PIR DEFENCE

A Second Line for White

C.W.BAKER

::':""-'
. ..'

:(i...

........-.
........,..

.;.':
J': : -:
..:...:........:....:

.. .
...1
:x-
:.... . :.::=: ....
.... .:.::::;: ..:; ?.
..
-...
:''!-.<:j.. .. .... N

f::;'
. ......-:.::=:

.:..:.:
:.:'..:':..;-: :::"'-':":::'.
..,. ...V

.::::..)?.:..
::-.:.
v;
",-.
..._...:.;.....--.
':':" '.:.:: ..::.=:'_:
'$.::::.
....,
. .' :;.,::::.:.: ::-:;:: ::;:..;.: ;:-..' '.,: ::: ::.;::.' ..
.-.....

.,...:..... . ;;m' :?;

:i}.:::/ :--/. ::....
'"
:-:
.'.(. .-t.:\.
,:
A ,:-;r-:
.}--.. : -::... ?......:.:..

;".- . ..:... :-.< :::::'::::'::. :.:.-

..::. . ", .
., - 0- .
.. ..... .:

. '.>< :::<....:. ..
.,
.. '. ...:)..:.:-...-.;:
:;.:.{::..::.:-.::-:. .
...J;:
.,
"'' y :...",.;:/).,::;.;. ...;,

...t
tt.
'. "' t/'.. .
 PIRC DEFENCE:

A Second Line for White

c. W .BAKER

The Chess Player, Nottingham

@ The Chess Player Ltd 1979
First published 1979

ISBN 0906042 22 4

Printed in England
for the publ ishers
The Chess Player Ltd.,
12 Burton Avenue, Carleton,
Notti ngham, N G4 1 PT
 CONTENTS

Chapter 1: 1 e4 g6 2 d4 7 3 .rc3 d6 4 f4 a61? 5

Chapter 2: 1 e4 g6 2 d4 7 3.te3 d6 4 f4 c5?1 . 12

Chapter 3: 1 e4 g6 2 d4 7 3 3 d6 4 f4.te6 14

Chapter 4: 1 e4 g6 2 d4 7 3 .te3 d6 4 f4 c6 19

Chapter 5: 1 e4 g6 2 d4 7 3 .te3 d6 4 f4 f6 5 e51? dxe5 26

Chapter 6: 1 e4 g6 2 d4 7 3 .te3 d6 4 f4 f6 5 e5 fd7 6 f3 c51? 28

Chapter 7: 1 e4 g6 2 d4 7 3 .te3 d6 4 f4 f6 5 e5 fd7 6 f3 0-0 32

3
Chapter 1: 1 e4 g8 2 d4 JsJ7 3 ..c3 d6 4 f4 a611

Black's intention is to lure White into a false sense of security by

renouncing piece development. Although this move is by no means
bad we aim to show that White can achieve an opening advantage by
sensible play. On no account should White treat this move with
contempt as he is liable to overreach himself. White invariab'v replies

5 .13 b5

The usual move, others should transpose.

6 .ld3

6 a4'? b4 7 2 7 8 3 a5 9 0-0 7 10 *e2 d5 11 e5 e6 12 g4 c5

13 dxc5 h514 f5?1 (Extremely wild.) 14... hxg415fxe6gxf316 xf3
xe5? (16 ... *h41 17 ex d 7 + 7 a:) 1 7 At> 5+ rtJe 7 (1 7 ... 8? 18
.xe51; 17....Q.c6 18 exf7+ 7! 19 fxg8i6 xg8 20 .Qxc6+ 4Jxc6 21
!J f7 + + -) 1 8 .g,g 5+ f6 1 9 i6x e 5 h 5 20 .Q.d 7! a 6 21 a f 1 ! «rf 8 2 2 h 4 !
(Idea ,*c7) 22 ... xg5+ 23 hxg5 fxe5 24 xf8 tDf6 25 gxf6+ f8 26
e7+ 1-0 Plaskett-Hawelko, Groningen 1978-9.

6 :lb7

The obvious and most logical move for B lack in th is position,

pressurising e4.

5
A) 7 .1831 B) 7..2 C) 7 0-0 D) 7 841

A) 7 Ja31

7 4Ml71

7 ... b4 trying to gain time by getting White to move h is minor piece.

8 1 (8 2 may be better as it can be redeveloped on the kingside if
necessary and from e2 it overprotects the vital d4 square.) 8 ... f6 9
4jJd2 U>d7 10 h3 0-0 11 0-0 c5 = Duckstein-Ivkov, Bamberg 1968.

8 8411

Encouraging Black's next move. 8 a3 preventing ... b4 must be

better.

8 b4
9 t.b 1

9 2 is preferable.

9 c5.

A good alternative is 9 ... f6 10 4jJd2 0-0 11 h3 c5 12 0-0 cxd4 13

d4 -IMc7 14 -IMe1 e5 =+ Bednarski-Ivkov, Lugano 1968.

10 c3 ¥8=+

Black has clearly seized the initiative and exposed the foolishness of
White's seventh and eighth moves.

11 t.bd2 bxc3

6
12 bxc3 0-0 13 nbl b814 OO 4115 ctc4d516exd5 d517 "e2
xb1 18 xb1 xe3 19 xe3 .Q.xf3 20 *xf3 cxd4 21 cxd4 Axd4 22
1 5 22 4 .a5 24 4 Ag7 25 *c6 nd8 26 h3 e6 27 f1 *b428
a6 4 29 nf3 2 30 f1f7 nf8 31 d3 *b1+ 32 c&'4l2 f1+ 33 1
3+ 34 «&f2 .re4+ 35 «&f3 ftf1 + 36 e4 *e2+ 0-1 Zuidema-Kotov,
Amsterdam 1968.

B) 7 ..2 W7

8 e5

Unfortunately Black cannot play 8 ... c5? owing to 9 5 e6 or 9

4 :t (Filipowicz-Sznapik, Mielec 1974) exploiting Black'5 weaknesses
on the light squares.

9 841

Breaking up Black's queenside counterplay. 9... b4 10 ci)e4 (The

knight now has the better square e4 at its disposal.) 10 .., d5 11 f2 c5
12 dxc5 xc5 13 3 :t Jansa-Vogt, Leipzig 1973. White has vastly
superior development and has retained his central control.

C) 7 0-0 4Mt7
8 e51

7
C1) 8....8 C2) 8... c51?

C1) 8 .8
9 84

Attempting to restrict Black's queenside play. 9 d51? is an interesting

alternative as yet untried. Maric's idea is to destroy Black's centre and
quickly win material. 9... exd5 10 exd6 cxd6 11 f5 with a dangerous
attack for the pawn.

9 b4
10 d5?

Better is 10 ... -'b<e4 11 -'b<e4 d5 12 3 c5 with an unclear position

as now Black's white-square problems are solved.

11 _5 :t: _f8

If 11... h6 12 xe6 fxe6 13 -'b<g6+ f5, catching Black's king and

gaining momentum for the attack.

12 ..1 a5

13 c3 h6 14 U13 bxc3 15 *xc3 7 16 b4 axb4 17 *xb4 nb8 18 *c3

7 19 3 0-0 20 fc1 c5 21 .Q.xc5 xc5 22 'ltxc5 6 23 a5 8 24
a6 nc8 25 *a3 g51 26 f21 gxf4 27 Ac2 7 28 4:XJ3 6 29 nab1 nc4
30 5 !i:E7 31 3 f5 32 .Q.xf5 exf5 33 'ltd3 'lta5 34 *xf5 'lta3 35
nd 1 'lta2 36 4:XJ7 nfc8 37 e6? I fxe6 38 'ltxe6+ carh8 39 fe5? nc240
f7+? 7 41 fri5+ 8 42 *96 f3' 43 xh6+ 8 44 f7+ <lg8 t-t
Scholl-Keene, Vlissingen 1970.

8
C2) 8 c51?
9 5

9 -'\e4 e4 1 0 xe4 cxd4 11 e6' += fxe6 12 {Eg5 fS 13 xd4

Black's position looks most precarious. 13 '0' *d7 14 e1 Axd4+ 15
flxd4 f6 16 a4 bxa4 17 xa4 h6 18 f3'? g8' 19 b3 c8 20 *d3
c51 21 xa6?1 g5 22 3 d5 23 flc4 gxf4 24 a71 fldSI 25 .Q.xf4
7! 26 'fIc7 'fIxc7 27 xc7 e51 28 31 1--1- Balashov-Sznapik, Bath
1973.

9 'ih6

Practically forced with the dual function of defending f7 and

preparing king-side castling.

10 f5

After 10 e6 -'b<d4+ 11 1 f8 12 f51 :t Dieks-Sznapik, Wijk aan Zee

2, 1975, White dominates the white squares around Black's king and
will soon win material.

10 cxd4

Sznapik has since found an improvement - 10 ... flb6 - which after 11

fxg6 hxg6 12 xf7 xf7 13 .Q.xg6 0-0-0 14 f7 cxd4 leaves an unclear
position wh ich is probably better for Black. Th is needs testing.

11 fxg61

An undisguised crude mating attack.

11 bxc3

9
 Black cannot afford 11 ... hxg6 owing to 12 6 +-. The last chance
was 11 ... cDxe5 12 gxf7+ t&d7 13 4 Axe4 14 xe4 although this
does not hold out too much hope.

12 Ixf7+ .xf7

13 xf7 ifu6+ 14 <&t11 *c6 15 *g4 0-0 16 h7+ h7 17 5+ ca;g8

18 tte6+ f7 19 *xf7+ 1-0 Zaitsev-Adamski, Polanica Zdroj 1970. An
entertaining gamelet.

D) 7 841

7 b4
8 ..2 W7
9 c3 bxc3
10 bxc3 c5
11 .b1 .b8
12 0-0

Note how White has not committed his bishop to e3 as it may

become a target for a future ... 4.

12 . . . cxd4

12 ... e6 13 f5 :!: Ljubojevic-Day, Canadian Open 1974. The move f5

opens the c1-h6 diagonal for White's queen bishop and weakens the
squares e6, f7 and 96.

13 cxd4 .gf8

10
14 e5 5 1 5 51 :!: (D. e6/4}a4) 15 ... e6 1 6 41 0-0 1 7 xd6 -'\a8
18 .Q.d2 nb6 19 t'lc2 r!c6 20 *a2 r!xd6J 21 exd6 4J7f6 22 *a3 8 23
.Q.xa6! 4Jxd6 24 r!fc1 *d7 25 a5 !i::£7 26 .Q.d3 b5 27 *c5 4Jxd4 28
.ac31 e51 29 4Jxd41 exd4 30 2 5 31 5! *g4 32 6 c6 33
fJxc6 3 34 c3 dxc3 35 fJd61 *e2 36 h31 c2 37 b3 2 38 b81
7 39 \t412! h5 40 a6 frf2 41 xc2! *xc2 42 a7 *a4 43 r!xf8+ Axf8
44 *b8 1-0 Ljubojevic-Sznapi k, Buenos Aires 1978.

11
Chapter 2: 1 e4 g6 2 d4 _7 3 k3 de 4 f4 c5?1

This is too crude a method of attacking White's centre as Black is

insufficiently developed.

5 dxc51

This move virtually refutes Black's last move.

A) 5.....5 B) 5... dxc5 C) 5... .lxc3+

A) 5 ..5
6 cxd6 .lxc3+
7 dxc3 .-xc3+
8 td2 __4

Simultaneously attacking e4 and d6.

9 Jd3 .-xd6
10 f3 +-

White's lead in development and the bishop pair give him a distinct
edge. Black will be further embarrassed after White plays the bishop
on to the a 1-h8 diagonal.

12
B) 5 dxc5
e dS+ exdS
7 h3 Jxc3+

It is necessary to remove White's knight from c3 and disrupt his

queenside pawn structure.

S bxc3 be
9 86
10 f3 f8
11 f5 :!:

Exploiting Black's weaknesses on f7 - 0 'Kelly-Castello, Paris 1963.

C) 5 .lxc3+
e bxc3 dxc5

7 *xd8+ d8 8 Ac4 e6 9 f3 f6 10 f51 xe4 11 5 ctx:t6 12 fxg6

hxg6 13 f4 h4 14 d6 xc4 15 xf7+ :t Selivanovsky-Gruzman,.
USSR 1964

13
 Black's idea is an immediate piece attack against White's centre.
However with accurate play Black is left with a difficult position.

5 h31

This move temporarily prevents ... .Qg4 and defends d4.

a) 5 d571 This weak move immediately gives Black control of d4 - by 5
... ctx:t 4 :
1) 6 1 (threatening c3) 6 ... c6 7 c3 (7 a4 cxd5 and the knight
escapes via f5) 7 .,. ctb5 8 b5 cxb5 =+. White is left with a pawn
centre which may easily become disrupted, for no tangible compen-
sation.
2) 6 c5 maintaining the grip on d4. 7 *d2 (7 dxc6 c6 produces a
position ak in to the Sicilian Dragon, where Wh ite has played a
premature f4.) 7 ... a6 8 e2 Zuk-Suttles, Canada 1971,8 ... xe2 =.
Black has a reasonable Benoni position.
b) 5 f3 41
a _ *
t

14
Black now exerts great pressure on d4 (5 ... f6 6 2 4 7 d5 ctb8 8
e5 8 9 5 8 10 e6 4:tl6 11 f5 :t Duckstein -Sigurjonsson, Siegen
1970. Clearly 5 ... ()f6 fails to exploit White's inaccurate move order.)
6 3 -'txf3 7 gxf3
1) 7 ... d5 - initially this move appears strange, but Black intends to
form a blockade on the light squares. 8 5 The most logical move,
neutralising the action of the powerful knight on c6. (8 e5 e6 9 *d2
e7 =+ Taimanov-Ufimstev, USSR 1965 as White's pieces have little
scope for activity; 8 xd5 e6 9 ctc3 xd4 =+ and the knight is
entrenched on d4 exerting great pressure on c2 and f3; 8 exd5 ctb4 9
5+ 8 10 4 to defend the d-pawn 10 ... f6 11 *d2 ct1fxd5 =+
White's pawns are very weak.) 8 ... e6 9 *d2 e7 100-0-0 *d7 11 f51?
0-0-0 12 fxe6 = Prandstetter-Marjan, Hungary 1976. However Black
would have obtained an advantage with 11 ... gxf5 disrupting Wh ite's
centre.

2) 7 .... e61? 8 ttd2 d5 9 f5 (9 e5 transposes to 1) 9 ... exf5 10 exf5?

(1 0 xd51 produces an unclear position with chances for both sides.)
10 ... *h4+ 1 1 f2 'lte7+ 1 2 2 6 13 f4 0-0-0 140-0-0 frd6 15 3
gxf5 16 hf1 e7 17 f3 7 18 612 de8 19 ftg2 xd4 20 xd5
cfud5 21 Axd5 4)e2+ 22 <lib 1 *b4 0-1 Nunn-Keene, Hammersmith
Open 1971; 23 3 3+ 24 bxc3 *xc3 25 1 ftb2+ 27 2 e7 27
4 d8+ 28 .Q.d5 *c3+ 29 ctk1 *a3+ 30 2 *e3 #

5 f6

5 ... 6? - the knight is misplaced on this square and quickly

becomes a target - 6 f3 .Qg4 7 *d21
a) 7 ... f5 8 d5 fxe4 9 5 8 10 h3 8 11 g4 :t B'ack's pieces are
immobile and helpless against White's future pressure on e6, f7, h6 and
the d4-h8 diagonal.
b) 7 ... f3 8 gxf3
1) 8 ... e5 9 fxe5 dxe5 10 0-0-0 (Of course 1 a h6? *h4+ solves
Black's problem of the knight on h6.) 10 ... 8 1 1 d5 !f:x:,e7 12 5+ :t
Black is underdeveloped, h is king is insecure in the centre and Wh ite
possesses the bishop pair.
2) 8 ... e6 9 0-0-0 4)e7? (9 ... f5 10 d5 :t) 10 f5 g8 11 fxe6 fxe6 12
-'1113 e5 13 dxe5 Axe5 14 f4 7 15 e5 f5 16 f5 gxf5 17 *g2 6
18 exd6 c6 19 d7+ 11f7 20 iiJh3 itfa5 21 nhe 1 6 22 nd6+ «Itf7 23
5+ 8 24 xh6 xh6 25 ftxh6+ «&f7 26 4 1-0 J.Hartston-
Polihroniade, Skopje 1972.
c) 7 ... d5 8 xd5 e6 9 3 f3 10 gxf3 d4 11 0-0-0 e3 12 *xe3

15
'tth4 13 Ab5 :t
After 5 ..' f6 White can transpose to the Austrian Attack with 6.t.f3
0-0 but that is outside the scope of th is book.

A) 8.182 B) 8 h3

A) 8 .182 0..0
7 .f3

White develops a piece and prepares to castle. Black must now play
actively or get a cramped position.
7 d5 (7 g47 e51 8 dxe5 fug41 :+ Ponelis-Keene. 1976) 7 ... 8 8 g417
e67 I 9 dxe6 fxe6 10 g5 ct1fd7 11 frd2 ct1c6 12 h4 ciX5 13 e5? I (13
f31?) 13 ." b6 14 f3 7 15 ffg2 6e8 16 U>5 fue5 17 b7 ttxb5
18 4xe5 lIab81 19 fxe5 bxc5 20 f3 frxb2 21 lId1 frc3+ 22 c&i2 Axe5
23 2 frxc2 24 lIhf1 frc4 25 <lig1 frxh4 26 4 2+ 27 1 f4+ 28
..,3 ttxh3+ 29 h3 g5 30 e6+ 'lg7 31 ct1c3 nbe8? 32 nxf8 nxf8
33 ctb5 t-t Dueball-Bilek. Bad Pyrmont 1970.
_ .t.,. 0
t
'i

a) 7 ... e517 8 dxe5 dxe5 9 .xd8 lIxd8 10 fxe5 4 11 51 :t lIe8 12

ctx:t5; 11... nd7 125. Black's position falls apart ash is rook has no
good squares.
b) 7 ... d5 8 e5 4 9 1 f6 10 h3 4)h6 11 g4 += White has the
initiative and a space advantage, Liebert-Kotov, Sochi 1967.
c) 7 ... e61?
1) 8 h3 b6 9 g4 7 10 g5 5 a: 11 ag1 !i::J37 12 4 e5 13 h5
gxh5 14 ttd2 615 f3b516dxc5b417 2 e418 2dxc519
4xc5 *xd2+ 20 d2 lIfe8 21 3 xe5 22 ct1xe4 lId8+ 23 1 xf4
24 xc5 2+ 25 c;t;b1 xg1 26 ct:d3 e5 27 a3 b3 28 1 d2 29 4Jf1

16
bxc2+ 30 2 f2 31 ctrl3 f3 32 4 h3 33 ctrl2 ne3 34 c1
xg5 35 xc2 h6 36 Uc8+ 7 37 ctc4 ne2 38 Dc7 h4 39 xa7 h3 40
J!d7 J!e1 0-1 Botterill-Ptaninc, Hastings 1974n5.
2) 8 0-0 b6 9 h3 7 10 e5 tx:i5 11 c[)xd5 exd5 12 *d2 f6 13 exf6
*xf6 14 ae1 ae8 15 c3 M16 16 5?1 (Better is 16 ctt12 += 6 4.)
16 ... g5 17 fxg5 itd8 18 g4 xf1+ 19 f1 itd7 20 3 8 21 f2
nxe1+ 22 *xe1 C[)f7 t-t A .Byrne-Lombardy, USA Final 1975.
d) 7 ... 4?1 8 1 e59 d5 U>8 (9 ... 7 10 h3 f6 11 fxe5 dxe5 12
2 i:) 10 h3 f6 (10... ttl6 11 fxe5 dxe5 12,W,2 + ) 11 fxe5 dxe5 12
M12:t Black's dark square weaknesses tell in the final analysis.
Bednarski-Sznapik, Poland 1975.

8 .51

a) 8 O-O? .Q.xf3 9 .Q.xf3 e51 = since Black can safely play e5 h is position
is quite tolerable. White must prevent this thematic advance.
b) 8 d5 8 9 h3 Axf3 10 Axf3 c6 11 *d2 cxd5 12 exd5 d7 13 4
c8 140-0 tta5 =

Black now has three choices in this position and all fail to equalise:
a) 8 ... 8 9 h31 :t White's spatial advantage and lead in development
guarentee him the advantage.
b) 8 .., dxe5 9 dxe5 ctrl7 10 h3 f3 11 f3 6 12 0-0 4 (12 ...
f61 += with the intention of undermining White's pawn centre is
better.) 13 5 tx:i2 14 .Q.xc6 xf1 15 b7 b8 16 61 :t R.Byrne-
Keene, Hastings 1972. Wh ite's bishop pair, space advantage and minor
piece play give him an edge.
c) 8 ... 4Xj7 9 e6 (9 h31 is a good alternative):
1) 9 ... f3 10 .Q.xf3 UJ6 11 d5.tx;4 12 dxc6 += Gipslis-Olafsson,
Tallinn 1975. If now 12 ... xe3 13 ttd3 f5 14 cxb7 J!b8 and White's
position is favourable.
2) 9 ... ctt>6 10 exf7+ 8 11 5 :t .Q.xe2 12 *xe2 .d7 13 0-0-0 ciXt8
14 h4 xf7 15 xf7+ xf7 16 h5 gxh5 17 xh5 f5 18 J!dh1 h6 19
xf5 *xf5 20 g4 t\i6 21 f5 (6 4) 21 ... d5 22 frh21 7 23 'fIxc7
J!c8 24 ttxb7 *d6 25 g5 b8 26 *a6 8 27 f61 +- exf6 28 gxh6
f8 29 flxa7 1-0 Smejkal-Knaak, Sandomierz 1976.

B) 8 h3

White's plan is to expand on the king-side and limit the activity of the

17
 ft
:it
* .? t!
a) 6 ... 0-0 7 g41? e5 8 dxe5 dxe5 9 f5 gxf5 (9 ... h6 10 -'k:t3 .td4 11
ed2 c5 12 0-0-0 c&n7 :I: Naitzec..Lorman t DDR 1978) 10 gxf5 4? (10
... .xd 1+ 11 rlxd 1 4 12 Ad3 Ad7 8 ... 6 and ... f6-h5-f4 or if 12
d4 exd4 13 rlxd4 ne8 with good compensation for the pawn -
Trifunovic.) 11 f3 c5 12 .Qg5 itb6 13 Axf6 .xf6 14 .rd5 xf3+ 15
ttxf3 flh4+ 16 2 17 ()e3 rlad8? (17 ... 7 18 rig 1 c&t18 1 9 rlg4
frh6 20 rid 1 6 += - Trifunovic) 18 rlg1 c&t18 19 fxe6 fxe6 20 .g3
itf6 21 .xg7+ .xg7 22 rlxg7 rtlxg7 23 4 rlf4 24 3 r1df8 25 Ae2
h5 26 xe5 r1h4 27 rlg1 cl;h7 28 rlg3 rlhf4 29 .rd3 rl5f7 30 c5 rica
31 e6 1-0 Fischer-Udovcic, Rovinj-Zagreb 1970.
b) 6 ... ci115 (With the intention of exploiting the weak square g3 and
playing the thematic ... e5. However, the plan is bad.) 7 e2 e5 8
dxe5 (8 fxe5 dxe5 9 d5 4 1 0 d4 exd4 11 d4 tth4+ 12 f2
c3+ 13 bxc3 ttxe4+ 14 .e2) 8... dxe5 9 ttxd8+ d8 10 f51 gxf5
11 exf5 f4 12 g4 h5 13 O-O-D 7 (To prevent 5) 14 rlg1 :t
Skrobek-Seifert, Hradec Kralove 1976/77.

Our conclusion must be that 4 ... 6 is a good try but leaves Black in
difficulty against a well-prepared opponent.

18
Ch8pter 4: 1 e4 16 2 d4 _7 3 k3 d6 4 f4 c6

A very flexible variation. Black reserves the option of playing ... d5

or .., b5. White now has three moves at his disposal, two of which are
fairly innocuous.

A) 5.183 B) 5.1c4 C) 5 f3

A) 5 .Ie3

A plausible move which however is not as accurate as 5 f3.

5 '»b6

Attacking the b2 pawn and pinning the d-pawn. 5 .0' ctx:t7 6 f3 b5 7

ttd2 crb6 8 -'kj3 f6 = 9 e5? (9 0-0 4; 9 h3 a5 10 0-0 b4 11 ()e2
d5!) 9 ... b4 10 xe4 1 1 e4 4 =+ Kane-Soltis, USA 1975

a) 6 ... ()f6 7 ()f3 d5 8 e5 4 9 1 h510 h3 61 1 f2 612 b41

+= Pavlov-Duhayon, Istres 1976. The pawn is immune and White
obtains good play on both sides of the board.
b) 6 ... e5 7 f3
1) 7 ... 4 (Black applies further pressure on the square d4 but his
king-side is left at White's mercy.) 8 fxe5 dxe5 9 4! exd4 10 .Q.xf7+

19
8 11 f2 :t.

2) 7 ... 71? 8 t'rd2 t'rc7 9 4 f6 10 dxe5 dxe5 11 fxe5 e5 12

fue5 .xe5 13 Af4 t'rc5 14 3 += Sigurjonsson-Forintos, Cienfuegos
1975

7 eSI

7 f3? 4Xt7 8 exf5 gxf5 9 Ad3 f6 10 t're2 6 11 h3 Ad7 12 0-0

t'rc7 13 5 d5 14 Ad2 t'rd6 15 <&t12 4 16 f3 t'lg6 17 Axe4 fxe4 18
5 Axe5 19 dxe5 f5 20 itf2 h5 21 b4 ng8 22 ng1 h4 23 1 7 24
b5 ng7 25 bxc6 Axc6 26 2 e3 27 itf1 nag8 28 g4 hxg3+ 29 Axg3 d4
30 nb4 fug3 31 nxg3 t'rxc2 32 nxg7+ nxg7 0-1 Judovich-Botvinnik,
USSR 1966.

7 dxeS

8 fxe5 Axe5 9 4 and Black's king-side weaknesses are adequate

compensation for the sacrificed pawn.

B)

5
6 .lb3
7
8 8S
9 .f3

Instead Bronstein-Vuchtman, Tiflis 1959, diverged with 9 '0' 6? 10

0-0 xa4 11 Axa4 0-0 12 a3 a5 13 .Qb3 4)a6 14 Ae3 bxa3 15 nxa3 +=.

C) 5 af3 Jg4

20
 Apparently Black's only good move in the position. 5... 6 leads to
a prospect'ess position for .wack after 6 2 4 7 3 0-0 8 5 e2
9 flxe2. Perhaps Black can play 5 ... d5 transposing into the
Gurgenidze system of the Caro-Kann.

C1) 6.182 C2) 6 A83 C3) 6 k4

C1) 6 .182 '»b61

Forcing Wh ite to make concessions in the centre.

7 e5 h6

Black can also play 7 ... 7 8 5 e2 9 *xe2 f81? a:

Papaposteolou-Ghizdavu, Athens 1971.

8 e4 0-0
9 c3

White's over-extended centre is an easy target:

a) 9 ... c5 10 dxc5 *c6 11 f2 dxe5 12 4)xg4 xg4 13 h3 6 14 fxe5
f5 15 Af4 fre4 =+ Terentiev-Shaposhnikov, Novosibirsk 1961.
b) 9... f5 10f2c511*b3f1c7120-06133614*d1 f5
+ Maimchev-Schvedchikov, Sverdlovsk 1961.

C2) 6 h3 '»b6

In th is instance Wh ite can afford to sacrifice the b-pawn. Petrosian

has played 6 ... d5 instead:
a) 7 e5! in Donner-Petrosian, Bled 1961, White achieved a position in

21
the Gurgenidze system of the Caro-Kann a tempo up. Note however
in a closed position such time-wasting is often possible provided the
position cannot suddenly be opened.
b) 7 21? dxe4 8 xe4 f6 9 xf6+ f6 10 4)e5 += Janosevic-
Petrosian, Lone Pine 1978, but Whi te lost in 33 moves.

a) 7 nb 1? I A superfluous move since the capture of the b-pawn is

taboo. 7... f3 (Better is 7 ... f6 8 *d2 d5 =.) 8 ttxf3 d4 9 4)a4
*a5+ 10 b4 *xa4 11 d4 f6 12 Ad3 0-0 13 0-0 4Ja6 14 e5 dxe5 15
fxe5 {Xj5 16 e6 with a very strong attack.
b) 7 'l.td3 White allows the f-pawns to be doubled as the bishop pair
and central pawn mass is more than enough compensation:
1) 7 ... f3 8 gxf3 7 9 0-0-0 O-OO 10 3 8 11 f5 ita5 12 1
f6 13 f4 b5 14 e5 + Hartoch-Czerniak, Amsterdam 1968.
2) 7 ... f6 8 0-0-0 d51 9 e5 4E4 =/+= Suetin-Gufeld, Tiflis 1969/70.
After 7 -ltd2 the position appears similar to that after 7 *d3, but
there are two subtle differences. Firstly a knight arriving at c4 will gain
a tempo by the attack on the queen and secondly after ... b5-b4xc3
Black will gain a tempo for the sanle reason.

7 .Axf3
8 gxf3 d7

22
 9 0-0-01

a) 9 Ac4 e6 10 3 d5 11 2 fla6 =+ (Black's last move prevents c4.)

Mueri-Alekseeva, Moscow 1965.
b) 9 3 f6 10 0-0 (10 e5 ciXj5 11 xd5 cxd5 is good for Black
whilst Axd7+ d7 is always comfortable for him owing to White's
light-square weaknesses.) 10 .., flc7 11 2 e6 12 c4 0-0 13 3 c5 14
dxc5 4)xc5 15 f5 += Knox-Keene, Blackpool 1971. However 11 ... 0-0
c5 gives Black better chances of equal itv .

9 ..5

ft.
J1
1) 1 2 ... ex f6 1 3 41 +
2) 12 ... bxc3 13 fxg7 cxd2+ 14 .Q.xd2 flxa2 15 3 +-
3) 12 ... f6 13 4Je4 dxe5 14 Ac4 exd4 15 .Q.xd4 d4 16 *xd4 f6
17 xf6+ lOxf6 18 he1 0-0 19 xe7 1iX15 20 .Q.xd5 itxd5 21 itxd5
cxd5 22 xd5 nfe8 += White has a defiite endgame advantage.
4), 12 ... xf6! 13 exf6 bxc3 14 fxg7 cxd2+ 15 d2 *xd2+ 16 xd2
g8 =+= (Keene and Botteri II) Wh ite's position is hopeless.
b) 10 Ac4 This move only helps Black's queen-side counterplay - 10 ..,
b5 11 3 ctt>6 12 f5 b4 13 2 frb5 (threatening ... a5-a4) 14 .d3
'ttxd3 15 cxd3 gxf5 =+ Adorjan-Jansa, Wij k aan Zee 1971.
c) 10 11 A good waiting move which solidifies White's queenside. 10
.., b5 11 f5 (After 11 e5 b4 12 4 d5 13 e6 fxe6 14 5 f8 15 .Q.h3
White has good compensation for the pawn; 11 ... d5 12 f5 e6? 13 fxe6
fxe6 14 ()xb5:1:; 12... gxf5 13 g1 f8 with an unclear position;
11 h4? A totally pointless move 11 ... 6 12 b3 f6 13 .Q.h3 e6 14
-Ihd3 b8 14 1 0-0 16 2 b4 17 2 c5 18 c3 c4 19 *c2 fc8 20

23
cxb4 ith5 21 e5 itxf3 22 exf6 itxe2 23 fxg7 c3 24 f1 ttf2 25 6 c6
26 ite4 ctx:I5 27 b5 Dc7 28 h5 c2 29 hxg6 cxd1tt+ 30 Dxd1 hxg6 31
h1 tlxd20-1 Pavlov-Czerniak, Bucharest 1966.) 11 ... f6 The only
logical developing move (if 11 ... 4Jb6 12 e5 d5 13 f6 exf6 14 exf6
xf6 15 Ah6 [6 e1 +] 15... 0-0 16 ()xd5 *xd2 17 /L')e7+ <#18 18
Axd2 f; 13 e6 gxf51 14 ng1 f6 15 exf7+ f7 and Black stands weU
- Pein) 12 -'W3 b4 (12 ... 0-0 13 (Xj51 winning material) 13 ciE2 0-0 14
6 c5 aiming for queenside counterplay 15 g7 (Another idea as
yet untested is 15 fxg6 fxg6 16 g7 g7 17 f4 :t, or 15 ... hxg6 16
3'? cxd4 [16 ... r!fc8 17 {)f51 f8 18 *95 +-] 17 obg7 <ftxg7 18
f5+ gxf5 19 nhg1 + +-) 15 ... g7 16 h4 Dfc8 17 b3 (17 h5t c4 -
Slack must accept the bishop sacrifice since 17 ... xh5 18 dg 1 8
19 tlh6 f6 20 e5 wins - 18 hxg6 cxd3 19 ith6+ '&t18 20 cxd3 fxg6
- Black must prevent gxf7 otherwise he will not have g8 at his
disposal to prevent the threats on the g-file - 21 f41 fxg6? [a: 21 ...
ng8 22 xg6+ rlxg6 23 fxg6 24 gxh7 +-; b: 21 ... g5 22 6 g8
23 itxh7+1 h7 24 Dxh7+ g7 25 Dh1 #; c: 21 ... f8 22 fxg6 +-
d: 21 ... gxf5 22 Ddg1 g8 23 6+ Dxg6 24 ttxg6 Dg8 25 Dxh7 +-]
and after 21 ... b31 Black had counterchances Maguire-Terry, corres
1978/79.) 17 ... 6 (17 ... c41? 18 .Q.xc4 Dxc4 a:) 18 h5 c4 19 hxg6
(19 Axc4 I 6 ... 3+) 19 ... cxd3 20 *h6+ (20 cxd3 fxg6 +; 20
Dxh7+ h7 21 Dh 1 dxc2+ 22 1 fxg61 -+) 20 ... <&h8 21 cxd3 fxg6
(21 ... c2 22 1 g2 23 dg1 rlxg1 24 xg1 fxg6 25 nxg6 g8 26
Dxf6 =) 22 Ddg1 I a: Keene and Botterill.

C3) 6 Jc4I

A little known move which we recommend as a very aggressive

attacking system against 4 ... c6.

8 . . . f8

24
a) Obviously 6 ... b510ses to 7 .Q.xf7+ f7 8 5+ 8 9 itxg4 +-.
b) 6 ... e6 7 .Qe3 d5 8 .Qe2 dxe4 9 xe4 += Black's weaknesses
guarentee Wh ite an advantage.
c) 6 ... -'lxf3 7 "xf3 Axd4 8 2 6 (8 ... 7 9 ttb31 :t)
1) 9 2 with attacking chances for the pawn, i.e. 9 ... 710Ac3f6
11 0-0-0 "c7 12 f5 5 13 fxg61? hxg6 14 e5 t.
2) 9 f5 f6 10 6 d7 11 7 4)e5 12 itth3 g8 13 f6 exf6 14
itxh7 8 15 3 gxf5 16 0-0-0 fxe4 17 3 xg3 18 hxg3 d5 19 <&b 1
"c8 20 c41 d4 21 "xe4 7 22 c5 .Q.xc5 23 h7 <ctd6 24 *f4 1-0
Martin-Tatai, St. Feliu de Guixols 1974.
d) 6 ... .rt16 7 3 t'Jb6 8 3 f3 9 f3 ita5 (9 ... f5 10 itd2 *a5;
10 e5 d5 11 h4 h5 +=) 10 f5! .txJ7 (10 ... gxf57 11 g1 f8 12 *d2
8 13 g5 + ) 11 itd2 8 12 fxg6 hxg6 13 0-0-0 f6 (13... e6!? 14
f 4 d 5? 1 5 f5 :t; 14... It)e 7' 7) 14 <&b 1 h 3 1 5 fie 2 r flh 5 16 flc4 r d 5 1 7
exd5 6 18 *b4 fxd5 19 d5! cxd5 20 a4 xf3 21 he1 e6 22 a5
4 23 itxb7 d8 24 1 \\>f8 (24 ... xc37r 25 *b5+' eM8 26 4+
\'txc3) 25 b3 *xh2 (25 ... xc37 /xa57 26 *b4+) 26 f1 6?! (26 ...
xf1 27 xf1 f5) 27 3 itg2 28 xf3 flxf3 29 flc7 f6 30 d6+
8 31 .Qe5 4 32 g1 1-0 Kudrin-Soltis, New York 1979.

7 851 dX85

7 ... {Xj7 8 f7+1 t

8 fX85 W5
9 h3 .lxf3

9 ... xc3 10 bxc3 -'b<f3 11 *xf3

a) 11 ... 0-0 12 0-0 e6 13 .Qa3 +-
b) 11 ... ef) 12 0-0 *d7 13 .Qa3; 12... *e7 13 3! t

10 hf3 :J:

and if 10 ... e6 11 4. We feel 6 4 is of great theoretical interest

and may well lead to original positions which favour the first player.

25
Chapte,5: 1 e4 g6 2 d4 Jt7 3 .c3 d6 4 f4 .f6 5 e511 dxe5

8 dxe51

6 fxe5?' is a quiet move which deserves little attention since Black

can obtain easy equality, viz. 6 ... 5 7 4 (7 4?' 4Jb4 8 a3 f5 +)
7 ... ()xc3 8 bxc3 0-0 9 ()f3 c5 =/=+.

8 bd1+
7 *xd1

Wh he obtains a space advantage, but in retu rn Black has chances of

underm ing Wh ite 's centre.

a) 7 ... fd7?1 is a passive move. 8 5 8 9 f3 c6 10 3 +=

Adorjan-Hartoch, Amsterdam 1971.
b) 7 ... 4)1,5 8 e2 f5 (8 ... 6 9 h3 f5 1 0 g1 :t) 9 3 += (9 g1
g51 =+) 9 ... xg3. White has a semi-open h-file and a space advantage
whilst Black has a poor dark square bishop and a troublesome c7
square.

8 ..1 h5

a) 8 ... f6 favours White, viz. 9 h3 6 10 f3 (Not 10 W5 8 11

exf6 exf6 12 g4 c6 13 3 =+ Castro-Quinteros, Sao Paulo 1978.) 1 a '0'
7 11 5 8 12 Ae3 f5 (12... c6 130-0-01) 13 f2 fxe5? 14 5

26
4)1)6 15 f7+ \\1d7 16 nd 1 + 6 17 1fJxe5+ 1-0 Baker-Boyd, 1978.
b) 8 .., ctx;6 9 h3 U16 10 5 4 11 xc7+ 8 12 xa8 xc2+ 13
2 xa1 14 3 f6 15 {)f3 fxe5 16 51 +- f:j d 1 /xa1 Lukin-
Tseitlin, USSR 1972.
c) 8 ... c6 9 h3 4Yl6 10 g4 f6 11 exf6 exf6 12 4 1fJf7 13 nh2f += {Xj6
14 Ab3 8 15 f51 e8+ 16 <l;f1 g5? (16 ... 7; 16 ... b6) 17 h4 h6
18 f3 7 19 .Q.d2 7 20 e1! (Exchanging Black's only active
piece.) 20 ... b6 21 xe8 xe8 22 1 .Qa6+ 23 1 .Q.f8 24 .Qg3+ (24
41) 24 ... 6 25 d6+ xd6 26 hxg5 hxg5 27 h7 ae8 28 .Q.e6
8 29 4 a6 30 a4 d8 31 .Q.d51 e8 32 c6 4 33.Qd5 4Je3 34
Jb36 4)xg4 35 4 d8 36 c4 4)e5 37 xf6 <;ttJ6 38 4+ 7 39 5
IIe8 40 6+ \fib8 41 6 IIg8 42 b3 1fJf6 43 e7 1fJxd5 44 cxd5 g4 1-0
Bronstein-Benko, Monaco 1969.

9 5 *d8
10 .f3 c6
11 .83 f6
12 h3 .h6
13 .ld3 .f5
14 .xf5 gxf5
15 86 :t

Poljak-Bondarevsky, USSR 1944.

27
Ch.pter 8: 1 e4 86 2 d4 _7 3 k3 d8 4 f4 .f6 5 8511

5 tafd7

5 ... dxe5 is covered in a later chapter. After the usual move order 5
f3 0-0 6 e5 Black has 6 ... 8 at his disposal. This particular move
order circumvents that possibility.

6 4E4? I sins against an important opening principle, viz.: moving the

same piece twice unnecessarily in the opening. 6... c5 7 c3 (7 f3?
cxd4 8 exd6 ctx;6 9 3 0-0 10 0-0 e6! :+: Granat-Pein, Chester 1979.) 7
... cxd4 8 cxd4 0-0 (8 ... 6a5+ 9 2? fld5 +; 9 frd21 += Balinas-Pein,
England 1978) 9 f3 cti:>6 1 0 2 ciX;6 11 0-0 6 12 fg5 5 13 3
h61 14 f3 (14 xd5 hxg5) 14 ... dxe5 15 dxe5 .Qe6 =+ Bronstein-
Etruk, Tartu 1962.
Now Black has to decide whether to play 6 ... c51? discussed here or
6 ... 0-0 considered in the following chapter.

8 c511

A) 7 8611 B) 7.1c4 C) 7 dxc51 D) 7 exd6

A) 7 8611

An immediate attempt to exploit the weak squares e6 and f7.

28
 7 fxe6

8 5 .lxd4

8 ... f6? 9 dxc5 + 6 10 4! d5 11 5 d4 12 c6+ bxc6 13

2 6a5+ 14 frd2 6xc5 15 xd4 6d516c3?! 0-0 17 0-0 518 t'le2
e5 19 fxe5 nxf1+ 20 itrxf1 4 21 itre1 c5 22 ctx:tf3 h6 23 *e4 adS 24
frxg4 frd1+ 25 <&;2 frc2+ 26 2 Axd2+ 27 {)xd2 *xd2+ 28 Ae1 f4
29 fre2 frxg5 30 frc4+ rfln7? (30 ... e6) 31 g3 3+ 32 2 '«rf5 33
Af1 "c8 34 e6 ctg5 35 frd5 xe6 36 f7 5 37 xe7 a5 38 h4 frh3+
39 <&;2 h5 (39 ... *h2+ 40 frg2 3+ 41 1 +-) 40 hxg5 h4 1-0
Vasyukov-Tseshkovsky, USSR Final 1974.

9 axe6 Jxc3+
10 bxc3 ..5
11 ab11

With the idea of nb5 and Black has to 1eave c7 unprotected. 11 2?

f6 +.
a) 11 ... f67 12 Ilb5 :t
b) 11... 6xc312 2 +
c) 11 ...6xa2 12 7+ 8 13 b2! :t
d) 11 ... a6112 2 b5 13 c4 b4 14 a3 6 15 Ad3 f6 16 f5 a: Saker

B) 7 Jc4 cxd4
8 itxd4

8 f7+I? <&>xf7 9 e6+t 8 10 exd7+ d7 11 xd4lZJc6 =+/a:

8 0-0
9 'h4 ac6
10 e6 fxe6
11 Jxe6+ ..,8
12 ..,2 .c5 =+

Ljubo jevic-Jansa, Skopje 1972.

C) 7 dxc51

The voluntary liquidation of the centre obviously favours Black.

29
 7 dxe5
8 fxe5

8 4 0-0 9 0-0 6 =+ Timofeeva-Gaprindashvili, Vilnius 1958

8 xe5
9 itxd8+ *xd8=+

D) 7 exd6 0-01

a) 8 dxc5 *a51 9 dxe7 e8 10 .Qd2 xe7+ 11 Ae2 *xc5 and the White
king is stranded in the centre or 9 ..Q.e3 xc5 with good play for the
pawn.
b) 8 3 exd6t (8 ... *b6? 9 dxe7 e8 1} 10 frd2t flxb2 11 b 1 fra3
12 b3 fla5 13 51; 2] 10 4}j5' frxb2 11 4 cxd4 12 1b<d4 d4
13 .xd4 frxd4 14 xd4 6 15 xb6 xe7+ 16 2 axb6:t; 10 '0'
frc6 11 c4 ctb6 [11 ... f6 12 5:t] 12 dxc5:t; 10... *a5+ 11 .Q.d2

:t; 10... *e6 11 4 U>6 12 5:t; 10... fld6 11 c4 c£/+=; 3] 10

4? .b4 11 2 [11 *d3 cxd4 12 d4 d4 13 ffxd4 6 -+]
6? [11 ... *xb2] 12 a31 flb6 [12 ... *xb2?? 13 4 +-] 13 tDa4
*a5+ 14 .Qd2 *c7 [14 ... *xa4?? 15 b3 +-] 13 d5 4 16 0-0 f6 17
c4? [17 xd4 cxd4 18 c4] xe2+ 18 *xe2 xe 7 19 *d 3 .Q.f5 20 ftb3
4 21 nad1? [21 ..Q.e3] xd2 22 xd2 *xf4 :+: 23 d6 e3' 24 frxb7
f8 25 93 frxc4 26 d7 4 27 ffc8 xf3 28 fd1 4+?' [28 ... d3
29 xd3 d3 30 *xf8+ .Q.xf8 31 d8* 2 -+] 29 xd4 f1+ 30
xf1 flxd4+ 31 f2 f5? [31 ... c4] 32 *xc5 'lhd1+ 33 f1 *d7 34
3 3? [34 .., d8 =+] 35 5! *e6 36 f4 *c8 1-0 time
Matulovic-Adorjan, Wijk aan Zee 1974.) 9 *d2 6 10 0-0-0 fla5 11 fb
(11 c&b 1? f6 12 h3 a6 13 dxc5 dxc5 14 5 xd5' 15 flxa5 xe3! I
16 fre 1 d 1 17 flxd 1 f5 18 1? [18 .Qd 3] ad8 19 *c 1 fe8 20

30
g4 4t 21 3 3 22 fle1 Ae4 23 flxe3 c4t! 24 i6c1 [24 I!g1 cxd3
25 -'b<d3 -'b<d3 26 *c1 ne4 {XJ4; 25 cxd3 d3+ 26 *xd3 e1 + 27
<a;t2 ctb4+] h1 25 f2 5 26 b3 c3 27 a3 4 28 3 f3 29 \t>a2
4 30 .Qg2 d3 31 f3 Axc21 0-1 Weiner-Sogaard, corres 1976.) 4)f6
12 fxg6 hxg6 13 6 4 14 .Q.xg7 g7 15 dxc5 dxc5 16 2 4! 17
hf1 xe2+ 18 *xe2 ad8 19 xd8 t'txd8 20 '*f2 t-t Sigurjonsson-
Sax, London 1975.
c) 8 dxe7 flxe7+
1) 9 fre21? *xe2+ 10 .Q.xe2 (1 0 xe2 cxd4 11 xd4 4:x:6 =+ or
perhaps 11 ... e8+ 12 2 4:x:6) cxd4 11 5 6 12 0-0 5 13 4)j6
6 14 5 ad817 (14 ... 5 a:) 15 e6 fxe6 16 4 c:tD4 17 1
d3 18 c3 5 19 31? xe3 20 xe3 Eley-Horton, England 1980; 20
... e51 =/=+
2) 9 2? cxd4 10 5 (10 xd4 e8 or 10 .., 5 8 ... d8 and
Wh ite has a precarious position.) 6 11 O-O? I a6 12 xd4 (12 3
b5 +) 4)xd4 -+ Pfleaer-Torre. Manila 1974.

31
Chapter 7: 1 e4 g6 2 d4 _7 3 k3 d6 4 f4 .f65 e51? .fd7 6 .f3 0-0

A) 7 h41? B) 7 e61? C) 7.1c4 D) 7.g5

A) 7 h41?

A bold attacking move aiming to destroy Black's king-side. Once 7

h4 was considered White's best move here but it is no longer considered
dangerous.

7 c5

A flank attack is best met by a counterattack in the centre. If 7 ..

6 8 h5.

8 h5 cxd4

A 1) 9 itxd4 A2) 9 hxg6

A1) 9 bd4

32
 9 dxe5
10 ..,2

10 frg1 e41 11 xe4 f6 12 xf6+ exf6 13 hxg6 e8+ 14 2 fxg6

15 ith2 ttb6+ 16 3 h5 17 4+ 6 18 e1 6 19 axe6 xe6 20
*h3 t-t Gasic-Milic, Vrnjacka Banja 1966. However 20 ... c£x:5 =+
Keene and Botteri II.

10 e4

10 ... exf4 11 hxg6 hxg6 12 f4 f6 13 *h4 fra5 14 5 4 15

3 d7 16 0-01 Ml5 17 ae1 e5 18 2 frc5+ 19.Q.e3 frc6 205
frc7 21 2 e2 22 xe2 fc8 23 c£x:e4 \ftf8 24 xf6 4)xf6 25 axf6
f6 26 7+ 1-0 Bronstein-Palmiotto, Munich 1958.

11 xe4 f6
12 xf6+ exf6

13 hxg6 ae8+
14 .183 fxg6 a+

White's attack is nothing to be worried about.

A2) 9 hxg6 dxc3

10 gxf7+ axf7
11 .I.c4

a) 11 xh71? h7 12 5+ 8 13 frh5 4)xe5 14 fxe5 xf1+ 15 <ltxf1

frf8+ and ... f5 -+.
b) 11 5? cxb21 12 .Qc4 (12 b2 *a5+ -+) 12 ... xe5 13 *h5 *a5+
14 <l/f1 d5!-+

33
c) 11 e6? cxb2 12 exf7+ <tIt8 13 b2 b2 14 4 fta5+ 15 <l>f1 f6
16 nb1 *c3! :+ since if 17 *e2/3/3 Slack answers 17 ... 4 =F.

11

An ingenious idea which forces White to make his intentions clear. 11

... f8 12 Axf7+ f7 13 5+ 8 14 frh5 h6 15 frl7+ 8 16 ffb3 =.

12 5

The following variations are also advantageous for Slack:

a) 12 .Q.xe6 xe5
b) 12 frxd6 ttb6
c) 12 ctg5 xe5 13 fxe5 cxb2 14 .h5 *xg5
d) 12 f5 xe5 13 fxe6 e 7.

12 .xe5

13 6h5 h6 14 fxe5 hxg5 15 itrh7+ cftf8 16 flh8+ h8 17 nxh8+ <l;g7

18 xd8 4Jc6 :+. Thus 7 h4 is no threat to a well prepared opponent
and so White must look for a better alternative.

B) 7 e611

34
 7 fxe6
8 h4

8 5 f6 9 4 d5 1 a 3 c5 11 dxc5 6 + Fridstein.

8 .f6

This move confers support to the squares h5, g4, e4, e6 and d5.
8 ... c5 9 h5 gxh5 1 a dxc5
a) 1 a ... f6 11 3 4X6 12 a3 h6 13 .Qd2 b6 cc Kristiansen-Botterill
b) 1 a ... c5 11 xh5 d7 12 3 4)f6 13 h4 7 14 3 4)xd3+
15 *xd3 fre8 16 0-0-0 frg6.

9 Jd3 c5

The same central counter thrust.

10 h5

10 dxc5 d5 11 5 6 12 h5 gxh5 13 xh5 h6 14 h1 e5 + Szell-

Petran , Hungary 1971

10 . . .
gxh5

11 cte4 h6 12 dxc5 xe4 13 e4 fra5+ 14 2 flxc5+ 15 .Q.e3 frb4 16

*d3 7 =+ Nowak-Banas, CSSR 1972.
Thus 7 e6 is an unsatisfactory move for Wh he.

C) 7 .I.c4

White's most promising choice. Black has here tried three moves.
Two are totally insufficient and the third has yet to be investigated
fully

C1) 7 ... dxe51 C2) 7 ... c51 C3) 7 ... ..b6

C1) 7 dxe51

35
 8 dxe5 b6
9 itxd8 axd8
10 .tb3 c6 +=

If 10 ... c5 11 3 :to White has a sma" but definite advantage.

C2) 7 c5
8 e6 b6
9 exf7+ ....8
10 h4111

This is Velimirovic's idea which requires an amazIng amount of

courage to play, as it is not at all clear.
a) 10 5 cxd4 11 xd4 e5 (11 ... xf7 12 4 t) 12 4)f3 6 13
.£txc6 bxc6 14 fxe5 dxe5 15 *xd8 xd8 16 .Q.g5 f8 17 0-0-0 .Q.g4 18
nd6 nac8. The position is just tenab'e for B'ack - Archives.
b) 10.Q.e2 cxd4 11 {)xd4 c£x:6 12 .Q.e3 xf7 13 a-a! (13 xc6 bxc6 14
h4 8 15 h5 e5! =) 13 ... 7 t Slack's position is difficult since his
rook is exposed and his centre pawns are fixed, e.g. 13 "0 'tt1e8 14 f3!;
13 ... e5 14 {)xc6 bxc6 15 fxe5 xf 1 + 16 frxf 1 .Q.xe5 17 .Q.g5 :t.

10 xc4

1 a ... 4? 11 h5 gxh5 12 .Q.e2 frd7 13 5 h6 14 .£txg4 frxg4 15 "ltd3

hxg5 16 *g6 h4 17 4 ( {)f2/xg5) 17 ... xf7 18 xg5 *g3+ 19
eM1 xf4+ 20 f4 'lhxf4+ 21 2 *g4+ 22 1 *g3+ 23 1 *g4+ 24
1 *14+ 25 1 *xg5 26 frxg5 c£Vd7 27 xh4+ 8 28 g4 1-0
Velim irovic-Rajkovic, Skopje 1971.

11 h5 axf71

11 ... .Q.g4 12 hxg6 h5 13 *d3 +-; 11... Af5 12 g4 xf7 13 hxg6

.Q.xg6 14 f5 :t.

36
 12 hxg8 .f8

13 5 Af5 14 .td5 *d7 15 nxh7+ B 16 .e21 e.g. 16 ... ci)b6 17

itxe7 ltxg6 18 ltxg7+JI ltxg7 19 f6+ +- and Black's position falls
apart .

C3) 7 .b61

The most logical move. It gains a tempo by the attack on the bishop
and the square e6 is now covered by the bishop on cB.

C)8h2 83 C)83

C3e) 8 h2 dxe5

8 ... e6? 9 0-0 6 10 7 11 c3 7 12 3 6 13 lte1

Trifunovic-Pirc, Belgrade 1954.

9 fxe& 8
10 0-0 Ag4

10... f6 is playable but favours White, e.g. 11 exf6exf612a4a513

41>5 6 14 b3 7 15 c4 c6 16 3 e8 17 3 Bertok-Pirc, Zagreb
1955.

11 .183 f8

Better than 11 ... ctb4 12 h3 f5 13 c1 c5 14 dxc5 4)6d5 15 xd5

37
d5 16 51 e8 17 5 :t Bogdanovic-Pirc, Ljubljana 1955.

12 exf8 exf8 -+

Black has the preferable position.

C3b) 8 Jd3

The bishop has a better future on the b 1-h 7 diagonal but Black
should equalise with sensible play.

8 k8
9 0-0

9 3 f6 10 exf6 exf6 11 0-0 4 =+; 10 d5 ctl>4 11 b6 axb6 12

e6 f5 13 4 c6 which is good for Black, Beaty-Botterill, Yorkshire
Final 1968.

9 . . . dxe5
10 dxe5 f6

a) 10 ... f5 11 .Q.xf5 frxd 1 12 nxd 1 gxf5 =

b) 10... ctb4 11 .Qe4 frxd1 12 nxd1 Af5

11 exf8 exf6

12 f517 gxf5 13 .e1 c{E5 14 .g3 {)xd3 (14 ... 61) 15 cxd3 6 :t
Knox-Horton, British Final 1968.

C3c) 8 Jb3

White obtains active play and a spatial advantage in this line.

8 k6

8 ... d5 and 8 ... 6 are also playable.

38
 9 0-0 ..5

10 4 b3 11 axb3 f6 12 exf6 exf6 13 ge1 a: (13 d5?1 e8 :+:

Minev-Tringov, Bulgaria 1969)
Our opinion is that 7 4 certainly deserves attention and play rnay
lead to original positions. 7... 6 appears to be Black's only attempt
to equalise.

D) 7 g5

A direct attacking move with which White has scored a string of quick
wins, but best play allows Black to obtain a slight advantage.

Necessary to defend the square e6 and prevent 4.

a) 7 ... h6? 8 xf7 f7 9 e6+ 8 1 a exd7 :t
b) 7 ... c517 8 e6 cxd4 9 exd7 d7 10 !Oce4 d5 11 3 f6 12 xh7
h7 13 h4 ite8 14 h5 <liy8 15 f5! Amazingly White has a decisive
edge, yet only one piece is developed. Murei-Gufeld, Riga 1968.

8 .ld3 c6

The only move. It attacks White's d-pawn and it allows ... 4 to be

played with a gain of tempo. 8... 4)a6!? 9 h4 dxe5 1 a h5 4)b4 11 hxg6
xd3+ 12 frxd3 hxg6 13 *g3 e8 14 h 7! f6 15 ctJe6 +-/t Baker-
Lloyd, British Final 1979.

9 e611

We consider that this innovation may well resurrect this line. After 9
d5!? Black has tried:

39
a) 9... 4?110 e6 fxe6 11 xh7r h7 12 *h5+ 8 13 .Q.xg6 f6 14
f51 exf5 15 *h 7+ 8 16 6 xg6 (16 ... .Q.xh6 17 *h8 #) 17 *xg6
(°17 *h8+?) 17 ... h6 18 *xh6+ 8 19 *g5+ 7 20 a-a-or :t Baker-
McFarland 1978.
b) 9 ... -tb4 10 e6 xd3+ (The moves now take a forcing character.)
11 .xd3 fxe6 12 dxe6 *e8 13 *h3 h6 14 f7 xf7 15 exf7+ *xf7 16
'ltf3 =+/a: Eropov-Kiarner, USSR 1969.

9 .Axe6

Less effective is 9 ... fxe6 1 a xh 7 h7 11 *h5+ 8 12 .11><g6 when

White has a strong attack.

10 d5 xd5
11 xd5 Jxd5
12 xh71

The position is still obscure and requires further analysis, but one
possibility is 12 ... .11><g2 13 xf8 .Q.xh 1 14 xg6 fxg6 15 .11><g6 when
Black has problems.

40
BOOKS ON OPENING THEORY FROM THE CHESS PLAYER

Schliemann/Jaenisch Gambit
Bird's Opening
Najdorf Poisoned Pawn
Torre Attack
King's Indian Def., 4 Pawns Attack
Nimzovich Defence
b6!
Spanish Exchange Variation
Sicilian c3 (second edition, revised)
Sokolsky Opening
Trompowsky Attack (second edition, revised)
Spanish 5 d4
French Defence, Tarrasch Variation
Richter-Veresov System
Petroff's Defence, A Line for White
Pirc Defence, A Line for White
Pirc Defence, Second Line for White
The Big Clamp (An Anti-Sicilian System)
The Old Indian Renewed
King's Indian Defence, Saemisch Variation
Sicilian Defence, Richter-Rauzer Variation
English Opening, A Line for Black
Staunton Gambit
French Defence
Anti-Meran Gambit

o 906042 22 4