 (18...
Rf5!) 19 Nf4 Qe4? (Necessary
was 19 ...Qe8 or 19... Nc6 20
Rel Qxf4 21 Bxf4 Rxdl 22
Raxdl Bxb2) 20 Ng5 Qc6 21
Qb3+ (21. ..c4 22 Qh3), 1-0,
Lputian - Mageraaov, Riga
1980.
12 Qxe6+
I n Mike nas - Klukin, Lenin­
grad 1971, Black unsuccess­
fully tested another contin­
uation : 12. .. Qh4+ 13 g3 Qe4+
14 Qe2 Qxd5 (14. ..Qxhl 15
exd7+ + Kxd7 16 Nf3 Re8 17 Be3
favors White) 15 exd7++ Kxd7
16 Bg2 Qf7 (Against 16 ...Qe5
Suetin r eco••ends 17 Be3 Qxb2
18 Rdl+ Kc7 19 Bf4+ Kb6 20
Qxb2 Bxb2 21 Rbl with a deci­
sive win of material) 17 Qb5+
Nc6 18 Bf4 Re8+ 19 Ne2 Bd4 20
0-0-0 when t he Black King
must succumb.
13 Qe2 1
Whi te has n othin g to gain
fro• 13 Be2 Na6 14 Nf3 Nb6 !
Chapter 1: 8 e5 dxe5
13 Qxe2+
14 Bxe2 0-0
15 Nc7 Nc6
16 Nxa8 Nb4
The critical position which
will decide the evaluation of
this variation.
17 Nf31?
Theory considers this to be
the best. 17 Rbl? is cer­
tainly inferior because after
17 ...Ne5 Black gains an enor­
aous advantage by threatening
18 ... Bf5. However, 17 Kdl ! ?
aerits a serious considera­
tion, e.g.:
a) 17... Ne5 18 Bd2 Rd8 (Or
18... Nbd3 19 Bxd3 Nxd3 20 Nf3
Nf2+ 21 Ke2 Nxhl 22 Rxh l Rf7
23 Bc3 b6 24 Rdl, etc.) 19 a3
Nbd3 20 Bxd3 Nxd3 21 Ke2 Bg4+
22 Nf3 when White retains his
material gains.
b) 1 7 . . .Nf6 18 a3! Rd8+ 19
Bd2 Ne4 20 axb4 Nxd2 21 Rxa7
Ne4+ 22 Kel Bxb2 23 Bc4+ Kg7
24 Ne2 and Black has no co•­
pensation for the l o s t mate­
rial.
It can be concluded that the
continuation 17 Kdl!? de­
serves a practi cal test.
17 Nc2+
18 Kdl Nxal
19 Bc4+ Kh8
20 Rel a6
The game Lputian - Mageraaov,
Bielcy 1979, s aw the errone­
ous 20 . . .Nf6? , when 21 Nc71
Rd8+ 22 Bd2 Bh6 (22. .. Bf5 23
Ne6 Bxe6 24 Rxe6 also favors
White) 23 Ne6 Bxe6 (Forced in
view of 23.. . Rd6 24 Neg5!) 24
Rxe6 Ng4 25 Kcl Bx d2+ 26 Nxd2
proved good for White.
Chi burdani dze and Guf e l d rec­
oamended 20 . . .Nb6 ! ? 21 Nxb6
8 C h apter 1 : 8 e5 dxe 5

axb6 2 2 Re7 , where Wh i te ' s Bc4+ Kh8 21 R e l ? because of

active Rook c ompens a tes the 2 1 . . . Rxf3 ) 1 8 . . . Ne5 1 9 Bd2
l o ss of a pawn . Rd8 20 a3 Nbd3 21 Bxd3 Nxd3
22 Ke2 Bg4+ 23 Nf3 (23 Kfl
21 Be8 Rf8+ 24 Kg2 Rf2 # ) 23 . . . Ne5
w i ns for B l ack .
2 1 Nc7 ! ? see•s to be s t rong­
er . 13 bxc3 Qe4+
14 Qe2 Qxe2+
21 Ne5
22 Rxe5 Capturi ng the Rook loses by
force to 15 exd7++ Kxd7 1 6
22 Nxe5 wou l d fai l to 22 . . . Bh3+ . 1 4 . . . Nf6, o n the other
Bxe61 hand, fails t o 15 Qxe4 Nxe4
16 Bg2 .
22 Bxe5
23 Bxc8 Rd8+? 15 Bxe2

Boles l avsky o ffered 23 . . . A feas i b l e a l t e r nat ive i s 1 5

Rxc8 ! 24 Nxe5 Rxa8 25 Bd2 Rf8 Nxe2!? N f 8 1 6 N f 4 ( Or 1 6
26 Nf3 Kg8 2 7 Bc3 g5! with Bg2 ! ? Nc6 17 R b l Nxe6 1 8 0-0
counterplay. Neda 19 Nf4 Rf8 20 Re l Rf7 2 1
Bh3 Re7 22 Nd5 Rf7 23 Rb2 Kf8
24 Bd2 Bxb2 2 4 Bh6+ Kg8 25 Rbe2 Bd7 26
25 Nb6 BK'J Bxe6 Nxe6 27 Rxe6 with adva n ­
28 Bd7 tage - Kapengut ) 16 . . . Nxe6 1 7
Bc4 Nxf 4 1 8 Bxf4 Bf5 1 9 0-0
Shershevsky - Semenyuk, Vi l ­ ( 1 9 0-0-0! is a l s o poss ib l e )
nus 1 974 . The co mp l i c a ted 1 9 . . . Nc6 20 Radl h5 21 Bd6
pos i t i o n i s s l i ght l y better Rh7? ( B l ack should sett l e on
for Whi t e . 21 . . . o-o-o, a l th ough 22 Rxf5 !
Rxd6 23 Rxd6 gxf 5 24 Be6+
B: 11 Qb4+ gives Whi te the better end­
12 lr3 ga11e ) 22 Rfe l + Kd8 2 3 Bxc5+
'=t 'ji;i.,,i , It. rt,fifJ,,&.,, '.Qif 'lilt Rd7 24 Bd6, whe n White has
a.21 .1LrrP iii" :J/£-! a
··. ·

won b ack the pawn while re­

�t•�· �t tain i ng the superior posi­
t i on , Mi l eyka - Barvik , R i ga
,,
�
m .4:>
f!Zt .!1 t�<»x 1 968 .
'(� . .
&';if; � • • 15 Nf8
. . . � On 15 . . . Ne5 White has 16 Nf3
£2<" " ,. I"�
¥11# � • �� Nxf3+ 17 Bxf3 Nc6 1 8 Bd5 with
ft�� • • �� a c l ear advantage.

'� �� ,, .aif'.)§ .

12 Bxc3+
12 . . . Qe7 ! ? 13 Bh3 Bxc3+ 14
bxc3 Nf8 15 Ne2 Bxe6 1 6 Bg2
res u l t s in very sharp play.
White i s down a pawn , but h i s
B i shop pair i s part i cularly
strony in the open pos i t io n .
Whi te s attempt to transpose
to l ines analyzed in Se c t i on
A woul d backfire because of
the weakening o f the hl -a8
d i agonal . Hence 1 3 Nd5? (In­
stead of 13 Bh3 ) 13 . . . Qxe6+
1 4 Qe2 Qxe2+ 15 Bxe2 0-0 16 White has a s t rong i n i t iative
Nc7 Nc6 17 Nxa8 Nb4 1 8 Kdl in s p i te o f s impl i f i cati ons
( 1 8 Nf3 is i l logical now and the "weak" e6 -pawn .
s i nce after 18 . .. Nc2+ 1 9 Kdl
Nxal Wh i te cannot play 20 16 e7 1
 Chapter 1: 8 e5 dxe5 9

The game Mi kenas - Po l ugaev­ W �· It.. ti{fff/ � r.&.. ·e··

.... ... .EL '.#f0! ;A· -e- i�
I

.t:t•i• •i
sky , Mos cow 1955 , saw i ns tead
16 Nf3 1 ? Nxe6 17 Bh6 Nc6 18
0-0 Bd7 1 9 Ng5 Nxg5 20 Bxg5
• •ttifiit:•
••• ,.
h6 2 1 Be3 0-0-0 22 Bxc5 with
a slight edge for Whi te. if;JIX.
�� -
,.,.
f..&::- JX/-"
I ns tead o f 17 Bb6 , M ikenas
sugges t s the s tronger 17 0-0 , • • • •
e . g . , 1 7 . . . o-o 18 Bh6 Re8 1 9
Ne5 ! til r11 4Jlil
"" -
.:f1 ••�
"' • 4- . !}4)
..:!..!.
�;-�:{%llli
16 Ne6
§ ��� r#J§
16 . . . Kxe7 wou l d encounter 1 7 B l ack is up a pawn , but h i s
Bg5+ Kf7 1 8 Nf3 Nc6 1 9 0-0 Kg7 pos i t i on i s di f f i cul t . White
20 Bb5 Ne6 21 Be3 Bd7 22 Radl has the Bishop pair , whi ch i s
Bea 23 Ng5! with a strong an extreme ly important factor
i n i t i ative. i n open pos i t i ons . Add i t i on­
all y , the dark-square complex
17 Mf3 Nc6 i n front of the Black K i ng has
18 0-0 h6? been weakened by the absence
of the Bishop which was t raded
Essential was 18 . . . Kxe7 . for the Kn i ght on c3 . Never­
the l e s s , caution is requi red
19 Bc4 of Wh i t e . Lagl and - Sostrom ,
20 Ba3 corr 1977 , now s aw the r i s ky
21 Rael 1 5 Ng5?! , and after 15 . . . Qe7
16 Qd5+ Kh8 17 Bb2 c4 1 18 Rfl
Bl ack faces a d i f f i cu l t de- Nf6 Black had good counter­
fens ive task . 21 . . . Kxe7 , for chances due to the White King
ex1111p1 l e , wi l l encounter 2 2 be i ng trapped in the center .
Nd4 1 Ncxd4 2 3 cxd4 wi th a
strong attack along the open 15 0-0 1 Nb6
f i l es ( Partos - Z uodar ,
Ascona 1976) . 1 5 .. . Nc6 16 Ng5 , played i n
Stein - Pazz , Beverwi j k 1964 ,
C: 11 Bxc3+ also gave White good attack­
12 bxc3 Qe7 i ng prospect s .
13 Be2
16 Bh6 ReB
Another poss i b i l i ty is 13 Nf3 , 17 Ng5 1 Qe3+
wh ich should revert to the
main l ine after 13 . . . Qxe6+ 14 Unfortunate l y the B i shop on
Be2 . e2 is t aboo in light o f the
8th rank weaknes s ( 17 . . . Qxe2??
13 Qxe6 18 Qxe2 Rxe2 19 Rf8 mate ) .
Against 1 3 . . . Ne5 bes t i s 1 4 18 Khl Be6
Nf3! ( The game Mil eyka Zu­
- 19 Nxh7 1 Qxh6
ravlev , Riga 1962 , saw the 20 Nf6+ Kh8
dub ious 1 4 Qa4+? ! , with good 21 Nxe8 Nc6
prospects for Bl ack after 22 Nc7 Rd8
1 4 .. . Nbc6 1 5 Bh6 Bxe6 16 0-0-0 23 Qel Bf5
Bd7 1 7 Qf4 c4 1 8 Kb2 0-0-0! ) 24 Rdl
14 . . . 0-0 ( On 14 . . . Nxf3+ 1 5
Bxf3 Qxe6+ Whi te gains dec i ­ Petersen - Shershenev , Riga
s i ve advantage by playing 16 1 964 . Black has no compensa­
Kf2 0-0 1 7 Bh6 ) 1 5 Nxe5 Qh4+ tion for the Exchange.
16 g3 Qe4 17 Rfl Rxfl+ 1 8 Kxfl
Qhl + ( 18 .. . Qxe5 loses to 19 D: 11 .. . Nf6
Qd8+ ) 19 Kf2 Qxh2+ 20 Kf3 Nc6 12 Qxd8+
21 Ng4 and Whi te wins ( Ras­
t i an i s - Fi l i powi cz , Warsaw The s imp l e s t way to secure a
1 9 7 7) . good pos i t i on . Mi kenas recom­
mended 12 Bc4 Qxdl+ 13 Kxdl
14 Nf3 0-0 Nc6 1 4 Nf3 Na5 15 Bb5+ Ke7 1 6
10 Chapter 1 : 8 e5 dxe5

Rel but Wh i t e ' s edge is l e s s 16 Nb31

pronounced here .
1 2 Bb5+ was tes ted i n Gumerov The Whi te p i eces qu i ckly and
- Z e l n i ca, corr 1 974 , but decisively jo i n the action.
after 12 . . . Nc6 1 3 Qe2 Qe7 1 4
Nf3 0 - 0 1 5 Bc4 Re8 1 6 Ng5 Nd4 16 Re8
17 Qf2 h6 18 0 - 0 Rf8 ! ( No t ·

18 . . . hxgS? 1 9 Bxg5 Rf8 20 Nd5 Unfortunate l y Black has no

with a d i f f i c u l t game for t i •e to develop the Queen­
Bl ack ) 19 Nf7 Bxe6 2 0 Bxe6 s ide . If 1 6 . . . Nc6 , 17 Nf4
Qxe6 21 Nxh6+ Bxh6 2 2 Bxh6 Nd4 1 8 Nxe6 Nxe6 19 Bc4 Rhe8
Ng4 ! 23 Qh4 ( 23 Qxf8+? Rxf8 24 20 Rhf l w i ns qui ck l y . Simi­
Rxf8+ Kh7 25 Bd2 loses to lar l y , 16 . . . Bxh3 i s met by 17
25 . . . Qd6 ) 23 . . . Nxh6 24 Qxh6 Bc4+ Kf8 18 gxh3 with the
Nf5 the pos i tion was equal . dec i s ive threat of Rhf l .
12 Kxd8 17 Nf4 Bf5
13 8g5 Bze8 18 Bc4+ Kf8
14 0-0-0+ Ke7 19 Rze8+ Nxes
15 Rel Kf7 20 Rfl l Bf6
It is i •possi b l e to de fend
against both g4 and Ne6+ .
21 Bxf6 Nzf6
22 Ne6+

Kuz•in - Espi g , Z i nnowit z

1971. 2 2 . . . Bxe6 woul d lose to
23 Rx f 6 + a n d any K i ng move
wi l l a l l ow 23 Nc7 . B l ack
resigns .
 CHAPTER TWO
1 d4 Nf6
2 c4 c5
3 d5 e6
4 Nc3 exd5 •
5 cxd5 d6
6 e4 g6
7 f4
=�7
8 e5
B l ack •aintains the central
tension, hoping to exp l o i t
the vulnerable,pos i t i on of
the enemy K i ng . Thi s con­
t i nuati on has fared better
than the central exchange on
e5 , whi ch was analyzed i n
Chapter 1 .
9 Nb5
Whi l e 9 Ne4 woul d transpose
to the Main Line , other op­
t i ons include :
a) 9 e6 , when B l ack's cho i ce
consist s of :
al ) 9 . fxe6 1 0 dxe6 Nb6
. .
( 1 0 .. . Nf6? ! is i nferi or be-
cause of 1 1 Bc4 ! Nc6 12 Nf3
a6 13 Ng5 Qe7 14 0-0 0-0 1 5
f5! Ne5 1 6 Nd5 Nxd5 1 7 Bxd5
Rxf5 1 8 Rxf5 gxf5 19 Qc2 with
advantage , Neuk i rch - Golz ,
DOR 1 963 ) 1 1 Ne4 0-0 1 2 Qxd6
Qxd6 13 Nxd6 Bxe6 14 Nxb7
Na4 ! 15 Nf3 Nd7 1 6 Bb5 Nxb2
1 7 Rbl Rab8 with an approxi ­
aately even game ( Mileyka -
Aexon , R i ga 1959 ) .
a2 ) 9 . . . Qe7 1 0 Be2 fxe6 1 1
dxe6 Bxc3+ 1 2 bxc3 Qxe6 1 3
Nf3 0 - 0 1 4 Ng5 Q f 6 (Better i s
1 4 . . Qe7 ) 1 5 Ne4 Qh4+ 1 6 g3
. 13 Ng5 Nf6 14 Qc2 h6 1 5 Nh3
Qe7 17 Nxd6 Nc6 18 0-0 Nf6 19
Bc4+ Kg? 20 Rel Qc7 2 1 f5!
when Wfiite has a s t rong at­
tack ( M i l eyka - Sandler , Riga
1980 ) .
a3 ) 9 . Nf6 10 Bb5+ Kf8 11
. .
Bc4 ( A viable a l ternat i ve i s
1 1 f51? gxf5 12 Nf3 fxe6 1 3
dxe6 Bxe6 14 Ng5 Bg8 15 0-0
h6 16 Rxf5 ! ? hxg5 1 7 Bxg5 Be6
18 Rf4 a6 19 Qf31 when it is
d i f f i cu l t for B lack to parry
the enemy threats , Butnor i us
- Vo l ovi ch , Vi l nus 1 967 )
1 1 . . . fxe6? I ( Better i s 1 1 . .
.
Na6 fo l l owed by . ..Nc7 ) 12
dxe6 Nc6 13 Nf3 Na5 1 4 Bd5
Nxd5 15 Qxd5 Nc6 16 Ng5 Nd4
17 f51 and the pos i t i on of
the B l ack K i ng is untenabl e
(Muller - Vasilescu , corr
1 96 7 / 68 ) .
b ) 9 exd6 0-0 1 0 Nf3 Nf6 1 1
Be2 (1 1 Ne5? ! i s dubi ous on
account of 1 1 . . . Nbd7 12 Be2
Nxe5 1 3 fxe5 Nd7 14 e6 fxe6
15 dxe6 Qh4+ 16 g3 Bxc3+ 1 7
bxc3 Qe4 1 8 Rgl Qxe6 with
good chances for Bl ack , Mi ­
kenas - Shcherbakov , Sochi
1 9 6 1 ) 1 1 . . . a6 ( Correct i s
1 1 . . . Ne8 ! wi th the further
. . . Nxd6 when the pos i t i on i s
equa l ) 1 2 a 4 Qxd6 13 Ne5 b6
14 0-0 Ra7 15 Bf3 Re7 16 Qb3
and Wh i te has a good gr i p on
the center (Podolny - Vas i l ­
chuk , USSR 1 956 ) .
c ) 9 Nf3 0-0 1 0 Be2 (Or 1 0
Bd3 dxe 5 1 1 0-0 f 5 1 2 Ng5 Nb6
13 fxe5 Bxe5 14 Qf 3 Bf6 1 5
Qh3 c 4 with comp l i cated play
in Ho l l i s - Bredewount , Eng­
l and vs Ho l l and 1 964 ) 1 0 . . .
dxe5 1 1 0-0 a6 1 2 a4 exf4 1 3
Bxf4 Nf6 1 4 h 3 Nh5 1 5 Bh2 ,
produc i ng a compl ex pos ition
where White ' s act i vely posted
p i eces and the s trong d-pawn
shou ld compensate the def i c i t
of a pawn ( Kris t i ansen -
Ho lm , Denmark 1 9 77 ) .
9 dxe5
10 Nd6+ Ke7
Obje c t i ve ly the s trongest
move , which forces Wh ite to
dec i de on his p l ans for the
Kn i ght . Les s act i ve i s
1 0 . . . Kf8 because o f 1 1 Nf3
(Not 1 1 Nxc8 Qxc8 12 Nf3 e4
Nxd5 16 Qxe4 Qe81 1 7 Qxe8+
Kxe8 18 Bc4 Nb4 and B l ack has
no probleas , Minev - Popov,
Bulgar i a 1 963 ) 1 1 . . . h6 (The
game Barkhatov - Vas i l ev ,
Mos cow 1964 saw B lack prevent
12 Chapter 2: 8 e 5 Nfd7
Ng5 by 11 . . . f6 . There fol­
lowed 12 Nxc8 Qxc8 13 fxe5
Nxe5 1 4 Nxe5 Qe8 15 Bf 4 fxe5
16 Be3 b6 17 Bc4 h6 18 d6 Nd7
19 0 -0+ Bf6 20 Bb5 Kg7 2 1 Qf3
e4 22 Qh3 and Whi te won
easi l y . 1 1 . . . exf4 was tes ted
in Mohring - Jut t l e r , corr
1963 , but after 1 2 Bxf4 Nf6
13 Bc4 Qe7+ 14 Ne5! Bf4 1 5
Qb3 N fd7 1 6 o-o B l ack s
s i tuat ion was hope l ess) 1 2
Be2 f 5 13 fxe5 Nxe5 1 4 Nxc8
Qxc8 15 0-0 and Wh i te ' s
pos i t i on i s def i nitel y worth
the pawn , G l iks•an - Kosan­
sky , Yugo s l avia 1972 .
Whi t e can now proceed:
A : 11 Nxc8+
B : 11 Nb5
The encounter Kava l ek - Trapl ,
Czechos l ovaki a 1 963 , saw in­
stead 11 fxe5?! Nxe5 12 Nxc8+
Qxc8 13 d 6 + Kf8 1 4 Nf3 Qe6 1 5
Nxe5 Bxe5 1 6 Be2 Kg7 1 7 0-0
Nc6 1 8 Bg4 Qxd6 ( 1 8 . . . !5 ! is
even s tronger t han the text
move) 19 Qb3 and now the
straightforward 19 . . . Rhf8 1 20
Qxb7 Rab8 woul d favor Black .
In the gaae, however, B l ack
erred with 19 . . . Qc7?? losing
qui ckly after 20 Rxf7+! Qxf7
21 Bh6+ .
A: 11 Nxc8+ Qxc8
White can now choose between :
Al: 1 2 d6+
A2: 12 Nf3
Al : 12 dB+
Whi te prevents the harmoni ous
12 . . . Re8 , but now B l ack w i l l
be able t o optimal l y deve lop
h i s Kni ght by . . . Nc6 .
12 ... Kf8
13 Nf3
13 Nc8
The strongest repl y . The
game Maffeo - Pastor, USA
1 973 , varied with 13 . . . e4 ! ?
l eading to i nteres ting � l ay
wi t h chances for both s ides :
14 N �5 h6 15 Nxf7 ! ? ( A spec­
u l at i ve but consequent dec i­
s i on . Partos - Hol m , Skopj e
1972 , s aw instead 1 5 Nxe4?
Qe8 1 6 Qe2 Nc6 17 Kf2 Bd4+ 1 8
Kg3 Kg7 with a very dif f i c ult
game f or Whi te ) 1 5 . . . Kxf7 16
Bc4+ Kf8 17 f5 g5? ! ( Larsen ' s
1 7 . . . Nc6 ! ? m i ght make it d i f ­
ficul t f o r Whi t e to j us t i fy
the piece sacr i f i ce ) 18 Qd5
Ne5? ( Essent i a l was 18 . . . Qe8 !
19 Qxb7 Nb6 20 Be6 N8d7 ) 1 9
f6 ! Bxf6 2 0 0-0 Kg7 2 1 Rxf6 !
Kxf6 22 Bxg5+ ! Kg6 ( Or 22 . . .
hxg5 2 3 Rfl+ Nf3+ 24 gx f3 wi th
unavo i dabl e m ate ) 23 Qxe5 hxg5
24 Rfl Rf8 25 Qxe4+ Kh6 26 Bf7
and Wh i t e mates .
14 Be2
The open i ng theory d i s counts
1 4 Bc4 on account o f 1 4 . . .
Nb6! , c i ti ng the game Baum­
bach - Po lugaevsky , Bad L i e­
benste i n 1963 , where after 1 5
Bb3 e 4 1 6 Ne5 Nxe5 1 7 fxe5 c 4
1 8 Bc2 Qf5 1 9 e 6 Qxe6 2 0 0-0
Rd8 B l a c k s e i zed the i ni t i a­
t i ve .
However , the game B i shop -
Begl i n , corr 1 973 , demon­
strate d that White has other
attacking opt ions . Undoubt ­
edly B l ack 's p l ay can be i m­
� roved upon , but Wh i te ' s p l an
is n ot eas i l y refuted : 1 4 Bc4
Nb6! 1 5 Ng5 ! ? Nd4? ( 1 5 . . . h6
woul d encounter 16 Nxf 7 Nxc4
17 Nxh8 Bxh8 18 fxe5 with the
unpl easant threats o f 1 9
Bxh6+ and 1 9 0-0+. However ,
stronger is 15 . . . Nxc4 16 Qd5
Qd7 1 7 Qxc4 Nd4 when the

doubl e-edged pos i t ion o ffers
chances for bo th s i des . Af­
ter the text aove Whi t e con­
ducts a dec i s i ve attack ) 16
Bxf7 h6 17 0-0 ! Qf5 1 8 fxe5
Qxe5 19 Bxg6 + Bf6 20 Qh5 Kg7
21 Bh7 ! Qe8 22 Nf7! , 1 -p .
2 2 . . . Qxf7 a l lows 2 3 Qxh6 aate
and 22 . . . Rxh7 is aet by 23
Bxh6+ Kg8 24 Rxf6 .
14 h6
Bl ack could also return the
pawn lmaed i ate ly by 14 . . . e4 ! ?
to improve the coordination
of his pi eces, for examp l e ,
15 Ng5 h6 16 Nxe4 Bd4 with
the further ...Kg7 .
Another possibi l i ty i s 1 4 . . .
Nd4 ! ? , tested in P i s hk i n -
B l ekhts i n , Leningrad 1974 .
There fo l l owed 15 0-0 e4 1 6
Ne5 ( More l og i c a l i s 1 6
Ng5! ? ) 1 6 . . . f6? ( A l l owing
Whi t e to s e i z e t h e ini t i a -
t i ve . On 16 . . .Nxe5! 1 7 fxe5
Bxe5 o r 1 7 . . . Qe6 Wh i te has
yet to prove that he has any­
thing for the sacr i f i ced ma­
t e r i a l ) 17 Be3l fx e 5 18 fxe5+
Ke8 1 9 Bxd4 cxd4 20 e6 Qc5 2 1
exd7+ Kd8 22 R e l Qxd6 2 3 Rf7
Bh6 24 Bg4!, 1-0 . Whi te
threatens 25 Rc8 + , and after
24 . . . Bxc l 25 Qxc l B l ack can­
not defend aga i ns t both Qc8+
and Qg5+ .
15 fxe5 Ndxe5
16 0-0 Nxf 3+
17 Bxf3 Bd4+
18 Khl
�re
19 Bd5
Less promi s i ng i s 19 . . . f6?!
20 Qb3 Rb8 21 Be6 Qd8 22 Bf4
Ne5 ( Better i s 22 . . . Be5 ! ? ) 23
Qd5 with go od prospects for
Whi te , Si lberberg - Tan i n ,
corr 1 967 .
20 Bf4
Not 20 Qd2 g5 , when Wh i te has
no aeans to fue l h i s att ack
( 2 1 h4? Qg4 ! ) .
20 Qd8
21 Qb3 g5
( See di agr a111 next column )
The d i agrallle
lll d pos i t i on i s
cons i dered better for B l ack .
Indeed , the game G i ps l i s - K .
Chapter 2 : 8 e 5 Nfd7 13
1,11� ill Sl •
;�i• ;•t�
. -��I '�,g .
••llQ.•
�¥ H ?£¥J
a ;J!I!· oo •.
•.M.• .�· •
• g. r&mr&! rmII.
.ft?� • ..fttl
5� .§ �-rlh
:�
'B
•
• %%B &'G'
Grigorian, K i s h i nev 1964 ,
proceeded 22 Bg3? ! Qb6 23 Qf3
f5 24 Rae l f 4 and B l ack had
the upper hand .
Howeve r , White can i mprove
h i s chances wi th 22 Qxb7! ?
Thi s aove does not win for
Whi te , but it forces B l ack to
p l ay accurat e l y , becaus e af­
ter 2 2 . . . Na5 23 Be5 + ! Bxe5 24
Rxf7+ Kg6 ( 24 . . . Rxf7 loses
qui ckly to 2 5 Qxf7+ Kh8 26
Bxa8 Qxa8 27 d7 ! ) 2 5 Be4 + Kh5
26 Bf3+ Kg6 ( 26 . . . g4 is aet
by 27 Qe4 ! Qg5 2 8 Bxg4 + 1 Qxg4
29 Qxe5 + when both 29 . . . Qg5
30 g4+ and 29 . . . Kh4 30 Qf6+ ,
f o l lowed by 31 Rxf8 , win for
Wh i t e ) 27 Bh5 + ! Kxb5 28 Qf3 +
g4 ( Or 28 . . .Kg6 29 Qf5+ Kh5
30 g4+ Kh4 3 1 Qg6 ! l eading to
mate ) 29 Qf5+ Qg5 30 Rxf8
Rxf8 31 Qxf8 Q f4 {3 1 . . . Qf6 32
Qe8 + Kg5 33 d7 Nc6 34 Rel ! )
3 2 Qxf 4 Bxf 4 33 d7 Nb7 34
Re l l B l ack has a very d i f f i ­
c u l t pos i t i on .
Correct i s 22 . . . gxf4 23 Qxc6
Rc8 24 Qa6 Be5 ( 24 . . . Be3 i s
e qual l y s trong ) 2 5 Bb7 (25
Radl Qxd6 ) 25 . . . Rb8 2 6 Radl
Qb6 2 7 Qxb6 axb6 28 Bc6 Rfd8 ,
when White has a s l igh t edge
but the op pos i t e color Bi shop
prevent him f rom making any
headway .
A2 : 12 Nf3
14 Chapter 2 : 8 eS Nfd7
12 Re8
B l ack must remember that h i s
centra l l y l o cated K i ng can
eas i ly fall under pres sure ,
e.g . , 12 . . . e4? 1 3 NgS Res 1 4
d6+ Kf8 l S Nxf 7 ! when both
15 . . . Kxf7 1 6 Bc4+ Kf8 17 QdS
and 1 S . . . Nc6 1 6 NgS h6 1 7
Bc4 ! hxg5 1 8 hxgS are un­
pleasant for B l ack .
13 fxe5
Other aoves invo l ve the im­
aediate development of the
B i shop:
a) 13 Be2 Kf8 14 0-0 e4 1 5
NgS Bd4+ ( The game Me insohn -
Podz i e l ny , Groningen 1 9 74/7S ,
saw instead 1S . . . h6 1 6 f5 ! ?
hxgS 1 7 fxg6 Nf6? 1 1 8 BxgS
Qd8 19 Qb3 Nbd7 20 BbS Res 2 1
Qg3 RxgS wi th coapl ex pl ay.
However , instead of 17 . . .
Nf6?1 , Larsen proposes 17 ...
NeS! with an exce l l ent pos i ­
t i o n ) 16 Khl N f 6 1 7 Bc4 QfS
1 8 Qe2 Nbd7 19 d6 e3 ! with a
great pos i t i o n for Bl ack
(Youngworth - Shi raz! . Los
Angeles 198 2 )
Nb6 f13
'
b) 13 Bc4 . . . Kf8 i s
analyzed i n I I us trat ive Game
1 , Yuneyev - Var l amov ) 14 BbS
( Or 1 4 d6+ Kf8 lS BbS Nc6 1 6
0-0 Kg8 1 7 fxeS BxeS 1 8 NxeS
RxeS 19 Bf4 with good attack­
ing chances accord i ng to Tai­
manov ) 1 4 . .. Rd8 lS 0-0 Rxd5
16 Qe l Kf8 ( I nteres t i ng i s
1 6 . . . e4 ! ? 1 7 Qxe4 + Kf8 1 8 Be3
wi th unc lear p l ay . 16 . . . c4 ,
on the other band subj ects
Bl ack to a s t rong attack , for
example , 17 fxe S RxbS 18 Qh4+
Kf8 19 Qxh7 Nc6 20 Bh6 Bxh6
21 NgSI or 17 . . . Kf8 18 Qh4
KES 19 Ng5 hS 20 Nxf7 RxbS 2 1
8 6 6 1 with powerful threats )
1 7 fxeS Nc6 1 8 Bxc6 Qxc6 1 9
Qh4 Kg8 20 NgS h5 2 1 Nx f7 Rf8
22 Bh6 Rd4 ( On 2 2 . . . Rxf7 23
Rxf7 Kxf7 24 Rfl+ Kg8 2S Bxg7
Black cannot p l ay 25 . . . Kxg7
because of 26 Qe7+ w i th a
soon aate ) 23 Qf2 Qe6 24 Bxg7
Rxf7 2S Bf6 NdS when the
chances are equal ( Mikenas -
Sue t i n , Erevan 1962 ) .
13 Nxe5
The game Sobek - Hardi csay ,
Ostrava 1979, saw instead
1 3 .. . Kf8!? whi ch also l ed to
equa l i ty . There fo l l owed 1 4
e6 ! ( On 1 4 Bb5 Bl ack can play
14 . . . c4 or 14 . . . a6 ) 1 4 . . .fxe6
lS Be2 ( 1 5 d6? ! , p l ayed i n
Vukovi c - Petros i an , Bar
1980, i s infer i or because
1 5 . . . Kg8 16 Bc4 Nc6 1 7 0-0
• Nb6 18 Bb3 Nd4 with an edge
for B l ack ) lS . . . exdS 1 6 0-0
Nf6 17 Ng5 Qc6 18 a4 ( Hardi c­
say p r efe r s 1 8 Bb5 1 ? Qxb5 19
23
Nxh7 + Kg8 ! 20 Nxf6 + Bxf6 2 1
Qxd5 + Kg7 2 2 Bg5 Nd7 Rxf6 1
Nxf6 24 Bxf6+ Kxf6 25 R f l + ,
wh i ch results in a perpetual
check ) 18 . . . c4 19 Nxh7+ Kg8
20 Nxf6+ Bxf6 2 1 Rxf6 Qxf6 2 2
Qxd5+ Qf7 23 Qxf7+ Kxf7 24
Bxc4+ Kg7 25 b4 Nc6 26 Bb2 +
Kh6 27 Ra3 and Whi te , in
spite of bei ng down the Ex­
change , managed to dr aw the
game due to good coordi nat ion
of h i s p i eces .
14 Bb5 Nbd7
15 Nxe5
On lS 0 -0 ! ? Bl ack aus t p l ay
1S . . . Kf8 , trans p o s i ng to the
Mai n L i n e . 1 S . . . a6? was
tried in L i tt l ewood - Povah ,
England 1 9 7 S , but after 1 6
NxeS BxeS 1 7 d6+ ! Kf8 ( 1 7 . . .
Bxd6 loses to 18 QdS ) 18 QdS
Bd4 + 19 Kh l N f 6 20 Bh 6 + Kg8
2 1 Rxf6 1 Wh i te is wi nning .
Othe r repl i e s to lS 0-0!? are
also i nadequate , for examp l e ,
1S . . . c4 16 Be3 Ng4 1 7 d6+ ( Or
17 NgS Nxe3 18 Rxf7+ Kd8 1 9
Qd2 with a n attack ) 1 7 . . .Kf8
18 Bd4 or 1 S . . Nxf3+ 16 Qxf3
.
NeS 17 BgS+ Kf8 18 Qf2 with
good prospects for Whi te in
both instances .
15 Kf8 1
15 . . . Bxe5 1 6 0-0 l eads to a
good game for White :
a) 16 . . . Qc7 1 7 Qg4 ! Kd6 1 8

Rx f 7 Bd4+ 1 9 Khl Ne5 20 Rf6+
Kxd5 21 Qe2 c4 ( 2 1 . . . Rf8?? 22
Bc4+ 1 leads to mate ) , Sher­
shevsky - Kapengut , Minsk
1974 , when 22 Bf4! woul d have
given Whi te a s t rong attack .
b) 1 6 . . . c4 1 7 d6+ Kf8 18 Bh6+
( A . Petr o s i an - Kapengut , -
Yaros l av 1 9 75 , saw ins tead 1 8
Qd5 Qc5+ 1 9 Qxc5 Nxc5 2 0 Bxe8
Kxe8 21 Re l Nd3 22 Bf4 Nxe l
23 Rxe l f6 24 Bxe5 fxe5 25
Rxe5+ Kd7 26 Re 7 + Kxd6 27
Rxb7 wi th a drawn Rook end­
game) 1 8 . . . Kg8 19 Qd5 Qc5+ 2 0
Qxc5 Nxc5 21 Bxe8 Rxe8 2 2
Rael �ith advantage according
to Kapengut.
c ) 16 . .. Kf8 1 7 Qf3 f5 18 g4
Bd4+ (Or 18 .. . a6 19 gxf51
axb5 20 fxg6 + Ke7 21 Bf4 1 and
White has the upper hand -
Kapengut ) 1 9 Khl Ne5 20 Qg2
Rd8 21 gxf5 Kg7 22 Bg5 R d 6 2 3
Rae l R b 6 24 Bf4! when Whi t e
h a s a c l ear advantage , Rajko­
vic - P l aninc , Majdanpek
1976 .
18 o-o Rxe5 1
16 . . . Bxe5 would ehcounter 1 7
Qf3 , transpos i ng t o the game
Rajkov i c - P l aninc shown
above. After the text move
17 Qf3 is not at a l l effec­
tive because of 17 ... Rf5!
17 Bf4
The cri t i cal pos i t ion of the
var i ation .
17 c4 1
The bes t reply accord i ng to
modern theory . Other aoves
are:
a ) 17 .. . a6 1 8 Bxe5 Bxe5 ( Or
18 ... Nxe5 1 9 Be2 c4 20 Khl
Qc5 21 Qd2 Rd8 22 Rfdl b5 23
a4 b4 24 Rael with advantage ,
Chapter 2 : 8 e5 Nfd7 15
Sosonko - Jakobsen , Barcel ona
1 9 7 5 ) 19 Bxd7 Qxd7 20 Qf3 ( 20
Qb3 Kg7 21 Rae l f6 22 Khl b5 ,
played in Shershevsky - Sa­
von , Minsk 1973 , is re l at i ve­
l y equal ) 2 0 . . . Rd8 ( 20 . . . Bxb2
21 Rae l favors Whi te ) 21 d6 1
and Whi te has the upper hand .
b ) 1 7 . . . Re4 18 Qf3 f5 1 9 Rael
( Th i s is stronger than 1 9
Bh6?1 Nf6 2 0 Bxg7+ Kxg7 whi ch
was seen in Kurt i n - Anders­
son , Mal t a 1 980 ) 1 9 . . . Bd4 + 20
Khl Rxe l 2 1 Rxe l Nf6 2 2 Bg5
Ng4 23 h3 Ne5 24 Qg3 a6 25
Rxe5 1 favoring Wh i te , Kagan -
Art i shevsky , Minsk 1 975 .
c ) 1 7 . . . Rf5 ! ? 1 8 Bd6+ ( In­
teres t i ng i s 18 g4 1 ? , e . g . ,
r
1 8 . . . Bd4+ 1 9 Khl Rxd5 20 Bc4 )
18 . . . K 1 9 Rxf5 gxfs 20 Bxd7
Qxd7 2 Bxc5 Bxb2 22 Rbl Be5
23 Qd2 f6 24 d6 Qc6 25 Rel
I
Rd8 wi th equal i t , Kurtin -
Lobron , Yugo s l av a 1 980 .
18 Qd4
L i kewi s e the best conti nua­
t i on . Other moves favor
B lack :
a ) 18 Bxd7 Qc5 + 1 19 Khl Rxd5
20 Qg4 ( On 20 Bd2 Black has
20 . . . Qd6 1 , avo i d i ng 2 0 . . .
Rxd7? 2 1 B b4 ! ) 20 . . . f5 2 1 Qh3
( 2 1 Be6? fxg4 22 Bd6++ Ke8 2 3
Bxc5 Rxc5 24 Rael Re5 25 Rxe5
Bxe5 26 Re l Rd8 ! is good for
B l ack - Kapengut ) 2 1 . . . Rxd7
2 2 Qxh7 Kf7 23 Radl ( Shefman
- Kapengut , Yaros lav 1975 ,
s aw i nstead 23 Bh6 but after
2 3 . . . Rg8 2 4 Rae l Re7 2 5 Rdl
Qe5 26 Bf4 Qf6 27 Qh3 Rge8
B l ack had the upper hand )
f
23 . . . Rad8 24 Rxd7+ Rxd7 25 h4
Qe7 26 Bg5 Qe2 favorin Bl ack
( Yuferov - Kapengut , M nsk
1 9 76 ) .
b ) 1 8 Bxe5 Nxe5 19 Khl Qc5 2 0
B a 4 R d 8 with act i ve pl ay for
B l ack .
18 Rf5
B l ack aus t refrain from
1 8 . . . Re 2 ? because after 1 9
Qxc4 Qxc4 20 Bxc4 Bxb2 2 1
R a d l Wh i t e stands better
(Kapengut ) .
19 Qxc4
1 9 Bh6? Bxh6 20 Bxd7 fails to
20 .. . Bg7 ! 2 1 Qxg7+ Kxg7 2 2
Bxc8 Rxf l + 23 Kxf l Rxc 8
16 Chapter 2 : 8 e5 Nfd7
( Legky - Schvedchi kov , USSR
1 9 78 ) .
19 Qxc4
19 .. . Nb6 20 Qxc8+ Rxc8 2 1 Bd6+
Kg8 22 Rxf5 gxf 5 23 Rdl Rd8 24
Bc5 Rxd5 , p l ayed i n Yuneyev -
Korsunsky , A l aa Ata 1980 , a l s o
l e d to a l eve l game .
20 Bxc4 Bxb2
21 Radl Ne5
22 Bh6+ Ke7
23 Rxf5 pf5
Shakharov - Shllu l enson , corr
1 976 . The resul t i ng pos i t i on
is fai r l y even .
B: 11 Nb5
White threatens 1 2 d6+ and 1 3
Nc7 . Black , however , chooses
to ignore thi s threat!
11 Re8!
Other aoves are infer ior :
a ) 11 . . . Kf8 1 2 Nf3 ( 1 2 d6 Nc6
1 3 Nc7 Rb8 1 4 Bc4 is aet by
14 . . . Nb& ) 12 . .. e4 1 3 Ng5 Nf6
14 d6 h6 1 5 Nxf71 ? Kxf7 1 6
Bc4+ Kf8 1 7 N c 7 N c 6 1 8 Be3 !
( Th i s is s t ronger than 18
Nxa8 Bg4 19 Nc7 Nd4 !) 18 . ..
Bd7 ( 1 8 ... Rb8 19 d7 ! ) 19 Bxc5
when Wh i te has a dangerous
i n i tiat ive for the s acrif i ced
aater i a l , Bri nck-C l aussen -
Fedder , Denaark 1972 .
b) 1 1 . . . a6 1 2 d6+ Kf8 13 Nc7
Ra7 1 4 Nf3 ( 14 Bc4 1 ? is also
playable ) 14 . . . Qf6 15 Bc4 b5
16 Bxf7! with a s t r ong attack
accordi ng to Kapengut.
12 d6+ Kf 8
13 Nc7
In Anikayev - Gore l ov , Mos cow
1981 , Wh i te refused to win the
- Exchange and proceeded 13
Be2!? Nc6 14 Nf3 Nd4 15 0-0
Nxe2 + 1 6 Qxe2 exf4 17 Qdl Re4
1 8 Nc7 Rb8 1 9 Qd5 Nf6 20 Qxc5
b6 21 Qa3 , producing a re la­
tively equal pos i t i on .
13 exf 4+
14 Nxe8?l
Allowing B l ack to s e i z e the
ini tiative . I ns tead , Wh i t e
should cont inue deve loping
wi th 14 Be2 ! , e . g . , 14 . . . Nc6
( 14 ... Qh4+ 15 Kf l is qui te
safe for White ) 1 5 Nxe8 ( 1 5
Nxa8 Nd4 16 Bxf4 is unc l ear )
1 5 . .. Qxe8 16 Nf3 Nd4 1 7 Nxd4
Bxd4 18 Bxf4 Ne5 19 Qb3 Qc6
( 19 . .. c4 encounters 20 Qa3
wi th the f o l l owing 21 0-0-0 )
20 Bxe5 Bxe5 21 0-0 f 5 when
the en su ing position i s very
compli cated .
Qxe8+ 1
Against 1 4 .. . Qh4+ Kapengut
recommends 15 g3 ! fxg3 16 Nf3
g2 + 17 Nxh4 gxhl = Q 18 Qe2 !
15 Be2 Ne5
16 Bxf4 Nbc6
17 Nh3?
Thi s l oses qu i ck l y . 1 7 d7
Bxd7 18 Qd6+ Kg8 19 0-0-0
fa i l s to·l9. . . Nd4 , b ut
stronger wou l d have been 17
Nf3 , for exaap l e , 1 7 . . .Nxf3+
1 8 gxf3 Nd4 1 9 Kf2 Bf5 20 Rel
Qc6 21 Qd2 Re8 2 2 Bdl .
17 Bxh3
18 ph3 Nf3+
19 Kf2 Qe4
20 Bxf3 Qxf4
21 Kg2 Nd4 1
22 Rel Nf 5
Wh i te res i gns , Sai rnov - Ka­
pengut , Minsk 1979 .
 CHAPTER THREE

1 d4 Nf 8 his di sposal :
2 c4 c5 Al: 9 . . 0-0 .

3 d5 e8 A2 : 9 a6
4
• • •

Nc3 exd5 AS: 9 . . . Qh4+

5 cxd5 d8
8 et Al: 9 o-o
'1 f4 r.., 10 Nf3
8 Bb5+
The gaae Partos - Lobron,
White delays the central ad­ B i e l 1 9 8 1 , tested 10 Qf3 .
vance e4-e5, fi rst hoping to There fo l l owed 1 0 a6 1 1
• . .

disrupt the natural develop­ Nge 2 Qh4+ 1 2 g3 Qe7 1 3 a3 Nf6

aent of the Black p ieces. 1 4 h3 Nbd7 1 5 g4 b5 1 6 0-0
Rb8 1 7 b4 w i th an edge for
White.

10 Na8
11 0-0

8 Nfd'1

Th i s is Black ' s aos t popular

reply. Other aoves will be
presented in Chapter 4. 11 Nc'1
White can now proceed:
A: 9 Bd3 A logi cal plan wh i c h prepares
B: 9 a4 a Queensi de expansi on and
C: 9 Nf3 restrains the themati c thrust
e4-e5 . The alternatives are:
A: 9 Bd3 a) ll . . . Nb4 12 Be2 !? (Or 1 2
Bbl Rb8 13 a3 Na6 14 a4 Nb4
15 Khl a6 16 a5 b5 17 axb6
Qxb6 1 8 Be3 Re8 19 f5 Qc7
with a level game, Spas sky -
Raskovsky, Sochi 1973) 1 2 ...
Re8 (Against 1 2 . . . b6 Kapengut
suggests 13 a3 Na6 14 Nd2
Bd4+ 15 Khl Nc7 16 Nc4! Nf6
17 e5 dxe5 18 d6 Ne6 19 fxe5
Nd7 2 0 Bf3 Rb8 21 Qel and
Whi te has the upper hand) 13
Khl ( 1 3 a3 Na6 14 Nd2 Nc7 1 5
Bf3 Rb8 1 6 Nc4, p l ayed i n
f
Fara o - Grunfe l d , G r az 1 9 7 2 ,
is a so good for White )
The aost popular continuation 13 . . . b6 (An interest i ng
in modern tournament prac­ alternat i ve is Kapengut's
t i ce. Whi te wi l lingly re­ 13 . . . Nb61? 14 a3 Na6 1 5 Nd2
treats the B i shop in order to Bd7 1 6 a4 Nb4 1 7 a5 Nc8 1 8
lessen the i mpact 9 • a6 and
. . Nc4 Rb8 1 9 Bf3 b5 ! ) 1 4 Nd2
the further . . . b5 . Black now Nf6 15 a3 Na6 16 B f 3 Nc7 1 7
has the following replies at e 5 dxe5 18 d6! Qxd6 19 fxe5
18 Chapter 3 : 8 Bb5+ Nfd7
Qxe5 ( 19. . . Rxe5 20 Nc4 1 ) 20
Bxae Nxa8 21 Nf3 Qb8 2 2 Bg5
Ng4 23 Qd2 when Wh i te bas
good prospects ( Kapengut ) .
b ) l l . . . Re8 1 2 Re l ( R i skin -
L1ndorenko , Minsk 1 9 80 , saw
i nstead 1 2 Nd2 Nf6 13 h3 Rb8
1 4 a4 Nb4 1 5 Nc4 b6 16 Re l
Ba6 1 7 Bfl Nh5 1 8 Nb5 Bxb5 1 9
axb5 Bd4+ 20 Kh2 Qh4 ! 2 1 Nxd6
Qg3+ 22 Khl Qf2 with a win­
ning pos i t i on for B l ack )
12 . . . Nc7 ( 1 2 . . . Nf6? 1 is infe­
r i o r because o f 13 a3 Nc7 14
Bd2 b5 15 b4 ! c4 16 Bc2 Bb7
17 Rbl when Whi te bas the
upper band . But Bl ack cou l d
cons ider 1 2 . . . Rb81? , p l anni ng
13 . . . b5 14 Bxb5 Bxc3 15 Bxd7
Bxe l 16 Bxe8 Qxe8 17 Qxe l Nb4
or 14 Nxb5 c4 ! 15 Bxc4 Rxb5
16 Bxb5 Qb6 + ) 13 a4 ( 13 h3? ,
pl ayed in Pacbaan - Lau , Bad
Neuenabr 1 980 , i s too pas ­
s i ve . The ga11e proceeded
13 . . . Rb8 14 a4 a6 1 5 as b5 1 6
axb6 Nxb6 1 7 Ra2 Bd7 18 Bd2
c4 1 9 Bc2 f5 20 Ng5 b6 21 Ne6
Nxe6 2 2 dxe6 Bxe6 22 Rxa6 d5 !
w i th good play for Black )
13 . . . a6 14 e5 ! dxe5 1 5 d6 Ne6
16 fxe5? (Correct is l� Nd5 !
Bf8 1 7 fxe5 f6 18 Bc4 wi th
advantage ) 1 6 . . . Nd4 ! 17 Nxd4
cxd4 18 Nd5 Nxe5 19 Nc7 Bg4
20 Qxg4 Nxg4 21 Rxe8+ Qxe8 2 2
Nxe8 Rxe8 23 Bg5 Bf 6 2 4 B x f6
Nxf 6 and Black has good pros­
pects ( Usacbiy - Suet i n , Kiev
1 958 ) .
c ) 1 1 . . . Rb8 1 2 Khl ( Z i e l inski
- Zurav l ev , corr 19 7 3 , var ied
wi th 12 Nd2 b5 ! 13 a4 c4? 1 4
Be 2 b 4 1 5 Nb5 c3 16 N c 4 Nb6
1 7 bxc3 Nxc4 18 Bxc4 Nc5 1 9
e5 ! dxe5 20 cxb4 , favor ing
Wh i te . Ins tead of the erro-
neous 1 3 . . . c4? Black could
play 13 . . . bxa4 1 4 Rxa4 Nb4 15
Nc4 Ba6 w i t h a good ga11e )
1 2 . . . Nc7 1 3 a4 a6 1 4 a5 ( The
intri cate 14 f5 ! ? is featured
in I l l ustrative Gaae 2 , Bar­
czay - Sauer•ann , corres pon­
dence 1 984 ) 14 . . . b5 (14 . . .
Re8 ! ? ) 1 5 axb6 Nxb6 (Or 1 5 . . .
Rxb6 1 6 Nd2 Rb8 1 7 Nc4 Nb6 1 8
Na5 Bd7 1 9 Be3 Nb5 20 Bxb5
axb5 21 e5 dxe5 22 Bxc5 Re8 ,
Z a i chik - Murshed , Tbi l i s i
1 983 ) 1 6 f 5 gxf5 ! 1 7 exf5
Nbxd5 1 8 NxdS Nxd5 19 Bxa6
Nb4 20 Bxc8 Rxc8 when the
pos i t i on poses no problems
for Black ( Elve s t - Dolaatov ,
Moscow 198 1 ) .
12 a4
The bes t aove . Farago -
F i l i powi cz , Po l ani ca Zdroj
1974 , saw i ns t ead 12 Nd2 Nf6 !
( A l s o p l ayab l e is 12 . . . Rb8 13
a4 a6 1 4 Nc4 Nf6 15 a5 Nb5 16
f5 Bd7 1 7 Bf4 Nh5 ! 18 Bxd6
Nxd6 19 Nxd6 Qh4 20 Qel Qf6
2 1 Nc4 Qd4+ 2 2 Qe3 gxf5 23
exf5 Qb4 wi th a s t rong i n i t i ­
a t i ve for the pawn ) 1 3 h 3 Nh5
14 Qf3 b5 ! ( 14 . . . Bd4 + i s
poi n tle s s o n account o f 1 5
Khl Qb4 1 6 Ne2 ) 1 5 Nxb5 Nxb5
16 Bxb5 Rb8 ( Better i s the
1 .. ediate 16 . . .Bd4 + 17 Khl
Qh4 18 Kh2 Rb8 19 a4 a6 20
Bc6 Rb4 w i th advantage - Ka­
pengut ) 17 a4 a6 18 Bc6 Bd4+
19 Kh2 Qh4 20 Ra3 ! and B l ack
aust now force a draw by
2 0 . . . g5 ! 21 fxg5 Be5+ .
12 a6
The al ternati ves are :
a ) 12 . . . Rb8 , when Whi t e can
proceed :
al ) 1 3 Bd2 a6 14 Qe2 b5
( 1 4 . . . Re8 ! ? ) 1 5 axb5 axb5 1 6
Nxb5 Nxb5 1 7 Bxb5 Qb6 ( But
not 17 . . . Bxb2? on account o f
1 8 Ba5 Qf6 19 e 5 Qxf4 20
Qxb2 ) 18 Bc4 Qxb2 ( 18 . . . Bxb2
19 Ba5 1 ) 19 e5 ! Qb7 20 e6 Nb6
( Essent i al is 20 . . . Bxal ! -
Gurevich ) 2 1 Rahl fxe6 22 Ba5
and Wh i t e is winning , Gure­
v i ch - Levi n , New York 1 985 .
a2 ) 1 3 Nd2 Nf6 ( Saidy -
Evans , USA 1 964 , saw ins tead
1 3 . . . a6 14 Nc4 Ne8 15 Qf3 Qc7
16 a5 b5 ! with a prom i s ing
gaae for·Bl ack ) 14 Nc4 b6 1 5
Bd2 a 6 1 6 Bel! Bg4 ( 1 6 . . . b5
17 axb5 axb5 is aet by 1 8 NaS
Bd7 1 9 Bh4 1 ) 17 Qc2 b5 18
axb5 axb5 19 Na5 c4 20 Be2
Qd7 2 1 Nc6 Rb7 2 2 Nb4 when
White has the upper hand ,
Farago - Bonf i , Kecskeaet
1979 .
a3 ) 1 3 Qell? , wh i ch is pre ­
sented in Lacha - Yeraan ,
Il l us t rat i ve Game 3 .
b ) 12 . . . Re8 1 3 Re l ( Wh i l e
Gufe l d's 1 3 b 3 i s a 1 s o p lay­
abl e , the pre•ature 13 Nd2 i s
met b y 1 3 . . .Bd4+ 1 4 Kh l Nf6
with attack i ng prospects on
the K i ngs i de ) 13 . . . Na6 1 4
Nb4 15 Bc4 ( Another pos s ib i l­
h3
ity is 1 5 B f l ) 1 5 . . . a6 1 6 Be3
Rb8 17 Bf2 and White has the
better prospects , Pe trosian -

Rodr iguez , Las Palaas 1975 .
c) 1 2 . . . Nf6 1 3 Bc4 ( Lavdansky
- Dz i uban , Alaa Ata 1973 , s aw
Wh ite s ucces s f u l l y i ntroduce
a d i f ferent p l an p l an : 1 3
h3 ! ? Re8 1 4 Nd2 Rb8 15 Nc4 b6
16 Qf3 Ba6 17 Khl Qd7 18 8d 2
Bxc4 1 9 Bxc4 a 6 2 0 e5 ! In­
teres t i ng i s a l s o 1 3 Bd2 ! ? ,
played in Orfalea - Wada ,
Scottsdale 1 9 8 1 . There fo l ­
lowed 1 3 . . . Rb8 1 4 B e l Nh5 1 5
Bh4 B f 6 1 6 Bxf6 Qxf6 1 7 g3
Bg4 1 8 Kg2 a6 1 9 h3 Bxf3 + 2 0
Qxf 3 b5 2 1 g 4 Ng7 2 2 axb5
axb5 23 Ra7 wi th a good game
for Wh i te ) 13 . . . Bg4 14 b3
Bxf3 1 5 Qxf3 Nd7 16 Ra2 a6 1 7
Qd3 Rb8 1 8 o3 and Wh ite re­
tains the b � � ter chance s by
pl aying Re2 and Bb2 ( T i .. an -
Mas i c , Soabor 1 9 74 ) .
d ) 1 2 . . . b6 13 Qe2 ( The al ter­
nate 1 3 Bd2 ! ? , prepar i ng the
previous l y shown maneuver
Be l -Bh4 , a l s o coaes i nto con­
s i derat i on ) 13 . . . Re8 14 Be3
Bb7 ( 1 4 . . . f5 ! ? ) 15 Rae l Nf6
16 h3 a6 17 g4 b5 1 8 g5 Nd7
19 Qf2 Nb6 20 f5 ! b4 21 Ndl
Nxa4 2 2 Nh2 Nb6 23 Ng4 when
Whi t e has a s trong attack ,
Falk - Ostoj i c , Baden Baden
1981 .
13 Rel
White prepares the themat i c
thrust e4-e5 . Other p l ans
invo lve :
a) 13 e5 Rb8 1 4 Re l ( 14 exd6
Ne8 a l l ows B l ack to win back
the pawn whi l e retaining a
good pos i t i on ) 14. Re8 1 5
• .
Re2 ( 1 5 exd6 Rxe l + 16 Qxe l
Ne8 1 7 Qe7 Bf6 1 8 Qxd8 Bxd8
19 Ne4 f 5 i s uncl ear ) 15 . . .
dxe5 1 6 d6 Ne6 1 7 Nd5 with a
co•p l ex pos i t ion ( Kapengut ) .
b ) 1 3 Nd2 Nf6 1 4 Qe l ( 1 4 Nc4
Bg4 ! ? 15 Qel b5 16 axb5 axb5
Chapter 3 : 8 Bb5+ Nfd7 19
1 7 Rxa8 Qxa8 1 8 Nxd6 c 4 19
Bbl Qa6 ) 1 4 . . . Rb8 15 a5 Bd7
( 1 5 . . . b5 1 ? also deserves a
f
try ) 1 6 Nc4 Bb5 1 7 Qg3 Re8 1 8
Rel Nh5 1 9 Q f3 Refraining
froa 1 9 Qf2? wh ch proves
favorab l e for Bl ack after
1 9 . . . Bxc4 2 0 Bxc4 Bd4 21 Be3
Bxc3 2 2 bxc3 Rxe4 ) 1 9 . . . Bxc4
( Snatchi ng the pawn by 19 . . .
Bxc3? ! 2 0 bxc3 Nxd5 i s very
r i sky in l ight of 21 g4 Nhf6
2 2 Bb2 ) 20 Bxc4 b5 21 axb6
Rxb6 22 g4 Qh4 23 Re2 Rb4 2 4
B d 3 ( 24 Bxa6? N f 6 25 b 3 Ra8 )
24 . . . Nf6 25 h3 Nd7 resul t i ng
in a coap l i cated pos i t i on ,
Cberepkov - Kapengut , USSR
1 980 .
c ) 1 3 Qel Rb8 14 e5 ( 14 a5
b5 ! 1 5 axb6 Rxb6 1 6 e5 Re8 ,
p l ayed in Be l l i ard - Wi t taan j
Graz 1972 , i s good for Bl ack
14 . . . Nb6 15 f5 dxe5 16 fxg6
hxg6 ( Gulko - Savon , Lvov
1978 , var ied wi th 16 . . . fxg6
and a fter 1 7 Bg5 Qd6 1 8 Qh4
Ncxd5? 19 Rad! Wh i te bad a
dangerous attack . I nstead o f
1 8 . . . Ncxd5? , Black s houl d
p l ay 1 8 . . . Nbxd5 ! wi th a n un­
c l ear game ) 17 Bg5 ( 1 7 Ne4 ! ?
coaes i nto cons i derat i on as
we l l ) 1 7 . . . f6 1 8 Qh4 Qe8 ! 1 9
Radl with s harp p l ay .
13 Re8
1 3 . . . Rb8 would encounter 1 4
e5 b 5 1 5 e6 1
14 Be3
Gar c i a - P . Craal i ng , Lucerne
1982 , s aw i ns tead 1 4 e5 ! ?
dxe5 1 5 d6 Ne6 1 6 fxe5 ( 1 6
f5 ! ? ) 1 6 . . . Nd4 1 7 Nxd4 cxd4
1 8 e6? dxc3 19 exf7+ Kxf7 20
Bc4+ Kf8 and Bl ack repe l led
the e neay attack . I ns tead o f
1 8 e6? , Whi t e coul d p l ay 1 8
Nd5 w i th a n unc l ear game .
14 . .. Rb8
15 Bf2 1
An i nteres t i ng i dea ; White
re locates the B i sho � i ntend­
ing to play Bh4 , wb1 ch aids
the K i ngs ide act i vi t i es , o r
to support the central break­
through e4-e5 by pos t i ng i t
o n g3 .
15 b5
16 axb5 axb5
20 Chapter 3 : 8 Bb5+ Nfd7

16 . . . Nxb5 ! ? a l s o comes into

p l ay .
17 Bh4 Bf6
18 Bg3 b4
19 Na4 Nb&
20 Nxb8 Rxb8
21 e 5 Bg7
22 Bh4 Qd7
23 Bc4 Bb7? 1

Undoubtedly 23 . . . Ba6 i s much

st r onger .
24 Ra7 Nb5 Bl ack ' s most common rep l i es
are :
25 Qa4 1 Rb8
26 Ra5 Bc8 A2 1 : 1 1 . . Qc7
.

27 e6 1 A22 : 11 . . . Nf6
Other moves a re i nfer i or :
Federau - Tr i ngov , West Ber­ a ) 1 1 . . . Re8 1 2 0-0 Nf6 ( Or
l in 1 985 . Whi te has a win­ 1 2 . . . Nf8 13 Qc2 Nbd7 14 Bd2
n i ng pos i t i on . Rb8 15 Khl Qc7 1 6 b3 Nf6 1 7
Rae l Qd8 1 8 Bc4 Nh5 19 e 5 Bg4
A2 : 9 a& 20 Qd3 with advantage , Batu­
10 a4 0-0 r i nsky - B e l okurov , Leningrad
1 960 ) 13 Re l ( Wa t son - Baran ,
The imaediate 10 . . . Qc7 i s USA 1982 , s aw instead 1 3 Khl
presented in I l l us trat ive Game Nbd7? and the gaae concl uded
4 ( Pike t - Horvath , Groningen 14 Bbl c4 15 Be3 Qc7 16 Bd4
1984/85 ) . Other Queen moves Nc5 17 e5 Nfd7 1 8 e6 1 fxe6 1 9
are clearly inferior , in both Bxg7 Kx g7 20 dxe6 Rxe6 2 1 Ng5
cases the Queen hav i ng t'o Re8 22 Qd4 + Nf6 23 Qxf6+ ,
re t rea t : 1-0 . 13 . . . Bg4 i s to be pre­
a) l0 . . . Qb6 1 1 Nf3 0-0 12 Nd2 ferred over 13 . . . Nbd7? )
N f 6 ( Or 1 2 . . . Re8 13 Nc4 Qc7 1 4 1 3 . . Nbd7? ( Better i s
.

o-o N b6 15 Qf3 Nxc4 1 6 Bxc4 1 3 . . . Bg4 ) 1 4 h3 Qc7 1 5 Nd2

Nd7 17 Bd2 N b6 18 Ba2 Bd7 19
a5 Nc8 20 e5 1 and Wh i te stands
better , Z e l i nsky - Lotsov ,
Riga 1 970 ) 1 3 Nc4 Qc7 14 0-0
Nbd7 1 5 Bd2 Nb6 1 6 b3 Ng4 1 7
Qf3 f 5 1 8 exf5 gx f5 19 h3 Nf6
20 Rae l Bd7 21 Ne3 , favo r i ng
Whi t e , Anikayev - S i de i f -Zade ,
Dnepropetrovsk 1 980 .
b ) 1 0 . . . Qa5 1 1 Bd2 Qb6 1 2 Nf3
0-0 ( Captur i ng the b-pawn
woul d be very r i sky ) 13 a5 !
Qc7 14 Qe2 (A s trong alterna­
t i ve is 14 0-0 ! ? r i gh t away ,
for examp l e , 1 4 . . . c4 15 Bc2
c4? (A dubi ous pawn
sacr i f i ce . Mor e l ogical i s
1 5 . . . Rb8 , to meet 1 6 Nc4 by
16 . . . b5 wi th a good game for
Bl ack ) 1 6 Nxc4 Nc5 1 7 Be3 !
Nfd7 ( 1 7 . . . Nfxe4? l os e s to 1 8
Nxe4 Nxe4 1 9 Bb6 ) 1 8 Rel f5?
( Es s ent i a l is 1 8 . . . Nxd3 ) 1 9
e5 1 dxe5 · 20 d 6 Qd8 21 Nxe5
Nxe5 2 2 Bxc5 Nx d3 23 Qxd3 Be6
24 Nd5 w i th an overwhelming
p o s i t i on ( F . Port i sch - Van
der Ster ren , Wijk aan Zee I I
1985 ) .
b ) 1 1 . . a5 12 0-0 Na6 1 3
.

Nf6 16 Be3 Nbd7 1 7 h3 Re8 18 Nb5? ! Nb6 1 4 Bbl c 4 1 5 f5 Bd7

Bd4 Bh6 1 9 g3 Nh5 20 Kg2 b5 2 1 16 Bg5 Bf6 17 Bxf6 Qxf6 18
axb6 Nxb6 2 2 Nh2 Bg7 23 Bxg7 Nc3 Nc5 19 Bc2 Raes 20 Qd2
Nxg7 24 Ng4 Bxg4 25 hxg4 Nd7 Nb3 21 Bxb3 cxb3 2 2 Qh6 Nc4
26 f5 1 when Whi te has the and Bl ack has the a dvan t a ge .

upper hand , L i gter i nk - Payr­ Howeve r , Wh ite ' s p l ay cou l d

huber , Groni ngen 1969 ) 14 . . . b5
15 axb6 Nxb6 1 6 0-0 c4 1 7 Bc2
N8d7 1 8 Rae l Bb7 1 9 Qf2 Nc5 20
f5 1 Nbd7 2 1 Qh4 Qb6 22 Kh l
Qxb2 23 e5 ! Qxc2 24 f6 and
Wh i t e i s winning , Pimonov -
Yudkev i ch , Moscow 1 9 7 1 .
11 Nf3
b e improved upon w i th 1 3 Bd2 ,
e . g . , 13 . . . Nb6 1 4 b3 with
good pro spects for Whi te
( P ro kh o r o vi c h - Gusev , Mo s cow
1959 ) .
A21 : 11 Qc7
B l ack prepares . . . c4 ,

i ntend i ng to pursue Queenside
p l ay .
12 0-0
Whi t e cou l d a l s o prevent the
advance c5-c4 :
a ) 12 Nd2 b 5 ! ? ( 1 2 . . . c4 1 3
Bxc4 1 ) 1 3 axb5 Nb6 1 4 bxa6
Bxa6 15 Bxa6 Nxa6 16 0-0 Nb4
17 Rxa8 Rxa8 1 8 Qf3 c4 19 e5
Nd3 ( Or 19 . . . dxe5 20 f5 e4
wi th sharp p l ay ) 2 0 Nde4 dxe5
21 f5 with comp l i cations ,
Tatai - Perenyi , Bal atonbe­
reny 1 982 .
b ) 12 Qb3 Re8? ! ( 1 2 . . . b5 ! ? 1 3
axb5 Nb6 ) 1 3 0 - 0 b 6 1 4 e5 !
dxe5 1 5 d6 Qxd6 1 6 Bc4 Rf8 1 7
Ne4 and Whi t e i s on the of­
fens i ve , Veks l e r - Shepilov,
Kazan 1 968 .
12 c4
13 Bc2 Nc5
Savchenko - Sedrak i n , USSR
f
1 985 , s aw instead 13 . . . Nf6 1 4
Be3 B 4 1 5 h 3 Bxf3 1 6 Qxf3
Nbd7 7 Rae l Rab8 18 Ba7 Rbe8
19 Bd4 Nh5 20 Bxg7 Nxg7 2 1
Q f 2 Rb8 2 2 Khl b 5" 23 axb5
axb5 24 e5 ! dxe5 25 fxe5 Nxe5
26 d6 ! Qxd6 2 7 Ne4 Qe6 28
Nf6+ Kh8 29 Qf4 ! , 1 -0 .
14 Be3
The game Garcia Mar t i nez -
Yap , Sevi l l a 1 982, saw Whi t e
adopt a somewhat different
move order : 14 h3 Nbd7 15 Be3
Re8 16 Rel Rb8 17 Bd4 Bh6?
( Better is the consequent
17 . . . b5 ) 18 e 5 ! Bxf4 19 e6
Ne5 20 Ne4 Nxe4 21 Rxe4 and
White was o n top .
14 Bg4
15 Bd4 1
15 h3 j us t loses a tempo,
which was demonstrated in
the game Furman - Dorfman ,
Mi nsk 1 9 7 6 . There fo l l owed
15 . . . Bxf3 16 Rxf3 Nbd7 1 7 a5
( 1 7 Bd4 is i nferior because
o f 17 . . . Bxd4+ 1 8 Qxd4 Qb6 1 9
a 5 Qxb2 20 Ra2 Qb4 2 1 e 5 b6 ! )
1 7 . . . Rfe8 1 8 Bd4 b5 1 9 axb6
Qxb6 20 Ra2 Rab8 2 1 Kh2 Bxd4
22 Qxd4 Nb3 ! and B l ack had an
exce l l e n t pos i t i o n .
15 . . . Bxf3
16 Rxf3 Bxd4+
Chapter 3 : 8 Bb5+ Nfd7 21
On 1 6 . . . Nbd7 , pl ayed in Mar­
szalek - Forinto s , Leningrad
1 960 , Whi t e proceeded i naccu­
rate l y w i th 17 Ne2? ! b5 1 � h4
Qb6 19 a5 Qd8 20 h5 Qf6 and
B l ack had the better chances .
Correct wou l d have been 1 7
Bxg7 Kxg7 1 8 Qd4 + Kg8 1 9 Qxc4
Qb6 20 Rf2 Qxb2 21 Rbl Qa3 22
Rf3 , w i th advantage .
17 Qxd4 Qb6
18 a5 1 Qxb2
19 Ra2 Qb4
20 e5
The game Szabo - Robatsch ,
Maribor 1978 , now conti nued
erroneou s l y with 20 . . . Nbd7?
whi ch lost mate r i a l to 2 1
Rfl ! Correct wou l d have been
20 . . . b6 1 wi th a compl ex pos i ­
tion .
A22 : 11 Nf6
B l ack resigns hims e l f to the
l o s s of a te•po , concentrat­
i ng i nstead on the comp l et i on
of Queens i de deve l opment .
12 0-0
Whi le 12 Nd2 is too s l ow ,
al l owing B lack a good game
after 1 2 . . . Re8 13 0-0 Ng4 1 4
N f 3 c4 , a stron � a l ternat ive
is 12 h3 ! ? , str1vin � to pre­
vent B l ack ' s harmoni ous deve­
l opment :
a ) 1 2 . . . c4 13 Bc2 ! ( Wh i t e
mus t avo i d 1 3 Bxc4? Nxe 4 !
Simil ar ly 1 3 Bbl ? ! Nbd7 1 4
Be3 Re8 1 5 0 - 0 Qa5 , pl ayed in
Andr i c - Ve l im i rovic, Be l ­
grade 1 968, poses no probl ems
for B l ack ) 13 . . . Qb6 1 4 a5 Qc5
15 Qe2 Nh5 1 6 Be3 Qb4 17 Kf2
Nd7 1 8 g4 Nhf6 1 9 Ra4 Qxb2 20
Rxc4 Qa3 2 1 Na4 and Wh i t e is
on top , Horovietz - Pj arnpuu ,
Mos cow 1 9 8 1 .
b ) 1 2 . . . Re8 13 0 - 0 c4 1 4 Bc2
Nbd7 15 Be3 Qc7 1 6 Bd4 Nc5 1 7
Re l Bd7 1 8 Q d 2 b5 1 9 e 5 ! Nh5
20 axb5 ( 20 g4? fai l s to
20 . . . b4 21 Ne2 Nxf4 ! ) 20 . . .
Bh6 ( Re frain i ng from 20 . . .
axb5 2 1 Rax8 Rxa8 on account
of 22 g4 ) 21 Be3 Bf5 2 2 b6
Qc8 23 Bxf5 gxf5 24 Bxc5
Qxc5+ 25 Qd4 when White has
the upper hand, Shershevsky -
Sarba i , M i nsk 19 80 .
12 Bg4
22 Chapte r 3 : 8 Bb5+ Nfd7

13 b3 Bxf3 c ) 15 . . . Qa5 1 6 Bf2 Qb4 1 7 a5 !

14 Qxf3 Nbd7 Qxb2? ( 1 7 . . . b5 1 ? ) 18 Rfcl Nh 5
1 9 Bel c4 20 Bxc4 Raes 2 1 Bf l
R f e 8 2 2 R e h l Bxc3 23 Rxb2
Bxb2 24 Rbl when Bl ack does
not have enough for the
Queen , L i t i nskaya - F i s ch­
d i ck , Baden 1 980 .

16 Bc4

Stoppi ng the t hr ust . . . c4 and

threatening e4-e5 . However ,
Kapengut has demonstrated
that B l ack can gain the upper
hand . , Hence 1 6 Rae l ! ? comes
into cons i derat i on .
The cri t i ca l pos i t ion i n this
vari a t i on . F l o r i an now rec­ 16 Nb6
o.. eods 1 5 g4 1 ? , bu t this
aove bas never found prac t i ­ The gaa e R i s k i n - Voi tke ­
c a l app l i ca t i on . Wh i l e 1 5 vitch , Yur•a l a 1 980 , s aw in­
Bd2 i s presented in Z a i c h i k - s tead 1 6 . . . Re8 ( 16 . . . c4 1 7
E lvest , I l l us trat i ve Gaae 5 , Bc2 ) 1 7 Bf2 Qa5 18 Kh l N b6 1 9
th i s sec t i on dea l s wi th t h e b3 Nb d 7 20 Be l Q c 7 2 1 R a 2 Nb6
aost co.. on move eaployed i n 22 Qd3 Nfd7 23 Re2 Qd8 24 Bg3
aas ter gaa e s . Nxc4 25 bxc4 Qf6 26 e5 ! and
Wh i te had the advan t age .
15 Be3 Rc8
17 b3 Nfd7
Other repl i e s are : 18 Bf2 g5 1
a ) 1 5 . . . Re8 , and now : 19 g3 Q f6
al ) 16 Rae l Rc8 ( 1 6 . . . Qc7 1 7 20 Rael Ne5
b3 Rab8 1 8 Bd 2 Re7 1 9 Bc4
Rbe8 20 Qd3 ) 1 7 Re2 ( Farago - The pos i t i on favo rs B lack .
Sapi , Bu d ape s t 1976 , saw i n­
s tead 1 7 Bf2 Qc7 1 8 Re2 Re7 A3 : 9 QM +
1 9 Rfel Ne8 20 e5 ! ? dxe5 21
Bh4 f 6 2 2 d6 Qxd6 2 3 Rdl Qb8
24 Bc4+ w i th i n t r i cate p l ay )
1 7 . . . c 4 1 8 Bc2 b5 1 9 axb5
axb5 20 Nxb5 Nc5 2 1 Na7 1
Nfxe4 22 Nxc8 Qxc8 23 Bxc5
Nxc5 24 f5 ! and Wh i te bas the
advantage , L j apeni s - Kaspa­
rov , Baku 1 9 78 .
a2 ) 1 6 a5 Qc7 1 7 Khl c4 1 8
Bc2 b 5 1 9 axb6 Nxb6 20 e5 !
Nfd7 2 1 e6 Nc5 22 f5 , favor ­
i ng Whi te , Farago - Tri ngov ,
Vrnj acka Banja 1 9 7 1 .
b ) 1 5 . . . Qb6 1 6 Rf2 ( Or 1 6 a5
Qxb2 1 7 N a4 Qb4 18 R fbl Qxa5
19 Nb6 Qxb6 20 Rxb6 Nxb6 2 1 10 g3
Rbl Nfd7 wi th a fai r l y even
pos i t i on ) 1 6 . . . Rae8 1 7 Re2 Tho•pson - Port i s cb , Ade l aide
Qb4 1 8 a5 and now , instead of 1 9 7 1 , dev i a t ed w i th 1 0 K f l ,
18 . . . b5? 1 9 Ra3 Nxe4 20 Nxe4 but after 10 . . . Na6 ( Or 1 0 . . .
c4 2 1 Bbl Bxb2 22 Ra2 , as i n 0 -0 ! ? 1 1 Nf3 Qd8 1 2 Kf2 Qb6
Port i s ch - Lutikov , Mos cow 13 Kg3 f5 ! ) 1 1 Nf3 Qd8 12 Kf2
1 959 , the comaentators sug- Qb6 1 3 Kg3 Nb4 1 4 h3 ( 1 4
gested 1 8 . . . c4 ! ? 19 Ra4 ( 1 9 Be2 ! ? ) 14 . . . Nxd3 15 Qxd3 Qa6
Bbl Nc5 ) 1 9 . . . Qxa4 1 ? 20 Nxa4 16 Qxa6 (A s t ron g al ternative
cxd3 2 1 Rd2 Nxe4 22 Rxd3 f5 i s 16 NbS ! ? o-o 1 7 a4 ) 1 6 . . .
wi th fu l l compe n sat i on for bxa6 1 7 e5 0 - 0 1 1 8 exd6 Rb8
the Queen . B l ack had a go od game .

10 Qe7
11 Nf3 0-0
12 0-0
12 Nb6
Other move s are :
a) 1 2 . . . Na6 13 Re l Nc7 1 4 a4
b6 15 B f l l ( Avo i di ng 1 5 Bc4
Ba6 16 Nb5 Bxb5 17 axb5 a6 18
bxa6 b5 ! ) 15 . . . a6 1 6 e5 1 Bb7
1 7 Ng5 f5 18 Qb3 ! , favor ing
White .
b ) 1 2 . . . a6 13 a4 Nf6 ( The
game Batur insky - Gol ovko ,
Mos cow 1 958 , saw instead
13 . . . b6 , but Whi te had the
edge after 14 Kg2 Ra7 15 Nd2
Rea 16 Nc4 Rb7 1 7 Qf3 Qf8 1 8
b3 . 13 . . . Re8 was tested in
Hund - Tho l e , corr 1 965/67 ,
aga i n favoring Whi t e after 1 4
Qc2 f6 1 5 Bd2 N f 8 1 6 Rae l Bb3
17 Rf2 Ned7 18 Ndl ) 14 Qb3
( Wh i l e 14 e5 ! ? s eeas to be a
viable a l t ernative , 14 Re l
Bg4 15 B f l Nbd7 16 Bd2 Ne8 1 7
b3 Bxf3 1 8 Qxf3 N c 7 1 9 Bc4
b5 ! led to e qua l i t y i n Stup i ­
c a - Ugr i novi c , Yugos l av i a
1959 ) 1 4 . . . Bg4 1 5 B d 2 Nbd7 1 6
Rae l Rae8 1 7 B c 4 Bh3 1 8 e 5
Ng4 1 9 e6 ! wi th advantage ,
Karoly! - Barczay , Hungary
1981 .
c ) 12 . . . Nf6 1 3 e5 1 dxe5 1 4
fxe5 Ng4 15 Bg5 f6 16 Bc4 and
Wh i te has good prospects .
13 Kg2
Pachaan - Grunfe l d , Lucerne
1 978 , var i ed with 1 3 Re l Na6
14 Bfl Bd7? ! ( 1 4 . . . Bg4 ! ? ) 1 5
h 3 c 4 1 6 Be3 Nb4 1 7 Bd4 Bxd4+
18 Nxd4 g5 1 9 Nf5 Qf6 20 a3
Bxf5 2 1 axb4 Bd7 22 e5 Qg6 23
Qd2 when Wh i te has the upper
hand . B l ack would be better
off to fo l l ow Kapengut ' s
13 . . . Bg4 ! 1 4 Bfl Na6 1 5 h3
Bxf3 16 Qxf3 Nc7 ( 1 6 . . . Nb4 1 7
Chapter 3 : 8 Bb5+ Nfd7 23
Qdl f avors Whi te ) 1 7 Bd2 Qd7 ,
i ntending 1 8 . . . Na4 . I f Whi te
prevents this by 18 a4 , B l ack
has a good game after 18 . . .
Rae8 wi th the further . . . a6 ,
. . . Nc8 and . . . b5 .
An intere s t i ng i dea i s 1 3
f5 ! ? , seen i n Ravikumar -
Thorste i n s , Copenhagen 1982 .
The game conti nued 13 . . . N8d7
( 1 3 . . . gxf5 1 4 Bg5 ) 14 Bg5 Bf6
1 5 Bh6 Re8 16 Khl Ne5 17 Nxe5
Bxe5 18 Qd2 c4 19 Bc2 Nd7 20
Rf2 a6 2 1 Raf l b5 22 Ndl f6
23 b4 cxb3 24 axb3 a5 25 Ne3
g5 26 Ng4 Kh8 27 h4 ! and
Whi te had a fero c i ous attack .
13 Bg4
1 3 . . . Na6 , avo i ding the Bi shop­
for-Knight exchange , was wit­
nessed i n Skembr i s - Grunfe l d ,
Graz 1981 . There f o l l owed 1 4
Qe2 ( Mi nev recommends 1 4 a3 ,
g
e . g . , 1 4 . . . c4 15 Bc2 Nc5 1 6
Re l , pre aring e4-e5 ) 1 4 . . . Re8
15 Re l N 4 16 Bb5 ( 1 6 Bbl ?
Bxc3 1 7 bxc3 N4xd5 i s advanta­
geous for B l ack ) 16 . . . Bd7 1 7
Bxd7 Qxd7 18 Be3 Na4 ( Or
18 . . . f5 ! ? - Mi nev) 1 9 a3 Nxc3
20 bxc3 Nxd5 21 exd5 Bxc3
produci ng a compl ex pos i t io n .
14 hS BxfS+
15 QxfS c4
The game Lukacs - Psakhi s , Sa­
raj evo 1 9 8 1 , saw ins tead 1 5 . . .
N8d7 16 a4 ( 1 6 Bd2 ! ? ) 1 6 . . . c4
17 Bc2 Nc5 1 8 Be3 Nbd7 1 9 Radl
a6 20 Bd4 ? ! ( 20 e5 i s uncl ear ,
but 20 Rfel ! ? comes i nto con­
s i derat i o n ) 2 0 . . . Bxd4 21 Rxd4
b5 ! 22 Rel ( Or 2 2 axb5 axb5 23
Nxb5 Rfb8 24 Na3 Rxb2 25 Rxc4
Nb6 when B l ack has the upper
hand - Psakh i s ) 22 . . . f6 ! with
good prospects for Black .
16 Bc2 Na6
17 a3 Nc5
18 Be3 Nbd7
19 Radl Rabe
20 Rfe l
20 Bd4? ! i s inferior on ac ­
count of 20 . . . Bxd4 2 1 Rxd4 b5
� 2 Rf2 f6 23 Rdd2 Rf e8 24
Rfe2 b4 with a saa l l p l us for
Bl ack ( S i n i avsky - P i gusov ,
Mos c ow 1981 ) .
20 b5
21 e5 1 b4
24 Chapter 3 : 8 Bb5+ Nfd7

22 axb4 Rxb4 1 1 Nf3 Qe7 12 Kf2 Na6 ( Better

23 Bel i s 12 . . . Bxc3 ! ? 13 bxc3 Nf6 )
13 Rel Nb4 14 Kgl a6 15 B f l
Agreed drawn in Lau - D o l ma­ R d 8 1 6 Be3 Qf8 1 7 Bf2 and
tov , Graz 1 9 8 1 , al though Wh i t e had the upper hand .
Wh i t e has a s l i ght edge . I nstead of 1 0 . . . 0 - 0 Kapengut
proposes 10 . . . a6 ! ? , e . g . , 1 1
B: 9 a4 Nf3 Qd8 1 2 Bd3 ( Or 1 2 Bc4 Nb6
13 Be2 Bg4 14 Nd2 Bxe2+ 1 5
Qxe2 N8d7 1 6 a 5 N c 8 1 7 Nc4
0-0 , when 18 e5? encounte r s
1 8 . . . dx e 5 1 9 fxe5 b5 ! )
1 2 . . . Nf6 1 3 h3 Nh5 1 4 Kf2 c4 !
15 Bxc4 Qb6+ and B l ack has
the i n i t i at i ve .

10 Qe 7
11 Nf3
1 1 Qf3? ! proved uns u c c e s s f ul
in the game Hort - Hul ak ,
Surakarta/Denpasar 1982 ,
whi ch proceeded l l . . . Na6 ( A
A f l ex i b l e cont inuat i on where viab l e al ternat ive i s 1 1 . . .
Whi te defends against the the ­ f5 ! ? ) 1 2 Nge2 Nb4 13 0 - 0 0-0
mat i c advance . . . a6 and . . . b5 1 4 �4 Nc2 ( Another pos s i b i l i ­
without coaai t t i ng the l i ght ­ t y l S 1 4 . . . a 6 1 5 Bc4 Nb6 1 6
squared Bi shop , whi ch can b 3 N c 2 1 7 Ra2 Nd4 1 8 Qg2 f 5
retreat to c4 , d3 or e2 . The o r 1 5 Bxd7 Bxd7 1 6 f 5 N c 2 1 7
s l i ght drawback i s the weaken­ Ra2 Nd4 1 8 Qg2 b5 ) 15 Ra2 Nd4
ed b4 - square , a l t hough tour­ 16 Qg2 Nxb5 1 7 ax b 5 Re8 1 8 g5
naaent prax i s has demonstrated f5 19 exf5 gxf5 wi t h a go od
that the maneuver Nb8-a6-b4 i s game for B l ack .
n o t par t i cu l ar l y threateni ng
to Whi te ' s p l ans . The 11 o-o
di agraaae d pos i t ion o f fers
B l ack the fo l l ow i ng opt ions : Accept i ng the pawn by 1 1 . . .
Bl : 9 . . . QM+ Bxc3+ 1 2 bxc3 Qxe4 + invo lves a
B2 : 9 . . . Na6 b i g r i sk , f o r exampl e , 1 3 Kf2
B3 : 9 . . . a6 0-0 14 Rel Qf5 1 5 B f l Nf6 16
Less popu l ar is 9 . . . 0-0 10 Nf3 c4 . whe n Wh i te , with the
Nf6? ! ( Better is 10 . . . Na6 . Bi shop �a i r at h i s di sposal ,
rever t i ng to Sect ion A2 2 ) 1 1 can eas i l y l aunch an attack
0 -0 Bg4 1 2 h 3 ( No t 1 2 Be3? ! on the weakened Bl ack K i ng .
Nbd7 13 Bf2 a6 14 Bc4 Qb6 1 5
Be l Rfe8 wi th chances for both 12 0-0 Na6
s i des , A . Zaitsev - Suet i n ,
Mi nsk 1962 ) 1 2 . . . Bxf3 13 Qxf3 Whi l e 1 2 . . . Nf6 encounters 1 3
Nbd7 14 Be3 a6 15 Bd3 Qc7 16 e5 , 1 2 . . . Nb6 , played in S l iwa
Rfe l c4 17 Bfl Nc5 1 8 Radl - Gromek , Po l and 1 960 , proved
Rfe8 19 e5 ! dxe5 20 d6 Qa5 2 1 advantageous for White after
fxe5 , when B l ack has a 1 3 Rel Bg4 1 4 Bfl Na6 1 5 h3
d i f f i cu l t pos i t i on , K i s hnev - Bxf3 1 6 Qxf3 Nb4 17 Qdl .
Agapov , Mos cow 1 984 .
a •.t.• m;•�r�
Bl : 9 QM +
m 1 •" � 1 � 1
.• �
.
•
i1!ml. '.d,I;� f{fjj, 1 ¥ff&
An idea with wh i ch the reader ....i �'.$ i'� j& (;{77.;
•�m it • •
i s a l ready fam i l i ar : Bl ack
.:> •
forces the weakening of the
ene•y K ings i de .
.L!. •
wal • .!!.
!i%fil .:> ·Jili1
�� • 'MP.

10 g3 ff@'
··�' r.-x
.·.
\Z...l ;�•z
• ..H2%
/:'\. ·il!S'
.: ·(,.
� 'Vff? - !4°''
.••

L i t i nskaya - F i s chdick , Baden � !if.¥1 � ��

1 980 , varied with 10 Kfl 0-0 � ��E E!.�
 Chapter 3 : 8 BbS+ Nfd 7 25

13 e5 1
Whi te s e i zes the ini t i at i ve E •A�'.�· S1
wi th the themat i c central ra�., t • � ••
;,;r;n "Jll Zflm t r!Kl
�i
th r ust . Other options &. M �Im ifJ
i n c l ude : "JI) . � 0i
11!%2 � '� .a.. if$.ffi -
a ) 13 Bd2 Nb4 ( 1 3 . . . Nc7 1 4 8.:a..!il&1.. .[.!. . •
Bc4 ) 1 4 R e l N f 6 15 Kg2 Bg4 l6 .a. \:tflf .a. i!$% -
h3 Bxf3+ 1 7 Kxf3 a6 18 B f l ( 1 8 11 tffeJ .J1. � rm
Bc4 ! ? ) 1 8 . . . Rae8 19 aS Qd7 2 0 •,lfj !:Z...l!:"{< .. •
•
y
Q b l Re7 ! 2 1 Ndl N e 8 2 2 Nf2 N c 7
and Black h a s comfortabl s o l ­ tm. • • ft .�
ved a l l h i s o peni ng prob ems ,
Ve l i kov - Skembr i s , Vrnja cka
s� �i;;'� • §
Ban j a 1982 . a ) 1 0 . . . Nc7 1 1 0-0 ( The re­
b ) 13 Re l - see I l l us trati ve treat 11 Bd3 t r ans po s e s to
Gaae 6 , Tal - Vel imi rovi c , Sect i on Al . 1 1 Bc4 , on the
Mo s cow 1982 . o ther hand , wins B lack a te•­
po afte r 11 . . . 0-0 12 0-0 Nb 6 )
13 dxe5 1 1 . . . NxbS 12 axb5 0-0 1 3 Bd2
(Or 13 Qd3 Qc7 14 b3 Nb6 w ith
The a l ternate 13 . . . Nb4 i s the fol l owing . . . c4 ) 13 . . . Nb6
analyzed i n I l l ustrative Game 14 b3 Bg4 15 h3 Bxf3 16 Qxf3
7 , Bagi rov - Mal ani uk , Baku Nd7 , p l anni ng . . . Qb6 and
1 983 . . . . a6 , when the pos i tion i s
r e l at ive l y equal .
14 d6 Qd8 b ) 1 0 . . . Nb4? 1 - see I l l us tra­
15 Nd5 t i ve Game 9 , Kasparov - Nunn ,
Lucerne 1 982 .
15 fx e 5 ? Nxes 16 Nxes Bxes 1 7
d 7 fai l s t o 1 7 . . . Bd4+ . 11 0-0
15 e4 It a p pears that this Kni ght
16 Ng5 deve lopment hol ds no future
for B l ack . I n most of in­
Another pos s i b i l i ty i s 1 6 stances the K night wi l l be
Ne5 1 ? , whi ch wi l l presented unabl e to p artake in the
i n I l l us trative Game 8 , m i ddl egame combat . Hence
Ko uatly - Hol ak , Tol uca 1982 . 1 1 . . . Nc7 l ? 12 Bc4 ( 1 2 Rel
NxbS 13 axb5 Re8 14 Qd3 Nb6
16 Bd4+ 15 b3 Bg4 16 Bb2 pro d uces an
17 Be3 unc l ear pos i t i on ) comes into
c o ns i derat i on :
Kapengut ' s i dea . Yuneyev , on a ) 1 2 . . . Re8 13 Re l Nb6 1 4 Bb3
the other hand , s ugge s t s 1 7 ( Or 14 B f l Bg4 15 Bd2 Bd4+ 1 6
Khl Nb6 1 8 Ne 7 + Kg7 19 f5 Khl Bf2 1 7 Re2 Bxf3 1 8 gxf3
Qxd6 20 f6+ Kh8 21 Be8 , al ­ Qh4 with co•p l i cati ons )
though 21 . . . e3 ! 22 Bxe3 Be6 14 . . . Bg4 1 5 Bd2 c4 16 Ba2 as
creates a very uncl ear pos i ­ 1 7 h3 , drawn , Mal i ch -
t i on .
17 Bxe3+
l
Bonsch , Berl i n 1 979 .
b 1 2 . . . a6 13 e5 (A strong
a ternat i ve is 13 Rel ! ? Nb6
18 Nxe3 Nf6 14 Bf l Bg4 1 5 h3 Bxf3 16 Qxf3
19 f5 Nc8 17 R b l Rb8 1 8 b4 when
Wh i t e has the upper hand )
White has a strong i ni t i a­ 13 . . . dxe5 ( 1 3 . . . b5 1 ? ) 1 4 d6
t i ve . Ne8? ( Better i s 1 4 . . . Ne6 1 ) 1 5
Ng5 e4 1 6 Be3 h6 ( 1 6 . . . Nef6 )
82 : 9 Na& 17 f5 1 hxg5 18 fxg6 Ne 5
lo ais ( 1 8 . . . Nef6 now loses to 1 9
Bg5 ) 1 9 Qh5 Nxg6 20 Qxg6 Nxd6
( See d i agram next c o l umn ) 21 Rxf7 ! Rx f 7 ( Or 21 . . . Nxf7
22 kfl and Bl ack mus t face a
10 0-0 s trong assaul t ) 22 Rfl Qf8 ,
as in P l e i s ter - Kul i gowsk i ,
Other moves are : Ramsgate 1 9 8 1 , when 23 Rxf7 !
26 Chapter 3 : 8 B b 5 + Nfd7

wou l d have given Whi te a d e ­ Bf3 b5 19 axb5 ax:b5 20 Qb3

c i s ive attack , e . g . , 23 . . .
Nxf 7 24 Nxe4 Qe7 25 Bxg5 Qc7
26 Bf6 .
c ) 1 2 . . . Nb6 13 Bd3 ( No t 1 3
Be2 Bg4 1 4 a5 Nc8 1 5 Nd2 Bxe2
16 Qxe2 a6 with equal i ty )
1 3 . . . Bg4 1 4 h3 Bxf3 1 5 Qxf3
Na6 16 e5 ! dxe5 17 f5 Nb4 1 8
B e 4 Qh4 1 9 Kh2 ! ( Nunn ) .
Nh5 21 Bxh5 gxh5 22 Nf3 Qd7
with an approximat e l y even
pos i t i on ( Doroshkev i ch - Ani ­
kayev , Novo s i b i rsk 1 9 7 6 .
14 Bel
Kapengut prefers 1 4 Qb3 1 ? ,
for examp l e , 1 4 . . . Rb8 ( 1 4 . . .
Nf6 i s •et by 15 e5 ! dxe5 1 6
fxe5 N fxd5 1 7 Bg5 Qd 7 18
Radl ) 1 5 Kh l b5 1 6 axb5 axb5
17 e5 ! ? dxe5 1 8 fxe5 Nxe5 1 9
Bg5 Qd7 2 0 Rad ! wi th chances
for both s i des .

14 Nf6

Preference •us t be gi ven to

f
14 . . . Nb6 ! ? 15 a5 ( Both 15 Bh4
Bf6 16 Bxf6 Qxf6 1 7 Qd2 B 4
and 15 h3 f5 pose no prob e•s
for B lack ) 1 5 . . . Nd7 16 Bh4
Qc7 wi th the fur ther . . . b5 .
The cr i t i ca l pos i t ion . Wh i t e 15 Nd2 Bd7
c an now choose fro• : 16 BM b5
8 2 1 1 2 8d2 17 e5 1 dxe5
822 12 Be3 18 Nde4 Bf5
B23 12 Khl 19 axb5 Bxe4
B24 12 h3 20 Nxe4 Q b6
The continuation 1 2 Re l i s 21 Bxf6 Bxf6
featured i n I l l us tra t i ve Gaae 22 f5 1
1 0 , Ree - Kul ak , W i j k aan Zee
1983 . Dorosbkevi ch - Kremenet sky ,
B r i ansk 1 975 . Whi te has a
821 : 12 Bd2 stro n g attack .
Wh ite prepares to trans fer B22 : 12 Be3
the Bi shop to the K i ngs i de
v i a el and h4 . S i • i l ar l y to the previ ous
sect i on , Wh i te read i es for
12 a6 the depl oyment of the Bi shop
on the K ings i de ( v i a f2 and
The game Dorosbkevi ch - Pf l e ­ h4 ) . However , in th i s in­
ger, Po l an i ca Zdroj 1971 , saw stance t h e d2-square rema i ns
ins tead 1 2 . . . Nf6 13 Qb3 Bg4 unoccupied to perm i t the re ­
14 Bc4 Nd7 15 h3 Bxf3 1 6 Rxf3 treat of the Kn i ght .
a6 17 Kh l Kh8 18 Re l Qh4 1 9
Ndl Rae8 20 N f 2 f5 2 1 g3 Qd8
22 ex f 5 gxf5 23 Rf e3 Rxe3 24
Rxe3 Bd4 25 Bc3 Nf6 26 Re2 ,
when 26 . . . Nh5 1 27 Bxd4+ cxd4
28 Kh2 Rg8 wou l d have given
Bl ack a good game . However ,
Whi te cou l d i mprove h i s p l ay
with 13 h3 1 ? , i nstead of the
dubi ous 1 3 Qb3 .
13 Be2 Re8? 1

More cons i s tent i s 13 . . . Rb8

1 4 Bel ( 1 4 Qb3 b5 ! ) 1 4 . . . Rea
15 Kh l Nf6 16 Nd2 ( 1 6 Bh4
Bg4 ) 1 6 . . . b6 1 7 Bg3 Bb7 18 12 a6
 Chapter 3 : 8 Bb5+ Nfd7 27

Other moves are : 823 : 12 Khl

a ) 1 2 . . . b6 13 Qe2 ( Better i s
13 Bf2 ! ? Ba6 1 4 Bh4 B f 6 1 5
Bxf6 Nxf6 1 6 Bxa6 Nxa6 1 7 e5 !
wi th advantage ) 13 . . . Nf6 1 4
Bf2 Nh5 1 5 Bh4 Qc7 16 Ne l
( Cons iderat i on s ho u l d be
Before dec i d i ng on h i s aiddle­
game s trategy , White reaoves
his Kin� from the dangerous
gl -a7 d i agonal .
•

give n to 1 6 f5 ! ? ) 16 . . . fS ! 1 7
exf 5 Rx f 5 1 8 g3 Bb7 1 9 Bc4
Bd4 + 20 Khl Qf7 21 Ng2 Re8 22
Qf3 Nxd5 and Bl ack has the
u pper hand , A . Z a i t sev - Tai ,
Erevan 1 962 .
b ) 1 2 . . . Nf6 13 h3 ( 1 3 e5 i s
point l e s s o n account o f
1 3 . . . Ng4 ) 1 3 . . . a 6 1 4 Bc4
Nxe4? ! 15 Nxe4 Re8 1 6 Ne5 ! b6
( 1 6 . . . dxeS 17 Bxc5 exf 4 1 8
Nd6 ) 1 7 Ng5 dxe5 ( Or 1 7 . . . f6
1 8 Ne6 Bxe6 19 dxe6 d5 20
Nc6 ! Nxc 6 21 Bxd5 Qc7 2 2 f5 ,
favori ng Whi te ) 18 fxe5 Bh6 ,
as in Soos - Povah , B i rmin­ 12 Nf6
gham 1977 , when 1 9 e6 ! wi ns
for Whi te . Consi derati on mu s t be gi ven
to 12 . . Qc7 or 12 . . . a6 13 B c4
.

13 Be2 Nb6 1 4 Bb3 ( 1 4 Qe2? Nxc4 1 5

Qxc4 b5 1 ) 1 4 . . . c4 ! ( Gufeld ) .
The game A. Z a i t sev - Gufe l d ,
Dobrecen 1 9 70 , s aw instead 13 13 f5 ! ?
Bc4 Rb8 14 h3 Re8 ( Another
o p t i on is 1 4 . . . b5 ! ? ) 1 5 Bf2 1 3 e5? i s met by 1 3 . . . dxe5 1 4
b5 16 axb5 Nb6 17 Be2 axb5 18 fxe5 Nfxd5 , etc .
Bh4 Bf6 1 9 Bxf6 Qxf6 2 0 Bxb5
Bd7 2 1 Bxd7 Nxd7 22 Qe2 c4 23 13 a6
e5 with advantage . Hence
B l ack must p l ay 13 . . . Nb6 ! ? An i nteres t i ng a l ternat ive i s
( i ns tea d o f 1 3 . . . Rb8 ) 1 4 Be2 13 . Ng4 ! ? 1 4 Bg5 Bf6 o r 1 4 h3
• .

Bg4 1 5 a5 Nd7 1 6 h3 Bxf3 17 Ne5 15 Nxe5 Bxe5 .

Bxf3 Re8 , reaching a bal anced
pos i t i on ( Soos - Niko l a i chuk , 14 8c4 Ng4
Lugano 1979 ) .
Kapengut prefers 1 4 . . . gxf5 ! ?
13 b6 1 5 Nh4 Nxe4 1 6 Nxf5 Bxf5 1 7
Rxf5 Qh4 wi th advan tage for
Kapengut prefers 13 . . . Nf6 ! ? , B l ack .
c i t i ng 1 4 h3 Re8 1 5 e5 dxe5
1 6 Bxc5 N fxd5 17 Qb3 Be6 1 8 15 Bg5 8f6
Nxd5 Nxd5 1 9 Radl Nxf4 , wh i ch 16 8xf6 Qxf6
favors B l ack . 17 Qd2 pf5
18 Rael
14 h3 Nf6
15 Bc4 Nxe4 Equ al l y strong i s 1 8 exf5 .
16 Nxe4 Re8
17 Ne5 1 dxe5 18 f4
18 d6 exf4 19 e5 1
19 Rxf4 Be6
20 Qb3 Kh8 Butnor i us - Bangev , USSR
21 Bxe6 Rxe6 1977 . Whi t e has a strong
22 Rafl Nc6 ; n i t i at i ve .
23 Qd5
824 : 12 h3
Doroshkev ich - Gorshkov , Len­
i ngrad 19 73 . Whi te ' s i n i tia­ A dubious defensive measure to
t i ve c o • pe n s a t es the de f i c i t depr i ve the B l ack p i eces of
o f a pawn . the g4- square .
28 Chapter 3 : 8 Bb5+ Nfd7

frequent al terna t i ve . After

1 0 . . . Qh4 + 11 g3 Q d8 12 Nf3 0-0
1 3 0-0 Re8 ( 1 3 . . . Nf6? 1 4 e5
dxe5 1 5 fxe5 Ng4 1 6 Bg5 favors
Whi te ) the opti on are :
a ) 1 4 Kg2 Nf8 ( 1 4 . . . Bxc3? 1 1 5
bxc3 Rxe4 i s ri sky i n v i ew o f
1 6 Bd3 Re8 1 7 c 4 1 when Whi t e
can eas i ly l aunch a K i ngs i de
at tack ) 15 Nd2 Nbd7 1 6 Bf3 Rb8
1 7 Nc4 Nb6 1 8 Na3 Bd7 1 9 a 5
Nc8 20 Nc4 Bb5 with a compl ex
pos i t i on ( Fara go - Raj kovi c ,
P l ovdi v 1 983 ) .
12 b ) 1 4 R e l Bxc 3 ( Ac c ep t i ng t h i s
y
a6
13 Be2 pawn s a c r i f i ce a l wa s invo lves

­
so•e r i sk . Hence B ack must
13 Bc4 a l s o comes i nto con cons i der another p l an of deve­
s i derat i on . l o pme n t , n amel y 1 4 . . . Nf8 15
Bfl Bg4 1 6 h3 Bxf3 17 Qxf3
13 Re8 Nbd7 18 Bd2 Rc8 , e tc . ) 15 bxc3
14 Rel f5 Rxe4 16 c4 Nf6 17 Bb2 Bg4 1 8
h3 Bx f3 ( 1 8 . . . Bxh3 1 9 Ng5 ) 1 9
Another poss i bi l i ty is 1 4 . . . Bxf3 Rxe l + ( 1 9 . . . Rxc4 20 g4
Nf6 1 5 Nd2 b6 1 6 Bf 3 Rb8 . al l ows Wh i te to l aunch a
strong Rings i de attack ) 2 0
15 exf5 Qxe l Nbd7 2 1 g4? 1 Qb6 2 2 Rbl
16 Bc4 Qb3 1 and B l ack has good
counterpl ay , Arkhi pov - Sax ,
Or 16 . . . Rxe l + ! ? 17 Nxe l Bd4+ Hungary 1 984 . Ins tead of 2 1
1 8 Khl Qf6 1 9 Bd2 Nb6 w i th a g4? ! Whi te shoul d p l ay 2 1 Rbl !
r e l a t i ve l y even posi·t i on . p l ann ing g3-g4 -g5 and Qc3 with
a strong attack .
17 Rxe8+ Qxe8 c ) 1 4 Nd2 Nf6 1 5 Bf3 Bh3 1 6
18 Bfl Bd7 Re l Nbd7 1 7 Nc4 Nb6 1 8 Ne3 h5
19 a5 Nc8 19 Qd3 Rb8 20 Bd2 Nc8 21 Rah l
20 Bd2 b5 1 Na7 22 b 4 cxb4 2 3 Rxb4 Nd7 2 4
Qbl Nc5 25 Nc4 , when i nstead
Hort - Panno , Madr i d 1973 . of 25 . . . a5 ( Hu l ak - Lobron ,
Bl ack h as go o d Q ueen s i de Zagreb 1 985 ) Timman recommends
counterp l ay . 25 . . . b5 1
83 : 9 a6 11 Nf3 Re8
10 Be2
l l . . . Nf6 · has prove d i nfer ior
The retreat to d3 trans � oses i n recent tournament prac­
to va r i at i ons ana lyzed i n t i ce . After 12 0-0 B l ack can
Section Al . proceed :
a ) 1 2 . . . Re8 1 3 e5 dxe5 14 fxe5
Ng4 15 Bg5 ( Mu i r - Eymann ,
Ramsgate 1 983 , s aw i ns tead 1 5
e6 ! ? fxe6 1 6 Ng5 Bd4+ 1 7 Khl
Ne5? 1 8 Nce4 exd5 19 Nf6 + Kh8
20 Qel Nbd7 21 Nxe8 Qxe8 22
Qh4 Qg8 23 Ra3 Nb6 24 Rf8 ! ,
1 -0 . B l ack ' s p l ay cou l d be
i mproved upon with 17 . . . Nf2+ )
1 5 . . . f6 16 exf6 Bxf6 1 7 Bxf6
( 1 7 Qd2 , p l ayed in Hol l i s -
Konda l i , corr 1 9 7 2 , i s even
stronger . That game concl uded
17 . . . Bf5 1 8 h3 Bxg5 1 9 Qxg5
Ne3 20 Qxd8 Rxd8 21 Rf2 h5 22
10 0-0 Nh4 Rf8 23 Rel Nc2 24 Refl Ne3
25 Nx �6 ! , 1 -0 ) 1 7 . . . Qxf6 18 d6
The Queen sort i e to h4 is a Bf5? ( E s sential was 1 8 . . . Ne 3 )
 Chapter 3 : 8 Bb5+ Nfd 7 29

19 Qb3+ Kg7 20 Nd5 ! Qxd 6 2 1 Qxf5 ! Nxa3 24 Nd5 Qc2 25

Radl Nd7 2 2 Qc3+ Kh6 2 3 h3 Qxf 7 + Kb8 ( Borik - P od z i e lny ,
Rxe2 24 hxg4 Bxg4 25 Qc l + Kg7 Wes t Ge r ma ny 1 983 ) , when 26
2 6 Nf4 , 1 -0 , Mes t e l - P . Nf6 ! wou l d win qui ckly .
L i t t l ewoo d , Has t i ngs 1 982/83 .
b ) 1 2 . . . Bg4 1 3 e5 Bxf3 13 h3
( Forced ; 13 . . . Nfd7 is •et by
14 e6 fxe6 15 dxe6 Bxe6 l & Equa l l y s trong i s 1 3 Nd2 Nbd7
Ng5 and 1 3 . . . Ne8 fai l s t o 1 4 14 Khl Rb8 15 Qc2 f5 16 Bd3
Re l Qe7 1 5 e6 ! ) 1 4 Bxf3 dxe5 fxe4 17 Ndxe4 Nf6 18 Nxf6+
15 fxe5 Nfd7 1 6 e6 Ne5 1 7 Qxf6 1 9 Bd2 Bf5 20 a5 when
Bg4 ! fxe 6 ( Or 1 7 . . . Kh8 1 8 Whi te has the upper hand ,
exf7 Rxf7 1 9 Rxf7 Nxf 7 2 0 Be6 F l ear - Kaiser , Bunde 1985 .
Ng5 21 Bxg5 Qxg5 2 2 Q b 3 ! ) 1 8
Bxe6+ Kh8 1 9 Ne4 Rxf l + 20 13 Nbd7
Qxf l Nbd7 21 Ra3 ! with a pow­ 14 Bd2 Nf6
erful i n i t i a t i ve , Semkov - 15 Qc2 Nh5
Popov , Sof i a 1 981 . 16 Kh2 f5
c ) 1 2 . . . Qc7 , wh i ch i s fea­ 17 Ng5
tured in I l l us trat ive Gaae
1 1 , Kasparov - Ku i j pers , 1 7 e5 dxe5 1 8 fxe5 i s fut i l e
Dort•und 1 980 . because o f 1 8 . . . Rxe5 !

12 0-0 17 h6
eiJi5
�
1a
19 fxg5 1
On 19 . . . gxh5 20 exf5 the
strong connected pawns woul d
ful l y compensate the l o s s o f
a p i ece .
20 Be2 QX£5
21 Bxf4 Qe7
22 Bd3
Razvalev - Var l aaov , corr
1 9 8 1 /83 . The pos i tion favors
Wh i te .
12 Nf8
C: 9 Nf3
Bl ack must regroup before
compl e t i ng his Queens i de de ­
y
vel opment . 1 2 . . . Bxc3 13 bxc3
Rxe4 14 c4 is ve r r i sky be­
cause of t h e resu t i ng weak­
nesses on the dark squares .
Other moves a l s o o f fer B l ack
very l i t t l e :
a ) 1 2 . . . b6 1 3 Nd2 Nf6 1 4 Bf3
8 b 7 1 5 Nc4? ! ( Stronger i s 1 5
Re l ! Nbd7 1 6 N c4 w i th good
prospects ) 1 5 . . . b5 16 axb5
axb5 17 Rxa8 Bxa8 18 Nxb5 Nxe4
1 9 Rel Nf6 20 Nbxd6 Rxe l + 2 1
Qxe l Bxd5 2 2 Bxd5 Nxd 5 2 3 f5 ,
p r oduc i ng a compl i cated po­ Whi te opts f o r deve l opment ,
s i t ion , ( Do11111 e s - Agapov , i gnoring the enemy threa t s on
L e n i ngrad 1981 ) . the Queens i de . In t h i s man­
b ) 1 2 . . . Qc7 1 3 Khl c4 1 4 Ra3 ner he a l s o avo ids the l i nes
Nc5 15 e5 ! Bf5 ( 1 5 . . . dxe5 1 6 i nvo l vi ng . . . Qh4+ .
d6 ) 1 6 Bxc4 Nbd7 17 Nd4 Nb6
18 Nxf5 gx f5 ( Or 18 . . . Nxc4 1 9 9 a6
Nxg7 Kxg7 20 Qd4 w i t h a c l ear 10 Bd3
advantage ) 19 8a2 dxe5 20 d6
Qc6 21 Qh5 Ne6 22 fxe5 Nc4 23 Po l ikarpov - Kapengut , Minsk
30 Chapter 3 : 8 Bb5+ N fd7
1 976 , s aw i n s tead 1 0 Be2 b5
1 1 a4 b4 12 Nbl 0 -0 13 Nbd2
Nf6 14 0-0 Re8 15 Bd3 B g4
( 1 5 . . . c4 ! ? ) 16 h3 Bxf3 1 7
Qxf3 Nxd5 ! 1 8 e 5 ( Better i s
1 8 exd5 ! ? Bd4 + 1 9 Kh2 Re3 2 0
Qd l Rxd3 2 1 Qc2 R e 3 2 2 Ne4
Rxe4 2 3 Qxe4 Nd7 wi th chances ­
for both s i des ) 18 . . . dxe5 1 9
Be4 Nc6 ! 2 0 Nb3 c 4 wi th ex­
ce l l ent p l ay for B lack , e . g . ,
2 1 Bxd5 e4 ! 22 Bxe4 Nd4 23
Nxd4 Qxd4 + .
The exchange on d7 a l s o pos e s
n o pro b l ems f o r Bl ack , e . g . ,
1 0 Bxd7+ Nxd7 1 1 0-0 0-0 1 2
a 4 Rb8 1 3 Qd3 Re8 1 4 Re l Qc7
1 5 Be3 , as i n Pfe i ffer - B i a­
l as , Wes t Geraany 1 959 , when
Bl ack cou l d gain the edge by
playing 15 . . . c4 ! 16 Qc2 Nc5
17 Bd4 Nb3 1 8 Rad l Nxd4 1 9
Nxd4 B g4 .
10 0-0
11 0-0 b5
12 Khl l
Wh i te safeguards against the
check on the a7-gl d i agona l .
Other options are :
a ) 1 2 Be3 Re8 ( Better i s
1 2 . . . b4 ! ? 1 3 Na4 Nf6 1 4 h3
Bd7 . Another v i ab l e cho i ce
i s 1 2 . . . Qc7 , p l ayed in Pere­
s i pki n - Vai ser , USSR 1 9 7 8 ,
w i th an intri cate gaae after
1 3 Rel Re8 1 4 h3 Nb6 1 5 e 5 !
c4 16 Bbl N8d7 1 7 Ne4 dxe5 1 8
d 6 Qc6 ) 1 3 Ng5 b 4 1 4 Na4 Nf6
15 e5 ! ? Nxd5 1 6 Bxg6 hxg6 1 7
Qxd5 R a 7 1 8 Radl and Whi te
has strong pressure , Loabard
- N i ewerge l t , Switzerland
1971 .
b ) 1 2 Qe l Re8 ( Adzemyan - Ker­
noz i cky , Mos cow 1 963 , s aw in­
s tead 1 2 . . . Nb6 1 3 Qg3 f5? 1 4
Ng5 b4 1 5 Ne2 fxe4 16 Bx e 4 Bf5
17 Bxf5 Rxf5 18 Qh3 h6 1 9 Ne6
Qf6 2 0 Ng3 Rxd5 21 f5 w i th
advantage ) 1 3 Qg3 c4 ( 1 3 . . . Nf6
fai l s to 1 4 e5 ! Nh5 1 5 Qf2 c4
1 6 Bc2 Bg4 1 7 Ng5 f6 18 Ne6
Bxe6 19 dxe6 fxe5 20 f5 -
Kapengut ) 1 4 Bc2 b4 15 Na4 Nf6
1 6 f5 Bd7 ( Hartston suggests
the Exchange sacr i f i ce 1 6 . . .
Nxe4 1 7 Bxe4 Rxe4 1 8 Ng5 Bxf 5 )
17 Bg5 Bb5 1 8 e5 dxe5 19 fxg6
fxg6 20 Nxe5 Qc7 2 1 Nxg6 Qxg3
22 hxg3 Nbd7 when Bl ack has
the i n i t i at i ve , Cherepkov -
Sue t i n , Sochi 1 9 6 1 .
c ) 1 2 a4 c4 13 Bc2 Qb6+ 14 Khl
b4 1 5 a5 Qc7 16 Ne2 Nc5 1 7 e5
Bg4 1 8 Qd4 Nb7 1 9 Bd2 b3 20
Be4 f5 ! 21 exf6 Bxf6 2 2 Qe3
Qc5 23 Nc3 Nd7 24 Ng5 Qxe3 25
Bxe3 Bxg5 ! 20 fxg5 Ndc5 and
B l ack has a smal l p l us
according to Kapengut .
12 Nb6
Kapengut prefers 1 2 . . . b4 1 3
Nbl ( 1 3 Na4 Nb6 1 4 e5 B g4 ! )
1 3 . . . Nb6 1 4 Nbd2 Bg4 1 5 h3
Bxf3 1 6 Nxf3 c4 1 7 Bc2 N8d7
18 Rbl Nc5 19 Rel Re8 20 e5
dxe5 21 Be3 Nd3 2 2 Bxd3 cxd3
23 fxe5 Nxd5 24 Qxd3 Nxe3
w i t h equa l i ty . However , it
appears that 1 6 Qxf3 woul d be
s uper i or to 1 6 Nxf3 .
13 f5 1 N8d7
14 Bg5 Bf6
15 Bf4 Qe7
16 Qd2 Bb7
On 16 . . . Ne5 Pachll an recom­
aends 17 Nxe5 dxe5 18 Bh6 Re8
1 9 g4 Qd6 20 Rf3 , favor i ng
Wh i t e .
17 Rael Rac8
18 Ndl Rf e8
19 Qf2 b4
20 Ne3
G l ek - Anikayev , Minsk 1 983 .
White has a s l i ght edge .
 CHAP TER l' O U R

1 d4 Nf6 Kxd 7 1 5 Rgl Bxc3+ 1 6 bxc3

2 c4 c5 Rhe8+ 17 Ne5+ dxe5 18 hxg3
3 d5 e6 exf4 + 19 Kd2 Qh2+ 20 Kd3 b5 !
4 Nc3 exd5 w i t h a strong attack for
5 cxd5 d6 B l ack ) ll . . . Bd4 1 2 exd7+ Bxd7
6 e4 g6 13 Qe2+ K d8 14 Bxd7 Kxd7 1 5
7 f4 Bg'l g3 Nxg3+ 1 6 hxg3 Qxhl 1 7 Qg2
8 Bb5+ when Whi te has the up p er
hand .
8 . . . Nfd7 , the m o s t po p ular
cont i nuat ion , was analyzed in 10 fxe5 Nb5
Chapter 3 . H ere we wi l l l ook 11 e6
at other opt i ons ava i l ab l e
f o r B l ack : Thi s l eads to forced and un­
A : 8 . . . Nb(l7 c l ear co•pl i ca t i ons . Hence
B : 8 . . . Bd7 Wh i t e • i ght want to cons ider
1 1 N f3 ! ? , e . g
. •11 . . 0-0 1 2
.

A: 8 Nbd7 Bg5 ( 1 2 e 6 i s inferi o r on

account of 12 . . . Nb6 . Winn i ng
the p i ece by 1 2 g4 Nxe5 1 3
gxh5 i s l ikewi se very r i sky
because o f 13 . . . Bh3 ! ) 1 2 . . . f6
( On 12 . . . Qb6 or 12 . . . Qa5
Whi t e p l ays 1 3 Be7 Re8 1 4
d6 ! ) 1 3 exf6 Ndxf6 1 4 o-o a6
15 Be2 b5 16 d6 ! with an ac­
t i ve game .

Thi s continuat i o n has found

j us t a marginal entry into
the opening •anua l s . I t has
� oor reputa t i on which is eas­
i l y s upported by the tourna­
ment praxi s . However , B l ack
has certain attacking poss i ­
b i l i t i e s whi ch require accu­
rate p l ay by the Wh ite s i de .
9 e5
The rapi d-chess ga•e Reshev­
sky - Tal , Be l grade 1 9 7 1 , s aw
i ns tead 9 Nf3 0-0 10 0-0 a6
1 1 Bd3 ( Be t ter is 1 1 Be2 ,
i ntend i ng to •eet 1 1 . . . Re8 by
1 2 Nd2 ) 1 1 . . . Rea 1 2 a4 c4 ! 1 3
Bc2 Nc 5 14 e5 Ng4 15 h3 Nh6
16 Be3 Nd7 1 7 g4 dxe5 18 fxe5
Nxe5 1 9 Nxe5 Rxe5 2 0 Bd4 Rg5
21 Bx!t7 Nxg4 ! and Bl ack ' s
attac K i s dec i s i ve .
9 dxe5
9 . . . Nh5? ! i s i nade qu ate in
view o f 1 0 e6 Qh4 + 1 1 K f l l
( Avo i ding 1 1 g3? Nxg3 1 2 Nf3
Qh3 1 3 exd 7 + Bxd7 14 Bxd7 +
B lack can now choose between :
Al : 1 1 . . . fxe6
A2 : 1 1 . . . Qh4+
Al : 11 fxe8
12 dxe8 0-0 ! ?
B l ack ' s defens i ve s trategy i s
based on thi s very move .
Whi t e mus t proceed wi th cau­
t i on t o avo i d a f i erce ene•y
attack , as de m ons t rated by
the f o l lowing examples :
a ) 1 3 exd7? Bxc3+ 14 bxc3
1h4 + 15 g3 ( 1 5 Kd2 Bxd7 1 6
Bxd7 Rf2+ 1 7 Ne2 Rd8 1 8 Kc2
Qe4+ 19 Kb3 Rxe 2 subj e cts
Whi te to a strong assaul t )
1 5 . . . Qe4+ 1 6 Qe2 Qxhl 1 7 Qe6+
Kh8 18 Qe5+ Ng7 19 Be3 ( 1 9
Bh6? f a i l s to 1 9 . . . Qxgl+ 20
32 Chapter 4 : 8 Bb5+
Kd2 Qxh2 + and 2 1 . . . Qxh6 )
19 . . . Bxd7 2 0 Bxd7 Rae8 ! 2 1
Bxe8 Rxe8 2 2 Qxc5 Qxgl + , 0-1 ,
Rajna - Nemeth , Budapest
1 984 .
b ) 1 3 Qd5? Qe7 1 4 Bxd7 Bxd7
15 Be3 ( 15 Qxd7 loses to
15 . . . Bxc3+ 16 bxc3 Qh4 + )
15 . . . Bxc3+ 16 bxc3 Bc6 1 7
Qxc5 Qxe6 1 8 N f 3 Raes 1 9 Kf2
Bxf3 2 0 gxf3 Qe4 , 0 - 1 , Bert -
Pouaarat , corr 1 98 4 .
Thus Whi te i gnores the teap­
tat i on of aater i a l gains , and
i ns tead con t i nues to deve l op
h i s pi eces , keep i ng i n • i nd
the secur i ty of h i s K ing ,
wh i ch i s i n great danger
wh i le in the center .
13 Nf3 1
13 Bd4 1 ?
The only reasonab l e cont i nua­
t i on i n a l i ne whi ch does not
f
enj oy much o f a r eputation in
the openin aanual s anyway .
On 13 . . . Nd 6 Ne i recommends
14 Qxd8 Rxd8 15 e7 Rd6 1 6
Ng5 1 Be6 1 7 0 - 0 a 6 18 Nxe6
axb5 19 Nc7 Rc8 20 N3xb5 ,
w i nning .
Th e o ld reco ..endat ion ,
13 . . . Rxf3 14 Qxf3 Bxc3+ ( Or
14 . . . Ne5 15 Qd5 Qh4+ 16 g3
Qe7 17 Bg5 Qxe6 18 Qd8 + ! Bf8
19 0-0 Nf7 2 0 Rxf7 ! ) 15 bxc3
Ne5 16 Qe4 Qf6 , was assessed
by Keres as equa l at one
ti me . However , the gaae
Ebzerman - Van der Zwan , corr
1979 , dec i s ively d i s pe l l ed
t h i s not ion : 1 7 e7 ! Qxe7 1 8
0 - 0 B f 5 1 9 Qd5+ Kg7 2 0 Bg5 1
Nf6 ( 2 0 . . . Qxg5 21 Qxe5+ Kb6
2 2 Rael a l so favors Whi te ) 2 1
Bxf6+ Kxf6 2 2 Rae l Qc7 23
Bd7 ! Rd8 24 Qe6+ Kg7 25 Qe7+
and Wh i te is w i nn i ng .
14 Qb3?
Better i s 14 exd7 Bxd7
( 1 4 . . . Qe7+ 15 Qe2 ) 15 Qb3+
K g 7 16 Bg5 Qe8+ 1 7 Be2 and
Bl ack has yet to prove the
correctne s s of h i s p i e ce
sacr i f i ce .
14 Qe7
15 Be3
15 Bg5 i s countered by 15 • . .
Ndf6 .
15 He5 1
16 Hxe5 Bxe3
17 Hd5 Qb4+
18 g3
Nes t e l - Hodgson , Engl and
1 983 , now s aw the erroneous
18 . . . Bf2+? 19 Ke2 Qe4+ 20
Ne3 1 Qxe5 21 e7+ Be6 2 2
exf8=Q+ Rx f 8 2 3 Qxe6+ ! Qxe6
24 Bc4 with a winn i ng e d ge
for Whi t e . I ns tead , B l ack
shoul d p l ay 18 . . . Nxg3 1 , e . g . ,
19 Nxe3 Nxhl + 2 0 K d l Qd4+
with a deci s i ve advantage .
A2 : 11 Qh4+ 1 ?
12 g3 Nxg3
13 bxg3 1 ?
Other moves are :
a ) 1 3 Nf3 Bxc3+ 1 4 bxc3 Qe4+
15 Kf2 ( Or 15 Kd2 Nxhl 16
exd7+ Bxd7 17 Bxd7+ Kxd7 18
Qxhl Raes 19 Qfl Qxd5+ when
Bl ack bas the upper band )
15 . . . Nxh l + 16 Qxh l fxe6 1 7
dxe6 0-0 1 ( 1 7 . . . Qxe6 18 Bh6
Qf5 19 Qe l + Kd8 20 Qe3 i s
unc l ear ) 18 exd7 Bx d 7 1 9 Bxd7
Rf7? ( Be t t e r is 19 . . Rad8 1 20
.
Bb5 c4 21 Be3 Rd3 22 Re l g5
23 h3 h5 1 w i t h a stron2 at­
tack ) 20 Bb5 c4 21 Bh6 ? ( Es ­
sent ial i s 2 1 Ba4 , i n or d e r
to meet 2 1 . . . Raf8 by 2 2 Bdl )
21 . • Qb4 + 2 2 Kg2 , P . L i t t l e ­
.
wood - Hartoch , London 1 984 ,
 Chapter 4 : 8 Bb5+ 33

and B l ack w i n s with the sim- 19 Kf3 Qhl + , the a l t e rnate 18

c l e 22 . . . Qh5 1 23 Qfl Qxb5 . Qe2 ! ? is the theme of I l lus­
) 1 3 exd7+ Bx d7 14 Bxd7+ trat ive Gaae 1 2 , P . Little­
Kxd7 15 Qa4 + ( On 1 5 Nf3 Bxc3 + wood - Norwood , London 1 9 85 .
1 6 bxc3 Raes+ 1 7 Kd2 Q f 4 + 1 8
Kc2 Qf5+ 1 9 Kb2 Nx h l 20 Qxhl 18 Bxc3+
Re 2+ 21 Nd2 Qd3 B l ack bas a 19 bxc3 Qxd5+
dangerous attack ) 15 . . . Qxa4 - 20 Kc2 Qe 4+
1 6 Nxa4 Nxhl 1 7 Nf3 Raes+ 1 8 21 Qd3 Qxe3
K f 1 Bd4 1 9 Kg2 Re2+ 20 ICxbl 22 Rfl Qe 8
R he 8 ( 20 . . . Rf2 2 1 Nxd4 cxd4 23 Kb2 c4
22 Nc5+ is unc l ear ) 2 1 Bf4 b6 24 Qd2 b5
( Avo i d i ng 2 1 . . . Rf2 in v i ew o f
22 Nxd4 ! cxd4 23 Nc5+ Kea 2 4 Crouch - Mar t i n , Engl and
d6 1 ) 2 2 Bg3 , resul ting in a 1 985 . The intri cate pos i t i on
co m p l ex p o s i t i o n . i s s l i ghtly better for Wh i te .

13 Qllbl B: 8 . • . Bd7
14 Be3 9 e5

The �e G i l - Kuczynski ,
Sharj ah 1 985 , de v i a te d wi th
14 exd 7 + , but a f te r 14 . . . Bxd7
1 5 Qe2+ Kf8 16 Be3 Re8 1 7
Bxd7 Rxe3 1 8 Qxe3 B d4 1 9 Qf3
QX£1 + 20 Q f l Qxg3+ Whi te was
in troubl e .
14 0-0
A r eas o nab l e a l terna t i ve i s
1 4 . . . Bxc3 + ! ? 1 5 bxc'S Qe4 1 6
Qf3 1 Qxf3 1 7 exd7+ Bxd 7 1 8
Bxd7 + 1Cxd7 1 9 Nxf3 Rhe8 2 0
Kf2 b 6 wi th a relat i ve l y e ven 9 dxe5
po s i t i o n .
Other moves are :
15 exd7 Bxd7 a ) 9 . . . Nh5 1 0 Nf3 dx e 5 ( Sa­
18 Bxd7 Rae8 1 ? kharov - P o l yak , Kiev 1 9 58 ,
saw i n s tead 10 . . . 0-0 1 1 Bxd7
A c ons e quent dec i s ion ; B l ack Nxd7 12 g4 Nxf 4 13 Bxf 4 dxe5
must prevent h i s adv e rs ary 14 Bg5 f6 15 Bh4 c4 16 Qe2
froa cons o l i dat i ng , when the Rea 17 Nd2 Nb6 18 Qg2 and
material s i tuation wou l d de­ B l ack had no c o a p e n s at io n for
c i de the outco m e . the sac r i f i ced piece ) 1 1 fxe5
0-0 12 Bxd7 ( Th i s i s stronger
17 Bxe8 Rxe8 than 12 0-0 Bg4 13 Be2 Nd7 1 4
e6 fxe6 1 5 dxe6 Bxe6 1 6 Ng5
Rxf l + 1 7 Qxf l Bd4 + 1 8 Khl Nf8
1 9 Nxe6 Nxe6 2 0 Bc4 Ng7 2 1
Bh6 Kha when B l ack de fe nd s
h i s p o s i t i on ) 12 . . . Qxd7
( 1 2 . . . Nxd7 i nvolves a pi ece
sacr i f i ce , e . g . , 13 g4 Nxe5
1 4 gxh5 Nxf3+ 1 5 Qxf3 Re8+ 16
Kdl Qh4 17 h6 Bh8 1 8 Bf4 and
Wh i t e has th e upper hand ,
We i sman - Stein , Odessa 1 958 )
1 3 0-0 Qf5 1 4 Qa4 Bxe5 1 5
Nxe5 Qxe5 1 6 Bh6 Rd8 1 7 Rae l
Qd4 + 1 8 Qxd4 cxd4 19 Nb5 Na6 ,
as in O ' Ke l l y - Diaz de l Cor­
18 Kd2 1 ? ral , Madr i d 1957 , when 2 0 d6 !
woul d be advantageous for
not h i ng i n 1 8
Wh i l e there i s Wh i te .
Kf2 o n account o f 1 8 . . . Qh 2 + b ) 9 . . . Qe7 1 0 Qe2 Bxb5 1 1
34 Chapter 4 : 8 Bb5+

Nxb5 ! ( 1 1 Qxb5+ encounters o f Ne4 and poss i b l y d5-d6 ,

11 . . . Nbd7 ) ll . . . Nxd5 12 Nxd6+ whi c h gives h i m a s trong
Kf8 13 Nf3 Nc6 1 4 0-0 Rd8 1 5 i n i t iat ive . Thi s concept can
Qb5 with a good pos i t ion for a l s o be u t i l i zed after the
Whi te , Espos ito - Rei nhardt , text move , but Whi t e chooses
Buenos Ai res 1957 . another p l an , whi ch is as
e f fe c t i ve .
10 fxe5 Qe 7
11 Nf3

Another poss i b i l i t y i s 1 1 Qe2

Bxb5 12 Nxb5 Nxd5 13 Nd6+ Kf8
14 Nf3 Nc6 15 0-0 Bxe5 1 6 Nxe5
Nxe5 17 Bh6 + Kg8 18 Ne4 whe n
Wh it e h a s a st rong ini t i ative .
11 0-0
12 0-0 Ng4
13 Bf4
Wh i te can a l s o opt for 13 Bxd7
Nxd7 14 Bg5 f6 15 exf6 Ndxf6
1 6 Rel with advantage ; i f
1 4 . . . QeS , Pachll an s ugge s t s 15 17 d6 1 ? Qxd6?
Nb5 Ndxe5 1 6 Nc7 Nxf3+ 1 7 Qxf3
Qe5 18 Bf4 Qd4+ 1 9 Kh l Raes 20 Evi dentl y B l ack overest i•ated
Nb5 Qxb2 2 1 Rabl Qxa2 22 Qxg4 h i s chances in the ens u i ng
Qxd5 23 Nxa7 , a l s o favor i ng eodgaae . Essenti a l was 1 7 . . .
Wh i t e . Qd8 ! 1 8 Nxe5 fxe5 1 9 Rxe5 Nc6 .
13 18 Nxe5 Qxdl
19 Raxdl fxe5
1 3 . . . Bxb5 1 4 Nxb5 Nxe5 back­ 20 Rxe5 Rf4
f i res on account of 15 d6 ! 21 Rxc5
14 Bxe5 I Bxe5
22
23
Rc7+
Rfl l
�:
15 Rel f6
16 Bc4 Kg'1 i
Lau - Pere n i , Budapest 1 9 8 1 .
B lack ' s pos t i on is d i f f i cu l t
On 16 . . . Kh8 Whi t e � l ays 1 7 to defe n d i n v i ew of h i s un­
Nxe5 fxe5 1 8 Qe2 w 1 th the i dea derdevel oped Queens i de .
 CHAPTER P'IV!
l d4 Nf8
2 c4 c5
3 d5 e8
4 Nc3 exd5
5 cxd5 d8
8 e4
rg7
7 f4
8 Nf3
The student of the K i ng ' s I n­
dian De fense wi l l be very fa­
m i l iar with thi s po s i t i on ,
for indeed this i s the pos i ­
tion o f the Four Pawns At­
t a ck . However , th i s author
contends that the pawn con­
f i gurat i o n and the a i ddlegaa e
s t r at e gy have auch aore in
co maon wi th the Modern
Benon i .
8 0-0
9 Be2 Re8
A v ery � opu l ar and act i ve
j
move wh i ch forces Wh i t e to
make a dec i s ion regar d i n h i s
e-pawn . Other cont inuat ons
wi l l be presented in the fol­
l owing chapter .
Whi te can now proceed :
A : 1 0 e5 1 ?
B : 1 0 Nd2
I nteres t i ng i s 1 0 0-0 1 ? ,
whi ch has found l imited ap­
pl i cat i on i n pract ical p l ay ,
al though it appears to offer
Wh i te good prospects of
l aunching a s trong attack .
Play can proceed 10 . . . Nxe4 1 1
Nxe4 Rxe4 1 2 Bd3 Re8 1 3 f5 1
Nd7 ( Wh i l e 1 3 . . . ir][f5 i s met
f
by 14 g4 ! , 1 3 . . . Bxf5 1 4 Bxf5
gxf5 a l l ows 15 3 1 , intending
16 Nh4 ) 14 Ng5 ECO recom­
mends 14 g4 1 ? ) 14 . . . Nf6 ( Kou­
at l y - Arnason , I nnsbruck
1977 , saw instead 14 . . . Qf6?
15 fxg6 Qd4 + 1 6 Khl fxg6 1 7
Rf4 Qx d 3 1 8 Qxd3 Re l + 1 9 Rfl
Ne5 20 Rxel and Whi t e wins .
S i m i l ar l y , 1 4 . . . Ne5 15 Bc2
fa v or s Whi te ) 1 5 fxg6 1 ( This
i s stronger than 15 Qf3 ? of
Koua t l y - Durr , Innsbruck
1 9 7 7 , where B l ack s e i zed the
i n i t i at i ve after 15 . . . c4 1 6
fxg6 hxg6 1 7 Bxc4 Qb6+ 18 Khl
Bg4 19 Qf4 Raes 2 0 Bd3 Re5 )
15 . . . fxg6 ( On 1 5 . . . hxg6 the
maneuver 16 Qa4 , wi th the
i dea of 17 Qh4 , is ev en
stronger than after the t e xt
move ) 1 6 Qa4 with chances for
an attack .
However , 10 Qc2? i s an error
i n view of 1 0 . . . Nxe4 1 ( But
not 10 . . . Na6? 1 1 a3 Nc7 1 2
0 - 0 Rb8 1 3 e5 1 Nfxd5 1 4 Nxd5
Nxd5 15 Rdl Be6 16 Bc4 , when
Whi te has the upper hand ,
Boutevi l l e - Droui l l y , France
1967 ) 1 1 Nxe4 Bf5 1 2 Bd3 Qe7
1 3 N f d2 Bxe4 14 Bxe4 f5 , fa­
vor i ng B l ack , Sprocha - Fa­
b i a n , c orr 1 9 6 1 .
A: 10 e5 1 ?
A c e ntr a l breakthrough which
l eads to ext r e ae l y sharp
a i ddl egaae pos i t i o n s .
10 dxe5
10 . . . Nfd7 i s i nadequate . The
�e Kouat l y - Murshed , Shar­
j ah 1 981 , proceeded 1 1 0-0 ! ?
( The mate r i a l s i t ua t i on i s
i n s i gn i f i cant in th i s type o f
pos i t i ons . The key factors
are ra p i d deve l opment and the
attack i ng poss i bi l i t i e s wh i ch
are soon to f o l l ow . Lehmann
- Toran , Munchen 1 954 , saw
instead 1 1 exd6 a6 1 2 a4 Nf6
1 3 0-0 Bg4 1 4 Ne5 Bxe 2 15
Qxe 2 Qxd6 with a s l i ght p l us
f or Whi t e . 1 1 Nb5 , on the
o t he r hand , wou l d be too
s l ow ) 11 . . . dxe5 12 d6 e4
( 1 2 . . . exf4 13 Bxf4 a l s o gives
Whi t e a s trong i n i t i at i ve due
to the t hreat of Nd5 ) 13 Ng5
Nb6 1 4 f 5 ! Bxf5 15 Nxf7 1 Qf6
( 1 5 . . . Kxf7 16 g4 wins back
the � i e ce , reta ining K i ngs ide
i n i t i at ive ) 16 Nh6+ Bxh6 1 7
Bxh6 Qd4 + 1 8 Khl Qxdl 1 9
R axdl N c 6 20 Nb5 Nd4 ( Black
returns the pawn in o r de r to
rel i eve Wh i te ' s pre s s ure .
36 Chapter 5 : 8 Nf3 0-0 9 Be2 Re8
20 . . . Red8 wou l d a l l ow 21 Be3 )
2 1 Nxd4 cxd4 22 Rxd4 Nd7
( 2 2 . . . Rac8 ) 23 B c 4 + Be6
( 23 . . . Kh8 woul d encounter t he
unp l easant 24 g4 ! Bxg4 25 Rf7 )
24 Rxe4 when Wh i te ' s advantage
is deci s i ve .
11 fxe5 Ng4
12 Bg5
The s trongest conti nuat i on
whi ch give s Whi te s p l endi d
p r o s p ect s for an attack .
Other move s are l e s s attrac­
t ive :
a ) 1 2 e6 fxe6 1 3 0-0 ( 1 3 d6 i s
harm l e s s ; after 1 3 . . . Bd7 ! 1 4
0-0 Bc6 1 5 Ng5 Ne5 1 6 Be3 b6
17 Nge4 Nbd7 Whi te had no
compensat i on for t he pawn in
Udov c i c - Marov i c , Yugo s l av i a
1 966 . S i m i l ar l y , 1 3 Ng5 exd5
14 0-0 Bd4+ 15 Khl Rf8 ! 16 Bf3
Nc6 17 Bxd5+ Kg7 18 Nf7 Qh4 1 9
Bf4 Ne7 2 0 Bb3 Nf5 2 1 Ne4 Bd7
22 Qd3 Rae8 c l ear l y favors
B lack , P av l ovic - I vanov i c ,
Yugo s l av i a 1970 ) 13 . . . exd5
( 1 3 . . . Rf8 14 Bc4 exd5 15 Nxd5
Kh8 16 Bg5 i s advantageous for
Whi te ) 1 4 Nxd5 Be6 1 5 Bc4 ( No t
1 5 N f 4 Qxdl 1 6 Rxdl Bf7 1 7 Ng5
Ne5 18 Be3 Bc4 1 , Hodos - Po r -
t i sch , L i pe ck 1 968 ) 1 5 . . . NeS
( Equal l y strong is 1 5 . . . N c6 )
1 6 Bg5 Nxf3+ 1 7 Qxf3 Qxg5 1 8
Rael Rf8 and B l ack has the
upper hand ( Mi l e yka - Tal ,
USSR 1959 ) .
b ) 1 2 0-0 1 ? Nxe5 1 3 Bf4 Nbd7
( 1 3 . . . Bf5 14 Nxe5 Bxe5 15 Qd2
Nd7 16 Rad! seems to j us t i fy
Wh i t e ' s pawn sacr i f i ce ) 1 4 d6
Nxf3+ ( 1 4 . . . Qb6 15 Nxe5 Qxb2
1 6 Na4 Qb4 , p l ayed i n Ke nd e -
S i r i k i ya , R i ga 1 967 , l eads to
uncl ear com p l i c a t i ons ) 15 Bxf3
Ne5 16 Nb5 lA feas i b l e al ter­
nat i ve i s 1 6 Qd5 , for examp l e ,
1 6 . . . Qb6 1 7 Radl c4+ 1 8 Khl
Qxb2 1 9 Na4 Qb4 20 Nc5 wi th
good prospe cts for Wh i te ,
Matzner - Curnow , Has t i ngs
1 977 ) 16 . . . Rf8 ( 1 6 . . . Bf5 l os ­
es to 1 7 N c 7 Nx f 3+ 1 8 Qx f3
Bxb2 1 9 Nxe8 Bxa l 20 Nc7 ,
Szabo - Z u cke rman , Las Vegas
1973 ) 17 Bd5 (A strong al ter­
n a t i ve i s 17 Nc7 Rb8 1 8 Rel ,
a l s o wi th advantage , Ba l ogh -
R i b l i , Hu nga r y 1 97 2 ) 1 7 . . . Bg4
1 8 Qd2 Qd7 19 Rael Nc6 20 Nc7
Raes 21 Khl Bf5 2 2 Bxc6 Qxc6
23 Nd5 and Wh i t e is w i nn i ng
( We l l s - Parr , England 1 9 79 ) .
12 Qb6
f
A counterstroke whi ch l eads
to comp l ex and doubl e-ed e d
p o s i t i ons . Other t r i e s n­
c l ude :
a) 12 . • f6 13 exf6 Bxf6 1 4
.
Qd2 ( On 1 4 Bxf6 Qxf6 1 5 0-0 ! ?
Ne3 1 6 Qd2 Nxf l 1 7 Rxf l Bf5
1 8 Bc4 Nd7 19 d6+ Kg7 2 0 Nd5 1
Qxd6 2 1 Qc3+ Nf6 22 g4 Bxg4
23 Ng5 Bf5 24 Nxh7 Rh8 1 the
pos i t i o n i s r e l ative l y even ,
K . G r i go r i an - Kupreychik ,
USSR 1 97 0 . However , after 1 4
Bf4 Ne3 1 5 Bxe3 Rxe3 1 6 0-0
B l ack has 1 6 . . . Kg7 ! , e . g . , 1 7
Qd2 Rea 1 8 Radl Bf5 1 9 d6
Nc6 , e t c ) , and now :
al ) 1 4 . . . Nd7 15 0-0 Nde5 1 6
Bxf6 Qxf6 1 7 Ng5 Qb6 1 8 Nge4
c4+ 19 Khl Bf5 20 d6 ! Nd3 ,
when 2 1 d7 ! i s dec i s ive ,
e . g . , 2 1 . . . Re5 2 2 Bxg4 Bxe4
23 Rae l ! Qd4 24 Rxe4 Rxe4 25
Nxe4 Qxe4 26 Qg5 1 Qd4 27 Qe7 1
( Peev - Donner , C i enf uegos
1 9 73 ) .
a2 ) 1 4 . . . Bxg5 1 5 Qxg5 Qxg5 !
( Th e best rep ly ; other moves
fav or Whi t e , for examp l e ,
r
15 . . . Ne3 1 6 Qxd8 Rxd8 1 7 Kf2
Ng4 + 1 8 K · Forintos - Enk­
l aar . Wi j aan Zee 1974 ) 1 6
Nxg5 B f 5 1 7 h 3 Ne5 1 1 8 0 - 0 ( 1 8
0-0-0 1 ? ) 1 8 . . . Nbd7 1 9 g 4 Bd3
wi th equa l i ty ( Kakage l dev -
Kapengut , Leni ngrad 1 969 ) .
a3 ) 14 . . . Bf5 15 h3 1 ? ( 1 5 0-0
Nd7 16 h3 Bxg5 17 Qxg5 Ne3 1 8
Qh6 Nxf l 1 9 Ng5 Qe7 20 d6
Qg7 ! ) 1 5 . . . Ne5 16 0-0-0 Nxf3
17 Bxf6 Nxd2 18 Bxd8 Ne4 1 9
Nxe4 Bxe4 2 0 Bh4 Bxg2 2 1 Rhe l
Bxh3 22 d6 ! Nd7 ( 2 2 . . . Bd7 23
Bc4+ Kg7 24 Re7+ ) 23 Bc 4 + Kg7
24 Re7+ Rxe 7 25 dxe7 a6 ( Pre­
vent i ng 26 Bb5 ) 26 Bel K f 6 2 7
Rd3 Nb6 ( 2 7 . . . B f5 i s met by 2 8
Re3 Re8 2 9 B c 3 + Kg5 30 B f7 ) 2 8
Rd6+ Kx e 7 29 Rxb6 Bg2 30 Bf 2
Rc8 32 Bh4+ Kd7 32 R f6 , and
 Chapter 5 : 8 Nf3 0-0 9 Be2 Re 8 37

White has go o d winning chances Rxal f 6 2 2 Bxc6 bxc6 2 3 R d l

accordi ng to the Soviet master Re8 22 Bxf 6 , dr awn , Kne z evi c -
B l och . Shamkovi ch , Reykj avik 1 984 .
b ) 1 2 . . . Qa5 1 3 0-0 Nxe5 1 4
Nxe5 ( Less c l ear i s 1 4 d6 ! ?
pl ay e d in Kon ikowski - Krebs ,
Dortmund 1 9 8 1 . There fol­
l owed 1 4 . . . h6 1 5 Be7 Be6 1 6
Nd5 Nbc6 1 7 N f 6 + Bxf6 1 8 Bxf6
Ng4 19 Bc3 Qb6 2 0 Qd2 Rad8 2 1
Khl c 4 2 2 h 3 Ne3 2 3 Nh4 Q c 5
24 Radl b5 25 Bf 3 Nxdl 2 6
Rxdl K h 7 27 Bxc6 Qxc6 2 8 Qd4
and Whi te had a s trong i n i t i ­
at ive f o r the s acr i f i ced Ex­
change ) 14 . . . Rxe5 ( 1 4 . . . Bxe5
15 d6 ) 15 Qd2 Qb4 16 Rf4 Qb6
17 Rh4 Rxg5 18 Qxg5 Bf6 1 9
Qh6 Bxh4 2 0 Qx h4 Nd 7 White now has two p l ans at h i s
( 20 . . . Qxb2 l oses to 2 1 Qd8 + di sposal :
K g7 22 Rfl Qxc3 23 Qxc8 Qd4+ Al : 14 d6 ! ?
24 Khl Qxd5 25 B f 3 ) 21 R f l f5 A2 : 14 Nxe5
22 Qe7 ! Qf6 23 d6 Qxe 7 24
dxe7 Kf7 ( Or 24 . . . Nf6 2 5 Nd5 Al : 14 d6 1 ?
Ne8 2 6 Bb5 Be6 2 7 Bxe8 Bxd5
2 8 Bd7 and Whi t e wins ) 25 Nd5 Threatening 1 5 Nd5 . B l ack can
Rb8 26 Bb5 ! and B l ack i s rep l y :
he l p l e s s t o prevent 27 Rel Al l : 14 . . . Qxb 2
( Konikowski - Spi cak , Cracow A 1 2 : 14 . . . Nxf3+
1974 ) . A13 : 1 4 . . . Be6
A 1 4 : 14 . . . Nbd7
13 0-0 Nxe5 Not to be reco1111 e nded i s
1 4 . . . c4+ 1 5 Khl Nd3 1 6 Bxd3
Bl ack has two other opt i ons : cxd3 17 Qxd3 Be6 18 Rael when
a ) 13 . . . c4+ 14 Khl Nd7 the stron � d-pawn gua ran te es
( 1 4 . . . Nf2+ 15 Rxf 2 Qxf 2 1 6 Wh i te a b i g edge i n p l ay .
Ne4 Q b 6 1 7 Nd6 Rf8 1 8 Be7
favors Whi te . 1 4 . . . Nxe5 , on Al l : 14 Qxb2
the other hand , a l lows 1 5 d6 15 Nd5 Nxf3+
Nd3 16 Bxd3 cxd3 17 Qxd3 B e6
18 Rael when , according to Whi l e 15 . . . Nbc6 i s featured i n
Taimanov , the s trong d6-pawn I l l us t rat i ve Game 1 3 , Vai s e r -
secures good prospects for Be l ov , USSR 1 983 , 1 5 . . . Qxal
Whi te ) 15 e6 fxe6 16 dxe6 sho u l d revert to the Main
Ndf6 17 h3 ! Qxb2 ( Whi l e L i ne , a l though Wh i te attempted
1 7 . . . Nf2+? l o s e s t o 1 8 Rxf 2 16 Ne7+? in D l ugy - Ar l and! ,
Qxf2 1 9 Bxf6 , 1 7 . . Ne3 18
• Eng l and 1981 . There fol l owed
Bxe3 Qxe3 1 9 Bxc4 Bxe6 2 0 Rel 16 • .Kh8 17 Qxal Nxf3+ 18 Bxf3
.

Qb6 2 1 Rxe6 ! Rxe6 2 2 Ne5 i s Bxal 19 Rxal Nd7 2 0 Rel Rf8 2 1

advantageous f o r Wh i te ) , and Bh6 Rd8 and the game was soon
now Murey sugge s t s 18 Q c l agreed drawn .
wh i l e Taimanov prefers 1 8
Qel l 16 Bxf3
b ) 13 . . . Bf5 14 d6 ( F i l i p rec­
ommends 1 4 Na4 ) 14 . . . Qxb2 1 5
Nd5 Nxe5 1 6 Ne7+ ( I ntere s t i ng
is 16 Rel ! ? ) 1 6 . . . Rxe 7
( 1 6 . . . Kh8 17 Nxf5 gxf5 18 Rb l
i s qu i te bad for Black ) 1 7
dxe 7 Nbc 6 1 8 Khl Nxf3 ! ( The
erroneous 18 . . . Re8? , p l ayed
in Peev - Sikora , Mos cow
1977 , proved advantageous for
Wh i te after 19 Rel h 6 2 0 BM
Nxe 7 21 Nxe5 Qxe5 2 2 Bb5 ) 19
Bxf3 Qxa l 2 0 Qxal Bxa l 2 1
38 Chapter 5 : 8 N f3 0-0 9 Be2 Re8

16 Qxal 22 Bxf8 Kxf8

The game Ane tbayev - Petke­ On 2 2 . . . Nxf8 23 ReB c3 2 4
v i ch , USSR 1 9 7 4 , var ied wi th Be4 ! Wh i te w i n s e as i l y as
1 6 . . . Nc6 but after 1 7 Bf6 ! deaons trated previously by
Nd4 18 Rbl Qxa 2 19 Bxg7 Kxg7 B l o ch ' s ana l ys i s .
20 Nc7 Whi te had the 6 etter
chances . 23 Re8+ Kg7
Tai manov , on the other hand , 24 Kf 2 Nf 6
recoamends t he i n cl u s i on of
16 . . . Qd4+ 1 7 Kh l t o keep the Or 24 . . . b5 25 Bc6 Rb6 26 Rxc8
K i ng away froa t he center , Rxc6 27 Ne8+ Kf8 28 Rx c 6 + and
c l a i a i ng t h a t 1 7 . . . Qxa l 1 8 B l ack i s dooaed .
Qxa l Bxal 1 9 Rxal Nd 7 20 Be7
R b 8 2 1 Nc7 Rf8 2 2 Re l c4 2 3 25 Rd8 b5
Bxf8 Nxf8 ( Or 2 3 . . . Kxf8 - s e e
the Mai n L i ne ) 2 4 R e 8 c3 25 Vai ser - Hodos , Kra s nod a r
Be4 Bf5 , f avors B lack . How­ 1978 . Accord i ng t o Bykhovsky
ever , t h i s asses saent has Whi t e wins after 26 Ne8+ ( I n­
been pr o ve n wrong by Bloch ' s s tead of the game ' s 26 Ke3? )
ana l ys i s : 26 Rxb8 Bxe4 2 7 26 . . . Nxe8 27 Rxe 8 ( threaten­
Ne6 ! fxe6 28 d7 c2 29 Rxf 8 + i ng 28 d7 ) 27 . . . Rb6 2 8 Rxc8
Kg7 ( 2 9 . . . Kxf8 30 d8=Q+ ) 30 Rxd6 29 a4 a6 30 Rc5 , e t c .
R f l and Whi t e wi n s ea s i l y .
A1 2 : 14 Nxf3+
17 Qxal
The gaae Va iser - Gr igoria­
d i s , USSR 1 975 , s aw i ns tead
17 Ne 7+ Kh8 1 8 Qxal Bxal 19
Rxal Nd 7 ? 2 0 Rel Rf8 21 Bh6
Rd8 22 Bd2 f 6 23 Bc3 and
Wh i t e had the upper hand .
However , B l a c k ' s play cou l d
b e i mp r o ve d upon wi th 1 9 . . .
Kg7 2 0 Rel Bd7 2 1 Bxb7 Nc6 ,
res u l t i ng in a coapl i cated
a i ddl e gaae c o aba t .

17 . . . Bxal
18 Rxal Nd7 15 BxfS Bd4+
19 Be7 1
On 1 5 . . . c4+ 1 6 Khl Qxb2 Whi te
shou l d play 1 7 Bd5 1 wi t h a
strong attack :
a ) 1 7 . . . Bxc3 1 8 Bxf7+ Kg7 1 9
Bxe8 Qxal 20 Qf3 and Whi te
wins .
b ) 1 7 . . . Qxc3 1 8 Bxf7+ Kh8 1 9
Bxe8 Qxal 20 Rf8+ !
c ) 1 7 . . . Rf8 1 8 Rxf7 1 Rx f7 1 9
Bxf7+ Kh 8 ( 1 9 . . . Kxf7 l o s e s t o
2 0 Qd5+ ) 2 0 Qe l Bd7 2 1 Rbl !
Qxc3 ( 2 1 . . . Bxc3 22 Rxb2 Bxe l
23 Bf6* ) 22 Qe7 Nc6 ( 22 . . . Qa5
23 Bd2 ! ) 23 Qxd7 , when the
d6-pawn is very s t rong .
B lack has a cons i derab l e ma­ d ) 1 7 . . . Be6 1 8 Bxe6 fxe6
terial advantage , but t h e ( 1 8 . . . Rxe6 a ls o e n c o u n t e r s 1 9
active Whi t e pieces make fu r ­ Qf3 ) 1 9 Q f 3 Nc6 20 Qf7+ K h 8
ther de ve l o pm e n t very di f f i ­ 2 1 Bf6 Rg8 ( Or 21 . . . Bx f6 22
cu l t . Qxf6+ Kg8 23 Rabi and Wh i te
wins ) 22 Rabi ( 22 Ne4? Bxf6
19 Rb8 2 3 Nxf6 Rg7 ) 2 2 . . . Qa3 2 3 Rxb7
20 Nc7 Rf8 and Black ' s po s i t i o n is hope­
21 Rel c4 l es s .
 Chapter 5 : 8 Nf3 0-0 9 Be2 Re8 39

20 a4
B l o ch p refers 20 Bf6 .
20 f5
21 Rael Bd 7
22 Be7 Kg'7
23 Rfel
Peev - Vogt , Bul gari a 1 973 .
Wh i t e has the better endgame .

A14 : 14 . • . Nbd7
15 Bb5
Konikowski - Hachaj , Cracow
1978 , saw instead 15 Nd5
Qxd6 ! ? 16 Nf6+ Qxf 6 17 Bxf 6
B l ack i s f o r c e d to give up Bxf6 1 8 Qd2 Nxf3+ 19 Bxf3
the Exchange . On 17 . . . Re6 1 8 Bd4+ 20 lhl Nf8 21 Bd5 Ne6
Qf3 f5 ( 1 8 . . . Q c 7 1 9 Nb5 and with unc l ear compl exi ties .
18 . . . Qd7 19 Bxe6 Qxe6 20 Rae l
are both favorabl e for Wh i t e ) 15 Re&
19 Rae l or 1 7 . . . Be6 1 8 Bxb7 16 Be7 Nxf3+
Nd7 19 Bxa8 Rxa8 2 0 Nb5 Qb6 17 Qxf3 Bd4+
21 Nx d4 cxd4 2 2 b3 Bf5 23 Qf3
Whi te has the upper hand . 1 7 . . . NeS i s aet by 18 Qf4 .
18 Bxb7 Nd7 18 Khl Ne5
19 Bxa8 R.xa8 19 Qf4 B.xc3
20 Nb5 Qb6 20 Qh6 1 Nd7
21 Nxd4 exd4
20 . . . Bd7 21 Bxd7 Nxd7 22 bxc3
B loch - Chetnikov , Mos cow a l so favors Wh ite .
1979 . 22 Qf3 ! now secures
Whi te good p ros p e c t s . 21 Rxf7 1 Kxf7
A13 : 14 Be6 Kouat l y - Rau pp , Ber l in 1 9 7 6 .
15 Nxe5 Wh i te now can win by force
wi th 2 2 R f l + Rf6 23 Qxh7+ Ke6
1 5 Bb5 wo u l d encounter 1 5 . . . 24 Bc4+ Ke5 25 Bxf6+ Kxd6 26
Nbc6 , but Whi te cou l d try Bxc3 , etc .
inst e ad B l o ch ' s 15 N d5 ! ? Bxd5
16 Qxd5 Nbd7 1 7 Rad l . A2 : 14 Nxe5 Bxe5
15 • . . B.xe5 Another possibi l i ty is 14 . . .
16 Nd5 Bd4+ Rxe 5 ! ? 1 5 Qd2 Bf5 wi th chanc­
es for bot h s i d es .
Prac t i ca l l y forced . 16 . . .
Bxd5 1 7 Qxd5 Bd4+ 1 8 Khl Rf8
19 Rxf 7 o f fers B l ack no hop e .
Siai l ar l y , on 1 6 . . . Qxb2 1 7
Nf6+ Bxf6 1 8 Bxf6 Qb4 ( Both
1 8 . . . Qa3 1 9 Rf3 Qa5 20 Qcl
Nd7 21 Bc3 Qd8 2 2 Qh6 and
18 . . . Qb6 19 Rbl are good for
Wh i t e ) 19 Bf3 Nd7 2 0 Rbl Qc4
21 Be7 Qd4+ 2 2 Khl Wh i te has
the better chan ces .
17 Qxd4 1 c.xd4
18 Nxb6 u:b6
19 Bb5 Ne&
15 Bc4
Or l9 . . . Bd7 20 Bc4 Be6 2 1
Rae l . Other moves pose no prob l ems
40 Chapter 5 : 8 Nf3 0-0 9 Be2 Re8

for B l ack : Whi te mus t consequent ly pursue

a ) 1 5 Bb5 Bd7 1 6 Qf3 f5 ( The the att a ck , preven t i ng hi s
game Kakagel dev - Zaid , USSR adversary from conso l idating .
1 9 73 , s aw i ns tead 16 . . . f6 1 7
a 4 Bxb5 1 8 Nxb5 Nd7 1 9 d 6 Qc6 17 . . . axb5
wi th a good game for Bl ack ) 1 7 18 Bxf7+ Kxf7
Bc4 Qxb2 1 8 d6+ Kh8 1 9 Rae l •

Bc6 20 Qh3 Nd7 and B lack has The game Vai se r Kozlov , USSR -

the upper hand , Ne i - C iocal ­ 1973 , saw i ns tead 18 . . Kg7 1 9 .

tea , Z i nnow i t z 1966 . Bxe8 Bd4+ 20 Khl Qxd6 2 1 Bxb5

b ) 15 Qd2 Bf5 16 Rae l Nd7 1 7 and Wh i te ' s •ater ia l advantage
Khl N f 6 1 8 Bd3 Bxd3 1 9 Qxd3 , provided the winn i ng edge .
Chr i s t i ansen - B i y i asas , USA
1977 , when 19 •Nd7 ! ? , i n­
. . 19 Rxf5+ gxf5
s tead of the game ' s 19 . . . c4? ,
wou l d have gi ven B l ack a good 19 . . . Kg7 l oses qui ck l y to 20
game . d7 !

15 Bf5 20 Qh5+ Kf8

Th i s aove is endorsed by the
open ing theory as the best
repl y . Yet it ap p ears that
B l ack shou l d put h i s hope
i nto other cont i nua t i ons :
a ) 1 5 . . . Qxb2 1 ? 16 d6 Rf8 1
( Less c l ear i s 1 6 . . . Bf5 , when
17 Bxf7 + ? Kxf7 18 Rxf5+ fai l s
to 18 . . . Kg7 ! Howeve r , after
the correct 1 7 Rxf 5 ! gxf5 18
Bxf7+ Kf8 1 1 9 Bxe8 Qxca 20
Be7 + Kxe8 2 1 Qh5 + Kd7 2 2 Qxf5+
Kc6 23 Qe4+ Wh i te has at least
a perpetual check ) 1 7 Nb5 ( 1 7
Rel Bxc3 18 Be7 Bd4 + 1 9 Khl The c r i t i cal pos i t i on of the
Nd7 20 Bxf8 Nxf8 21 Rxf7 Be6 var i a t i on . Wh i te w i ns in the
2 2 Rxf8+ Rxf8 23 Bxe6+ Kh8 i s fol l ow i ng •anner accord i ng to
qui te coafor tab l e for B l ack ) the Soviet mas ter Pukshansky :
1 7 . . . Qxal 1 8 Qf3 Qb2 19 Bxf7+ 21 Bh6+ 8g7 22 Bxg7+ Kxg7 23
Kg7 20 Be7 Bf5 2 1 Bxf8 + Kxf 7 ! Qxe8 c4 + 24 Khl Qf2 ( Or
f
and Bl ack bas repe l l ed the 24 . . Qxd6 25 Rel Ra6 26 Re7+
.

eneay attack retaining a good

, Kf6 27 Qf8+ K 5 28 Qg8 + Qg6
pos i t ion , e . g . 22 Qxb7+ Nd7 !
• 2 9 Rg7 and Wh te wi n s ) 2 5 d7
23 Qxd7+ Kg8 1 or 2 2 Bh6 Nc6 23 Rxa2 26 R e l Nc6 2 7 d8=Q Nxd8
Nc7 Qd4 + 2 4 Be3 Qxe3 + 25 Qxe3 28 Re7 + Kf6 29 Qf8+ Kg5 30
Bd4 ( G orova ya - Kwi atkovskaya , 027+ Kf4 31 Qe5+ and mate
corr 1970/7 1 ) . fo l l ows .
b ) 15 . . . Qb4 16 Qb3 ( The i nfer­ I t can be conc l uded that the
i o r 1 6 Q f 3? Bf5 17 g4 l oses to l ine starti ng wi th 15 . . . Bf5
17 . . Qxb2 ! 18 Ne2 Bd4+ 19 Nxd4
. has been dec i s i ve l y refuted .
Qxd4 + , Kranz - Dob i e r z i n , DDR
1979 ) 16 . . . Bf5 1 7 d6 Qxb3 1 8 B: 10 Nd2
axb3 Bxd6 19 Nd5 Nd7 2 0 Rxf5 !
( 20 Bb5 Re5 1 ) 20 . . . gx f5 21 Bb5 -. ..... � ··�­ '" 'w . ,
Be5 2 2 Bxd7 Reds 23 Bxd8 Rxd8
24 Ne7+ ( 24 Rdl Bd4+ 25 Kfl m i• .• t1i£ t ;;:JL
- r�T t
d ¥� :3_ t lif41
!!?"� � ilii>:' Wk
. ·-·

Kf8 1 ) 24 . . . Kf8 25 Bxf5 Kxe7 2 6

Rxa7 wi th a l evel endgame ( Ja­
nosevi c - Forintos , Vrnjacka • �4 ft 8 •
Ban j a 1973 ) .
R ;'t"(·BWW
ft E!% .
16 Nb5 a6 f*1f
,,y
� • �)
' N A u;w .a. <;;&·
Avo i d i ng 16 . . . Nd7 17 d6 . ::: � 4J ·,,_ � �/;t� J;\ fiM
ft �
17 d6 l
§; �t(y� . §
 Chapter 5 : 8 Nf3 0-0 9 Be2 Re8
A q u i e t pos i t i on al move whi ch
s i mp l y protects t h e e-pawn and
avoids the sharp l ines s tem­
ming f r om 10 e5 . B l ack can
p roceed :
B l : 10 . . . Nbd7
B2 : 10 . . . � g4
83 : 1 0 . . . a6
Whi l e the al ternat i v e 10 . . . Na6
is the s ub j e c t of I l l ustrat i ve
Game 1 4 ( Ro ,ers - Kr i s t i ansen ,
Thessalonik1 1 9 84 ) , there are
a coup l e of l e s s common moves
ava i l ab l e for B l a ck :
a ) 1 0 . . . b6 1 1 0 - 0 Ba6 1 2 a4
( Not 12 Bxa6 Nxa6 13 Re l Q d 7
14 N f 3 Rad8 1 5 Bd2 Nb4 with a
l eve l pos i t i on , Uhl mann -
Szabo , Saraj evo 1 96 3 ) 1 2 . . .
Bxe2 13 Qxe2 a6 ( The s impl i ­
fying 1 3 . . . Nxe4 ! ? a l s o comes
into cons i derat i o n ) 14 Nc4 Ra7
15 Qf3 Rd7 16 Bd2 b5 17 axb5
axb5 18 Nxb5 Nxe4 19 Ba5 Qe 7
( Better seems 1 9 . . . Qf6 1 ? ) 2 0
f 5 and Whi te has the upper
hand , A. Za i tse v - Z uravlev ,
USSR 1 965 .
b ) 1 0 . . . c4 1 1 a4 ( Bl ack equa­
l i ze s ea s i l y after 1 1 Bf3 Nbd7
1 2 0-0 b5 13 Kh l a6 14 a4
Rb8 , as wit n ess ed in Poma r -
F i s cher , Havana 1 9 66 ) 1 1 . . .
Nbd7 1 2 0 -0 Nc 5 1 3 B f 3 ( 1 3
e5 ! ? ) 13 . . . Bh6 ( 1 3 . . . Qc7 1 4
e5 ! ) 1 4 Qc2 Nd3 ( 1 4 . . . Bxf4 1 5
Nxc4 f avors Whi te ) 1 5 Nxc4
Nxc l 16 Qxc l Bg4 17 Bxg4 Nxg4
18 Qd l f5 19 Qd3 ! ( Bo l es l av­
sky ' s 19 h3? enco unt e r s 1 9 . . .
Rc8 ! ) 1 9 . . RcS 2 0 exf5 Rxc4 2 1
. ter p ros p ects , Peev -
Qxc4 Qb6+ 2 2 Kh l N f 2 + 23 Rxf 2
Qxf2 24 Ne4 Qxb2 2 5 R f l wi th
good pr os pe c ts for Wh i te .
Bl : 10 Nbd7
11 0-0
11
B l ack i ntends to po s t t h e
41
Kni ght act ivel y on c5 . How­
ever , the drawback of th i s
move i s that the c-pawn can
e as i l y become vu lnerab l e .
A l e s s co11J1on bu t vi able a l ­
ternat i ve i s 1 1 . . . a 6 1 2 a4
Qc7 13 Kh l Rb8 14 Qc2 ( The
game Cserna - Wegner , Wes t
Ber l i n 1 983 , saw instead the
immed i ate 1 4 e5 ! ? , wi th good
prospects after 14 . . . dxe5 1 5
Nc4 e 4 16 f5 ) 1 4 . . . c 4 1 5 e 5
dxe 5 1 6 Nxc4 b 5 1 7 axb5 axb5
18 fxe5 ( 1 8 d6 ! ? - Tukmakov )
18 . . . Nxe5 19 d6 Qd7 20 Nxe5
Rxe5 21 Bf4 Rf5 ! w i t h chance s
f o r both s i des ( Tukmakov -
Arnason , Bor 1983 ) .
12 a4
Black threatened 1 2 . b5 ,
• .
whe n 1 3 Nxb5? would lose the
Knight to 1 3 . . . Qb6+ . Whi te
could a l s o prevent this with
1 2 Kbl , wh i ch is analyzed in
I l l us trat ive Gaae 1 5 ( Meduna
- Sax ) .
Another poss ibi l i ty is 1 2
Bxc4 Nc5 :
a ) 13 Bb5 Re7 14 Rel Ng4 1 5
e5 Nd3 1 and Bl ack h a s the
edge , Nemet - S ikora , Stary
Smokovec 1 978 .
b ) 1 3 Qf3 Bg4 14 Qg3 Ncxe4 1
1 5 Ncxe4 Nxe4 1 6 Nxe4 ( 1 6
Qxg4? Qb6+ 17 Khl Nf2+ 18
Rx f2 Qxf2 favors B l ack )
1 6 . . . Rxe4 1 7 Bd3 Qb6+ 1 8 Khl
Be2 , whe n B lack has the bet ­
Lechtynsky , Lubl i n 1 975 .
c ) 1 3 e5 dxe5 1 4 fxe5 Rxe5
( 1 4 . . . Ng4 15 Nf3 Nxe5 16 Nxe5
Bxe5 17 Bf4 ) 15 Nf3 Re8 1 6 Khl
Nfe4 ( Toth - Vel imi rovi c ,
Budva 1 9 8 1 , var i ed with 1 6 . . .
a6 1 7 a4 Nce4 1 8 Nxe4 Nxe4 1 9
Qb3 Nd6 and the st rong d-pawn
gave Whi t e a sma l l edge ) 1 7
Nxe4 Rxe4 ( Or 17 . . . Nxe4 1 ? 1 8
Qb3 Nd6 w i t h e q ua l i t y ) 18 Bg5
t 6 1 9 Rel fxg5 20 d6+ Rxc4
( 20 . . . Kh8 ! ? ) 21 Rxc4 g4 22
Rxc5 ( St r onge r might be 2 2
Ne5 1 ? ) 2 2 . . . gxf3 23 Qxf3 ( 23
Qd5+ 1 ? Kh8 24 Qxf3 ) 23 . . . Be6 ,
as i n Kal l ai - Foi sor , Bucha­
rest 1 983 , when 24 Qxb7 wou l d
l ead to a comp l i cated pos i ­
tion .
12 a&
13 Kii i
Both 1 3 Nxc4 Nxe4 1 4 Nxe4
42 Chapter S : 8 Nf3 0 - 0 9 Be2 Re8

Rxe4 IS Bd3 ( I S Nxd6? Qb6+ ) 82 : 10 Ng4

IS . . . Rd4 and 1 3 Bxc4 NcS per­ 11 B.xg4
•it B l ack to a c t i vate h i s
p i e ce s . I n t e re s t i ng i s 1 1 Nc 4 ! ? Bxc3+
( O r 1 1 . . . hS 12 Bxg4 Bxg4 1 3
13 NcS Qd3 Bxc3+ 14 bxc 3 BfS l S Nd2
14 e5 Bxe4 16 Nxe4 Qe7 17 0-0 Qxe4
18 QbS R e 7 19 f S favo r i ng
Whi l e 14 Qc2 f a i l s t o 14 . . . Wh i t e - T a i m an o v ) 1 2 bxc3
Nfxe4 ! , 14 B f 3 wo u l d encoun­ Rxe4 13 0-0 wi th a d e q uat e
ter 14 . . . Rb8 ! IS a S bS 1 6 compens ation for the p awn .
axb 6 Rxb6 1 7 Nxc4 Rb4 1 8 Nxd6
Qxd6 19 es Qd8 20 exf6 Bx f 6 11 Qh4+
w i th coun t e r p l ay .
The nove l 1 1 . . . Bxc3 ! ? i s pre­
14 dxe5 sented i n I l l ustrat i ve G ame
15 fxe5 16 ( Chr i s t i ansen - G h i t e s cu ,
T h e s s a l o niki 1 9 84 ) .
IS Nxc4 a l l ows I S . . e4 ! ?
12 g3 Qxg4
15 Rxe5 13 Qxg4 Bxg4
16 Nxc4 Re8
Lukacs - Kar l sson , He l s inki
1 983 , s a w ins tead 1 6 . . . RfS 1 7
Bf4 l ? ( Better i s 1 7 Bf3 Ng4
18 Bxg4 Rxf l + 19 Qx f l Bxg4 2 0
BgS ! ) 1 7 . . . gS? ! ( 1 7 . . . NhS ! ? )
1 8 Be3 Rx f l + 1 9 Qxf l Nfe4 20
Nxe4 Nxe4 2 1 Bd3 Nd6 2 2 Bb6
Qd7 2 3 R e l w i th advantage for
Wh i te .

17 Bg5 h6
18 Bb4 Neef
19 d8
19 Nx e 4 Rxe4 20 Bg3 w a s 14 Nb5
pl ayed in the game Yrj o l a -
Vai ser , Sochi 1 984 , and a f t e r 14 Kf2 a6 l S a4 transpo s e s to
20 . . . NxdS? 2 1 Rxf7 ! Be6 a var i a ti o n anal yzed in Sec­
( 2 1 . . . Kxf7 2 2 Nd 6+ ) 22 Rxb7 t i o n 83 .
Kh8 2 3 Qc2 BfS 2 4 Nd6 Re7 2S
Qc6 ! Wh i t e had a dec i s i ve 14 Na6
adv a n t age . I ns tead o f 20 . . . 15 h3
NxdS? Black cou l d have t r i ed
20 . . . Bd7 ! ? or 20 . . . hS ! ? Or lS Nxd6 Nb4 ! 1 6 Nxe8 Nc2+
17 K f l Bh3 + 1 8 Ke2 Rxe8 1 9
19 g5 Rbl Bg4 + ( B o l e s l av s ky recom­
mends 19 . . . Bd4 2 0 a3 f5 ! 2 1
Or 19 . . . Nxc3 20 bxc3 gS 2 1 e 5 Bg2 wi th s atis f actory com­
B f 2 Ne4 2 2 Bb6 Nxc3 2 3 Qd3 p e n s at i o n for t h e Exchange )
Qd7 2 4 BhS Rf8 2S Bd4 ! and 20 Kd3 ( Or 20 K f l Bh3+ 2 1 Ke2
Wh i te w i n s ( D o r fm an ) . wi t h an ev e n game ) 2 0 . . . Nb4+
21 Kc4 B e 2 + 22 Kb3 ( 2 2 KxcS?
20 Bel Bes l o s e s t o 2 2 . . . Nd3+ 23 Kd6
21 Nxe4 Nxe4 Bg4 ) 22 . . . Bd3 2 3 a3 Bc2+ 2 4
22 Ba5 Kc4 Bd3+ resu l ti ng i n a draw
( L i be r z on ) .
B e l y avs ky - Ve l im i rovi c , Mo s ­ Howeve r , the text move s eems
cow 1 982 , ended qui ckly after dub i ou s and White shou l d opt
22 . . . Bxc4? 2 3 Bxd8 Bxe2 24 f o r l S Kf2 ! ?
d7 ! Re6 2 S Qxe2 , 1 - 0 . H ow e v ­
e r , 22 . . . Qd7 23 B c 7 wou l d 15 Rxe4+ 1 ?
a l s o b e advan tageous f o r 18 Nxe4 Bf3
Wh i t e . 17 0-0
 Chapter 5 : 8 Nf3 o-o 9 B e2 Re8 43

1 7 Nf2? Re8+ 1 8 Kfl Be2 + 19

Kg2 Bxb5 favors B lack .

17 Bxe4
18 Nc3 Bd3
19 Rf3
Or 19 Rdl c4 with good pros­
pects for the sacr i f i ced Ex­
change .

19 NM
20 Bd2
Avo i d i ng 20 Be3 Bxc3 21 bxc3
Nxd5 when B l ack has the upper
hand . The atteapt to des troy White ' s
center by 1 5 . . . f5? ! fai l ed the
20 Bd4+ test in Z a i tsev - Adl e r , Le­
21 Kb2 Bc4 ningrad 1 963 . There fol l owed
1 6 h 3 fxe4 1 7 Nc4 Bf3 1 8 Rel
Panchius - L i berzon , I s rae l Bf8 1 9 Nb6 Ra7 2 0 a5 with an
1 984 . B lack h a s the B i shop obv i ous advantage for Wh i te .
pair and an extra pawn for
the Exchange . 16 h3 Bd4+
17 Kg2 Bxc3
B3 : 10 a6 lS bxc3 Be2
11 a4 N&'4 19 Rel Bd3
20 Re3 c4
ll . Nbd7 wou l d revert to
. • 21 Ba3 f5
Section Bl .
Against 21 . . . Nb6 Bo l e s l avsky
12 Bxg4 proposes 22 Bxd6 Nxd5 23 Rxd3 !
cxd3 24 c4 with a pos i t i onal
On 1 2 Nc4 ! ? i t i s r i sky for edge for the Exchange .
Bl ack to snatch the pawn
1 2 . . . Bxc3+ 13 bxc3 Rxe4 be­ 22 e5 1 Nb6
cause 14 0-0 f5 15 a5 gives
1
Whi te an act i ve game ( Pr i ed­ Or 2 2 . . dxe5 23 fxe5 Rxe5 2 4
.

s t e i n - Landraf , corr 1 967 . Rxe5 Nxe5 25 R e l Nf7 26 Be7 ,

Instead , B l ack shou l d sett e threatening 27 d6 .
for 1 2 . . . h5 ! ?
23 Bxd6 Nxd5
12 Qb4 + 24 Rxd3 1 cxd3
13 g3 QX&'4 25 c4 Nc3
14 Qq4 Bq4 26 c5 Raes
27 a5 Reds
Both 1 5 h3 Bf5 and 1 5 a5 Nd7 2S Kf 3
16 h3 Bf5 17 Ra4 b5 are DOW
comfortab l e for Bl ack , but A . Z a i tsev - Lundgohl , corr
Whi te has another aove at h i s 1966 . Whi t e has a c l ear ad­
d i sposal . vantage .
 C H AP T E R SIX
1 d4 Nf 6
2 c4 c5
3 d5 e6
4 Nc3 exd5
5 cxd5 d6
6 e4 g6
7 f4 Bg'1
8 Nf3 0-0
9 Be2
Chapter S deal t wi th the very
popu l ar rep l y 9 . . Re8 . . In
t h i s c ha � t e r the reader wi l l
fam i l iarize hiasel f with the
less co ..on conti nuat ions :
A : 9 . . . bS
8 : 9 . . . Bg4
C : 9 . . . Na6
In addi t i on , there are sever­
a l more obscure opt i ons :
a ) 9 . . . b6 1 0 eS ! Ne8 1 1 0 - 0
Na6 1 2 Bc4 Nac7 1 3 Rel Rb8
( 1 3 . . . a6 14 a4 Bb7 lS Ra3 bS
16 Rb3 ! ) 14 a4 a6 l S NgS bS
16 axbS axbS 17 e 6 ! with ad­
vantage , Knezevi c - P i thart ,
O l omouc 1 975 .
b ) 9 . . . Nbd7 10 0 - 0 ( Knezev i c
- I . Z a i tsev , Smederevska
Pal anka 1 9 7 1 , var i ed with 1 0
eS ! ? , but a f t e r 1 0 . . . dxeS 1 1
fxeS Ng4 1 2 e 6 Nde5 1 3 NgS c4
14 0-0 Qb6+ l S Khl Nf2+ 16
Rxf2 Qx f 2 1 7 Nge4 the sharp
C
os i t i on o f fered chances for
oth s i des ) 1 0 . .ReS 11 Nd2
. a ) 1 3 . . Qb4? ! 1 4 Nx c 8 ( Equal ­
( 1 1 es is po i n t l e s s now . In
the game Hudyakov - I. Z a i t ­
sev , USSR 1 9 7 3 , after 1 1 . . .
dxeS 1 2 fxeS NxeS 1 3 NxeS
RxeS 14 Bf4 Bl ack unexpected­
l y s a cr i f i c ed the Exchange by
14 . . . RxdS ! l S Nxd5 NxdS , ob­
taini ng a good pos i t i on )
1 1 . . . a6 1 2 a4 c 4 1 3 Bf3
( Avo i d i ng 1 3 Bxc4 Nc5 1 4 Qc2
Nfxe4 lS Ndxe4 BfS 1 6 Re l
Rc8 ) 13 . . . Qc7 1 4 Qe2 Nb6 1 5
Q f 2 Bg4 1 6 as Nbd7 1 7 Ra4 and
Wh i t e has the better pros­
pects , Peev - Ve l ikov , Pernik
1 9 7S .
c ) 9 . . c4 ! ? 1 0 Nd2 ( 1 0 Bxc4
.
• Nxe4 ! 1 1 Nxe4 Re8 12 Nd2 f5
is go od for B l ack ) 1 0 . . . Re8
1 1 a4 Nbd7 12 0-0 a6 1 3 Bf3
Qc7 14 Qe2 QcS+ 15 Qf2 Ng4 1 6
Qxc5 ( 1 6 Bxg4? Bd4 ) 1 6 . . NxcS .
17 Bxg4 Bxg4 1 8 Nxc4 Bxc3 1 9
bxc3 Nxe4 , p r o d u c i n g a l evel
game , K i r s c h - B e r trame T i e­
-
mann , corr 1 9 7 8 .
d) 9 . . a6 - see I l l u s t r a t i ve
.
G ame 1 7 , Wi tkowski - Joks i c ,
S c a u r i L a t i na 1 98 1 .
A: 9 b5
A sharp cont i nuat i on aiming
at the destruc t i on of Whi te ' s
c enter by means of an i mm e d i ­
a t e Queen s i de attack .
10 e5 1
The most energe t i c rep l y
whi ch coonters Black ' s Queen­
s ide th re a t s w i th a thrust i n
the cente r . The s i mp l i fy i ng
10 BxbS Nxe4 1 1 Nxe4 Qa5 + 1 2
K f 2 Qxb5 1 3 Nxd6 w i n s a pawn
but i t proves i ns i gni f i cant
i n v i ew o f the vu l ne r a b l e
pos i t i on of the Whi te K i ng :
.
l y effect i ve i s 1 4 a3 Qb6 l S
Nc4 ) 1 4 . . . Rxc8 l S Qc2 Nd7 1 6
Rdl Rab8 1 7 Rbl c4 1 8 Be3 NcS
19 NeS BxeS 20 fxeS with ad­
van t age , Be l i nkov - Chernov ,
USSR 1 9 6 1 .
b ) 13 . . . Qa6 1 4 Nxc8 Rxc8 1 5
NeS ( Ma l i ch - G a r c e s , T e l
Aviv 1 964 , s aw i ns tead 1 5 Re l
Nd7 16 Kgl Re8 1 7 a4 c4 1 8 a5
NcS 19 NeS , when 19 . . . Nd3
wou l d have given B l ack a good
game ) 15 . . . RdS ( 1 5 . . . c4 ! ? ) 1 6

Re l ( Or 16 Q f 3 Qd6 1 7 Rd l Bxe5
18 f x e5 Qxe5 wi th a l evel
pos i t i on ) 1 6 . . . f6? ( Be t t e r is
1 6 . . . Qd6 ! 17 Nc4 Qf6 - Udov­
c i c ) 1 7 Ng4 b5 18 Ne3 f5 1 9
Kgl Nd7 20 Q c 2 Bd4 2 1 B d 2 Re8
2 2 Khl Nb6 23 Nxf5 ! gx f5 2 4
Qxf5 and Whi t e has a s t rong
attack , A . Z a i t sev - Ho do s
U SS R 1 962 .
c ) 13 . . . Qb6 ! 1 4 Nc4 ( 14 Nxc8
Rxc8 1 5 Ne5 Rd8 1 6 Rel Nd7
a l l ows B l ack to o rgan i ze
pres sure on the d5-pawn )
14 . . . Qa6 ( 14 . . Qb4 1 5 Qb3 ! Bb7
. 1 9 . . . Nc2 + 1 ( 1 9 . . . Rxf3 20 Bxf3
1 6 Qxb4 cxb4 17 Rd l Nd7 18 Na5
f
Ba6 19 Nc6 is ood for Whi t e ,
A . Z a i t se v - S monov i c h ,
Leni ngrad 1 96 2 ) 15 Qe 2 Bd7
( No t 15 . . Nd7 16 Rdl Bb7 17
. very co•p l i cated ba t t l e in
Nce5 Nxe5 1 8 fxe5 Qxe2 + 19
Kxe2 , when Whi te has the su­
per i o r endgame , A . Zaitsev -
Savon , USSR 1962 ) 16 Be3 Bb5
1 7 Rh c l Res . drawn , A . Z a i t ­
se v - Bogdanov i c , Socbi 1 967 .
Black bas ful l compe nsati o n
for the pawn .
10 dxe5
11 fxe5 , Ng4
12 Bg5 1
y
The on l move with prospects
of fue l i ng Wh i te ' s pressure :
a ) 1 2 B f 4 b4 ! ( No t 1 2 .Nd7.
1 3 e6 fxe6 14 dxe6 Rxf4 15
Qd5 Kh8 16 Qxa8 Nb6 17 Qxa7
Bxe6 18 0-0 Ne3 19 Rf2 b4 , as
in Ker es - Spassky , R i ga
1 965 , when 20 Ndl ! woul d pre­
serve the advantage ) 13 Ne4
( Wh i l e 1 3 Na4 en co unters
1 3 . . . QaS , 1 3 Nb5? was p l ayed
in Zuko v - Petrayev , USSR
1967 . The game cont i nued
1 3 . . . a6 14 Nd6 Nxe5 1 5 Bxe5
Bxe5 1 6 Nxf7 Rxf 7 17 Nxe5
Qb4 + 18 g3 Qe4 wi th a w i nn i ng
pos i t ion for B l ack ) 13 . . . Nd7
by
14 e6 ( 1 4 Bg5 is m e t
Chapter 6 : 8 Nf3 0-0 9 Be2 45
14 . f6 ) 1 4 . . . fxe6 1 5 dxe6
. .
(Or 1 5 Bd6 Ne3 16 Qb3 Nxg2+
17 Kf2 c4 18 Qxc4 Nb6 19 Qb3
Qh4+ 20 N g3 Qh3 2 1 Bxf8 Bxf8
2 2 Rae l Nf 4 23 Bfl Qb6 and
B l ack stands better accord i ng
_ to Petrayev ) 1 5 . . . Rxf4 1 6 Qd5
Kb8 17 Qxa8 ( M i kbalev - Pet­
, rayev , Novos i birsk 1 96 7 , saw
instead 17 R d l Rb8 18 Nxc 5
Rf5 19 Qe4 Ngf6 20 Qa4 Qe7 2 1
exd7 Nx d 7 and B l ack bad the
advan tage ) 17 . . Nb6 18 Qc6 .
Ne3 1 9 g3 ( 1 9 Kf2 Bd4 ! )
Nc2+ 21 Kf2 Bd4+ l eads to
perpetual check . I f B lack
wants to try for •ore , he can
p l ay 21 Qf8 , whi c h led to a
. . .
Tbaunhausser Gerer , corr -
1968 ) 20 Kf2 ( 20 Kfl Rf5 ! ? )
20 . . Qd4 + 2 1 Kg2 Qxe4 22 Qxe4
•
( Or 22 Bb5 Ne3+ 23 Kgl Qc2
and Bl ack wins , Wal ter - J .
Schmidt , corr 1 968/ 7 1 ) 2 2 . . .
Rxe4 23 Bd3 Rxe6 24 Rael Ne3+
25 Kf2 c4 , 0 - 1 , Mart i n -
Botteri l l , Char l ton 1978 .
b ) 1 2 Nxb5 Nxe5 1 3 o-o Nbd7
14 Bf4 ( 14 a4 a6 15 Nd6 Rb8
y
16 Nxc8 Qxc8 17 Nxe5 Bxe5 1 8
Qd3 Rb4 1 9 Qxa6 Qb8 , p l a ed
in Uh lman n - Kava l ek , Ha le
1 963 , favors B l ack ) 1 4 . . Qb6 .
1 5 Khl a6 1 6 N c3 Qxb2 17 Na4
Qa3 18 R e l Ng4 , l eadi n � to a
comp l ex m i d d l egame , Ne 1 -
Doda , Leningrad 1 960 .
c ) 1 2 Bxb5 Nxe5 13 0-0 Bg4 1 4
Be2 Bxf3 15 gx f 3 ( 1 5 Bxf3 )
15 . . f5 16 Be3 Nbd7 17 f4 Nf7
.
18 Bb5 Rea 1 9 Bf2 Nd6 wh e n
B l ack has a comfortab l e pos i ­
t i o n , P l atonov - Ge l l er , USSR
1 958 ,
d ) 1 2 0-0 Nxe5 1 3 Bf4 Nbd7 14
Bxb 5 ( or 1 4 Nxb5 Q b 6 1 5 Khl
a6 16 Nc3 Qx b 2 17 Na4 Qa3 1 8
R e l Ng4 with chances for both
. s i des ) 1 4 . Qb6 15 Nx e5 Nxe5 . .
16 Qd2 a6 1 7 Be2 Bf5 18 Radl
Rada with a l e ve l pos i t i on ,
Padevsky - Sakharov , O d essa
1 968 .
12 Qb6
An aggre s s i ve •ove , whereby
Black i n t ends to create d i ­
rec t threats on the enemy
K i ng after . c4 . The l ess . .
act i ve 1 2 . Qa5 i s the sub-
. .
j e ct o f I l l u s t rat i ve Game 1 8
( Op! Ager , Rans bofen 1984 ) .
-
Agai n s t 1 2 . . . f6 Whi t e has :
46 Chapter 6 : 8 Nf3 0 - 0 9 Be2
a) 1 3 exf6 ! Bx f6 1 4 Qd2 ( Not
14 Bx f6 Qx f6 1 5 Bxb5 Bd7 1 6
Qa4 Q e7 + 1 7 Kd2 Qe3 + 18 Kc2
Rf4 and Black has s e i zed the
i n i t i at i ve , Mar t i nez - Kava­
l ek , Tel Avi v 1 96 4 ) 14 . . . Bf5
1 5 Nxb5 Nd7 ( Or 1 5 . . . Qb6 16
d6 Nc6 17 Bc4+ Kh8 1 8 0-0 ,
fa vor i n g Wh i te , Kar l s son -
Meyer , Uppsa l a vs Bre•en
1 977 ) 1 6 0-0 Qb6 17 B c 4 Nde5
18 Nxe5 Nxe5 1 9 d6+ Nxc4 20
Qd5 + Kg7 2 1 Bxf6+ Rxf6 2 2
Qxc4 Rb8 2 3 Rae l Rf7 2 4 Re7
Rxe7 2 5 dxe 7 h5 26 Rel w i t h a Nxe5 1 7 Be7 Nbd7 1 8 Nxe6 fxe6
c l ear advantage for Wh i te
( Sosonko - Reshevsky , Amster­
dam 1 9 77 ) .
b ) 1 3 d6 fxg5 ( 1 3 . . . Bb7 14 e6
and 1 3 . . . Be6 14 ex f 6 Bx f6 1 5
Bx f6 Qxf6 1 6 Qd2 are both
bet ter for Wh i te ) 1 4 Qd5+ Kh8
1 5 Qxa8 Qb6 16 Qd5 ( otherw i s e
1 6 . . . Bb7 ) 1 6 . . . c4 ( Both
16 . . . Bb7 and 16 . . . � e3 are
unc l ear ) 17 Qxb5 Q f 2 + 1 8 Kdl
B d7 1 9 Qb7 Ne3+ 20 Kd2 Bc6
resu l t i ng in co•p l i cated
play .
13 o-o c4 +
Other cont i nuat i ons are even
weaker :
a ) 13 . . . Nxe5 14 Nxe5 ( On 1 4
Be7 c4+ 1 5 Kh l B l ack sacr i ­
f i ces t h e Exchange b y 1 5 . . .
Nbd7 , when 1 6 a4 b4 1 7 a 5 Qb8
18 Ne4 Nx f3 19 Bxf 3 Ba6 2 0
Qa4 Qb5 1 2 1 Qxb5 Bxb5 2 2 Rfbl
b3 23 Bxf8 Bxf8 forces Wh i te
on the defens i ve , Udovc i c -
Vas i ukov , R i j eka 1 9 6 3 ) 14 . . .
Bxe5 1 5 Be7 Nd7 ( Prac t i cal l y
forced in v i ew o f 15 . . . ReS 1 6
d 6 Bxc3? 1 7 bxc3 Be6 1 8 Bf3
Nc6 1 9 Bf6 ! w i t h advantage .
However , ins tead of 16 . . .
Bxc3? , Bl ack can try 1 6 . . .
Be6 1 ? , as in Lerner - L i v­
s h i t z , USSR 1 963 ) 16 d6 Bb7
17 Nd5 ( Or 17 Bf3 ! ? Kg7 1 8
Bxb7 Qxb7 1 9 Bxf8+ Rx f8 20
Qe2 c4 21 Radl wi th good play
f or Whi te , J i •enez - Med i na ,
Mal aga 1 966 ) 1 7 . . . Qc6 18 Bf3
Kg7 19 Nc7 Qb6 20 Nxa8 and
Wh i te has the upper hand ,
Gore l ov - Vas i ukov , Moscow
1981 .
b ) 13 . . . h6 14 Be7 Ne3 1 5 Qd2
c4 16 Kh l Re8 17 d6 Nc6 1 8
Bh4 Nxf l 1 9 Rxfl Be6 20 Ne 4
with exce l l ent prospects f or
Whi te , Sakharov - Tukaakov ,
Mos cow 1 963 .
c ) 13 . . . Nd7 - see I l l us trat i ve
Game 1 9 , Hovde - Schoppaeyer ,
correspondence 1 983 .
14 Khl Nxe5
Other moves are c l ear ly i n­
ferior :
a ) 14 . . . N f 2 + 1 5 Rxf2 Qxf2 1 6
Ne4 Qb6 1 7 Be7 Re8 1 8 Nd6 ,
w i nn i ng back the Exchange and
reta i n i ng a pos i t i onal advan ­
tage .
b ) 14 . . . a6 1 5 d6 ! Be6 16 Nd4
1 9 Bx f8 Rxf8 2 0 Ne4 and Wh i te
has the upper hand , Rytov -
Zuravlev , Krons tadt 1 9 73 .
c ) 14 . . . Nd7 1 5 e6 ! fxe6 1 6
dxe6 Qxe6 1 7 Nxb5 Rb8 18 N fd4
Qd5 19 Bxg4 Qxg5 2 0 B e 6 + with
good prospects , Sal zman -
Ka l i nsky , USSR 1 964 .
15 Nxe5
On 15 Be7 Bl ack shoul d pro­
ceed 1 5 . . . Nbd7 ( Wi tkowsk i -
K i nn.ark , Ys t a d 1967 , s aw
ins tead 15 . . . Ng4 1 6 Bxf8 Bxf8
17 Qd4 Bc5 18 Qe4 Bd7 19 d6
Nc6 2 0 Ng5 N f 2 + 2 1 Rxf2 Bx f 2
2 2 Nd5 Qd8 23 Ne7+ Nxe7 24
dxe7 Qe8 25 Rdl Bc6 2 6 Qe5
and the advanced pawn dec i ded
the game ) 16 d6 Bb7 17 Nd5
Bxd5 18 Qxd5 Ng4 1 wi th good
counterpl ay for B l ack , for
example :
a ) 1 9 a4 N f 2 + 20 Rxf 2 Qxf 2 2 1
Bxf8 Rxf 8 2 2 Qxb5 Qxe2 2 3 Qxd7
Qxb2 , Nei - Gufe l d , USSR 1963 .
b ) 1 9 N g5 N f 2 + 20 Rxf2 Qxf2 2 1
Bf3 Nb6 2 2 Qd l Rad8 ( Lu t i kov -
Yurtayev , USSR 1 9 77 ) .
15 Bxe5
16 Be7 Re8
16 . . . Nd7 ! ? i s worth a try .
17 d6 Bb7
 Chapter 6 :
18 Nd5
But not 1 8 d7? Nxd7 1 9 Qxd7
Bc 6 and B l ack wins .
18 Qd4
19 · QXd4 Bxd4
20 Nc7 Nd7
21 Nxb5 Bb6
2 1 . . . Bxb2? fai l s to 22 Rahl
fol l owed by 2 3 Nc7 .
22 Bxc4
Mi l i s t e r - Kl ovsky , USSR
1 964 . Wh i t e has a d i s t i n ct
advantage .
B: 9 Bg4
A strong deve l op i ng aove
whi ch i nh i b i t s the break­
through e4-e5 . Thi s l ogical
i dea gives B l ack go o d prac­
t i cal chances i n s p i t e of t h e
fact t ha t B l ack wi l l be
forced to give up a B i s hop
fo r a Knight .
10 0-0
Other ava i l ab l e opt i ons are
not as s o l i d :
a ) 10 Nd2 Bxe2 1 1 Qxe2 Re8 1 2
0-0 N a6 ! 1 3 Qf3 ( Avo i d i ng 1 3
Qd3 Nb4 1 4 Q b l Ng4 ! 1 5 a3
Bd4+ 16 Khl Nxh2 ! wh en B l ack
has a de c i s ive attack ) 1 3 . . .
Nb4 1 4 Rbl Nc2 1 5 Qd3 Nd4 1 6
b 4 Nd7 1 7 Ba3 b 6 with good
game for B l ack , Sal zman -
Schm i dt , USSR 1 964 .
b ) 10 e5 Bx f 3 ( 1 0 . . . Ne8? a l ­
lows 1 1 Ng5 Bxe2 1 2 Qxe2 Nc7
1 3 0-0 Qe7 14 Nce4 ) 11 Bxf3
dxe5 ( 1 1 . . . Re8 12 0-0 dxe5 13
fxe5 Rxe5 w i ns a pawn , but
after 14 Bf4 Re8 15 Qb3 Whi t e
h a s a go o d p o s i t i o n ) 1 2 fxe5
Nfd7 13 e6 Ne5 14 exf7+ Rxf7
1 5 0-0 Nbd7 16 Ne4 ( Bet ter is
8 Nf3 0-0 9 Be2 47
1 6 B e 3 ! ? Nxf3+ 17 Rxf3 Rxf3
18 Qxf3 Ne5 19 Qe4 c4 w i t h a
fai r l y even pos i t i on ) 1 6 . . .
Nxf3+ 1 7 Rxf3 R xf3 18 Qxf3
Ne5 when B lack has the better
prospects , Knez ev i c - Gl i go­
r i c , Yugo s l av i a 1970 .
c ) 1 0 h3 Bxf3 1 1 Bxf3 a6 1 2
a 4 Nbd7 1 3 g 4 h 6 1 4 h 4 Nh7 1 5
Kf2 c4 16 Be3 Rc8 1 7 Bd4 Nc5
18 Bxg7 Nd3+ 19 Kg3 Kxg7 20
Qd2 g5 ! 21 Ne2 ( Or 21 hxg5
hxg5 22 Qh2 Rh8 23 Qh6+ Kg8
24 e5 Qb6 ! ) 21 . . . Qf6 and
B lack has the edge , D . Gure­
v i ch - Gheorgh i u , USA 1 981 .
10 Nbd7
Bl ack i s no hurry to trade on
f3 s i nce he is not forced to
do so . The immediate 1 0 . . .
Bxf3 1 1 Bxf3 m i ght in fact
perm i t Wh i te t o s e i ze the
ini t iat ive on the Kings i de ,
e . g . , 1 1 . . . Nbd7 1 2 Rel ( 1 2
g4 ! ? r i ght away i s a l s o
s t rong ) 12 . . . Rc8 1 3 Re2 a6 14
Qel Qc7 1 5 g 4 h 6 1 6 h 4 Nh7 1 7
g5 h 5 1 8 Be3 c 4 1 9 Q f 2 Rfe8
20 Rae l when Whi te has the
better chances ( Uhlmann -
I vkov , Saraj evo 1 96 4 ) .
The game Tatai - Yap , Rome
1 985 , devi ated wi th 12 a4 a6
13 Rbl ? ! ( On l y th e themat i c
1 3 g4 ! ? might y i e l d pos i t ive
results ) 1 3 . . . NeS 1 4 Ne2 b5
15 b4 cxb4 16 Rxb4 Qb6+ 1 7
Khl Nc7 1 9 axb5 Nxb5 1 9 Qb3
Nc5 20 Qc4 Rfc8 w i t h a great
pos i t i on for B l ack .
11 h3
White must p l ay t h i s sooner
o r l ater . Several games have
wi tnessed 1 1 a4 , e . g . , 1 1 . . .
Res ( 1 1 . . .. Rc8 ! ? 1 2 h3 Bxf3 1 3
Bxf3 c4 ! a l s o comes i nt o con­
s i derat ion ) 12 h3 Bxf3 1 3
Bxf3 c4 ! 1 4 B e 3 Qa5 1 5 Bd4
( On 15 g4 Nc5 16 Qc2 Re7
Whi t e mus t no t be tempted by
1 7 g5? because of 17 . . . Nfxe4
18 Nxe4 Nxe4 19 Bxe4 Rae8 )
1 5 . . . Re7 1 6 Khl a6 ( 1 6 . . . Raes
is premature in l i gh t of 1 7
Nb5 Nxe4 1 8 Bxe4 Bxd4 1 9 Bxg6
when Wh i te has go od chances )
1 7 g4 Raes 18 g5? Nxe4 ! 1 9
Nxe4 Rx e 4 20 Bxe4 Rxe4 2 1
Bxg7 Kxg7 2 2 Q f 3 f 5 and Bl ack
has splend i d prospects for
the sacr i f i ced Exchange , Peev
- Ve l im i rovi c , Sof i a 1 9 7 2 .
48 Chapte r 6 : 8 Nf3 0-0 9 Be2

Howeve r , Whi t e ' s p l ay c o u l d Nxe5 19 Bg5 Nfd7 B l ack had

b e i mproved cons i de r a b l y w i t h
1 8 Rel !
Another feas i b l e opt i on i s 1 1
N d 2 , f o r examp l e , l l . . . Bxe 2 1 2
Qxe 2 Re8 1 3 Qf3 Rc8 ( Peev -
the b e t t e r p r o s p e c t s .
1 4 Q c 2 was p l ayed in Bagl ey -
Gheorgh i u , Ph i l a d e l p h i a 1 980 ,
and here a l s o B l ack emerged
on top : 14 . . c4 15 Be3 Rc8 1 6
.

Ts cheskovsky , Al hena 1 9 7 7 , s aw Rae l Qc7 1 7 Khl Qb8 1 8 a 5 ( 1 8

i n s tead 1 3 . . . Qe7 14 a4 c4 15 - Bd4? f a i l s to 1 8 . . . Nxd5 ! 1 9
Khl Nc5 16 e 5 ! dxe5 1 7 fxe5 Bxg7 Nb4 and 2 0 . . . Kxg7 )
Qxe5 1 8 Nxc4 with a s l i ght 1 8 . . . Nc5 19 Re2 h 5 2 0 e5 dxe5
edge for Wh i te ) 14 Nc4 Nb6 ! 1 5 21 fxe 5 Rxe5 2 2 Bf4 Nfd7 2 3
Nxd6? ( Stronger is 15 Na3 , Bx e 5 Nxe 5 24 Ne4 N b 3 2 5 Qdl
e . g . , 1 5 . c4 16 Be3 Nfd7 1 7
. . Nd4 ! 2 6 Qxd4 ? ( E s s e nt i a l was
Nc2 Nc5 1 8 Bd4 ) 1 5 . . . Qxd6 1 6 2 6 Rd2 , even th o ugh
e 5 Qd7 1 7 exf6 Bxf6 1 8 f 5 Bd4+ 26 . . . Nexf3 2 7 gxf3 Qe5 !
19 Khl Bxc3 2 0 bxc3 Nxd5 and s ubj e c t s Whi te t o a s t rong
B l ack has good p r o s p e c t s , a t t ack ) 2 6 . . . Nxf 3 ! , 0 - 1 .
We l l s - Nunn , Borehamwood
1 980 . 14 c4
15 Be3 Qa5
11 B:d3 16 Khl Nc5
12 Bxf3 Re8
B l ack has two other i n t e r ­
e s t i ng con t i nuat i ons at h i s
d i s po s a l :
a) 12 . . c4 13 Be3 Qa5 ( Nunn
.

reco11111e nds 1 3 . . . RcB , when 1 4

Bxa7 b6 1 5 Nb5 Ne8 1 6 Q c 2 R c 5
1 7 a4 o f f e r s chances for both
s i de s ) 14 Qe2 ( The imme d i a t e
1 4 g4 ! ? o n c e aga i n comes i nto
cons i derat i o n ) 14 . . . Raca 15
g4 Nc5 16 g5 Nfd7 1 7 Qxc4
Rfe8 and Bl ack has the i ni t i ­
a t i ve for a pawn ( Kap l an -
S i gur j onsson , Has t i ngs 17 Bxc5 1
1 975/76 ) .
b ) 12 . . a6 1 3 g4 ( 1 3 a4
. Whi t e gives up a strong B i sh­
transpo s e s back to the Ma i n op f o r a Kn i ght to b r i ng
L i ne ) 1 3 . . . h 6 1 4 h 4 b5 1 5 g5 about h i s p r i n c i pa l s t r ategi c
hxg5 1 6 hxg5 Nh7 1 7 Qe l f6 1 8 endeavor - the central break­
gxf6 B x f 6 1 9 Qg3 Kh8 with through .
s harp p l ay ( Brgl e z R i ch­ -

ardson , corr 1 9 7 7 / 79 ) . 17 Qxc5

18 e5 dxe5
13 a4 19 fxe5 Nd7
20 e6 fxe6
Whi te can a l so colllll e nce a 21 Ne4 Qe7
Ki ngs i de attack wi th 1 3 g4 ! ? 22 Bg4 Ne5
which i s presented i n I l l u s ­ 23 Bxe6+ Kh8
t r a t i ve Game 2 0 , Koua t l y - 24 Qd2 Rf 8
Lobron , Rov i nj 1 980 . 25 Rfl Nd3
26 Ng5
13 a6
14 Rel l B l ack shou l d now proceed
2 6 . . . h6 ! 2 7 N f 7 + Kh7 , whe n 28
S t r e ngthen i ng the e-pawn and b3 ! ? b5 ! ( 28 . . Bxa l ? 2 9
.

prepar i ng the thrus t e 4 - e 5 . Qxh6 + ) 2 9 ax b 5 axb5 3 0 Rxa8

The game Peev - Nemet , Mla­ Rxa8 31 bxc4 bxc4 32 Qe3 Nc5
denovac 1 9 7 5 s aw i n s tead the
. wou l d r e s u l t in a r e l a t i v e l y
pas s i ve 1 4 K h l ? and after even p o s i t i on .
1 4 . . . b5 ! 15 axb5 axb5 16 Rx a8 Kakage l dev - Yurtayev , USSR
Qxa8 17 e5 ( 1 7 Nxb5 Nxe 4 1 8 1 9 8 3 , saw i n s tead 2 6 . . . Bf6?
Bxe4 Rxe4 1 9 Nxd6 Rd4 i s good 2 7 d6 ! Qxd 6 2 8 Nf7+ Rxf7 2 9
for B l ack ) 17 dxe 5 18 fxe5
. . . B x f 7 B x b 2 3 0 R a d l Q d 4 3 1 Bxc4
 Ch ap t e r 6 : 8 Nf3 0-0 9 Be2 49

Qxc4 32 Qxd3 Qxa4 33 Rbl ! and Ba6 ! 1 5 Qb3 Bxc4 16 Qxc4 a6 1 7

Bl ack ' s pos i t ion was hope­ Qd3 b 5 and Black has a great
less . po s i t i o n , Szabo - Saidy , Tel
Avi v 1 964 .
C: 9 Na8
10 dxe5
Bl ack plans to pos t the Kn ight
on c 7 , impeding the thrus t � Avo iding 10 . Ne8 1 1 0-0 Nac7
. .

e4-e5 . Thi s forces White to 12 a4 b6 13 Re l Bb7 14 Bc4 a6

energe t i c action . 15 Ra3 ! b5 16 Rb3 when Whi te
has the upper hand , Knezev i c
- L e i n , Alhena 1974 .

11 fxe5 lfg4
12 Bf4
1 2 Bg5 is i neffect ive once
B l ack p l ayed .Na6 , e . g . ,
. •

1 2 . . . f6 ! ( Less accurate i s
1 2 . . Qb6 1 3 0-0 Nxe5 1 4 Be7
.

Nxf3+ 1 5 Bxf3 Qxb2 1 6 Ne4 Re8

17 d6 wi th co•plex p l ay , Maka­
rov - Bo l e s l avskf � USSR 1 964 )
1 3 e x f 6 Bxf6 14 Qd2 Ne5 !

12 Re8
10 e5 1 13 e8 1
The less act i ve 10 0-0 Nc7 i s Not 1 3 0-0 Nxe5 14 Nxe5 Bxe5
comfor tab l e for Black . Al­ 15 Bxe5 Rxe5 when the pos i ­
though the game Ste i ner - t ion i s equal .
Stoppe l , Vienna 1 9 69 , pro­
ceeded 11 Nd2 a6? 1 12 a4 b6 13 fxe8
Bd7 .J:r
. • .

( 1 2 . . . Rb8 1 3 a5 ) 13 Bf3 Rb8 14 d8 77'-"

14 Nc4 Nfe8 15 Re l b5 16 axb5
axb5 17 Na5 Bd7 18 e5 ! b4 Szabo pre f ers 14 . . . N b4 .

( Better i s 1 8 . . . dxeS ) 19 Ne4

Bb5 20 Nc6 Bxc6 21 dxc6 Nb5 15 Qd2
(21 . . dxe5 e n coun ters 2 2
.

Nxc5 ! t hreaten i ng 23 Nd7 ) 2 2 15 h3 Nf6 16 Ne5 Nb4 1 7 Bg5

Be3 Nd4 23 exd6 Nxd6 24 Nxc5 h6 ! 18 Bxf6 Qxf6 1 9 Nxd7 i s
with advantage for Whi te , unc l ear .
this was the resul t of inac­
curate p l ay by Bl ack . In­ 15 Nb4
s t ead o f 1 1 . . . a6? 1 , h e must 18 0-0 Rf8
p l ay 11 . . . Rb8 ! immediate l y : 17 h3 Nf8
a ) 1 2 Nc4 b5 1 3 Nxd6 b4 ! 1 4 18 Bc4
Nxc8 bxc3 15 d 6 Qxc8 16 dxc7
Qxc7 and Bl ack has the upper Cobo - Ciocal tea , Havana
hand . Soderborg - B o l e s l av­ 1 965 . White has suf f i c ient
sky , S t oc kho l • 1 964 . compensat i on for the sac r i ­
b ) 1 2 a4 Re8 13 Bf3 b6 14 Nc4 f i ced pawn .
 C H AP T E R SEVEN

Illustrative Games

GAME 1 19 Bx h 6 ! Nxc4 20 Q g4 Ne5 2 1

Yuneyev - VarlllllOV Qg5 Qd8 2 2 fxg6++ Kg8 2 3 Q h 5
Leningrad 1982 Qd6 24 R f 7 ! Nxg6 25 B f4 ! ) 1 9
fxg6 + Kg7 and B l a c k repe l l e d
1 d4 Nf6 the enemy attack , G i ge r ! -
2 c4 c5 Grunfe l d , Groni ngen 1 9 7 4 / 7 5 .
3 d5 e6
4 Nc3 exd5 16 Bb5 Bd4+
5 cxd5 d6 17 Khl h6
6 e4
7 f4 c B l ack shou l d probab l y s e t t l e
8 e5 n
N 7 o n 1 7 . . . N8d7 , i n order t o
9 Nb5 dxe5 m e e t 1 8 f5 b y 18 . . . Nf6 .
10 Nd6+ Ke7
11 Nxc8+ Qxc8
12 Nf3 Re8
13 Bc4
Other cont i nuat i ons w e re ana­
lyzed i n Chapte r 2 S e c t i on
A2 .

13 Kf8
14 o-o e4
Aga i n s t 14 . . . Nb6 Bo l e s l avsky
recommends 1 5 Bb5 Rd8 16 d6 !
e4 ( Or 1 6 . . . exf4 1 7 Bxf4 Nc6
18 Be3 , favor i ng Whi t e ) 1 7
Ng5 Kg8 1 8 f5 ! 18 f5 1
15 Ng5 The only way to cont i nue the
att ack . 18 Bxe 8? Qxe8 19 Nh3
The excur s i on 1 5 Ne5? 1 f a i l ed f5 suff i c i ently c o mpe n s a tes
i t s test in Ma lkoci - George ­ B l ack for the Exchange .
scu , c or r 1 9 7 1 /73 . T h e game
proceeded 15 . . . Nb6 ( But not 18 bxg5
15 . . . Nxe5 16 fxe5 Bxe 5 17 d6 19 fxg6 f6
f5 18 Qd5 and Wh i te w i ns ) 1 6 20 Bxg5
Bb5 N8 d 7 1 7 Nxd7 + Nxd7 18 f5
Bd4 + 1 9 Khl a6 20 fxg6 hxg6 20 Qh5 Ke7 21 Bxe 8 Qxe8 2 2
2 1 Qg4 Ne5 ! ( Th i s i s s tronger Qh7+ K d 6 23 Qxb7 Qe7 a l l ows
than 21 . . . Nf6 ) 22 Qh4 axb5 2 3 B l ack to ho l d the pos i t i on .
Bg5 Nf3 ! 24 gxf3 e3 25 Rfdl
Bxb2 and Bl ack had the advan­ 20
tage .
20 . . . Ke7 l oses to 2 1 d6+ Kd8
15 Nb6 22 Qxd4 !

On 15 . . . h6 Wh i te can p l ay 16 21 Rxf6 1
Nh3 Bd 4 + 1 7 Khl Kg7 1 8 f5 !
wi th sharp p l ay . Yuneyev ' s Whi te consequen t l y carries on
1 6 f5 1 ? hxg5 1 7 fxg6 Ne5 1 8 his attack . The erroneous 2 1
d6 ! a l so mer i t s cons i dera­ Bxe8? Qxe8 22 Bxf6+ i s met by
t i on . However , the Kn i ght 22 . . . Bxf6 23 Rxf6 Kxf6 24 Qh5
sacri f i c e 1 6 Nxf7? 1 i s dub i ­ N8d7 25 Rf l + Ke7 26 Rf7+ Kd6 !
ous o n account o f 1 6 . . . Bd4 + and B l ack wins eas i l y .
1 7 Khl Kxf7 18 f5 Nf6 ! ( The
game Tayl or - van Gof , Ha s ­ 21 Bxf 6?
t i ngs 1 9 79/80 , s aw the i nac­
curate 18 . . . Ne5? and Whi te Pera i t t i ng the Whi t e Queen to
obtained a winning game after dec i s i ve l y enter the bat t l e .
 Chapter 7 : I l l us t rat i ve Games 51

The forthcom i ng maneuver could b i s Wol �a-Gambi t " ( Sportver ­

have been averted by 21 . . . l ag , Ber l i n 1982 ) Tai manov
Rh8 ! , when the outcome of the assesses the this pos i ti on as
game wou l d be far from c l ear . favorab l e for White . However ,
t h i s game demonstrates that
22 Qb5 BX25 B l ack ' s chances are no worse
23 Rfl l RhA i n the resul t i ng comp l i cat­
24 Rf7+ Kg8 - i ons .
25 Rb7 1 N8d7
19 b4
Unfortunatel y 25 . . . Bf6 wi l l 20 Bxf6 Nxf8 1
fai l t o 2 6 Rxh8+ Bxh8 2 7 Qh7 + ,
l e ad i ng to mate . Th i s rep l y i s to be pre ferred
over 2 0 . . . Qxf6 . When p l ayed
28 bbB+ Kg7 in the game Z a i c h i k - Taborov ,
27 bc8 bc8 Tal l i nn 1 9 7 6 , it produced an
28 Qb7+ Kf8 uncl ear pos i t i on after 2 1 Nd4
29 Bxd7 Nxd7 g5 22 Nc6 c3 23 bxc3 bxc3 24
30 Qf7+ Ke5 Qe3 Rb5 25 Ba4? 1 Rc5 . How­
31 Qxd7 Rf8 ever , instead of 25 Ba4? 1 ,
32 Qc'l + Whi t e coul d p l ay 25 Rf3 1 wi t h
advantage .
Bl ack res igns ; after 32 . . . Rf6
33 h4 ! Bxh4 34 Qh8 Bg3 35 Qb8 + 21 Qd4 b3
Rd6 36 g 7 the Whi te pawn 22 Bbl Bd7
reaches promoti on . 23 Qc3
23 N d 2 is met by 23 . . . Ng4 ! 24
GAllE 2 Nxc4 Qh4 25 h 3 Rb4 wi th t he
Barczay - Sauer•ann i n i t i at i ve .
CorreaPQPdence J,t84
23 Rc8
1 d4 Nf8 24 Ra7 Qb8
2 c4 c5
3 d5 e8
4 Nc3 exd5
5 cxd5 d8
8 e4
7
8
f4
Bb5+
cfl
N 7
9 a4 o-o
10 Nf3 Na&
11 0-0 Nc7
12 Bd3 a8
13 Kbl Rb8
By transpos i t io n reach i ng the
pos i t i on analyzed in Chapter
3 Section Al .
25 Qxf8
14 f5 1 ? b5
15 axb5 Nxb5 Whi t e attempts to comp l i cate
18 Bg5 Bf8 1 the pos i t i on by sacri f i c i ng
the Exchange because 25 Qd4
Thi s cont inuat i on i s more Qxd4 26 Nxd4 gxf5 ! 27 exf5
accurate than 16 . . . f 6 , whi ch Ra8 2 8 Rc7 Rfc8 woul d be bet­
was p l ayed in t h e game Spassky ter for Bl ack .
- Savon , Mos cow 1 9 7 1 , where 1 7
Bf4 Ne5 1 8 h3 Rf7 1 9 g4 gave 25 Qxa7
Wh i t e the up pe r hand . 26 e5
17 Nxb5 axb5 26 Qxd6 encounters 26 . . . Qc7 .
18 Qd2 c4
19 Bc2 26 c3 1
21 i>xc3 Qes
In his boo k "Modernes Benoni 28 Qxd8 Bxf5
52 Chapter 7 : I l l us t rative Ga.mes

29 Bxf5 �f5 15 Qg3 Ba6

30 Hd4 I
31 Hc6 15 . . . exd5 wou l d al l ow 1 6 d6
Na6 1 7 f 5 .
31 Nxf5 wou l d fai l to 31 . . .
Qf2 ! 16 Bb5 dx e 5
17 fxe5 Bxb5
31 Ree s 18 axb5 Hxe5
32 Qf6 19 Rxa7 Hxd5

32 Ne7 + woul d lose to 32 . . .

Rxe7 33 Qxe7 Q cl .

32 Qf4 1
33 Rgl h6
34 h4

Or 34 Ne7 + Kh7 35 Nxf 5 Qg5 !

34 Kh7
35 He7 Rxe7 1
36 Qxe7 Rg8
Whi t e res i gns ; he cannot
avert 37 . . . Qf2 wi th the fur­
ther . . b l ;Q and . . . Qxg2
. At f i rst g l ance i t appears
mate . that Bl ack has won the open­
i ng batt l e ; he is up a pawn
and his centra l i zed Knights
GAME 3 seem to control the bo ard .
Lacha Yeraan- �ver , Whi t e ' s s urpr i s i ng
Correspondence 1983 n e1i t move d i s pe l s th i s no­
t i on .
1 d4 Nf6
2 c4 c5 20 Bh6 1 Bh8
3 d5 e6
4 Hc3 exd5 On 20 . Bxh6 2 1 Nxe 5 Whi t e
. .

5 cxd5 d6 threatens both the f-pawn and

6 e4 Nc6 . 2 0 . . Nxf3+ , on the oth­
c
.

7 f4 er hand , l o s es the Exchange

8 Bb5 + Nfl7 after 21 Qxf3 Bd4+ 22 Khl Nf6
9 a4 0-0 23 Bg5 Kg7 24 Nd5 Re6 25 Ne7 !
10 Hf3 Ha6 h6 26 Nc6 .
11 0-0 Nc7
12 Bd3 Rb8 21 Nxe5 Bxe5
Black ' s other moves were fea­ Or 21 . 22 Qx c3 Bxe5 2 3
. . Nxc3
tured i n Chapter 3 Sect ion Al . Qb3 and Whi te penetrates via
the f7-square .
13 Qel l ?
22 Rfxf7 1
Wh i te immed i ately trans fers
his Queen to the K i ngs i de , Another surpr i s e . Captur i ng
i ntending to i n i t i ate a c t i o n the Queen now leads to disas­
against the e ne m y K i ng wi th­ ter : 2 2 . . . Bxg3 23 Rg7+ Kh8 2 4
out de lay . Rxh7 + Kg8 2 5 Rag7+ K f 8 26 Rh8
mate .
13 b6?
22 Nxc3
Thi s is too s l ow ; Bl ack wi l l 23 Qxe5 Qdl +
be unab l e to procure Queen­ 24 Kf 2 Qc2+
s i de counterplay . The only 25 Qd3+
chance was 13 . . a6 , prepar i ng
. 26 �: Qc4+
the thrust . . . b 5 . 27 Qf4
14 e5 1 Re8 B l a ck res i gns .
 Chapter 7 : I l lus trat ive Games 53

GAllB 4 Another i naccuracy , as Bl ack

Piket - Horvath wi l l i ngly weakens b i s Queen­
Grooingeo 1 984/85 s i de pawns wi thout compensa­
t i on . Hence 1 7 . . 0-0 was .

1 d4 Nf6 s t i l l cal led for .

2 c4 c5
3 d5 e6 18 axb6 Rxb8
4 Nc3 exd5 19 b5 Qc8
5 czd5 d6 20 Qe2 Nb3
6 e4 g6
7 f4
:c7
20 . . . Rb4 i s probabl y s trong­
8 Bb5+ er .
9 a4 a6 21 Bxb3 Rxb3
10 Bd3 Qc7 22 e5 dxe5?

r
Bl ack immedi ately pursues There was s t i l l t ime to se­
Queen s i d e act i on . The more cure h i s King b 22 . . 0-0 . .

common 10 0-0 was presented

. . . The text move a l ows White to
i n Chapter 3 Sect i on A2 . l aunch a dec i s i ve attack .

11 Nf3 c4
12 Bc2 Nc5
13 0-0
The game Szabo - Robats ch ,
Mari bor 1978 , s aw i ns tead 1 3
Be3 Bg4 1 4 0 - 0 0-0 1 5 Bd4 ( 1 5
h3 ? ! , pl aye d in Furman -

Dorfman , USSR 1 976 i s dub i ­ ,

ous on account o f 1§ .> . Bxf3 .

16 Rxf3 Nbd7 17 ai 'Jft'e8 1 8

Bd4 b 5 1 9 axb6 Qxb6 2 0 Ra2
R ab8 21 Kh2 Bxd4 2 2 Qxd4 Nb3
with a s l i ght edge for Bl ack )
15 . . . Bxf3 1 6 Rxf3 Bxd4+ 1 7 23 b6 1
Qxd4 Q b6 ? ! ( Better i s 1 7 . . .

Nbd7 , coap l e t i ng h i s deve l op­ I ntend i ng to me e t 23 . . . Bxb6

ment ) 1 8 a5 ! Qxb2 19 Ra2 Qb4 24 fxe5 Bxc l by 25 e 6 1 , e . g . ,
20 e5 Nbd7? ( Essent i a l i s 25 . . Qc5+ 26 Kbl Bxb2 ( 26 . .
. .

20 . . . b6 -Szabo ) 2 1 R f l b 5 2 2 Rxb2 woul d l ose to 2 7 exd7+

Rb l Nb3 23 Bxb3 Q c 5 2 4 Qxc5 Kd8 28 Qe5 ) 2 7 exd7+ Kd8
Nxc5 25 Bc2 and White is up a ( 2 7 . Kxd7 2 8 Rxf7+ ) 2 8 Re l !
. .

piece . Qf8 29 Qxc4 and White wins .

13 Bg4 23 Bf 6
14 b3 Bzf3 24 Ne4 Be7
15 Rxf3 Nbd7 25 d6 f5
16 b4 ! ?
Desperat i on ; 25 . . . Rxf 3 a l l ows
Whi te i ni t i ates R i ngs i de ac­ 26 dxe 7 ! , threateni ng 2 7
tion wi thout wai t ing for hi s Nd6 + .
advers ary to cast l e .
26 Rxb3 cxb3
16 Rb8? 27 dxe7 fxe4
28 Qxe4 Qc5+
B l ack should accept the cha l ­
lenge b y playing 1 6 . 0-0 ! . . Or 28 Kxe7 29 fxe5 Qc5+ 30
. . .

anyway so that after 1 7 h5

, Be3 Qxe5 31 Bg5+ and Wh i t e
he c ou l d counter White ' s at­ wins eas i l y .
tack with the Queens ide
thrust 17 . . . b5 ! , e . g . , 1 8 29 Be3 Qxe 7
axb5 ax b 5 1 9 Rxa8 Rxa8 20 30 Qa8+ Qd8
hx:g6 hx26 wh e n the capture 31 Qd5 1
o n b 5 wi l i fai l to 2 1 . . Qb6 . .

Now B l ack i s prevented from

17 a5 b5? cas t l i ng .
54 Chapter 7 : I l l us trat i ve Games

31 Qf6 Queens i de p l ay ) 1 9 . b5 20
. .

32 fxe5 Qxe5 axb6 Rxb6 21 b3 Qb8 22 Bc4

33 Qxe5+ NbS 23 Na4 Rb7 24 Qd3 Qd8 25
b4 cxb4 26 Rxb4 Nf6 27 Bxb5
Bl ack res i gns ; 33 . . . Nxe5 l o ses Rxb5 28 Rc4 , f avor i n g Wh i t e ,
to the s i mp l e 34 Bd4 . Dur i e - Tringov , Sombor 1 980 .
c ) 1 5 . . . c4 ! ? 1 6 Bxc4 Qb6+ 1 7
• R f 2 ( 1 7 Qe3 fai l s t o 1 7 . . .
GAJIE 5 Nxe4 ! 1 8 Nxe4 Qxe3+ 1 9 Bxe3
Zai chik - Elvest Rfe8 ) 17 . . . Qxb2 1 8 Rbl Qa3 19
Tal l i nn 1981 Rxb7 Nc5 20 Rbl Nfd7 2 1 e5
Nxa4 w i th intri cate p l ay ,
1 d4 Nf6 Lukacs - Szalanczy , Hungary
2 c4 e6 1 982 .
3 Nc3 c5
4 d5 exd5 16 a5 1 ?
5 cxd5 d6
6 e4 Th i s move shou ld have been
7
8
f4
Bb5+
c
Nfl7
de l ayed in f avor of 16 Bc4 ! ?
I n the � ame Wi l l i ams - Me c­
9 Bd3 0-0 king , N i ce 1 9 74 , after the
10 Nf3 a6 further 16 . Nb6 17 b3 Nxc4
. .

11 a4 Nf6 1 8 bxc4 Nd7 19 Rae l QaS 20

12 0-0 Bg4 Qd3 Qc7 21 Khl Rf8 22 Ndl ! ?
13 h3 Bxf3 Rae8 , the p l ayers sett l ed for
14 Qxf3 Nbd7 a draw . However , i nstead of
15 Bd2 22 Ndl ! ? , Whit e co u l d p l ay 22
Re 2 ! , prepar ing the p r omi s i ng
The aore coaaon 15 Be3 was thrus t e4-e5 .
presented in Chapter 3 Sec­
t i on A2 2 . 16 b5 1

15 Re 8 B l ack corre ctly i n i t i ates

Queens i de act i v i t i e s i n order
Bl ack a l s o has several other to aver t the unpl easant 1 7
moves at his di spos al : Na4 .
a ) 1 5 . . . Qc7 16 Bc4 ( 1 6 Rae l i s
met by 1 6 . . . c 4 1 7 Bbl b5 1 1 8 17 axb6 Qxb6
K h l b4 ! ) 1 6 . . . Nb6 ( 1 6 . . . Rae8 18 Ra2 Qb3
i s i n ferior on account of 1 7 19 Bbl a5
Rae l R e 7 1 8 Qd3 , w i th the
threat o f e4-e5 ) 17 b3 Nfd7 1 8 19 . . . RebS 20 Bel Ne8 21 Ra3
Rae l Raes 1 9 Qd3 ( 1 9 Re2 ! ? Qc4 also comes i nto p l ay .
mer i ts cons i derat ion as we l l )
1 9 . . . Qd8 2 0 e5 ( Farago - Sue­ 20 Bel c4
t i n , Dubna 1979 , saw t he 21 Ra3 Qb6+
pas s ive 20 Khl ? ! and B l ack got 22 Rf 2 Qc7
the better of i t after 20 . . . 23 Bc2 Nc5
Qh4 2 1 Re2 g5 ! 2 2 g3 Qh5 ! 23 24 Re2 Nfd7
Rg2 Nxc4 2 4 bxc4 f5 ! ) 20 . . . 25 Ba4
dxe5 2 1 f5 e4 2 2 Nxe4 Bd4+
( 22 . . . Ne5 fal l s short of its Whi te has pract i ca l l y l o s t
goa l after 2 3 Qg3 Nxd5 24 Bxd5 the bat t l e f o r t h e center as
Qxd5 25 f 6 Bh8 26 Bh6 Nd3 2 7 the thrus t e4-e5 is no l onger
Re3 Rx e 4 2 8 Bxf8 Qd4 2 9 Bh6 . e f fect i ve , e . g . , 25 es dxeS
23 . . . Nbxc4 24 bxc4 Nxc 4 i s 2 6 f5 Nf6 . Hence be tr i e s to
even weaker , los ing t o 25 !6 ! s i mp l i f y the pos i t ion through
Nxd2 26 fxg7 Nxe4 27 gxf8=Q+ exchanges .
Kxf8 28 Qd3 ! Nd6 29 Qc3 -
P i nter ) 23 Khl Ne5 24 Qc2 25 Nxa4
Nbxc4 25 bxc4 f6 2 6 fxg6 and 26 Rxa4 Rab8
Wh i te has the up p er hand ,
P i nte r - Dur i e , Baj aok 1 980 . The Queens i d e s i tuat ion bas
b ) 15 . . . Ne8 1 6 aS Nc7 1 7 Ra2 s t ab i l i zed i n B l ack ' s favor ,
Rb8 1 8 Kh2 Re8 19 Rbl ! ? ( An and therefore Wh i te turns h i s
i nte r e s t i n g plan i nvo lving attent i on back to the ce n ter ,
 Chapter 7 : I l l ustrative Ga11e s 55

hop i ng to gai n s ome momentum . An attrac t i ve a l ternat i ve i s

the i mmediate 1 3 e5 ! , whi ch
was featured in Chapter 3
Section B l .

13

27 e5 dxe5
28 f5 RW
29 RxW a.xW
30 Ne4 Nc5
31 d6
14 e5 1
On 31 f6 Nxe4 32 Rxe4 ( 32 fxg7
Nd6 33 Bb6 f5 ) 32 . . . Bf8 Whi te Whi te has the s pat i a l advan­
has no way to bo l s ter h i s tage and h i s central act ion
s aggi ng attack . aias at c ra11p ing B l ack even
further . The ga11 e Lutikov -
31 Qc8 Vas i ukov , Mos c ow 1 95 9 , va r i ed
32 with 14 B f l ! ? b6 15 Bc4 Bb7 16
33
iir �
Rf8
Qb3 Raes 1 7 Bd2 a 6 1 8 Re2 Q d 8
19 Rael Nf6 wi th the b etter

t37 Qd5
Rfl
Qxc4
Nd3
Nxcl
Qxd6
prospects for Wh i te as Bl ack
is hard pres sed t o i n i t i ate
any k i nd of counterplay .
38 Qxcl Less prom i s i n� i s 1 4 Qb3 ,
p l ayed i n Ree - Lobron , Par i s
38 Qh4 encounters 38 . . . Qd4+ . 1 98 3 , wh i ch c o n t i nued 1 4 a6 . . .

( Lukov - Szeke l y , Erevan 1 984 ,

38 Bh6 saw i n s t ead 14 . Nb6 1 5 Nd2
39 Khl Qd4
. .

N6xd5 ! 16 Nxd 5 Nxd5 17 Qx d5

40 b3 Qc3 1 Bd4+ 18 Kg2 Be6 19 Qg5 Bf6 2 0
Qh 6 B g 7 2 1 Q h4 Bf6 and the
Whi te res i gn s
. On 4 1 Qxc3 game was a greed drawn ) 1 5 B f l
bxc3 the Bl ack pawn reaches b6 16 h3 Bb7 17 Bg2 Nd3 18 Re2
promo t i on and 41 h4 Qxc l 42 b5 19 axb5 c4 ! 20 Qc2 ( 2 0 Qxc4
Rxcl f6 wins mater i a l for l oses the Exchange t o 20 . . .

B l ack . axb5 ) 20 axb5 2 1 Rbl b4 22

. . .

N b 5 Rfc8 with good chances for

B l ack .
GAME 6
Tal - Veliairovic 14 a6
Moscow 1982 15 Bfl dxe5
16 d6 Qe8
1 c4 e6
2 d4 Nf6 16 Qd8 s eems s tronger .
3 Nc3 c5
. . .

4 d5 exd5 fxe5 b6?

5 cxd5 d6
17

6 e4 g8 Bl ack pl anned to deve l op h i s

7 f4 p i eces as qui ckly a s pos s i ­
8 Bb5 + :c7 b l e , but the text move puts
9 a4 QM+ him on the brink o f defeat .
10 g3 Qe7 Hence Bl ack s h ould have tried
Nf3 0-0 17 Nxe5 ! ? ( Or 1 7 Nc6 ) 18
12 0-0 Na6
11 . . . . . .

Nxe5 Bxe5 , when Whi t e has the

13 Rel fol l owi ng opti ons :
56 Cha pt e r 7 : I l l us trative Games

a) 19 Bh6 Bd4 + 2 0 Khl Qd8 2 1 15 Nxd6 N6xd5

Bxf8 Qxf8 2 2 Ne4 Be6 w i t h an 16 Bd2 Bg4
unc l ear pos i t ion . 17 Qb3 Rada
b ) 19 Ne4 Qc6 ( But n o t 19 . . . 18 Bc4
Bd4 +? in v i ew of 20 Qxd4 ! ) 20
Bg2 Kh8 2 1 Be3 and Wh i te h as The Whi te p i e c e s hav e been ac­
the i n i t i a t i ve for t h e pawn . t i vely pos ted : i n part i cu l ar ,
c ) 1 9 Rxe5 Qx e 5 20 d7 Bxd7 2 1 - the Kn i ght on d6 contro l s some
Qxd7 Qd4+ with c om p l ex p l ay . i mportant squares in the enemy
c amp .
18 e6 1 fxe6
19 Bc4 Bb 7 ? 18 Nb6
19 Bxb4 cxb4
E s s ent i a l was 1 9 . . . Kh8 .

20 Rxe6 Kh8
On 20 . . . Q f 7 2 1 Re4 Qxc4 2 2
Rxc4 Bxf3 2 3 Qb3 K h8 B l ack
does not have ade q ua t e com­
pens a t i o n for the Queen but
he can con t i nue h i s res i s ­
tance f o r a l ong t ime . The
text move loses i .. e di a t e l y .
21 Rxe8 Raxe8
22 Bf4 g5
Or 22 . . . Bxf3 23 Qxf3 g5 24 Qg4
an d Wh i t e w i n s a s e a s i l y . I t is po s s i b l e that B l ack
counted on t he trap he s e t ,
23 Nxg5 � n am e l y , 20 Qxb4 ? Nxc4 2 1 Qx c 4
Rxd6 ! 22 exd6 Qe3+ 23 Kg2
Bl ack r e s i gns . Rc8 ! Wh i t e , however , found a
much s tronger repl y .

GAME 7 20 Bx f 7+ 1 Rxf7
B&&"i rov - Mal an i uk 21 Ng5 Rxd6
Bak u 1 983 22 exd6 Bd4+
23 Khl Qe8
1 d4 Nf8 24 h3 1 Bd7
2 c4 cs
3 d5 e6 24 . . . Be2 wou l d l o se to 2 5
4 Nc 3 exd5 R f c l ! Kg7 26 Nxf 7 Qxf7 27
5 cxd5 d6 Qxf7+ Kxf7 2 8 R c 7 + Ke6 2 9
8 e4 e6 Re7+ .
f4
:c1
7
8 Bb5+ 25 Rael Qf 8
9 a4 Qh4+ 26 Re7 Bc6+
10 Qe7 Kh 2 Bd5
-�3
27
11 0-0 28 Qxb4 Bf 6
12 0-0 Na6 29 Nxf 7 Bxf7
13 e5 Nb4
Against 29 . . . Bxe 7 Wh i t e i nten­
The e x c ha n� e 13 . . . dxe5 was ded 3 0 Nh6+ ! Qxh6 3 1 dxe7 B c 6
p r e s e n t e d in Chapter 3 S e c - 32 R e l Bea 33 Qb5 ! Kf7 34 Q e 5 ,
t i on B l . w i n n i ng .
14 Ne4 Nb6 30 Rxb7 Qe8
31 Re l Qc6
1 4 . . . dxe5 wou l d encounter 15 32 Rc7 Q f3
d6 Qd 8 ( 1 5 . . . Qe8 16 Nxc5 ) 1 6 33 Qd2 h5
fxe 5 , when 1 6 . . . Nxe5? 1 7 Nxe5
Bxe5 l oses t o 18 d7 ! B d4 + 1 9 Or 33 . . . Nc4 34 Qe2 Qxe 2 + 3 5
Kg2 Bxd7 ( 1 9 . . . Q e 7 20 Re l ) 2 0 Rxe 2 Nxd6 36 Rxa 7 w i th a de­
Bxd7 Qx d 7 2 1 Nf6 + . c i s i ve advantage .
 Chapter 7 : I l l us trative Ga.mes 57

34 Qe2 Qd5 1 9 . . . Bxb2 , on the o th e r hand ,

35 Rdl Qf5 wi l l l ose to 20 Qd5 ! Bxal 2 1
36 d7 Nd5 Be5+ f6 2 2 Rxf6 !
37 R c8+
19 . . .
37 Qe8+ ! a l s o wins for Whi te , 20 Qd5
21 Rf2
:rs
e . g . , 37 . . . Kg7 38 Qxf7+ Kxf7 Nb4
4
39 Rxd5 Qxd5 0 d8 =Q+ . � 22 Qxe4 a6
37 Kh7 Pos s i bl y stronger i s 22 . . . g5 ,
38 d8=Q h4 with the i dea of get t i ng r id
39
�+
Rxd5 o f t h e dangerous d-pawn .
40 Kq3
41 Rc7+ 23 Bfl
24 Be5
and B l ack f i nal l y gave up .

GAME8
Kouatly - Holak
Tol uca 1982
1 d4 Nf6
2 c4 c5
3 d5 e6
4 Nc3 exd5
5 cxd5 d6
6 e4
c
� Bb5+ N'17
f4

9 a4 , Qb4+ 25 Nxg6+?
10 7
11 fr3 Qe 0-0 Unnecessar i ly forcing the
12 0-0 Na6 p l ay . A feas i b l e a l ternative
13 e5 dxe5 was 2 5 Bxh3 Qxh3 26 Bc3 , when
14 d6 Qd8 the powerful d-pawn cramps
1 5 Nd5 e4 the enemy forces . Another
16 Ne5 1 ? poss i bi l i ty was 25 Qh4 Bxf l
2 6 Raxfl ! , as 26 . . . fxe5? wi l l
A st rong al ternat i ve i s 1 6 l o s e to 2 7 Nxg6+ Kg8 28 Qc4 + .
Ng5 , wh i ch was analyzed in
Chapter 3 S e c t i on B l . 25

16 Kh8
26
27
28
Qh4+
Bxh3
Bxg7?
v
K
f

Accept i ng the second pawn by

16 . . . Nxe5 17 fxe5 Bxe5 wou ld Wh i te shou l d accept the fact
lose a piece to 1 8 d7 ! Bxd7 that his advantage has d i s s i ­
19 Bxd7 Bd4+ 20 Kg2 as 20 . . . pated and enter a l eve l end­
Qxd7 wi l l fai l to 2 1 Nf6+ . game by 2 8 Qc4 + , e . g . , 28 . . .
Qf7 2 9 Qx f 7 + Rxf7 30 Bxg7 Kxg7
17 Ne7 31 Rd2 . K ee p i n g the Queens on
the board can prove bene f i c i a l
An attrac t i ve a l ternat ive i s only f o r B l ack .
17 Bxa6 ! ? Nxe5 ( 1 7 . . . bxa6 1 8
Nc4 i s hope l e s s f o r B l ack ) 1 8 28 Kxg7
fxe5 bxa6 1 9 Nf6 etc . 29 Rel Raes
30 Re7+ Rxe7
17 Nxe5 31 dxe7 Rf6 1
18 fxe5 lb:e5
19 Bf4 1 I t transp i res now that the
advanced pawn is weak and the
Wh i t e deve l o p s ano t he r pi ece l i ght-squared B i shop is out
and at ·the same t ime sets the of p l ay .
trap 1 9 . . . Bd4 + ? 2 0 Qxd4 + ! cxd4
21 Be5+ f 6 22 Rxf 6 , winning . 32 g4 Qxe7
58 Chapter 7 : I l l us trat i ve Gam e s

33 gxf5 Qe l + After 13 . . . gxf5 14 Bg5 B l ack

34 Bf 1 Nd3 faces s e r i ous p ro b l ems :
35 Qxf6+ a ) 1 4 . . . B f 6 1 5 Bf4 0-0 ( Or
15 . . . Q c 7 1 6 Nd2 0-0 1 7 Nc 4
Desperat i o n i n a l ost pos i - Be5 1 8 Bxe5 dxe5 1 9 exf5 ) 1 6
t i on . i
e5 ! ( R e f rai n n g from 1 6 Bxd6?
on a c c o unt o f 16 . . . Bxa4 1 7
35 Kxf 6 Rxa4 Qxd6 ) 1 6 . . . dxe5 1 7 Nxe5
l
Re8 1 8 Qf3 ! and B a c k i s u ­ n
Wh ite res i gns . der a t t ack .
b ) 14 . . f6 1 5 B f 4 ( The f i an­
.

che tto e d B i shop has been ex­

GAME 9 c l uded from a c t i ve p l ay and
Kasparov - Nunn i
Wh i t e s w t c h e s h i s atten t i on
Lucerne 1 982 to the d6-pawn ) 1 5 . . . Q c 7 1 6
Nd2 Nd3 1 7 Bxd6 ! Qxd6 1 8 N c 4
1 d4 Nf6 i n
with a w nni g game for
2 c4 e6 Wh i t e .
3 Nc3 c5 Agai ns t 1 3 . . . c4 K a spa r ov i n ­
4 d5 exd5 t e n d e d 1 4 Bg5 ( 1 4 Be3 ! ? i s
5 cxd5 d6 a l s o s t ro n g ) 1 4 . . . Qb6+ 15 Khl
6 e4 g6 Nd3 16 f6 Bf8 1 7 a 5 ! Nf2+
7 f4 ( 1 7 . . . Qxb2 1 8 N a4 ) 1 8 Rx f 2
8 Bb5+ :n7 Qxf2 1 9 Na4 ! , when B l ack has
9 a4 Na6 a d i f f i c ul t p osi ti n . o
10 Nf3 Nb4? 1
14 Bg5 f6
The standard 10 o-o was
s co pe of h i s
. . •

presented i n uChapter 3 Sec- Bl ack l im i ts the

tion B2 . � B i shop be cause both 1 4 . . . Bf6
1 5 Qd2 Qe7 16 Rae l Rae s 17
11 0-0 a6? e5 ! dxe5 18 Bxf6 Qxf 6 1 9 Ne4 !
and 14 . . . Bd4+ 15 Khl ! ( 1 5
Thi s loss of a t em o wi l l be � Qxd4 ? fai l s t o 1 5 . . . cxd4 1 6
the cause of B l ack s pr ob l e m s Bxd8 dxc3 1 7 bxc3 Nxd5 )
in the a i d d l egame . Correct 1 5 . . . f6 1 6 Bh6 o w ul
d have
i s 1 1 . . . o-o . � i ven Wh i te a dangerous
i n i t i at ive .
12 Bxd7+ 1
15 Bf4 gxf5?
After 1 2 Bc4 0-0 13 Kh l Nb6
14 B e 2 Bg4 or 1 2 Be2 0-0 1 3 Thi s b l under i 11111 e di atel y de­
B e 3 N f 6 Bl ack fa i r ly ea s i l y c i des the game . Better was
comp l etes h i s deve l opment . 1 5 . . . Qe7 , e ve n though Wh i te
r
Thus Wh i t e c o r e c y trades tl wou l d h av e a c l e ar adva n t a ge
the B i s hop for a Kn i ght , in a f t e r 1 6 fxg6 hxg6 1 7 Nh4 Kh7
return ga i n i ng a s t r ong i n i ­ 18 Bg3 .
v
t i a t i e o n the K i ngs ide .
16 Bxd6 Bxa4
12 Bxd7
Bl ack was count i ng on t h i s
tac t i cal thrus t , but Kasparov
env i s i one d t he e n s u i ng p o s i
t i on s m o r e ac c ur ate ly .
­

1 6 . . . Re8 1 7 Bxc5 fxe4 18 Nd4

woul d a l so resul t in a
di f f i c u l t p o s i t i on f o r B l ack .
17 Rxa4 Qxd6
18 Nh4 1
The Kni ght tr i um phan t l y
reaches f5 .

18 fxe4
13 f5 1 0-0 19 Nf5 Qd7
 Chapter 7 : I l l us trat ive Ga.mes 59

Or 1 9 . . . Qe5 20 Qg4 Qc7 ( 20 • . . b ) 14 . . . Nf6 15 Bc4 Nd7 1 6 Be3

R f 7 2 1 Nh6 + ) 2 1 d6 and Wh i te Nb6 17 Bfl Bd7 18 B f 2 Rc8 1 9
wins . g4 c4 20 a5 Na8 2 1 e5 and
Wh i te has the upper hand
20 Nxe4 Kb8 ( Horvath - Bonsch , Keste l i
1981 ) .
20 . Nxd5 l oses to 21 Qxd5 1
. . c ) 14 .. .Rb8 1 5 Be3 b6 1 6 Qd2
Qxd5 22 Ne7 + an d 20 . . . R ae8 B b 7 1 7 Bf2 Qe7 18 Bc4 Qf8 1 9
encounters 21 Qg4 Kh8 2 2 Nxc5 . Bg3 Bh6 2 0 Qf2 Nf6 2 1 Bh2 Nh5
22 Ng5 Rbd8 23 Radl with ad­
21 Ifxc5 vantage ( Enevo l dsen - F i l i po­
wi c z , S i egen 1 9 70 ) .
B l ack res igns ; 2 1 . . . Qxd5 2 2
Qxd5 Nxd5 23 Ne6 wi ns eas i l y . 15 Be3 Bb7
16 Bf2 Rc8
17 Qd2
GAME 1 0
Ree Kulak - Even stronger i s 1 7 Qb3 or 1 7
Wijk aan Zee 1983 Bc4 , prevent ing Bl ack ' s next
move .
1 d4 Nf6
2 c4 e6 17 c4
3 .Nc3 c5
4 d5 exd5
5
�
cxd5 d6
6 e4
7 f4 c
8 Bb5+ Nc7
9 a4 0-0
10 Nf3 Na6
11 0-0 Nb4? 1
12 Rel
Other cont i nuat i ons were fea-
tured i n Chapter 3 Section 82 .

12 a6
13 Bfl 18 e5 1
The alternate 13 Bc 4 a l l ows : Whi t e ' s central act i o n i s
a ) 13 Re8 1 4 Na2 Nxa2 1 5
. . character i s t i c of thi s type
Rxa 2 Nb6 1 6 B f l Bg4 1 7 Bd2 of pos i t f ons .
Bd4+ 18 Khl , Uddenfe l dt -
Poul sen , Norway vs Sweden 18 dxe5
1974 , whe n B l ack shoul d con­ 19 Ne4 a5
t i nue 18 . . f5 ! . 20 Nd6 e4
b ) 1 3 . . . Nb6 1 4 Be2 Bg4 1 5 h3 21 Bh4 Qc7
Bxf3 1 6 Bxf3 Qh4 1 7 Kh2 Rfe8 22 Nxe8 Rxe8
18 g3 Qd8 19 Re2 Nc4 w i th
chances for both s i de s , Watson B lack i s prac t i cal ly l ost ;
- Nunn , England 1 980 . the remainder o f the 'ame i s
j us t a que s t i on o f White ' s
13 Re8 techni que .
Hul ak a l s o cons i ders 13 . . . Nf6 . 23 d6 Qc5+
24 Bf2 Qc6
14 b3 b6 25 Rael Nc5?
Black fai l s to equal i z e . Hastening the defeat . Neces­
Other moves fare no better : sary was 25 . . Ba6 , wh i ch would
.

a ) 14 . Qc7 1 5 Qb3 f5 16 Bd2

. . a l l ow B l ack t o defend a l i t t l e
Nf8 17 e5 ! b6 18 Ndl Bb7 1 9 longer .
Ne3 Nd7 2 0 Bc3 Qb8 2 1 Rad l h6
22 Nc4 , favoring White { Nepo­ 26 Bxc4 1 Rd8
myashchy - Agapov , Leni ngrad
1 980 ) . Unfortunate l y 26 . . exf3 wou l d
.
60 Chapter 7 : I l l u s t rat i ve Games

l o s e to 27 Bb5 ! Rxe l + 28 Rxe l a l l ows Whi te to l aunch a de­

Qd5 29 Qxd5 Nxd5 30 Re8+ Bf 8 c i s i ve a t tack .
31 Bxc5 bxc5 32 d7 .
27 Ne5 Rxd6
· ��• s wa
28 Bxf7+ Kf8 .%f,';1., 1 �
�, � fill;
!Iii [.�.". 1
.il!L
29 Qe2 Bxe5 t- a �1 4- •
�i .u.
• t rq ea
30 fxe5 Rd3
31 Bc4 Kg7 -
• �J 'CL Y::tif
" ' "fe . «i
••f!;
. . e3? i s po i nt l e s s beca u s e
31 .
4- -
.u. •�• �� � � . •
of 32 Bxe3 ! Rxe3 33 Q f l + . • . if:"i:{ '.�
.·k&·y
·{ 4:J1B
gi. .
!#!ft: · frz..J ;w;:;, .·.

tA* • .0i?i' 4). 0,i);i

32 Be3 Rd7 fil\ � 7.?J .!l ?�
33
34
Bb5
Bxd7
Qe6
Nxd7 @,i itJt:lfl#it 8 �
35 Rc7 Bc6 17 f5 1 Nc6
��'4
�� =
4 B l ack hopes to f i nal l y deve l op
hi s Qu e e n s i de . The var i at i ons
I t is incomprehens i b l e why i nvo l v i ng the capture on f5
Bl ack prol ongs the 'ame i n are c l ear l y favor ab l e f o r
thi s hope l e s s p os i t i o n . Whi t e , e . g . , 17 . gxf5 18 Bg5 . .

Bf6 1 9 Nd5 Nxd5 20 Qxd5 N c 6 2 1

38 Rdl Ke8 Rae l , o r 1 7 . Rxf5 1 8 Bg5 1 Bf6
. .

39 • Nc5 19 g4 Rxg5 20 Nx'5 Bxg5 2 1

40 ltg5 Nxe6 R f 7 , w i t h a diffi cu l t p o s i t i o n
41 Re7+ for Bl ack i n both i n s tances .

B l ack res i gns . 18 8g5 Bf6

19 Ne 4 B,X£5
20 N fxg5 gxf 5
GAME 1 1
Kasparov - Kui j pera Pract i c a l l y f o r c e d in l i ght o f
Dortaund 1980 t h e threat 21 f 6 .

1 d4 Nf 6 21 Nxd6 Nd4
2 c4 e6
3 Nc3 c5 21 Qxg5 l o s e s to 2 2 e 7 + and
. . .

4 d5 exd5 21 Ne5 a l l ows 22 Qh5 ! Nxc 4

. . .

5 cxd5 d6 23 Ndf7 .
6 e4 g6
7 f4 Qb5 Bxe6
8 Bb5+ :fl1
0-0
22
23 Rf6
Rael
9 a4 24 Nxf5 1 Nxf5
10 Nf3 a6 25 Nxe6 Nxe6
11 Be2 N f6 26 Rxe6 Rxe6
12 0-0 Qc7 27 Qxf 5 Re8
28 Rel
The more co11111o n r e p l i e s were
� res ented in Chapter 3 Sect­ B l ack res i gn s .
i on 83 .
13 e5 Ne8 GAME 12
14 e6 1 fxe6 P . Littlewood - Norwood
15 Bc4 Qe7 London 1985
Captur i ng on d5 wo u l d al l ow 1 d4 Nf6
16 Nxd5 . A l s o , 15 ..Kh8 1 6
. 2 c4 e6
dxe6 N c 6 1 7 Nd5 Qd8 1 8 Ng5 i s 3 Nc3 c5
hope l e s s f o r B l ack . 4 d5 exd5
5 cxd5 d6
16 dxe6 Nc7 6 e4
7 f4 c
The e-pawn is taboo in v i ew 8 Bb5+ N�7
of 1 7 Rel , but the text move 9 e5 dxe5
 Chapter 7 : I l lustrat i ve Games 61

10 fze5 NhS up the Queens i de . In the

11
12
13
Er
e6
�
=
h4+ aeantime , Whi t e struggl es to
c o ordin ate hi s own pieces .

14 Be 0-0 28 axb5 ub5

15 e.xd7 Bxd7 27 Qxc5 b4 1 ?
18 Bxd7 Rae8 1 ?
17 Bxe8 Rxe8 • The sharp pos i t i on enhan ces
18 Qe2 1 ? B l a ck ' s attack .

Wh i te can a l s o p l ay 18 Kd2 ! ? ,
�= Ka3
�:b4
which was analyzed i n Chapter
4 Sect i on A2 . 30
31 Ral
�i!!
Rc 2
18 • . . Bd4 32 Nh3
19 o-o-o
The Knight f inal ly enters the
A new i dea . The game F l ear - p l ay , but i t i s unab l e to
Norwoo d , London 1984 , s aw bolster the weakened Queen­
instead 19 Kd2 b5 20 Rdl b4 s i de .
21 Bxd4 Rxe2+ 22 Ngxe2 bxc3+ 32 Qd2 1
33 Ka4 Rxc3
�
23 Bxc3 Qxd5+ 24 Kcl and
te - had the advantage . 34 Ra3 Qdl +
35 Ka5 Qd5+
19 • • . Rxe3 38 Kb8 Qc8+
20 Qc4? 1 37 Ka7 Qd7+
38 Kb8 Rc8+
An unwarranted Queen sort i e .
l
Stron er i s 20 Qc 2 ! , when The Black pieces are po i sed
20 . . . xg3 wi l l be aet by 2 1 for dec i s ive action . Whi te ' s
Nge2 Qh6+ 2 2 KQ l Rg2 2 3 Qa4 ! fate i s al ready sealed .

20 a8 39 Ka5 Qa7+
21 a4 40
41
Kb5 a: 1+
Ka4 8+
Avert i ng 2 1 Nge2 Qh6 22 Kbl 42 Kb3 Rb8
b5 when Bl ack has good pro s ­ 43 Ra8+ Kg7
pects .
Whi t e res i gns .
21 Qh8
22 Kbl Qh5
23 Rfl Bxc3 GAD 1 3
24 bxc3 Qe5 Vai ser - Belov
25 Kb2 USSR 1983
1 d4 Nf8
2 c4
3 Nc3 rg7
4 e4 d8
5 f4 0-0
8 Nf3 c5
7 d5 e8
8 Be2 exd5
9 cxd5 Re8
10 e5 dxe5
11 fxe5
12
13
Bg5
0-0
�g:
Nxe5
14 d8 �b2
15 Nd5 c8
25 b5 1
The more popular 15 . . Nxf3+.

Bl ack i s per f e c t l y aware t h at was presented in C h ap t er 5

h i s mater i a l def i c i t forces Section Al l .
him to an energe t i c attack .
The text move l o gi c a l l y opens 18 Rbl
62 Chapter 7 : I l l u s t rat i ve Games

1 6 Nf6+ ! ? also comes i nto 26 Qb6

cons i derat i o n .
Threatening 2 7 Nh 5 ! whi ch
16 Qxa2 l e ads to mate . B l ack , una b l e
to defend b y 2 6 . . . Q d 2 i n v i e w
After 1 6 . . . Nxf 3 + 1 7 B x f3 Qd4+ o f 27 Nf 5 ! , i s f o r c ed to give
18 Khl the s trong d6-pawn and up his Queen to prevent get ­
Wh i t e ' s l ead in deve l opment t i ng m at e d .
give him go od chan c e s f o r the
sacr i f i ce d pawns . 26 Qxf6
27 Rxf6 Rd8
17 Nc7 Bf 5 28 Rfl Nd6
18 Nxe8 Bxbl? 29 Nb5 1 Ne8
1 8 . . . Qxb l ? wou l d f a i l t o 1 9 Or 2 9 . . . gxh 5 30 Q g5 + . B l ack
Q xb l Bxb l 2 0 Nc 7 . Hence unne c e s s ar i l y pro l ongs the
B l ack shou l d s e t t l e on 1 8 . . . game .
Rxe8 ! ? 19 Rxb7 Nd4 20 Nxd4
cxd4 2 1 Bb5 Qd5 22 Bxe8 Qxb7 30 Rel Rdl
with compens at i on for the 31 Rxdl Bxdl
Exchange . The text aove is 32 Qe3 Ba4
an error wh i ch per• i ts Wh i t e 33 Nf4 Bc6
to ga i n the uppe r han d . 34 Qxc5 a6
35 Nd5 Kg7
19�Nxg7 Bc2 36 Nb4
20 Qel Qd5
B l ack re s i gn s .
Captur i ng the Kn i ght on g7
wou l d al l ow 2 1 Nx e 5 Nxe5 22
Bf6 + . GAME 14
Roge r s- Kr i s t i ansen
21 Nxe5 Qxe5 · Tbessal oniki 1984
22 Bf6 Qxd6
1 dc44 Nf6
2 £6
3 Nc3 BC1
2
4
5
e4
f4 d6
0-0
6 Nf3 c5
7 d5 e6
8 Be2 exd5
9 cxd5 Re8
10 Nd2 Na6
Other move s were the subj e c t
o f C h a p t e r 5 S ec t i on B .

11 0-0
23 Bc4 1
B l ack has won eno ugh pawns
for the p i e c e but Wh i t e is on
the o f fens i ve . The threat i s
2 4 Bxf7+ !

23 Rf8
24 Qcl
S t r o n ge r i s
2 4 Q e 3 ! , pr event i ng B l ack ' s
next move .

24 Ne5
Hop i ng f o r 25 Qx c 2 ? Ng4 ! 11 Nc7
25 Qf4 1 Nxc4 An i n t er e s t i ng a l t e rnat i ve i s
 Chapt er 7 : I l l us trat i ve Games 63

1 1 . . . Rb8 ! ? , retai n i ng the o p t ­ 1 5 h3 i s met by 1 5 . . . Ng4 ! ?

i on of p l a y i n g . . . Nb4 ( af t e r wi th a dangerous i n i t i ative
a 2 - a4 ) . P l ay can proceed : for Bl ack .
a ) 1 2 a4 Nb4 ( Kapengut r e c om­
mends 12 . . . c4 ! ? ) 13 Bf3 b6 14 15 Ba6? 1
Nc4 Ba6 1 5 Qb3 Rb7 1 6 g3 Rbe7
when B l ack has a good gaae , B l ack i nexp l i cably refrains
Ru bi ne t t i - Garc i a , Buenos fro• the consequent 1 5 . . .
Ai res 1 964 . Ng4 ! ?
b ) 1 2 Re l N c 7 13 a4 b 6 ( Or
13 . . . a6 1 4 a5 Bd7 15 B f 3 Bb5 16 Na3 Bb7
1 6 N f l Bxfl 17 Kxfl Nd 7 18 g3 17 Be3 Qd7
b5 w i th good p l ay for B l a ck , 18 h3 a6
Anders son - Mat u l ov i c , Havan a 19 Nc4 b5
1 966 ) 14 Bf3 Ba6 1 5 Ndbl 20 Nxd6 1 Qxd6
( Wh i te t r a ns f e rs the Kn i ght 21 e5 Qd8
to a3 , where it wi l l co n tr o l 22 d6 Ne&
b5 and c4 ) 15 . . . Nd7 16 Na3 c4 23 ub5 ub5
1 7 Ncb5 Bxb5 18 axb5 c3 ! 1 9
Rb l c xb 2 20 B xb 2 Bxb2 21 Rxb2 Ther e is no t i • e to retreat
Q f 6 5',nd Bl ack has equal ized , the endangered Knight ; 23 . . .
Mal i ch - Tr i ngov , Saraj evo Nd7 wou ld a l l ow 24 Bxb 7 Rxb7
1965 . 25 bxa6 , when the White pawns
are very dangerous .
12 a4
24 Bxb7 Rxb7
The game K i rs ch-Bert raae - 25 exf 6 Bxf6
Schoemaker , corr 1 9 7 8 , var ied 26 f5 1 Nd4?
with 1 2 Bf3 R b8 1 3 a4 ( 1 3 N c 4
i s unc l ear , e . g . , 13 . . . b5 1 4 Black had no cho i ce but to
N a 5 Bd7 1 5 e 5 dxe5 1 6 fxe5 capture on f5 as White cannot
Rxe5 17 Nc6 Bxc� 18 dxc6 ) eas i l y bene f i t from Bl ack ' s
13 . . . a6? ! ( Better i s 13 . . . b6 weakened K i n gs i de . After the
14 Nc4 Ba6 ) 14 Nc4 b5 15 Nxd6 text move White conducts a
Qxd6 16 e 5 Qd8 1 7 d6 ! Ne6 1 8 dec i s ive attack .
axb5 axb5 1 9 ex f 6 Bxf6 20 f 5 !
and Wh i t e had a s t rong a t ­
t ac k .
21
28
rx
Qd
r !fd
.Jl7
12 b6 Wh i l e 28 . . . Kf7 wou l d be met by
29 Nxb5 l Nxb5 ( 2 9 . . . Rxb5 30
A l ogi cal a l t e r na t i ve is Ra7+ ) 30 Q d 5 + , 28 . . . Kg7 29 Ne4
1 2 . . . a6 ! ? , e . g . , 1 3 Bf3 Rb8 i n i t i ates a strong attack .
14 Nc4 b5 15 axb5 axb5 16 Na5
( 1 6 Nxd6 Qxd6 1 7 e5 Qd8 poses 29 Ne4 Be5
no pro b l ems for B l ack ) 1 6 . . . 30 Nxc5 Qxd6
Bd7 1 7 e5 dxe5 1 8 d6 e4 ! ? 1 9 31 Ra& Rb&
dxc7 Qxc7 20 Be2 c 4 2 1 Be3 32 Ra7+ Kc8
Ra8 22 b4 cxb3 23 Nxb5 Bxb5
24 Bxb5 b2 25 Ra3 Red8 26 Qa4 Or 32 . . . Re7 33 Rxe7+ Qxe7 34
Ng4 with a dec i s i ve attack Ne4 a nd Whi t e w in s .
for the p i ece , Ko l beck - An­
de r sen , D e nm a rk 1 967 . 33 Khl l Qxc5
13 Rel 33 . . . Nf5 also loses qui ckly
to 34 Qb3+ .
The pas s ive 13 Rbl , p l ayed in
G r i go r i a n -
S u e t i n , R i ga 1 9 75 , 34 Bxd4 QM
e n c ou n t ered
13 . . . Ba6 14 Bxa6 35 Bc3 Rd6
Nxa6 1 5 Qf3 Qe7 16 b3 Nb4 1 7
Bb2 Nc2 ! 1 8 Rbc l Nd4 1 9 Qd3 a6 35 . . . Qb3 is me t by 36 Qd 7 .
and B l ack had a good game .
36 Qf 3 Qb3
13 Rb8 37 Rxe5
14 Bf3 h5 1
15 Nc4 B l a ck r e s i gn s .
64 Chapter 7 : I l l us trative Ga.me s

GAME 1 5 15 Nd3 1
Su
Meduna -

Bai le Berculaoe 1982 B l ack s a c r i f i c e s a pawn for

ac t i v e p l ay in the center .
1 d4 Nf6
2 c4 c5 16 Bxd3 exd3
3 d5 e6 17 Qxd3 Bf5
4 Nc3 exd5 18 Qd2 Rc8
5 cxd5 d6 19 Ne5
6 Nf 3
7 Nd2
8 e4
c d7
Bg'7
1 9 b 3 wou l d be met by 19 . . b5 !
.

9 Be2 0-0 19 Ne 4
10 0-0 Re8
11 f4 c4 An i n t e re s t ing opt i on i s
12 Khl 1 9 . . . b5 ! ? 2 0 d 6 ( 20 Nxb5 Rc2
21 Qd4 Qxd5 2 2 Qxd5 Nxd5 )
Other moves were p r ese nt e d i n 20 . . . b4 2 1 Nb5 ( Or 2 1 Nd5 ! ? ) ,
Chapter 5 Sect i on B2 . as in D l ugy - F e dorowi cz , USA
1 984 , wher e B l ack had d i f f i ­
12 � Nc5 cul t i e s after 2 1 . . . Rf8? Ac­
13 e5 1 ? cord i ng to Federowi cz correct
wou l d h av e been 21 . . Rc2 ! .

White cannot p r ote c t the pawn w i t h a good game , e . g . , 2 2

by 13 Qc2? b ec au se of 13 . . . Qxb4 Rxe5 ! 23 fxe5 Ng4 .
Nfxe4 ! 14 Ncxe4 Bf5 1 5 Bf3
Qe7 1 6 Rel Bxe4 1 7 B xe 4 f 5 1 8 20 Qd4 f6
Qxc4 fxe4 when B l ack has t he
upper band . S i m i l ar l y , a f te r Another poss i b i l i ty was
13 Bf3 b5 ! ? 1 4 Nxb5 Nfxe4 1 5 20 . Nxc3 21 bxc3 Qd6 .
. .

Nxc4 Ba6 1 6 Nba3 Q h 4 1 7 Kgl

Race Black has a strong ini ­ 21 Nf3 b6
t i ative for the pawn .
The active l y p o s t e d pi eces
13 dxe5 and the Bi shop pa i r account
14 Nxc4 for Bl ack ' s go od p r o s p e ct s i n
t h e m i ddl egame f o r t h e s a c r i ­
R i tov - Tal , Tal l i nn 1 979 , de ­ f i ced pawn .
viated by 14 fxe5 Rxe5 15 Nxc4
Rf5 ! ( Or 1 5 Re8 16 Bg5 h6 1 7
. • . 22 Rael Bf8
Bh 4 Nce4 ! 18 Nxe4 Rxe4 1 9 Bg3 ! 23 Nxe4 Rxe4
Qxd5 20 Qxd5 Nxd5 21 Bf3 Rd4 24 Qd2 Rxcl
22 Rad l Nb6 wi th chances for 25 Rxcl Bb4
both s i des ) 1 6 Bf3 Ng4 17 Ne3 26 Qd3 Bc5
Nxe3 1 8 Bxe3 b6 ! 1 9 Qc2 Ba6 20
Rfdl Be5 2 1 Bd4 Qh4 22 Bxe5 Wh i l e 26 Rxf4 27 Qb3 Re4 28
. . .

Rxe5 with equal p l ay . Nd4 wou l d favor Whi te , a via­

b l e alternat ive was 26 Qe7 ! ? . . .

e4
27 Bxc5 1
Or l4 . . . exf4 15 Bx f 4 Nfe4 .
Pract i ca l l y f o r c e d s i nce 2 7
15 Be3 Bgl ? Re l 28 Q d 2 Rxcl 2 9 Qxc l
Qxd5 pr o d uc e s a n endgame wh i c h
i s better for B l ack .
27 Rel+
28 Rxel Bxd3
29 Ba3 ! Qxd5
30 Re8+
31 Re7+ �
32 h3 g5
The apparently s trong 3 2 . . .
Be4? l o s e s to 33 Rxe4 ! Qxe4
34 Bf8+ Kh5 35 g4 , mate .
 Chapter 7 : I l l ustrative Games 65

33 fq5+ Kg6 1 18 Rae8 1

Bl ack must proceed mos t care­ B l ack ' s counterp l ay al ong the
ful ly . After the erroneous e- f i l e gives h i m good pros­
33 . . . fxg5? 34 Re5 Qxa2 35 pects of equa l i z ing the game .
Rxg5 Qf7 3 6 Bb4 Whi te threat­ After the erroneous 18 b6? . . .

ens the unp l easant 3 ? Bd2 . Whi te woul d succeed in post­

i ng h i s p i e ce s to the i r opt i ­
34 gxf6 Klr:f6 mal poten t i al by p l aying 1 9
35 Rxa7 Be4 Rb3 Raes 20 Rbe3 .
36 Be7+ Ke6
37 Ne5+ Kf5 19 Rxb7 fxe4
38 Nxe4 20 Re3
Agreed d r awn . 20 N f l a l l ows 20 . . . NeS !

20 Bf5
GAME 16 21 Kg2
Christiansen - Ghitescu
Theasaloniki 1984 A prevent i ve measure against
2 1 . . . Nf6 2 2 Rxe 7 Ng4 + .
1 d4 Nf6
2 c4 c5 21 Nb&
3 d5 d6 22 Rxe7 Rxe7
4 Nc3 23 Bb2 Kf7
5 e4 rg7
6 f4 0-0 The resu l t i ng pos i t ion i s
7 Nf3 e6 relative l y even , but both
8 Be2 exd5 s i des must proceed very
9 cxd5 Res accurate l y .
10 N,d2 Ng4
1 1 Bxg4 Bxc3 ! ? 24 Kf2 Bc8 1
The more common 1 1 . . . Qh4 + was Wi th the i dea of attacking
thoroughly analyzed i n Chap ­
the c4-po i nt . 25 Ra3? wi l l
ter 5 Section B2 . now encounter 2 5 . . e3+ ! 26.

Rxe3 Rxe3 2 7 Kxe3 Ba6 28 Kd3

12 bxc3 Qh4+ Nxd5 , when Bl ack has the bet­
Qxg4 ter endgame
f: 8�4
.

Bxg4
15 Kf2 f5 25 Bc3 Ba6
16 Rel 26 Nxe4 Nxc4
27 Rel Bb7
16 h3? wou l d fai l to the ob­ 28 Ng5+ Kf8
vi o us 1 6 . . fxe4 .
. 29 Bg7+ 1
16 Nd7 Thi s unexpected move keeps
1 7 c4 Re7 the game i n bal ance . Whi te
18 Rbl had to refrain from 29 Rxe7?
Kxe7 30 Nxh7 in v i ew of
30 . BxdS w i t h a favorable
. .

endgame for B l ack .

29 Ke8
30 Ne6 Kd7
31 Nf8+ Ke8
32 Ne6
Drawn .
GAME 17
Witkowski - Joks i c
Scauri Latina 1981
1 d4 c5
2 d5 N!6
66 Chapter 7 : I l l us trat i ve Games

3 C4 e6 deve lopment after 18 . c4 1 9 . .

4 Nc3 exd5 Na5 !

5 cxd5 d6
6 e4 Qd8
rg'7
18
7 f4 19 Nc4 Rd7
8 Nf 3 0-0 20 Re2 Nc6
9 Be2 a6 21 d6

Other moves are the subj ect of

Chapters 5 and 6 .

10 0-0
Whi t e can a l s o s l ow B l ack down
on the Queen s i de by 1 0 a4 .
The game Z a i t sev - Nurmamedov ,
USSR 1 9 6 1 , then conti nued
10 . b6 1 1 0-0 Re8 12 e5 dxe5
• .

1 3 fxe5 Ng4 1 4 e6 fxe6 1 5 Bc4

and Wh i t e h ad the upper hand .

10 .� Bg4
21 Nxe5 ! ?
The pr incipal con t i nuat ion .
10 . b5 , i ..e d i ate l y l eads to
. . Whi te probabl y expected only
sharp play after 1 1 e5 ! whe re 21 . Na5 2 2 Nxa5 Qxa5 23 Bc6 .
. .

Wh i t e has the better chances : I n t he meant ime , the unex­

a ) 1 1 . . . dxe5 12 fxe5 Ng4 , and
now :
al ) 13 B f 4 Re8 14 a4 b4 1 5
N e 4 Nxe5 1 6 Nxe 5 Bxe5 1 7 Bxe5
Rxe5 18 Bf3 Bb7 19 Nd2 w i th
good prospects , Wi tkowski
Larsson , corr 1 9 6 9 .
a2 ) 13 Bg5 Qb6 1 4 Be7 Res 1 5
pec ted text move changes the
ent i re comp l exion of the game .
22 Rxe5
- On 22 Nxe5 Rxd6 2 3 Qc2 Rdl +
24 Kf2 Qh4+ B l ack wou l d have
a danger o us a tt a c k .

d6 Be6 1 6 Nd5 Bxd5 1 7 Qxd5

Qc6 18 Qd2 Nd7 1 9 Ng5 ! ? Ngxe5 22 Nxd6?
20 Nxf7 ! and Wh i te has a
s trong attack , Wi tko ws k i - B l ack fai l s to f o l low hi s
A l i v i rta , Arhus 1 9 7 1 . i dea through w i t h 22 . Bxe5 ! . .

b ) 1 1 . . Ne8 1 2 a4 b4 13 Ne4
. 23 Nxe5 Rxd6 .
Nd7 14 Khl dxe5 1 5 fxe5 Nxe5
16 Bg5 f6 1 7 Nxe 5 fxg5 1 8 23 Rd5 Bd4+
Rx f8 + Bxf 8 1 9 d6 ! B e 6 20 B c 4 24 Rxd4 cxd4
Bxc4 2 1 Nxc4 R a 7 2 2 Q d 5 + Kh8 25 Ne5 1
23 Rfl Bg7 24 Nxg5 , 1 - 0 ,
Kos ykov - Sarwi nsk i , Nal e czow Th i s i nterme d i ate move was
1 9 79 . over l ooked by B l a ck who only ,

cons i dered 25 Qxd4 . Whi te

11 e5 Bxf3 now forceful ly s e i z e s the
12 Bxf3 Ne8 i n i t i at i ve .
13 Rel b5
14 a4 1 25 Rc 7
26 Qxd4 Qe7
Gai n i ng the c4-square for h i s 27 Bh6 Nf5
Kn i gh t .

Unfortunately the Rook has no

14 b4 r e t r e a t s quar es due to the
15 Nbl Ra7 threat of 28 Nc6 .
16 Nd2 dxe5
17 fxe5 QM 28 Bxf8 Kxf8
18 Re4 29 Nxf!6+ 1 fxf!6
30 Qh8+ Kf '7
A s t ron ' al ternat i ve is 18 31 Bd5+
Nb3 ! ? , intendi ng to hamper
B l ack ' s natural Qu een s i de B l ack res i gns .
 Chapter 7 : I l lustrat ive Games 67

GAJIB 18 18 Rxb5 1 Nc8

Opl Ager
-

Ranahof eo 1984 The game Konikowski - Segi e t ,

O l s ztyn 1 96 7 , deviated with
l d4 Nf6 1 8 . . . Bxb5 and concl uded after
2 c4
re-i
1 9 Qb3 a 6 ( Or 19 . . . c4 20 Bxc4
3 Nc3 Bxc4 21 Qx c 4 Nc6 22 Qxf 7+ Kh8
4 e4 d6 23 Bf6+ Bxf6 24 Qxf6+ Kg8 25
5 f4 0-0 d7 ! and Whi t e wins ) 19 Qxf7+
6 Nf3 c5 Kh8 20 a4 ! Nd7 2 1 axb5 Qd2 22
7 d5 e6 Bg4 , 1 - 0 .
8 Be2 exd5
9 cxd5 b5 19 Nxd4
10 e5 dxe5
11 fxe5 Ng4 White re f r ains fro• 1 9 Nc7 ,

12 Bg5 1 Qa5 w i nning the Exchange , and

ins tead steps up his attack .
;Jihe Queen i s s omewhat m i s ­
P"faced on a5 . The mor e com­ 19 Nxd4
mon o p t i o n s were presented in
Chap ter 6 S e c t i o n A . 19 . . cxd4 20 Bc4 Be6 21 Bxe6
.

fxe6 22 Qf3 i s a l s o •ost fa­

13 0-0 Nxe5 vorab l e for Wh ite .
The game Pol ikarpov - Zvor­ 20 Bc4 Be6
k i na , USSR 1964 , s aw i ns tead 21 Bxe8 fxe6
1 3 . b4 , but after 14 Ne4 h6
. .

15 Be7 Ne3 16 Qd2 Nxf l 1 7 21 . . . Nxe6 22 Qf3 wins even

Rxf l Whi te had t h e upper qui cke r .
hand .
' 22 Qg4 Qd2
14 Nxe5 Bxe5
15 Be7 Bd4+ 22 . Nf5 wou l d be met by 23
. .

16 Khl Re8 Qe4 .

17 d6
23 Radl Qe3
Wh i te h as s t rong i n i t iative
for the pawn . B l ack s ho u l d Unfortunately Black c annot
now co n t i nu e 1 7 . . a6 18 B f3
. capture on b2 i n v i ew of 2 4
Ra7 19 Bd5 , i n t e nd i ng to gi ve Rxd4 !
up a Roo k for the powerful
B i shop by 1 9 . . . Raxe7 20 dxe7 24 b4 Nf5
Rxe7 . Wh i te woul d actua l l y 25 Bg5 b5
r e ta i n the be t t e r chances
after 21 Qf3 Qc7 22 Rae l Rxe l Prac t i cal l y forced , s i nce any
23 Rxe l but h i s advant age
, Queen •ove wi l l a l l ow the
woul d be f a r f rom de c i s i ve . dec i s ive 26 d 7 .
B l a ck ' s next move i s a b l un­
der a f t er whi ch h i s p o s i t i on 26 Qxf5 1 exf5
de teri orates rathe r qu i ck l y . 27 Bxe3 Rxe3
28 bxc5
17 Bd7?
The Rook endgame i s h o p e l e s s
for B l a ck .
28 Rc3
29 Rel Rxcl
30 Rxcl Kf7
31 c6 Ke6
Or 31 Ke8 32 Re l + Kd8 33
. . .

Re7 and Whi t e wins .

32 Rdl
B l ack res i gns .
68 Chapter 7 : I l l us t rat i ve Games

GAME 19 20 Qc6
Hovde - Schoppaeyer
Correspondence 1 983
1 d4 Nf6
2 c4
3 Nc3 rg7
4 e4 d6
5 f4 0-0
6 Nf3 c5
7 d5 e6
8 Be2 exd5
9 cxd5 b5
10 e5 dxe5
11 fxe5
12
13
Bir5 1
o-o
SC
Nd7 The pos i t i o n dep i c ted o n the
d i agram has b e e n r e c o gn i z e d
The other �p l i es we r e the for a l ong t i m e as b e t t e r f o r
subj ect o f 4Se ct i on A in Chap­ W hi te . Hence i t i s i n c o m p r e ­

ter 6 . hens i b l e why B l ac k repeats

t h i s v ar i a t i o n w i t hout intro­
14 e6 d u c i n g any improvements .
Thi s ne gl i gen ce is qu i ck l y
The game Bakker - Kerkof f , puni s h e d b y h i s adve r s ary .
Amsterdam 1 966 , va r i e d wi th
14 Be7 Ne3 15 Qd2 Nxf l 1 6 20 Rb8
Rxf l c4+ 1 7 K h l Nxe5 1 8 d6 21 Qxa6 Qxb2
Be6 19 Ng5 , producing an un­ 22 Radl Nf2+
c l ear pos i t i on .
2 2 . . Rxc7 woul d encounte r 2 3
.

14 fxe6 ·· Q e 6 + and 24 Qxg4 .

15 dxe6 Qxe6
16 Nxb5 Ba6 23 Rxf 2 Qxf2
24 R fl Q c2
The erroneous 16 . . . Ne3? woul d 25 Qe6 Rbl
encounter 1 7 Q c l . S i a i l ar l y , 26 Nel l Qf2
16 . . . Qc6 , p l aye d in Sega l -
Hug , Sao Pau l o 1 9 7 3 , proved D e s perat i o n ; 2 6 . . . Bf2 wou l d
advantageous _ for White after lose to 2 7 Bh6 .
17 Nd6 Rb8 1 8 Bc4+ Kh8 19
Nf7+ . 27 Rxf2 Bx f2
28 Bd2
17 Nc7
Bl ack res i gns .
The i n f e r i o r 17 Re l led to
equa l i ty in K . G r i gorian -
Podgaets , US SR 1 9 7 1 , after GAME 2 0
17 . . Bxb5 1 8 Bxb5 Nd e5 .
. Kouatly - Lobron
Rovinj 1 980
17 Qxe2
1 d4 Nf6
Or 1 7 . .Bxe 2? 18 Nxe6 Bxdl 1 9
. 2 c4 c5
R fxd l R f 7 2 0 Nd8 Rxf3 2 1 gxf3 3 d5 e6
Nge5 22 Kg2 and Wh i te is win­ 4 N c3 exd5
n i ng ( Sosonko - Hug , G e ne va 5 cxd5 d6
6
rg7
1 9 77 ) . e4
7 f4
18 Qxd7 8 Nf3 0-0
9 Be2 Bg4
The game Sosonko - L i berzon , 10 0-0 Nbd7
Bad L a ut e r b e r g 1 9 7 7 , was 11 h3 Bxf 3
agreed drawn a f t e r 18 Nxa6 . 12 Bxf3 Re8
13 g4 ! ?
Bd4+
Rf7 An aggres s ive co n t i n u a t i on
 C hapt e r 7 : I l l ustrati ve Games 69

aiainR at a rap i d K i ngs i de Against 1 9 d6 B l ack p r e pa red

attack . Th e mo r e p o s i t i o n a l 1 9 . . . Rc8 20 Nd5 Qxd6 21 Bf4
13 a4 was er esen t e d in Chap­ Nxd5 2 2 Bxe5 Qxe5 2 3 Qxd5
ter 6 Sect i on B . Qg3+ 24 Bg2 ( 24 Khl Qh3 + .)
24 . . . Bd4+ 25 Khl Qxh4 + , l ead­
13 b6 ing to mate .
B l ack prepares . . . Nb7 , when 19 Rf5
the fo l l owing . . . g5 w i l l s e - 20 Ne2 Nxd5
c u r e h i m t h e s t rategi cal l y
important e5-square . A t the B l ack has al ready won back
same t ime B l ack is qui te enough mater i a l to co•pensate
ready for t he w i n � at tack on him for the sacr i f i ced piece .
t h e other f l ank via . . . b5 .
21 Bxd5 Rxd5
�
Thi s forces Whi te to proceed
coli quent ly . 22
23
Qb3
Qc4?
Rd3

14 b4
Stronger is 23 Qc2 .

23 Qd7
24 Rf2 Re8
25 Rafl Rxe2 1

Bl ack resorts to t ac t i cs t o
d e c i de t h e gam e .

26 Rxe2 Bd4+
27 Ref2
Or 27 Rff2 Qg4+ 28 Kfl Qh3+
2 9 Kel ( 29 Kgl Rd l + ) 2 9 . . .
Qhl + 30 R f l Qxh4 + 3 1 Ref2 Rf3
b5 1 ? and Bl ack wins .

The game Peev - Boho s i an , 27 Ol?4 +

B u l ga r i a 1 9 7 1 , s aw Wh i t e ga i n 28 iii Q63+
the upper hand after 1 4 . . . Nh7 29 Kcl Bxf2+
15 g5 hxg5 16 hxg5 a6 17 a4 . 30 Rxf2
The text •ove offers a p ie c e
for whi ch B l ack w i l l obta in 30 Kx f 2 woul d l os e to 3 0 . . .
goo dc o u n t e r c ha n c e s . Qf3+ 3 1 Kgl Qg4+ 32 Kf2 Rd4 .

15 1'5 b4 30 . • . Qg4+
18 gxf6 Nxf6 31 Khl
17 e5
Or 3 1 Rg2 Rdl + 32 Kf2 R d 2+ !
1 7 Ne2 Nxe 4 1 8 h5 g5 is un­
c l ear . 31 Qxh4+
32 Kcl
17 dxe5
32 Rh2 Qe l + 33 Kg2 Qe2+ would
A s trong opt i on i s 1 7 . . . bxc3 produce the same r e s ul t .
18 exf6 Bxf 6 19 Qc2 cxb2 20
Bxb2 Bxb2 2 1 Qxb2 Qxh4 , when 32 Q e4 +
B l ack has adequat e c ompe n s a ­ 33 Khl Rh3+
t i on for the s a c rif i c e d mate­ 34 Rh2 Rxh2+
rial . 35 Kxh2 g5
18 fxe5 Rxe5 �b i t e
r e s i gn s ; h i s po s i t i on
19 Bf4 is ho pe l e s s .
 IN D E X O F V A RIA T I O N S

I ntroduc t i on : 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 c5 3 d5 e6 4 Nc3 exd5

5 cxd5 d 6 6 e4 g6 7 f4 Bg7 5

Chapter 1 : 8 e5 dxe5 9 fxe5 Nfd7 1 0 e 6 fxe6 1 1 dxe6 6

A: 11 . Qe7
. . 7
B: 1 1 . Qh4 +
. . 8
C: 1 1 . . Bxc3+ . 9
D: 1 1 . . . Nf6 9

Chapter 2 : 8 e5 Nfd7 9 Nb5 dxe 5 1 0 Nd6+ K e 7 11

A : 1 1 N��� + Qxc8 12
Al : 12 dfP 12
A2 : 1 2 Nf3 13
B : 11 Nb5 16

Chapter 3 : 8 Bb5+ Nfd7 17

A : 9 Bd3 17
Al : 9 . 0-0
. . 17
A2 : 9 . a6 1 0 a4 o-o 1 1 Nf3
. . 20
A 2 1 : 1 1 . . . Qc7 20
A2 2 : 1 1 . . Nf6 . 21
A3 : 9 . QM+
. . 22
B : 9 a4 24
B l : 9 . Qh4 +
. . 24
B2 : 9 . . Na6 1 0 Nf3 o�o 1 1 0 - 0 Nb4
. 25
B 2 1 : 1 2 Bd2 26
B 2 2 : 12 Be3 26
B 2 3 : 12 Kh l 27
B24 : 1 2 h 3 27
B3 : 9 a6
. • . 28
C : 9 Nf3 29

Chapter 4 : 8 Bb5+ ( o ther repl i e s ) 31

A: 8 . . . Nbd7 9 e5 dxe5 1 0 fxe5 Nh 5 1 1 e 6 31

Al : 1 1 . . fxe6 . 31
A2 : 1 1 . . Qh4 + ! ? . 32
B: 8 . Bd7
. . 33

Chapter 5 : 8 Nf3 0-0 9 Be2 Rea 35

A : 1 0 e5 ! ? dxe5 1 1 fxe 5 Ng4 1 2 Bg5 Q b 6 1 3 0-0 Nxe5 35

Al : 1 4 d6 ! ? 37
Al l : 1 4 . . . Qxb2 37
A1 2 : 1 4 . . . Nxf3+ 38
A13 : 14 Be6 . . . 39
A 1 4 : 1 4 . . Nbd7 . 39
A2 : 14 Nxe5 39
B : 1 0 Nd2 40
B l : 1 0 . . . Nbd 7 41
B2 : 1 0 . Ng4 . . 42
83 : 1 0 . . . a6 43

Chapter 6 : 8 Nf3 0-0 9 Be2 ( other repl i e s ) 44

A: 9 . . . b5 44
B: 9 . . . Bg4 47
C : 9 . . . N a6 49

Chapter 7: I l l u s t r at i ve Gam e s 50
 F i ne Books F rom Chess E nterprises, I nc.
O pen i n gs :
Dona ldso n : Meran D efense $5.50
D ru ash : A l a p i n ' s O pen i n g $3.50
Eckert : S i c i l i a n Scheven i ngen : Keres' Attack $5 . 5 0
Estri n : G a m bits $5 . 00
E str i n : Th ree Dou b l e K i ng Pawn O pen i ngs $5 .00
Estri n : W i l kes- Barre Variation, Two K n i ghts Defense $4.00
F i l i powi cz & Ko n i kowsk i : 4 . d5 in the Cordel D efense
. . $3.25
G refe : The Oddba l l S i c i l i a n , U n orth odox Ways To W i n $6 . 00
G refe & S i l ma n : Center Cou nter $5 . 5 0
J a n i ck i : A n g l o- Benon i Two Kn ights Defense $5.00
J a n i ck i : A n g lo-Ben o n i F o u r K n i ghts Defense $5.00
J a n i c k i & Ko n i kowsk i : F lo h r- M i kenas System, E n g l ish $5 . 00
Kapita n i a k : Sici l ia n D efense, Wing G a m b its $5 . 00
Kon i kowsk i : Arkhangelsk System, R u y Lopez $6.00
Ko n i kowsk i : Modern Ben o n i , F o u r Pawns Attack $6.00
Kon i kowsk i : Petrosian System , Qu een's I nd i a n $6. 5 0
Kon i kowsk i : Queen's G a m b i t Dec l i ned, Exchange Variation $4.00
Koni kowsk i : Ta rtakower System, Queen's G a m bit $5.00
Ku l i gowsk i : D eve l o p ments i n the K i n g's I nd ia n D efense $5 . 5 0
Leverett : Sici l ian Defense, Vel i m i rovic Attack $5 . 00
Marf i a : Qu een ' s G a m b i t W ith B f4 $2.50
M a rf i a : Queen's I n d i a n With 4 g3 $3.50
Marfia & D u d ley : D o u b l e F ian ch etto O p e n i n g System $2. 00
Sch i l l e r : B l ackmar D iemer G a m b i t $5 . 00
Sch i l ler: Cambridge Spri n gs D efen se, Queen ' s G a m b i t $6.00
Sch i l le r : Cata l a n $5.50
Sch i l l e r : G ru en fe l d Defense, R u ss i a n Variations $5. 5 0
Sch i l l er & G o l d m a n : S ic i l ia n D ragon Y u goslav Attack $6 . 5 0
Sch i l l e r : S i c i l i a n , M odern R ichter R a uzer $5 . 00
Sch i l l e r : S i c i l ian, R ic hter R au zer With a6 $5.00
Sch i l l er : O rth odox Va riation, Queen's G a mb i t $6. 5 0
Sha m kovich & Sch i l l e r : Caro- Kann 4 . . . N d 7 $5 . 00
Tay l o r : R u bi n ste i n Variation, N i mzo- l n d i a n D efense $5.00
Tej ler & Marfia : E u we Defense, B l ack mar- D iemer G a m b it $2.50
Wal l : Larsen's O p en i n g $ 5 . 00
Wa l l : Owen 's Defense $5 . 00
Wa l l : 500 F rench M i n iatu res $5. 00
Wal l : 500 I ta l i a n M i n iatu res $ 5 . 00
Wal l : 500 Ki ng's G a m b i t M i n iatu res $5.00
Wal l : 500 R u y Lopez M i n iatu res $5.95
Wa l l : 500 S i c i l i a n M i n iatu res $ 5 . 00
Watson : 4 Nc3 G a m b it in the Qu een's G a m b i t & Slav $ 5 . 00
Watson : Tai ma nov & K n i ghts Tou r B e n o n i $ 5 . 00
Watson : 6 . . . N c6 i n the Saem i sch V a r iation, K i n g's I nd ian $ 5 . 00
Wi l l ia m s : The R ea l American W i l k es- B arre Variation $3. 25
M idd l e Game:
N i mzowitsch : B l ockade $4.50
Sheff i e l d : Tension i n the Ch ess Position $5 . 00
E nd ga m e :
Botv i n n i k : B otv i n n i k on the E n dga m e $5 . 5 0
B rieger : The J o y of Mate $2 .00
Cvetkov : Pa wn E n d i n gs $5 .00
Med n i s : Practica l R ook E n d i ngs $4. 5 0
Medn i s : Quest i o n s & Answers o n Practica l E nd g a m e P la y $7 .95
G a m es, B i ogra p h y :
B otv i n n i k : F i fteen G a mes a n d T h e i r Stories $5.00
K o l ta n owsk i : Ch essn i cdotes I $5 . 00
Koltanows k i : C h essn i cdotes I I $5. 00
Ko tlf,m owsk i : I n T h e Dark ( b l i ndfold chess ) $9.95
McCo r m i c k : T h e G ames of V i ktor K u p re i ch i k $5 . 00
P l atz : Ch ess M e mo i rs $ 1 0 .00
Tou rnaments :
C h r i s t i a nsen : 1980 U . S. C h a m p i o n sh i p O/P
Chr istia nsen : 198 1 U. S . C h a m p i o n sh i p 0/P
Ch r ist i a n sen : 1983 U . S. Cha m p i o n sh i p $6.50
F i n e : Amsterd a m 1 936 $3. 50
H ebert : B o rder Wars I I I , N orth A m e r i ca n Correspondence Ch $5. 00
M a rf i a : 1981 U . S. O pen Pa l o A l to $ 5 . 00
Marfia & Watson : 1 982 U. S. O pen St Pa u l $ 5 . 00
Marfia & Watson : 1983 U . S . O pe n Pasa dena $6. 00
M a rf i a : 1984 U. S . O pen F t Worth $6.50
Tay l o r : M a n h atta n I nte r n at i o n a l N ew York 1 985 $6.00
C hess Pro b l e m s :
B a rc l a y : American Sa l ut e s Co m i ns M a n s f i e l d , M B E O /P
Co mics:
Watso n : Ch essman Co m i cs 2, T reachery i n Tra nsylva n i a $2. 5 0

Ava i l a b l e fro m yo u r favorite ch ess d e a l e r o r postpa id :

Chess E nterp rises, I n c.

107 Crosstree R oad
Coraopo l i s, PA 1 5 1 08
$6.00

West G e r m a n M aste r K o n i kows k i here t u r n s h i s

atte n t i o n a n d a n a l yt i ca l ta l e nts t o a stu d y o f t h e
p o p u l a r M o d e r n B e no n i , a n o p e n i n g w h i c h h a s a
w i d e v a r i ety of co m b i n at i o n a l a n d t a ct i c a l themes.
T h i s v a r i a t i o n featu res a cent ra l pawn sto rm by
W h i te, fo rc i n g B l ack to p la y ca refu l l y and accu rate­
l y . A se l ect i o n of a n n otated, com p lete g a m e s
i l l u strate cu rrent tou rnament practi ce i n th i s
ex c i t i n g var i a t i o n .

I SBN 0-93 1 462- 7 1 - 1