Grandmaster repertoire 18 kotronias the sicilian sveshnikov by Jose Manuel Vargas

(Grandmaster Repertoire) Vassilios Kotronias The Sicilian Sveshnikov

Tired of bad positions? Try the main lines!

Grandmaster Repertoire

Tue Sicilian Sveshnikov By

Vassilios Kotronias

Quality Chess www.qualitychess.co. uk

First edition 20 1 4 by Quality Chess UK Ltd Copyright ÂŠ 20 1 4 Vassilios Kotronias

Grandmaster Repertoire 18-The Sicilian Sveshnikov All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior permission of the publisher. Paperback ISBN 978- 1 -907982-92-7 Hardcover ISBN 978- 1 -907982-93-4 All sales or enquiries should be directed to Quality Chess UK Led, 20 Balvie Road, Milngavie, Glasgow G62 7TA, United Kingdom Phone +44 1 4 1 204 2073 e-mail: info@qualitychess.co. uk website: www. qualitychess.co.uk Distributed in North America by National Book Network Distributed in Rest of the World by Quality Chess UK Ltd through Sunrise Handicrafts, ul. Skromna 3, 20-704 Lublin, Poland Typeset by Jacob Aagaard Proofreading by Colin McNab & John Shaw Edited by Daniel McGowan Cover design by adamsondesign.com; Cover photo by capture365.com Printed in Estonia by Tallinna Raamatutriikikoja LLC

Contents Introduction

Minor Lines

1 2 3 1.llids 4 5 Main Lines - 7.i.g5 Minor Diversion 6 9.i.xf6 7 8 9 10 11 1 1 .exfS 12 13 1 1 .i.d3 14 15 16 17 18 12.0-0 19 20 21 22 23 9.llid5 24 25 10.i.xf6 26 1 1 .c4 27 28 29 1 1 .c3 30 31 32 13.a4 33 15.i.c4 34 35 36 37

Lines without 6.tt:ldb5 7th Move Alternatives 9th Move Alternatives 9.c4 1 1 .ie2

4 5 27 41 55 70

9.tll ab 1 and 1 0.tt:lab 1 1 1 th Move Alternatives 1 l .ixb5!? 1 l .g3 1 1 .c3 and 1 1 .exf5 Introduction 1 5th Move Alternatives 1 5 .id3 1 2.c3 1 3.�h5 1 3 .tll xb5!? 1 2.�h5 1 2.c4 1 4.tt:lxb5 14.�h5 1 4.c4 1 4.Ele 1 1 4.c3 Introduction to the Classical Variation 1 1 .ixf6 1 1 th Move Alternatives Introduction and 1 3th Move Alternatives 1 3 .ie2 1 3 .g3 Introduction 1 3.g3 1 3.h4 and 1 4.g4 Introduction 1 5 .ib5 1 6th Move Alternatives 1 6.b3 1 7.0-0 1 7.tll ce3

83 91 98 1 12 1 19 131 141 1 59 1 68 1 84 1 98 21 1 216 228 234 243 253 269 284 296 307 318 325 335 347 355 367 377 384 398 406 420

Symbols & Bibliography Variation Index

430 43 1

Introduction Sometimes it is people that inspire us: good people, bad people, strange people and mediocre people. My specialty has been meeting strange people. People with weaknesses; people with great intrinsic merits; people who love life; people who suddenly leave without warning; people who can be loved at one moment and hared the next. One day I was thinking about the people I've met - specifically, the really strange ones. The more I thought about them, the more I realized that they were like the Sveshnikov Sicilian: free, uncompromising, boldly displaying their strengths, and unashamed of their weaknesses. People who turned their weaknesses into strengths, by making me love them and get lost in them. I suddenly decided that I wanted to write about these people. I wanted to analyse them deeply, to understand them, to master their mentality. I wanted to know why they came, why they left, why they captured so strikingly my whole existence. I am not a writer of novels, but I think I can understand certain things about this world when I try to. For me chess has life inside it, and chess openings represent living creatures. Some are dull, other have strong colours; some live on the earth, others deep in the sea, and others high in the sky. The Sveshnikov definitely belongs to a chameleon category. It can be dull and colourful, logical and irrational, systematic and unpredictable at the same time. Its transformations border on the miraculous, and all this happens from a starring point of a fixed structure, of apparent clarity. But the more you dig in, the more you realize that a small spark is all that is needed to put you on a pathway without return. Thus, instead of writing a novel, I ended up writing an opening book about a child of Siberia. The Sveshnikov Sicilian was heavily analysed in the cities of Chelyabinsk and Novosibirsk, by chess pioneers who turned it into a formidable and respected weapon. Nowadays many players are so afraid of meeting it that they resort to sidelines against the Sicilian; even Anand abandoned the Open Sicilian after a single Sveshnikov encounter in his world ride march against Gelfand. I sincerely hope that Evgeny Sveshnikov will forgive me for shedding too much light on the fascinating and mysterious nature of his invention, but I believe his set-up is one that chess players deserve to get acquainted with. It is sound, adventurous, dynamic and brilliant. Vassilios Korronias Athens, July 20 1 4

Minor Lines a

Lines without 6.llJdb5 Variation Index 1.e4 c5 2.� f3 � c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.�xd4 � f6 s.� c3 s ... e5 A) 6.� de2 i.b4 7.a3 i.a5 Al) 8.b4?! A2) 8.f3 A3) 8.i.gS!? B) 6.� fS C) 6.�xc6 bxc6 Cl) 7.i.gS?! C2) 7.f4?! C3) 7.i.d3 C4) 7.i.c4 D) 6.� f3 i.b4! Dl) 7.i.d3 D2) 7.i.c4!? E) 6.� b3 i.b4! El) 7.i.d2 E2) 7.i.d3 E3) 7.i.c4

6 6 6 7 8 13 13 14 15 16 17 17 18 21 22 23 24

Minor Lines

l.e4 c5 2.lll f3 lll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lll xd4 lll f6 5.lll c3 e5 Here the most common move by far is 6.lll db5, but in this chapter I would like to explore some of White's alternative options: A) 6.lll de2, B) 6.lll f5 , C) 6.lll xc6, D) 6.lll f3 and E) 6.lll b3. A) 6.lll de2 With this retreat White wants to keep control of d5, while taking the sting out of the annoying pin with . . . ib4.

6 ...i.b4 This remains a thematic development, despite the above comment. Its chief merit, of course, is that it creates a direct threat ( . . . lll xe4) while also planning the customary idea of . . . d5. The more primitive 6 ... ic5!? also has a good reputation. Black forgets about d5 and trains his guns on f2, which looks particularly weak in the given set-up. After 7.lll g3 (7.ie3?! ixe3 8.fXe3 and Black can choose between 8 . . . 0-0 and the more direct 8 . . . d5!?) 7 . . . d6! (premature is 7 . . . 1Wb6?!) White has tried several moves, but Black has an acceptable game in all cases.

Black has freed his position, enjoymg the slightly better game, Petrov - Krasenkow, Plovdiv 2003.

AI) 8.b4?! Ab6 This merely highlights White's primary problem in this line, the f2-square. White's choice here is hardly appetizing as Black has all the tricks.

9.h3 This move is designed to cancel out these tricks by covering g4. 9.ig5 ? ixf2t 1 0 .<Âąixf2 lll g 4t+ and 9 .lll g3 ?! id4!t are clearly out of the question. 9.f3 d6! I O.ig5 ie6 and White fails to win the battle for the d5-square. 9 ... 0-0 10.g3 d5!?N More aggressive than the still acceptable 1 0 . . . d6. l l .exd5 lll d4 12.i.g2 i.f5 13.ďż˝a2 a5t This could be very fruitful for Black given the awkward placement of the white pieces. A2) 8.f3

7.a3 i.a5 A critical juncture. White is tempted to weaken his queenside by b2-b4, but there are more refined methods of play as well: Al) 8.b4?!, A2) 8.f3 and A3) 8.i.g5!?. The more cautious 8.id2 allows 8 ... 0-0 9.lll g3 d5! 1 0.exd5 lll xd5 1 1 .lll xd5 1Wxd5 1 2.ixa5 1Wxa5t

8 ... h6!? Given the chance, Black denies his opponent the nagging ig5 pin.

Chapter 1

9.b4 An attempt to fight for the bishop pair by exchanging the b6-bishop for the c3-knight. 9.'Wd6!? il.c7 1 0.'Wd3 ti:le7! This looks fine for Black as . . . d5 cannot be stopped. Palliser only considers 1 0 . . . 0-0 when l l .ie3 favours White. I l .ti:lb5 l I .il.e3 d5 1 2.exd5 ti:l exd5 1 3 .ti:lxd5 \Wxd5 l 4.ti:lc3 \Wc6 l 5 .\Wb5 il.e6= l l . . .d5 1 2.tll xc?t ¥fffxc7 1 3 .tll c3 dxe4 l4.fxe4 1 4 .tll b5 'Wc6+ 14 . . . 0-0 1 5 .'Wc4! 'Wb8! 1 6.\Wc5!? ti:lc6 1 6 . . . ti:lg6 l 7.il.c4 il.e6 1 8.il.xe6 fxe6= l 7.ie3 il.e6 1 8 .0-0-0 E!:c8 1 9.'Wd6 \Wxd6 20.E!:xd6 tll a5= A balanced ending is reached as White's two bishops are outweighed by his weaknesses at e4 and c4.

9 ...�b6 10.ll'la4 1 0 .tll b5?! d5! l l .exd5 ti:lxd5 1 2 .c4 fails to the beautiful tactic:

Lines without 6.tt:ldb5

1 1 . .. axb6 12.�b2 0-0 13.ll'lg3 1 3.b5 tll a5 1 4 . ti:l g3 would have been about equal according to Palliser. l 4 . . . !!e8 and Black is certainly nor worse. 1 3 ... dxe4 14.fxe4 Moroz.evich - Gelfand, Monte Carlo 2003. Ar chis point Black has achieved a more than satisfaccory game and could have crowned his opening play wirh: 14 ... lll g4!?N+ A3) 8.�g5!?

At first I was most concerned about chis, and it does seem co be the best move. Ir should be mer by:

8 ... h6 9.�h4 In Bertagnolli - Brom berger, Austria 20 1 0, White chose 9.ixf6 and after 9 . . . \Wxf6 1 0 .\Wd3 o-o l l .f3 d6 1 2.o-o-o 02.b4?! ids! 1 3 .tll d5 'Wg6+ is clearly bad for White) Black should have continued 1 2 . . . ti:l e?!N intending 1 3.'Wxd6 ie6 with dangerous compensation for the pawn.

l 2. . . a6! l 3.cxd5 axb5 Taking on c6 is impossible. 1 4.dxc6?? ( 1 4.ib2 ti:l e7+ is the lesser evil) 14 . . . if2t! 1 5 .lt>xf2 ¥fffxd l -+

10 d5! This central thrust offers Black at lease equality. 1 0 . . . ic7 l l .c4i plays into White's hands. •••

1 1 .ll'lxb6 l l .exd5 ti:lxd5 l 2 .c4 ti:l de7 1 3 .'WxdSt ixd8= is a balanced ending.

10.f3!?

Minor Lines

Now this is the most critical.

12 ...�xf6 13.llid5! 1 3 .tll xb5?! ia6 1 4 .tll bc3 ixe2!�

No better is: 1 0 .1.Wd3 g5 l l .ig3 d5!+t

13 ...�ds 14.llig3 a6 1 0.b4 ib6 l l .Wfd3 d600 gives a very unclear position. The weakening of White's queenside makes it more dangerous than usual to castle long and, at the same time, invites counterplay with . . . a5. For example: 1 2.0-0-0 �e6! l 3.1.Wxd6 g5 1 4.1.Wxd8 Elfxd8 1 5 .l: hd8t E:xd8 1 6.�g3 tll g4 1 7.tll d l a5! l 8.b5 tll e7 l 9.tll ec3!? ( I 9.h3 tll f6 20.f3 tll g6�) 1 9 . . . ic5 20.h3 (20.a4 tll g6�) 20 . . . ixa3t 2 1 .tll b 2 i.b4 22.tll ba4 ia3t 23.tll b2 ib4=

1 5.c3 Or 1 5 .a4?! bxa4 1 6.E:xa4 d6 1 7.ic4 tll e7+t and, despite being slightly worse structurally, Black keeps good play as the enemy king cannot castle. 1 5 ... d6= B) 6.llif5 Eyeing d6 via f5 has the disadvantage of allowing Black to liberate his position at once by employing the typical central thrust . . . d5. Palliser focuses on 10 . . . d5 in

Dangerous Weapons:

1he Sicilian.

1 1 .h4 .ih6 12 ..ixf6 White's best try in the position. Three of the following attempts are met with the same move! The fourth leads to an unbalanced game. 1 2 .tll d5? tll xe4!-+ 1 2.tll xb5 ? tll xe4!-+ 1 2.1.Wd2? tll xe4! 1 3 .i.xd8 if2t! 1 4 .'i!?d l tll xd2+ 1 2 .1.Wd3!? g5 1 3 .i.g3 a5! 1 4.E:b l axb4 1 5 .axb4 d600

6 ... d5! Now Black will obtain free piece play at the cost of a slightly worse pawn structure. Quite often endings arise here, and Black's active pieces enable him to fight for the initiative. 7.exd5! In this way White creates his own trump as d5xc6 will follow, saddling Black with a weakness on c6. 7.tll xd5?! is not so good because after 7 . . . tll xe4! 8.tll fe3 i.e6, Black controls the centre and his men are more harmoniously placed.

Chapter I

Lines without 6 .tll db5

The e3-knighr in particular blocks the radius of the c l -bishop, thus making its development problematic.

7 .ixf5 8.dxc6 bxc6! ...

the c2-pawn in return for some pressure down the c-file. 9 . . . Wxd l t No matter how White recaptures, he is faced with a hard task: 1 0.Cll xd l This looks like the lesser evil. 1 0.l'!xd l l!b8!+ is also unwelcome for White. 1 0 . . . i.xc2 White has another difficult choice to make:

Black is not willing to exchange queens voluntarily bur leaves the choice to White, as control of the d-file is important. The pawn on c6 is both a weakness and a strength as it controls the vital b5- and d5-squares. At this point White has to make a fundamental decision - whether to exchange queens or nor.

9.ďż˝f3 This has been the main choice in tournament play and is also the best move. There are a variety of other developing moves bur most of them grant Black the initiative: 9.iWe2 is a clumsier development of the queen. Black can play: 9 . . . Wc7! (the most flexible here, the development of the f8-bishop can wait) 1 0 .g3! ig4!? l 1 .iWe3 (1 l .f3? ie6+ weakens White's kingside considerably) l l . . .ie6! 1 2.ig2 !'.:: d 5+ when he is at least equal. 9.ďż˝d3 allows Black to gain time and space in the centre, an opportunity he should rake with 9 . e4!. . .

9.1g5 This move is linked to the idea of sacrificing

1 1 .:Elcl 1 l .ixf6 gxf6 1 2.Cll e3 ( 1 2.l'!c l ib4t 1 3 .lii e2 ig6 transposes to 1 1 .:!'!c l ) 1 2 . . . igG 1 3 .a3 ic5+ 1 1 . . .i.b4t 1 2 .lii e2 ig6 1 3.l!xc6 0-0 1 4.ixf6 gxf6 l 5.a3!? 1 5 .l!xf6 l!fd8+ 1 5 . . . ie7 1 6.Cll e3 :!'!fb8! l 7.b4 a5 1 8 .Cll dS ids+ Black has all the pressure although, admittedly, is by no means winning. 9.ia6 Another try to enter the ending on White's own terms. White plans to improve on the lines starting with 9.ic4 by preventing Black from castling long, while creating a threat in ib7. 9 . . . Wxd l t! The tempting 9 . . . Wb6 1 0.We2 id6 Riffo - Llorens Sepulveda, Santiago 2005, offers Black no more than equality after the correct l 1 .id3!=. 1 0 .lii xd l 1 0 .Cll xd l ?! ixc2

Minor Lines

1 0 . . . EldSt! After this however, it becomes apparent that placing the bishop on a6 also has its defects: l l .id2 Now l l .©e2 ixc2! 1 2 .ie3 ( 1 2.ig5 Elb8!+) is not so good in view of: 12 . . . lll g 4! 1 3 .ib7 (the a7-pawn is immune in view of . . . Ela8) 1 3 . . . ©d7! 1 4.!i:ac l id3t! 1 5 .©xd3 ©c7t! 1 6. ©e2 ©xb 7+ and Black has everything under control while being a clear pawn up. � ��·� �.i ��,, ·"� ·;r-, • �-- , %� � 6 t� f � � ""'�� •� �,,�t�·ef 5 •�. j_� , % � ,� � 4 � �� ·ef�t3J� "'"'�·;; r� �-;; � �-;; 23 ,�_, t3J r� . t3Jr�,/.· �� .. %_: 8 7

1 L.ib4! 1 2.©cl 1 2.©e2 ixc2 1 3 .Elac l if5+ 1 2 . . . 0-0+ Black has a pull, as White's king is awkwardly placed and the rest of his forces are rather scattered. 9.ic4 The idea here is to enter the ending at the cost of sacrificing the c-pawn, but with harmonious piece placement. The king will be deployed to e2 and the queen's bishop to e3 or g5, preparing to pressurize and possibly regain the pawn by means oHla l -c l . 9 . . .'&xd l t 1 0.©xd l 1 0.lll xd l ?! ixc2 1 1 .0-0 ig6! 1 0 . . . ic5!? Probably the most accurate, though 1 0 . . . ib4!? is also worthy of consideration. The most tenacious reply appears to be: l l .ie3!? l l .f3 0-0-0t or l l .ig5 0-0-0t 1 2.©e2 ( 1 2.©cl ig6!?+) 1 2 . . . ixc2 1 3 .Elac l ig6 1 4 .lll a4 id4 1 5 .ib5 ©b8+ Black has to

content himself with a slight advantage by playing the simple: l l . . .!xe3 1 2.fxe3 Eld8t 1 3.©cl ©e7+ With the better king and superior coordination. 9.ie2 A passive way of development that Black best copes with by essaying: 9 . . . ib4! White cannot obtain an equal game as the following brief analysis shows: 1 0 .0-0 Going into the ending by 1 0.'&xdSt Elxd8 doesn't improve at all on the immediate 9 .Wxd8t as the pawn on c2 is still vulnerable. 1 0.id2 Elb8 l l .a3 ( l l ..ic4 0-0 1 2.0-0 will transpose below) l I . . .id6 1 2.Wc l h6 1 3.0-0 0-01' gives Black good prospects of a kingside initiative. 1 0 . . . 0-0 l I .id2 l I .ig5 h6 1 2.ih4 ixc3 1 3.bxc3 '&xd l 1 4 .ixd l lll d5+ is also much worse for White. 1 1 . . .ElbS 1 2.ic4

1 2 . . . h6!1' Preventing subsequent bishop invasions on g5, when the set-up with ... Wc7 and ... id6 will give Black attacking chances against the white king.

...

9 �d7! The best place for the queen. 9 . . . '&c8?! 1 0.ia6! is better for White.

10 .igS The natural developing move.

Chapter 1

Lines without 6.tlidbS

1 O.ia6?! is highly inconsistent and scatters White's forces. After 1 0 . . . ie7 1 1 .0-0 e4 1 2 .Wg3 0-0 l 3.�g5 �d6 l 4.Wh4 Garbarino - Cifuentes, Casilda 1 984, l 4 . . . ie5!N+ looks very promising. After 1 O.ic4 Black can react in a variety of ways. I like the following thematic example: 1 0 . . . e4 ( 1 0 . . . ib4!? is also fine) l 1 .Wg3 ig6 1 2 .We5t �e7 1 3.0-0 0-0 1 4.E:d l Wb7 1 5 .ia6!? Wxa6 1 6.Wxe7 Wb6 1 7.h3

The most natural reaction, keeping pressure on the e-pawn. l l .We3 ?! loses time and allows Black to improve the positioning of his pieces. Black should continue: l l . . .'Ll g4 1 2 .Wd2 ( 1 2.Wg3?! ic5 1 3.'Lldl h6 1 4 .if4 g5 1 5 .ie5 0-0 1 6.ie2 'Llxe5 l 7.Wxe5 id4+ gave Black a clear advantage in the blitz game Serper - Kasparov, Internet 1 998. In such positions endings are welcome, Black's two bishops being an excellent asset.) 1 2 . . . Wxd2t 1 3.ixd2 ic5 1 4 . 'Ll d l

8 ��.��•· �•-,, 6 , %•1• %-� %� -*��

5��,�, , Y,��•��•� %

� � �'/��a ' / �'r�8rtJ / ��''0 � � � 2� 8r� 8 m ,,,,%� 3

...

10 e4 A strong and natural move, gaining space and vacating the e5-square for the black pieces. At this point we reach a juncture.

��.f•: d

Now the tactical trick l 4 . . . 'Llxf2! l 5 . 'Llxf2 e3 opens up the game whilst conquering the two bishops, a major achievement, Teske Krasenkow, Bundesliga 2003. 1 1 .Wd l !?

Minor Lines

As indicated by Kolev and Nedev, the best move is: l l . . . id6! Avoiding the queen trade and seizing as many dark squares as possible, in anticipation of ig5xf6. Black is opting for the standard formation with . . .1M'e7 and . . . ie5, and stands fine: 1 2.ixf6 Other moves are met by . . . 1J/!e7 with comfortable play for Black. 1 2 . . . gxf6 1 3. 1J/!d4 1 3.ic4 0-0-0!? 1 3 ... 1J/!e7! Black enjoys a strong position, a likely continuation being: 1 4 .!b5!? 14.0-0-0 ie5 1 5 . 1J/!a4 0-0+ 1 4 . 1M.la4 0-0 1 5 .g4 ig6 1 6.h4 h6 17.0-0-0 Elab8-+

8 7 6 5 4 3 2

12 ...1M'b7 Most logical, according to Sveshnikov himself. 13.1M'a6! The point.

1 5 ... e3!? 1 5 ... tli g4 1 6.ixe7 cJJxe7 1 7.h3 tlie5 1 8.b3± 1 5 . . . tlid5 1 6.ixe7 cJJxe7 1 7.ic400 16.ix:f6 hc2!? Ir looks as though it is time to bail out to an equal ending. a

1 4 . . . Elc8! 1 4 . . . 0-0!? 1 5 . .ixc6 ie5= is less ambitious. 1 5 .. h4 l 5.tlid5 1J/!e5 !+ 1 5 . . . 0-0+ Black's chances are to be preferred. The two bishops can support central activity based around the e5-outpost and a potential advance of rhe central pawns.

1 1 . ..i.e7 12.�dl! Gaining time to develop by hitting the black queen. This move seems to encourage Black to arrack b2, bur White has an idea up his sleeve.

1 6 . . . ixf6 1 7.id3! Elb4 1 8.b3 exf2t 1 9. cJ1xf2 Elf4t 20.cJ1g3 ie5 2 1 .ixf5 l'!xa4t (2 1 . ..Elxf5t 22.cJ1h3±) 22. cJ1h3 Elxa2 23.!!he l f6 24.Eld7 0-0 25.Eled l l'!e8 26.Elb7t

17.ixg7 .!;g8 1 8.ic3 1 8.Elcl ixa4 1 9 .ic3 can be met with 1 9 . . . ig5!. 1 8 ...exf2t 1 9.We2 ixa4 1 9 . . . !xd l t!? 20. cJJxd l !b4!00 could be worth examining. 20.b3 ibst 2 1 .xf2 �g5! 22.ixbs 22.id3 Elc5

Chapter 1

Lines without 6 . lli db5

point White has several options: Cl) 7 ..ig5?!, C2) 7.f4?!, C3) 7 ..id3 and C4) 7..ic4.

Cl) 7..ig5?! This is hardly appealing with the kingside still undeveloped, yet it is by no means easy to refute. Its basic defect is that it weakens b2 and Black should be able to take advantage of this factor immediately.

7 ... gb8! Making it awkward for White to defend the pawn or sacrifice it with impunity. This is what may follow:

C) 6.CLJxc6 White is surrendering control of the centre for now. He will be looking to attack it at a later stage by means of f2-f4 or with pressure along the d-file.

6 ... bxc6

�� •"•• � ,,� ,�j." �'� 5� �� -� � "t,'� �� 3 � �m�� 0%" � �01'�0" 8 1.m.t�•�

7 6

�:ri1�� a

Now Black controls the d5-square and seems to be better, but things are not that easy. The central advance . . . d5 cannot be carried out effectively at such an early stage. Black should focus on developing in a way that prevents White from creating pressure along the half-open d-file, along with bringing his king into safety. At this

8 ..ic4?! Ignoring the threat, trusting that White will be able to lock in the rook once it lands on b2 and eventually capture it. This may be true, but at a considerable cost. 8.�b l ! ? This limits the damage. 8 . . . h6 Gaining the bishop pair gives the best long term chances. After 8 . . . ib4 best appears 9.a3!?, a difficult move to find. (Instead, 9.ic4 d5! 1 0.exd5 cxd5 is a variation where the insertion of the moves . . . f1b8 and f1b 1 comes in handy for Black.) 9 . . . ixc3t 1 0.bxc3 f1xb l 1 1 .'IWxb l and it is not so easy for Black to gain the advantage as massive simplification has taken place. 9.ixf6 This is forced, otherwise Black will succeed in playing . . . d5 with the better position. 9 ... \Wxf6 1 0.ic4 ic5 !

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 a

Minor Lines

This classical placement of the bishop is best, and fits well with Black's overall strategy of playing for .. .f5 . 1 1 .0-0 0-0 1 2 .'&d3 Relatively best. 1 2 . . . '&g6!? 1 3 .'&g3 1 3.ia6? ixa6 1 4.'&xa6 i.d4+ 1 3 . . .'&xg3 1 4.hxg3 This doesn't relieve White despite the queen exchange, as Black's two bishops are strong in the ending. 1 4 . . . ©h?+ 1 4 . . . g6!? 1 5 .'ll a4 ie7 1 6.f4 exf4 1 7.gxf4 d6 Black holds the initiative.

8 .. J�xb2! 9 ..ih3 9.0-0 is optically better, but then 9 . . . :I"lb8! 1 0.'&d3 h6! l 1 .ih4 ( l l .ie3 '&c7 also favours Black) 1 1 . . .g5! 1 2 . .ig3 d6 1 3 .l"lab l :I"lxb l 1 4. :I"lxb l ie7+ denies White serious compensation for his pawn. Black's compact central pawn structure reduces the scope of the g3-bishop. 9 ...Ah4! 10 ..td2 Was 1i.Wf3

1 2.a3 o-o 13.Aa2 Ae7 14.tll dS 1 4 .'ll d l :I"lxa2!! 1 5 .ixa5 :I"lxal + 1 4.ib3 '&c7 1 5 .'ll a4 :I"lxb3 1 6.cxb3 d5�

The opening of the centre signals the beginning of a winning attack against the exposed white king.

14 ...WcS! White is experiencing insurmountable difficulties as the following variations show: 15.tll xe?t 1 5 .ib4 '&xc2! 1 6 .'ll xe7t Wh8-+ 1 5 . 'll b4 .ic4 16 .ic3 :I"lxa2 1 7. 'll xa2 a5+

1 5 ...Wxe? 1 6.Ah3

Black has a strong initiative.

C2) 7.f4?! This is well met by:

Chapter 1

Lines without 6. tll db5

7 ...'!Wc7! Intending to augment the pressure on f4 and thus force a decision by following up with . . . id6.

C3) 7.�d3

8.'!Wf.3 8.fxe5? �xe5+ is bad for White. 8 . .tc4? exf4+ will transpose to 9 .ii.c4? below. 8 ...�d6! 9.f5 9.ic4? exf4 1 0.0-0 g5 l l .g3 g4 1 2.�f2 f3+ renders White's compensation for the pawn more than dubious. 9.ii.d2? as suggested by Deep Junior, is entirely pointless after 9 . . . exf4 1 0.0-0-0 ie5+. Trying to keep White's pawn front intact with 9.g3 should be answered by 9 . . . gb8! 1 0.id3 0-0 1 1 .0-0 ic5t 1 2.©h l i.d4!, when the successful regrouping of the black bishop puts White under pressure on both wings. 9 ...�b4! 1 0.a3 1 0 .id2 d5! l l .exd5 cxd5 1 2.ib5t ©f8!+ 10 ...hc3t 1 1 .bxc3 d5 12.�d3 '!WaS! 13.�d2 0-0 14.0-0 Sahl - Carlsen, Moss 2006. Best appears:

This is a logical developing move. It is, however, easily defused by:

7...�b4! 8.0-0 0-0 Black is threatening . . . d5, so White has to try and prevent it. The following options are available: 9.f4 The most logical, but on the other hand Black will now conquer the e5-square. 9.©h l can be met with 9 . . . d5! 1 0.exd5 cxd5 l l ..ig5 ib7!?+ and Black will enjoy the better chances in view of his mobile centre. 9.ig5 prevents . . . d5, but the bishop ends up badly placed after 9 . . . h6 l O . .th4 g5!? ( 1 0 . . . gbs+) l l .ig3 d6+ as its scope is obstructed by Black's compact central structure.

9 ... d6 9 . . . d5!? 1 O.fxe5 tll g4+± was unclear in Kosasih - So, Tarakan 2008. 10.'Wern 1 0.fxe5 dxe5 ( I O . . . tll g4!? +) l l .ig5 ie7+ 1 0 . f5 d5+ 18 ... lll xe4 1 9.'Wxe4 f6i With a solid edge for Black.

1 0 ... exf4 1 1 .�xf4 lll g4 12.'11Mg3

Minor Lines

8.ig5 doesn't work in view of 8 . . . h6! and White has nothing better than 9.ixf6+. Instead 9 .�h4? is bad due to: 9 . . . g5 1 0.ig3 'Lixe4 l l . lff1f3 ( l l .i.xe5 1Mle7! 1 2 . lff1d4 f6 1 3 . lff1xe4 1Mf xe5+ with a clearly better ending for Black.) l I . . .ixc3t 1 2.bxc3 d5 1 3 .ixe5

.i � .!.�· ,,, ·� �� , , % , ,, � � � � ,,,% � � �

8B8• ·: �� m'��"'"�8tl§ �

� �� 65 � rA m-,, r�J'�•� 4 �� -- - "� i)� r�� 3 ��r,��·i·�-�

1 3 . . . 0-0! 1 4.id3 Ele8 1 5 .ixe4 Elxe5 1 6.0-0-0 1Mfe7 l 7.id3 This was Cherkasov Shariyazdanov, Swidnica 1 997, and now Black should play: l 7 . . . Elb8!N+

C4) 7.ic4

8 ...0-0! 9.igS h6 10.ih4 1 0.a3 ixc3 l l .ixf61ff1xf6 1 2.bxc3 E'ld8 1 3 .ib3 Elb8 1 4.f4 exf4 1 5 .1!tifd4 1!tifxd4t 1 6.cxd4 g5 1 7.g3 ia6 1 8 .Elf2 fxg3 1 9.ixf7t \t>g7 20.hxg3 ms 2 1 .i.b3 Elxf2 22.@xf2 Elf8t 23.\t>g2 ie2 24. E'le l if3t 25.\t>gl h5+ with a slight edge fo r Black in Oeunmaa - Svilponis, corr. 2008. 10 ...gS I I .ig3 E:e8+± This looks fine for Black. a

While eyeing f7, the bishop on c4 also intends to dissuade Black from an early . . . d5.

7 ...ib4!? There are other moves as well, but fighting for control of d5 is circumspect. 8.0-0 8 . °@d3 0-0 9. 0-0 d5 1 0.exd5 ixc3 l l . °@xc3 cxd5 1 2.ib3 a5!+± is fine for Black.

l I . . .ixc3 1 2.bxc3 'Lixe4 1 3 .ixe5 d5= is about equal.

1 2.gel 1 2.h4? ixc3 1 3.bxc3 'Lixe4 1 4 .Wh5 °@f6 1 5 .hxg5 hxg5 1 6.Elae l d5+ 12 ... d6 1 3.'1Wd3 1 3 .h4 ie6 1 4 .ib3 'Li d7= 13 ...ie6 1 3 . . . a5!?

Chapter 1

Lines without 6.Cll db5

This makes matters worse. 8.ixf6 ixc3t! ensures Black's advantage by ruining White's pawn structure.

D) 6.lll f3

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

7.id2? would be a nice choice were it not for the fact that it loses material: 7 . . .ixc3 8.ixc3 liJxe4 9.liJxe5 (9 .ixe5 ?? liJxe5 I O .liJxe5 �a5t-+) 9 . . . liJxc3 l O.liJxc6 liJxd l l l .liJxd8 liJxb2 1 2 .liJxb7! ixb7 1 3 .�b l ixg2 1 4.ixg2 �b8+ Black has a clear extra pawn which he should be able to consolidate in due course. a

This continuation is passive and hands over the initiative to Black. Still, the second player must play accurately, avoiding a few tricks.

6 ...ib4! Black develops quickly, already threatening to capture the enemy e-pawn. As a consequence there will be an unavoidable ruining of White's pawn structure. We shall examine Dl) 7.id3 and D2) 7.i.c4!?. Most of the other moves are rather unimportant: 7.ig5 ?! Positionally very bad. 7 . . . h6! 8.ih4?

Dl) 7.id3 This is not as bad as its reputation. It should be met by a typical central thrust:

7 ... d5! 8.exd5 Now Black should prefer the more natural: 8 ... lll xd5! The alternative 8 . . . �xd5!? 9.0-0 (9.id2? ixc3 1 0.ixc3 e4 l I .ixf6 exd3 1 2.ixg7 �e4t 1 3 .'ii fl �g8 1 4.ic3 dxc2 1 5 .�e l if5+) 9 . . . ixc3 1 0.bxc3 0-0 l l .liJg5! �d8 1 2.�e2 ie6!00 is perfectly viable too. 9.0-0!

Minor Lines

9 . . . tt:lxc3 1 O.bxc3 Preferable from che practical poinc of view is: 1 0 . . . ie?! 10 . . . ixc3! ? 1 1 . '.i!b l is a bic dangerous for Black because he is lagging in developmenc, and che c3-bishop is cut off from the defence of his kingside. l l . "&e2 "&c7 1 2 . 1'=1e l ig4 Inferior is 1 2 . . . 0-0?! 1 3 . "&e4! g6 1 4 .ih6t, but 12 .. .f6!? is nor our of the question. 1 3.h3 ixf3 1 4. "&xf3 0-0 1 5 . B:b l But not 1 5 .ih6? f5 . l 5 . . . '.i!ad800 With a respectable position for Black, who should prepare . . . f5 .

10.bxc3 0-0 Black's position is sound in view of his superior pawn structure and well-placed knights, bur he must be careful nor to let the white knights loose. White's best continuation is: 1 1 .c4 1 1 . '.i!e l should be met by l l . . .�g4! with the idea: 1 2.h3?! ( 1 2.c4 tt:l db4=) 1 2 . . . tt:lxc3 1 3. "&d2 ixf3 1 4. "&xc3 id5+ l l . t2'ig5 h6 1 2.tt:le4 ( 1 2. "&h5?! f5!+) 12 . . . "&c?+ is, if anything, slightly better for Black.

12.i.b2 Vf!c7 1 3.:Sel :Se8 14.V!!d2 i.g4 1 5.1Mfe3 i.xf3 16.1Mfxf3 :Sad8m Black's solid position should enable him co easily hold White's bishops at bay and perhaps exploit che enemy pawn weaknesses at a later scage. 02) 7.i.c4!?

�� ..t�•m � �� · ,,/, ·-··y,

��f"� � , � ,, � � 5� � -�� -, � �-�� !� � : � .•�� 00"'if�� -�J00 �0"-' 2 �/t!la t!la�jl!J � 1

� �°iii� a

�: g

This is relacively besc. Whice will sacrifice his e-pawn in order to gee che bishop pair and some dark-square compensation, although it is uncertain whether this is enough even for equal icy.

Chapter 1

7 . . 0-0! 8.0-0 Delaying development with 8 . 1/;tld3? proves to be no fun for White: 8 . . . d5! 9.ixd5 tll x d5 1 0. 1/;tlxd5 1/;tlxd5 l l .exd5 lll d4 1 2.lll xd4 exd4 1 3 .a3 l'l:eSt ( 1 3 . . . .ia5!?, as recommended in several sources, is less clear after l 4.b4 l'l:eSt 1 5 .tll e2!) 1 4.@dl .ixc3 1 5 .bxc3 dxc3+ 8.ig5 h6 9.ih4 g5 ! 1 0 . .ig3 In Cox's opinion chis is no fun for White either, which is quite true. However, he gives a wrong justification for this.

.i � .i. � ��·

� ·�r�� -,y,�� • . 6 . . J� 1� -"' t��. ��· i' �� -t� 5� ��-��"··%�Y:.. %� 4 �%� ��@-� 3 � fil�� ri"fi . . %� 1 d"!i�wt!s 2 S( =. . %.� 8

�.ref

1 0 . . . d6!?N I believe this is the correct move here, after which White will suffer due to his bad g3bishop. 1 O . . . \Wa5 ?! (Cox) is not so good due to 1 1 .0-0! �xc3 1 2.bxc3 '1Wxc3 1 3 .'1Wd6!. l l .'<Mfd3 1 1 .0-0? .ixc3 1 2.bxc3 tll xe4+ I l . . .ie6 1 2.ixe6 &:e6 1 3.0-0 1xc3 14.bxc3 ·�cl+

8 ...hc3! It's now or never! The main virtue of the move is to weaken the enemy formation, rather than to win a pawn. 9.bxc3 �xe4 However, grabbing the pawn cannot be bad. 9 . . . d6 might transpose after 1 0 .ia3 tll xe4, but White has the extra option of 1 0.'1Wd3!?.

IO.i.a3! The most testing response. 1 o.'1Wd3 lll f6 l l .'1Wd6 l l .ig5 h6 1 2.ih4 d5!+ 1 1 . . .lll eS 1 2.'<Mfd3 8

.i �.i. � 'il ��•m .,y,. .,%• ,• , .%• '• %•. %�,

5 �.-� %,� %.� � ,•. 43 �%�,-�. �� .%� ��-% ��-� � � 2 �� r!l�JlJ 6

� � � �� b

This does not secure a draw by repetition, because Black continues with: 1 2 . . . d6 1 3.l'l:d l 1 3 .ia3 iW a5+ 1 3 .�g5 '1Wc7+ 1 3 .tll g 5 tll f6 1 4.ia3 h6 1 5 .tll e4 if5 1 6.tll xf6t \Wxf6 1 7.'<Mfxd6 '<Mfxd6 1 8 .ixd6 l'l:fdS+ 1 3 . . . ig4!+ Denying his opponent full compensation.

5 43 2

Black looks better to me as the g3-bishop is inactive and White's queenside pawns are weak. After something like: 1 5 .h4 g4 1 6 .tll d2 tll a5 It will not be easy for White to obtain counterplay.

Lines without 6.ttJdb5

Minor Lines

1 0.!'i:e l A weaker attempt, due to: 1 0 . . . 'll xc3 l 1 .Wd6!? 1 1 .Wd3 d5! 1 2.1Mfxc3 ( 1 2.ib3 d4 1 3 .'ll xe5 'll xe5 1 4.!'i:xe5 Wf6 1 5 .'Wg3 ie6+) 1 2 . . . dxc4 1 3.ia3 ( 1 3.'ll xe5 ?! 'Wd4! gives Black the initiative, while 1 3 .Wxc4? ie6 1 4.'Wc3 !'i:c8+ 1 5 .'ll xe5 ? 'll d4-+ led to an opening disaster for White in R. Williams - Baum, corr. 20 1 0.) 1 3 . . . !'i:eS 1 4 .'ll xe5 'll xe5 1 5 .!'i:xe5 Ei:xe5 1 6.'Wxe5 ie6+ This is simple and good for Black. l l . . .'Wf6! Black must lift the blockade as quickly as possible. 12 . .ia3 Ei:e8 1 3 .!!e3 b5!

Tactics now come to the rescue. 1 4 .ib3 a5! 1 5 .!'i:xc3 l 5 .'ll xe5 'll xe5 1 6.'Wxf6 gxf6 l 7.!!xc3 ib7 1 8 .Elg3t 'll g6 1 9 .c3 Ele2!+ 1 5 . . . b4 1 6.'Wxf6 gxf6 1 7.Ei'.xc6 l 7.'ll xe5 fxe5 1 8 .Ei'.g3t Wf8 1 9 . .ib2 a4 20 . .id5 Ei:a5 2 1 .c4 'll e7! 22 ..ixe5 'll x d5 23 .ig7t We7 24.cxd5 d6+ is a clear extra pawn for Black. 1 7 . . . dxc6 1 8 .ic l a4 1 9 . .ic4 ie6!+ Black had emerged from the complications with a clear endgame advantage in Siigur LePage, corr. 20 1 3 .

1 0... d6 1 1 .ï¿½el ! 1 1 .'We l This move allows Black to demonstrate his superiority by the fine tactical sequence:

1 1 . . .if5! 1 1 . . .'ll f6?! as recommended by Cox, runs into 1 2.Ei:d l e4?! 1 3 .Ei:xd6 'Wa5 1 4 .Ei:xf6! (a move he failed to notice, analysing 1 4.ib4 instead) 1 4 . . . 'Wxa3 l 5 .1:'ixf7! !:'ixf7 1 6.'Wxe4+1 2.Elb 1 1 2 .id3 'll g5!!+ 1 2.Ei'.d l !? 'Wa5 ! 1 3 .ib4 'll xb4 14.cxb4 'Wc7! 1 5 .id3 d5 1 6.c4! f6! 1 7.cxd5 'll d6+ 1 2 . . . 'Wa5 1 3 .'ll h4 ie6!N 1 4 . .txe6! 1 4.'Wxe4 d5+ 1 4 .ib4!? 'll xb4 1 5 .cxb4 Wc7 1 6.ixe6 fxe6 l 7.Wxe4 !:'if4!+ 14 . . . fxe6 l 5 .'Wxe4 \Wxa3 1 6.!!xb7 'Wa6t For example: l 7.!!c7 Ei:ac8 1 8 .!!xcS \Wxc8 Black is spoilt for choice in view of his superior structure.

1 1 ...'ll gS Trying to play for complications. If Black is only interested in a draw, then l 1 . . .'t!t1a5! ? 1 2.ib4 'll xc3! 1 3.ixa5 'll xd l 1 4.ic7 'll b2 1 5 .ib3 ie6 1 6.ixd6 Ei:fc8= should easily achieve it.

12.lll xgS 1 2.ixd6? 'll xf3t 1 3 .gxf3 Wg5 t 1 4.Wh l Ei:d8-+ 1 2 .id5!? is another attempt to keep matters as simple as possible. Only 1 2 . . . ie6!? gives Black some play. Instead, 1 2 . . . 'll xf3t 1 3.ixf3 if5= produces a dead-drawn position.

Chapter 1

Lines without 6.tlidb 5

12 ...WfxgS 13.ixd6 1 3.Wxd6 l"1d8 1 4 .Wc5 ie6!? ( 1 4 . . . ih3 is also playable) 1 5 .ixe6 fxe6 1 6 .Wb5 ( 1 6.'19c4 E1d5 17.Wb3 lll a5 1 8 .Wb4 b600) 16 . . . E1d700

E) 6.lll b3

1 3 . . . ig4 happened in Mukhin - Minasian, Leningrad 1 990. Now, instead of 1 4.Wc l = which led to a very drawish ending, White could have put Black's idea to the test with 1 4.Wb l ! ? 1Cox) . However, after 1 4 . . . if3! 1 5 .ifl l"1fd8! i!5 . . . E1fc8? 1 6 .E1e3!Âą is Cox's idea, but it is much more natural to attack the bishop on d6.) 16.Wxb7 Wg6!+ Black has everything in order and looks slightly better.

14.Wff3 Wff6 15.Wfxf6 gxf6m The ending is unbalanced as both sides have weaknesses, but White's look more real. _.\

practical example from correspondence play continued:

16.E1adl i5 17.id3 ig4 1 8.f3 l3xd6 19.fxg4 gad8 20.l3e3 Wg7 2 1 .l3fl h6 22.h4 b6 23.g3 gf8 24.g2 lll e7 25.l3ef3 lll d5 26.ie4 l3c8 27.ixd5 13xd5 28.13xf6 l3d7 29J%6f3 13c4 30.Wh3 l3e7 3 1 .a313a4 32.l3al e4 33J:!e3 l3e6 34.Wg213g6 35.h313d6 36.l3e2 gc6 37.l3e3 Although Black has the initiative, White eYentually held in Duffy - Dzenis, corr. 20 1 1 .

This is the other classical retreat. The knight on b3 has fewer possibilities than it would have on f3 but, on the other hand, it fortifies the queenside and leaves the f-pawn unblocked. Black should follow the same strategy as in the 6.lll f3 variation, namely developing quickly and trying to inflict weaknesses upon the enemy's pawn formation.

6 ...ib4! This move is in accordance with the strategy j ust outlined. White has three main replies which I would like to consider: El) 7.id2, E2) 7.id3 and E3) 7.ic4. Before proceeding with the examination of these options, there are a few other moves to look at: 7.f3?! d5! 8.ig5 dxe4 9.Wxd8t lll xd8 1 0 .ixf6 gxf6 l l .fxe4 ixc3t 1 2.bxc3 We7!+ and Black had obtained an excellent endgame in Karaklajic - D. Cramling, Reggio Emilio 1 979. White has many pawn weaknesses, and both his minor pieces are inferior to their black counterparts. 7.ig5 This is countered with the usual motif: 7 . . . h6 8.ixf6 ixc3t! 9.bxc3 Wxf6 It seems that White does not have sufficient compensation for the weakening of his queenside. For example:

Minor Lines

1 0.ic4 0-0 l l .�d2 Initiating pressure along the d-file, bur this does not turn out to be dangerous. 1 1 .0-0 d6 1 2 .�d3 ie6+ 1 1 . . .d6! 1 2.l"ld l �g6! 1 3 . f3 ie6 1 4.ixe6 �xe6!? Superior to 1 4 . . . fxe6 1 5 .0-0 l"lad8 1 6.c4 b6 l 7.a4!= 1 5 .�xd6 �c4 1 6.�d3 1 6.�c5 �a4+

play in return for doing so. The move is not as bad as its reputation and has been rather underrated.

7... 0-0! 7 . . . ixc3 8.ixc3 llixe4!? 9.�g4! (the point, hitting g7 and e4) allows White to obtain fully fledged compensation in return for the pawn, e.g. 9 . . . tlig5 1 0.f4!� and the open lines for the bishops mean that White is at least not worse. White should try to catch up in development with:

s.Ad3! 8.tlid5 ixd2t 9.tlixd2 d6 1 0.i.c4 llixd5 l l .�xd5 � g5+ is a dream position for Sveshnikov lovers. 8.�f3 is even worse in view of 8 . . . d5!N 9.exd5 tli d4 1 0.�d l l"le8!+ a

1 6 . . . �a4! 1 7.0-0 l 7.tlic5 �xa2 1 8 .tlixb7 l"lab8 l 9.tlid6 ( l 9.tlic5?? l"lfd8-+) l 9 . . . l"lb2+ 17 . . . l"ladS l 8.�e2 �xa2 l 9.l"ld5 a5!+ With an initiative for Black in view of his strong passed a-pawn.

El) 7._ad2

8 ... d5!? Unfortunately, the strategically well-founded 8 . . .ixc3 9.ixc3 d5 1 0.exd5 llixd5 is met by 1 l .�d2! tli f4 1 2 .ie4! and White was okay in Cilloniz Razzeto - Ciucurel, email 20 1 1 .

This is an attempt by White to avoid weakening his pawn structure, or to get some complicated

9.exd5 llJxd5 10.lLJxdS �xd5 1 1 .0-0 Ae6i Despite the modest nature of Black's space advantage, it is not easy for White to reach equality as his b3-knight is passive.

E2) 7..id3

Chapter 1

Lines without 6.tt:ldb 5

A common move in practice.

7 ... d5 8.exd5 ll:)xd5 White has to make a decision regarding the pressure on c3 . 9 ..id2 Ir rums our that this sensible move is best. 9.0-0?! is a gambit that Black does best to accept.. 9 . . . 't.l r.-xc3 1 O.bxc3 .ixc3 1 l ..ia3!? . ( 1 1 .gb l 0-0 1 2 .°®f3 .ib4+ seems to deny Whne compensation.) 1 1 . . . .ixa l ! 1 2 .'®xal '®c7 1 3 .gb l {intending to meet . . . .ie6 with ctJc5) l 3 . . . b6 14.°®c3 .ib7 1 5 .if5 g6 1 6 . .ih3 f5+ The threat of castling long cannot be averted.

� The more posinona1 9 .J;<,XC 3" 1 O.bxc3 0-0 is also promising for Black.

and here Black should simply play 13 . . . hS+ when White has no attack at all and should start worrying about his weaknesses.

1 1 .'IMlhS After 1 1 .0-0 Black maintains a slight edge with the minimum of risk: 1 1 . . . 0-0 1 2.f4 f5 1 3.fxe5 and now 1 3 . . . ctJxeS!+ looks like the best move, despite surrendering d4 to the b3-knight. A possible continuation is: 1 4 .if4 �c7 1 5 .°® �2 ( 1 5 .l2J d4? �xc3 1 6.ltJbS °®c5t 1 � .c;t> � 1 ibS � ) 1 5 . . . id7 White still has to suffer m view of his miserable pawn structure. 1 1 . .. '1Mfc7 12.0-0 .ie6 Black is intending 1 3 . . . g6 1 4.�h6 0-0-0, so White must hurry to prove that he has some compensation for his ruptured paw� structure while the enemy king is still in the middle.

··

••

1 0.bxc3 .id6!? This aggressive move, eyeing White's kingside, has been the choice of Emmanuel Lasker. However, 1 0 . . . ie7 also looks good. 1 1 .°®h5 g6 1 2.°®e2 ( 1 2.�h6 ifs 1 3 .°®e3 .ig7+) 1 2 . . . 0-0 1 3.h4 was Jobava - Bykhovsky, Budva 2009,

Instead 1 3.ie3 0-0-0 1 4.if5 ( 1 4.l2Jc5? .ixc5 1 5 . .ixc5 !1d5 1 6.ie3 e4-+) 1 4 . . . �d7 1 5 ..ixe6 �xe6+ looks irremediably better for Black. 1 3_me l !? g6 1 4.�h6 ifs 1 5 .°We3 happened in Badolati - Piccoli, corr. 2009, and here the logical l 5 . . . b6N would have been level.

1 3 ... h6 l 4.f4?!

Minor Lines

Rather better is 1 4.�ad 1 acquiescing to a slightly worse position after: 1 4 . . . g6 1 5 .�h4 ie7 l 6.:!J.xe7 �xeTf-

14 ... exf4 1 5.:Sael It seems as though White has achieved something, but Lasker is cool.

18 ... fxe6 1 9.Wi'xg6 hxg5 20.Wi'xe6t ©c7 2 1 .Wi'f'lt ©b8-+ Black will spend some time coordinating his pieces, after which his material advantage will prove decisive.

� E3), 7.i.c4 . 8 .IU.i.�•, � 7 � %�· -•-•w�• , 6 B'ilB .,, ,%� � '; 4 �.'.f1tLS'� ��

� �.,,., ;�

�.-

3•lb� �� . '*'/f', ,�%� 'f(. �� *'� '*'� ;=, , ,%·� 1 /�,

� 5 2 0�0%0 a

1 6.i.fS!? On 1 6.�xe6?!, 16 ... fxe6 1 7.�f7t Wes 1 S .�xe6t �d7 1 9 .�dS iJ.eS-+ is terminal. And now Lasker gives:

16 ... Wfb6t!N 17.@hl g6 1 8.i.xe6t 1 S.�xe6 gxh5 1 9.�e7t Wd8-+

� c

�0%0�0

An approach similar to the 6.'2lf3 variation. This is considered to be the main line here, but the bishop seems a bit loose on c4. It cannot drop back to b3, whilst there are no prospects of a successful attack against f7. Part and parcel of Black's strategy should be to trade this bishop with . . . ie6, which can give him a fine preponderance on the light squares if the weakness-inflicting . . .:!J.xc3 has taken place beforehand.

�

7 ... 0-0 7 . . . lll xe4!? 8.ixf7t ©xf7 9.�dSt ©es 1 0.�xe4 d5 l l .�e2 d4 1 2.a3 ie7 1 3.'2le4 ifS 1 4.f3 �fS 1 5 .0-0 �c8 1 6.id2 �b6 1 7.�d3 a5� led to interesting play in Schubert - Lucki, corr. 2009. 8.0-0 8.f3 lll a5! 9.idS '2lxd5 1 0.\WxdS d6 1 1 .�bS 'l; '2lc6 1 2.id2 a6 1 3 .�e2 ie6 1 4.'2ld5 ixd5 1 5 .exdS · ixd2t 1 6.�xd2 lll eTf- was better for Black in Sadikovic - Kostic, Valjevo 20 1 0. S.ig5 h6 9.ih4 d6 1 0 .�f3 ie6+ is rightly considered by Sveshnikov as slightly better for Black.

Chapter 1

Lines without 6.tll db5

More accurate is: 8 .�d3 And here I prefer: 8 . . . d6! On 8 . . . d5!?, I found that 9.ixd5! l0xd5 1 0.exd5 l0e7 eventually leads to a forced draw after best play. 9.id2 9.0-0 ixc3 1 O.bxc3 with a direct transposition to the main line. 9 . . . ie6 1 0.0-0 E!c8!? Leading to fine chances for Black in a complicated position. 1 0 . . . ixc3 1 1 .ixc3 ixc4 1 2.�xc4 d5 1 3 .exd5 �xd5= 1 1 .:1'1ad l 1 1 .i:!fe l l0d4 1 2.ixe6 fxe6+!

1 0.�d3 ie6 This position can be considered as rather unsatisfactory for White. Some practical examples follow: 1 l .ixe6!? 1 1 .ia3 ixc4 1 2.�xc4 �c7 and Black has the easier game. 1 1 .i:!d l ixc4 1 2.�xc4 E!c8 1 3.�d3 l0a5! and again Black is comfortable. 1 1 . . . fxe6 1 2 .�a3 This can be met with the customary: 1 2 . . . E!f7! 1 3.c4! 1 3 .ixd6?? E!d7-+ 1 3 .�xd6?! �xd6 1 4.ixd6 l0xe4+ 1 3 . . . E!d7 1 3 . . . d5= 1 4 .E!ad l b6! 1 5 .E!d2 �e8 1 6 .E!fd l

8 ..Axc3 9.bxc3 d6! With this move Black shows that he is ;olely intent on developing his bishop to e6, -:hallenging control of the weakened light squares :n che white camp. .

·1 !llxe4 1 0 .ia3 d6 is not out of the question, :-uc after 1 1 .�e l ! White has real compensation.

1 6 . . . aS!?N 16 ... E!ad8 1 7.�e2 �e7 happened in Forgach - Luther, Zwesten 1 999, but now instead of weakening himself with 1 8 .f4?! l0e8, White could have hung around with l 8.E!d3N h6 1 9 .f3 with the idea 1 9 . . . aS 20.�f2!. 1 7.ixd6 a4 1 8 .lOc l E!xd6! 1 9.�xd6 l0xe4 20.�c7 l0xd2 2 1 .E!xd2 �c8 22.E!d7 22.�d6 l0a5 22 . . .�xc7 23.E!xc7 E!dS! An awkward move for White to meet.

...

IO.i.a3 This can be mer with an interesting and .:ncested move, but I will consider another a.riacion first.

·,

10 .ie6!?N 1 1 .�xe6 fxe6 White now has the following choices: ••.

12Jl:el!? This keeps the most pressure on Black by forcing the knight retreat to e8.

Minor Lines

26 1 2.\Wxd6 Wxd6 1 3.ixd6 md8+

1 2.ixd6 Elf7 1 3 .ib4 ( 1 3 .tll c 5 ? tll e8!+) 1 3 . . . \Wxd l 1 4.l"\axd l a5 1 5 .ia3 tll xe400

1 5 'IMfxaS 16.i.xd6 1 6.\Wg4 .B:f6 1 7.ixd6 tll xd6 1 8.Elxd6 Wxc3 1 9 . .B:ed l Wxc2 20.l"\d8t Elxd8 2 1 .Elxd8t @f7 22.Wh5t l"lg6 23.1Wf3t E:f6= •••

16 lll xd6 17.:gxd6 '1Mfxc3 18.gxe6 '1Mfxc2= •••

Conclusion

12 lll eB l 3.'1Mfe2 :Ek8!? 1 3 . . . Wc7 1 4.l"\ad l .B:d8 1 5 .\Wc4 .B:f600 •••

1 5 .ib4!? tll x b3! 1 6.cxb3 a5 1 7.ia3 l"lxc3 1 8 .l"lcl !'!xcl 1 9.Elxc l Wb6 20 . .B:d l l"\f7 2 1 .h3 h6 22 . .B:d2 .B:d7 23 .\Wg4 tll c700

In this chapter we have examined lines where White refrains from the customary 6.tll db5 . These lines are relatively harmless, as they fail to exploit the temporary weakness of the d6-square to gain time. 6.tll de2 is perhaps the most well-founded positional try, as it fortifies the c3-knight in anticipation of 6 . . . ib4. This remains a good move for Black however, as the threat of taking on e4 gains time and forces concessions. After 7.a3 ia5 White's should play 8.ig5!?, when the counter-pin enables him to fight for d5 and he should be able to maintain equaliry. 6.tll f5 allows the freeing 6 . . . d5 7.exd5 ixf5 8.dxc6 bxc6 when Black, in spite of having three pawn islands, is at least equal due to the great freedom of movement enjoyed by his pieces. Then 9.Wf3 Wd7! 1 0.ig5 e4 1 1 . '1Mf e2 ie7 1 2.l"\d 1 is regarded as the main line, and Black should be fine after either 1 2 . . . \Wb7 or 1 2 . . . \We6!?. 6.tll xc6 bxc6 fortifies Black's centre and, even after the best continuation 7.ic4, Black should have no problems by adopting quick development. 7 . . . ib4!? 8.0-0 0-0 9.ig5 h6 1 0.ih4 g5 1 L�g3 Ele8 1 2 . .B:e l d6 1 3.1lh'd3 ie6 is the recommended course, when Black is well developed and the kingside weaknesses can't be exploited. Finally, both 6.tll f3 and 6.tll b3 should be answered with the customary 6 . . . ib4!, leading to positions with excellent long-term chances for Black as White will most likely be saddled with doubled c-pawns.

Minor Lines a

7th Move Alternatives Variation Index 1 .e4 c5 2.tll f3 tll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tll xd4 tll f6 5.tll c3 e5 6.tll db5 6 ... d6 A) 7.tll a3 B) 7..ie3 a6 8.tll a3 :B:b8!? 9.tll d5 tll xd5 1 0.exd5 tll e7 B l ) l l .c3 B2) 1 1 ..ic4 B3) l l .c4 B4) 1 1 .b4!? C) 7.a4 a6 8.tll a3 .ig4! Cl) 9 ..ie2 C2) 9.f3 .ie6 C2 1) 1 0 ..ie3?! C22) 10.tll c4!? C23) 1 0 ..ig5 .ie7 C23 1) l 1 ..ic4 C232) l 1 .tll c4 C24) 1 0 ..ic4 :B:c8 C24 1) l 1 .tll d5 C242) 1 1 .0-0

28 29 29 29 30 31 32 32 34 34 35 35 36 36 37 37 38

Minor Lines

1 .e4 c5 2.lll £3 lll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lll xd4 ll:if6 s.lll c3 e5 6.lll db5 d6 In this chapter we shall examine three lesser known tries by White: A) 7.lll a3 , B) 7.ie3 and C) 7.a4. A) 7.lll a3 The idea of this move is evident. White tries to avoid his knight being cramped on a3 after a subsequent . . . a6 and . . . b5, which happens in the main lines of the Sveshnikov. However, the time lost in development allows Black to equalize effortlessly.

7 ...�e7! Black does best to ignore the knight and speed up his development. 8.ig5 The only way to fight for control of the d5square. 8.lll c4 is met by 8 . . . li:lxe4! 9.lll xe4 d5 and Black regains his piece with good central control. For example, 1 0 .li:Jc3 dxc4 l l .Wi'xd8t ixd8 1 2.ixc4 li:lb4!+ and defending c2 is already awkward for White.

8 ... lll xe4!? Black embarks on this surprising tactic anyway! Logical alternatives like 8 . . . 0-0 and 8 . . . ig4 are also perfectly okay. 9.lll xe4 9.ixe7 lll xc3 1 0.ixd8 li:lxd l 1 1 .E:xd l Wxd8 1 2 .lll b5 We7 1 3 .lll xd6 ie6+ is slightly becrer for Black in view of his superior development. 9 ...ixg5 10.lll xd6t 1 0 .lll xg5 Wi'xg5 l l .Wi'xd6 a6! ? 1 2 .lll c4 ie6 l 3.Wi'c5 0-0-0 l 4.li:le3 Wc7 l 5 .id3 f5!t was good for Black in Gusev - Timoshenko, Odessa 1 975. 10... @e7 u .lll ac4 ie6!+± Black's development guarantees councer-chances.

excellent

1 2.°IW£3!? An idea employed at the highest level by D. Mastrovasilis. 1 2.lll xb7?! Wi'xd l t 1 3 .E:xd l li:l d4 1 4.li:la3 E:ab8+ looks bad for White.

/, 6 %� lrn'£�- - - , ,m �� ' 0v�mr� �� ef.I�-� 45 �� ji �� !��, � 231 ��, W t!:ffi fJ/it!:ffi a 8 8 w � � "� �=�-� s i.• � �� ,,_S , _, .,

__ ,,

,,,,,

12 ...id2t! Not so convincing is: 1 2 . . . li:ld4 1 3 .Wi'xb7t '&d7 1 4.Wi'xd7t! Wxd7 1 5 .W d l !N ( 1 5 .id3 ie7 16.c3 ixd6 1 7.lll xd6 Wxd6 1 8 .cxd4 exd4 1 9 .Wd2 id5 20.f3 Y2-Y2 was a natural conclusion in D. Mastrovasilis - Nedev, Heraklion 2007, as Black has reached full equality.) l 5 . . . ie7 1 6.li:le4 lll c6 1 7.c3 E:hd8 1 8 .Wc2 f5 1 9.E:dl t;!; 1 2 . . . Wf8 looks viable at first sight, but after 1 3 .lll x b7! ( 1 3.c3 Wi'e7+± with the idea 1 4.h4 ih6 1 5 .Wh5 E:d8 1 6.E:d l if4 1 7 .g3 g6 1 8.Wi'e2 ih6 1 9.ig2 f5 !? 20.ixc6 bxc6 2 1 .°1Wxe5 ig7 22.Wi'e3 id5�) 1 3 . . . li:Jd4 1 4.li:lxd8 li:lxf3t 1 5 .gxf3 E:xd8 1 6.E:d l ! Black's compensation for the pawn is far from clear.

13.Wxd2!? 1 3 .lll xd2 Wi'xd6 1 4.0-0-0 E:hd8 1 5 .ic4 Wf8 1 6.li:Je4 \We7 1 7.ixe6 Wxe6 1 8.Wb l Wg8= with a totally equal position. 13 ...ixc4 14.ixc4 '1Wxd6t 1 5.©cl \Wh6t!N 16.@bl \Wf6 17.°1Wa3t l 7.Wi'xf6t gxf6!?+± is an interesting ending with chances for both sides, bur I guess that the more conventional 1 7 . . . Wxf6= would also do.

Chapter 2

7th Move Alternatives

A slow move. Its only idea is to guard against the check on a5, netting Black the d5-pawn.

18.'Wxd6t Wxd6 19.c3 E\!hd8 20.Wc2 ©e7 2 1 .E\!hel B!ac8= We have reached an ending where Black should maintain the balance rather easily.

1 1 ...lb5 12.id2 ie7 1 3.g3 1 3 .id3 0-0 1 4 . 0-0 llih4! 1 5 .�e l ?! ( 1 5 .g3 li:l g6 1 6.h4 f5 1 7.h5 llih8 1 8 .f4 liJ f7+ would have been the lesser evil) 1 5 .. .f5 1 6.ifl id7 l 7.tlic2 happened in Szalanczy - Ujj , Hungary 20 1 2, and at this point, 1 7 .. .f4!N � intending manoeuvres such as . . . �e8-g6 or . . . �f5-g5 would have rendered White's situation critical.

B) 7.ie3 \\"irh this move White strives for play on the queenside.

-... a6 8.lba3 �b8!? _\ fine prophylactic move, controlling b6 :X:forehand so as to make it difficult for the a3,;night to re-enter the game.

13 ... 0-0 14.ig2 id7 15.0-0 g6! 1 6.B!el hS!t Black had an excellent position in Perenyi Kosten, Budapest 1 988. White's problem is that his queenside play is yet to come, while Black can undertake activity by . . . h5-h4xg3 , followed by . . . 'it>g7 and . . . �h8, with attacking chances down the h-file. B2) 1 1 .ic4

9.� dS lll xdS 1 0.exdS lb e7 Black has no significant weaknesses on the ,.:.;ngside, and his prospects on this flank should :: o r be underestimated. Let us examine how play ::i aY continue after four of White's responses: 8 1 ) l l .c3, B2) 1 1 .i.c4, B3) 1 1 .c4 or B4) I I .b4!?.

Awkward-looking. White intends to castle, followed by �fl -e l and ifl , restoring the coordination of his pieces to a certain extent. However, this idea is predictable and Black can easily formulate a good answer. My preference would be:

Bl) 1 1 .c3 1 1 ...lbg6!? 12.0-0 ie7 13.�d2!? After 1 3.�e l 0-0 1 4.ifl , the typical 14 .. .f5!

Minor Lines

I 5 .id2! (l 5 . f3?! ih4!+ underlines that White has gone completely astray) 1 5 . . . e4!N 1 6.'Lic4 b5 l 7.'Lia5 'Lie5+ is slighrly better for Black.

1 8 ...ixfltN 1 9.B:xfl aS!? Taking the b4-square away from the white queen helps Black. .. attack on che kingside!

13 ... 0-0 14.f3 f5 l 4 . . . 'Li f4!? is also worthy of consideration.

This point would be nicely illustrated in the line: 1 9 . . . b5 20.'Lia5 Wih4?! 2 1 .'Lic6 i''ffS 22.1Mi'b4! with the idea 22 . . . l'!h5 23.g4!±.

1 5 ..ie2 f4 1 5 . . . id7!? 1 6.'Lic4 b5 1 7.'Lia5 Wic700 16.ia7!? 1 6.if2 ih4 1 7.'Lic4 ixf2t 1 8 .l'!xf2 'Li e7 1 9.Wib4 l'!f6+ with the idea 20.'Li b6?!

20.b4!? a4!i White's queenside counter-offensive has been slowed down, a factor which gives Black's attack on the ocher wing good chances of success. B3) 1 1 .c4

16 ... B:as 17.ifl Planning an eventual c4-c5 advance, but it is again rather slow and also cakes away the c4square from the a3-knighc.

1 1 .. . .!li fS 12 ..id2 ie7 13.id3! 1 3 .�e2 0-0 1 4.'Lic2 l'!eS 1 5 .0-0 if6 1 6.ic3 e4 1 7.Wid2 ig5 1 8 .Wie l 'Lih4 1 9.\Mi'd l id7� gave Black good chances in Nagy - Grimm, Heviz 20 1 3 . 13 ... 0-0 14.0-0 My recommendation here is: 14 ... .!lih4!? This looks best, but it is not the only move for Black.

Chapter 2

7th Move Alternatives

l 4 . . . g6 fortifies the position of the f5-knight and reserves several options, such as the space-gaining . . . h5 or even . . . lll g7 planning .. .f5 .

1 5.b4 1 5 .�hl f5 1 6.f4?! lll g6+ looks promising for Black. 1 5 ... 5 1 6.£3! f4!N 17 ..iel l 7.E1c l b6 gives Black a pleasant game. 17 ... .!Z\ 5 1 8 . .if2 .ih4 1 9.c5 1 9.ii.xf5 ii.xf2t 20.E1xf2

1 3 .g3?! is weak in view of 1 3 . . . h5!t. l 3.ii.d3 0-0 14.0-0 is another possibility, coying with the ideas lll c4 or c2-c4. Then 1 4 . . . ii.d7 1 5 .lll c4 ii.f6 1 6.E1b l E1e8 1 7.E1e l g6! ? ( l 7 . . . \Wc700) 1 8.lll a5 lll e7 l 9.c4 ilg7+± produces a highly unclear position.

;;� ..t·� · �

;;�

tjifJi •t m � � 6 i� , , , /, �-, , , Y, �� - - %�f� �. � 5 � �� m��8:, ��- ,,%�AJl)m�� 8

"" "� �� ""

�� -0 �®'0 �®-� 23 8 8 � 'ef[j 8 'ef[J,, 1 ,� �.v=�•� a

19 ....ixflt 20.:Sxf2 .!Zl e3+± The strongly entrenched knight on e3 secures counterplay for Black in a rather unclear position. B4) 1 1 .b4!? White plans co bring his knight into play via c4 tollowed by a2-a4-a5 . However, an immediate iump onto that square is impossible due co . . . b5, so White secures an outpost on a5 before anything else.

1 1 .. . .!Z\5 1 2.Ad2 .ie7 l 2 . . . \Wh4!? is an interesting alternative. 13 . .!Z\c4 Bringing the knight into play immediately has :ieen the trademark of the system's inventor Emil Szalanczy.

13 ... 0-0 14.a4 After 1 4.id3 the plan based on 1 4 . . . lll h 4! is good, because White has lost the possibility to play c2-c4 and opt for c4-c5 later on, a fact that renders his counterplay rather slow and artificial. Play continues 1 5 .0-0 f5 1 6.f4 lll g6!, and now the dilemma posed by the pressure on f4 is a difficult one co solve. The game Szalanczy - P. Horvath, Hungary 1 993, continued 1 7 .g3 ( 1 7.fxe5 dxe5+) 1 7 . . . exf4 1 8.gxf4 if6 1 9.E1b l b5! 20.lll a5 '1Wb6t 2 1 .�hl \Wd4!+ and White's situation was already critical. 14 ...i.g5 White has lost time with his queenside operations, which means that his king is still in the centre. Thus the text is a good idea, trying to gain access to the white camp. 1 5.a5 e4! 1 6.:Sa3 i.d7!Ni Black has an excellent game. For example: 17.i.e2 l 7.lll b 6? e3!+

Minor Lines

disharmony in the placement of the enemy pieces, or force favourable exchanges that will make . . . d5 easier. If White reacts with 9.f3, then the bishop retreats to e6 and the weakening of e3 can be of some significance, as we will see below. This, along with 9 .ie2, is the response we shall examine in most detail: Cl) 9 ..ie2 and C2) 9.f3.

17 ... .ib5 1 8.0-0 .ixc4 1 9 ..ixc4 ge8 Ir is clear than Black's minor pieces, in combination with the strong e4-pawn, are quite active. C) 7.a4 With chis move, White signals his intention to set up a bind by means of .ig5 and llib5-a3-c4. Since Black's main plan of cramping the b5knight by ... a6 and ... b5 has been prevented, he must seek counterplay in the centre.

7... a6 8.llia3

There is one more try for White char we should briefly cover: 9.�d2 Black should exploit the blocking of the c l bishop and threaten to push his backward d-pawn. 9 . . . ie6! White now has: 1 0.ic4 This is an attempt to prevent . . . d5 but it has an artificial look. Instead, 1 0.CLJc4 lli b4 l l .ie2 (l l .a5?! !'lc8 1 2.llib6? CLJxe4!-+) l l . . .!'lc8 1 2.llie3 allows Black to equalize immediately with 1 2 . . . d5 = . H e should d o so, as 1 2 . . . �c7 1 3 .0-0 fl.e7 1 4.a5!? �c5 1 5 .E!:a400 could be a bit shaky.

.i. � � ,, , , -��%jef��

%%,� /,� 7 ��-W.'0 �%�,�� 6 i �41Jf�.t� � �� , , ,/,.,_, ;�� 5 4 !� ,�� m��%1'0 ��!@''0. 8

"'"

,,,

r� cS � r� cS rlj d' , /,-,, , ,/,m , /,� ,�

,, ' 'ri/�' , ' �"'"' · a

1 0 . . . CLJxe4!N 1 O . . . !'lc8!? is also satisfactory. l 1 .llixe4 d5 1 2.CLJg5 fi.b4! 1 3.d ixa3 1 4.CLJxe6 fxe6 1 5 .ixd5 exd5 1 6.!'lxa3 0-0 17.0-000 Black is at least equal in view of his good knight, pawn centre and White's displaced rook on a3. Cl) 9 ..ie2 Allowing Black to carry out his idea smoothly.

Chapter 2

7th Move Alternatives

9 ....ixe2 10.%Vxe2

1 3 . . . 'lid4!? 1 4.'&d3 l'!d8 is at least equal for Black too. 1 4 .ie3 0-0 Not a simple draw for White, as the position is slightly unbalanced and Black controls more space.

1 I. .!ll d4! 12.%Vd3 1 2 . .ixf6?! 'lixe2 1 3.ixd8 'lixc3 1 4.ic7 'lixa4 1 5 .exd5 @d7 1 6.ixe5 Eie8 1 7.0-0 i"lxe5 1 8 .'li c4 i"lxd5 1 9.l'!xa4 ic5+ is a forced line given by Kolev and Nedev. .•

I I ..ig5 This has been the most popular choice, fighting for the light squares. 1 1 .0-0 has been the subject of correspondence chess, bur I cannot believe that this is anything more than an equalizing attempt by White. After l I . . .d4 l Uld l ixa3 1 3 .l:ha3 '&d6 1 4 .ig5 '&e6! 1 5 .'lia2 0-0 1 6. 'li c l 'li e8 1 7.Eig3 Locio - Fonio, corr. 20 1 1 , I prefer I 7 .. .f6N l 8 . .id2 'li d6+ when only Black can be better in my opinion. White does not have a real attack and his light squares are a bit weak, something that the black knights may exploit at a later stage. .-\lternatively: l l .exd5 'lixd5 1 2.'lixd5 1 2.0-0 'lixc3 1 3 .bxc3 ic5 1 4.Eib l '&e7 1 5 .'li c4 0-0 1 6 .ie3 happened in Panarin Simonian, Voronezh 20 1 0, and here the most clear-cut is 1 6 . . . ixe3N l 7.'lixe3 ( I 7.'&xe3 Eiad8 is also at least equal for Black) l 7 . . . Eiad8 1 8.c4 f5! 1 9.'lid5 '&f7 with excellent kingside play, as shown by the further moves 20.Eifd l e4 2 1 .°'&e3 Eid? 22.Eid2 'li e5 23.°'&c3 l'!e8t 12 . . . '&xd5 1 3.0-0 ie7

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

12 ....ih4! Black is winning the battle in the centre as the following variations show: 1 3.0-0! It is best to lead the king to safety as quickly as possible. 1 3 .exd5 This should be answered by: 1 3 . . . l"lc8! White now has a difficult choice to make. 1 4.@fl !? The best attempt. 1 4 . .!ll ab l '&xd5 1 5 .0-0 '&c4+ is a safe plus for Black. 1 4.ixf6 '&xf6 1 5 .tliab l ( 1 5 .0-0?! allows the typical trick: 1 5 . . . ixc3 1 6.bxc3 l"lxc3!+) 1 5 . . . '&g5 ! 1 6.0-0 '&g6! l 7.'&xg6 hxg6 1 8 .i"lcl b6!� leaves White in a precarious state, as he cannot untangle on the queenside.

Minor Lines

20 ... i:'!:adS 2 1 .Vfig4 Vfid7 22.Vfie4 Vffe7 With a repetition of moves. C2) 9.8 The most natural move and, apparently, the most testing one.

1 4 . . . �c7 14 . . . ixa3!? 1 5 .l"1xa3 �b6� 1 5 .ixf6 gxf6 1 6.d6 1 6.CiJe4 f5 ! 17.tiJf6t me? 1 8.tiJh5 ixa3 1 9.�xa3t md8!+ 16 . . . �xd6 1 7.CiJe4 �e6 1 8.c3 CiJb3 1 9.cxb4 Ei:d8! 20.liJxf6t me? 2 l .tiJd5t �xd5 22.�xd5 Elxd5 23.Ei:e l + White faces an uphill struggle to secure a draw.

s � � � •m �� m1 ·� . .,/,_,,�--.% 6 m m m "W m "Cll � "//, �� ll "//, �%'llll 3 �. . � - 8 2 wtf ;.. ..3�·ti0. ;B/'�m1-:� .. J �. . . a ��·0/, � 1 /� mv il�M 7

Tml•m• "m !m f ,

/. .

9 ...ie6 Black has provoked the weakening with f2-f3 and is ready to break free in the centre. At this point White may try to stop Black's intended central advance or ignore it. We shall examine four options: C2 1) I O.ie3?!, C22) 10.lll c4!?, C23) 1 0 ..igS and C24) IO.ic4. C2 1) I O.ie3?! This is not so good, due to:

10 ... lll b4! l 1 .lll c4 d5! Black already enjoys the better game.

17.!'i:ab l Vff e7 18.lll c4 0-0= With an equal game. White's weak pawns are compensated for by his superior pieces. 19.i:'ffel i:'!:fe8 20.lll e3 The players agreed a draw in Humphreys B. Jones, corr. 2008, a likely conclusion being:

12.ih6 1 2 .CiJxe5 ?? d4! 1 3 .ixd4 �xd4! 1 4.�xd4 liJxc2t l 5 .mf2 liJxd4-+ is a typical trick. 1 2.tiJb6? d4 1 3 .liJxa8 �xa8 1 4 .id2 dxc3 l 5.ixc3 �c8-+ is also out of the question.

Chapter 2

7th Move Alternatives

12 ...'Wxf6!N 13.CLJb6 �cs 14.aS 1 4.lll bd5 ? ixd5 1 5 .exd5 1.Mfg6!+ is almost winning for Black. 14 ... dS! A human sacrifice! 1 5.exdS 1 5 .lll bxd5 i.xd5 1 6.exd5 ( 1 6.lll x d5 lll xd5 1 7.exd5 'Wh4t 1 8.g3 Wb4t 1 9 .'itif2 Wxb2+) 1 6 . . . Wg6!� 15 ... .if5 16.id3 CLJxd3t 17.cxd3

13 ... CLJ bxdS 14.CLJxdS CLJxdS 15.ifl �ds+ White was in dire straits in Mueller - Babula, Bundesliga 1 998, and a few subsequent games. C22) 10.ltJc4!?

19 ...'We3t 1 9 . . . ib4!?� is playing for all three results! 20.'We2 'Wcl t 2 1 .'Wdl 2 1 .lll d l ? .�.b4t 22.'itifl 0-0+ 2 1 . ..'We3t= Once again, the best reply is:

10 ... ltJb4! 1 1 .i.gS I 1 .ie3?! d5! is the same as in variation C2 1 . 1 1 ...:gcs 12.ixf6!? 1 2 .lll e 3 ie7+, intending ... 1.Mfb6 followed by . . . h6, poses Black no problems.

C23) 1 0 ..igS Another serious move, with the aim of controlling and eventually conquering d5. However, after:

1 0 ...ie? Both moves at White's disposal can be countered efficiently: C23 1) 1 1 .ic4 and C232) 1 1 .CLJc4.

Minor Lines

C23 1) 1 1 ..ic4

14.0-0 h5!N 1 5.'it>hl h4 Now the white king is a bit cramped.

Whire is crying ro intensify his control over d5. Now Black should rake advantage of rhe weakening emailed by f2-f3 wirh an accurate move:

1 6.c3 !!c8 17.'Wd3 tt::l e7 18.tt::l xe7t! 1 8 .!:'1.fd l ?! tl'i g6! 1 9 .b4 ixd5 20.Vfffx d5 ie3!�

1 1 ...0-0! l l . . .Vfff b 6!? has been suggested by Kolev and Nedev, bur I am nor convinced by ir. The disadvantage of rhe early queen sortie is that White can continue with ixf6 followed by tl'id5, when it is certain that he will get annoying compensation on the light squares and b-file after the forced . . . Vfffxb2. After 1 2.ixf6! ixf6 1 3.tl'id5! ixd5 1 4.ixd5 Vfffx b2 1 5 .tl'ic4!? Vfff b 4t 1 6.Vfff d 2! I was unable to find a route to full equality for Black.

1 9.ixe6 Vfff xe6 20.tl'ic2?! h3! gives Black good chances as 2 1 .g3?! 'Wb3! 22.l:!fb l d5! 23.exd5 l:!fd8 allows him to break through dangerously in the centre, exposing the weaknesses around the enemy king.

12 ..ixf6! This is critical. 1 2.ixe6?! fxe6 allows Black to control the cenrre and easily obtain the better game, for example: 1 3. tl'i c4 tl'i d4 1 4.a5 ll'i d7 1 5 .ixe7 Vfffxe7 1 6.0-0 lfac8 1 7.b3 ( 1 7.tl'ie3? Vfff g 5!-+)

l 7 . . . b5! 1 8 .axb6 tl'ixb6 1 9 .Vfff d 3 tl'ixc4 20.bxc4 �c6+

12 ....ixf6 13.tll d5 Ag5 1 3 . . . ih4t 1 4 .g3 ig5 1 5 .0-0 ©h8 1 6.©g2 f5 l 7.exf5 ixf5 1 8 .id3 ie6 1 9 .ie4 was unclear in Vescovi - Shabalov, Elbow Beach 200 1 .

1 8 ...'Wxe7 1 9.gfdl 1 9.b4? ixc4 20.tl'ixc4 Vfff c7+ 1 9.a5 l:!fd8�

19 .. J'3fd8 20 ..ixe6 20.id5 ixd5 2 1 .'Wxd5 gc5 22.Vfff b 3 h3! 23.g3 Vfff c 7!t 20 ...'Wxe6 2 1 .'Wd5 h3!?m Black has excellent counterplay in whar should be a dynamically balanced position. C232) 1 1 .llJc4 Inching closer to the centre, this move threatens ixf6.

Chapter 2

7th Move Alternatives

12.i.xf6 After 1 2.exd5 lll xd5 1 3.i.xe7 ( 1 3 .lll x d5 ixg5 1 4 . liJ db6 E:b8+) 1 3 . . . lt:l cxe7 1 4.lt:Jxe5 ( 1 4.lt:Jxd5 lll x d5 1 5 .lll xe5 ?! Wh4t 1 6.g3 1Mi'b4t+) 14 . . . Wb8! Black has clearly taken over the initiative. 12 ... dxc4 1 3.1Mi'xd8t 1 3.ixg7 E:g8 14.�h6?! lt:J d4 1 5 .ie3 ( 1 5 .Wd2 ih4t! 1 6.c.!/dl Wf6+) 1 5 . . . Wb6!+ allows Black an almost winning advantage.

This move aims, in conjunction with . . . tt:J b4, to keep the a3-knight out of play. 1 0 . . . Wa5! ? is consideration.

alternative

worthy

Here we reach another split: C241) 1 1 .liJ dS and C242) 1 1 .0-0. l l .ig5!? is best met with the traditional l l . . .ie7! 1 2.ixf6 ( 1 2.0-0 0-0+) 1 2 . . . ixf6 1 3.tt:Jd5 ig5 1 4 . 0-0

13 ... E:xdS 14.i.xg7 gg8 15.i.h6 i.c5 1 5 . . . lt:J d4 1 6.0-0-0 b5t is also possible. 8

7 6

4 3

l6.i.d2 1 6.tt:Jd5 ixd5 1 7.exd5 E:xd5 1 8 .E:d l ( 1 8 .ixc4? �d6) 1 8 . . . E:xd l t 1 9 .c.!/xd l b5t permits Black to obtain lasting pressure without any material investment.

1 4 . . . h5!N 1 5 .c3 ( 1 5 . f4 exf4 16.tt:Jxf4 ixf4 1 7.E:xf4 lll e5 1 8.ixe6 Wb6t 1 9 .h l fxe6+ is also excellent for Black, e.g. 20.b3! Wc5 ! 2 1 .lll c4 tt:Jxc4 22.bxc4 E:f8!) 1 5 . . . 0-0 1 6.1Mi'd3 h4� with fine counterplay, in the spirit of variation C23 l , examined above.

C241) 1 1 .liJ dS

16 ... .iflt 17.c.!/e2 .ih41iii White's uncoordinated pieces give Black .::xcellent compensation for the sacrificed pawn. C24) 10.i.c4 \Vith this bishop move White prevents Black rrom carrying out . . . d5, but the disadvantage is ::hat the a3-knight cannot re-enter play.

10 ... E:cS a

Minor Lines

1 1 . .. ixdS 12.ixdS 1 2.exd5 tiJe7 1 3 .c3 g6+ is fantastic for Black, who has attacking potential on the kingside. 12 ... lll xdS 13.Wl'xdS 1 3.exd5 1Mfa5t 14.1Mfd2 tiJ b4+ l3 ...Wl'h4t! 14.g3 1 4.©fl il.e7 1 5 .ie3 0-0 1 6.E1dl ©h8 1 7.if2 i&h51 gives White a serious headache. 14 ...V;l/h3 15.id2 1 5 .<±if2 tiJb4 1 6.�b3 d5 1 7.exd5 1Mff5 1 8.g4 i&g6� gives Black tremendous compensation for the sacrificed pawn. 1 5 ... lll d4!N 1 5 . . . ie7 1 6.0-0-0 0-0 1 7.ic3 was more pleasant for White in Teske - Piscopo, Pardubice 2009.

C242) 1 1 .0-0 The final variation of this chapter allows me to present an interesting novelty found during my home analysis.

1 1 . .. lll b4! The idea is to disturb White's plan of occupying d5 with a piece. 12.lll ds 1 2.ixe6 fxe6 presents Black with no problems; the d5-square is conveniently covered, and the a3-knight is out of play. 1 2 .ib3 !xb3 1 3.cxb3 d5 1 4.exd5 tiJ fxd5 1 5 .1Mfe2 ic5t 1 6.c±ih l id4+ is slightly better for Black, who essentially has an extra pawn on the kingside. 1 2.We2 �c7 1 3.b3 d5! 1 4.exd5 tiJbxd5 1 5 .tiJxd5 lll xd5 1 6 .ib2 il.c5 t 1 7.©h l 0-0! 1 8 .ixe5 1Mf e7!� offers Black fantastic compensation for a mere pawn.

16.0-0-0 1 6. c±if2?? i&h5-+ 1 6 ...V;l/d? This looks slightly better for Black. A possible, albeit not forced, continuation is:

8 7 6 5

� ��B<S>m ,� ":mef��,

�d�j �5 Wdfj�.qi � • • �� r ��% � � �� ,� � , )}!%�� ®" 4

· · · · ··

2 - - l�i� �W# ��ffJ �°if-::m % , �

4 3

2 1

17.©bl :Sc5 1 8.Wl'a2 V;l/xa4 19.b3 Wl'd7 20.ib4 �c6 21 .f4 ie7 22.c3 a5! 23.ixaS :Sa6-t White's king will suffer.

12 ... :Sxc4!?N An interesting exchange sacrifice, yielding a pawn and bishop pair in return. This move has never been tried in practice. The usual line has been 1 2 . . . tiJ bxd5 1 3.exd5 ( 1 3 .ixd5?! tiJxd5 14.exd5 id7 1 5 .c4 Wb6t

Chapter 2

7th Move Alternatives

1 6.'it>h l ie7 1 7.b3 0-0 1 8 .id2 f5 favoured Black in A. Ivanov - Parligras, Bled 2002) 1 3 . . . id7 with level chances. ( 1 3 . . . MS!?, keeping d7 in reserve for the knight, might be an improvement although Black has ro take into account the consequences of l 4.f4!?00 - battling for control of the e3- and d4-squares by crying co provoke . . . e4.)

13.tt:lxc4 tt:l fxd5 14.exd5 tt:lxd5 In chis position Black has definite compensation for the exchange, as the following sample variations show. But he must play accurately. 15.b3 Protecting the c4-knighc will allow White co carry out f3-f4, breaking up Black's impressive central pawn front. 1 5 .Cll e3 Cll xe3 1 6.ixe3 ie7 1 7.f4 �d7 1 8 .b3 0-0 is approximately equal. If 1 9 .c4, then:

17 ..ixf4 0-0 18.Wff3 1 8 .a5 Cll xf4 1 9.Elxf4 d5 20.Cll e3 �c7+± gives Black excellent counterplay. 1 8 .�d2 b5 1 9.axb5 axb5 20.Cll e3 �b6 2 1 .'it>hl Cll xf4 22.gxf4 'fff c500

1 8 ...Wf c7! 19.l;f2 1 9.gad l b5 20.axb5 axb5 2 1 .Cll e3 Cll xe3 22.�xe3 �xc2 23.ixd6 ixd6 24.gxd6 Wxb3=

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

19 ...Wfc5! 1 9 . . . b5!? 20.axb5 axb5 2 1 .Cll e3 if6 22.Eldl Cll xf4 23.Wxf4 ie5 24.Wf3 (24.Wb4 Wc600) 24 . . . 'fff c5 25 .gfd200 g6 is also excellent for Black. 20.l;el b5 2 1 .axb5 axb5 22.tll e3 tt:lxf4 23.Wfxf4 .ig5f! a

. . exf4! 20.gxf4 d5 2 1 .c5 if5 22.�d2 ges+± �Yes Black enough counterplay. .

: 5 .�e2 �c7! 1 6.b3 ie7 l 7.f4 exf4 ( l 7 . . .f6!? : 8.f5 if700) 1 8.ixf4 0-0+± is similar to the main ..:ne.

15 .�e7 1 6.f4 exf4 1 6 . . .f6 1 7.gf3!? ( 1 7.f5 if7 1 8.�g4 g5!00) : -. . . 'fff c7 ( 1 7 . . . e4 1 8 .gg3) 1 8 .gd3 �c6 1 9 .'fff f3 :'-D 20.f5 if7 2 l .id2:j; looks slightly awkward :·0r Black in spice of his impressive pawn cluster. ..

Conclusion

In chis chapter we have dealc with White's 7th move alternatives co the most obvious continuations 7.Cll d5 and 7.ig5 . These are 7.Cll a3, 7.ie3, and 7.a4 . 7.Cll a3 is rather artificial, and by using the liquidating tactical sequence 7 . . . ie7! 8.ig5 Cll xe4!? Black solves his opening problems in an easy and comprehensive manner. An important memory-marker after 9 .tll xe4 ixg5 1 0.Cll xd6t 'it>e7 l l .Cll ac4 ie6! 1 2.Wf3!? is the accurate and harmonious 1 2 . . . id2t!, which serves

Minor Lines

Black well by accelerating his development and exchanging the rather awkward-looking bishop on g5 . Slightly more complicated play arises after 7.fi.e3, when Black should continue with 7 . . . a6 8 .lll a3 l'l:bS!? 9 .lll d5 lll xd5 1 0.exd5 lll e7, obtaining a typical structure where his kingside pawn preponderance offers him good chances in that sector. His knight, against most White moves, should be deployed to f5 , followed by . . . fi.e7 and . . . 0-0. The only exception to this rule seems to be 1 l .fi.c4, when 1 1 . . .lll g 6! ?, preparing a direct push of the f-pawn, looks more appropriate. An important strategic principle is that in those positions where the knight is deployed co f5 , it should subsequently move to h4 to pave the way for an advance of the f-pawn. The exception here is when White overly delays the development of his kingside, giving Black realistic chances for . . . e5e4-e3. Finally, the most popular choice, namely 7.a4, should be answered by 7 ... a6 8 .lll a3 fi.g4!. Black's life is made particularly easy after 9 .fi.e2, due to 9 . . . fi.xe2 1 0.ďż˝xe2 d5! with immediate equality. The main move 9.f3 poses more complex problems, but even here Black seems to be absolutely fine by retreating his bishop to e6. He is then ready to carry out . . . d5 under favourable circumstances, by utilizing the b4-square and the weakness on the g l -a7 diagonal. An interesting idea after 1 0.fi.c4, which seems to be White's most circumspect reaction, is 1 0 . . . l'l:cS 1 1 .0-0 lll b4! 1 2 .lll d 5 l'l:xc4!?N. I believe that the second player reaches comfortable equality here, but some memorization is definitely needed.

7. � d5 a

9th Move Alternatives Variation Index 1 .e4 c5 2.�f3 � c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.�xd4 � f6 5.�c3 e5 6.�db5 d6 7.� d5 �xd5 8.exd5 8 ... � b8 42 42 44 45 45 46 46 47 47 48 48 50 52

A) 9.�f3 a6 10.�a3 �e7 Al) l 1 .�d2 0-0 A2) 1 1 .�g5!? f6 12.�d2 0-0! 13.�b4 �d7! A2 1 ) 14.�d3 A22) 14.�e2 B) 9.�e3 �e7 1 0.�d2 a6 1 1 . � a3 � d7 1 2.� c4 0-0 B l ) 1 3.�e2 B2) 1 3.a4 C) 9.a4 �e7 1 0.�e2 0-0 1 1 .0-0 � d7 Cl) 1 2.a5?! C2) 12.�e3 C3) 1 2.f4 C4) 1 2.�h l ! A l ) note ro 1 2.�b4

A2) note ro move 1 4

23 . ge7!N+ ..

C l ) after 2 1 . tiJ e2

7. tll d5

l.e4 c5 2.'Df3 CD c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.'Dxd4 'Df6 s.'Dc3 e5 6.'Ddb5 d6 7.'Dds The system inaugurated by this move creates a tense situation on the board. White will obtain a queenside pawn majority as the e-pawn arrives on d5, while Black will have compensation consisting of a 4-3 kingside pawn lead - giving him chances to obtain an attack by carefully advancing his mass. White needs to fit in c4-c5 to make the extra pawn on the queenside a factor, and will try to freeze Black's play (consisting of .. .f5 and . . . e4, followed by . . . tt'le5) with f2-f3 or a timely f2-f4. Black will quite often free his play by exchanging dark-squared bishops via g5 or even h4, a fact that will facilitate attacking manoeuvres such as . . . E:f8-f6-h6.The e5-square, once conquered by a black knight, might prove a fine base of attack. 7 ... 'Dxd5 8.exd5 CD b8

9 ... a6 10.'!Wa3 ie7 Now White has a choice between Al) 1 1 ..id2 or A2) 1 1 .igS!?. Al) l l .id2 0-0 My conviction is that Black is at least equal and that the resulting positions are dangerous for White.

12.ib4 Principled, immediately.

attacking

the

juicy

target

l 2.ie2!? This is less committal. l 2 . . . tt'l d7 White faces a tough choice. l 3.ib4 1 3.0-0 allows Black to play 1 3 . . . tt'l b6!?, forcing White to block his c-pawn: 14.tt'lc3 i.fS+ 1 3.c4!? tt'l c5 14.0-0 ( 1 4.tt'lc3 igS!) 14 . . . ďż˝d7 l 5 . tt'l c3 a5+ and the white queen is slighcly out of play. 1 3 . . . tt'l cS 1 4.ixcS dxc5 1 5 .d6 ixd6 1 6.E:d l axb5 1 7.'!WxaS c4+

White has four options in this position. We shall start with: A) 9.Wff3, B) 9.ie3 and C) 9.a4. The main line of 9.c4 is covered in the next chapter.

A) 9.Wff3 A tricky move. The idea is to crudely attack d6 by means of W/a3 followed by id2-b4. However, Black should be fine with best play.

1 2.c4 tt'l d7 1 3.tt'lxd6 ( 1 3 .ib4 does not bring any dividends in view of 1 3 . . . tt'l cS 1 4.ixcS? dxc5 1 5 .d6 Perez Mitjans - Minos Constante,

Chapter 3

9th Move Alternatives

Barcelona 20 1 2, and now 1 5 . . . ixd6!N 1 6.l"\d l ig4!-+)

20.0-0 f5 2 l .g3 'Wf6+ Black has more than enough for the exchange due to the weakness of the d5-pawn and the strong c5-knight, yet White may be able to hold. 1 3.0-0-0?! Considered by Rybka among the first two options, but it looks very dangerous to transfer the king to the queenside.

;� ·� � -j_ � ,,. '.�.,.,,,, 19tiE r �•";� � - - -"� >< ��,,, ,--��n�� 1�� : �� ..,,1m �� 3 �w�� 2 £j rf!J< � �w-rf!J<�� t!:i � t!:i w-W!J'0, 8 7 6

12 \Wd7!? This clever move ensures (as it does in line A2 below) that White cannot capture with the bishop on d6, because after 1 3 .ixd6? axb5! he lacks the move 1 4.ixe7 hitting the queen on d8 with tempo. ...

12 . . . axb5!? 1 3 .Wxa8 tll a6 14.i.d2 i.g5 !? is also possible, and leads to unclear play.

13.ie2 This is probably best. 1 3.ixd6? axb5 1 4.\Wxa8 Wxd6-+ I 3.tll xd6?

a5 l 4.ic5 b6 l 5 .ib5 Wc7-+

l 3.c4?! looks dubious but I couldn't find a clear refutation. Logical seems 1 3 . . . axb5! 1 4.Wxa8 "2:a6 1 5 .id2, and now best appears: 1 5 . . . Wg4!N :\. splendid square for the queen, which breaks free into White's position. There is the threat of checking on e4 followed by . . . tll b4, or simply capturing the pawn on c4. White can just survive with 1 6.Wa7! tll c 5 1 7.Wa3!, bringing the queen back to the defence at the cost of the important .:4-pawn. After 1 7 . . . bxc4 1 8.Wf3 Wh4 1 9 .ie2 b5

- - - "�!•:rm: b

1 3 . . . axb5!?N 1 4.Wxa8 tll a6 1 5.i.a5 ! ? This i s the most tenacious, although Black's compensation is more than obvious. 1 5 . . . 'Wg4! 1 6.ixb5 tll c5! 1 7.id2 1 7.ib6 if5 1 8.Wa3 l"lc8! l 7 ... if5 1 8.Wa3 l"lc8 1 9.ie3 Wg6� 1 9 . . . lli a6!?� intending 20.id3 tll b4 2 1 .h3 tll xd3t 22.l"\xd3 Wxg2 is also good. 1 3 .id3 b6 14.0-0 1 4.llixd6? a5 1 5 .if5 \Wxf5!-+ 1 4 . . . l"\d8!? 1 4 . . . ib?? l 5 .tll xd6± Cox recommends 14 . . . e4 1 5 .ie2 ib7 1 6.ti:Jd4 ixd5 when Black has won a pawn, although White may have just about enough compensation after something like 1 7.l"\fd l . 1 5 .id2 \Wb7 1 6 .tll c3 tll d7+ This is, in my opinion, superior to Cox's choice.

13 ... b6 1 3 . . . axb5?! l 4.'Wxa8 tll a6 is riskier than usual. For example, 1 5 .c3! ? We? 1 6.Wa7 tll xb4 l 7.cxb4 'Wc2 l 8.\We3 1Mfxb2 1 9 .0-0;!; and White castles

7. tll d5

into safety without having shed too many pawns for the exchange.

14.0-0 .ib7!? Leading to forced play.

1 3 . 0-0-0 b6 1 4.h4 ib7 1 5 .lli c3 f5 1 6.f4 ct'i d7 1 7.Wb l Wfc7 1 8 .fxe5 ct'ixe5 1 9 .Wib4, as played in Miettinen - Reinhart, corr. 2009, seems unclear after l 9 . . . b5N+!.

12 0-0! 13 .ib4 This brutal move has been played most often in practice. •••

1 4 . . . �ds 1 5 .id2 Wib7 1 6.ct'ic3 ct'i d7 1 7.ct'ie4 also leads to a roughly level game, e.g. l 7 . . . ct'i c5 l 8.ct'ixc5 bxc5 l 9.Wib3 Wic7 and I feel the position is slighdy easier for Black to play.

•

1 3 .ie2 may have more point now that . . . f6 has been played, yet after 1 3 . . . b6! 1 4.c4 ib7 1 5 .ct'i c3 f5 1 6.0-0 ( 1 6.g4!? f4 1 7.llie4 ct'i d7 is unclear too) 1 6 . . . ct'i d7 the position is again unclear due to the awkward placement of the white queen. However, this may be the best position White can attain in the whole 9.�f3 variation as the b7-bishop is hardly impressive.

1 3 ...�d7! Here White has several options, with the most crucial being A21) 14..id3 and A22) 14 ..ie2. 1 4 .c4?! looks strange: 1 4 . . . b6 1 5 .ct'i c3 f5 1 6.ie2 ib7 1 7.Wib3 V!lc7 1 8.0-0 ( 1 8.c5 bxc5 1 9.ixc5 ct'id7+) 1 8 . . . ct'i d7 1 9.f4 exf4 20.i'!xf4 ig5 2 1 .�ffl �ae8 22.Wic2 g6 23.Wh l Solleveld - Alekseev, Santo Domingo 2003.

16 ... �xh3 17.gxh3 hd5 1 8.lUdl 19.liJfS .ixb4 1 9 . . . axb4 20.�xd5 ic5 2 1 .if3=

ct'i c6!

20.�xdS g6 21 ..ibS= The position is balanced.

A2) 1 1 ..igS!? This looks like the more refined move, intending to stop . . . ig5 ideas by provoking . . . f6.

l 1 ...f6 12.i.d2 It seems that White has forced a weakness, but it doesn't make much difference as far as the assessment is concerned. 1 2 .ie3 is the other move, when 1 2 . . . 0-0

Chapter 3

9th Move Alternatives

A21) 14.�d3

Black was suddenly pressing in Marczell - Poleshchuk, corr. 2009, although White managed to salvage a draw.

A22) 14.ie2 This seems to be the best course.

14 ... b6 1 5.0-0-0 gds I6 ..id2 Wb7 17.ltJc3 f5 1 8.f4 b5 19.Wb4 ltJd7 White's queenside castling appears risky, but he has some ideas of his own to prise open the kingside. a

I don't like the look of this move for White.

14 ... b6 1 5.0-0 Black has a couple of strong continuations:

15 ... g6 I also like Black's chances after l 5 . . . 8:d8!?N l 6.iJ.d2 �b7 l 7.lll c3 lll d7� , intending . . . lll c5 with excellent play. In case of 1 8.iJ.f5?! lll c5 1 9 .ixc8 8:axc8+ it seems that only Black has profited from the exchange of light-squared bishops, and 1 8.b4 8:f8! 1 9 .if5?! ( 1 9 .f3 f5 20.�b3 'it>h8+ is the lesser evil for the first 2layer) 1 9 . . . b5 20.�e6t 'it>h8 2 1 .ie3 f5 is no improvement for White, as 22.�b3 f4 23 .ic l ;'.:_ b6t still leaves him under great pressure. 16.gadl gds 17.id2 Wb7 1 8.liJc3 f5 19.!e2 �d7 20.Wb4 ltJc5 2 1 .a4 f4 22.Wa3 if5 23.b4 tid7 24.g4! fxg3 25.fxg3!? ltJf6 26.bS axb5 27..L:bS gac8 28.!c6 Wa6 29.liJbS ih3 \Ve have reached a position that is more �.-:miniscent of a King's Indian than a Sicilian, .tlrhough admittedly the white pawn is still on �2. As you may have guessed, all of these difficult ::10Yes were played in a correspondence game. :':a\· continued: 30.�b4!? ixfl 3 1 .gxfl l::!: ffi 32.Wh4 �h8! 33.i.gS Was 34.c3 ltJ e4!! 35.ixe7 gxfl t 36.©xfl Wxa4 37 . .if6t ©g8i

22 ....id? 23.a4 gdc8 24.aS gc7 25 ..id4 25 .ib6 8:xc3! 25 .. .l'�ac8 26.g4 ltJxg4 27.h3 ltJf6 28.gxg?t!! ©xg7 29.'3gl t �f'7 30.ixf6 :gc4! 30 . . . ixf6 3 l .�xd6 3 1 ..ig?!! �e8! 32.Wa3 Wa7 33.:gg2 Wes 34.WxcS g4xc5 35 . .ihSt �d8 36 ..id4ii White had enough compensation to hold the draw in Marczell - Poli, corr. 2008.

7.tlid5

B) 9.ie3 This has a similar idea to 9.a4, which will be examined later. The plan is to leave the c4-square open for the manoeuvre tli a3-c4, laying siege to the d6- and b6-squares, combined at some point with f2-f4.The queen can be developed on d2, which will practically force . . . a6 as the a-pawn will be under attack. Then White retreats to a3 with the knight, developing his play as outlined above.

9 ...ie7 1 0.1Mfd2 1 0 .c3 is not so good in view of 1 0 . . . a6, when the knight cannot jump to a7. This is well illustrated by 1 1 .tlia7?! if5! ( 1 I . . .id7? 1 2 .°&b3 b5 1 3 .°&a3!± is the trap Black must avoid) 1 2.'Wb3 '&d7 1 3 .a4 0-0 1 4.a5 ig6!+ followed by pushing the f-pawn.

1 3 .'&b4, as played in Gorbatov - Kucera, Liberec 20 1 2, doesn't seem right. Black can react with 1 3 . . . b5N 1 4 . tli a5 tli f6 1 5 .ltJ c6 '&e8+, when his chances are preferable. White has wasted too much time getting his knight to c6, and the weakness of d5 starts to make itself felt.

Bl) 13 ..ie2 One of the two main moves. I think Black should react with the natural:

13 ... f5 14.f4 exf4 1 5.ixf4 � c5 Eyeing the all-important e4-square whilst keeping the possibility . . . g5 at hand.

10 ... a6 Now it was obligatory to move the pawn, as White was threatening to take on a7. l 1 .ltJa3 ltJd7 12.ltJc4 0-0

1 6.0-0?! b5 1 7.tlia5 tli e4 1 8 .°&e l ( 1 8.'&b4 '&b6t 1 9 .�h l ctJ f2t 20.!'1xf2 '&xf2 2 1 .ifl !'1e8+) 1 8 . . . '&b6t 1 9.�hl if6 20.ctJc6 !'1e8+

A critical j uncture. White must decide whether or not to throw in a2-a4: Bl) 13 ..ie2 or B2) 13.a4. Trying to cramp Black's queenside with l 3.tlia5?! fails to: 13 ... fS 1 4.f3 .!h4t 1 5 .g3 f4! 1 6.if2 e4!+

16 ... ltJ e4N l 7.1Mfe3 1 7.'&b4 b5 1 8 .tli a5 ig5 1 9.!'1hfl ixf4t 20.!'1xf4 '&b6= 17 ...g5 18.ig3 if6+± Black has good counterplay.

Chapter 3

9th Move Alternatives

B2) 13.a4 The most logical.

13 ... fS 14.f4

1 8.aS 1 8 .tt:l b6 l§'.bS 1 9.a5 f4 20.tt:lxcS Wxa5 2 1 .@b l (2 1 .Wxe4 Wa l t 22.@d2 fxe3t 23.1Wxe3 ib4t 24.@e2 1Wxb2) 2 1 . . .gbxcS 22.1Wxe4 fxe3 23 .id3 g6 24.1Wxe3= 1 8 .g4 b5 1 9.ct'ib6 gbs 20.lll xcS gxc8 2 1 .gxf5 ct'i c5 22.ixc5 gxc5f!

1 8 ...i.d7 19.lll xd6 l 9 .lll b6 :!'kS! 20.lll xcS? Wxa5-+ 19 ... lt:Jxd6 20.�a3 .ib5f! B. Benko - Rada, Internet 2004 C) 9.a4

Alternatively, 1 4 . . . exf4 1 5 .ixf4 lll c5 l 6.ie2 ( 1 6.id3 g5!? l 7.ig3 lll xd3t l 8 .cxd3 f4 l 9.if2 if5 20.0-0 Wes 2 1 .l"!fe l 1Wf7f!) 1 6 . . . id7 1 7.a5 ct'ie4 1 S.1Wb4 ib5f! was also okay for Black in Wharrier - Krebs, corr. 2009.

The idea of this move is to keep c4 open for the knight, which is to be transferred there via a3 . This would tie the e7-bishop to the defence of the d6-pawn. With accurate play though, Black should be able to counter White's plan efficiencly.

9 ....ie7 10 . .ie2 0-0 1 1 .0-0 lll d7 Black need not attack the knight on b5 with . . . a6, since ie3 is not a threat.

15.fxeS l 5 .a5 ?! ct'i e4+ was better for Black in Lopez Almeida, Havana 1 999. 15 ... lll e4 1 6.�d3 dxe5 An unclear position has been reached. 17.0-0-0 1 7.d6 ig5! 1 8.ib6 ( 1 8.0-0-0 lll f2 l 9.1Wd5t ::t>hS+; or 1 8 .ixg5 1Wxg5 1 9.d7 ixd7 20.Wxd7 3ad8+) 1 8 . . . 'iWeS 1 9.ie2 1Wc6 20.0-0 ie6 2 l .a5 i.dS! 22.ie3 gcs 23.ct'ixe5 Wxd6 24.Wxd6 i!:lxd6+ 17....id6 With the d-pawn safely blockaded and a strong knight on e4, Black can face the future with confidence.

This position can be considered a tabiya for the 9 .a4 system. There are several options worthy of investigation: Cl) 12.aS?!, C2) 12 ..ie3, C3) 1 2.f4 and C4) 12.@hl!.

7.tll d5

Cl) 12.a5?! Rather weak as the knight is now forced back to c3. 1 2.c3 is a prophylactic and non-committal move, in anticipation of . . . f5 . After 1 2 . . . f5 1 3 .f4 a6 14.ctJa3 Vfic7 1 5 .'ii h l exf4 1 6.�xf4 ctJ c5 Black's position compares favourably with our 1 2.�h l main line, where the omission of the move c3 gives White some extra possibilities. In the present situation Black has easy equality.

1 5 ...�xcl 16.Wfxcl .!Lif6 17.f4? 1 7.W/d2! id?!+ would have been slightly better for Black; instead, the less positional l 7 .. .f4?! l 8.id300 is merely unclear. 17 ... l!e8 18.Wfd2 i.d7 19.fxe5 �xe5! Best, as White cannot exploit the e6-square. 20.i.f3 VNc7 21.lLie2 Grigorov - Vyzmanavin, Tbilisi/Sukhumi 1 986.

1 2.c4 a6 1 3.ctJc3 f5 is a direct transposition to the line 9 .c4 a6 1 0.ctJc3 ie7 1 l .ie2 0-0 1 2.0-0 f5 1 3.a4 ctJ d7 - see variation A in Chapter 5 on page 7 1 .

1 2... a6 1 3 . .!Li c3 f5 14.f3 i.g5 1 4 . . . b5!? is also possible. The weakening of the pawn structure after 1 5 .axb6 Vfixb6t 1 6.©h l is compensated for by piece activity. After 1 6 . . . E:b8 or 16 . . . f4!? 1 7.ctJe4 ctJ f600, there are chances for both sides.

·m ·�� • • ��----.��, 6 !� ,� �� %�,0 ��'0 � � 8 �� • w - �-"' " "- ""'"� 3 jW� jW� �� 2 �tDK' fu!u ��,� ---�� B 1 s A �.i.� �

, , , , ,Y,

% '0

s 4

,,,,,

;/,

7 /� ��M��

�

1 5.i>hl 1 5 .ixg5 Vfixg5 1 6.Vfic l Vfid8! 1 7.Wfd2 b6 1 8.axb6 Vfixb6t 1 9 .'ii h l a5 20.ib5 ctJ f6 2 1 .Vfif2 Vfixf2 22.E:xf2 id? 23.ixd7 ctJxd7 24.tt:lb5 E:a6= reached an interesting ending that was unfortunately agreed drawn at this point in Lane - Dell'Isola, corr. 20 1 1 .

C2) 12.i.e3

Chapter 3

9th Move Alternatives

12 ... a6 There should be nothing to fear from liJa7 in this particular position. 13.tlJa3 1 3 .liJ a7 ig5! 1 4.\Wd2 ( 1 4.liJxc8 E&xc8+ planning . . . e4, and then posting the knight on e5, is at least slightly better for Black) 14 . . . ixe3 1 5 .\Wxe3 f5 ! ( 1 5 . . . \Wb6!? unnecessarily complicates matters after 1 6.liJxc8 E:axc8 l 7.\Wxb6! liJxb6 1 8 .c3!+±) 1 6 .liJxc8 E&xc8 l 7.c3 e4! 1 8.a5 ( 1 8.f4 exf3 1 9.ixf3 liJe5t) 1 8 . . . lt'ie5+ and Black's kingside initiative looks threatening. 1 3 ... fS White has a choice between advancing his r-pawn one or two squares. 14.f4 This looks like the lesser of two evils. Black will o:er the e5-square for his knight but at least the ·.v hire king retains some breathing space. .-\irer 1 4.f3?! the reply 14 . . . f4 looks like a ?<JSitionally dubious move at first, as Black :.::ises control of e4. However, it will rake some ::me before the a3-knighr is in control of this ·.-:ral square. 1 5 . .if2 \We8! 1 6. liJ c4 \Wh5 1 7.ltfh l : -.�d3 E:f6+) 1 7 . . . E:f6 1 8.g4 fxg3 1 9 . .ixg3 Elg6 .:: 1J .t'4 \Wh6 2 1 .'IWe l ! lt'i f6! and Black had a strong .;.:rack in Rowson - Adams, London (5) 1 998.

14 ... exf4! 1S.i.xf4 tlJ eS! Best, placing rhe knight where it belongs. 1 5 . . . \Wb6t 1 6.ltfh l \Wxb2 1 7.lt'ic4 \Wf6 1 8.a5 liJ c5 1 9 .E&b l �

1 6.tlJc4!? White must challenge Black's pride and joy on e5. 1 6.ixe5?! dxe5 1 7.lt'ic4 ic5t 1 8 .ltfh l e4 1 9.c3 \Wf6+

1 6 ... tlJxc4 17.i.xc4 i.f6N In rhis position it is hard for either side to play for a win. 1 8.c3 l 8.\Wd3 ?! is dubious, and after l 8 . . . ixb2 1 9 .E&ab 1 .if6 it is hard for White to prove his compensation. 8

7 6

4 3

1 8 ....id7! 1 9.aS fic7 20 ..id3 �ae8 20 . . . \Wc5t 2 1 .ltfh l \Wxd5 22.ic2 \Wxd l 23.Ei'.axd l =

2 1 .fib3 i.eS 22.fib4 i.c8= The position is approximately balanced.

22 . . . ixf4!? 23.E&xf4 g5!? 24.E&c4 \Wb8 is Deep Junior's wild recommendation, and is certainly not for rhe faint-hearted!

7.tlid5

C3) 12.f4 This is an accempt to play f2-f4 without wasting a tempo on ie3, buc it has a slight tactical flaw. The resulting positions do become quite interesting though.

1 6 . . . g5! Black not only gees a terrific 4-2 kingside pawn lead, but also severely hampers the c l bishop's radius o f action. 1 7.b4! Nevertheless we are at a tricky crossroads, and ultimate precision is needed from Black:

12 ... a6 13.lll a3 8

i. �� .t� " ·"�;ref·�.B• · ·v,�

76 �� -�,��, • �� r,�� -�

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

5 '�?? �..},� � � ��'9,,,, �.�a"LJ• ,,%� ��'�

�

� ��!�!�!� ��1�r-� a

13 ... bS!i' Here lies the point. Black is able to carry out chis freeing thrust on the queenside, exploiting the temporary weakness on the g l -a7 diagonal. I cried 13 . . . exf4 l 4.ixf4 ig5 ! against Kaidanov at the 2008 Gausdal Classic, which was enough to maintain the balance.

14.©hl Threatening to capture on b5. 1 4.axb5 ? axb5 1 5 .ixb5 '&b6t 1 6.©h l l:!xa3 l 7.l:!xa3 '&xb5+ is the tactical shoe mentioned above. 14... bxa4 15.lll c4 exf4 16 ..ixf4N Black has won a pawn but White gets good activity in return. With proper handling from both sides chis position should be dynamically balanced. 1 6.l:!xa4!? A double-edged yet insufficient move.

1 7 . . . lDeS!N l 7 ... if6?! led to success for Black in che only previous game, Anchev - De Vreugt, Patras 1 999, but it is not the best. 1 8.ti:lxe5 dxe5 1 9.ib2 f6! Better for Black, but it may not be enough to win. For example: 20.c4! id7! 2 1 .d6!? 2 1 .b5 axb5 22.l:!xa8 '&xa8 23.d6 id8 24.cxb5 ib6+ 2 1 . . .ixd6 22.b5 ie6 23 .if3 l:!a7 24.id5! '&e7 25.l:!xa6 �xa6 26.bxa6 ic5 27.'&b3 ixd5 28.cxd5 '&d6 29 .'&c4 �b8 30.ic3 �a8 3 1 .�a l l:!a7 32.'&d3+ White has some chances to hold in view of his cwo passed pawns. 1 6.id2 This has also been tried. The bishop is eyeing up a5 . 1 6 . . . lDeS l 7.ia5 l 7.l:!xa4 id7 1 8 .l:!a3 f3 l 9.gxf3 ti:lxc4 20.ixc4 if6+ 1 7 . . . '&e8 1 8 .ti:lb6 1 8 .lll x e5 dxe5 1 9 .d6 if6+ 1 8 . . . f3! 1 9.ixf3 A critical moment had arisen in Rowson

Chapter 3

- 9th Move Alternatives

- Adams, London ( 1 ) 1 998. It seems that Black should now make use of the last move's deflection by:

;i �, �,)�� , %�· � · � � 76 �,,:,m, , ,;• "•'""� � . <;�%- � 5 , , .�� /, , ,;� �� 4 8

· .�, ��,��'0 2 �� - - � if� ,m. . . %�;� l•� 3

24.gxd l ib5+; or 1 8 .'ll xd6 ixd6 1 9.ixd6 'll e4! 20.ig3 tlixg3t 2 1 .hxg3 Wf6+) 1 8 . . . ib5! 1 9.gxe7 ixc4+ is fine for Black, who has kept the extra pawn by exploiting the weakness of e4. l 7.!'la3!? also opts for a rook transfer to the e-file with the plan of !'lxe7.1his tries to avoid the defects of both l 7.if3 and 1 7.l'l:e l . After 1 7 . . . a5! though, there is no question of a White advantage: l 8 .ge3 ia6 l 9.'bxa5 Wxa5 20.gxe7 Wd8 2 1 .!'le3 ixe2 22.Wlxe2 f5+± l 7.ie3 Wlc7+± doesn't seem able to pose Black any problems either.

1 9 . . . Wb5!?N+± White has the following options: 20.l'l:xa4!? a) The more obvious 20.'ll xa8 Wlxa5 2 1 .Wld4 if6 22.ie2 'll d7! 23.l'l:xa4 (23.l'l:xf6 'll xf6 24.'ll b6 'll d7 25.'ll c4 [25 .'ll xa4 ges 26.b4 Wc7+±] 25 . . . Wc700) 23 . . . Wd8 24.Wa7 (24.Wb4 ib7!) 24 . . . ib7! is good for Black. b) 20.b4 axb3 2 1 .cxb3 l'l:b8! (2 l . . .'ll xf3 22.'ll xa8 'll e5 23.ClJc?;l;) 22.ie2 Wle8 23.'ll xc8 �xc8 24.l'l:c l We8 25 .ixa6 ig5 !?+± looks dynamically balanced (25 . . . f5 is also possible) . 20 . . . gbs 2 1 .c4 Wxb2 22.c5 if5+±

1 6 ... tlic5! �faintaining the pawn for as long as possible -.,-ii) make White's life difficult. In addition, the ill ight eyes e4. .!...-=ter .. 1 6 . . . 'll b6 17.'ll xb6 Wxb6 1 8 .gxa4 Wxb2 ·:Oiire gets compensation by either l 9.!!c4 or : �.:';e4!? Wb7 20.id3 f5 2 1 .l'l:e3. i -.J.o

1 8.l'!el Aa6 19.tlixa5! 1 9 .l'l:xe7 ixc4 is better for Black . 19 ....ih4!? Utilizing a double attack so as to free f6 for the black queen.

Controlling e4 and preparing l'l:fl -e l xe7. The .:.:.sadvantage is that the bishop is no longer on :..--:.<'.'. a6-fl diagonal, a fact Black can try to exploit.

1 9 . . .if6 20.'bc6 Wd7 2 1 .gb l l'l:fe8 22.Wd2;!; is slightly better for White, as the c6-knight impedes Black's movement.

--�e I is another possibility. Then l 7 . . . id7! � _lf.3 ( 1 8 .ixd6 ixd6 1 9 .'bxd6 Wf6 20.'bc4 -� :e-i 2 1 .l'l:fl Ci:J f2t 22.�gl 'll xd l 23.l'l:xf6 gxf6

20.'bc6 '!Wf6 Another double concessions.

�

attack

forcing

further

7.tll d5

2 1 .g3 l:Ue8!f± This position should be about equal. Further analysis has verified my feeling that Black is doing fine. C4) 12.@hl ! A prophylactic choice that has been the most common move in tournament play.

12 ... a6 13.c!ll a3! Of course. The knight opts for its ideal position on c4. 1 3 ... 5 14.£4 Quite rightly, White blocks any further advance of the enemy f-pawn. l 4.lll c4 has only rarely been tried. The reason for this may be 1 4 . . . f4!?N 1 5 .a5 ( 1 5 .i.g4? li:J f6 1 6.i.xcS ElxcS+) 1 5 . . . ElbS ( 1 5 . . . e4!?) when Black has good attacking chances. l 6.ig4 ( l 6.f3 Elf6!?�) 1 6 . . . lll f6 1 7.i.xcS Wxc8 1 8 .lll b6 Wf5 1 9 .f3 i.dS! 20.lll c4 i.c7 hardly eases White's play.

.i B .i. � �� •m 7s n •%m4i_ Y.m% • 6 •%m %m ·�m � ·trmlm 5 � �m�� % � m � � %� .

.. .

....

· %

.....

�

2I " u!�fu!u ..

lf "•'·'-�

...

,;,

;G . % c

� § �W e

14 ...Wc7!? This move may be Black's best chance to equalize. Its main virtue is that it fortifies d6, preparing . . . if6. The best continuation for Black will be to opt for a modest set-up involving . . . e5xf4, . . . lll c 5 and . . . id7.

1 4 . . . exf4!? This releases the tension, but it may be okay with the correct follow-up. 1 5 .i.xf4 lll e5?! 15 ... g5 1 6.i.d2 lll e5 1 7.lll c4± is also better for White, but either 15 ... Wc7! or 15 ... lll c5! will most likely transpose to 1 4 . . . Wc7. 1 6.i.xe5! Also good is 1 6.Wd2!?. 16 ... dxe5 1 7.lll c4 i.d6 l 7 . . . i.f6 1 8 .a5± and White's strong passed d-pawn and wonderfully placed knight on c4 are more relevant than Black's pair of bishops. 1 8 .a5± Surprisingly better for White. 1 8 . . . 8:f6 1 9 .lll xd6 Wxd6 This is answered effectively by: 20.Ela3! i.d7 2 l .Elb3 Threatening to unblock by l'!b6 and forcing Black onto the defensive.

15.c!ll c4 exf4!N 1 5 . . . b6!? looks natural, but after 1 6.l'!a3 the position is slightly favourable for White. 16 ..ixf4 c!ll c5 This position is worth remembering. Black intends . . . �d7 followed by . . . b5, kicking away the annoying knight. White will have to invest a tempo on a4-a5 and that allows the second player the required respite to conclude development and equalize. 17J'�a3 The most dangerous try. The idea is to threaten Ela3-e3xe7 without wasting time on a4-a5 . Others include: 17.i.f3 i.d7 1 8.l'!e l lll e4 1 9 .ixe4 Wxc4 20.i.d3 Wxf4 2 1 .i:!xe7 8:ad8 22.W/fl (22.We2 8:de8 or 22.Wh5 8:de8! 23.Elxd7 Wxa4!+) 22 . . . Wh4 23.Elae l l'!de8 24.ElxeS ixe8= 1 7.a5!? id7 1 8 .lll b6 1 8.B:a3 l'!ae8 1 9 .l'!e3 ib5!f± ( 1 9 . . . lll e4? 20.id3 �.f6 2 l .Elxe4 fxe4 22.ixd6 WdS 23.ixfS exd3

Chapter 3

9th Move Alternatives

24.ic5 dxc2 25 .'1Mfxc2 ib5 26.d6±) 1 8 . . . :!! a e8 1 9 .b4 1 9 .ih5 g6 20.if3 if600 1 9 . . . ti::l e4 20.:!! a 3! i.f6 2 1 .c4! ti::l c3 2 1 . . .g5 22.ie3 ti::l c3 23.:!! xc3 ixc3 24.ixg5 ixb4 25 .ih5 :!! e400

exchange on e4. 20.id4 ib5! 2 1 .ti:Jb6 ixe2 22.1Mfxe2 ti::l e4+

17 ... i.d7 1 8.:Se3 liJ e4 The only move here. 19.CLJd2! CLJxd2 20.'1Mfxd2 .if6 2 1 .Wfb4! :Sae8! 2 1 . . .'1Mfxc2 22.1Mfxb7 ixa4 23.ixd6t is less clear. 22.:Sxe8 22.ixd6 1Mfxc2 23.id l ! (23.id3 1Mfxb2) 23 . . . 1Mf c8 24.E1e2 E1xe2 25 .ixe2 E1e8 26.id3 E1e3! 27.'1Mfd2 ig5! 28.b4 (28.a5 h6=) 28 . . . h6 29.ic5 Ei:f3 30.1Mf dl E1xfl t 3 l .1Mfxfl a5! 32.d6 id2!f! gives Black excellent counterplay.

22.2'.xc3 ixc3 23.c5 ie5 24.ixe5 :1'1xe5 25.cxd6 2 5 .ti::l c4 :!! e4 26.id3 (26.ti::l xd6 :!! xb4+) 26 . . . E1d4 27.ti:Jxd6 E1xb4 28.1Mfcl E1d4! 29.1Mf c3 • 29.liJxf5 i.xf5 30.ixf5 @h8 3 1 .d6 1Mlxa5+) 29 . . . :1'1xd3 30.1Mlxd3 1Mfxc5+ :_.:; . . �xd6 26.ti::l c4 '1Mff6 27.ti::l x e5 1Mfxe5 28 .1Mld2 28 .if3 E1e8 29.d6 @f8! 30.ixb7 ib5 3 1 .E1gl :;.ds+ :. 3 . ges 29.ic4 '1Mf d6=

22 ... :SxeS 23 ..id3 ie5 24 ..ixe5 :Sxe5 25.a5! Now Black can balance White's potentially dangerous queenside pawn majority with some fine tactical nuances: 25 ... h6 26.c4 Preparing a storm with 1Mfc3 and b2-b4 etc.

. .

: -.ld2 'This can be met calmly. : -. . . "":b8! � o r example: - �

.i)

: s .lf3 ti::l d 7! 1 9 .b3 ti::l e 5= : S .la5!? b6 1 9 .ic3 id7 20.a5 b5 2 1 .ti::l b6 '::ould be met with a motif that's well worth ::'membering when a white knight has settled : ::. b6 behind a pawn structure on a6 and b5: :. : . . . ies! 22.id4 ig6f! The bishop finally -'==':S a fair share of the fun while the merits : :· having the knight placed on b6 in this :-.:...-i:i cular position are not clear. ; -ld7 1 9.ic3 ig5 : .:, . . . 1f6?! 20.ixf6 :!! xf6 2 1 .liJb6 ti::l e4 .:.2-ld3± is not a good idea for Black as he will :c lefr with the inferior minor piece after the

27.ixf5 ixf5 28.:!! xf5 1Mfe7 29.:!! fl E1e2 30.E1gl (30.h3 Wfe4 3 1 .E1gl E1e3!=) 30 ... 1Mle4 3 1 .1Mlb6

7.tll d5

(3 1 .'Wxd6 l"lxg2=) 3 1 . . .'Wxc4 32.'Wxd6 'We4= with the idea 33.h3 Eixb2

27 ... WdS! 28.'Wd4 We7!! 28 . . . 'Wg5 29 .g3! is not so clear.

32.c5 ?! Eie2 33.h4 'Wxh4 34.cxd6 f3 35.ixf3 ixf3 36.'Wxh4 E:xg2t 37.©h l l"lg4t 38.E:xf3 l"lxh4t 39.©g2 E:g4t 40.©f2 E:g5 4 1 .l"lc3 l"lxd5 42.E:c7 E:xd6 43.l"lxb7 ©fs+

32 j.xh3 33.gxf4 Wg3 34.!U2 gel t 35.�fl gez 36.:B:fZ gel t= •••

29.�gl 29.g3 f4! 30.l"lxf4 ih3 3 1 .Eie4 l"le l t 32.l"lxe l 'Wxe l t 33.'Wgl 'Wxa5+ 29.b4 'We5 30.'Wxe5 dxe5 3 1 .l"lf3= 8

7 6

4 3

2 1

29 ...WgS! Now that the king has been lured to g l , this forces a draw by perpetual. 30.b4 30.g3 l"lxg3t 3 1 .hxg3 'Wxg3t= 30 ... £4!= For example: 3 1 ..ie4 .ig4 32.h3 32.E:xf4?? E:el t 33.E:fl l"lxfl t 34.©xfl 'Wf4t 3 5 .©gl if5-+

Conclusion

This chapter has been our introduction to the complex 7.lll d5 lll xd5 8.exd5 lll bS variation which is characterized by dynamic play arising from the potentially mobile pawn majorities each side possesses. The slightly odd 9.'Wf3 a6 1 0.'Wa3, intending to target the d6-pawn by id2-b4, leads to positions where Black should know his theory but in the end comes out at least equal. Rather important here (after the moves 1 O . . . ie7 l l .ig5!? f6 1 2.id2 0-0! 1 3.ib4) is the nuance 1 3 . . . 'Wd7!, which prevents White from winning the pawn in question and gradually forces a retreat of his pieces. The two ocher moves examined in the chapter, namely 9 .ie3 and 9 .a4, are different versions of the same plan, which involves posting the white knight on c4 and putting the black centre under pressure by a later f2-f4. The most accurate move order to achieve White's objectives seems to be 9.a4 ie7 1 0.ie2 0-0 1 1 .0-0 lll d7 1 2.©h l !, when he proceeds to carry out his intended advance of the f-pawn without allowing tactical counterplay based on . . . a6 and . . . b5. After the thematic continuation 1 2 . . . a6 1 3 .lll a3! f5 1 4 . f4 'Wc7!? 1 5 .lll c4 exf4! 1 6.ixf4 lll c5 Black stands objectively well, but the position is not an easy one and it is worth remembering the details as explained in the relevant section in some depth.

7. ï¿½ d5 a

9.c4 Variation Index 1.e4 c5 2.ltJf3 ltJ c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.ltJxd4 lD f6 5 . ltJ c3 e5 6.ltJ db5 d6 7.ltJ d5 ltJxd5 8.exd5 ltJ bS 9.c4 9 ... a6

_.\) l O.VNa4 lD d7 Al) 1 1 .VNa3 A2) 1 1 .c5!? A3) l l .i.e3 B) 10.ltJc3 i.e7 B l ) l 1 .i.e3!? 0-0 12.VNd2 f5 1 3.f3 ltJ d7! B U ) 1 4.i.e2 B l 2) l 4.i.d3!? B2) l 1 .i.d3 0-0 1 2.0-0 f5 B2 1) 1 3.f4 ltJ d7 B2 1 1) 1 4.i.e3 B2 1 2) 1 4.VNc2 B2 1 3) 14.Whl B22) 1 3.f3 ltJ d7! B22 1) 14.i.e3 B222) 14.Whl

56 56 57 59 60 60 60 61 62 62 63 63 64 65 65 66

7.tt:ld5

l .e4 cS 2.tll f3 tll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tll xd4 tll f6 5.tll c3 eS 6.tll dbS d6 7.tll dS!? tll xdS 8.exdS tll b 8 9.c4 a6 This move order is designed to avoid the line 9 . . . ie7 1 0.c5.

l 7 . . . 'l;Vxd6!! l 8.'ll xa8 e4 1 9.l"i:cl (l 9 .'l;Vb6 'l;Vd5!) 19 ... l"i:d8 20.Wf2 ig4 2 1 .'\1!!r c 5 ih4t! 22.g3 '\1!!r d 2t 23.Wgl ie7! 24.Wc3 ixb4! 25 .'l;Vxd2 1xd2 26.Wf2 ixc l 27.!e2 l"i:d2 0-1 Kiselev V Ivanov, USSR 1 986. A masterly performance by Black. l I .ig5 can be answered boldly by: l 1 . . .Wxg5!?N (Safer is l l . . . f6 1 2 .ie3 ie7 1 3.c5 tt:lxc5 1 4.tt:lxd6t Wf8 1 5 .ixc5 ixd6 1 6.l"i:cl ixc5 1 7.E:xc5 'l;Vd6 1 8.l"i:cl 1d7 1 9 .Wb3 Wf7 20.ie2 l"i:hc8 2 1 .0-0 b5= Herzog - Bennett, email 20 1 0.) 1 2. tt:l c7t We7 1 3 .tt:lxa8 Wg4�

Al) l l .'Wfa3 Seemingly the most innocuous of White's options, but it still manages to play with fire.

A) 10.Wa4 A tricky attempt. White is creating tactical problems for his opponent to solve. Black's next move is forced.

1 0 ... tll d? Again we will branch out into several choices for White: Al) 1 1 .Wa3, A2) 1 1 .cS!? and A3) l l .�e3. l I .b4?! looks rather extravagant. l I . . .ie7 1 2.c5 0-0! 1 3 .cxd6 if6! 1 4.ie3 tt:l b6 1 5 .'l;Va5 'i:lxd5 1 6 .'ll c7 'll xe3! l 7.fxe3

1 1 . .. tll cS! l I . . . tt:l f6 1 2 .'ll c3 ie7 1 3 .id3 0-0 14.0-0 b6 1 5 .'l;Vb3;t gave White an edge in Reppert Damnjanovic, corr. 2009. 12.b4 �f5! Suddenly the situation becomes quite tense. 1 3.bxcS There is no way back. 1 3.tt:lc3?! 'll d 3t 1 4.ixd3 ixd3 1 5 .c5 dxc5 1 6.bxc5 b6! 1 7.Wa4t ( 1 7.d6? bxc5! 1 8.'ll d5 'l;Vxd6! 1 9 .Wxd3 l"i:ds+)

Chapter 4 - 9.c4

is better for White as he has maintained the cramping pawn duo on c5 and d5) l 8.cxb6 ( 1 8.c6 Wff5! 1 9.ie3 b5 20.Wfa5 i.d6+) 1 8 . . . Wfxa4 1 9.ti:Jxa4 0-0-0+ and Black is the happier player here. Also preferable for Black is: 1 3.ti:Jxd6t Wfxd6 1 4.bxc5 Wfxc5 1 5 .Wfxc5 ixc5+

13 ... axb5 14.1Mff3 14.Wfb3 dxc5 1 5 .wrxb5t id7 1 6.'&xb7 id6+ is hardly worrying for Black due to his tremendous development.

15 ... icS! 1 6.c6 Ag7 17.cxbS 0-0 18.Wfb3 1 8.l!b l e4 1 9.Wfb3 bxc6 20.dxc6 ie6 transposes. 1 8 ... bxc6 19.dxc6 e4 20.i:!bl Ae6 2 1 ..ic4 Or 2 1 .wrb4 ixa2 22.Elb2 e3! 23 .ig2 (23 .fxe3 id5 24.l'!gl '&h4t 25.Elg3 ie5+) 23 . . . exf2t 24.1"1xf2 l'!e8t and White is doomed. 2 1 . .. dS 22.ie2 d4 23.ic4

:8 � ��.!{& !ri�1' �� '� ��"�� 5 If&� lS � 4 R1Lm' � i R lS � � v� � ,� �� ' ��;��w-�1. . %.. . 1 ��.:m � a

This star move enables Black to grasp the :..."'litiative. For example:

1 5.g4?! :'.'Jot the best try, but it allows us to illustrate :..,e power of Black's last move.

_-'-.lternatively, 1 5 .id3 e4! 1 6.ixe4 ig7 1 7.ixf5 .�.xal 1 8 .0-0 0-0 1 9.if4 dxc5 20.Elxal '&f6+ is :x>th better and easy to play for Black.

: 5.c6 bxc6 1 6.dxc6 ( 1 6.g4? e4! l 7.wrc3 Elg8 : 3_gxf5 ig7+ or 1 6.cxb5 ig?t also show the _ieas behind 14 . . . g6 in plain fashion) 1 6 . . . d5! : -.�xd5 ib4t 1 8 .id2 ixd2t 1 9 .Wfxd2 Wfxd2t .:1J ;tixd2 b4! 2 1 .ie2 d8! 22.g4 ie4 23.f3 i-xc6 24.Elhb l Ela3 25.Elxb4 c7 26.Elb3 Elha8+ _o probably the best defence for White.

• .: g

23 ...Axc4!-+ I was delighted to find this move in my home analysis. 23 . . . ixg4 should also win, but in a more difficult manner. The text recommendation is simple and effective, and brings the game to a swift end: 24.1Mfxc4 Wfh4 25.h3 e3 That's about it. White can safely resign. A2) 1 1 .c5!? Originally the main idea behind 1 0.Wfa4. It seems to force 1 1 . . .Elb8 when White can obtain the two bishops by 1 2.ti:Jxd6t, bur the resulting position is not advantageous for White.

1 1 ...gbs The safest move, but in truth it is not forced. 1 l . . .dxc5!? 1 2.d6 axb5 1 3 .wrxa8 c4! ? has been played by Spasov. He considers that Black may

7.ttJd5

even be better, but that is an exaggeration. With correct play the position should be balanced.

12.lll xd6t i.xd6 1 3.cxd6 0-0 White has the two bishops and an extra pawn, but it is doubled and isolated. In addition, he lags in development and Black has the simple plan of playing . . . lll f6, . . . b5 and . . . ib7, going after both exposed cl-pawns. Sometimes the further advance . . . b5-b4 will be needed to block the white queen from defending the d6-pawn, enabling . . . iWxd6. Accuracy is required by both sides.

14.id3 This blocks the cl-file and is a rather artificial placement of the bishop. 1 4 . . . b5!N 1 5 .iWb4 1 5 .iWa3 b4+ or 1 5 .iWc2 li:J f6+. l 5 . . . a5 1 6.°&c3 ti:J f6 l 7.iWc7 l 7.ig5 !? iWxd6 1 8.ixf6 iWxf6 1 9 .0-0 ( 1 9 .iWxa5 ? e4 20.ie2 iWg5+) 1 9 . . . ib7 20.gfe l =

6 5

2 1

14.i.e2! Allowing an immediate recovery of the pawn by . . . li:Jc5, but it is the best move. 1 4 .ie3?! Eyeing the critical c5- and b6-squares, but the bishop is exposed here and at the same time kingside development is neglected. 1 4 . . . ti:J f6 1 5 .ia7 No better is 1 5 .E'.d 1 iWxd6+ and now: 1 6.iWa3? iWxa3 1 7.bxa3 E'.d8 1 8 .ic4 b5 1 9 .ib3 ib7+ 1 5 . . . E'.a8 1 6.ic5 b6 1 7.ia3 ib7 1 8.E'.d l 1 8.ie2 b5 1 9 .iWh4 li:Jxd5 20.iWxd8 E:fxd8+ is even worse. 1 8 . . . b5 1 9 .°&b3 iWb6! 20.ie2 ixd5! 2 1 .iWe3 2 1 .E'.xd5 li:Jxd5 22.iWxd5 b4+ 2 1 . . .iWb7 22.ic5 ?! ti:J d7 23.b4 f5 24.f3 ixa2! 25.0-0 ie6+ Black went on to win in Westerinen - Kramnik, Gausdal 1 992.

1 7 . . . :8.b6! 1 8 .ie3 l:hd6 1 9 .iWxd8 gf:xd8 20.ixb5 lll xd5 20 . . . id7!? 2 l .ic5 E'.g6? Obtaining excellent counterplay. 14.iWa3 b5 1 5 .id2 ti:J f6 1 6 .ib4 ib7 1 7.d7 '&xd7 1 8 .ixf8 gxf8� is evaluated as 0.00 by the engines, a fact that speaks volumes for Black's compensation.

14 ... bS! This looks like the best move. 1 5.iWa3! 1 5 .iWb4 ti:J f6 1 6 .ig5 gb6? 15 ... b4! 1 6.iWg3 lll c5!N Why not capture on d6 in one go? 16 . . . iWf6?! 1 7.0-0 was agreed drawn in Doeres - Loew, lngolstadt 1 99 1 , but 1 7 . . . iWxd6 1 8.:gdl ti:Jb6 ( 1 8 ... ib7 1 9 .a3!± or 18 ... f5 1 9.f4! e4 20.b3± or 1 8 . . . a5 1 9 .ie3 ib7 20.ib5±) 1 9 .a3 gives White a dangerous initiative.

Chapter 4 - 9 . c4

17.Ae3 l 7.\Wxe5? lt:l d3t!+

Highlighting the disadvantage of i.e3 . The threat of . . . ig5 will soon make its appearance.

1 7.f4!? Wlxd6 1 8 .fxe5 Wxd5 1 9.i.h6 lt:l e6 20. 0-0 �d4t 2 1 .l"lf2 Wxb2 22.l"lcl (22.l"ldl Wc2, intending . . . Wlg6) 22 . . . iWa3 23.l"lf3 b3!? 24.l"lxb3 3xb3 25 .axb3 ©hS 26.i.d2 lt:J d4+±

12.ie2 White has to be modest after all.

17 ...V;Vxd6 1 7 . . . lt:l e4 1 8.\Wxe5± 1 8.�cl ltJ e4 19.V;Vh4 V;VxdS 20.0-0 .if5m

1 2.lt:la7? ig5 1 3 .lt:lxcS ( 1 3 .i.xg5 Wxg5 1 4.lt:lbS ©e7! 1 5 .lt:Jc3 lt:l c5 1 6.'WlaS 'Wlg6 1 7.0-0-0 i.f5 1 8 .'Wlc7t id7t) 1 3 . . . l"lxc8+ 1 2.cS 0-0 1 3 .cxd6 ( 1 3.c6? lt:l b6+) 1 3 . . . i.gS! 1 4.lt:lc7 ixe3 1 5 .fxe3 ( 1 5 .lt:lxa8 i.d4-+) 1 5 . . . l"lb8 1 6 .'Wlb4 Wlg5t 1 2.Wfa3 ltJf6 1 3 .ie2 i.g4!N+

1 2 ... 0-0 13.V;Va3 1 3 . 0-0?! f5 !t does not look good for White.

s i.� .i.B �:1 9�

aTa'i••" • t _ Y, � � , , 6 ·� �

1 The position is unclear. White has some :ompensation for the pawn in the form of his :wo bishops and the slightly loose enemy pawn �vrmation on the queenside.

2 1. .. ltJf6 22 ..ic:4 22.Wlg5 i.e6 23.l"lfd l Wlxa2 24.Wlxe5 l"lfeS+± 22 ... V;Vas

23.V;Vgs Ae6! The status quo is maintained. A3) 1 1 .ie3

=:>esigned to prepare c4-c5 or Wla3 under the best : :·nditions. l I .. .ie7!

.. J�-0 '0 � -� 21 ,� b t3J �r� £3J r�%um� %= .... %• � 3

...

....

21.f3!? 2 1 .if3 \WdS!

... %

�� " 'm"'�� : �� i�---� � � � �� .

1 3 ... fS! 14.ltJxd6 1 4.f3 was played in Wharrier - Merrheim, corr. 20 1 2 . Now 14 . . . ih4tN 1 5 .g3 f4 1 6 .if2 e4! leads to wild complications where Black's chances do not seem worse. For example: 1 7.gxh4 ( 1 7.fxe4 f3�) 17 . . . e3 1 8 .ig3 ( 1 8.0-0 lt:l c5 1 9 .b4 ih3�) 1 8 . . . axb5 1 9.'Wlxa8 bxc4 20.0-0-0 fxg3 2 1 .hxg3 'Wlb6 22.'Wla3 lt:le5 Black seems to have at least sufficient compensation for the exchange. 14 ... �f6 15.cS f4! An important move

spite of its anti-

7.tlid5

positional appearance. It gives Black at least equal chances.

16 ..id2 ll)xc5 17.ll)xcS gxc8 1 8.gcl e4 Black has a strong initiative. B) 10.ll)c3 A consistent move, intending to finish development quickly and then follow up with the preparation of the c4-c5 advance. White will use f2-f4 or f2-f3 to slow down his opponent's counterplay on the kingside, and Black will have to react accordingly.

1 l . . .�g5 1 2.'Wd2 �xe3 1 3 .'Wxe3;l; is slightly better for White in Matulovic's view, as the exchange has taken place too early. This allows White to formulate his plans accordingly.

12.%Vd2 f5 1 3.f3 1 3.f4 has been rare, possibly because of 1 3 . . . li::i d? 1 4.�e2 ( 1 4.0-0-0?! �f6 1 5 .ie2 Kozirev, Chelyabinsk 2008, Bereznoi 1 5 ... b5!N� hardly looks sensible for White) 1 4 . . . exf4 1 5 .�xf4 li::i e5 1 6.0-0 �d7+± and Black has an excellent position. 13 ... ll) d7!

10 ....ie7

The tabiya for chis variation, with White having to make a fundamental choice regarding the placing of his king's bishop: Bl) 1 1 .ie3!? or B2) l l ..id3.

As we have mentioned, White will often find himself with a decision to make regarding his king's bishop: BU) 14 ..ie2 or B12) 14 ..id3!?.

BU) 14..ie2

•

The main line of 1 l .�e2 is covered in the next chapter.

Bl) l 1 ..ie3!?

This has been most common in practice, but I am not sure it is most accurate.

14 ... b6! This waiting move, bolstering c5, is best.

This rare idea was introduced by Matulovic. White would like to hinder Black's plan of exchanging dark-squared bishops on g5 .

14 . . . f4?! 1 5 .�f2 Elf6 1 6.id3 Elh6 1 7.0-0-0;!; or l 4 . . . Elf6?! (Moiseenko's try) l 5 . f4!N;!; are both better for White.

1 1 . .. 0-0

15.0-0

Chapter 4 - 9 . c4

1 5 .0-0-0 a5!? 1 6.f4 if6 1 7.li:Jb5 li:J c5 1 8.fXe5 ixe5 looks quite playable for Black.

1 6.fxe4 f4 17.id4 if6! It is evident that Black has compensation.

15 ... f4! 1 6.ifl �U6 A situation analogous to Rowson - Adams (see page 49) . Black has initiated a brutal mating plan with the transfer of his heavy pieces to the h-file. As it turns out, things are not easy for White.

18.tll e2! Relatively best.

17.b4 An attempt to first take precautions by l 7.li:Je4 doesn't help to nullify the pressure, for example: l7 . . . :§h6 1 8 .©hl ( 1 8.g4 fXg3 1 9 .hxg3 li:J c5+) 18 . . . °!WeS 1 9 .igl °!Wh5 20.ti:Jf2 ti:J f6-t 17.. J�h6 1 8.idJ Or 1 8 . <ii h l \Wes 1 9.li:Je4 \Wh5 20.igl 1h4! 2 1 .:§ac l li:J f6! 22.c5! (22.li:Jxf6t gxf6-+) 22 . . . bxc5 23.bxc5 ig3 24.li:Jxg3 fXg3 25.cxd6 ·�g6! 26.°!We l li:Jh5! and the attack looks lethal.

1 8.ixf6 \Wxf6 1 9 .ie2 li:Je5-t 1 8.ie2 .ixd4t 1 9 .°!Wxd4 li:Je5 20.c5 'Mlf6! White is facing an unpleasant dilemma. 2 1 .:§ad l 2 1 .©h l g4! 22.cxd6 (22.c6 \Wh6!) 2 2 . . . id7-t 2 1 .°!Wb4 g4 22.c6 :§f7!� 2 1 . . .g4 22.cxd6 id7 23.:§€2 l'faeS Despite being two pawns down Black is probably better, as his kingside pawn storm is difficult to meet. For example: 24.g3 f3 25 .ifl h5!-t White is under heavy pressure, with his c3-knight being strikingly inactive.

18 ...\We8 19.g4 1 9.:§fe l \Wh5 20.h3 li:J f6 2 1 ..ixb6 ixh3 22.gxh3 \Wxf3 also leaves White struggling. 19 ... fxgJ 20.ixgJ �ow Black has a choice: 20 ... \Wh5=

20 . . . ti:J f6!?t reinforces the idea that Black is at :east equal here.

Bl2) 14.idJ!? :\

provocative move, but it leads to interesting It can be met by:

:: :ay. l4

. g5!?N _.\ bold attempt to complicate matters. ..

1 5.0-0 1 5 .ic2 b5!? l 5 ... e4!

l 5 . . . b6

1 6 .ic2!?

1 8 ... tll e5! Instead, 1 8 . . . ixd4t!? 1 9.li:Jxd4 \Wb6 20.°!Wc3 (20.Wff2 li:Je5 2 1 .ie2 'Mlxb2+) 20 . . . li:Je5 2 1 .ie2 .id7 22.l:facl (22.c5!?) 22 . . . !!acS 23.b4;!; allows White to consolidate the extra pawn. 1 9.c5 ig4! This gives Black good counterplay as suddenly the threat of .. .f3 has arisen, and if li:J g3 then . . . fXg2 followed by . . . ti:J f3.

7.tlid5

20.:!%f2 20.b4? f3! 2 1 .lll g3 fxg2 22.©xg2 l2:\ f3! is a demonstration of che above-mentioned tactic. 20 ... dxc5 2 1 .ixc5 :!%e8 Black's fine central blockade yields powerful compensation, for example: 22.:!%cl 22.lll d4 lt:ld7 or 22.id4 ih5 !. 22...:!%c8 23.id4 '1Wd6 24.:!%xc8 :!%xc8 25.ic3 ih5 26.h3 ig6? B2) 1 1 .J..d3 This is a more ambitious, yet risky, approach. The bishop on d3 will be pressurizing f5 , whilst keeping open che e-file and e2-square for use by che white queen or knight. The risk incurred by the bishop is chat ic can be hie by Black's knight once ic reaches e5 or c5. White will also have to cope with che typical . . . e4 breakthrough if he chooses to implement the set-up with f2-f3. Let us see how things work in practice:

1 1 ...0-0 12.0-0 f5

B2 1) 1 3.f4 Not considered to be very good, but there is no easy refutation.

13 ... lll d7 Black signals his intention to occupy e5 with a knight, and White has used several moves in an effort to undermine che outpost or reduce its effectiveness: B2 1 1) 14.ie3, B2 12) 14.'\Wc2 and B21 3) 14.©hl . 1 4 .g3?! introduces the typical idea o f taking back with a pawn on f4, thus keeping che e5-square under control. A logical response is: 14 . . . exf4 1 5 .gxf4 lt:l c5 1 6.ie3 ( 1 6.ic2 b5 !+) 1 6 . . .if6+ 1 4.fxe5 lll xe5 1 5 .ie3 allows: 1 5 . . . i.g5! 1 6 .i.d4 Wff6! l 7.ie2 ( l 7.lll e2 id?+)

E•..t. 11l� �-· �. i •

7 •� •�r�. ;.� � 6 � �,f · • · � �t.1% �r, 5 1ll /.a xraf&"� 4 -� tj"g . . . .� s

.....

· · .�- � % "//,{""'y,� � 3 11l � � .

�n· · · ·�·!� �- - "� ;� rm-- a

l 7 . . . Wfh6! and Black looks fine, for example: 1 8 .c5 i.e3t ( 1 8 . . . id?!N+ may be even better) 1 9.©h l if4 20.igl dxc5 2 1 .d6 (2 1 .gxf4 Wfxf4 22.ixc5 Ele8 23.d6 id? 24.lt:ld5 Wfe4 leaves White without a clear follow-up) 2 1 . . . lt:l d? 22.Wfd5t ©h8 23.gad l l"\b8+± Muhren Berendsen, Dieren 2003. 1 4.l"\b 1 removes the rook from the h8-a l diagonal, whilst protecting the b2-pawn in case of checks on b6. le also prepares b2-b4, bur ic is rather slow. Black should react with 14 . . . exf4 1 5 .ixf4 lll e5, and if 1 6.c5 then the customary: 1 6 . . . lll g6!N l 7.ig3 ( l 7.Wfb3 tlixf4 1 8 .gxf4 ig5 1 9 .Elf3 dxc5+) 1 7 . . . f4 1 8 .if2 lll e5!?00 ( 1 8 . . . dxc5 l 9.Wfh5 .ie6 20.Elbd l �)

Chapter 4 - 9 . c4

1 6 ...if6! 17.Wfc2 1 7 .ie2 tD g6+

B2 1 1) 14.ie3 This loses a tempo.

14 ... exf4 15.ixf4 lll e5 Black's position is already excellent as the following variations prove. 16.i>hl!? 1 6.c5 is met with the typical retort 16 ... l2J g6!N 1 7.c6!? ( 1 7.cxd6 ixd6 1 8 .ixd6 Wfxd6+) l 7 . . . bxc6 1 8 .dxc6 Wfb6t 1 9.iih l W!'xc6 20.ie2 :;b8! 2 1 .l2Jd5 id8! 22.Elc l Wfd7= and everything is in order. l 6.W!'c2 Designed to force . . . g6, which will slow down Black's kingside counterplay as the g6-square is taken away from his knight. l 6 . . . if6 1 7.iih l l 7.ie2 '1Wb6t 1 8.iih l id?+ : -. . . iih8!N :\n excellent move, avoiding the queen checks on e6 in case a massive exchange is carried out on f5 and preparing to develop simply by . . . id7. : s .3ae l id7 1 9 .ie3 l 9.ixe5? ixe5 20.c5 '1Wh4 2 1 .Elxe5 dxe5+ l 9.c5?! l2Jxd3 20.Wxd3 dxc5 2 1 .id6 1':1e8+ l 9.ixf5!? ixf5 20.Wxf5 ih4 2 1 .Elxe5 dxe5 22.Wxe5 Wb6+ : -) . . . l"k8+ Black has managed to keep everything in order .,-:rhout weakening his kingside.

17 ... i>h8!Ni We have transposed to 1 6 .Wfc2, as given above. B212) 14.Wfc2 A move designed to offer the c3-knight some extra protection in anticipation of . . . if6. It also intends to force the weakening . . . g6, although it is certainly debatable as to whether this can be exploited.

14 ... g6 The standard move in praxis.

1 5.i>hl A useful move, but there are some attempts to do without it. In general, however, it is hard for White to enforce a successful c4-c5 . 1 5 .Elb l .if6 1 6.b4 a5! 1 7.a3 axb4 1 8 .axb4 b6 looks excellent for Black, all the more so as the computer's suggestion of 1 9.l2Jb5 ( 1 9 .ie3 exf4 20.ixf4 l2J e5+ with the idea 2 1 .l2Jb5 id7! 22.l2J d4 [22.l2Jxd6? ia4-+J 22 . . . Ela3 23.ie2 Wfa8 24.b5 Ela2 25.Wf dl Ele8+) comes to nothing after:

1 9 . . . ia6! 20.l2Jxd6 e4 2 1 .ie2 Wc7 22.c5 ixe2 23.Wxe2 bxc5 24.l2Jb5 Wb6 25 .ie3 id4 26.bxc5 ixe3t 27.Vffxe3 Wxc5+

4 3

1 5 .ie3 if6! 1 6.l"lad l Placing the rook on e l doesn't seem to have much point here. 1 6 . . . Ele8 a

7. lll dS

1 7.Wf2 exf4 1 8 .ixf4 li:'ie5 1 9 .ie2 id7 20.c5 l"1c8! 2 1 .cxd6 li:'ic4 22.ixc4 l"1xc4� also leads to an excellent position for Black.

15 ...i.f6! 16.i.e3 1 6.l"1b l l"1e8! or 1 6.g3!? l"1e8!. 16 ... l"1e8! 16 . . . exf4 l 7.!xf4 li:'ie5 1 8 .!e2 !d7 l 9.l"1ac l E!c8 20.'&b3 '&e7 2 1 .E!fe l ie8! 22.li:'i a4 Atabayev - Atakisi, Beijing 2008, also looks good for Black after the simple 22 . . .ixa4 23.Wxa4 l"1fe8=. 17.:Sael exf4 18.i.xf4 lli e5 19.b4?! 1 9.ie2 id7 20.�b3!? b6 2 1 .ie3 l"1b8 22.Wa3 li:'i f7!+ 19 ...i.d7 20.cS dxcS 2 1 .bxcS? 2 1 .d6 ic6! 22.bxc5 '&a5+ 2 1 . .. llixd3 22.�xd3 �a5 23.:SxeSt i.xe8 24.c6 bxc6 25.i.d2 Black had a winning position in Brooks Shaked, Los Angeles 1 99 1 , which he could have best exploited with:

25 ...'WfcSN-+

B21 3) 14.'it>hl This is considered the best move.

14 g6 ..•

The idea behind 1 4.<;t>h l is revealed. Black would like his bishop on f6, but is pressurized into this concession first. 14 . . . e4 1 5 .ie2 if6 1 6 .ie3 li:'ic5 1 7.id4 id7 1 8 .°&d2! ( 1 8.b4?! li:'i d3 1 9.ixf6 '&xf6+) 1 8 . . . a5± Lopez - Munoz Pantoja, Lima 1 994, is a bit better for White, though Black is solid enough.

15.i.e3 1 5 .b4 a5! or 1 5 .E!b l if6!. 15 ...i.f6 16J'kl! An optimal formation for White. The e3bishop and the c l -rook are now well placed for preparing c4-c5. 1 6.'&d2 exf4 1 7.ixf4 li:'ie5 is okay for Black. This was verified after 1 8 .ie2 l'!e8 1 9 .l"1ae l id7 20.b3 l"1c8 2 1 .a4 '&b6 22.id l ig7 23.ie3 ?! (23.li:'ia2!?) 23 ... '&b4+ 24.id4? ixa4! 25.bxa4 l"1xc4 26.l'!f4 ih6-+ in Garcia Sanchez - Sutton, corr. 2008.

17.i.xf4 i.eS! In this particular position only the exchange of dark-squared bishops guarantees good counterplay. l 7 . . . li:'ie5?! 1 8.c5!

Chapter 4

18.°!Wd2 1 8.b4?! ixf4 1 9.l"i:xf4 a5+±

9 .c4

18 .ixf4 1 9.Wfxf4 tlJ eS 20 .ie2 b6m With the idea: •

��.t � ��i /,��%��B, ;:-��i

, Y,� ;� , , .%� , 65 >; % "�%-,?. , , �, � .% �� 4 � � ,. �� 3 "'�" � � -� � � t!:i � '•Wj rw£ 8

1 8.'Lie2 1¥ff6+± ..•

.,,,

•ef " "% "//, /,

2 1 .b4 a5!+± B22) 13.8

This is considered co be the best move. However, ic has che disadvancage of allowing an exchange of dark-squared bishops via g5. 8

7 6 5

t"''; d

�-�

l 9 . . . l"i:b7!? 20.l"i:bc l 20.'Lia4 1¥fh4+± 20 . . . l"i:c7 2 1 .1¥fe3 1¥fh4 22.'Lia4 l"i:f6 23.f4 l"i:h6 24.h3 g5 ! 25 .i.xf5 25.£Xg5 f4--t 25 . . . gxf4 26.1¥f e l 26.1¥fd 3 'Li f6 27.ixcS l"i:xc8 28.'Lixb6 l"i:f8+ 26 . . . Wg5 27.ie6t <j;>hs If I were White I would be sweating at the thought of the black knight reaching f6.

B22 1) 14. .ie3 .ig5 1 5 ..if'2

The main drawback of this sec-up is that it often allows a prospective positional pawn sacrifice with . . . e4.

1 3 tt.Jd?! 1 3 . . . ig5 allows 1 4.ixg5 1¥fxg5 1 5 .f4! exf4 : 6.'Xff e2 1¥fh6 1 7.ic2!± ( I 7.l"i:ae l !?) . •••

Thite can cry eicher: B22 1) 14.Ae3 o r B222) 1-i.@hl .

: -±.gb l ig5 1 5 .b4 ixcl 1 6 .1¥fxc l 1¥ff6 1 7.<j;>h l This can be mec with a solid reply. : -. . . b6N= For example: : � . a3 l"i:b8 l 8 . . . l"i:a7 1 9.'Lia4! l"i:c7?! 20.1¥f e3 is something :o be avoided. : .:. .'�d2 l 9.'Lia4 e4! 20.£Xe4 'Lie5 2 1 .ie2 id7 seems okay now.

1 5 . . .1¥ff6 In this double-edged position the chances appear equal. 1 6 ..ic2 It makes sense to remove the bishop from tempos like . . . 'Li c5 or . . . e4. Nevertheless Black can still implemenc his idea. 1 6.'Lia4 b6!? ( 1 6 . . . 1¥fh6 l 7.°1We2 e4! 1 8 .£Xe4 f4� is also viable) l 7.'Lixb6 'Lixb6 1 8.ixb6 l"i:b8 l 9 .ia5 ie3t 20.<j;>h l l"i:xb2 2 1 .i.c3 l"i:f2 22.l"i:xf2 ixf2 23.f4 ic5 24.l"i:b l ?! (24.fxe5 dxe5 25 .1¥fe2 l"i:e8 26.l"i:fl is more to the poinc) 24 . . . We7 25.£Xe5 dxe5+ Yz-Yz Matulovic - Milanovic, Belgrade 2002.

7. lll d5

1 6.We2 e4! 1 7.fxe4 f4 1 8 .iih l li:Je5 1 9.id4 We7 20.ixe500 and again, a draw was agreed in Milos - Matsuura, Sao Paulo 2004. A possible continuation is:

16 ...'11Nh6 17.'!We2 e4! 1 8.fxe4 f4 19 ..id4 Now 1 9 .c5 is less effective. Black has: 19 . . . dxcS ( 1 9 . . . li:J eS+) 20.e5 f3 2 1 .gxf3 .1i.f4 22.ig3 li:lxe5+ 19 ....if6 Thanks to his control over the e5-square and the pawn majority on the f- to h-files, Black has good compensation. 8

7 6

4 3

A common try is 1 6 .�c2. A typical example from this position continues: 1 6 . . . li:lcS 1 7.ie2 ( 1 7.ixc5?! dxc5 1 8 .l"lae l id7+ G. Gomez - Matsuura, Belo Horizonte 2004.) 1 7 . . . aS 1 8.li:la4! ( 1 8.a3? a4 1 9 .ixc5 dxc5 20.li:lxa4 �h6+) 1 8 . . . li:lxa4 1 9 .Wxa4

20.'!Wd2 liJeS 21 ..ixeS .ixeSi The advantage lay with Black in Atlas Markos, Pulvermuehle 2006. B222) 14.i>hl We will take this sensible move as our main line.

14 ....igS! 15.h4 aS! 8

1 9 . . . e4! 20.Wa3 if4 2 1 .fxe4 ie5 22.:E!:ab l Wh6 23.g3 fxe4 (23 . . . �g6!? 24.cS f4µ) 24.ie3 l"lxfl t 25.l"lxfl �g6 26.if4 ih3 27.l"lf2 id4 28 .ie3 ie5 29.if4 id4 30.ie3 ie5= A draw was agreed in Smeets - Pavlovic, Wijk aan Zee 2004.

6 5

4 3

Chapter 4 - 9 . c4

White's last move tried to gain space on the queenside, striving for an eventual c4-c5 , but after this well-timed retort by Black there is no question of an advantage.

1 6.a3 axb4 17 ..ixgS WfxgS 18.axb4 i"lxal 19.Wfxal Wf e3 20 ..ie2 lll b 8!? Filippov's continuation. More ambitious than Kramnik's 20 . . . b5. 20 . . . e4 2 1 .'frc l !;!;/± was Leko - Krasenkow, Essen 2002. 20 . . . b5 2 1 .'frc l 'frxc l 22.:!'lxc l bxc4 23.ctJb5 i.b7 24.ct:lxd6 i.xd5 25 .i.xc4 i.xc4 26.:!'lxc4 e4 27.fxe4 fxe4 28.cJigl e3 29.i"le4 tt:l f6 30.i"lxe3 :!'ld8 3 l .:!'le6 :!'lb8 32.i"le7 :!'lxb4 Y2-Y2 Leko Kramnik, Monte Carlo 2003.

point. But as the game proved, this was a questionable achievement. 2 1 . . .ctJ a6 Despite the reduced material and the apparent simplicity of the position, it is not easy to play for White. The black queen is tremendously active and the b4-pawn is a weakness. 22.i"lb l 22.c5 ? just loses a pawn: 22 . . . dxc5 23.ixa6 bxa6 24.bxc5 '\1>lrxc5-+ 22.:!'la l id? 23 . ctJ d l '\1>lrd4 24.'frxd4 exd4 25.b5 ctJc5 26.cJigl i"le8 27.@f2+ 22 . . . id? In Belozerov - Filippov the black queen was on f2, so White could not play ctJ d l because of che mace on e l . 23.ctJ d l 'frd4! 24.'frxd4 exd4 25.cJigl There is no time for 25.c5?? due to 25 ... i"leS-+.

�

� ��· r 76 . :�.r. -��Y,¥�, %�• � � � : ·�,-�Y; ,% Y: , % 8

__, __

:c, , %

�� !i!� � �r�!� �mL, a

2 1 . :!'lb l is an untried suggestion of Deep Junior. ..\frer 2 1 . . .ctJ a6 22.i"lb3 fii. d7 23 .'frg l '\1>lrd4+± it is iard to see the point. 2 1 .'frb2 This novelty from Svidler hardly changes anything, White is unable to make progress on rhe queenside anyway. Svidler soon reaches a similar position co Belozerov - Filippov, below, wich che additional possibility of ctJ d l at some

25 . . . :!'lb8!!+ Amazing prophylaxis against the c4-c5 advance. At the same time Black wants to play . . . b5. 25 . . . @f7?! 26.c5 dxc5 27.ixa6 bxa6 28.bxc5± 26.b5?! An admission of defeat, but it was easy co gee pessimistic after Black's phenomenal play. 26.c5 ? dxc5 27.ixa6 bxa6-+ illustrates the point of 25 . . . i"lb8!!, as the b-pawn is pinned. 26.tt:lf2 b5 27.cxb5 ixb5 28 .id3 g6+ was relatively best. 26 . . . ct:lcs+ Black went on to win a fine game in Svidler Timofeev, Moscow 2004.

7. lll d5

2 1 . ..'\Wb6! White has the following options: 22.'\Wa3 Keeping c5 under surveillance. 22.l&b2 tlJa6 23.i"lb l id? 24. tlJ d l i"le8!? 25 .l&d2?! l&d4! 26.i"lb2 l&xd2 27.i"lxd2 tlJxb4 28.i"lb2 tlJa6 29.i"lxb7 tlJcS 30.i"lb6 Peptan Vuckovic, Bar 2005, and now 30 . . . WfS!N+ does not promise White anything special.

· � 22.tlJbS tlJa6 23.tlJxd6!? l&xd6 24.cS . 87 � �· �· %%,�· .i.�{"'�"'; �� . . . %� ��f'?; 65 'fl) � �� lS �-�� %%,� %%,�, , J%� - - % �· %%,

� 4 •. . %.�.,. 3 %%,� �

2 1

��f�·fw�--�f"'"; b

� � 11�� c

24 . . . l&h6!! 24 ... l&dS ?! 25.bS!? (25 .l&c3 l&h4 26.f4?! [26.ic4] 26 ... exf4 27.bS We?-+ Salgado Lopez - Khairullin, Heraklion 2004.) 25 . . . tlJ c? 26.i"ld l Wh8 27.'.Wa3! tlJ e8 28.b6 (28.d6 id?) 28 . . . t2Jf6 29.c6 i"lg8 30.l&cs:;; 25 .l&c3 25 .Wxh6 gxh6 26.ixa6 bxa6 27.i"le l i"le8 28.c6 Wf7 29.d6 i"ld8 30.d7 ixd7 3 1 .cxd7 i"lxd7 32.Wg l + 25 . . . Wf4! 26.ic4 Wd4! 27.lltixd4 exd4 28.d6t Wh8 29.ixa6 bxa6 30.c6 i"ld8 3 1 .i"lel Wg8 32.c7 i"lxd6 33.i"leSt Wf7 34.i"lxc8 i"lc6 35.Wg l =

22 ... tll a6 23.i"lb l

23 ...'\Wf2!? Also possible is: 23 . . . lltie3 24.i"ld l id? 25.cS dxc5 26.ixa6 cxb4 27.Wxb4 bxa6 28.d6 e4 29.fxe4 fxe4 30.Wc4t Wh8 3 1 .h3 Wh6 32.lltixe4 ixh3 33.Wgl Wf6 34.gxh3= V2-V2 A. Horvath Karacsony, corr. 20 1 0 . 24.'\Wb2 More dynamic appears 24.cS dxc5 25.ixa6 (25.bxcS tt:lxc5 26.ic4 e4?) 25 . . . cxb4 26.l&xb4 bxa6 27.l&c4 (27.d6 ie6? or 27.Wb3 Wc5 28.d6t Wh8 29.i"ld l i"ld8) , but after 27 . . . l&d4 28.lltic7 (28.Wb3 i"ld8 29.d6t �fs 30.i"ld l lltic5+) 28 . . . e4 29.i"ld l Wf2t Black has more than sufficient counterplay thanks to his own passed pawn. 24 ...id7 25.ifl 2 5 . tlJ d l ?? lltie l t 25 ... '\Wd4; Black went on to win in Belozerov - Filippov, Tomsk 2004.

Chapter 4 - 9 . c4

Conclusion Chapter 4 has been an introduction to the 7.lll d5!? lll x d5 8.exd5 lll b8 9.c4 variation. White's 9th clearly indicates his queenside ambition and after 9 . . . a6 he has often tried to take the initiative with the tricky I 0.�a4 lll d7 l l .c5!?, which has been one of the most important lines of the present chapter. I have chosen to place my faith in Kramnik's 1 l . . .Eib8 1 2.lll xd6t ixd6 1 3 .cxd6 0-0, considering that the ensuing position is not worse for Black in spite of the enemy's bishop pair. Analysis verified this assessment, and it is quite evident to me that White's weak cl-pawns offer Black the type of counterplay that is easy to remember or even calculate over the board. The other topic of the chapter was well-trodden territory, where White accepts that he must retreat his knight to c3 and fight for an edge in a less aggressive fashion. After 1 0 .lll c3 ie7, I delved deeply into positions where White refrains from I l .ie2 (see next chapter) in favour of 1 l ..ie3!? or 1 l ..id3. While these treatments have their merits, in the end it always becomes clear that Black has typical devices to combat them. In the case of l l . .ie3!? White wants to fight against the trade of dark-squared bishops on g5 by placing his queen on d2, but after 1 1 . . .0-0 1 2.�d2 f5 1 3 .f3 lll d 7! Black finds other means to develop his play. 1 4 .�d3!?, for example, can be met with the dynamic pawn sacrifice 1 4 . . . e4!, immediately vacating e5 for the knight and providing counter-chances. The less provocative 1 4.ie2 invites Black to attack by means of 1 4 . . . b6! 1 5 .0-0 f4!, followed by the rook shift . . . Eif6-h6. l l .id3 has been the subject of a heated theoretical discussion and by now it has been established chat in the line 1 1 . ..0-0 1 2.0-0 f5 1 3 .8 ( 1 3.f4 gives Black too many tactical chances as the relevant section explains) 1 3 . . . lll d7! 1 4.<;tih l ig5 ! 1 5 .b4 a5! 1 6.a3 axb4 l 7 . .ixg5 �xg5 1 8 .axb4 Eixal 1 9 .�xal Wff e3 20.ie2 lll b8!? Black has too much counterplay. By constantly harassing White on the dark squares Black will reach equality.

7.�dS 1 1.le2 Variation Index 1 .e4 cS 2.ctJf3 Cb c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Cbxd4 tiJ f6 S.tiJc3 eS 6.tiJdbS d6 7.tiJ dS!? ttJxdS 8.exdS tiJ b8 9.c4 a6 l O.tiJ c3 �e7 1 1 .�e2 0-0 12.0-0 1 2 ... fS! 71 72 73 73 74 75 78 78 79 81

A) 1 3.a4 B) 13.b4 C) 1 3.a3 D) 1 3.:E!:b l !? E) 1 3.:E!:el F) 1 3.f4 G) 1 3.f3 tiJ d7 Gl) 1 4.:E!:bl G2) 1 4.�e3 G3) 14.@h l

F) after 26.Wa2!

G2) note to 1 5 . . . :Bf6!?

G2) after 22.'tt> h l

26 . . . :BaeS!?N

24 . . . �xd4t;N

22. . .Wd7!N

Chapter 5

1 .e4 c5 2.lll f3 lll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lll xd4 ll:l f6 s.lll c3 e5 6.lll db5 d6 7.lll d5!? lll xd5 8.exd5 lll b 8 9.c4 a6 10.lll c3 Ae7 1 1 .�e2 The most common continuation. 1 1 ...0-0 12.0-0 f5! The starting position for our current chapter. White has a number of tries here, and I am satisfied with Black's chances after each of them: A) 1 3.a4, B) 13.b4, C) 13.a3, D) 13.:abl !?, E) 13.:ae l , F) 13.f4 and G) 13.f3.

1 3 .'Wc2 covers the b2-pawn in preparation of f2-f4. After 1 3 . . . tt:ld7 14.f4 it is merely a transposition co variation F on page 7S. 1 3 .�h l tt:ld7 14.f4 if6 1 S .°!Wc2 is another way co transpose co variation F.

A) 13.a4 This may look a bit strange co the uninitiated, but it has an idea; co fix Black's queenside structure with a4-aS and then attack it by c4-cS or tt:l a4b6 . Black should react with precision.

13 ... lll d7 This move is my personal preference.

l l .!e2

14 ... e4! 1 4 . . . if6 I S .f3! b6 1 6.axb6 '!Wxb6t 1 7.�hl tt:lcS 1 8.tt:la4!? gives White an edge. 1 5.f4! Deciding to halt the attack is the best option. 1 S .ie3 tt:leS! 1S ... f4 1 6.id4 f3 1 7.gxf3 exf3 1 8.ixf3 if6 1 9 .ig2 seems co deny Black full compensation. 1 6.b4 f4! 1 7.ib6 Wes 1 8.lLlxe4 '!Wg6 Black has comfortable equality but perhaps no more. 1 9 .if3! 1 9 .f3?! ih3 20.)"\f2 ih4 2 1 .'Wd4 )"\ae8! 22.)"\afl ixf2t 23.:gxf2 ifS+ 1 9 . . . tLlxf3t 1 9 . . . tt:lxc4?! 20.)"\e l tt:lxb6 2 1 .axb6 id8 22.°!Wd4 id7 23.)"\ac l ± 1 9 . . . ih3!? 20.�h l ixg2t! 2 I .ixg2 f3 22.ih3 '!Wxe400 20.°!Wxf3 ig4 2 1 .°!Wc3! 2 1 .°!Wd3? ie2!+ 2 1 . . .ifS! 22.tt:l d2 if6 23 .id4 ixd4 24.'!Wxd4 ih3 2S .'!We4 ifs 26.°!Wf3 26.°!Wxf4 id3 26 . . . ig4 27.'!We4 ifs 28 .°!Wf3 ig4= With the idea:

1 3 . . . aS 1 4.cS!?N dxcS l S .tt:lbS id6 1 6.igS !?+± is another idea worth analysing.

14.aS l 4.f3 aS! is fine for Black.

I S .id2 if6!? 1 6.tt:la4 ieS 1 7.f4 exf3 1 8 .)"\xf3 )"lb8 1 9 .ie3 tt:l f6 and White must be wary of Black's threats:

7.lll d5

18 ...�g5! l 8 . . . :1'ic8?! fails due to l 9.�b3!±, which is quite an annoying move. Black cannot exchange bishops or set up the formation with . . . f4 and ih4. 19.�d4 We7? Black has good counterplay. 20.b4 E!ac8 2 1 .c5?! This isn't so good.

15 ... exf3 1 6.gxf3 llJ e5 Black is okay, but extreme precision is required. 17.gflN After l 7.:1'if2 Le Roy - Sebag, Hyeres 2000, the key move is l 7 . . . id7!N to take the sting out of c4-c5 . Then 1 8 .ie3 ih4!? ( 1 8 . . . :1'ic8 is possible, but it is not clear the rook belongs here) 1 9 .g3 ig5 20.id4 �e7 2 1 .�b3 f4 22.c5 (22.tll e4 fx:g3--+) 22 . . . f3+t looks promising. 17 ...�d7! This standard move is best again.

B) 1 3.b4 An attempt to quickly start play on the queenside by preparing the c4-c5 advance. However, Black has a strong reply.

J. �..t.� �

•m 7 �,,_ _ ,_ _�_ , _ y,m r , � ·� �-, , , , % ,/, , ll _ m1 �� "m llll� 8

,,/,

17 . . . if6 would be met with: 1 8 .ie3 �e7 ( 1 8 . . . id7! ?) 1 9 .id4 id7 20.b4! :1'iac8 2 1 .c5!

1 8.�e3 1 8.c5?! �c7!+ brings White down to earth.

��,-1�,�� 4 L'F"1�� ,�� '@0 �"'"' 2� �- ��,� ��flJ1Jt!f 5 3

1 � a

�v. � � c

13 ... a5! 14.bxa5 On l 4.c5?! the clever tactical sequence 14 . . . axb4 1 5 .cxd6 ( 1 5 .tll b5?! dxc5 1 6.d6 if6+) 1 5 . . . ixd6 1 6.tll b5 id7!? 17.tll xd6 ia4+ solves Black's opening problems comfortably.

6 5

4 2

14 ... gxa5 1 5.llJb5 Pointless is l 5 .id2?! tll d7 1 6 .tll b5 :1'ia6 l 7.ib4 e4!+ intending l 8.tll d4 tll c5+.

3 1

21. .. dxc5 22.�xc5 gxc5! 23.d6 �e3t 24.@hl We6 25.bxc5 �c6liii Black has executed what I would christen as the perfect exchange sacrifice.

Chapter 5

1 5 ... tll d7 16.a4 1 6 .ia3?! E'.a6+

1 l .ie2

1 9 . . . E'.h6 With good attacking chances for the second player.

16 ... llfa6!?m 1 6 . . . tt'l c500 should also suffice. Black seems to have efficiently blocked White's demonstration. C) 13.a3 A logical move, designed to carry out b2-b4 whilst avoiding the shortcomings of 1 3 .b4 a5! incurred in line B.

13 ... tll d7 14.b4 if6 This looks like the most exact continuation. 15 ..ie3 1 5 .f3?! e4 1 6.'t.Wc2 exf3 1 7.E'.xf3 tt'le5 1 8 .E'.f2 �cl+ 1 5 .�b3 Putting the queen slightly offside, and allowing Black to stir up counterplay:

1 5 ... b6 A sound choice. 16.�cl 1 6.f3 e4 l 7.id4 exf3 1 8 .ixf3 l':!e8 ( 1 8 ... ie5!?) 1 9 .l':!cl tt'le5 20.c5 bxc5 2 1 .bxc5 dxc5 22 . .ixc5 �a5� 1 6 ... e4 17.id4 l 7.fifd2 l':!b8 1 8 .tt'la4 ie500 17 ...ieS 1 8.Wid2 1 8 . .ixe5 tt'lxe5 1 9 .c5 bxc5 20.bxc5 dxc5 2 1 .d6 ib7 22.tt'la4 ic6! 23.tt'lxc5 l"1f6 24.d7 (24.�b3t ©h8 25.d7 ixd7 26.l"1fd l 't.We8 27.tt'lxd7 tt'lxd7 28.l"1c7 tt'l e5 29.�b7 l"lb8 30.'t.Wa7 l"1a8=) 24 . . . �e7 25 .�b3t ©h8 26.l"\fd l h6 is approximately equal as the d7-pawn falls. 18 ... W/f6 19.ixeS tll xe5 20.Wfe3 Black doesn't look worse after: 20 ... �bSm Or 20 . . . �g6�. D) 13.l"1b l !?

I 5 . . . e4!?

15 . . . ©h8 1 6.©h l b6 1 7.f3 ig5 1 8 .ib2 E'.b8 1 9.E'.adl tt'l f6 20.fifc2 ie3 2 l .id3 tt'lh5 22.g3 i.d7 23.E'.de l id4 24.ic l b5! also gave Black fine counterplay in Adams - King, London 1 990. : 6.if4 1 6.c5 dxc5 1 7.ie3 cxb4 1 8.axb4 ie5� (or 1 8 . . . f4!?) :6 ... ie5N 1 7.ixe5 tt'lxe5 1 8 .c5 E'.f6! 1 9 .c6 1 9.l':!ac l E!h6 20.g3 ©h8+

With the same idea as 1 3 .a3, namely preparing b2-b4, but White considers chat his rook will stand more actively on b 1 after an eventual c4c5.

13 ... tll d7 14.b4 1 4.fifc2 b6 1 5 .b4 ib7 1 6.a4 l"1c8 1 7.a5 bxa5 1 8.bxa5 ia8 1 9 .ie3 �e8 20.l"1fd l id8 2 1 .ib6 ixb6 22.axb6 i.b7 23.tt'la4 e4 24.E!b3 �e7 was unclear in Penades Ordaz - Pommrich, corr. 20 1 0. 14 ... e4! A good move to maintain equal chances. 1 4 . . . b6!? has a poor reputation but is perfectly

7 . ctJ d5

playable in my opinion. However, we shall concentrate on 1 4 . . . e4 for the purposes of chis book.

15.c5!? This has been the most prominent try, having been played by Judie Polgar. 1 5 .ie3 if6 1 6.id4 ie5 1 7.c5 Wif6 1 8 .ixe5 should be met by 1 8 . . . Wfxe5! 1 9.t2la4 ( 1 9.E:c l ?! dxc5 20.bxc5 f2lxc5 2 1 .d6 ie6+) 1 9 . . .f4!?+:! when Black seems to have excellent kingside play. Instead, 1 9 . . . E:b8 was Short - Van der Wiel, Brussels (rapid) 1 987, but perhaps White could have taken advantage of the opportunity to play 20.f4!?N here.

17.lll a4 1 7.c6 h8 17 ... f4! 1 8.f3 1 8.ixe5? ixe5 1 9.f3 \Wh4+ or 1 8 .t2lb6? f3--t . 18. . .� 5 19.fxe4 �xe4 20.ll:lb6 20.E:c l ? f3! 2 1 .gxf3 f2lxf3t 22.ixf3 ixb2+

E) 1 3.gel

1 5 ... lll e5! l 5 . . . if6!? 1 6.Wib3 ! lt>h8 l 7.t2la4 b5 1 8 .cxb6 t2lxb6 1 9.f2lxb6 '!Wxb6 20.ie3 id4 2 1 .E:fd l i.xe3 22.\Wxe3 Vflxe3 23.fxe3 id7 24.E:dc l ib5 25.lt>f2t looks like a defendable ending, but the text is better. 16.�b2 1 6 .1Wb3 lt>h800 is now fine for Black. White cannot play c5-c6, and at the same time his pawn on c5 is under attack as the bishop is still on e7. 1 6 ...�f6!N The tempo-loss l 6 . . . id7?! occurred in J. Polgar - Karjakin, Bilbao 2007, and now Judie could have obtained a nagging edge by l 7.t2la4N.

A rare move, with the idea of dropping the bishop back to fl . White will then then prepare central and queenside play by means of b2-b4 and ib2, aiming at an eventual c4-c5 . Sometimes, if Black resorts to . . . e4, White may counter with the manoeuvre f2l e2-d4. Black must be careful, buc should be able to reach an acceptable position.

13 ... lll d7 14.�fl �g5!? By controlling f4 Black signals his intention to follow up with a kingside onslaught. 14 . . . if6!? or 14 . . . e4 are viable options too. Black has no problems in either case.

15.b4 e4 16.�b2?! Now White comes under a strong attack. 1 6.ixg5 Vflxg5 1 7.Vflc l Vfih4!00 was preferable.

Chapter 5

16 ... lll eS 17.cS if4! 18.h3 �g5 19.lll e2!? Setting a positional trap. 19 ...id2!N Avoiding falling into it. 1 9 . . . lll f3t? 20.'tt> h l lll xe l 2 1 .lll xf4 \Wxf4 22.\Wxe l \Wh6 23.gc u was already better for White. He went on to win in Jukic - Zelenika, Tucepi 1 996.

20 ..ixeS 20.ic l e3! 2 1 .f4 li:l f3t 22.'tt> h l \Wh4!+ doesn't change much. 20 dxeS-+ Black is clearly dictating the play in view of his kingside pawn mass and threatening bishop pair. .•.

F) 1 3.f4

..\.

very popular choice; White simply denies his opponent more space on the kingside.

1 3 ... lll d? This can be considered one of the two or three :TJain tabiyas of the system. At this juncture '\\bite has many moves.

l -1.'§'c2 :::> rocecting b2 and eyeing f5 . Again White's '='-'-tegy will be to prepare a well-timed c4-c5 .

l l .!e2

1 4.gb l This looks a bit strange here. 1 4 . . . if6 White should continue with: 1 5 .\Wc2 Necessary if he is to carry out b2-b4. 1 5 . . . exf4 1 6.ixf4 li:le5! 17.ie3! l 7.b4?! a5! 1 8 .a3 axb4 l 9.axb4 li:l g6! 20.id2 ie5! -+ illustrates a typical attacking formation for Black.

78 6 54 3 2 a

1 7 . . . igS! 1 8.id4 1 8 .�d2? f4 1 9.ixf4 Ei'.xf4! 20.Ei'.xf4 li:l g6+ 1 8 . . . \Wf6!? 1 9 .'tt> h l �h6 20.cS if4 2 1 .h3 ie3!? 22.ixe3 \Wxe3 23.c6!? 23.cxd6 �c5 24.\Wb3 �xd6= 23 . . . bxc6 24.dxc6 �e6 Black is definitely not worse. 1 4.ie3 Preparing Ei'.a l -c l , followed by fxe5 . When Black recaptures with the knight, White will play li:la4 or even an immediate c4-c5 . 1 4 . . . if6! This quiet option is my preference. 1 5 .Ei'.cl 1 5 .\Wd2 exf4 1 6.ixf4 liJeS 1 7.Ei'.ac l id? is excellent for Black, as the white queen lacks access to b3 to harass the b7-pawn. 1 5 .fxe5 ixe5! 1 6.if2 \Wf6 1 7.'1Wd2 li:lc5+ is another pleasant position, illustrating that the knight may even go to c5 according to circumstance. 1 5 . . . exf4 1 6.ixf4 And now best is:

7. lll d5

7 6 45 3 2 a

1 6 . . . ges! Exploiting the omission of @hl .The rook is very influential on e8, bolstering e5 and preventing the annoying sally 1Mi'b3 in several lines by pressuring the e2-bishop. For example: 1 7.@h l ctJe5 1 8.1Mi'b3?! 1 8 .b4 a5!+ 1 8 . . . tlJ g6!+ l 4.fXe5 ClJxe5! 1 4 ... dxe5!? 1 5 .ie3 id6 1 6.a3;!; looks better for White, but it is worth a further look as it is highly unbalanced. 1 5 .ie3 ig5! 1 6.id4 Black must play accurately if he wishes to avoid a queenside bind. 1 6 . . . b6! 1 6 . . . ges 1 7.tlJa4!;!; l 7.ctJa4 1 7.b4 ge8! with the idea 1 8 .c5?! bxc5 1 9 .bxc5 dxc5 20.ixc5 1Mi'c7!+ 1 1 . . . gbs Black stands well here. 1 8 .1Mi'b3 ge8! White cannot capture the enemy b-pawn without significantly worsening his position. 1 4 .g3?! Aiming to recapture on f4 with a pawn, thus keeping the black knight out of e5. But the price is too high as the king's safety is seriously compromised. 1 4 . . . if6 1 5 .ie3 1 5 .1Mi'c2?! exf4 1 6.gxf4 ge8! prevents the

bishop's development to e3, yielding a clear advantage for Black. For example: l 7.if3 b5!+ 1 5 . . . 1Mi'e7 1 6.1Mi'd2 1 6 .if2 exf4 ( 1 6 . . . g5!?--t) 1 7.gxf4 ctJc5 1 8.if3 1Mi'c7 1 9 .1Mi'c2 id7+ 1 6 . . . ges! 1 7.gae l exf4 1 8 .ixf4 ctJ e5 Black stands well, as becomes evident if White aims for play on the queenside. l 9.ctJa4 Running into trouble. 1 9 .c5 id7! is also fine for Black. 1 9 . . . b5 20.tlJb6 20.cxb5?! axb5 2 1 .i.xb5? loses to 2 1 . . .gxa4 or 2 1 . . .ll:if3t. 20 . . . gbs 2 1 .c5 2 1 .ll:ixcS gexc8 22.cxb5 axb5+ is the lesser evil.

2 1 . . .1Mi'c7 22.ie3 dxc5 23.ll:ixcS 1Mi'xc8 24.d6 1Mi'c6! 25.:!:1xf5 :!:1bd8+ With a wonderful position for Black.

14 ...i.f6!? It seems that Black can play this move despite his pawn on f5 being loose. No one has dared to capture the pawn in practice. 15.ÂŠhl The scandard reply. After 1 5 .1Mi'xf5 exf4 1 6.1Mi'e6t :!:1ÂŁ7! l 7.1Mi'xd6 ie5 1 8 .1Mi'a3 ( 1 8.1Mi'e6?? id4t 1 9.@h l ll:i e5-+) 1 8 . . .Wh4 Black suddenly has the makings of a strong kingside attack. For example: 1 9 .if3 id4t 20.@h l ll:ie5 2 1 .ll:ie2! ll:ixf3 22.1Mi'xf3 ig4 23.1Mi'd3 f3! 24.gxf3 ie5! 25.f4 ih3! There is no

Chapter 5

1 1 .�e2

forced win, but Black has fine compensation and White is teetering on the edge of a precipice in view of his weakness on che light squares.

1s ... exf4 1 6.Axf4

1 7.Wi'd2 This has been Apicella's choice of lace. 1 7 . . . b6 l 7 . . . ixf4!? 1 8 .Eixf4?! ( 1 8.i19xf4=) 1 8 . . . llie5 1 9.Eiafl id? 20.Wi'd4 Eic8+ 2 1 .g4? was played in Apicella - Krasenkow, Haguenau 20 1 3 , and here 2 1 . . .lli g6N 22.Ei4f2 Wi'h4 23.b4 llie5 24.c5 h5! would have been much better for Black.

1 7.l'l:adl This has been the standard move after its .;dopcion by the French GM Apicella (an ::xpert in the current system) but it doesn't .;.:complish much. The idea is to enforce c4-c5 ":>\· placing the rook behind the potential passed .:-pawn. : -.id3 is designed to vacate e2 for che knight anticipation of . . . ixf4, but it looks unnatural. -\Teer 1 7 . . . g6 1 8 .l'fa e l ixf4 ( 1 8 . . . b6!?) 1 9 .Eixf4 ;:_ es 20.lli e2 Wi'g5! 2 1 .Eiffl id? 22.lli f4 �ae8+ Black had the upper hand in lnkiov �zermiadianos, Chania 1 993.

.:1

: -.b4!? aims as usual for c4-c5 . After 17 ... txf4! :-. ::iwever, White cannot materialize his idea. �' :ay might continue 1 8.Eixf4 a5! 1 9 .Eixf5 ��paradze - Gagunashvili, Tbilisi 2006, ;_-:d now:

.i.� ��- · · � ��-Y-�� 7� � ��-i) �� 6 ·��n �� 3 ��,-�, �F'//\ �� · - - -- � �-ef�;kl �� -� � � i/��%_ji Ii� 8

�. . . . %

�- .

---

%� ,,_/

�

1 8 .Eiac l ixf4 1 9.Wi'xf4 llie5 20.b4 a5 2 1 .a3 axb4 22.axb4 Wi'f6 23 .Wi'd4 id? 24.Eial 24.Wi'xb6 Eifb8 24 . . . l'!xa l 25 .l'!xal Eic8 26.Eia7= and a draw was agreed here in Apicella - Suarez Real, Cannes 2008, although I would have been tempted to play on with 26 . . . ie8.

17 ...Axf4! 1 S.:axf4 lll e5 19.b4 a5!

7. 'll d5

This strong move frees the a8-rook and ensures Black at least equal play.

20.a3 axb4 21 .axb4 i.d7 22.c5!? Apicella's move. 22.'1Wd2?! '1Wb6 23.l"lb l EI:fe8 24.h3 occurred in Spraggett - Yakovich, Santo Antonio 200 I , and now Black missed the simple: 24 . . . EI:a3!N 25.�c l (25.c5 dxc5 26.d6 [26.tll b5 Ei'.g3! 27.bxc5 �xc5+] 26 . . . 'it>h8+) 25 . . . EI:ea8 26.�d2 h6+

22 ... clxc5 23.bxc5 Wa5 24.c6!? bxc6 25Jfa4 Wc5 26.Wa2! This was Apicella - Saric, Cannes 2007, and here I recommend:

2 1 .'1Wa5 e4 22.fxe4 '1Wb2 23.i.h5 g6 24.�b6 ixb5 25.cxb5 �xb4 26.ie2 tll c5

87 � � �� · 6 ��NiA· ·��!I.%·��·-· j � 5• r� zr•zr� , �� 4 �L. �,� , ; �� !� � � � � � ��!��·!/,{-�" 0,

� � �11 � a

27.�xd6? (27.exf5 was necessary, with equality.) 27 . . . �d4t 28.'it>h l tll xe4 29 .'1We6t 'it>g7 30.g3 Eff6 3 1 .�e7t l"lf7 32.'1We6 tll g 5! 0-1 A. Rombaldoni - Krasenkow, Stockholm 20 1 3 .

26 ... :BaeS!?N 27.clxc6t i.e6 28.Wa3 Wxa3 29.:Bxa3 lLixc6 30.i.b5 :Bc8 3 1 .:Bd6 lLidS!i White is struggling. G) 13.8 The main move, stopping . . . e4.

13 ... lLi d7 1 3 . . .f4!? 1 4.id3 if5 looks anti-positional, yet it may be playable. 1 3 . . . �g5 led to a brilliant victory for Black after: 1 4.�xg5 '1Wxg5 1 5 .�cl '1Wf6!? 1 6.b4 a5 1 7.a3 axb4 1 8 .axb4 EI:xa l 1 9 .'IWxa l tll a6 20.tll b5 i.d7

We shall examine three options fo r White: GI) 14J�b l , G2) 14.i.e3 and G3) 14.@hl .

Gl) 14.gbl This can be met in two ways:

14 ...i.g5 The safe and solid route to equality. 1 4 . . . a5!?N keeps more pieces on the board, albeit by weakening the b5-square. After l 5 .i.e3 tll c5 1 6.tll b5 b6 1 7.f4!? i.f6 1 8 .fxe5 i.xe5 1 9 .tll d400

Chapter 5

the resulting position is unclear. Black's weakness on c6 is coumer-balanced by his great piece activity.

15.b4 b6! 1 5 . . . a5 ?! 1 6.a3 axb4 1 7.axb4t is not so good as Black cannot really use the a-file, whilst the weakening of the b5-square is significam. 1 6.ixg5 1 6.a3 il.xcl 1 7 .Wfxcl Wfh4� should be fine for Black too. 16 ...WlxgS 17.Wlcl Wlh4! 1 7 . . . Wfxcl 1 8 .E!fXc l t 18.f4 1 8.Wle3 l"1b8= 18 ...Wfe7 19.Wfe3 ge8!= 8

l l .�e2

G2) 14 ..ie3 .ig5 Presenting White with a dilemma; whether to allow the exchange of bishops by Wld2 or drop his bishop back to f2. The latter aims to stop Black from fully liberating his position.

1 5 .ifl!? Making Black's task of exchanging bishops more difficult. •

1 5 .Wfd2 .ixe3t 1 6.Wlxe3 a5! The weakening of b5 is not significant here. Indeed, it is very hard for White to gain control of c5 by carrying out b2-b4 as he has not yet thrown in either a2-a3 or E:b l . 1 7.f4 1 7.lll a4?! b6 1 8.a3 f4� 1 7.tLlb5?! tlic5 1 8.f4 l"i:e8!+ 1 7.b3 tLl c5 1 8.E:ab l ?! f4 l 9.Wlf2 .if5 was better for Black in Gunnarsson - Gause!, Gentofte 1 999.

s ,i .i. �-�-l�� - - ��. 7 �� -�-�-- j�

6 4

�

%•l• �� 54 �, , % �-� ��7; , , % � ��%'"//, �""' , ,%� 3 � � � � ��i•�� 2 �n· •' ""f . %� ��-i{ ' 6

/,,/'

2 a

Black had a solid stance in the cemre in Popovic - Tzermiadianos, Cacak 1 995, ensuring �im of even chances. For example:

20.fxeS 20.@h l g600 or 20.a4 exf4 2 1 .Wxf4 Wfe3t 22.�xe3 l"i:xe3= . 2 0. . .1Mfxe5 2 l .Wfxe5 l:'!:xe5! Black maintains the status quo. But not: .::. : . . . tt:lxe5 ?! 22.c5! bxc5 23.bxc5 dxc5 24.tt:la4t

� a

� c

� :� e

1 7 . . J;e8! l 8.i/.d3?! 1 8.l''\ae l tlic5 19 ..ih5 g6 20 . .id l .id7 2 1 .fxe5 E:xe5 22.Wd4 '<Mrb6 23.l"i:xe5 dxe5 24.'<Mrf2 Wb4+ 1 8 . . . lll c5 1 9 . .ic2 .id7 20.@h l ? '<Mff6 2 1 .fxe5 l"i:xe5 22.Wff2 l"i:ae8+ White suffered a catastrophic loss in Kasimdzhanov - Carlsen, Moscow (blitz) 2007.

1 5 ... �f6!? A very aggressive move, intending . . . l"i:h6 and . . . .if4 followed by a queen transfer to g5. At one time it was thought to win by force, however a

7. lll dS

recent game proved that things may not be so easy. Before proceeding with the examination of this interesting idea, let's take a look another possibility: l 5 . . . Wlf6= Intending . . . Wfh6 and . . . ie3 . This should be about equal. 1 6.b4 l 6.Wf c2 Wfh6 1 7.E!:ad l if4 l 8.g3 ie3 l 9.b4 b6 20.ixe3 Wfxe3t 2 1 .@h l a5 22.a3 was drawn at this point in Romanov - Degryarev, corr. 20 1 2 . 1 6 . . . Wlh6 1 7.@h l a 5 1 8 .a3 e4!? l 8 . . . axb4 l 9.axb4 E!:xa l 20.Wlxa l lll f6+± looks quite good too. 1 9.fxe4 if4 20.igl ie5 2 1 .E!:cl axb4 22.axb4 f4 23.Wld2 23.c5 dxc500 with the idea: 24.bxc5 lll xc5 25 .ixc5? f3 26.ig l f2!+ 23 . . . g5! 24.id4 24.c5 lll f6! 25.id4 ixd4 26.Wfxd4 g4 27.cxd6 g3 28.Wf gl lll g4 29.ixg4 ixg4--+

� j_ � �Ei• 7 �� r-��- .(,��;/.'•'V r 6 �� 1.•��-� ��-J:'ii 54 ��A'��•A W,8J .tl···Jil � A W� iW %� · " "� � . . 3 �� ', , . 'r. ·"·:� � ��-� 8

�

%'0% 0 � 0 iA'l.

��1.� 2 �� . .J�£� �� 1:, � � ..

24 . . . ixd4!?N 24 ... E!:f6?! 25.c5! f3 26.ixe5 fxg2t 27.@xg2 lll xe5 28.E1xf6 ih3t 29.@h l Wfxf6 30 .Wfe3 was promising for White in Matulovic Vuckovic, Zlatibor 2007. 25 .Wlxd4 lll e5--+ Black has strong compensation.

1 6.b4 E!:h6 17.g3! It seems that only this move gives White chances for an even struggle.

Inferior is: 1 7.c5? if4! 1 8 .g3 ( 1 8.h3? Wlg5 1 9.@h l lll f6 followed by . . . lll h5-g3 gives Black a decisive attack.) 1 8 . . . Wlg5 1 9.@g2 ( 1 9 .cxd6? Wlh5 20.h4 E1g6-+; 1 9 .c6? lll f6--+) l 9 . . . lll f6 With so many black pieces massed on the kingside it is not surprising White eventually succumbed in Belotserkovsky - Volzhin, Krasnodar 1 997. 8

I. ·� .t �

��'> .. %� �· �%(%� �

: T�Prl'i � . . �� -� . .Y, �. .

%�p�

� : �".'�!1�� . . . %�:·//,/, �� W.%� .

,�; - 8 w8%%

�

. . ;nld . . � r;B/ �

� � ;arm. . . a

17 ... t2Jf6! 1 8.cS! 1 8 .h4?! Black has a dangerous initiative here. 1 8 . . . lll h5! 1 9.f4 l 9.c5? lll xg3 20.ixg3 ixh4-+ l 9.hxg5 Wlxg5 20.g4 lll f4 2 1 .ig3 E1h3! 22.@f2 fxg4 23.lll e4 Wlg6+ l 9 . . . lll xf4 20.gxf4 20.hxg5 Wfxg5--+ 20 . . . ixf4!? 2 1 .h5 2 1 .if3 i'hh4!! 22.�xh4 Wfxh4 23 .Wfe2 e4+

Chapter 5

G3) 14.<±ihl

2 1 . . .id7 22.�h l ie8 23.Elgl ixh5! 24.ixhS \We8 25 .Elg2 1"lxh5t 26.�gl 1"lh3+

18 ... f4! 19.g4 :Bh3!! 20.id3 20.�g2? liJxg4+ 20 ... hS 2 1 .gxhS 2 1 .tll e4 lll xe4 22.ixe4 hxg4 23.fxg4 ih4! 24.ig2 ixf2t 25.Elxf2 Ele3 26.h3 a5! 27.a3 b6! 28.c6 Wf6!� 21. .. :BxhS 22.<±ihl All chis occurred in Czarnota - Miron, Poznan 2005, and now after: 22 ...'Wd7!N Black would have had a strong attack. The game continuation 22 . . . ih4 23.ixh4 Elxh4 24.Elf2 liJh5 25.liJe4 left White a bit better.

23.igl ih4 24.'We2 'Wh3 25.cxd6 :Bg5 26J:!fcl tll h 5 27.tll e4 �.f5 28.'!Wfl he4! 29.Wixh3

l l .ie2

Preparing b2-b4, without having to worry about . . . Wb6t.

14... aS! This move, played against me by Eljanov, looks best. Its main merit is that it stops b2-b4. 15.ie3 l 5 .a3 is interesting. 1 5 . . . lll cS 1 6 .ie3!? ( 1 6.b3 id7= or 16 . . .f4!?) 16 ... a4!? 1 7.ixcS dxc5 1 8 .liJxa4 id7 1 9 .tll c3 E:a6!?� is a position deserving further analysis. 1 5 .b3 should be met by 1 5 . . . liJ cS 1 6.ie3 ig5!, since 1 7.ixcS?! ( 1 7.igl transposes to Kotronias - Eljanov) 1 7 . . . dxcS 1 8.d6 ie3! 1 9 .iWdSt is met adequately with 1 9 . . . Elf7! 20.E:ad l \Wf6! 2 1 .liJbS ie6 22.'1Wd3 id4+

15 ... tll cS! The most exact move order. 1 5 . . . igS!?, as played by Eljanov, could have been answered by 1 6.ixgS 1Wxg5 1 7.liJbS liJcS!? (17 ... E:f6 1 8 .f4! exf4 1 9 .tll c7i) 1 8 .lll xd6 id7 1 9 .\Wc l !? when it is doubtful chat Black has full compensation for the pawn.

1 6.b3 1 6.1Wd2 is not dangerous due to 1 6 . . . id7!, as 1 7.ixcS dxc5 1 8.d6 simply doesn't work because of 1 8 . . . ic6. 16 ...igS! 17.igl 1 7.ixcS dxc5 l 8 .d6 ie3! is better for Black, as already mentioned in the note to White's 1 5 th move above. 17...id7 1 8.a3!? 1 8.Elb l Wf6? 30 ... tll h st 3 1 .<±ih1 tll g3t= A surprising perpetual is the conclusion.

considered the following variation after the game in an attempt to find an improvement: 1 8 .\Wc2

7.lll d5

Black still has resources here, and I will examine the move I consider best:

For example: 22.c5 if4 23.c6 bxc6 24.dxc6 ixc6 25.tLld5 ixd5 26.Wxd5t @h8 27.Elc6 e4 28.fxe4 tb d2 29.exf5 Elae8!

20 .. JkS!? 21Jl: b l ! 2 1 .tLlb5? dxc5 22.tLl d6 tbxa l 23.'@xa l cxb4+ 2 1 . .. clxcS 2 1 . . . tb d2 22.'@c2 tbxfl 23.ixfl � 22.bxcS lLlxcS 23.d6 �b3 24.tLldS @hs 25.�b6 �cl 26.:!'!xcl .ixcl m Resulting in an unclear position, with mutual chances. 1 8 . . . Wf6!? It looks more accurate to keep the rook on the a-file for the time being, maintaining control of a4. 1 9 .a3 1 9.Elad l ?! 'l!Mh6 20.a3 ie3 2 1 .ixe3 Wxe3 22.b4 axb4 23.axb4 Ela3!+ 1 9 .Elab l Wh6 20.a3 a4 2 1 .b4 tLl b3f! 19 . . . a4 20.b4 tLl b3 2 1 .Elad l Elac8f!

19 ... tLl b3 20.cS!? 20.Ela2 Wf f6 (20 ... Elc8 2 l .g3 if6 22.Elc2 tbd4+!) 2 1 .Elc2 (2 1 .id3?? e4) 2 1 . . .Wh6f!

Conclusion

Chapter 5 deals with the most important variation after 7.tLld5!?, namely 7 . . . tbxd5 8.exd5 tbb8 9.c4 a6 1 0.tbc3 ie7 1 l .ie2! 0-0 1 2.0-0 f5 . The move l 1 .ie2! is the best in the position as the bishop is kept at a reasonable distance from the black pawns, giving White time to define his strategy without worrying about . . . e4 thrusts being carried out with tempo. After Black's 1 2th White has several moves, but the basic choice is between 1 3.f4 and 1 3.f3. In case of 1 3 .f4 Black's task is somehow easier to carry out. He will play 1 3 . . . tb d7, followed by . . .if6, . . . exf4, and . . . if6-e5, seeking to exchange dark-squared bishops and establish a knight on e5. This strategy gives Black a fair share of the chances and an easier game to play, as the white king often finds himself in peril. 1 3 .f3 is more cunning and I have used it myself with White, hoping to slowly outplay Black on the queenside by preparing c4-c5 . The critical line runs 1 3 . . . tbd7 1 4.�hl (on other moves Black may play 14 . . . ig5) 14 . . . a5! 1 5 .ie3 tbc5! 1 6.b3 ig5 ! 1 7.igl id7 when Black is fully developed and has slowed down White's queenside offensive. The position is equal and this was effectively proven by che game Kotronias - Eljanov and its subsequent analysis.

Minor Diversion 9.�abl and 10.�abl Variation Index 1 .e4 c5 2.ltJf3 lD c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.ctJxd4 ctJ f6 5.lDc3 e5 6.ctJ db5 d6 7 ..ig5 a6 8.ctJ a3 8 ... b5 84 85 85 86 88 89

A) 9.ctJ ab l .ie7 10 ..ixf6 .ixf6 l 1 .a4 b4 12.ctJd5 .ig5 Al) 13.tll d2 A2) 1 3 ..ic4 B) 9 ..ixf6 gxf6 1 0.lD ab l f5! B l ) l 1.a4!? B2) 1 1 ..id3

B) nore ro move 1 1

B l ) afrer 1 5 .�d3

B2) afrer J 2 d5!

1 5 . . . �b?!N

1 3 . f3 ! ?N

...

Minor Diversion

1 .e4 c5 2.tlJO t2J c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tlJxd4 t2Jf6 s.t2Jc3 e5 6.t2J db5 d6 7..ig5 The standard weapon against the Sveshnikov. White intensifies his control over the d5-square at the cost of a slight displacement of his b5knight. 7... a6 8.t2Ja3 8.�xf6 gxf6 9.llia3 b5 1 0.llid5 is just a transposition to the main lines - see Chapters 7 to 22. 8 ... b5 This position has been analysed extensively in the past thirty years or so. The general consensus is that Black's activity compensates for his structural weaknesses.

and occupying d5 will not be possible anymore as i.xf6 can be answered by . . . bxc3!. 1 O.a4?! illustrates exactly such a case: 1 0 . . . b4 1 l .�xf6 8

7 6 45 3 2 1 a

1 l . . .bxc3! 1 2.i.xe7 cxb2 1 3 .�a2 llixe7 1 4.�xb2 This was Suetin - Kalinitschew, Berlin 1 993. Black has no problems and may even be slightly better after 14 . . . i.e6N+, controlling the critical d5- and c4-squares.

In this chapter we shall focus on: A) 9.tlJab l and an introduction to B ) 9.ixf6. 9.llid5, the so-called Positional Variation, will be covered in Chapters 23 to 37 of the book.

A) 9.tlJab l Th e text plans to redeploy the knight o n d2, but this is not such a great achievement as White needs both his knights focusing on d5.

9 ....ie7 10 ..ixf6 The only circumspect continuation. If White delays this capture then Black will push . . . b4,

1 o.llid2?! Black has a thematic reply. 1 0 . . . b4!?N Denying the opponent's knight an entrance to d5. 10 . . .ie6 is also fine. l l .llia4 l 1 .llid5 llixd5 1 2.exdS �xg5 1 3.dxc6 d5 l 4.a3 l"1b8+ is clearly good for Black, thanks to his two bishops and proud pawn centre. 1 l . . .�e6 1 2.�xf6 �xf6 1 3 .i.c4!? 1 3 .llic4?! llid4 14.c3 bxc3 1 5 .bxc3 lli b5+ is at least slightly better for Black. The two bishops and better development offer him the lion's share of the chances. 1 3 . . . 0-0 1 3 . . . id7 1 4 .id500 14.0-0 llid4 1 5 .c3 bxc3 1 6.bxc3 llib5 1 7.ixe6 fxe6+ Black maintains a slight pull because of the awkward placement of the white knights. He should typically restrict the a4-knight by controlling b6.

Chapter 6

9 . tt'l ab l and 1 0 . tt'l ab l

10...Axf6 l I .a4 Hitting the b5-pawn forces Black to surrender control of the c4-square. In this way White hopes co achieve a hegemony over the light squares, but in reality there is only a faint chance of succeeding. 1 I . .. b4 12.tll d5 Ags A typically Sveshnikovian posmon for this bishop. In the present instance it is even more effective because a bishop eyeing c l combined with a cramping black pawn on b4 facilitates pressure against the c2-pawn. The bishop also reserves the option of giving himself up for a white knight, reducing White's control over the light squares. There are two ways for White to combat this: Al) 13.tll d2 and A2) 13.�c4. Al) 13.tll d2 0-0 14.tll c4 14.tll f3?! is a typically bad idea for White. 14 . . . ih6 1 5 .�c4 ©h8+, intending . . . f5 , was good for Black in Niewold - Dibley, corr. 2008.

l 5 . llJ cb6 E!a7!?+ leaves White without a clear follow-up. Instead 1 5 . . . E!bS 1 6.a5 llJxa5! 1 7.:§xa5 ixd5 1 8 .�xd5 :§xb6= is a trick worth knowing, although the resulting position offers nothing more than an easy draw.

1 5 ... tll d4!N 16.lll cb6 1 6.ll'ixb4?! f5 l 7.exf5 :§xf5+ 16 gbs 17.aS hd5 18.exd5 1 8.ll'ixd5 b3 ..•

18 ...�c7 19.0-0 lll xc2 zo.ga4 lll d4 2 1 .Axa6 �a7 22.Ad3 f5t With a fine kingside initiative. The black queen on a7 is quite functional, eyeing f2 and blocking the enemy a-pawn. The b6-knight is not really an obstacle to the queen's activity, as it can be driven back by . . . id8 (another typical idea in the Sveshnikov) at any point. A2) 13.Ac4 0-01 I think rhis is the best choice, keeping the c8-bishop flexible.

14.0-0 1 4 . ll'i d2 ©h8! 1 5 .0-0 transposes to the next note.

1s.Ae2 1 5 .id3 ixd5!? 1 6.exd5 tll a 5+ is a typically good structure for Black, who may attack on the kingside without any risk.

14 ... @hs! A natural and aggressive prophylactic move, which is part and parcel of Black's strategy in the Sveshnikov. By removing the king to the corner

Minor Diversion

Black prepares to free up his position with . . . f5 , liberating the power of both bishops.

15.c3!? This looks to be the best continuation available to White. 1 5 .ll'i d2 f5 ! Now this move is justified as White cannot control both e4 and d5 with the knight on d2. I 6.exf5 Trying to set up a blockade on e4. 1 6.f3 ll'i e7! 1 7.\tih l was Filipenko - Gorelov, USSR 1 983, and now 1 7 . . . ib?!N+, intending to take on d5, would have secured an edge for Black. I 6 . . . ixf5 l 7.f3 l 7.ll'ib3?! a5! l 8.We2 ll'ie7!+ is slightly better for Black.

16.cxb4 lLixb4 17.lDbc3 ik8 1 8.'Mfe2 a5 19.:!! adl :!! c5 20.b3 .!Lixd5 2 1 .ll'ixd5 g6 22.:!! d3N 22.'it>h l 'it>g7 23.f3 h5 24.ll'ic3 Wc8 25 .ixe6 Wxe6 26.ll'id5 El:fc8+± was balanced in Gonzaga Grego - Rovchakov, corr. 2008. 22.Wfb2 Wb8 23 .Wc3 ih6 24.f4 Wc8! 25.Wa l Wb7! Fighting against f4-f5 by putting enough pressure on the d5-knighc. 26.fice5 ig7 is unclear.

.iR�•S . •��•Y.•e •,

7 6 !.1.�.� . :,. r' 54 ��-�-�. . .< ;,·· · %• �_£··"� �� -� ��:·"� �� -s 2 r�% � ,� • � rl5 ,%

�- � �� irrii "' ..

1 7 . . . ixd2! An advantage of having two bishops is chat you can always give one of chem back! 1 8 .Wxd2 Wa5 ! 1 9.'it>h l Wc5 20.ll'ie3! 20.b3 ll'ia5+ 20 . . .ig6 2 1 .id5 gac8 22.ie4= Black has the freer game and a target on c2 to pile up on, but the result should objectively be a draw. 22 . . . v;rd4!? and 22 . . . if7 are viable possibilities.

1 5 ....ie6! 1 5 . . . bxc3 1 6.ll'ibxc3 El:b8 1 7.!'l:b l f5 1 8 .exf5 ixf5 1 9.id3;!; is something I would avoid as Black.

23.:!! fdl Wi'b7!= This produces a typical position where it is hard for either side to disturb the status quo. B) 9 ..ixf6 This introduces one of the critical lines in the Sveshnikov. Black's pawn structure gets ruined, but in return he obtains good piece play with his two bishops and potential central pawn breaks.

9 ... gxf6 9 . . . Wxf6?! 1 o.lt:Jd5 Wd8 is time-consuming and offers White a strong queenside initiative. After l l .c4 it is not easy to cope with the pressure, since l l . . .b4 is met by: 1 2.Wa4 id? 1 3 .ll'ib5! axb5 1 4.Wxa8! Wxa8 1 5 .llic?t 'it>d8 1 6.ll'ixa8+- White is practically winning as the knight can escape through b6.

Chapter 6

10.liJabl A rare move, bur not one to be underestimated. White wants to bring this knight back into play as quickly as possible. Here the d2-square is useful for this purpose. The standard 1 0.lt:JdS will be covered in Chapters 7 to 22.

"I!!' � i�m�wM �f s� .a. � � A \Ulj·�� ,,.,,/,� ,,��-."-�,� ,

7 �� p� ��'w�0 �� 6 · -�w � � 5 -r �Wi! � /,.,�_ �

�Wfi � : ��·F' ',. -1��,�%�� 0 � �, :;{ l£j ; fj w� fj • w� fj wtJ· ,,,,.

,,,,

�� lrc::·1.r��· a

9 . tZ'l ab l and 1 0 . tZ'l ab l

10 ... fS! Black starts to contest the light squares and opens up the game for his two bishops. This is rhe essence of the Sveshnikov: grab space, files and diagonals - and do not let your opponent squeeze you by establishing a bind on d5 and f5 . Now White must decide on his development scheme, and this very much depends on the placement of his king's bishop. There are three plausible options; the squares c4 (after provoking . . . b4) , d3, and g2. White's two main responses here are Bl) 1 l .a4!? and B2) 1 l .�d3. 1 1 .iWhS ? is pointless. After l 1 . . .l:Xe4 1 2.lt:lxe4 ( l 2.lll d2 lll d4 1 3 . 0-0-0 ifs+ is terrible for White) 1 2 . . . dS 1 3 .lll gS l"la7!+ it is clear that White's demonstration has come to an end and he will be pushed back with disastrous consequences. 1 1 .exfS?! Too straightforward and rather naive for a Sveshnikov connoisseur.

1 1 . . .ixfS l 2.id3 ie6 1 3 .ie4 White's attempt to seize control of the central light squares can be nipped in the bud by a beautiful move:

%%�".S•�� .. .;,� �� · · ·

s i. �

: T.l�fi �� . .J@.1''0 �� 3 �m· · �i� �� 7:

�nf

�r'0 �r� ii�:

'%% [>:i 1� [>:i � 1� [>:i 1!J �ZS• %•I\ a

l 3 . . . lt:Jd4!!N Giving up the exchange for a massive kingside attack. Instead, 1 3 . . . l"lc8 was only slightly better for Black in Ninov - Saric, St Lorrain 2005. The threat . . . dS leaves White no choice but to take the rook. l 4.ixa8 \Wxa8 1 5 .0-0 Black follows up with another strong reply: 1 5 . . . ifS! White is teetering on the edge of a precipice. 1 6.lt:Jd2 1 6.f4?! l"lg8 l 7.l"lf2 ih6!+ allows Black's last piece to join the attack, creating an impressive picture of attacking coordination. 1 6 . . . ixc2 1 7.\We l 1 7.\Wc l ih6+ l 7 . . . �d3 l 8.iWe3 ixfl 1 9.l"lxfl l"lg8 20.lt:lde4 l"lg6+ Black consolidates the extra pawn whilst still maintaining attacking chances. l l .g3 lll e7!? is the introduction to a fine idea, and after 1 2.ig2 ib7 we see the essence of Black's manoeuvre, to oppose bishops on the long diagonal. After 1 3 .lll d2 .lig7 14.0-0 0-0 1 5 .iWhS ( l 5 .exf5 d5! is excellent for Black) l 5 . . . b4 1 6.lll d l l:Xe4 1 7.lll xe4 d5 1 8 .lll cS ic6 1 9 .a3 Black had a nice position in Luther - Bae, Bled (ol) 2002, and could have bolstered his advantage with:

Minor Diversion

13.tt:ld2 0-0 14.WfhS! Worse is: 14 . .ic4?! Wh8 1 5 .'\Wh5 ( 1 5 . 0-0 fxe4 1 6.tt:lxe4 f5+ is hardly appetizing for White either as Black has achieved all his strategic goals.) 1 5 . . . tt:l d4! 1 6.0-0 ( 1 6.0-0-0? fxe4 l 7.tt:lxe4 if5+ Motylev - Grebionkin, Internet 2004.) 1 6 . . . fxe4 1 7.c3!? ( 1 7.tt:lxe4 .if5+) 1 7 . . . bxc3 1 8.bxc3 tt:l e6 1 9.tt:lxe4 f5+! Black's mobile centre gives him excellent counterplay.

1 1 .tt:ld2 looks natural, given the motto 'knights before bishops' . Yet 'developing' this knight first (in fact it is the knight's sixth move!) does not fight for control of the light squares. After 1 1 . . ..ig? 1 2.'\Wh5?! (better are 1 2 . .id3 tt:le7 or 1 2.g3, likely transposing to lines analysed below) 1 2 . . . fxe4 1 3 .tt:ldxe4 0-0 14.0-0-0 tt:l d4 1 5 .g4

14 ... tlJ d4 1 5 ..id3 Here lies the difference, White protects and attacks at the same time. Wohl - Shaw, Turin (ol) 2006.

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 1 5 ....ib?!N 16.d! 1 6.exf5 .ixd5 1 7.f6 h6 1 8 .fxg7 Wxg7+ is fine for Black. 1 6 ....ixdS 17.exdS 1 7.cxd4 fxe4 1 8 . .ixe4 .ixe4 1 9.tt:lxe4 exd4 should not be a problem for Black either.

Bl) 1 1 .a4!? A major alternative, seeking to provoke and exploit weaknesses on the light squares.

1 1 . .. b4 1 2.tlJ dS .ig7! Surrendering the e4-square to White by 1 2 . . . fxe4 1 3 .tt:ld2 ig7 14.tll xe4 0-0 looks less accurate.

17 ... e4 1 8.cxd4 1 8 . .ib 1 ? l"!c8-+ 18 exd3 19.0-0 Wff6 20.tlJ£3 20.l2Jb3 f400 •.•

20 ...Wfg6 2 1 .Wfh3 Wlg4!? I believe Black has solved all his problems and may even be slightly better.

Chapter 6 - 9 . tt:J ab l and 1 0 . tt:J ab l

B2) I I .i.d3 A serious move which controls the e4-square and furthers development. It deprives Black of . . . fxe4 as the bishop would recapture, granting White a desirable domination over the central light squares. Black must be precise here.

.i -.i.�� ,,,,,/,� ��i

� � � :5 Tnl• �� !111! � '•' .r � ��" '� �� /, '"//, ��m �%3 -��,��mJt � ��· ��, �� 2 J;�J[j , _ , , ;� jfJ [j � , ' / / � � v� m: 1 �mtZJ� 8

�

,,,,,

�

l l . . tli e7! It seems that Black can afford the luxury of moving this knight again, as White's pieces are too clumsy to take advantage of the time lost. l l . . .ig7!? is another viable developing move as 1 2.exf5?! would be met by the simple 1 2 . . . d5, with absolute control of the centre. Even after 12.tlid2 Black seems to have no difficulties by playing 1 2 . . . tli e7!+±, whilst 1 2 . . . 0-0 1 3 .'&h5!? ltl e7! 1 4.exf5 f6� leads to double-edged play. 12.°IWhS An attempt to muddy the waters, as it seems that White already stands worse. The idea is to follow up with ti:'i d2 and 0-0-0. Before looking at this move we will examine some alternatives: 1 2.exf5 Surrendering the centre. 1 2 . . . d5 1 3.0-0 1 3.f6 tli c6+ 1 3 . . . b4! 1 3 . . . e4? 1 4 .tlixd5! '&xd5 1 5 .ti:Jc3� 1 3 . . . ig7? 1 4.f6! ixf6 1 5 .'&f3 ig7 1 6.ti:Jxd5! tlixd5 1 7.ie4 ie6 1 8 .Eld l ±

1 4.f6 1 4 . tli a4 e4 1 5 .f6 tlig6 1 6.Ele l '&xf6+

s :i �.!. �· � �E ,, /,f"/�" """ '"" J-.. B

� ·): � � '-m�� ; �% �� ·� ... ZB m� 4s ��. 3 �'Wf\i'f,/,�\"� � W�'WM : �� 2 �� /""�tii� ii-i='" "

o r.0% o a

ro o ro f

1 4 . . . ti:J g8! 1 5 .ti:Ja4 1 5 .Ele l ?! bxc3 1 6.Elxe5t ie6 1 7.tlixc3 tlixf6 1 8 .if5 id6+ offers White no real compensation for the material. l 5 . . . ti:'ixf6+ Black has good chances to slowly smother his opponent with his bishop pair and powerful centre. 1 2.ti:Jd2 Allowing a central break. 1 2 . . . d5! Black conquers the centre once more. It is too late now for: 1 3 .'&h5 ? After 1 3 .ti:Jxd5 tlixd5 1 4.exd5 '&xd5+ Black has an extremely strong bishop pair in an open position. 1 3 . . . dxe4 1 4.i.xe4 1 4 . ti:J dxe4?! fxe4 1 5 .ixe4 ie6 1 6.'&xe5 Elg8 1 7.ixa8 '&xa8 1 8.tlie4 ig7-+

Minor Diversion

1 4 . . . E\a7! Avoiding the unnecessary complications chat would follow after l 4 . . . fxe4, allowing the activation of White's knights via e4 and d5. 1 5 .0-0-0 'Wd6 1 6.\t>b l 'Wh6+ White can do nothing better than enter a much worse ending.

12 ... dS!

1 3.exd5 b4 14.li:Je2 'Wxd5 1 5 .li:Jd2 ie6 1 6.0-0 E\g8 1 7.f3 ( 1 7.lll g3 llig6!+, with a powerful hold on the f4-square) 1 7 . . . E\g6 1 8 .°Wh4 Mrsevic Parezanin, Yugoslavia 2000, would have been clearly superior for Black after 1 8 . . . ih6!N+.

1 3 ... �g8! It seems that White is struggling. For example: 14.lll d2!? No relief is offered by 1 4.0-0? 'Wb6t 1 5 .\t>h l dxe4! 1 6.fxe4 ib7 1 7.lll d2 'Wh6! 1 8 .'Wxh6 ixh6+ when both black bishops are penetrating White's exposed position. 1 4.g3? E1g6! (preventing 1 5 .lll d2?, due to 1 5 . . . E\h6! 1 6.°Wg5 f6 1 7.°We3 d4 winning a piece) leaves White nothing better than: 1 5 .exf5 lll xf5 ! 1 6.ixf5 E\g5 1 7.'Wxh7 ixf5 1 8 .°Wh8 'Wd6+

14 ... �xg2 15.0-0-0 'Wd6i Black will almost certainly be able to exchange queens via h6, depriving White of his only trump.

Conclusion

This chapter introduced us to the wonderful world of the 7.ig5 a6 8.lll a3 b5 lines. This position has been the subject of a heated debate over the past few decades, with White players discovering new ideas all the time and Black players defending their beloved system with almost religious fervour. The topic of the chapter has been White's attempt to quickly re-introduce the a3-knight into play by retreating it to b l .This can be done with an immediate 9.lll ab 1 , or it can be preceded by 9.ixf6 in order to force a weakening of Black's pawn formation before doing so. In the first case, after 9.lll ab l ie7 1 0 .ixf6 ixf6 1 l .a4 b4 1 2.lll d5 ig5 , we reach a rypical situation where White controls some light squares in the centre and Black has a pair of bishops and free piece play in return. After the time consuming 1 3 .lll d2 0-0 1 4 .lll c4, Black should be able to fill the hole on d5 by a combination of . . . ie6 and . . . lll d4 , followed by an eventual . . . ixd5, obtaining a valuable pawn majoriry on the kingside. Black is at least equal in the ensuing position so White should instead prefer 1 3 .ic4 0-0! 14.0-0, when Black replies 14 . . . \t>h8! with balanced play. Whether he will play .. .f5 or not depends on the specifics of the position here, which the reader is advised to consult carefully. The other main line of chis chapter is 9 .ixf6 gxf6 1 0 .lll ab l f5 !, when Black obtains lively piece play in return for his weakened pawn structure. After 1 1 .a4!? b4 1 2 .lll d5 ig7! 1 3 .lll d2 0-0 1 4 .�h5! lll d4 1 5 .id3 Black is just in time to press White in the centre by means of 1 5 . . . ib7! 1 6.c3! ixd5 1 7.exd5 e4, giving Black at least equaliry. The main alternative to 1 l .a4!? is the natural 1 l .id3, but even then Black has no problems with the fine positional retort l 1 ... lll e7! controlling both d5 and f5 and preparing a quick . . . d5 if the circumstances allow it. Overall, I don' t see any problems for Black in chis chapter.

9 .ixf6 1 1th Move Alternatives Variation Index 1 .e4 c5 2.CLJ f3 CLJ c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.CLJxd4 CLJf6 5 . tlJ c3 e5 6.ttJ dbS d6 7.�g5 a6 8.tlJ a3 b5 9.�xf6 gxf6 1 0. ttJ dS

1 0 ... fS! A) 1 1 .Wfd3?! fxe4! 1 2.Wfxe4 �g7 Al) 1 3.ttJf6t A2) 1 3.tlJe3!? B) 1 1 .ttJxbS?! axb5 1 2.�xbS �b7! 1 3.exfS :Bes B l ) 14.c3 B2) 14.0-0 C) l l .c4

B) note to 1 3 .exf5

A l ) after 26.'41b2

26 . . J�d l !N

92 93 93 94 95 96 97

1 4 . . ElcS!N .

C) after 20.�d3

20 . . . i>f6!N

9 .ixf6

l.e4 cS 2.t2Jf3 tLl c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.t2Jxd4 t2Jf6 5.tLlc3 eS 6.tLldbS d6 7.i.gS a6 8.tLla3 bS 9 ..ixf6 gxf6 10.tLldS This is the mosc logical move in the posicion. The knighc occupies a proud outpost in the centre, while preparing co bring che a3-knighc back into play by c2-c3, c2-c4 or even the sacrifice ixb5.

�j_ �· .i � ,,% � ,, �.i% .,v, ,

�

�� 7 �� ,,� / �� F - �"� 6 1. m 'fl)t�

�� ·� �-/, �� "8' �% � � � �� 3 "�W/%�� 0'-' 2 �j�� - ��0%�J!J � � 1 /� � if= JL m� 5

10 ... fS! Black loses no time in undermining the centralized position of the knight. This variation is called the Chelyabinsk Variation and is characterized by this very move, whereas 1 0 . . . .tg?!? introduces the so-called Novosibirsk Variation - which is outside che scope of our repertoire. This chapter deals with the dubious sidelines A) 1 1 .�d3?! and B) 1 1 .tLlxbS?!, while C) 1 1 .c4 is a more solid attempt.

opposing queen's entrance ro the game with an enterprising pawn sacrifice:

1 1 ... fxe4! 12.°l:Wxe4 ig7 Allowing White to win a pawn, bur the loss of time will seriously compromise his position. Accepting the pawn with Al) 13.t2Jf6t seems most natural, but there are alcernatives such as A2) 13.tLle3!?. 1 3.c3 can be met with the simple 13 ... 0-0 1 4 . tt:l e3 l'fa7!+, exploiting the fact that the c6knight is immune from capture as 1 5 .iWxc6?? ib7-+ nets the white queen. 1 3.0-0-0 Some precision is required here. 1 3 . . . ie6! This developing move is preferable co 13 . . . 0-0?! since l 4.tt:le3!t would create problems for the second player. White cannot exploit che hanging nature of the c6-knight, for example: 1 4 . tt:l f4 1 4 . tt:l e3?! tt:l d4+ or 1 4 . tt:l f6t?! ixf6 1 5 .iWxc6t e7+. l 4 . . . d5! l 5.tll xd5 1 5 .tt:lxe6 ih6t! 1 6.b l dxe4 1 7.tt:lxd8 l'hd8 1 8 .!!xd8t xd8+ 1 5 . . .f5 1 6.iWf3 1 6.tt:lf6t iWxf6 l 7.iWxc6t f7+

l l .ixb5!? is examined in the next chapter, l l .g3 in Chapter 9, l l .c3 in Chapter 1 0 and l l .exf5 in Chapters 1 0 co 1 2. The main line of 1 L�d3 features in Chapters 13 co 1 7.

A) 1 1 .�d3?! As so often happens in chess, bringing the queen out at an early stage is unprincipled. This is especially true when there are poorly placed pieces in the position, as is the case with the a3-knight here. Black does best to greet the

1 6 . . . 0-0 Black clearly has tremendous compensation in return for the pawn.

Chapter 7

1 1 th Move Alternatives

1 7.'ll f4 �g5 1 8 .'1Wxc6 �xf4t 1 9.@b l i.£7 The two powerful bishops have their sights set on the castled position of the white king.

Al) 13.ctJf6t .ixf6 14.\Wxc6t .id? 1 5.\Wxd6 '11*fe7

2 l .i.e2 @f7 does not change much.

2 1 . ..ib4! 22.ge2 <ii f7 23.c!LJb l ghd8t 24.c3 .ic5! 25.b4 ib6 26.<ii b2 Muratov G. Timoschenko, Beltsy 1 977. -

White has won a pawn, but the two bishops and misplaced knight on a3 offer Black good counterplay.

1 6.0-0-0 After 1 6.�xe7t the reply 1 6 . . . @xe7!�, with potential pressure against the c2- and b2-pawns, looks most natural although 1 6 . . . ixe7 is also fine for Black. 16 ... '11*fxd6 17.�xd6 .ie7 1 7 . . . @e7�

A2) 13.lll e3!? This is probably the most serious move at White's disposal. The knight eyes f5 whilst the queen hits the c6-knight (which in turn shields the attack on the a8-rook) at a moment when Black has not yet managed to organize his forces. However, Black has an energetic response: a

18.�dS!? A refined move, as forcing . . . f6 allows White to retreat his rook to d2 while slowing down Black's counterplay based on . . . i.g5 attacks. However, Black's initiative is a long-term one. 1s ... f6 19.�d2 ie6! 20.@b1 l�ks= Black had good compensation for the pawn. 2 1 .@al Trying to prepare a retreat on bl for the knight, since . . . b4 will soon be threatened.

9 .Axf6

13 ... dS! Solving Black's problems by allowing him to coordinate his pieces and repel all threats - ac che cost of a pawn.

19 ... �abS 20.cxd4 exd4 2 1 .tlJfS .ie4 22.tlJxg7 22.tll c8?! E!:dxc8 23.Ci:Je7t 'itif8 24.Ci:Jxc8 E!:xc8+ gives Black tremendous compensation for che exchange.

14.WxdS 1 4.Ci:Jxd5? f5 1 5 .�f3 0-0+ is similar to 1 3 .0-0-0.

22 ... Wxg7 23.'it>d2 E:xb6 24..id3 .id5= The position should be about equal. The isolated d-pawn gives Black more space while his rook on b6 can operate along che sixth rank, hitting White's kingside pawns.

14 ...WfxdS 1 5.tlJxdS 0-0 16.c3 Preparing to redeploy the knight co a beccer square whilst crying to block che powerful g7bishop. I 6.c4?! Ci:Jd4t is anci-posicional. 1 6.0-0-0 ie6! 1 7.tll c7 E!:ad8!t is clearly good for Black as the e6-bishop cannot be taken due to che check on h6.

16 ....ih7 17.tlJ c2 E:fd8 18.tlJce3 White is on the verge of consolidating the extra pawn bur chere is a nice caccical blow:

B) 1 1 . lDxhS?! A rather dubious sacrifice of a piece for three pawns. White only gains a temporary initiative in return.

1 1 . .. axbS 12 ..ixhS

� -.i.�-� -�-, , , /,-,,�-,��, !Wi� 1.�� il?,J� :4 W,ffi��f•�·'· �� "ti�� 3 �� :{�,r�. �� 2 fj m fj �,rtJ� fj � ., � �' ....�r� � f� � �� W m l:t 8

. . .

, , /,

,,,,

12 ....ih7! The bishop will be more active on b7 than its counterpart on b5 once an unpinning of che c6knighc cakes place. Ir follows char it should not be placed on d7, when an exchange of the bishops is unavoidable in the long run. 19.t2Jb6!N 1 9 .Ci:Je7t?! 'itif8 20.Ci:J7f5 Ci:Jxf5 2 1 .Ci:Jxf5 if6 22.h4 b4!t unleashed the potential of the bishop pair, often Black's chief strength in the Sveshnikov. Black went on to win in Kapenguc - Kalinitschew, USSR 1 978.

13.exfS The most prudent choice, after which material equality theoretically exists and the pawn on f5 may give rise to tactics if Black is careless. 1 3 .a4?! Played in Ricardi - Di Benedecco, Mendoza

Chapter 7

2007, with the obvious aim of enforcing tt'l b4 as well as preparing a transfer of the rook to the third rank. 1 3 . . . i.g7 1 4 . tt'l b4

8 .i � �/, ·�0'��B'- -� ,, , � � � :5 11.��-� �� 0 . ��P' �� 1� · �43 �rn�� .;0;/,�� 0� , , ,%,;��-%��-� � �2 ./flj �y�-Jtlj�fj r,

78 6 45 3

� � w, , � : a

1 1 th Move Alternatives

1 4 . . . !"icS!N In the game Black blundered with 14 . . .Wc??? l 5.!"ia3! 0-0 l 6.l'!c3± only to realize that the c6-knight is doomed. 1 5 .Wd5 1 5 .exf5 0-0 1 6.tt'lxc6 ixc6 1 7.i.xc6 Elxc6 1 8.0-0 e4 1 9 .c3 d5+ is fine for Black. The queenside pawns have been contained thanks to the good coordination of his pieces. 1 5 . . . Wc7 1 6.a5 1 6.!"ia3? 0-0 1 7.tt'lxc6 ixc6 1 8 .ixc6 Wxc6 1 9.Wxc6 !"ixc6-+ is just hopeless. 1 6 . . . 0-0 l 7.ixc6 i.xc6 l 8.tt'lxc6 Wxc6 l 9.Wxc6 Elxc6 Black should win the endgame.

13 ... l'!cS This looks like the most logical continuation and one that maintains chances of an advantage. 1 3 . . . Wh4!? 14.tt'lc?t?! was Shtyrenkov Agaragimov, Alushta 20 1 3 . White should have preferred 14.0-0!? although after 1 4 . . . !"ig8 Black should at least be equal.

1 6 . . . tt'l d4!! 1 7.fXg7t <±>xg7 1 8 .i1o'i'g4t <±>f8 1 9.ctJe3 !"ig8 20.Wh3 tt'lxc2t 2 1 .ctJxc2 !"ixc2 22.Wh6t !"ig7 23.ga3! Wg5 ! 24.Wxd6t We7 25 .Wxe7t <±>xe7+ le is White who has to struggle for the draw despite being two pawns up.

Bl) 14.c3

This is perhaps more critical. As was shown with l 4.a4, it is useful to have the d4-square covered if White intends Wf3 . However, Black's chances are still preferable:

White can now try Bl) 14.c3 or B2) 14.0-0.

14 ....ig7 1 5.'1Wf3 l 5 .Wg4 i.f6+

1 4.a4 should be met by: 14 . . . ig7 ( 1 4 . . . Wg5 l 5.g4!+± rather helps White.) l 5.Wf3 ( 1 5 .a5 0-0 1 6.Wg4 t±>hs+ leaves Black with all the chances.) 1 5 . . . <±>f8! 1 6.f6

1 5 ....if6 1 6 ..id3 1 6.0-0 �f8 l 7.id3 ctJe7 l 8.ie4 ixd5 1 9.ixd5 tt'lxd5 20.Wxd5 !"ic5 allows Black to lift the blockade on d5, obtaining the better game.

9 .�xf6

16.'1Wd3 0-0 1 7 . .ia6 .ixa6 1 8 .'1Wxa6 .ih8!? Clearly a computer move. 1 9.'1Wd3 l"le8 20.'1Wg3t @f8 2 1 .'1Wh3 tll e7! 22.f6 tll g 8! 23.'1Wxh7 ixf6 24.0-0 .ig7 25 .l"lad l lll e7+ Black eventually criumphed in Droessler - Domancich, corr. 20 1 3 .

1 5 ...if6 1 6.E:adl 1 6.c3 ©f8! 17.id3 tll e7+ produces a well known strategic situation which is slightly favourable for Black. 1 6.a4 did not help White after the accurate: 1 6 . . . ©f8! 1 7.ixc6 l"lxc6 1 8.'1Wb3 ia8 1 9.a5 l"lg8 20.l"lfd l l"lc5 2 1 .a6 '1Wc8 22.a7 i¥fxf5 23.c4

6 5

4 3

2 1

1 6 ...ih4!! A star move, preparing to challenge the d5knight by a direct ... tll e7. 17.ie4 tll e7 1 8.0-0-0 1 8.0-0 .ixd5 1 9 .ixd5 lll xd5 20.'1Wxd5 l"lc5 2 1 .'1We4 .if6+ is also fine for Black, who has sufficient control of d5. 1 8 ...it.xdS 19.i.xdS i.f6i Black maintains a compact central structure and a fairly safe king, granting him the slightly better chances. B2) 14.0-0 it.g7 15.i¥ff3 l 5 .'\Wh5?! @f8! is fine for Black. The same applies to 1 5 .id3?! tll d4 1 6.ie4 in view of the simple l 6 . . . ixd5 l 7.ixd5 l"lxc2+ 1 5 .c3 can be met by the usual 1 5 . . . @f8 or 1 5 . . . 0-0 1 6.'1Wg4 Wh8 1 7 . .id3 l"lg8! with the idea 1 8 .f6? ixf6 1 9.'1Wf5 l"lg6+. After 1 5 .'1Wg4 most accurate is 1 5 . . . l"lg8!, for example 1 6.f6 @f8! 1 7.fxg?t l"lxg7 with a tremendous attack against g2.

17.ixc6 ixc6 1 8.c4 E:g8i With a slight edge for Black, although White's position is admittedly hard to break.

Chapter 7

1 1 th Move Alternatives

C) 1 1 .c4 A common pawn break, although it perhaps comes too early at chis point. Stilt, it has been employed by Nakamura and Volokicin here, and is thus worthy of examination. My preference is to head for an ending:

1 1 . ..Wa5t 12.Wd2 Wxd2t 13.i>xd2 .ih6t The next sequence of moves is forcing and doesn't require much explanation. Black loses a pawn in return for a strong centre and active piece play. 1 3 . . . @dS!? is an interesting alternative that requires further analysis.

14.i>dl 0-0 1 5.exfS Axf5 16.cxb5 axb5 17 ..ixb5 ll:l d4 18.lll e7t @g7 19.lll xfSt lll xf5 20 ..id3 20.llic2 d5 2 1 .b4 l'l:a7+±

2 1 .lll b5 2 1 .llic4 !i:fb8 22.g4 lli d4� 2 1 . .. d5 22.i.xf'S White is forced to exchange the dominant knight. 22.a4 e4+!

22 ... @xfS 23.a4 E:fd8 24.�el d4 25.E:a3 25.f3 j'!a6! 26.g4t @f4 27.!i:e4+ @xf3 28.j'!xeS @xg4 29.!i:e4t @h5 30.Ega3 f5+ 25 ... �ac8= Black's well-placed pieces more than make up for his pawn deficit, which he should soon recover anyway. I would enjoy applying some pressure as Black, although the position is objectively level.

Conclusion

Having reached one of the two principle tabiyas of the whole system after the thematic sequence 9 .ixf6 gxf6 1 0.llidS fS!, Chapter 7 deals with some minor 1 1 th move options for White: 1 l .'&d3?!, 1 1 .llixbS?! and 1 l .c4. As implied in the notation, the first two moves are dubious and White is struggling for equality if Black reacts in a proper manner. In the case of 1 l .'&d3?!, the correct reaction is 1 l . . . fxe4! l 2.1Wxe4 ig7, offering a pawn sacrifice which can be extremely troublesome for White. Indeed, if White responds with 1 3.llif6t ixf6 1 4.\Wxc6t id7 1 5 .\Wxd6, then 1 5 . . . \We7 1 6.0-0-0 1Wxd6 1 7.!i:xd6 ie7 leads to an ending where Black's two bishops and the awkward placement of the a3-knight more than outweigh the pawn deficit. White's best option (after 1 2 . . . !g7) seems to be the refined 1 3 .lli e3!? but even then Black persists with 1 3 . . . dS! 1 4.\WxdS \Wxd5 1 5 .llixdS 0-0 1 6.c3 ib7 1 7.llic2 j'!fd8 1 8 .llice3 lli d4!!, obtaining easy equality by tactical means. The sacrifice 1 1 .li.JxbS?! seems co be even worse as White's temporary initiative soon evaporates after the rather forced sequence 1 1 . . .axbS 1 2.ixbS ib7! 1 3.exfS j'!c8, when Black is ready to put his bishop on g7 unpin the c6-knight and then challenge White's control over d5. Black's extra piece and bishop pair are long-term assets, and I think that che analysis included shows the right way of defusing White's pressure and taking over the initiative. Finally, 1 l .c4 is best met by a forcing sequence going into an endgame in which Black's initiative fully compensates for the missing pawn.

9 .ixf6 a

1 1.ixh S!? Variation Index 1 .e4 c5 2.ttJf3 ttJ c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.ttJxd4 ttJ f6 5 . ttJ c3 e5 6.ttJ db5 d6 7.i.g5 a6 8.ttJ a3 b5 9.hf6 gxf6 10.ttJd5 f5 1 1 .bb5!? axb5 1 2.ttJxb5 1 2 .. J:l:a4!

A) 1 3.b4?! B) 13.ttJ dc7t?! ©d7 14.0-0 gxe4 1 5 .1Mfd5 Wff6 B l } 1 6.a4 B2) 16.ttJaS!? C) 13.ttJ bc7t ©d7 14.0-0 gxe4 C l } 1 5.c4 g g8!N C l l) 1 6.g3?! Cl2} 1 6.1Mf a4!? C2} 1 5 .1Mfh5 ttJ d4 C2 1 } 1 6.f4!? C22} 1 6.1Mfxf7t C23} 1 6.c3 tlJ e2t 17.©hl ©c6! 18. g3 ©b7 19.a4!? gc4! C23 1) 20.Wfxe2 C232) 20.ttJ b5!? B2) afrer 2 l .f3

2 1 . . . f4N

C23)

C2 1 ) after 2 1 .0ixd5

2 1 . . . @a7!N

n o t e to

1 8 .g3

20 . . . Wg7!N

99 101 101 1 02 1 03 1 03 1 03 1 05 1 05 1 06 1 07 1 07 1 09 1 10

Chapter 8 - l l .!xb 5 ! ?

1 .e4 c 5 2.llif3 lli c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.llixd4 Clif6 s.llic3 e5 6.llidb5 d6 7.i.g5 a6 8.llia3 h5 9.i.xf6 gxf6 10.lli dS f5 1 1 .i.xhS!? An ambitious sacrifice that leads to unclear play. The resulting positions are a bit scary for both players, with a lot of theoretical knowledge (and strong tactical skills) required. My feeling is that the line should end in a draw after correct play by both sides. 1 1 . .. axbS 12.llixbS The points of the sacrifice are quite obvious. White immediately gets two pawns and threatens a devastating knight fork on c7, while Black must lose more material or surrender the right to castle. 12 .. .:!3a4! The most active square for the rook, hitting e4 and gaining access to White's kingside. White can reply in three ways. We shall look at two somewhat dubious attempts first, before examining the most critical try: A) 13.b4?!, B) 13.llidc7t?! and C) 13.tlibc?t. 1 3 .c4?! 1''1xc4 14.0-0 Allowing the black king to escape to the kingside. 14.tll b c7t would transpose to 1 3 .lll bc7t lt>d7 1 4.c4?!.

1 6.a4N a) 1 6.b4 l'!x b5 l 7.l"1xc6 ib7!+ b) l 6.Wh5 ?! 0-0 1 7.b4?! was White's choice in Sulskis - Pileckis, Kaunas 2008, and at this point Black should have played: l7 . . . l"1xb5N l 8.l"1xc6 id7+ c) l 6.lll bc7t @f8 1 7.Wh5 h6! 1 8 .exf5 lll d4 1 9 .b4 l"1xc l 20.1"\xcl ixf5+ d) l 6.lll xe7 lt>xe7 1 7.l"1xc5 dxc5 1 8 .Wc l lll d4! 1 9 .Wxc5t \t>f6+ 1 6 . . . 0-0 l 7.b4 1"1xc l 1 8 .Wxc l ďż˝b7 1 9.exf5 ig5+ The position is better for Black. The d5-knight will be challenged while at the same time he maintains a material advantage and two powerful bishops.

A) 13.b4?! l:hb4! This is probably best, breaking up the force of White's attack. I also analysed 1 3 . . . Wh4!? in detail, but found it to be less clear.

14.llibc7t 14.lll xb4 lll xb4 1 5 .0-0 ii.el 1 6.l"1b l lll a6! 1 7.exf5 0-0 1 8 .f4 e4 1 9 .Wd5 lll c7! 20.lll xc7?! (20.Wxe4 lll xb5 2 l .l"1xb5 il.a6 22.f6 il.xf6 23.l"1h5 1"1e8 24.Wxh7t @f8 25 .1"1g5!+ gives White some drawing chances) 20 . . .Wxc7 2 1 .i:'!fe l was Sulskis - Cmilyte, Siauliai 2005, and now 2 l . . .il.h4!?+ would have guaranteed Black an edge. 14 ... lt>d7 1 5.0-0 Black should play:

1 00

9 .�xf6

1 5 ... l"lgS! A strong and flexible continuation, which enables the black queen to shadow her opposite number. By keeping the queen on d8, Black gives priority to the full activation of his pieces while waiting for White to declare his intentions. After all, it is White who is material down and must show something for it. Noc so good is 1 5 . . . �g5 ?! 1 6 .tll xb4 tll xb4 1 7.c3! Luther - Reinderman, Venlo 2000, when the absence of the queen from the queenside makes Black's king vulnerable. After the clumsy l 5 . . . gb7?! 1 6 .�h5!, it again becomes apparent chat the black queen is not able to take countermeasures against her white colleague.

16.lll xb4 1 6.�h5 is answered by 1 6 . . . �gS! 1 7.�xf7t i.e7+, followed by .. .'&g6, which put an end to White's attack in Cvak - Nedoma, corr. 2009. 1 6.g3 is a logical prophylactic measure but Black may now play 1 6 .. .l"�b7! . The inclusion of the moves g2-g3 and . . . !i:g8 favour Black, as can be seen after l 7.�h5 �g5 ! when the queen gets out: 1 8.�xf7t ie7 1 9 .tll xe7 lll xe7 20.tll e 6 (After 20.tll d5 Black has a pleasant choice between 20 . . . Wd8 or 20 . . . �g7, in both cases with a position close to winning for him.) 20 . . . �g6 2 1 .lll fSt gxf8 22.�xf8 fxe4 23.gfb l !i:c7-+ The smoke has cleared and it is obvious Black is winning, Luther - Leko, Essen 2002.

1 6 ... lll xb4 17.lll d5 l 7.c3 fails to impress with the black queen on d8, for example 1 7 . . . Wxc7 1 8.cxb4 and now both 1 8 . . . fxe4 and 1 8 . . . Wb7 1 9.�a4t We7 20.bS fxe4 Valencia Ciordia - Folk Gilsanz, corr. 2009, seem to win for Black. 17 ... lll xd5 18.�xd5 @e7 Black's two bishops should decide the issue sooner or later.

8 7

m .t.,� � � m � %a, �-, jWtm' ". ��

��.

" 'wr

��

: �.a1!• � � � � � �� 2 fj fj • ,,,,,, �� £,,'lf!fi,,%�fj,0!''f[j ""!i/• 3

1 � a

�r

�r�

- -�� c

19.l"lab l Intending t o invade o n b 8 , o r a t least scare Black into thinking chat he will. White has other moves of course, but it seems there is no real compensation. A march of the a-pawn is best dealt with as follows: 1 9 .a4 �c7 20.gab l f4 2 1 .a5 Wf6 22.gfc l l"lg6 23,!i:b6 Wd7 24.�d3 �g4 25 .g3 !i:h6! 26,�fl �hS 27.h4 l"lg6 28 .�g2 We2 29.l"lb8 i.d7-+ White was doomed in Kroes Sanga, corr. 2009. 1 9.exfS ixf5 20.l"lab l ie6 2 1 .�f3 (after 2 1 .l"lb7t Wf6 22.�f3t Wg7 the black king escapes to safety, leaving White without compensation) 2 1 . . .fS! 22.l"lb7t Wf6 23.l"lxh7 Atuan - Pommrich, corr. 20 1 1 , and here best appears: 8

7 6 54 3 2 a

23 . . . Wb6!N+ planning 24.�hS Wc6 25 .�h4t l"lgS! 26.g3 �f3--+

Chapter 8

1 9 ....ie6 20.�b?t @f6 2 1 .exf5 i.xf5 22.f4 e4 23.�dS �cs 24.�bS Black should now respond in thematic fashion:

HiKH � i. �

-�-�r�r!�H£

�� :-,� � ,,,,,%� m ��,,,,:; , �

�� 1��1,t �� "'�

�� ,� , � ,� � �, �>'//'/�/, , , 4 "

H�� g� , c

24 hS!+ Repelling the anack and enabling Black to consolidate his material advantage. .••

B) 13.lll dc7t?! The idea here is to free d5 for an early occupation by the white queen.

101

l l .ixb 5 ! ?

Bl) 1 6.a4 Starting the march of the a-pawn proves to be rather slow.

1 6 ... �gS 17.g3 l 7.a5 ll'lb4! Expelling the queen from her dominant position looks like the best option. 1 8.�a8 �h6! 1 9 .a6 1 9.ll'la7 ie7-+ 1 9 .g3 �h3� is similar. 1 9 . . . °Wh3 20.g3 l"i:h4 2 1 .�g2 2 1 .�h l f4 22.l"i:a3 (22.a7 fxg3-+) 22 . . . ih6! 23.l"i:e l (23 .a7 .ib7!) 23 . . . fxg3 24.l"i:xg3 (24.fxg3 !f4-+) 24 . . . if4-+ doesn't help White. 2 1 . . .�xg2t 22.©xg2 E:c4-+ After the exchange of queens the smoke will clear in Black's favour. 17....ib7! Provoking White into his next response. 1 8.a5 lll xa5 19.�d3 At first glance White's threats appear to be very dangerous. However, Black can now exert real pressure on the kingside:

1 3 ... Wd7 14.0-0 E:xe4 15.°WdS �f6 8

4 3

White can choose between two options: Bl) 1 6.a4 and B2) 16.lll aS!?.

19 ...�h4!! 20.lll dS 20.E:xa5 �h3 2 1 .'2ld5 comes to the same. 20.E:fd l ?! �h3 2 1 .'2ld5 l"i:h4! 22.l"i:xa5 f4! is bad for White with the rook on d l , as Black can

1 02

9.ixf6

always answer 23.'Ll b6t with 23 . . . 'it>d8-+ (with the king's rook moved to al there is 24.Ela8t here) .

1 8 .Elad l B:g8 1 9.g3 �e6 20.�c5 Eld4! 2 1 .'Llxd4 exd4 22.Wf a3 'Lle5 23.f4 'Llg4 24.Elfe l �h6+ gives rise to a powerful black attack.

20 ...Wfh3 2 1 .E:xa5 E:h4 22.E:fal ! 22.'Llb6t?? 'it>d8-+

Even after the (relatively) most resistant 1 8 .f3 Black has a fine reply:

22 ... f4!? 23.lb b6t 25.liJ bd5t 25.'Lle8t?? 'it>g5 !-+

©e6!

24.lbc7t

'it>f6

25 ... ©g7 26.Wff3 Wfxh2t 27.'it>fl E:h3 28.E:a7 ©h6 29.E:xb7 Wfhl t 30.'it>e2 30.�xh l Elxh l t 3 1 .'it>g2 Elxa l 32.'Llf6 Elg6 33.'Llcd5 fxg3 34.fxg3 Ela8 35.Elxf7 Elg?+ 30 ...Wfxal 3 1 .liJxf4 E:hl 32.liJd3 Wf dl t+ Black should win, although some accuracy is required. B2) 16.liJaS!? A typical move for this variation, trying to gain time while improving the knight's position. White's attack does look dangerous but it is merely an illusion.

1 8 ... 'it>c7 1 9.Wfxe4 1 9 .�b5 'Llxa7 20.�a5 �d8!! 2 1 .�xa? 'it>c6!-+ 19 ... 'it>xb6 20.Wfe3t liJd4 2 1 .f3 Black had obtained a completely winning position in Zelcic - Baci, Bizovac 2006. Best here is:

1 8 .Elfd l ? �e6-+ forces an empty-handed retreat as 1 9 .�c5 ?? fails to 1 9 . . . Ele l t!.

Chapter 8

Black would have easily clinched the game in his favour.

C) 13.c!Dbc7t The most natural move is the best one.

13 ... @d7 14.0-0 White's idea is to invade on h5 with the queen (while always keeping b2-b4 and c2-c4 ideas in reserve) . Black does best to grab the central pawn and keep his rook active. Before proceeding to examine this line though, we'll take a look at 1 4th move alternatives for White: l 4.liJb6t? ©xc7 1 5 .CDxa4 fxe4 ( 1 5 . . . '&h4!? 1 6.liJc3 liJd4+) 1 6.CDc3 ( 1 6.'&d5 ie6 1 7.'&xe4 f5 1 8.'&e3 '&b8 1 9.0-0 '&a7 20.'&xa?t CDxa7 2 1 .c4 CD c6+) 1 6 . . . l'!g8 1 7.CDd5t ©b8+ is obviously unacceptable. 1 4.c4?! l'!xc4 1 5 .0-0 The other major option at this point. But not 1 5 .liJ b6t? ©xc7 1 6.liJxc4 ib7 1 7.l'!cl ©b8 1 8.0-0 liJ d4+ with an optimal position for Black. 1 5 . . . liJd4 1 6.liJa8 1 6.liJb6t ©xc7 l 7.CDxc4 ©b8 1 8 .1Mfa4 fxe4 1 9 .'&b4t ib7 20.CDa5 1Mfc7+

1 03

1 l .�xb 5 ! ?

l 7 . . . l'!c5 1 8 .l'!ac l 1 8.b4 fxe4-+ 1 8 . . . fxe4 1 9 .1Mfxe4 f5 !-+ Providing the king with a good refuge square on f7, which should be enough for the win.

14... Elxe4 8

7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

We now begin another branch with Cl) 1 5.c4 and C2) 15.1Mfh5. 1 5 .CD a8? i.b7 1 6.liJab6t ©e6!-+ looks bad for White.

Cl) 1 5.c4 An underrated move which should be met with a flexible reply:

1 5 ... ElgS!N Activating yet another piece. Instead, 1 5 . . . E1xc4? 1 6 .Wd3! E1e4 1 7.f3± is the chief point of 1 5 .c4. White has another choice of moves: C l 1) 1 6.g3?! or Cl2) 1 6.V;Va4!?. 1 6.1Mfh5 ? always fails when the black queen has access to the g5-square: I 6 . . . '&g5 ! 1 7.1Mfxf7t ( 1 7.Wxg5 .Ei:xg5-+) l 7 . . . i.e7 l 8.g3 Wg6-+

CU) 1 6.g3?!

A precautionary measure on the kingside before

1 04

9 .ixf6

switching attention to the queenside. However, as my analysis shows, the weakening of the light squares should eventually prove fatal for White.

1 6 ...�b7 This move prepares . . . ©c8-b8, should it be necessary. Additionally, tlia8 is prevented. The bishop has to watch out for a2-a4-a5-a6, but with the pawn still on a2 it seems there is no danger. 1 6 . . . Wh4 is less clear as White is not forced to go for Wa4, and may venture instead l 7.Wb3.

17.'!Wa4!? Trying to disturb Black by creating an awkward pin on the knight.

1 9 . . . Wh3! The only move to play for a win but it looks strong. It exploits the fact chat the rook has not been lured co e2, so there is a threat of switching it to h4. I see no satisfactory continuation for White. 20.Wbs 20.tiJf6t ©xc7 2 1 .tlixe4 tiJd4-+ 20.tlia6 fxg3 2 1 .tlic5t ©c8 22.tiJ b6t ©b8-+ 20.Elfd l Elg6 2 1 .tlia6 fxg3-+ and Black should prevail in the attack. 20 . . . fxg3 2 1 .fxg3 Ele2 22.Elxf7t ©d8 23.tlie6t ©e8!-+

18 ... °1Wh4! 19.gd3 ge2! 20.gfl! The most resistant. Hopeless is: 20.Wb5 Elxf2! 2 1 .©xf2 Wxh2t 22.©e l (22.©fl fxg3-+) 22 . . . Elxg3 23.Elxg3 fxg3 24.'!Wxb7 Wf2t 25.©dl Wfl t 26.©c2 We2t 27.©c3 (27.©b3 tli a5t) 27 . . . Wf3t 28.©c2 tiJ d4t-+

1 8.gfdl This looks bad for White, but it's by no means easy to demonstrate a win.

20.Elf3 Elxb2+ allows Black to coordinate his forces for the final assault, for example: 2 1 .tiJbS Elg6!-+

1 8.Elad l Keeping f2 protected but restricting the king's breathing space. 1 8 . . . Wh4! The star move. The king should not be evacuated to c8 as this represents a loss of time. l 9.Eld3 1 9.©h l ?? Wh3-+

20 ... fxg3 2 1 .hxg3 2 1 .Elxg3 Elg6-+ 2 1 . .. e4 22.cS :i'!xb2 23.:i'!b3 gxb3 24.'!Wxb3 e3! 25.°!Wxe3 25.tiJf6t ©xc7 26.tiJxg8 Wh3 27.Wb6t ©c8 28.cxd6 exf2t-+

Chapter 8

1 05

l l .ixb 5 ! ? .

25 ... ltJ e5 26.�bl .ic6 27.�b4 Wfh3-+ Black prevails at the end of chis rich tactical line.

19 ... ©xeS 20.WxcSt liJdS! 20 . . . Wds 2 1 .lll f6t mfs 22.Wxdst lll xd8 23.lll xgS lt>xg8 24.a4 is an unclear ending.

Cl2) 1 6.Wfa4!?

21 .WxfS Wg5 This should be better for Black, if only slighcly. For example:

A good practical fighting chance that appears best under the given circumstances.

16 ...Wh4 17.g3 gxc4 We are at a crossroads: 1 8.WaS! Worse is: 1 8 .lll b6t ii>xc7 1 9.lll xc4 d5-+ 1 8 .Wa3 Wh3! 1 9 .E'.fc l ( 1 9 .lll f6t ii>xc7 20.lll xgS liJd4-+) 1 9 . . . E'.h4! 20.lll f6t ii>dS 2 1 .lll xgS Wxh2t 22.mfl Wh i t 23.ii>e2 E:e4t 24.md2 Wg2-+

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

22.tiJf6t ©e7 23.ltJxgSt Wxgs; To sum up, after 1 5 .c4 E'.g8 it is only 1 6.Wa4!? that yields White good practical chances. Even then the position should be at least slighcly better for Black ifhe plays in the most accurate manner. C2) 15.V.Vh5

This has been the most critical move in practice. White has a brutal threat of mate in one!

18 ....ih6! Instead, l 8 . . . lll d4 allows the stunning 1 9 .E'.fc l ! (but not 1 9.ii>h l E'.xg3!!-+) and White does okay in the complications . 1 8 . . . E:a4 1 9 .lll b6t! ii>xc7 20.lll d 5t 2 1 .lll b6t ii>c7= is j ust a draw.

lt>d7

l 8 . . .f4!? needs some analysis and may be a winning cry coo.

19.liJeS! A spectacular-looking move which forces Black into a decision at move 20.

1 5 ... ltJ d4 This is obviously the most aggressive, but Black has ocher good choices as well. l 5 . . . lll e7 is a logical move, seeking to challenge and destroy the grip imposed by the white knights. I found chat it is perfeccly viable, but White is not worse and has several ways co force a draw. 1 5 . . . Wh4!? is also playable, activating the queen (albeit at the cost of some material) . I found that it leads co a draw after best play but chose to concentrate on the knight move, which I believe offers White the most chances co go wrong.

1 06

9 .ixf6 .

C2 1) 16.f4!i' 'it>c6 17.c4! This move requires attention, as the position of the knights is now cemented and an avenue towards a4 has opened up for the white queen.

17... 'it>b? 1 8.'1Wh3 1 8 .a4 ctJ e6 1 9 .ctJb5 l"1xc4 20.a5 'it>bS 2 1 .a6 l'!c5! 22.CLJ bc3 �g7 seems to leave White without much of an attack. 18 ... 'it>bs 1 9.a4! .ie6 20.aS White does have some attack and Black must be careful to avoid unpleasant surprises. 20 .ixdS Clearing the atmosphere looks like the best option here. .•.

1 6.'it>hl allowed Black to consolidate and eventually win after 1 6 . . . 'it>c6 1 7.'\Wxf7 'it>b7! 1 8.c3 CLJ c6 1 9 .ctJe6t '1Wd7 20.°\Wxf5 l"l.h4 2 1 .'1Wc2 (2 1 .'1Wd3 'it>bS) 2 1 . . .WbS 22.ctJxfS l"l.xf8 23.f3 ib7 24.Wf2 l"l.h5 25 .l"l.ad l ctJ e7 26.'1Wb6 ctJxd5 27.l"l.xd5 l"l.f6+ in Kireev - Polovnikov, corr. 20 1 0.

21 .liJxdS

1 6.f3 can be splendidly met as follows: 1 6 . . . ctJ e2t!! l 7.Wf2 '\Wh4t 1 8.°\Wxh4 l"l.xh4 1 9.'it>xe2 l"l.c4! 20.ctJ b6t 'it>xc7 2 1 .CLJxc4 i.a6 22.b3 d5 23.c3 dxc4 24.b4 ig7 25.a4 e4+ Black eventually prevailed in Pintaudi - Bolignano, corr. 20 1 1 . 1 6.l"l.fd l !? 'it>c6 l 7.l'!d3! This is a very logical idea, bur it only leads to a draw after: 1 7 . . . l"l.gS 1 8 .l"l.c3t 1 8.'1Wxf7 CLJ e2t 1 9.'it>fl 1"1g7 20.ctJe6 ixe6 2 1 .'1Wxe6 '1Wd7 22.'1Wxd7t {22.CLJe7t l'!xe7 23.'1Wd5t lt>c7 24.Wa5t \tics 25 .'IWaSt 'it>c7 26.°\Wa5 t=) 22 . . . Wxd7 23.ctJf6t 'it>e6 24.tt:Jxe4 fxe4= is a balanced ending. 1 8 . . . 'it>b7 1 9 .'1Wxf7! CLJ e2t 20.'it>h l CLJxc3 2 1 .bxc3 l"l.g7 22.l'!b l t 'it>c6! 23.l"l.b6t A draw was agreed in Auch - Fritsche, corr. 2008, in view of the picturesque perpetual: 23 . . . 'it>c5 24.l"l.b5t Wc6 25 .l'!b6t=

2 1 . .. 'it>a?!N I like this prophylactic move, blocking the dangerous march of the a-pawn in advance. The only move seen in practice is 2 1 . . .exf4, when 22.a6 Wa8 produces a tense situation that has led to a draw in rwo correspondence games.

22.a6 Wfd7! 23.llJf6 23.b4? CLJ e2t 24.'it>h l CLJxf4 25.CLJxf4 {25 .l'!xf4 exf4 26.b5 �g7-+) 25 . . . exf4 26.b5 �g7 27.b6t 'it>a8-+

Chapter 8

23 ...'!Wc7 24.llJxe4 fxe4= The position is approximately balanced, but there is still play left. C22) 16.°!Wxf7t Black should choose the safest move here:

1 6 ....ie7! With the simple idea of chasing the white queen away by . . . Wf8 . 17.f3!? This appears the only reasonable try. l 7.lll b5?! Wf8 1 8 .lll f6t (or 1 8.llJ b6t l 9.Wd5 lll x b5 20.Wxb5 We8! 2 I .Wd5 22.lll xc8 Wxc8+ and the mass exchanges relieved the pressure) l 8 . . . @d8 l 9.Wxf8t 20.lll xe4 fXe4+ is a good ending for Black.

@d8 @c7 have l"lxf8

Even worse is: l 7.lll a8?! Wf8 l 8.lll f6t ( l 8.lll db6t @d8 1 9 .Wd5 lll e2t 20.@h 1 Wh6!-+ allows a well known tactical motif to make its appearance; l 8 .llJab6t @d8 1 9.Wxf8t ixf8+) 1 8 . . . @d8 l 9 .Wxf8t l"lxf8 20.lll xe4 fXe4 2 1 .lll b6 ib7 22.c4 lll e2t 23.@h l lll f4-+

C23) 16.c3 White's best cry - an attempt to play for the attack. I am satisfied that Black has enough resources here though.

16 ... llJ e2t 17.©hl ©c6! The king is heading to b8, slipping like an eel through the white knights. 18.g3 Denying Black the h4- and f4-squares, but weakening the long white diagonal. 1 8 .Wxf7?! \?;:Vd7! 1 9 .Wh5 lll f4 20.Wd l This was Marty - Cucchiani, Zurich 2004, and now best was:

0s -*- � � 8 � �. J ��, �d � � ' ; 6 ��·"--- -\�,,,, ��

s � �i� �-Btl:J ��"i• ��

�� ' � � � � ��nl· %� % 'i[!Ja fj �-00. 2 'i[!Ja 4

17 .. J�h4! 18.g3! '3h6 1 9.c3 llJe2t! 20.@g2 °!Wf8 2 1 .°!Wxe7t '!Wxe7 22.llJxe7 ©xe7 Nagatz - Heckler, Bad Lauterberg 1 98 l . White faces a rough fight for a draw in the endgame.

'ifj

,d ' ' %� i� "'•� a

�

1 07

l l .�xb 5 ! ?

20 . . . �g7!N 2 1 .l"lgl Inferior is: 2 l .g3?! lll xd5 22.lll x d5 �f7! (22 . . . ie6!? is not bad either.) With the pawn on g3 this creates a huge difference. 23.lll b4t (23.c4 l"lxc4-+) 23 . . . @d7 24.a4 (24.f3 l"lc4 25 .b3 [25.a4 h5+ or 25 .�a4t @e6+] 25 . . . l"lc5 26.c4 @es 27.lll d5 ib7+) 24 . . . ib7 25.f3 �c4! 26.a5 l"le3 27.a6 .ia8+ leads nowhere for White, and Black's attack should be decisive. 2 1 . . .liJxd5 22.lll xd5 ie6 23.c4 �a7!? 24.Wb3 !xd5! 24... @d7 25.lll f6t! @e7 26.lll xe4 fxe4 is less clear. 25.Wb5t @c7 26.�xd5 After 26.cxd5?! @d8+ the black king crawls back to the kingside with a winning position. 26 . . . @d8+ Black has the better chances.

1 08

9 .il.xf6

18 .. @b7 Hurrying to get to a safe haven. This is an important position. It is difficult for White to get at the black king since he is constantly oscillating between the two flanks. Now he can either try to attack the knight or start to rush forwards with his a-pawn. 1 9.a4!? An interesting try, threatening to advance the a-pawn at speed. 1 9.°1Wxf7 Ei:c4!+ leaves White without a good discovered check.

ixd5t 27.i>gl Wb6+ It seems that the material advantage and two bishops should tip the scales in Black's favour. 1 9 .Ei:ae l This move, employed by D. Mastrovasilis, is a quite logical way of playing. 1 9 . . . Ei:c4 20.tt:la6!? 20J!xe2? gxc7 2 l .ClJxc7 'Wxc7+ 20.'Wxe2? gxc7 2 l .'Wb5t Wa8 22.'Wa5t Wb8+

.t.� • �E � � � '"'"��"'" '��' ' : �-� s

'! , , � � �· -if � % � � � � -� 45 �� 1� , , %� �� %� � w-�W. 3 �%��r�� Jll% • Jflw· -�

1 9.Ei:fd l Another logical continuation, rounding up the knight by means of !"i:d2. However, after: 1 9 . . . i>b8! 20.a4 20.Ei:d2?! is proven tactically flawed after: 20 . . . !"i:c4! 2 l .li.'ib5 °1Wa5! 22.a4 li.'i d4! 23.!"i:xd4 (23.b4 'Wa8!) 23 . . . exd4 24.'Wxf7 'Wa8 25 .b3 !"i:xc3 26.i>gl (26.li.'i bxc3 'Wb7-+) 26 ... Ei:c5 27.b4 'Wb7!-+ 20 . . . ib7 2 l .°1Wxf5 The queen chase after 2 l .'Wxf7 ie7! 22.f3 (22.li.'ie6 'We8 23.°1Wxf5 Ei:d4!) 22 . . . !"i:f8 23 .'Wg7 (23.'Wh5 Ei:c4+) 23 . . .l'k4 24.li.'ie6 Ei:g8! 25 .'Wf7 'We8+ has a happy ending for Black.

2 8 ��}'.�� ••

� .: � � e

20 . . . ie6N Most clear-cut, if Black is only interested in equality. 20 . . . Wa8!? 2 l .b3! (2 l .ClJ ab4 ib7 22.f3 tt:lxg3t! 23.hxg3 gg8+) 2 l . . .gxc3 22.'Wxe2 ib7 23.Wgl �xd5 24.Ei:c l if3!?N (24 . . . gcs 25 .'Wb5� was balanced in D. Mastrovasilis Illescas, Calvia 2004) 25 .°1Wb5 ic6 26."\Wb4!?00 is also not fully dear. If instead 26.'We2? !"i:xcl 27.!"i:xcl Wb6 28.tt:lb4 .ib7+ or 26.l2J c7t 'Wxc7 27.Wa6t Wb8 28.l'hc3 i.b7 29 .'Wa7t i>xa7 30.Ei:xc7 Wb6+ Black can breathe easier. 2 l .lll ab4 Wa5! Forcing things before White can consolidate. 2 l . . .!"i:c5 22.'Wxe2! ixd5t 23.tt:lxd5 !"i:xd5 24.'Wf3 e4 25.Ei:xe4! fxe4 26.'Wxe4 'Wg5 27.gd l 'Wf5 28.'Wxd5t 'Wxd5t 29.!"i:xd500 is an interesting and probably balanced ending, but it seems that it's only Black who should exercise some care. 22.ClJ e3 li.'id4! 23.l2Jxc4 On 23.a3, then 23 . . . ClJ c6 defends. 23 . . ..ixc4 24.cxd4 Wxb4 25.dxe5 dxe5 26.'Wxf5! ixfl 27.'Wxf7t Wa6 28.Ei:xfl °1Wb7t

Chapter 8

29.'1Wxb7t Wxb7= Black's pawns are weak and his bishop is the wrong colour to promote on h 1 . The game should end in a draw.

22.f3?! l:!c5) 22 . . . ib7 23.Wgl ixd5! 24.Wxd5t Wb8 25 .a5 (25.°lWb5t E:b7 26.We2 '1Wd7 27.a5 fi.e7 28.a6 Elb6+) 25 ... \Wd7 26.b5 (26.a6 1Wc6+) 26 . . . E:c5 27.'1Wa2

19 Jk4! 1 9 . . . ©b8 allows 20.Ela3!t. .•

White's two most challenging responses are C23 1) 20.Wxe2 and C232) 20.lLlbS!�. 20.a5?! Elxc7 2 l .a6t gives Black even more choice: 2 1 . . .Wa7!? (or 2 1 . . .Wa8 as below) 22.Wxe2 ie6 23.Elfd l Elc5 24.c4 ixd5t 25.cxd5 Wb6+ This position is of course much better for Black.

C23 1) 20.Wxe2 B:xc7 Producing another tense situation, but the exchanges relieve the pressure on Black.

2 1 .aS After 2 1 .Elfd l Wa8! 22.Wf3 (22.a5 ilb7 23.a6 ixd5t 24.Elxd5 Wd7 didn't give White enough for his piece in Gonzalez - Mori, corr. 2005) 22 ... ib7 23.a5 '1Wd7 24.a6 ixd5 25.Elxd5 '1Wc6 26.b4 Wxc3 27.l:!d3t (27.Wg2 e4+) 27 . . . Wc6 28 .E:d5 ig7 29.b5 e4 30.Wxf5 Wc4 3 1 .E:b l Elb8 32.Elxd6 E:c5!+ Black defends everything nicely and should eventually win. 2 1 .°lWb5t looks frightening, but Black will be able to defend: 2 1 . . .WaS 22.b4 (22.ttJb6t?! ©a7 or

1 09

1 L.txb 5 ! ?

27 . . . e4! 28.b6 (28 .a6 ig7!) 28 . . . ig7! 29.a6 ixc3 30.Elab l f4! (30 . . . ia5 3 1 .E\fc l E:xcl t 32.Elxc l ixb6 33.°lWb2 Wd8 34.Elc6 Wa7 35.Elxb6 '1Wxb6 36.Wxhs+) 3 1 .E:fc l (3 1 .b7 ©a7 32.°lWb3 °lWc7+) 3 1 . . .fxg3 32.hxg3 '1We6 33 .'1Mfe2 id4+ The pawns are shielding the black king!

2 1 . .. ©a8! The customary answer, White is struggling for a good reply. 22.Wd3 22.Wf3 ib7 23.Wgl E:c5 24.tlib6t Wa7 25.'1Mfxf5 ih6+, or 22.f3 h5+ or 22.Wg l h5t should all be worse for White. 22.a6 ie6 23 .'1Mfb5 (23 .ttJb6t Wa7 24.'1Mf e3 E:c5 !+) 23 . . . ixd5t 24.'1Mf xd5t Wa7+ and Black has a standard advantage that he should be able to convert. 22 ... hS 23.B:fdl h4 24.a6 .ie6 25.Wf3 Wa7 26.b4 26.'1Mfe3t E:c5 27.b4 ixd5t 28.Elxd5 ih6-+ 26 ...hdS 27.B:xdS Wb8 28.c4 B:xc4 29.We3t was 30.bS .ih6 3 1 .Wd3 B:hc8 32.WxfS Wc7 33.Wf3 e4 34.Wf6 h3 35J�ad1 B:cl 36.Wxh6 Wc4 37.Wxcl Wxcl 38.b6 e3 39.b7t Wa7 40.bxc8=W Wxc8 41 .fxe3 We6 0-1 Guedes Jr. - Wemhoner, corr. 2009.

9 .�xf6

1 10

C232) 20.lll b S!?

e4 27.'!Mff4 ic5 28 .'1Mfe5 l"1c8+) 24 . . . Wc6t 25.i>gl lll c7 26.'ll xf5 l"1g8+±

�if - � , , ,%� � .• ,,Y,� � · � � �

: lii -f� � s4 Bfa" fBw �� '•%� �� 1� , , , ��.,,,, �% "//, ��·� Y,

3 � �� : %' 0 % %' 0%� � /� %�----% /,,,,,, ,_,,%� 2 The most critical move, maintaining a dangerous initiative.

20 ... i.e6 21 .:!'�fdl 2 1 .lll e3?! Elg4! 22.'ll xg4 fxg4 23.f3 '!MfcS+ is less testing. 2 1 ...lll d4! Forcing some wood off the board. 22.lll e3 lll xbS!

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

d '�Jfa" 'a"� a

23 ... �cS! The best defence, as has been verified by praxis. White has many interesting attacking possibilities at his disposal, but nothing clear. 24.c4 24.l"1a6 ElaS 25.Elc6 25 .Elda l ?! Elxa6 26.Eixa6 d5+ frees Black's game considerably. 25.'1Mff3t e4 26.Wf4 Eixa6 27.bxa6t i>as 28.g4!? '1Wh4!! 29.'ll xf5 '!Mfh3! 30.'!Mfxe4t d5 3 l .'!Mfa4 id7!= shows a brilliant defensive idea. 25 . . .Wf6! 26.'!Mf e2 ie7 27.lll c4 ixc4 28.'1Mfxc4 Eihc8 29.ElxcS Eixc8 30.'!Mfa2 30 .Wd5t?! i>c7 30 . . . ElaS 3 I .'!Mf c4 :E'ic8= With a draw. 24.lll xf5 d5+± is double-edged.

24 ... !i:a8!"' There are now two possible follow-ups: a

23.axbS!? 23.'ll xc4 is hard to assess, Black does best to keep it closed by 23 . . . '1Mf c7!? for example: 24.'ll e3! (24.axb5 '!Mfxc4 25.'1Mf g5 Wxb5 26.WdS ig7+; or 24.'ll xe5 dxe5 25 .axb5 '!Mfc4 26.'!Mf f3t

2s.@grn A sly precaution, avoiding checks on the long diagonal. The direct 25 .c5 Eixa l 26.c6t i>c7 27.Eixa l W b S 28.'1Mff3 (28.'1Mfe 2 ih6! 29.'ll c4! id5t 30.f3 Wxb5 3 1 .Ela?t i>xc6 32.'ll xe5t dxe5 33.:E'ia6t

Chapter 8

'it>c5 34.�f2t 'it>b4 3 5 .iMfe l t 'it>c5= is a fantastic drawing line) 28 . . . 1Mfxb5 29.l"i:a?t 'it>c8 30.l"i:a8t 'it>c7 3 l .l"i:a7t 'it>c8= leads to a draw by perpetual.

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

25 ...\WcS!m I like this as the black position looks extremely hard to break down. 26.:Sxa8 26.b4 ie7"f?. or 26 . . . l"i:g8"f?. with an unclear position. 26 ... @xa8 27.:Sal t @bs 28.:Sa6 '1Wb7 29.t!lixfS '1We4! 30.'IWgS 'IWxfS Agreed drawn in Strautins - Karacsony, corr. 20 1 0 , in view of: 3 1 .'IWdSt .ic8 32.:Sb6t 'itia8 33.:Sa6t @b8= Heavy stuff!

Conclusion

Chapter 8 has dealt with the tactical line l l .ixb5!? axb5 1 2 .tll x b5 l"i:a4!, a sequence that requires utmost precision from both sides and contains many entertaining tactical motifs. My analysis of this position verified my original feeling that che chances are equal, which in my view is only natural considering that White is giving up his important light-squared bishop in order to achieve the mess that arises on che board. The most critical continuation is undoubtedly 1 3 .tll bc7t 'it>d7 14.0-0 l"i:xe4. White has kept the

l l .ixb 5 ! ?

111

black king in the middle, has better development in return for the piece, and has an active queen who can swiftly switch from one side of the board to che ocher. In addition, White will cry to advance his queenside pawn mass. However, Black's pieces have their own avenues towards the white king, and his counterplay can be quick and virulent along the g- and h- files or on the long h l -a8 diagonal. After 1 4 . . . l"i:xe4 I consider the continuation l 5.c4 to be slighcly inferior for White in view of 1 5 . . . Ei:g8!, when Black maintains che better chances even after che active 1 6 .1Mi'a4!?. The established main line is 1 5 .�h5 , when I decided to offer l 5 . . . tll d4 as the best way to generate play and create the most annoyance for White, although with perfect play from both sides ic is still a draw. A line chat seemed intriguing after l 5 . . . tll d4, was 1 6.f4!? 'it>c6 1 7.c4! 'it>b7 1 8.�h3, followed by a march of the a- pawn to harass che black king before he seeded into safety. However, Black could defend by giving up his light-squared bishop for one of che knights and place his king in front che a-pawn, utilizing it as a kind of shield. The chances then would be equal. 1 6.�xf7t was che obvious move, but in chat case 1 6 . . . ie7! (intending co chase che intruder away by . . .�f8) leaves White in some difficulty, which che reader can check by consulcing the relevant analysis. Thus 1 6.c3 CLJ e2t 1 7.'it>hl 'it>c6! 1 8 .g3 'it>b7 l 9.a4!? became che main line of this chapter, with White keeping good compensation in view of che looseness of the Black position and insecurity of his king. Black has an excellent defensive resource in 1 9 . . . l"i:c4! though, when he will soon push the white pieces back and force exchanges. A line one has to memorize is 20.tll b5!? ie6 2 1 .Ei:fd l tll d4! 22.CLJe3 tll xb5! 23.axb5!? l"i:c8!, with correspondence chess confirming that the black position is not worse. The reader can confirm this by consulting the end of the chapter; indeed this whole line is more about moves and tactics rather than strategy, so black players need to do their homework.

9 .ixf6 1 1. g3 Variation Index 1 .e4 c5 2.lbf3 lb c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.llixd4 llif6 5 . lli c3 e5 6.lli db5 d6 7 ..ig5 a6 8.llia3 h5 9 ..ixf6 gxf6 lO.lDd5 f5 1 1 . g3 fxe4 1 2 ..ig2 i.e6 1 3 ..ixe4 .ig7! 1 4.�h5! 14 ... E:cS! 1 14 1 14 1 15 1 16 1 17

A) 1 5.0-0 lb e7 Al) 1 6.llixe7 A2) 1 6.E:adl B) 1 5 .c3 C) 1 5.E:dl

Al) after 2 l .cxb 5

A ) note t o I 5 . . . 1U e7

2 1 . . .�c7!!

C) after 3 l .bxa4

3 1 . . . b3!N

Chapter 9

1 .e4 c5 2.tli8 tli c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tlixd4 tlif6 s.tlic3 e5 6.tli dbS d6 7 ..igS a6 s.tlia3 bS 9.Axf6 gxf6 10.tlids f5 I Lg3 A move designed to overprotect the light squares in the centre while shielding against attacks along the g-file. 1 1 . .. fxe4 12 ..ig2 .ie6 1 2 . . . if5 1 3.f3!? e3 1 4.f4� is complicated, and perhaps what White wants in this line. The text is more thematic. 1 3 ..ixe4 .ig7! A harmonious position for Black, who is certainly not afraid of the check on f6. With the knight passively placed on a3, such material gaining operations are condemned to failure in the Sveshnikov. 14.�hS! Preventing castling is the only idea that somehow j ustifies White's play. Otherwise Black will castle and continue with .. .f5 , with a clear advantage. 1 4 .tll f6t?! is dubious, and after 1 4 . . . .ixf6 1 5 . .ixc6t ©e7 1 6.ixaS \Wxa8 Black has tremendous compensation for the exchange. For example: 1 7.f3 ( 1 7.0-0 hS!-t intending 1 8.f3 El:g8! 1 9 .c3 h4 20.g4 h3 2 1 .\We2 .ig5 22.tll c2 fS !+; or 1 7.El:gl b4! 1 8 .tll b l El:c8+ with the idea 1 9 .c3 .ig5!) 1 7 . . . h5! 1 8.\We2

1 13

l l .g3

1 4 .\Wd3?! should be answered by:

� �� 8 �.i � �-- .."* %� r�-�-· 6 '%��:�,�� .. .. % � � � 5 ��· -�� }£ � � � � � �� 1� �� :2 � .. ..%� � 0 /�....:!, :�. . �� (Jef . . . . .. �

%�

� c

� . �� e

1 4 . . . 0-0! 1 5 . .ixh?t ( 1 5 .g4 \Wh4! 1 6.\Wg3 [ 1 6.0-0-0 .ixg4 1 7.f3 .t.e6 1 8.tll c7 dS !+J 1 6 . . .\Wxg4 1 7.\Wxg4 ixg4 1 8.tll e3 id? 1 9.0-0-0 f5 20 . .ig2 El:ad8! 2 1 .El:xd6 tll d4+ does not change the evaluation) 1 5 . . . ©hS 1 6.g4 ( 1 6.0-0? f5-+) 1 6 . . . .ixg4 1 7.\Wg3 .ie6 1 8 . .ie4 .ih6+ Black has a clear advantage. 14.0-0?! 0-0 1 5 .c3 f5+ leads to White playing a Sveshnikov main line position a whole tempo down. An example of how things could evolve is:

.i ��.".a. ..%��• . · ·"� 6 ra:�f...·��' l�lii 5 �@/.. �� .� }£.l· � 3 �, w�· ·%��ow�...%wlj 2 /�. o · .. s

�

:•//,;

�-

�

�-%

st ·%� 1��:= . a

1 6.ig2 El:b8 1 7.tll c2 a5 1 8.a3 ©h8 1 9.\We2 \Wd7 20.l"lad l e4! 2 1 .f3 tll d4! 22.tll xd4 .ixd5 23 .\Wd2 b4! 24.axb4 axb4 25.fxe4 bxc3 26.bxc3 fxe4 27.l"lxfSt El:xf8+ Black had slightly the better of it in Caruana - lvanchuk, Reggio Emilia 20 1 1 . 1 4.c3?! 0-0 1 5 .tll c2 f5 will most likely transpose to 1 4.0-0?!, unless White deviates with 1 6 .tll f4 .id? l 7.tll e6 ( 1 7 . .id5t ©h8 1 8.tll e6 .ixe6

1 14

9 .�xf6

1 9 .ixe6 ttJ e7+) 1 7 . . . ixe6 1 8 .ixc6 gc8 1 9 .idS Wf6 20.0-0 f4 2 1 .ltJb4 a5 22.ixe6t (22.Wb3?! gc4! 23.ixe6t Wxe6 24.ttJd3 WdS+) 22 ... Wxe6 23.WdS Wf7! 24.Wxf7t @xf7!+ when Black obtains the better ending.

impressive) 1 8 . . . Ei:cS 1 9.Wf3 the most accurate seems to be:

14.. J'kS!

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

1 9 . . . WgS!N+ Threatening . . . ig4 and also intending to dominate the a3-knight by . . . Wg6. Instead, in Zapata - Illescas, Linares 1 994, there followed 1 9 . . . Wd7 and now 20.gd3! (rather than 20.l"i:d2?! .ih6!) 20 .. .fS 2 1 .Wd l ! 1"\f6 22.ltJ c200 would have been unclear. a

A key move in this variation, preparing to contest control of d5 by means of . . . ltJ e7 and, if necessary, . . . 1"\c5 . We shall examine White's three main options: A) 1 5.0-0, B) 1 5.c3 and C) 1 5.�d l .

A) 1 5.0-0 This appears less exact after the thematic:

1 5 ... ltJ e7 White can try Al) 16.ltJxe7 or A2) 1 6.�adl . The alternatives are even less impressive: 1 6 .WgS ?! is bad due to: 1 6 . . . ttJxdS l 7.Wxg7 Wf6! 1 8 .Wxf6 ltJxf6 1 9 .ib7 l"lc7! 20.ixa6 b4 2 1 .ltJbS 1"\c6!? 22.ib7 (22.a3? b3 23.cxb3 @e7+) 22 . . . 1"\xc2 23.l"i:ac l (23 .a4 @e7+) 23 . . . gxb2 24.f4 @e7 25 .gc7t id7 Black stands well. 1 6 .gfd l appears illogical; what on earth is the other rook doing on a l ? After 1 6 . . . ttJxdS 1 7.ixdS 0-0 1 8.c3 (an attempt to justify the placement of the a l -rook by 1 8 .c4 bxc4 1 9.l"i:ac l c3 20.gxc3 gxc3 2 1 .bxc3 Wes+ is by no means

Al) 16.lll xe7 Relinquishing the central outpost cannot be critical.

1 6 .. .'�xe7 17.�adl l 7.c3 d5 18 . .ifS .ixf5 1 9.WxfS We6+ is at least slightly better for Black. 17 b4 18.lt:lbl h6!i' An almost untried suggestion. .•.

18 . . . gcS 1 9.c3 a5 ( 1 9 . . . dS!? 20.cxb4 l"i:c4 2 1 .ifS gxb4 22.ltJc3 d4 23.ltJe4 l"i:xb2 24.f4 ixf5 25.WxfS We6 26.fxeS 0-0 27.ltJf6t i.xf6 28.exf6 Wxf5 29.l"i:xfS 1"\d8 30.ggSt @f8 3 1 .gg7 1"\d6 32.gxh7 also proved to be equal in Pertinyez Soria - Ramos Verdu, corr. 2009, which was agreed drawn at this point.) 20.cxb4 (20.a3 d5 will just transpose) 20 . . . axb4 2 1 .a3 d5 22.axb4 gc4= has equalized in a decent number of games.

19.c3N 1 9 .a3 Vanchak - Peschardt, email 2003, and now 1 9 . . . aSN 20.c3 transposes co the next note.

Chapter 9

l l .g3

1 15

19 ... aS 20.cxb4 20.a3 '\Wd7! 2 1 .:B'.d2! (2 1 .cxb4 axb4 22.axb4 d5 23.tlic3 d4+ looks slightly better for the second player as he has managed to control the light squares in a satisfactory manner) 2 1 . . .0-0 22 . .id5 (22.'\Wf3 gb8=) 22 . . . :B:c5 23 .'\Wd l gd8! 24.axb4 (24 . .ixe6 fxe6f!) 24 . . . axb4 25.cxb4 gb5 26.tlic3 gxb4= is also equal. 20 ... axb4 2 1 .a3 hxa3 22.t/Jxa3 Wfd7! Kolev and Nedev claim that Black is slightly better here. However, the computer has a strong suggestion:

17.hdS O-O Black has castled and is ready to shake White's hold on d5. In view of the awkwardly placed knighr on a3 , the task of equalizing should not be too difficult. 18.Wi'e2 This has been the subject of much debate in correspondence chess. The idea is to play c2-c4 rather than c2-c3.

23 ...ďż˝g4 24.W/h4 ďż˝xdl 25.:B:xdl 0-0 25 . . . h5!? frees the h6-square for the rook and is worthy of consideration. 26.tlic4 W/ds 27.Wlg4 Wigs 28.Wie2;i Black doesn't seem to have any real advantage, despite his extra exchange, in view of his opponent's light-squared domination. Of course, there is no chance of Black falling into an inferior position provided he proceeds cautiously.

l 8.c3 prepares to bring the knight to the centre, and after 1 8 . . . :B:c5 the strategic battle is reaching a climax. White has a choice between relinquishing the outpost on d5 or protecting the bishop with '\Wf3. a) 1 9 . .ixe6 fxe6 20.tlic2 does not look impressive for White. I think Black should react with: 20 . . . a5 2 1 .gd2 d5= An approximately equal position, as in Becerra Rivero - Sarkar, New York 2008.

A2) 1 6.:B:adl

b) 1 9.'\Wf3 '\Wd7 20.:B'.d3 'itih8 2 1 .tlic2 !h3 22.:B:e l f5f! was excellent for Black in Berg Zezulkin, Rowy 2000.

White fails to achieve his positional aims with chis standard reply.

c) 19 . .ib3!? tries to keep the bishops opposed without compromising the position of the white

1 16

9 .!xf6

queen. 1 9 . . . �d7! is most flexible, and after 20.gd2 the position is unclear. Black has good chances after either 20 . . . ig400 or 20 . . . e4? .

18 .. Jks 19 ..L:e6 Black had no problems after 1 9 .c4 ixd5 20.gxd5 gxd5 2 1 .cxd5 �c8 22.�d2 (22.Cll c2 eyes c6, but as it turns out Black can even ignore the threat: 22 . . .f5!? 23.'ll b4 f4 24.Ele l gf7 25.'ll c6 �h3 26.�fl �f5 27.'ll dS gf6 28.'ll e6 ih6 29.gcl fxg3 30.gcst @f7 3 1 .hxg3 e4? A logical variation, after which Black is not at all worse.) 22 . . . e4! 23.Cll c2 ixb2 24.'ll b4 �c3! 25 .�g5t "®g7 26.�e3 f5 27.'ll xa6 gas 28 .°®b6 �a7 29.°®xb5 ia3 30.'ll b4 gbs 3 1 .�a6 "®xa6 32.Cll xa6 gb2+ White had to play well to draw in Simmelink - Kopasov, corr. 2009.

22 ... e4 23.bxa6 E:a5 24.lll c2 Wb6 25.a3 E:xa6 26.b4 go 27.bS E:a8 28.i;bcl gaf"8 29.a4 h5! Black's strong attack was enough to eventually bring home the full point. B) 1 5.c3 This will most likely transpose to variation C, but there are still some possibilities to explore.

19 ... fxe6 20.c4 d5! 2 1 .cxbS

1 6 .°®g5 ?! is met by 1 6 . . . 'll xd5! l 7."®xg7 'it>e7! 1 8 .°®g5 t ( 1 8.0-0 'll f6 1 9 .°®g5 "®b6!t) 1 8 . . . 'll f6 1 9.ig2 Elg8 20.°®d2 h5 with an initiative for Black.

1 6 ...Wxe7 17.E:dl 1 7.0-0 d5 l 8 .if5 ixf5 l 9.°®xf5 "®e6+ is, as usual, excellent for Black.

22.E:bl 22.bxa6 °®b6!=, intending . . Jh5 , is the brilliant point of Black's idea. For example 23.'ll b l (23.gcl l'fa5� does not change much) 23 . . . ga5 24.'ll c3 e4 and Black has terrific Benko type compensation for the sacrificed pawns.

17 .. J'kS! 18.0-0 h6! 1 8 . . . d5?! 1 9.if5 ixf5 20."®xf5 "®e6 2 1 .°®d3! (2 1 .°®xe6t fxe6 22.f4 e4 23.f5 'it>e?+) 2 1 . . .0-0 22.Cll c2 Eld8 23.gfe l !;!; looks more pleasant for White, as Black has no clear plan and the slightly worse pawn structure. 19.lll c2 1 9 .�f3 "®d7!

Chapter 9

l l .g3

1 17

1 9.if5!? 0-0 20.iiJc2 d5! 2 1 .iiJb4 a5 22.iiJd3 gc6 23.gfe l e4 24.ibf4 gd6+±

2 1 . .. a5! Striking whilst the iron is hot!

19 ... d5 20.if5 '!Wg5!f± Black at least equalizes by forcing queens off.

Too slow is 2 1 . . .Wf7?! 22.iiJd4 �xd4 23.'.Wxd4 when the loss of his dark-squared bishop means that Black will suffer.

C) 1 5.gdl White delays castling and initiates an effort to efficiently control d5. The move order is rather irrelevant here, White may start with the text move or 1 5 .c3 .

15 ... ib e7 1 6.c3 :!k5! Black pressurizes the d5-knight with all his forces. This is, in my opinion, the best way to play for a win. 17.iiJb4!? l 7.'.Wg5 ?! is a strange decision leading to a pleasant endgame for Black. After 1 7 . . . ibxd5 l 8.'.Wxg7 '.Wf6 l 9 .'.Wxf6 iiJxf6 20.ib7?! (20.ig2 We?+) 20 . . . We7! 2 1 .ixa6?! gbs in Berg McShane, Germany 2003, Black had a big advantage since the bishop is trapped on a6. 17 ... '!Wb6 18.'!Wg5 \tf8 19.'!We3 f5 20.�g2 e4 Black wants to restore the coordination of his pieces by placing his king on fl. 21.tll ac2 After this move, however, he has to change direction.

22.tll d4 �c4!? The point, keeping the white king in the middle. 23.tll bc2 23.b3 i.£7 24.ib bc2 iiJd5! 25 .'.Wg5 1Dxc3+ 23 ... @fl 23 . . . b4!? has an excellent score in correspond ence games. It seems fully viable, but one good line is enough. 24.tll b3 White tries to get out of his difficulties through simplification. 24.b3?! id3+ is obviously unacceptable. 24.ih3!?N looks more to the point. 24 . . . b4!? 25 .ixf5 bxc3 26.bxc3 gxf5 27.iiJxf5 '.Wxe3t 28.iiJfxe3 ixc3t 29.i"ld2 ixa2+ should be excellent for Black, yet it is not absolutely clear that this line is forced. 24.a3!N, intending ifl , could be the best choice of all. 24 . . . h5! 25 .ifl ih6 26.ixc4t bxc4 27.'.We2 leads to a mess, and now comes either 27 . . . h4+± or 27 . . . °1Wxb2 28 .'!Wxh5t ibg6 29.0-0 ig7 30.°1Wg5?. In this position Black can force a draw by 30 . . . ih6 3 1 .'.Wh5 ig7, and as far as I can see this is his best option.

24...�xb3 24 . . .!k6 25.iiJcd4!;!; 25.axb3 b4! Black is in time to create counterplay. 26.c4

1 18

9 .ixf6 .

Sacrificing the pawn is the right decision. Otherwise White is worse.

the b-pawn in Asrian - Moiseenko, Beersheba 2005.

26.cxb4 axb4 27.0-0 .E:b8 28.ltJd4 .E:d5+

32.lll e3 .if6;J With such a strong b-pawn Black has more than enough compensation.

26 ....ixb2 27.0-0 �b8 28.�f4!? 28.f3?! achieves nothing after 28 . . . d5 29.fXe4 dxc4!, intending 30.exf5 B:e5! 3 1 .'11Mxb6 !!xb6+

29.�xd6 �xd6 30Jhd6 a4! 3 1 .bxa4

Conclusion

In Chapter 9 we continued our examination of 9 . .ixf6 gxf6 1 0.ctJd5 f5 by looking at the practical continuation 1 1 .g3. With this move White aims at fast development and control of the light squares in the centre, hoping that the kingside fianchetto will also provide extra safety for his king after castling. Black should continue with 1 l . ..fXe4 1 2 . .ig2 ie6 1 3 ..ixe4 ig7! 14.'\!Mh5! i'!c8!, preparing to challenge White's control over d5 by ... ctJe7. His task is aided by the fact that the a3-knight is still out of play and White has not taken any measures to improve its position. In most cases Black succeeds in carrying out his plan by playing . . . liJ e7 in combination with a well-timed . . . B:c5, placing d5 under heavy observation. A typical line is 1 5 .0-0 ctJ e7 1 6.B:ad l ltJxd5 1 7.ixd5 0-0 1 8 .c3 B:c5 , when White will have to fight to maintain control over the critical squares. l 9.'11M f3 '11M d7 20.Ei:d3 @h8 2 1 .ctJc2 .ih3 22.B:e l f5 leads to a position where Black has avoided the exchange of light-squared bishops, making White's play look pointless. The more topical 1 5 .Ei:dl leads to a sharp situation after 1 5 . . . ctJ e7 1 6.c3 B:c5! 1 7.ltJb4!? '11M b 6 1 8 .�g5 @f8 1 9.'11M e3 f5 20.�g2 e4. There are mutual chances here as Black's loss of castling is compensated for by his bishop pair, good control over the light squares in the centre, and the reduced scope of the g2-bishop. It is worth studying the ensuing play in depth, but my conclusion is chat Black is at lease equal ifhe stays tactically alert.

9.ixf6 1 1.c3 and 1 1.exfS Introduction Variation Index 1 .e4 cS 2.�f3 � c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.�xd4 � f6 5.�c3 e5 6.� dbS d6 7.i,g5 a6 8.�a3 b5 9.i,xf6 gxf6 1 0.�d5 1 0...fS

120 121 122 123 125 125 126 127 128

A) 1 1 .d B) 1 1 .exfS i,xfS B l ) 12.�f3?! B2) 12.i,d3 B3) 12.d i,g7 B3 1) 13.�f3?! B32) 13.�c2 0-0 B32 1) 1 4.a4 B322) 1 4 ..ie2!?

28 . . . e3!!

83 1 ) note to 1 4 .�d3

82) after 29Jld6

8 1 ) after 28 .itd5

29 . . . �h4!!

22 . . . '&e6!N

1 20

9 .i,xf6

�.i � �· 8 i. � '"" m' i q ' " "" � � � r� ��r�� . . .�� •• 4� �,-�. ��W.�� '0��,��,� .. �&� i.tw� [§ 23 �� w.t&J��w· % �L��ird,, . 8:

1 .e4 c5 2.ctJf3 ctJ c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.ctJxd4 ctJf6 5.ctJc3 e5 6.ctJdbS d6 7.Ag5 a6 8.ctJa3 b5 9.Axf6 gxf6 10.llJdS f5 In this chapter we shall consider both A) 1 1 .c3 and B) 1 1 .exfS.

A) 1 1 .c3 This is a common move order to enter the line l l .exf5 �xf5 1 2.c3 whilst avoiding the possibility of 1 2 . . . ie6 1 3 .tll c2 ih6!?, which is outside our repertoire anyway. Black surely doesn't want to lose a tempo by playing . . . ie6 here, so he has to develop his king's bishop to g7.

1 1 . ..�g?! Black should not give in to material considerations. l l . . . fxe4?! 1 2 .ixb5! axb5 l 3.tll x b5 ie6 l 4.tll bc7t �d7 l 5.tll xa8 ixd5 1 6.�xd5 �xa8 l 7.�xf7t is a forced sequence that Black should avoid. White is slightly ahead on a material count, but this is at lease close to balanced. The ocher main factors, however, are clearly in White's favour: Black must practically protect his king for the rest of the game while White's is quite safe, White has no weaknesses in his pawn structure while Black has nothing but weaknesses (quire a difference!) , and finally White's piece activity will be celling once he activates his rooks. The conclusion comes naturally: White is much better. 12.ctJxbS?! The mainstream option of l 2.exf5 ixf5 1 3 .tll c2 transposes to line B32, while 1 2.id3 ie6 is analysed in Chapters 1 3 to 1 5 . 1 2.tll c2?! is a dubious experiment which should be met by 1 2 . . . fxe4. Of course! Now that he is developed, Black should grab the pawn. With 1 3 .tll ce3 ie6 1 4.g4 White wants to secure control of the light squares, so Black should shake the bind immediately by l 4 . . . tll e 7! l 5 .ig2 lll xd5 1 6 .tll xd5 h5!. According to Yakovich, Black has the better game. A possible continuation IS:

1 7.h3 ( 1 7.a4! ? b4! 1 8 .cxb4 hxg4 1 9.ixe4 E'1a7+ and Black is at least slightly better in view of his two bishops, mobile kingside pawn mass and safer king.) 1 7 . . . E'1c8 1 8 .ixe4 hxg4 1 9 .hxg4 E1xh l t 20.�xh l �h4 2 1 .i.f3 Chuprov - Zinchenko, Pardubice 2008. And now instead of 2 1 . . .ih6+ as played in the game, both 2 1 . . .�f8Nt and 2 1 . . .E'1c5Nt promised a larger plus.

12 ... axbS 13.�xbS �b7 14.llJb4 1 4 .exf5 0-0+ I must admit that prior to writing chis book I had a different refutation in mind here:

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

14 ... �c8! This move, luring the white queen to a4, is best. For at least fi.ve years I was certain that the correct continuation was:

Chapter 1 0

121

l l .c3 and l l .exf5 Introduction

1 4 . . . 1Wd7 However, a relatively recent correspondence game shook my confidence. 1 5 .exf5! 1 5 .1Wd5 !'lc8 1 6.exf5 can be met by both 1 6 . . . 0-0+ and 1 6 . . . 'i>e7!?+. 1 5 . . . f8! Avoiding the crap: 1 5 . . . 0-0? 1 6.f6! ixf6 l 7.1Wf3 ltlxb4 1 8 .1Mf g3t +-

8 7 6 45 3 2

1 5.""1a4 It is now clear to me that Black should be able to unravel sooner or later, making his extra piece a significant factor. A possible continuation is: 1 5 ...'Wd7 16.exf5 1 6 .lll d5?! 0-0 1 7.lll b6 occurred in Schilling Staniszewski, corr. 2008, and the most accurate would have been 1 7 . . . We7 1 8 .lll xc8 !'lxc8+ with a large plus for Black. 16 ... ©£8! 17.0-0 !'lg8 18.!'ladl .if6 19.g3 h5 20.lll ds Wxf5! 20 . . . id8 2 1 .Wfe4+! 2 1 ..id3 'We6 22 ..ie4 .ids! 23.lll e3 h4

1 6.a4!! I had underestimated chis move in my notes. Alternatively, 1 6.f6? ixf6 1 7.1Wf3 lll xb4 1 8.\Wxf6 loses to 1 8 . . . lll c2t! 1 9.©d2 ""1xb5. My main line was 1 6.0-0 l"lg8 1 7 .g3 !'la5!, when White is in real trouble and must accept that he has totally lost the battle for initiative. See the game Sokolov - Lautier, Val d' Isere 2004. The reason I had dismissed 1 6.a4 was that I had trusted an existing game without analysing it. 1 6 . . . \Wc7 Now White has the very deep reply: 1 7.f6!! 1 7.ltld5 \Wd8 1 8.ic4 e4 1 9 .0-0 lll e5+ was bad for White in Van Kempen - Binelli, e-mail 1 999, and is the game I had relied upon. l 7 . . . ixf6 1 8 .Wf3 As played in Salvatore - Nocci, corr. 2009. The double attack on f6 and c6 forces a long tactical sequence. Interested readers may wish to check this with a compucer, or you can j ust take my word that it ends up being equal.

In spite of its complicated appearance the position should be at least slightly better for Black. For example:

24.i.fS 'Wh6 25 ..ixcS 25.ltlg4? l"lxg4 26.1Wxg4 hxg3+ 25 ... hxg3 26.fxg3 'Wxe3t 27.<tfihl .ixc8 28.�xc6 .ih3 29.'Wxd6t .ie7 30.'WdS f6--+ Black's two bishops are a fearsome force in conjunction with the remaining pieces. B) 1 1 .exf5 This is a popular choice, usually initiating a light square campaign based on c2-c3, lll a3-c2-e3, id3 etc.

9 .i.xf6

1 22

1 1 . ...ixfS

.i � �·� �-

i U%� i ��'U%�,�U%� 1m 6 1. m'Al�i�

The simplest way to meet 1 5 .E:dl is: 1 5 . . . llixc2t 1 6.llixc2 �xc2 l 7.E:d5 !? ( l 7.'1Wd5 ixd l 1 8.Wxd l ih6-+ or 1 7.E:d2 ih6! 1 8 .Wxh8? Wa5!-+) 17 . . . Wa5 t! 1 8 .i'e2 Wxa2 1 9 .11Wc6

� i 'U llJ '�'• .tU � � �� 4 � � iiill ,� �� 32 ��, , , :�, - �� ,. � �;,,,,8��,,.,,��,�8 '\UKJ� }!,�3� 8 �.�, , � 1 �l:,% - § � � . �M s

i: ,,, a

!+., f

IF? h

We shall consider Bl) 12.Wf8?!, before moving on to White's more standard plans of B2) 12 ..id3 and B3) 1 2.c3.

Bl) 12.Wf8?! This greedy move should rebound on White.

12 ... tlid4! 13.tlic7t Wfxc7 14.Wfxa8t <Jle7 However, Black needs to know some theory. The following lines underline White's difficulties: 15.c3 This has by now been refuted, but the alternatives are also uninspiring. l 5 .Wxa6?! offers no hope whatsoever. After 1 5 . . . b4 1 6.llib5 llixc2t 1 7.i'dl Wc5-+ White is doomed. l 5 .id3 is a relatively better try, yet it doesn't suffice after: 1 5 . . . Wl'a5t 1 6.@fl ixd3t 1 7.cxd3 Wd2 1 8 .We4 ( 1 8.Wb7t?! led to White's demise after 1 8 . . . i'f6 1 9 .We4 ih6 20.E:e l Wxb2 2 1 .lli b l E:c8! 22.Wxh7 if4-+ in Carapinha Leiner, corr. 20 1 0.) 1 8 .. .f5 1 9 .We3 Wxb2 20.E:e l @f7+ White's queenside disappears whilst he has no real play to compensate, as his rooks are very passive.

1 5 ... b4! Ensuring that the knight remains on d4 for the next crucial stage. l 6.cxb4 Wl'b6! 17 ..ixa6 Things are easier after l 7.ic4? Wxb4t 1 8.i'fl Wxb2 1 9 .E:e l Wxa3 20.Wa?t i'd8! 2 1 .Wb8t (2 1 .Wb6t i'c8-+) 2 1 . . .ic8 22.Wb6t iid7 23 .Wa7t i'c6 24.Wa8t �b7 25.�d5t i'xd5 26.Wxb7t i'e6 27.Wc8t i'f6-+ as the king escapes while Black maintains a great material advantage. 17 ...Wfxb4t 1 8.<Jlfl .ih6! 19.Wl'b?t 1 9.Wxh8 1:Wxb2 20.Ele l '1Wxa3 2 1 .E:xe5t dxe5 22.Wxe5t llie6!! 23 .1:We2 (23 .'1Wxf5 1:Wc l t 24.i'e2 lli d4t-+) 23 . . . iif8 24.i'gl lll f4 25 .'IWfl ih3! 26.gxh3 1:Wf3-+ 19 ...Wfxb7 20 ..ixb7 E:b8 2 1 ..ia6 E:xb2 22.E:gl 22.h3 d5-+ leaves White completely paralysed. 22 il.e4! 23.g4 E:b6 24.il.c4 d5 25.E:el tli O 26J�xe4 dxe4 27.E:hl E:b2 2 8..idS e3!! 29.fxe3 e4! 30.tlic4 E:bl t 3 1 .©g2 tli h4t 32.©g3 E:xhl 33. ©xh4 gxh2t 34. <Jlg3 E:c2-+ A beautiful win for Black in Krakovsky Gabris, corr. 2009. .•.

Chapter 1 0

B2) 12.i.d3 This move aims co reach similar posicions to those arising afcer l l .g3 in che previous chapcer without weakening White's kingside pawn structure.

�! �6 r.•aT · �'i)��

� ��: 'l1l%�� : �� j�� 32 � �11��M·�M ;y)\.:�M·� 1

o �a- Q m . %�

�r,/·1.. . .. ... .ef. .. �iV� /=� - �. . "

�a- o �b .% .

1 23

l l . c3 and l l . exf5 Introduction

12 ...ie6!? 1 2 . . . e4 1 3 .iWe2 'll d4 1 4 .iWe3 il,,g7 1 5 .f3 iWh4 t 1 6 .g3 'll xf3t 1 7 .iWxf3 exf3 l 8.gxh4 ixd3 1 9 .cxd3 ixb2= is che old main line which is considered to lead co a draw. The cexc is more combative. 13.ie4 1 3.'Wf3?! counts on the 'crap' 1 3 . . . ig7 (also good is 1 3 . . . ixd5 1 4.'Wxd5 'll e7 1 5 .'Wf3 d5 1 6.iWf6 l"1g8+ incending 1 7.'Wxe5 ig7-+) 14.'ll f4?! but the resulcing position seems to be in Black's favour afcer 14 . . . d5!? 1 5 .'ll xe6 £Xe6+. 13 ...i.g7 14.W/h5! It goes wichouc saying that, as in the variation with 1 l .g3, this is che only way to justify White's play. The extravagant 14.'ll f6t?! is again dangerous in view of: 14 . . . ixf6 l 5 .ixc6t r!fe7 l 6.il.xa8 iWxa8 1 7.0-0 :1'1g8 1 8.f3 ( 1 8.g3 b4 1 9 .'ll b l il.h3 20.f3 �xfl 2 1 .mxfl e4+) 1 8 . . . il.h3 1 9. l"1f2 iWa7! 20.g3 �g5+ 14.'ll e 3 is more reasonable than taking rhe

exchange, yet afcer: 14 . . . :1'1c8 1 5 .c3 ( 1 5 .'ll f5 il.f8!) 1 5 . . . 'll e7! 1 6.ib7 :1'1b8 1 7.ixa6 s

· ··· � �E �-�- - �-- - ;,i� · �·

6 �-� ·"--- ��-1-�� .....�� 4 �� 23 � ?� S:ft . . �� '/. . �� - - %� � 1= - -,,%-� 7

l 7 . . . id7! l 8.'ll ac2 :1'1b6 1 9 .'ll b4 d5 20.'ll exd5 :1'1d6 2 1 .ib7 ie6+ Black has good compensation for the macerial as Whice's minor pieces are hanging in che air. 1 4 .iWd3 0-0! 1 5 .ixh?t mhs 1 6.if5 'Wh4 1 7.c3 ( 1 7.'Wg3? 'Wh5 1 8 .ixe6 £Xe6 l 9 .'ll e3 'll d4-+) 17 . . . b4! 1 8 .iWg3 iWh6 1 9.ixe6 £Xe6 20.'ll xb4 'll xb4 2 1 .cxb4 e4 22.:1'1d l :1'1ac8 23.'We3 'Wxe3t 24.£Xe3 i.xb2 25.'ll b l :1'1c61' led to powerful compensation for Black and an evencual win in Ninov - Brunsek, corr. 2009.

14 ... :Sc8 1 5.:Sdl 1 5 .c3 'll e7 1 6 .'ll xe7 1 6 .'Wg5 ?! mf8!+, wich che idea: 1 7.'ll e3?! (l 7.'ll xe7 iWxe7 1 8 .'Wxe7t r!fxe7+) l 7 ... d5 1 8.l"1d l f5 !!+ The cuscomary 1 6.l"1d l transposes to the note on 1 6.c3 below. 1 6 . . . 'Wxe7 1 7.0-0 1 7.if5 e4 1 8.'ll c2 ( 1 8.i.xe6 'Wxe6 1 9 .'ll c2 b4! 20.'ll xb4 l"1xc3!) 1 8 . . . :1'1c5 1 9 .'ll e 3 i.xc3t 20.bxc3 ixf5 2 1 .'ll xf5 'Wf6 22.'ll xd6t iWxd6+ 1 7 . . . d5 1 8 .if5 ixf5 l 9.iWxf5 iWe6 20.iWd3 e4+ With an excellent position for Black as his rook is nor awkwardly placed on c5. 15 ... lll e7 16.lll xe7 1 6.0-0 l"1c5 1 7.'ll e3 (other possibilities are l 7.'ll b4!? iWb6 with unclear play, and l 7.'ll xe7 'Wxe7 transposing to the main line) l 7 . . . d5

1 24

9 .ixf6

1 8 . ctJ b l Wi'c7 1 9 .b4 !l:c4 20.ixd5 ctJxd5 2 1 .ctJxd5 ï¿½xd5 22.!l:xd5 !l:xb4 23.c3 !l:a4 24.!l:fd l 0-0 25.a3 e4 wich an approximacely balanced posicion chac was agreed drawn in Ninov - Zidu, corr. 20 1 0 . l 6.c3 Jc seems mosc logical to try to bring che knight inco play as quickly as possible. l 6 . . . !l:c5 Piling up on d5 before Whice has cime to reinforce it wich ctJ c2-e3. l 7.ctJxe7 1 7.ctJb4?! Wi'b6 l 8.Wi'g5 mf8 1 9 .Wfe3 f5+ is noc so good with the pawn on g2 as the bishop lacks chat recreac square. 1 7.Wi'g5 ?! ctJxd5 1 8 .Wi'xg7 Wi'f6 1 9 .Wi'xf6 ctJxf6 favours Black, since afcer 20.ib7 'iii e7 2 1 .ixa6 !l:b8+ White will lose two pieces for a rook. l 7 . . . Wi'xe7 1 8 .0-0 l 8.ctJc2 d5 l 9.if5 d4! gets rid of any potential problems on d5: 20.0-0 dxc3 2 1 .bxc3 ixf5 22.Wi'xf5 0-0 23.ctJe3 e4= The game is approximately balanced. 1 8 . . . h6!? 18 ... d5 1 9 .if5 ixf5 20.Wi'xf5 Wi'e6 2 1 .Wi'd3!? is less clear - compare with the similar position after l l .g3. l 9.!'i:d3 1 9 .if5 0-000 1 9 . . . d5 20.!'i:g3 20.if5 Wi'g5!+ 20 . . . dxe4 2 1 .!'i:xg7 Wi'f6 22.!'i:g3 Wi'f4= A balanced posicion.

1 6 ...Wxe7 17.0-0!? Instead 1 7.c3 b4! 1 8.ctJb l ! ( 1 8 .cxb4? d5! 1 9.ixd5 loses spectacularly to 19 ... Wi'xb4t 20. @fl ixd5 2 l .!'i:xd5 !!cl t 22.!l:d 1 1Ml d2-+) 1 8 . . . a5! ( 1 8 .. .'&d7 1 9 .0-0 d5 20.!'i:d3! bxc3 2 1 .ctJxc3 d4 gives White an iniciacive after eicher 22.h3 or 22.f4!?) 1 9.0-0 !l:c5 20.a3 d5 2 1 .axb4 !l:c4!? looks okay for Black.

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

17 .. .l:k5! 1 7 . . . b4 1 8 .ctJb l is less appealing here as White has available che manoeuvre :E!dl -d3-g3. 18.b4 !tc3 19.lll h l !tc4 20.ll:\d.2 !txb4 2 1 .c3 !ta4 22 ..ic6t @f8 23.lll e4 dS! This defence is possible when the pawn is still on g2 as White's back rank is weak. 24.hd5 .ixd5 25.!txdS !txe4 26.!tfdl .if6 27.g3 27.Wi'h6t 'iii g 8 28.g3 :E!g4 29.!'i:c5 !l:c4+ 27 ... h6 2s.Wf5 !tc4 29.!td6

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

29 ....ih4!! 30.:!'!g6!? 30.!'i:xa6 Wi'g5!+ or 30.gxh4 :E!f4+.

Chapter 1 0

125

l l .c3 and l l .exf5 Introduction

30 ... E:gS 3 1 .E:xa6! 3 1 .l"ixh6 l"if4! 3 1 . .. WfgS 32.Wfh7 �ks 33.E:dS E:g7 34.WfhSt )';gS 35.Wfh7 )';g7 36.WfhSt= The draw seems unavoidable.

for Black.) 14 . . .�xd5 1 5 .Wxg? l"if8 ( 1 5 . . . <±ie?!?) 1 6.l"igl b4! l 7.lt:Jc4 bxc3 1 8.bxc3 We? 1 9 .lt:J e3 lt:J e7 20.l"ic l (20.lt:Jxd5 lt:Jxd5 2 1 .l"ic l l"ib8t) 20 . . . ie6! 2 1 .Wxh? d5� Black has fine compensation for the pawn in view of his mobile centre and the scattered white forces.

83) 12.c3

83 1) 13.Wff3?!

Now the a3-knight is finally able to return into play, albeit at a considerable cost of time. Each side has its trumps: White possesses the better pawn structure and some light-square control in the centre, while Black has two bishops and the potentially dangerous d6, e5 and f7 pawn mass.

12 il.g7 ..•

Another unappealing possibiliry for White.

13 ...ie6! The position of the queen on f3 can only be justified by the removal of the d5-knight with tempo, attacking the knight on c6 at the same time. But this doesn't work here, as can be concluded from the study of the following lines: 14.id3 An attempt to control e4 and f5 , but it doesn't quite succeed. Nor do the other moves. 1 4 . lt:J f6t?! ixf6 1 5 .Wxc6t <±ie7+ leads to a rypical situation; with Black standing clearly better in view of his compact pawn mass in the centre, safe king and powerful pair of bishops. In contrast, White's stray queen and stranded a3knight cut inglorious figures. 14.lt:Jf4?! is met convincingly:

We shall examine an overambitious attempt for White, before moving on to the more usual continuation: 83 1) 13.Wff3?! and 832) 13 . .!Z:i c2. Pointless is 1 3 .lt:Je3? because after 13 ... �e6+ Black successfully mobilizes his impressive pawn mass in the centre. 1 3 .�d3 �e6 1 4.ie4 l"ic8 1 5 .Wh5 lt:J e7 1 6.l"id l lk5 is fine for Black, as we have already seen in variation B2, the note on 1 6.c3 on page 1 24. 1 3 .g3! ? is playable, yet after: 13 ... ie4! 1 4.Wg4! ( 1 4.f3?! ixd5 1 5 .Wxd5 lt:J e7 1 6.Wd2 d5 l 7.lt:Jc2 0-0 1 8 .ig2 Wb6!+ leads to a dream position

8 .i � %%��· . ,/,� �%%�f;ef�.i" -%�£�£ � ��.t• "' � 6 �i •'ilr � . /, , , , 5 �"'�·� �� '" "m�� 7

��iv� 32 m�� ' 0 ' ' %��W/J,Wff 1

� , %� %�.1�-g a

1 4 . . . d5!? 1 5 .lt:Jxe6 fxe6 1 6.Wfh5t <ii e 7 1 7.ie2 b4! 1 8 .cxb4 e4 1 9 .Wg5t if6 20.Wd2 �b6 Black had all the play in Tsyvarev - Yagupov, Bor 2000.

1 26

9 .ixf6

l 4.li:lc2 This can be met in exemplary fashion: 1 4 . . . 0-0 1 5 .lll ce3 1 5 .0-0-0? looks suicidal, and after 1 5 . . . gbs 1 6.h4 a5 1 7.h5 h6 1 8.a3 b4 1 9.axb4 axb4 20.li:lcxb4 lll xb4 2 1 .li:lxb4 �a5 22.gh4 �al t 23.Wc2 �a4t 24.Wd2 d5 White soon bit the dust in Kusmierek - Maldonado Pacheco, corr. 20 1 0. 1 5 . . .f5 1 6.�h3 Trying to stop the pawn roller by pinning the f5-pawn.

8 .i. � � ��· ·� �•. .?,� -<��A 6

l�"1w �i� . Y. �� · · "%! � · � � ��i�11� �� 'iV 3�� ·· "-m '· · · �� · · · "� Wi3,m1£ .!1

.. ..

�

1 6 . . . �d7!! l 7.ie2 1 7.li:lb6 �fl 1 8 .li:lxa8 f4 1 9.li:lg4 h5+ illustrates Black's beautiful idea. 1 7 . . . gae8! 1 8 .�h5 l 8.f4 li:Jd4!+ is another beautiful theme, showing the weaker side of rwo knights protecting each other. 1 8 . . . f4! 1 9.li:lg4 gds 20.gd l e4!? 2 1 .�h4 ixd5 22.gxd5 This was Lengyel - Geisler, Budapest 1 994, and now Black should have played the accurate: 22 . . . �e6!N 23.gg5 �c4-+ White will not last long.

14... 0-0 In this position White must do something to prevent . . f5 , which will underline the awkward position of his queen. .

15.ifS The best attempt. Other tries are no better:

1 5 .lll c2?! f5 1 6.li:Jf4 is proven weak by 1 6 . . . �c8!? l 7.li:lxe6 e4+ l 5.g4?! is a radical way of preventing Black's intended advance, but after 1 5 . . . b4 1 6.cxb4 (if 1 6.li:lc4, then 1 6 . . . bxc3 1 7.bxc3 ixd5 1 8 .�xd5 e4!+ exploits the uncasrled white king) 1 6 . . . ixd5+ Black had an almost decisive advantage in Fabian - Gurgenidze, Bad Wildbad 1 993.

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

1 5 ...'l!Ng5! 16.li:le3 1 6.ic2 l'fac8+ is not very appetizing for White either. 1 6 ... CLJ e7 17.ie4?! 1 7 .ixe6 fxe6 1 8 . �h3 gf6+ 17... d5! 18.CLJxd5 1 8 .ixd5 li:lxd5 1 9 .li:lxd5 e4-+ 18 ... CLJxd5 19.ixd5 l3ad8 20.h4 'l!Nh6 2 1 .E:dl ixd5 22.l3xd5 e4-+ This led to a debacle for White in Leygue Vaisser, France 2003. B32) 13.li:Jc2 This is universally accepted as the best move here.

13 ... 0-0 Besides the traditional 14.li:lce3 (see Chapters 1 1 and 1 2) , the only really independent ideas here are 832 1) 14.a4 and B322) 14.�e2!?.

Chapter 1 0

1 27

l 1 .c3 and l 1 .exf5 Introduction

B321) 14.a4 After bolstering the b4-square, White attacks the weak enemy pawn duo.

14 .!D e7! White's premature flank act1v1ty (with his kingside still undeveloped) should logically be met with counterplay in che centre. By immediately challenging d5, Black puts the most acute problems to his opponent. ...

1 5 .!Dce3 A logical move, controlling both d5 and f5 . Other options include: .

1 5 .tt'lxe7t Wxe7 1 6.tt'ie3 ( 1 6.tt'ib4?! fails to both 1 6 . . . Wb?+ and 1 6 . . . ie4! 1 7.f3 ib7 1 8 .axb5 axb5 1 9 .Elxa8 l'!xa8 20.ixb5 d5t) 1 6 . . . ie6!? (also possible is 16 ... id7 l 7.tt'ld5 Wd8 Drus Scharf, corr. 20 1 2, 1 8 .id3!? e4 1 9.�c2 E!:b8=) 1 7.axb5 axb5 l 8Jha8 l"lxa8 1 9.ixb5 Wb7 20.id3 e4 2 1 .ib l Wxb2 22.0-0 !'!:al 23 .Wxd6 Elxb l 24.Wd8t if8 25 .Wg5t= 1 5 .tt'lcb4!? tt'ixd5 1 6.tt'ixd5 ( 1 6.Wxd5?! ie6 1 7.Wd l Wg5+) 1 6 . . . �e4+± should be an acceptable position for Black too.

There will be nothing but grief after 1 6.axb5?! tt'ixd5 l 7.tt'ixd5 axb5 , since 1 8.l"lxa8?! Wxa8 1 9.tt'ic7? succumbs to 1 9 . . . We4t-+. The sensible I 6.ie2 should be answered with 1 6 . . . tt'ixd5 ! 1 7.tt'ixd5 l"lc8! and Black has good play. After the further moves: 1 8.axb5 ( 1 8.0-0 E!:c5 l 9.if3 a5! 20.axb5 E!:xb5 2 1 .Wd2 f5 22.E!:fd l [22.c4 E!:c5 23 .ie2 e4+±) 2 2 . . . \t>h8= looks fine for Black too.) l 8 . . . E!:c5 l 9.tt'ib4 axb5 20.0-0 d5 2 1 .f4?! (2 1 .tt'ia6 E!:c8 22.ixb5 e4� is what White should play.) 2 1 . . .e4 22.f5 ic8 23.l:'la8

1 5 .id3 e4! stops White from obtaining a grip on the light squares. (After 1 5 . . . ie6 1 6.ie4!?, a logical move found by Anand, Black seems to be suffering a little bit.) 1 6 .ie2 bxa4!? This seems co equalize comfortably. (The same goes for 1 6 . . . ie6 1 7 .tt'ixe?t Wxe7 1 8.0-0 ib3 as played in Kudrin - Hamdouchi, Tripoli 2004.) After 1 7.E!:xa4 tt'ixd5 1 8 .Wxd5 ie6! 1 9.Wxe4 l:'le8+± the exposed white pieces give Black excellent counterplay.

15 ie6 Black's pressure on d5 nullifies any of White's hopes for an advantage: .••

23 . . . d4! 24.tt'ia6 E!:c6 25 .ixb5 E!:h6+ 26.Wg4 dxc3 27.bxc3 Wb6t 28.E!:f2 e3-+ Black forced capitulation in Wittmann - Feher, Balatonlelle 2002.

1 28

9 .�xf6

16 ... fS 1 6 . . . tlixdS 1 7.tlixdS e4!? is also playable. 17.i.h3!? 1 7.axbS ? f4 1 8 .tlixe7t 'fffxe7 1 9.tlidS Wff7+ 17 ... lll xdS 18.lll xdS E!b8 19.0-0 1 9 . t2J b4 can be answered with the extraordinary: 1 9 . . . 'fff c 8!? 20.0-0 (20.axbS Ei:xb5! 2 1 .0-0 a5+ or 20.'fffxd6 Wfc4!�) 20 . . . aS 2 1 .tlid5 Ei:f7+

20.axbS :SxbS! 2 1 .c4 :Sxb2 22.:Sxa6 Black has two choices. 22 ... e4!? This may be the most exact. I also analysed 22 . . . h8=, when Black stands fine in view of his bishop pair and the weakness of the c4-pawn.

23.:Sxd6 23.tlie3 �e5 ! 2 3. . .�xd6 24.ll:\f6t g xf6 25.�xd6 hc4 Hardly a position to worry Black. B322) 14.i.e2!?

This has the same idea as 1 4.a4, only in a slightly disguised form. White wants to preface a2-a4 with some preparatory moves.

1 5 .tlicb4!? Trying to profit from the temporary weakness of a6. I chink Black should play: 1 5 . . . tlixb4 1 6.tlixb4 'fff b 6! 1 7.0-0 1 7.tlidS does not force a draw, as Black may play l 7 . . . 'fff b 7!? ( 1 7 . . . 'fff d 8=) 1 8.tlie3 �e6! and now 1 9 .'fffxd6?! Ei:fd8 20.'fff b4 f5 2 1 .Ei:d l (2 1 .0-0? f4 22.�f3 a5! 23.'fff xa5 e4 24.ig4 ixg4 25.tlixg4 h5-+ wins Black a piece) 2 l . . .f4 22.�f3 'fff f7!� gives tremendous compensation as all his pieces are optimally placed. 1 7 . . . aS 1 8 .tlidS Black has an accurate retreat: 1 8 . . . Wfd8!= With the idea of ...ie6 followed by ... h8, . . .Wfd7 and . . .f5 . 1 9.�g4?! The bishop can be challenged immediately. 1 9 . . . �e6! 20.i.xe6 fxe6 2 1 .tlie3 d5+ Obtaining the usual powerful central cluster.

1 5 ... aS!?= Producing perhaps the most interesting position of this chapter, with Black having to exercise some care after the following idea:

Chapter 1 0

1 29

l l .c3 and l l .exf5 Introduction

16.tll ce3 i.e6 17.a4! White's moves make sense, he is fully developed and now he scares queenside play before Black can initiate his own play wich .. .f5 . I found the following rather narrow path to equality which I suggest the readers memorize: 17 ... bxa4 1 8.°Wxa4 tll e7! Black has to challenge for control of d5 rather chan plunge his rook into the enemy camp. This is what happened in Tomczak - Cyborowski, Warsaw 2002, where my former Trier teammate opted for l 8 . . . Elxb2. I think he would have had a hard cime had White now chosen 1 9 .Wxc6!N Elxe2 20.Elfd l !;t The rook on e2 is in some difficulty in view of the Wb5 threat, and if Black is forced to retreat then he will lose his extra pawn and be saddled with a passive defence for the rest of the game. I invite the readers to explore this position in order to understand how strong the white knights are, adding chac the best I could find is: 8 7

20 ... dS! This looks like the only way to equalize and is very much in the spirit of the opening. 2 1 .gxaS d4!? Considering that Black has no real chances to play for a win in this position I tried to find something forced, and I think this move accomplishes che task of securing the draw. 22.cxd4!? After 22.ttJf5 ixf5 23.'Wxf5 e4! 24.cxd4 Elxb2 25 .ic4 E:d2! White's advantage is symbolic, and he should not make any progress.

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

22 ...°Wb4! 23.ga4!? Others are also equal: 23.d5 Wxa5 24.dxe6 fxe6=

4 3 2 a

23.Elfal Wxd4 24.ttJf5 ixf5 25.Wxf5 Wf4!? 26.Wc2 (26.Wxf4 exf4 27.l::\d l E:xb2=) 26 ... ElfcS 27.!'l:c5 E:xc5 28 .'Wxc5 Wd4=

20 . . . 'Wd7 2 1 .'Wxd7 ixd7 22.!'l:xa5 Elb8 23.c4 ie6 24.llie7t ©h8 25.©fl !'l:eb2 26.lLl 7f5 if8 27.ttJxd6 Elb l 28.c5 !'l:xd l t 29.ttJxd l Black has some chances to hold after either 29 . . . ©g?t or 29 ... ixd6 30.cxd6 E:d8 3 1 .Elxe5 E:xd6 32.ttJe3 ©gn.

23 Wxb2 24.°Wxb2 gxb2 25.dS gxe2! 25 . . . ixd5 26.llixd5 Elxe2 27.ttJe7t ©h8 28.lLlf5;t is more laborious as the knight is strong on f5 .

19.tll xe?t 'Wxe7 20.'1Wc2! The only move to create problems, defending b2 and fighting for the light squares.

26.dxe6 fxe6 In spite of his structural weaknesses Black is equal, due to the pressure on f2 and his active pieces. I will give some sample lines:

.•.

1 30

9.Jtxf6

27.:ga6!? 27.g3 ih6 28.ll'ig4 (28.lll c4 e4f±) 28 . . . ig7 29. <ii g2 e4 (29 . . . h5 30.ll'ie3 ih6=) 30.h4 h5 3 1 .ll'ie3 ih6 32.!!:xe4 ixe3 33.!!:xe3 1"lfxf2t= is an immediate draw 27.1"lc4 ih6 28.ll'i d l (28.lll g4 if4=) 28 . . . e4 29.1"lc6 ig7 30.1"lxe6 id4 3 1 .g3 <ii g7 32.<ii g2 h5= produces a kind of positional draw.

27... �f7! A solid response; planning . . . h5 (this may be not obligatory, as we shall see) followed by . . . e4 in conjunction with . . . ih6(d4) . There seems to be no way for White to counter this. 28.h3!? The computer's top choice. A simple equalizing line after 28.g3 is: 28 . . . e4 29.:!:!d l (29.1"la4 l"1d8! 30.1"lxe4 1"ld4 3 1 .1"lxd4 itxd4 32.lll c4 e5 33.<ii g2 e4=) 29 . . . @g8 30.1"lxe6 1"lfxf2 3 l .1"lxe4 1"lf8 32.1"ld7 h5= 28.:!:!b l 'itig8 29.1"lxe6 1"lfxf2 30.h3 h5= is an easy draw for Black, for example:

3 1 .1"lb7 e4 32.1"ld7 (32.1"lxe4 1"lxg2t=) 32 . . . 1"lf8 33.lll d 5 :!:!el t 34.iih2 h4 35 .1"lg6 :!:!ffl 36.1"ldxg7t! 'itif8 37.1"lg8t @f7 38.1"l8g7t=

28 ... hS!? This should lead to a draw. 28 . . . e4?! 29.1"la4 1"ld8 30.1"lxe4 l';d4 3 1 .1"lg4! 1"lxg4 32.ll'ixg4 h5 33.lll h2 id4 34.ll'i f3 .ib6

3 5 .ll'ig5t! (35 .g3 e5=) 35 . . . @f6 36.h4 iif5 37.g3 e5 38.ll'ih3± is the engines' devilish idea.

29.g3 29.g4 ih6=, or 29.lll c4 e4= or 29.:!:!b l 'itig8=. 29... e4 30J'!a4 1"ld8! 3 U 'gxe4 l"gd4 This idea again! 32.gxd4 .ixd4= The advance of the e-pawn will secure the splitting of the point.

Conclusion

In the beginning of Chapter 1 0 we focused on l l .c3 in conjunction with 1 2th move options that don' t transpose to the standard l l .exf5 . After l l .c3 ig7!, both deviations that have an independent value, namely 1 2.ll'ic2?!, and 1 2.ll'ixb5 ?!, lead to dubious positions for White. The former because it gives up a pawn which White will have to play che weakening g2-g4 in order to recover, the latter because it drops a piece without serious compensation. In the second part of the chapter we examined some less popular continuations for White after che standard l l .exf5 ixf5 . 1 2.�f3?! ll'id4! 1 3.ll'ic?t �xc7 1 4.�xa8t 'itie7 sees White walking on the edge of a precipice and I think chat the material presented here amounts to a complete refutation, the only remark being chat Black needs to know his theory. 1 2 .id3 is not bad, yet the main continuation after 1 2 . . . ie6!? suggests it is quire harmless. 1 2.c3 ig7 1 3 .ll'ic2 0-0 is the prelude to a more serious test of Black's set-up. The rash 1 4.a4 lll e7! is hardly a problem, as is indicated by the main line 1 5 .ll'ice3 ie6 1 6.g3!? f5 1 7 .ih3!? lll xd5 1 8 .ll'ixd5 1"lb8 1 9.0-0 �d7! 20.axb5 1"lxb5!. The simple 1 4 .ie2!?, however, raises some interesting questions. I carved a rather delicate path to equality by 14 . . . 1"lb8! 1 5 .0-0 a5!? 1 6.ll'ice3 ie6 l 7.a4! bxa4 1 8 .�xa4 ll'ie7! 1 9.ll'ixe?t �xe7 20.�c2! d5! 2 1 .1"lxa5 d4!?, a line that the reader does best to consult carefully as it may be the only route to complete equalization.

1 1.exfS 15th Move Alternatives Variation Index 1 .e4 cS 2.lLlf3 tlJ c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tlJxd4 tlJ f6 S.tlJc3 eS 6.tlJdbS d6 7.i.gS a6 8.tlJa3 bS 9.i.xf6 gxf6 10.lL!dS f5 1 1 .exfS i.xfS 12.c3 i.g7 13.lL!c2 0-0 14.tlJ ce3 14 ...i.e6

A) 1 5.a4?! B) 1 5 . g4?! C) 1 5 . g3 fS! Cl) 1 6.i.g2 C2) 1 6.i.h3!?

A) after 22.IWc l ?1

22 . . . \Wh4!

1 32 1 33 135 1 36 1 37

B) note to 1 9 .c4

C 1 ) after 2 l .ï¿½g2

1 l . exf5

1 32

1 .e4 cS 2.�fJ � c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.�xd4 � f6 5.�c3 e S 6.�dbS d 6 7..igS a6 8.�a3 bS 9.hf6 gxf6 10.�dS f'5 1 1 .exf'5 .ixf'5 1 2.c3 ig7 13.�c2 0-0 14.� ce3 .ie6

� � e ��·� 7: � � � � � , . ,, � �,�wif �,,. ��r % �, � � � � � 6 1. •'ll r .l.i.� ,, � :- �·�% -� �

�� _ . � � � 3 � �� m � 2 �..�. �.> !�-� .,,, , , ;�- %� a

= e

1 7 . . . e4! 1 8 .0-0 ctJe5 1 9 .'fff e2 \Wg5 20.Whl Wh8 2 l .i.xa6 l"1g8 22.ctJ c7 :Ba7 23.ctJxe6 fxe6 24.i.b5 d5 25 .:Bac l i.f8, Black had a strong accack in G. Garcia - Gruchacz, Lone Pine 1 978.

We will now consider two somewhac dubious accempcs for Whice, before moving on co a beccer cry: A) 1 5.a4?! B) 1 5.g4?! and C) 1 5.g3. The main line 1 5 .�d3 is covered in che next chapter.

A) 1 5.a4?! This move is inconsistent with 14.lt:'ice3. The b4-square is no longer well-guarded and, additionally, the knight on e3 can be attacked by . . . f7-f5-f4.

1 5 ... b4! l 5 . . . ctJ e7 is also satisfaccory for Black, as we saw in variation B32 l of the previous chapter. White has the following choice:

1 6.cxb4?! I have promoted this as my main line in order to demonstrate the dangers White faces if he gets over-enthusiastic with his queenside play. Objectively White should not surrender the centre like this. The truth is that 1 6.�c4?! is no better than our main line on account of: 16 . . . bxc3 1 7.bxc3

1 6 .�e2! looks quice sensible, however, and Whice should noc be worse afcer ic. For example: 16 . . . bxc3 l 7.bxc3 ctJ e7 1 8.ctJxe7t 'fffxe7 1 9.0-0 e4 20.:Bb l Elfd8 2 l .ctJd5 \Wg5 22.c4 :Bab8 23.a5 l"1bc8 24.:Bb3 (24.:Bb6 :Bc5 25.:Bxa6 ixd5 26.cxd5 :Bxd5 27.'fff e l �d4 is ac lease equal for Black) 24 . . . Elc5 25.'fff b l \We5 26.:Be3 ixd5 27.cxd5 :Be8 The players soon agreed a draw in chis scerile position in Carroll - Dorer, email 20 1 0 .

1 6 ... f'5! I like chis aggressive, all-out accacking move . 17J'kl 1 7.�c4 is no beccer due to: 17 .. .f4 1 8 .ctJc2 ( l 8 . ctJ b6 fxe3 1 9 .ixe6t Wh8 20.ctJxaS lt:'i d4 2 l .id5 :Bxf2+ leads co a cremendous accack for Black despice Whice's extra rook) 1 8 . . . e4 1 9.0-0 Wh8! A very imporcant move, freeing g8 for pocencial use by che rooks (l 9 . . . ctJe5?! 20.ctJd4 .tf7 2 l .i.b300 is premature) . 20.:Bel e3! 2 l .fxe3 f3! 22.gxf3 'fffh4 23.f4 i.xb2, and Black has a powerful kingside accack Almost all the white pieces are on the opposing wing. 17 ... � d4 Black's powerful bishops, cencralized knight and mobile pawn mass are worch more than a mere doubled pawn.

1 33

Chapter 1 1 - 1 5th Move Alternatives

18.tlic7 .ib3! 19 ..ic4t .ixc4 20.gxc4 gc8! 21.tliedS 2 1 .tlicd5 i>h8!� 2 1 . .. gf7 22.Wi'cl?! 22.0-0N )"lfXc7 23.tlixc7 )"lxc7 24.)"lxc7 '1Wxc7+ does provide survival chances for White. Objectively he must be worse, despite his annoying distant pawns.

1 5 ... b4! Most energetic, as it gives Black a target at c3 to work on. This method of gaining an advantage follows one of the principles of endgame thinking, saddle the opponent with as many weaknesses as you can! 16 ..ig2 Taking the pawn is worse. 1 6.cxb4?! !'1b8 1 7.a3 a5 1 8 .b5 tli d4 1 9.a4 f5 ! 20.gxf5 �xd5 2 1 .tlixd5 )"lxf5 gave Black excellent attacking chances in Rodriguez - Yusupov, Amsterdam 1 978. After 1 6 .tlixb4?! tlixb4 1 7.cxb4 e4 1 8.'t¥i'd2, the obvious l 8 . . . d5;;:; gives Black a tremendous centre and fantastic bishop pair to compensate for the pawn. 1 8 . . .'t¥i'f6t as in Sieberg - Gromotka, corr. 1 990, is also fine.

16 ... bxc3 17.bxc3 gc8 The perfect square for the rook, preparing to gang up on c3.

23.0-0?! tlie2t 24.i>h l tlixc l 25.E;xh4 E;fxc7 26.tlixc7 )"lxc7+ is certainly much worse for White.

23 ... f4 24.f3 e4 25.Wi'el Wfxel t 26.'.t>xel exf3t It is Black who is applying pressure. B) 1 5.g4?! An old move which appeared in 1 976 and, at first, was considered to give White chances of an advantage. The intention to prevent . . . f5 is logical, but the drawbacks are obvious too. White significantly weakens his own structure and will have problems with his king in any ensuing tactical complications. Today's evaluation is that the position is almost certainly better for Black, with the only question being the extent of his advantage.

1 8.0-0 There are some other important lines here. 1 8 .'1Wd3 ?! Normally we tend to say that keeping the king in the centre is bad, although White is understandably reluctant to castle because of the weakened dark squares (f4 in particular) .

1 34

1 1 .exfS

However, the text move is the wrong way of waiting as it allows strong tactical play.

1 8 . . . e4! This is by no means obligatory, but looks good. 1 9.ixe4 White has to take with the bishop, as after 1 9.Wxe4?? ixd5 he goes downhill quickly, for example: 20.�xd5 (20.lll xd5 l'!e8-+) 20 . . . ixc3t 2 1 .We2 lll d4t-+ l 9 . . . lll e5 20.Wxa6!? It is best to grab this pawn for the simple reason that 20.�e2 does not protect the g4pawn anyway. With 20.Wxa6 White not only takes the pawn, but also keeps e2 available for his king. 20.We2? lll xg4! 2 1 .l'!g l (2 1 .lll xg4 loses to 2 1 . . .ixd5 22.ixd5 ixc3t, because the king cannot move to e2 and thus Black will simply take on a l next, remaining an exchange up) 2 1 . . .lll xe3 22.�xe3 Wh8 23.Wfl (23 .l'!xg7 Wxg7 24.Wd4t f6-+) 23 . . . Wh4 24.l'!d l l'!fe8 25 .�g3 ih3t 26.�g2 �c4t 27.�d3 Wxd3t 28.l'!xd3 occurred in Polgar - Gelfand, Pacs 2003, and now 28 . . . id7-+ would have been terminal. 20 . . . lll xg4! 2 1 .lll xg4 At this point Black has a choice between 2 1 . . .ixg4� or 2 1 . . .f5! 22.ig2 fxg4 23.0-0 ie5 24.l'!ae l l'!f5!�, with excellent compensation for the material in both cases. l 8.ie4 lll e7! White does have a few difficulties and is already trying to reduce the damage.

1 9 .c4! ? This i s the best attempt, although i t cannot be regarded as a panacea for the problems of the position. a) 1 9 .0-0?! lll xd5 20.ixd5 (20.lll x d5 Wh4+) 20 . . . l'!xc3+ allows Black to simply cash in a pawn. b) 1 9.!':cl ?! lll x d5 20.lll xd5 ih6 2 l .l'!c2 was played in Berti Contreras - Echavarria, Internet 2009, and here 2 1 . . .�h4!N+ would have netted Black a pawn, yielding excellent winning chances. c) 1 9 .lll xe7t Wxe7 20.�d3 occurred in Brito - Barbosa, Nova Resende 2009, and at this point Black missed, or underestimated, 20 . . . d5! 2 1 .lll x d5 ixd5 22.Wxd5 l'!fd8 23 .�b3 Wg5 which would have given him a strong initiative.

1 9 . . . ©hs! Black is planning to activate the g7-bishop by . . . ih6. Play may then continue: 20.0-0 ih6 We have transposed co the position reached in the main line, below, after 20 . . . ©h8!.

1 8 lll e?! Again this move leaves White with a choice to make. ...

19.c4 1 9 .lll xe7t �xe7 20.Wd3 �g5+ is condemned by Rogozenko as bad for White and I see no grounds for challenging this evaluation.

135

Chapter 1 1 - 1 5 th Move Alternatives

l 9.1Wd3 can b e answered by: l 9 . . . �xd5 ( 1 9 . . . h5!? 20.gxh5 f5 2 1 .�xe7t \Wxe7 22.�d5?! [22.Elad l !?] 22 . . . \Wfl 23.�b6 e4 24.\Wxd6 Elfd8 25 .\Wf4 Elc6+ gave Black a large positional advantage in Zsilrzova Lisenko - Vega Gutierrez, Khanry-Mansiysk 20 1 0, bur White's play was far from perfect.) 20.ixd5 ih6 2 1 .�f5 if4 22.c4 '®g5 23.@h l ixf5 24.gxf5 (24.\Wxf5 \Wxf5 25.gxf5 @g7= would have been safer) 24 . . . '®h6 25.Elgl t @hs 26.Elg2 Elg8 27.Elag l Elxg2 28.Elxg2

�

�� • 8 � �� -� ��- . . �·�� 6 , . it� • 5� ��• �'�" ��:t�-•-. %�t!:,,�n 4 �� -r�%� �2 �t!:i � � • �-! � ll efi0]" 7

�� ·

3� a

� � "� � c

28 . . . ixh2! 29 .ixf7! e4! 30.\Wd l ie5t 3 1 .\Wh5 \Wxh5t 32.ixh5 Elxc4 33.if7 Elcl t 34.Elgl !!xgl t 35 .@xg l id4 A draw was soon agreed in Elisei - Litigio, corr. 20 1 2, as Black's extra pawn is meaningless for winning purposes.

20.ie4!? An attempt to blockade and control the light squares. After the logical 20.\Wd3 @h8 2 1 .!!ab l !?, Black manages to create play beautifully: 2 l . . .ixe3! 22.�xe3 � g6! 23.!!fd l 1Wg5 ! (23 . . . � f4 24.\Wxd6 \Wxd6 25.Elxd6 ixc4 26.�xc4 Elxc4 27.1"1xa6=) 24.\Wxd6 .ixg4 25.�xg4 \Wxg4+ The knight is clearly the superior minor piece. 20.h3 @h8 is unclear, but is at least equal for Black. For example: 2 1 .\Wd3 f5 !? 22.�xe7 e4! 23.1We2 (23 .1Wd4t ig7 24.\Wa7 !!c7+) 23 . . . '®xe7 24.gxf5 �xf5 25.�xf5 E!xf5 26.\Wxe4 \Wxe4 27.�xe4 Elg5t=

20 ... @hs! 2 1 .Wd3 This is rhe best move. 2 1 .@h l ?! �xe3! 22.�xe3 ixc4+ 2 1 .�xe7 \Wxe7 22.� f5 '®g5+ (or 22 . . . ixf5 23 .ixf5 !'1xc4+) 2 1 .'®f3 f5! 22.gxf5 ixe3 23.�xe7 ixf2t 24.Elxf2 '®xe7 25.f6 '®f7+1+

2 1 . ..i.xe3 22.tll xe3 f5! 22 . . . � g6!? 23.!!ad l '®g5+! is also promising. 23.gxfS tll xf5 24.tll xf5 ixf5 25.ixfS WgSt 26.@h1 Wxf5 27.Wxf5 !!xf5; Black is better thanks to his slightly superior pawn structure. However, I believe that White should be able to draw without too many problems in view of the reduced material. C) 1 5.g3 A popular move, yet it is not altogether thematic as the e3-knight invites Black to attack it with . . . f7-f5-f4. This is in fact Black's best choice.

1 5 ... f5! In this particular position the advance of the f-pawn is stronger than usual. Black must only be

1 36

1 1 .exfS

careful not to let his opponent settle on the light squares after he achieves . . . f4.

18.lll xf4?! This is the obvious reaction but there are other, possibly better, ways to continue. It seems that White should avoid grabbing material with his king still uncastled, as the first two lines listed below illustrate. 1 8 .gxf4?! should be answered as follows: 1 8 . . . exf4 1 9 .tll xf4 ixc2 20.'&xc2 E!:xf4 2 1 ..ixc6 l!c8 22 . .id5t Wh8 23.0-0-0 b4 24.c4 '&h4+ Black is at least slightly better in view of his pressure on the long dark-squared diagonal. 1 8 .tll cb4?! tll xb4 1 9 .tll xb4 e4 20.gxf4 '&h4 2 1 .tll d5 ďż˝fae8 22.'&d2 is very dangerous for White after either 22 . . . e3t or 22 . . . b4t .

It follows from the previous note that the placement of White's light-squared bishop will play an important role: Cl) 16 ..ig2 or C2) 1 6 ..ih3!?.

1 8 .0-0 is best answered by 1 8 . . . f3 1 9 . .ih l e4, and the buried bishop on h 1 renders the resulting position at least equal for Black. For example:

Cl) 1 6.ig2 f4 17.lll c2 White has lost time and his control of e4 ts minimal, but Black shouldn't relax. The next move is a step in the right direction:

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

17 ....if5! Not only controlling e4, but also threatening . . . f3 according to circumstance. However, this move requires precise calculation as White can win a pawn.

White may choose not to take the pawn and instead strike at the enemy's weakened queenside. l 8.a4!? Play is likely to continue as follows: 1 8 . . . Wh8! Neutralizing the threat of 1 9.axb5 axb5 20.E!:xa8+- by getting the king out of a virulent check on e7. The position has not essentially changed, and Black's space advantage

Chapter 1 1 - 1 5 th Move Alternatives

persists, but at least White can achieve some simplification. Rather premature would be 1 8 .. .f3 1 9.ifl ixc2 20.Wxc2 e4, in view of 2 1 ..ih3, and White could even be better in this complicated position. 1 9.axb5 1 9.0-0 f3 20 . .ih l e4 can hardly be to White's liking due to the position of his bishop. 19 . . . axb5 20.Eha8 Wxa8 2 1 .ttl db4 e4 22.gxf4 tt:lxb4 23.ttlxb4 The position is unclear, offering chances to both sides. A computer line is:

1 37

lost for White.) 23 . . . cj;>h8! 24.axb5 Eixb5! 25.ttlb4 Eibf5! 26.Wd2 \Wf7 27.\Wxd6 fXg3 28.hxg3 Eixf3 29.Eixh3 Eixf2 30.Wd3 .ie5 3 1 .liJc6 ic7! 32.tt:ld4 ib6 33.g4 '.Wb7 34.Eig3 ic7 Black went on to win in Huuskonen - Sospedra Sebastian, corr. 20 1 2.

8 � �- �. ��. �.,'ii , 7 ��

. �� -, % �� "" '�� T"//, ��Z, �! � -� � 45 �//,'� � ,,,.,.;�-�� · ��--�. , /,� � 3� .� ��. , . %�,7;�: 2 �. . %�, %1= , 6

�

23 . . . l:'ig8 24.0-0 .ie5! 25.cj;>hl .ixf4 26.ttl d5 .ie5 27.f4 exf3 28.Wxf3 .ie6 29.ttlc7 'ih'xf3 30.ixf3 ic4 3 1 .l:'ig l = With a likely draw. I n my view this is White's best way to play after 1 6 . .ig2.

1 8 ... exf4 19 ..ixc6 Wf e7t White must now forfeit the right to castle and this seems to have a decisive impact on the proceedings. For example: 20.cj;>fl .ih3t 2 1 ..ig2 The alternative 2 1 .cj;>gl ?! hardly improves White's chances, as was demonstrated by the following super-accurate kill: 2 l . . .l:'iac8 22 . .if3 (22.tt:ld4 Wf7!? 23 . .if3 Eic5 ! comes to the same thing) 22 . . . Eic5 23.a4 (23.ttld4 happened in A. Hunt - Berkvens, Esbjerg 2003, and now 23 . . . 'ih'f7!N would have tied White up. The point being that 24.a4 is simply met by 24 . . . b4+, whereas 24.\Wb3 l:'ic4!-+ is completely

23. cj;>fl .ifS! A key move. 24.llJd4 White has no time to coordinate his pieces. After 24.!i:e 1 ?? , the brilliant tactical point behind Black's bishop retreat is illustrated: 24 . . . .ixc2 25 .Wxc2 .id4t!-+ Black wins immediately.

24 ... E:aeS! 25 ..ifl Wies 26.mg2 E:e3!t The white king is in peril. C2) 1 6 ..ih3!? An attempt to slow down, or even completely cancel out, Black's intended advance. The disadvantage is the reduced control over d5, but White can't have everything. In any case, 1 6 . .ih3!? seems to be the most prudent choice given the wild lines which occur after 1 6 . .ig2.

1 38

8 7

6 5

1 l .exf5

.1m%� �, �� -� , , /,� ,,,,,Y,� m

'� 1.!.� ••i-CZJ_,, % _

� �� /'.��r� ��,% , ,%% ,,�

3 � �� tz£ , , • � ,,,,,,,w tz£ ,,,,,,�wa � 2 oA w �d �d i 0 � �, ,,,,,,B � . �ii�,,,,,, m .M ,,,,, 4

�

, ,, /,

16 ... �bS! I think this is the most circumspect continuation. Black is trying to delay a2-a4, while preparing a harmonious development of his queen to d7. 17.0-0 '1Wd7 Black has a splendid formation, keeping the White army at bay. He can improve it further by . . . ©h8 and . . . a5 , and then contemplate whether to challenge d5 or play for the attack by . . . f4. Sometimes the move . . . \Wf7 comes in handy too, averting iWh5 and augmenting the pressure on d5. 1 8.f4 This is the move widely employed in practice, blocking Black's attack and fixing f5 as a potential target. 1 8.a4 is not so effective now because of 1 8 . . . b4!, and Black stands fine. After 1 9 .iWd3 it is the aggressive 1 9 . . . e4! ? which I like most. I see no reason for Black to complain after 20.Wxa6 tt'le5, when the idea ... f4 gives him a strong attack: a) 2 1 .cxb4? is proven weak after: 2 1 . . . tt'l f3t 22.©g2 f4 23.ixe6t iWxe6 24.tt'lxf4 1"1xf4 25.gxf4 Wg6t 26.©h l iWh5 27.tlig4 Wxg4+ b) If 2 1 .1"1fd l ? bxc3 22.bxc3 f4 23 . .ixe6t iWxe6 24.tt'lxf4 1"1xf4! 25.gxf4 tt'l f3t 26.© h l (26.©fl ??

iWh3t-+) 26 ... iWh3 27.tlifl Black can ask for (and get!) more than a draw with 27 ... ©h8!-+ . c) Even after the best defence, 2 1 .tt'lf4!, Black has:

�� ·

i Y,•i• Y,�� 6 wa Y,�.iR""'� 8

� [',

., , , %.:. ,,,,,

=��•l�•,�i. �,J% 3 �· W!fd' ,,,.,,,Wffd'° ;'fAf'

• �?.'di,, %�• �� rciii �=-irb,, a

2 I . . . .ih6! Ensuring him of sufficient compensation at least. 22.tt'lxe6 Wxe6 23 . .ixf5 1"1xf5 24.tlixf5 iWxf5 25 .iWxd6 tt'lf3t 26.©g2 tt'lh4t=

1 8 ... e4 Black has a protected passed pawn and needs to unblock the d5- and e3-squares to get an edge. The advance . . . b4 can also be used as a tool to weaken White on the long dark squared diagonal. On the other hand, White is planning to combine pressure on the d-pawn with an effective g3-g4 advance, breaking up the impressive duo on f5 and e4. He may also be considering a well-timed a2-a4. Our main line will consider White's most aggressive response.

19.'IWhS Black will be able to diffuse chis move without much trouble. Some of White's alternatives are given below: Slow play by 1 9 .a3?! is best answered with 1 9 . . . tlie7!, trying to shake the central blockade. Then 20.tt'lxe?t iWxe7 2 1 .1"1e l (2 1 .1"1f2 d5! 22.tt'lxd5? iWc5 23.tt'lb4 e3 24.1"1e2 1"1bd8+) 2 L.1"1bd8 22.1"1cl Wa7 23 ,\We2 d5 24.©h l

Chapter 1 1 - 1 5th Move Alternatives

1 39

has a choice between several moves, but I have decided to suggest the logical 1 9 . . . li:l e7!. It could be argued that Black is missing a chance to free his play by pushing . . . b4, but the white queen's invasion to a4 can complicate matters. After 20.li:Jxe7t (White seems to have nothing better, 20.l"ld2 allows Black to post his pieces most harmoniously after 20 . . . li:lxd5 2 1 .li:lxd5 'Wb7!+!) 20 . . . Wi'xe7 Black has a satisfactory, and possibly superior, game: b

24 . . . d4t 25.cxd4 ixd4 26.Ei:c6 id7 27.Ei:c2 Wh8 28.b4 'Wb6 29.li:Jd5 'We6 30.li:Je3 °Wb3 3 1 .Ei:c7 °Wd3 32.Wg2 Ei:f6! 33.Ei:xd7 Ei:xd7 34.li:lxf5 ib6 35 .°Wxd3 Ei:xd3 36.Ei:xe4 Ei:d2t 37.Wh l h5+ was already much better for Black, who went on to win in Jonsson - Teeriaho, corr. 2008. 1 9. © h 1 gets the king off the perilous a7-g1 diagonal, but does not hinder the . . . li:le7 idea. An experimental line is: l 9 . . . li:l e7 20.li:lxe7t 'Wxe7

�

,//, £ B, �� - �� , , /.' "' "��·)�;p�-?f%

8 � � � % �� 76 1. �� j_� � �� 4 ��!A "" ,� 3 �,,,r�, � r�& 2 � � - -'� '-- - � , , %� , , ,Y,

, ,Y,

a) 2 1 .l"ld2?! 'Wa7 22.Wf2 b4+ b) 2 1 .Wh l b4! 22.c4 (22.cxb4? l"lxb4 23.li:Jd5 'Wa7! 24.li:Jxb4 'Wxf2 25 .'Wxd6 ic4+) 22 . . . 'Wa7 23.l"le2 �c5 24.Ei:b l + c) 2 1 .°Wh5 °Wd7! 22.l"ld l d5+! d) Relatively best might be: 2 1 .li:Jc2 'Wa7!? (2 1 . . .d5+!) 22.°Wxd6 l"lfe8 23 .°Wd2 (23.l"ld l e3 24.Ei:e2 ic4+) 23 ... b4! 24.cxb4 l"led8 25.Wi'e l ixb2 26.E1d 1 �f6�

,,,

� �

, �,,,,% �ffl WM ;�_J

WN1'

1.-,

�L,%� 1� r-� a

2 1 .g4!? 'Wh4 22 . .tg2 fxg4 23.°Wxd6 Ei:be8 24.f5 ic8 25.Ei:f4 Wi'h6 (25 . . . ie5 26.Ei:xg4t 'Wxg4 27.'Wxf8t Wxf8 28.li:lxg4 h5�) 26.'Wxh6 ixh6 27.l"lxg4t Wh8 28.l"le l ixe3 29.l"lxe3 ixf5 30.l"lf4 ig6 3 1 .l"lxfSt l"lxfS 32.Wgl Wg7 33.l"le2 Ei:f4 34.Ei:f2 Ei:g4= with equality. Of course, there is room for improvement in such complicated variations. 1 9.l"lf2 is a multipurpose move, preparing to double on the d-file or bring the bishop back to fl according to circumstance. At this point Black

20.�adl Apparently a logical plan. 20.Elf2 bxc3 2 1 .bxd E1b5 (an interesting alternative is 2 1 . . .a5!? 22.l"ld l a4 23.Ei:fd2 Wh8+!

1 40

1 l . exf5

when the idea . . . a3 followed by . . . l"1b2 was on the cards, Elisei - Ilyuschenko, corr. 2008} 22.l"1d I as in Ziolkowski - Debowiak, Poznan 1 998, will transpose after to the main line after 22 . . . E:a5!?= (22 ... tlie7 23.c4± is less exact} .

20 ... bxd 2 1 .bxc3 gbS! 22.i'l:fl :BaS!? 23J'Hd2 An attempt to seize control of the light squares by means of 23 . .ifl !? is countered by: 23 . . . tli e7 24.ic4 (24.tlixe7t l!!ixe7 25 .ic4 ixc4 26.tlixc4 l"1c5 27.tlixd6 .ixc3+ or 24.tlib6 l!!i c6 25.tli bc4 l"1d5!! 26.tlixd5 tlixd5t) 24 . . . tlixd5 25.ixd5 ixc3 26.l"1c2 E:c5 27.l!!i h6 ixd5 28.l"1xd5 l"1xd5 29.tlixd5 ig7 (29 . . . l!!i a4=) 30.l!!i g 5 l!!i e 6 3 1 .l"1c7 l"1f7 32.l!!i d St �.f8f± Black is at least equal.

Conclusion

24.lll xe7t 24.c4 l!!i a 7! 25 .©h l (25 .tlixe7t l!!ixe7 26.E:xd6 l!!i a7=) 25 . . . tt:Jxd5 26.cxd5!? (26.tlixd5 Vfff f7 27.l!!ixflt l"1xf7 28.i'!b l ifs is at least equal for Black) 26 . . . .ifl 27.V!ff e2 .ig6 28.tlic4 l"1c5 29.tlixd6! V!ff c7 30.tlixf5 ixf5 3 1 ..ixf5 l"1xf5 32.V!ffxe4 l"1f8 should be balanced. 24 ... �xe7 25.gxd6 .if7!? 25 . . . V!ff a7 26.2"1xe6 V!ffxe3t 27.©h l E:xa2= 26.�gS!? 26.V!ff e2 E:xa2 27.�e l .ie6? or 27 ... .ig6? .

In this chapter we examined several non-critical lines after l l .exf5 .ixf5 1 2 .c3 .ig7 1 3 .tlic2 0-0 1 4 . tli ce3 ie6. After both l 5.a4?! b4! and l 5 .g4?! b4! Black is at least equal, because White cannot grab the offered pawn with impunity due to his lag in development. This unavoidably results in a weakening of his pawn structure, providing Black with a permanent source of counterplay. As a consequence, only 1 5 .g3 f5! remains as a serious alternative, but even then it is White who has to tread with care. The continuation 1 6 . .ig2 f4 l 7.tlic2 if5 ! reveals that the pawn on f4 is cramping the movements of the white knights, and l 8.tlixf4?! only makes matters worse in view of 1 8 . . . exf4 1 9 .ixc6 l!!i e 7t when the white king has to lose his castling privilege under unfavourable circumstances. Therefore, the best course of action seems to be 1 5 .g3 f5 ! 1 6 .ih3!? when by pinning the adverse f-pawn White slows down Black's attack, ensuring himself of equality. Black should proceed by playing 1 6 . . . E:bS!, making it harder for White to get in a2-a4. The main line is 1 7.0-0 V!ffd7 l 8.f4 e4 l 9.Vfih5 b4! with typically strong counterplay for Black. The lines examined here represent no threat to the Sveshnikov, and it is actually Black who dictates the play in most of them.

1 1.exfS 15.id3 Variation Index 1 .e4 c5 2.lDf3 lD c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lDxd4 ltJ f6 5.lD c3 e5 6.ltJ db5 d6 7 ..ig5 a6 8.ltJ a3 h5 9 ..ixf6 gxf6 lO.ltJd5 f5 1 1 .exfS ixfS 1 2.c3 ig7 13.ltJc2 0-0 1 4.ltJ ce3 .ie6 1 5 ..id3 1 5 ... fS A) 1 6.a4 B) 1 6 ..ic2 B l ) 1 6 ... £4 B2) 1 6 ... e4!? 17.lDf4 .if7 B2 1) 1 8.0-0 B22) 1 8 ..ib3 B23) 1 8.lDh5!? C) 16.Wfh5 e4 17 ..ic2 lD e7! C l ) 1 8.ltJf4 C2) 1 8 ..ib3 C3) 1 8.�dl b4!? C3 1) 1 9.0-0 C32) 1 9.lDxb4 C33) 1 9.cxb4!? D) 1 6.0-0

1 42 1 43 144 1 45 1 46 146 148 1 48 1 49 1 50 1 52 1 52 1 53 155 1 56

1 42

1 1 . exfS

1 .e4 c5 2.tll f3 tll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tll xd4 tll f6 s.tll c3 e5 6.tll db5 d6 7.ig5 a6 8.tll a3 b5 9.ixf6 gxf6 10.l!ldS f5 1 I .exf5 ixf5 12.c3 ig7 13.l!lc2 0-0 14.l!l ce3 ie6 15.id3 A natural move, directing the bishop's fire towards h7. It is obvious that Black will shorten the bishop's radius of action by playing . . . f5 , but White considers that he will then be able to undermine Black's proud pawn structure and king position by means of Wh5 and g2-g4. 1 5 .. .f5

17.0-0 1 7.tll x b4? tll xb4 1 8.cxb4 e4 1 9.ic4 ixc4 20.tll xc4 d5+ is good for Black. 1 7.cxb4 e4 1 8 .'ll f4! if7

s i, � a •• 7 �.". %.t� · � . � � �� 6 •• 'Alt� -• � �"l �� 45 ��rn · �"" ' � 8 1f!f< :((!$

�

� � � " �� - - • 3 �� %�� i?'�8·o:;, � 2 i�i?'&· . %�; 8 � i?'& u % · m ... -

� ,,,,,, �)'':;

':;

One of the most important positions in the whole Sveshnikov. Black seems to have obtained long-term advantages such as the two bishops and more space, but his slight weakness on the light squares (f5 in particular) gives White a target to pile up on. Now White has four moves to choose from: A) 16.a4, B) 16.ic2, C) 16.WfhS and D) 16.0-0.

A) 16.a4 A rather unspirited attempt to play on the queenside. In fact, . . . b4 is a move that Black wants to play in order to saddle White with a weakness on c3.

1 6 ... b4 It is common practice for White to accept the weakness on c3 by castling, although there are alternatives.

1 9.ic4! Fighting against Black's bishop pair. 1 9 . . . Cll xb4 20.0-0 (20 .Wid2? i.xc4 2 1 .Cll xc4 1"1b8!+ or 20.ixf7t 1"1xf7 2 1 .0-0 ie5+ e.g. 22.Cll fd5 1"1b8 23.Cll xb4 gxb4 24.Wd5 1"1d4t) 20 . . . ixc4 2 1 .Cll xc4 d5 22.tll e3 (22.tll e6?! Wf6 23.lll xf8 dxc4 24.Cll d7 Wff c6 25.a5 1"1d8 26.Wa4 Wxa4 27.1"1xa4 Cll d 3 28.Cll b6 lll xb2+ is dangerous for White, despite his extra exchange, as the passed c-pawn has tremendous potential.) 22 . . . ie5 23.Cll exd5 Cll xd5 24.Wxd5t Wxd5 25.Cll xd5 ixb2 26.1"1ab l gab8= This is not exactly bad for White, but he is the one who has to be more careful in order to maintain his position.

17 ... bxc3 18.bxc3 i>hs Black has achieved his positional aims, as there is a weak pawn on c3 to attack and his king has been safeguarded. A possible continuation is: 19.:Elb l 1 9 .Wh5 e4 20.i.c2 Cll e7!+ 19 ...WfaS! It suddenly becomes apparent that Black is on the verge of taking over the initiative in view of the pressure on d5 and c3 . 20.ic4!?

1 43

Chapter 1 2 - 1 5 .id3 .

A logical move, trying to oppose Black's light squared bishop. 20.ic2?! is mer convincingly by 20 . . . f4 2 1 .�h5 ig8. This is where . . . cj{hs comes in handy. 22.'ll f5 Wfxd5 23.'ll xg7 cj{xg7 24.l"lfd l

22 .. .f4! 23 .�e2 fxe3 24.ixe6 exf2t 25.l"lxf2 l"lxf2 26.\Wxf2 'l.Wxc3 27.'ll c4 e4!t Black is simply better, despite the opposite-coloured bishops, as all his pieces are more active than their white counterparts and the e-pawn seems dangerous.

20 ... f4 20 . . . l'!ad8 2 1 .'ll b4!

8 7

2 1 .tll b4! 2 1 .'ll c2 �c5+

6 5

2 1 .. ..id7! 22.Wi'xd6! White is correct to boldly capture the pawn on d6.

4 3 2 a

24 . . . �f7! 25 .�g4t cj{h8 26.l"lxd6 'lie? 27.l"lb7 l"lae8+ Black should be able to prevail in view of his extra piece, although he is in a little bit of a tangle at the moment.

22.'ll ed5 ?! e4 23.'ll xc6 (23.l'!e l e3! 24.fxe3 'll e5 25 .ie2 ixa4--+) 23 . . .ixc6 24.'ll e7 ixa4 25 .�xd6 �e5+ and 22.'ll xc6 ixc6 23.'ll d5 Wfc5 !t are both highly dubious.

After 20.'ll b 4 Black refuses the exchange by 20 . . . 'll e7!, bolstering his control of f5 and d5, when the advantage seems to rest with his side. For example: 2 l .fii.c4 (After 2 1 .c4, 2 1 . . .l"labS+ is one of several ways for Black to play.) 2 1 . . .d5! 22.ixd5 'll x d5 23.'ll exd5 �c5 24.c4 e4� The two bishops seem to offer him more than enough compensation for the material. 20.'ll b6 is unsurprisingly worse thanthe main line, due to being less flexible: 20 . . . E'.ad8!? 2 1 .ic4 d5! 22.ixd5

22 ... fxe3 23.Wi'xd7 exflt 24.@hl 25.cxb4 \Wb6m With an unclear yet balanced game.

lll xb4

B) 1 6 ..ic2 This is considered to be a headache for Black if he is in a must-win situation. The bishop move is designed to take the sting out of . . . e4 and thus adds extra force to White's planned 'l.Wh5 . White will then follow up with g2-g4,

1 44

l l . exf5

undermining Black's pawn front on e5 and f5 . The bishop may also switch to b3 if necessary, seeking to be exchanged for its counterpart on e6 so as to conquer the light squares. It is worth analysing two options for Black. Bl) 16 ... £4 is a proven solution, but it allows a forced draw if White wants it. B2) 16 ... e4H is a risky, yet not unsound, way to avoid the draw.

Bl) 1 6 £4 •..

This exploits the main disadvantage of 1 6.ic2 (the time lost) at the cost of allowing a draw.

17.'WhS :!':\f7! This simple defence is the point behind I 6 .. .f4. Now the white knights are hanging. 1 8 ..ixh7t The correct capture. 1 8 .Wxh?t?! @f8 1 9 .Wg6 ( 1 9 .if5 '\Mies+ or 1 9.ig6?! fxe3 20.ixf7 exf2t 2 1 .@xf2 ixf7 22.ghfl ixd5 23.@gl t if7 24.gxf7t @xf7 25 .gfl t @e6 26.Wxg7 t°iJ e7 27.'1Mfg4t @d5 28.'1Wf3t e4 29.l'!dl t @c6 30.Wxe4t d5-+) 19 . . . We8 20.0-0-0 fxe3 2 1 .fxe3 requires some analysis, although Black looks fine after: 2 l . . .gaa7!? 22.ie4 b4!

19 ... 'WeS! 20 ..ixe6 'Wxe6 2 1 .'Wg4 'Wh6! A key move, protecting f4 in order to avert a knight retreat to c2. 22.llib6 Black is by no means worse after: 22.0-0 e4 23.t°iJf5 'We6 24.'\Wxf4 (24.t°iJfe3= was agreed drawn in Nordal - Ferreira, corr. 20 1 2.) 24 ... Wxd5 25 .Wxd6t Wxd6 26.t°iJxd6 ge7= The same applies to 22.t°iJc2?! e4 23 .Wh3 (or 23.0-0 t°iJe5 24.We2 '1Wg6 with a powerful attack) 23 . . . Wxh3 24.gxh3 t°iJe5 25.0-0 which was an extremely risky choice in Ivanchuk Carlsen, Leon 2009. Black could have obtained an excellent position with: 25 . . . gf5 !N+ 22.t°iJ f5 acquiesces to a draw by repetition. After 22 . . . We6 23.t°iJfe3 Wh6, Y2-Y2 has been the conclusion to hundreds of games and should objectively be the most correct way to finish the battle.

22 .. J'�ds 23.lli edS 23.t°iJf5?! We6 24.t°iJe3 Wxg4 25.t°iJxg4 d5 26.a4 gb7 27.a5 d4 28.0-0 dxc3 29.bxc3 t°iJxa5+ was just bad for White in Walczak - Doroshenko, corr. 20 1 2 .

1 8 . . �fS 1 9 ..if5! The only way to save the piece. .

8 7 6 5 4 3

23 ... e4 Black has some initiative, but there is no clear advantage in sight. A game from this position continued:

Chapter 1 2

24.h4 .!li es 25.�gS .!ll d3t 26.i>fl ges 27.°Wxh6 hl6 28.f3 .!ll xb2 29.fxe4 gxe4 30.gh3 g5 3 1 .gel This was Guedes Jr. - Martello, corr. 20 1 1 , and the point was eventually halved. B2) 1 6 ... e4!? The best practical chance in a must-win situation. Now we are at an important juncture:

17. .!ll f4 Probably the most critical, and the reason that 1 6 . . . e4!? is not so popular. The obvious purpose of the move is to immobilize the enemy pawn mass and ultimately destroy it. White will employ the exchange of bishops via b3 to facilitate the execution of his idea. However, as we shall see, things are not so simple. 1 7.0-0? f4+ is unthinkable for White, e.g. 1 8 .�xe4 fXe3 1 9 .Wh5 ?! ( 1 9.lll xe3+ looks like a better practical chance) 1 9 . . . exf2t 20.Wh l (20.l"ixf2 l"ixf2 2 1 .ixh7t Wf8 22.Wxf2 l"ia7 23.Wgl tlie5-+) 20 . . . l"if7 2 1 .ixh7t Wf8 22.ig6 l"iaa7!+ and Black defends while preserving his material advantage. l 7.Wh5 tli e7!+! transposes to variation C. l 7.f4 should be met with the typical l 7 ... b4! 1 8 .0-0 ( 1 8.ia4?! l'!c8 1 9.ixc6 l'!xc6 20.Clixb4 l'!xc3!+) 1 8 . . . bxc3 1 9.bxc3 tli e7+!, with excellent counterplay for Black. For example:

145

1 5 .i.d3

20.ib3 l'!c8 2 1 .l"ib l ! ixd5 22.ixd5t! (22.tlixd5 ©h8+) 22 . . . Wh8 23.c4 Wa5 24.ie6 Wc5 25 .l'!b3 d5!? 26.cxd5 id4 27.Wh l ! ixe3 28.d6 l'!cd8 29.l'!xe3 l'!xd6 30.Wa l t Wd4 3 1 .Wxd4t l'!xd4= l 7.ib3 is an attempt to play for tli f4 in a slightly disguised form, but Black has his chances here too. For example: l 7 . . . tli e5 1 8 .0-0 ( l 8.tlif4 if7 transposes to variation B22) 1 8 . . . Wh8! 1 9 .lll f4 ic8! An interesting idea, choosing to play with two bishops even at the cost of time. 20.Wh5! (20.a4 Wh4!�)

� :i, �1� �it! � � ��. 3� ��li '��r,.,�.f , , ; m . �. -s �z� B �� 3� kit � 2 ��-%" . %� ',, . , . ;�%��-':« il�� v1� 8 � 5

. ..

,,,:?

....

�

20 . . . Wf6! 2 1 .tlied5! (2 1 .l'!fd l ih6 22.tli ed5 Wg7+! gives Black excellent chances to play for a win in a complicated position) 2 1 . . .'Wh6 22.Wxh6 ixh6 23.l'!fd l l'!b8= is a balanced ending.

17 ..i.f7 .

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

1 46

1 1 .exfS

This is certainly forced. White now has several choices: 82 1) 18.0-0, 822) 18.ib3 or 823) 18.CLJh5!? 1 8 .tt:lxf5 ?! is answered by 18 . . . '1Wg5 , hitting both knights. It leaves White no other option than 1 9.tt:lxg7 '1Wxf4 20.etJh5 ixh5 2 l .'1Wxh5 '1Wxf2t 22.Wd l '1Wxg2 23 .1Wd5t Wh8 24.'\Wxe4 '1Wxe4 25 .i.xe4 d5t when the situation looks grim for him.

82 1) 1 8.0-0 A natural and strong choice, as f5 is now hanging.

1 8 ...ie5 Trying to slowly push back the cavalry, but White can pose Black some fresh problems of his own. 19.etJh3!? Keeping the route towards h5 open for the queen, while threatening the pawn on f5 as well as the positional improvement ib3 . 1 9 .g3 is not dangerous for Black after 1 9 . . . 'IWgS 20.tt:lfg2 (20.h4 \Wf6 2 1 .tt:lfd5 ®g6 22.ttlg2 Wh800) 20 . . . etJe7 2 l .f4!? (2 l .i.b3 f4 22.'\Wg4 ®xg4 23.tt:lxg4 i.xb3 24.axb3 f3 25.tt:l 2e3 ig7 26.tt:lc2 d5 27.tt:lge3 Elfd8 28.Elfd l a5+!) 2 l . ..exf3 22.\Wxf3 b4+! with counterplay against the enemy's queenside.

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

1 9 @h8!? 20.CLJxf5 20.f4 '!Wb6 2 1 .Ele l if600 should not worry us. •..

20 ...ie6 2 1 .f4!? 2 1 .etJg3 ixh3 22.gxh3 d500 2 1 . ..ixc3 22.bxc3 ixf5 23.CDg5 d5 This is an attempt at neutralizing White's initiative. 24.g4 icB 25.ih3 '!Wb6t 26.@hl CLJe7 27.f5 27.ixd5 tt:lxd5 28 .'\Wxd5 e3+± 27... l!a?m The position is quite unpredictable and a total mess. 822) 1 8.i.h3 This is the traditional way of playing such positions, grasping the opportunity to achieve a light-squared bishop exchange and, consequently, domination over d5. Yet things may not be so bad for Black after the following move:

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

1 8 ... CLJe5! In my opinion, it is difficult for White to gain an advantage here, as Black is ready to use . . . ih6 as a tool to free his position.

1 9.0-0 A standard reaction, but there are other moves.

Chapter 1 2 - 1 5 .�d3

l 9 .lll xf5?! does noc look particularly dangerous in view of: 1 9 . . . Wg5 20.lll xg7 \Wxf4 2 1 .lll h5 (2 1 .lll e6 1Wf6-+)

1 47

26.lll xd8 :l'i:xd8 27.f4 lll a4� We have reached an odd endgame where, despite the extra exchange, White does not look ac all better. The activicy of Black's pieces is an extremely significant factor.

19 ....ih6! 20.lll e6 20.lll fd5 is met by the coldblooded 20 . . . �h8!, since 2 1 .lll xf5 ixd5 22.ixd5 :l'i:xf5 23.ixe4 (23.ixa8 Wxa8 24.'<!fixd6 if4 is no beccer for Whice eicher) 23 . . . :l'i:f6 24.ixa8 1Wxa8 yields a position with all the black pieces focusing harmoniously against the white king e.g. 25.�hl (25.a4 :l'i:g6 26.f3 1Wg8 27.1We2 1Wc4! 28.�ae l lll d 3 29.:l'i:dl lll f4 30.Wxc4 bxc4 3 1 .g3 lll d3f7) 25 . . . if4! 26.'<!!i d4 :Elg6 27.f3 '&f8! 28.g3 ixg3 29.hxg3 :l'i:xg3 30.:Ei:f2 '&h6t 3 1 .:l'i:h2 :l'i:h3 32.�xh3 Wxh3t= with a draw.

1 9 .ixf7t An ocher sensible accempt. 1 9 . . . :Elxf7 20.Wd5!? (20.0-0 ih6 2 1 .lll e6 '<!fid7 22.Wd5 �e8 23.lll d4 �h8+ is slightly beccer for Black.) 20 . . . :l'i:c8! 2 1 .0-0 ih6 22.lll e6 '<!fid7 23.:l'i:ad l f4 24.lll c2 :l'i:e8t Black almosc certainly has the better game, in view of the tremendous concentration of forces on the kingside.

20 ...Le6 2 1 ..ixe6t �h8 It turns out White cannot win a pawn for free.

l 9.iWh5!? is designed to prevent . . . ih6. However, after: l 9 . . . d5! 20.ixd5 !? (if 20.'<!fixf5 ? d4-+ or 20.Wh3 d4!f7 Black frees his play, obcaining ac lease an even game) 20 . . . \Wxd5 2 1 . l2'l exd5 ixh5 22.lll xh5 lll d3t 23.�e2 :8ad8 24.lll df4

7 6 45 3 2 8

22.ixf5!? ixe3 23.fxe3 Wg5 24.'<!fixd6! 1'hf5 25.:l'i:xf5 '&xf5 26.�fl '&g5 27.:l'i:f8t �xf8 28.1Wxf8t '<!!i g8 29.'<!fif6t '<!fig? 30.'<!fid8t= is yet another draw by perpetual. a

24 . . . ih6! 25.lll e6 (25 .lll xd3? exd3t 26.�f3 f4t puts White in serious jeopardy) 25 . . . lll xb2

Finally, 22.a4 f4 23.lll g4 f3!f7 cannot be worse for Black.

1 48

1 l . exf5

22 ... '!Wf6! 23.lll d4 lll d3 Black has good compensation which should promise him at least a draw. 24.'!We2 24.'1Mfc2? leads to a disaster for White: 24 . . . '1Mf g6 25 .id5 l"lae8 26.f3 l"le5! 27.ixe4 ie3t 28.ÂŠh l '1Wg3!!-+ 24 ... gae8 25.id7 ge7 26.ig4 lll f4! 27.'!Wdl lll d3= Thus, we may conclude that l 8.ib3 allows Black to muddy the waters sufficiently to obtain at least equal chances. B23} 18.lll h 5!? The engines give this decentralization as the strongest move in the position.

22 ... d5+! With another unclear position, although there is an immediate trap for White to avoid. 23.:Sdl?? A terrible blunder, in view of: 23 ...'!WeS-+ A double attack! C) 16.'!Wh5

19.lll xf5 ÂŠh8! With two fine prophylactic moves Black has obtained good compensation for the pawn. 20.0-0 20.lll hg3 d5 2 1 .0-0 ie6 also gives Black excellent compensation, for example: 22.'1Wh5! (22.tll e3?! 1Mfh4! 23.a4 l"lad8--t} 22 ... '1Mf e8! 23.'1Mfxe8 l"laxe8 24.tll e3 lll a5! 25 .ib3 d4 26.ixe6 l"lxe6 27.cxd4 ixd4=

A logical continuation, immediately hitting the traditional weak point in the black camp, - f5 .

1 49

Chapter 1 2 - 1 5 .id3

However, the position of the bishop on d3 allows Black to strike back at once.

1 6 ... e4 17 ..ic2 lLi e7! This move is most thematic, challenging White's control over d5 .

22 . . . f4 23 .'!Wd5 '!Wg6 24.llic2 )"\g8 25 .g3? (25 .llie I +) 25 . . . i.e5 26.mh l This happened in P. Cramling - Fedorowicz, Hastings 1 985. And now play should have continued:

Now White has a wide choice, but none of the moves available promise any real chances of an advantage: Cl) 1 8.lLif4, C2) 18.ih3 or C3) 1 8.l:!dl . l 8.llixe7t Rather too easy-going. 1 8 . . . '!Wxe7 1 9 . .ib3 1 9 .0-0 should be met with the typical l 9 . . . b4! 20.cxb4 1xb2 2 1 .E!:ab l ie5 22.ib3 �h8 23.llid5 'Vfig7 24.E!:bc l as in Georg - Flumbort, Neuchatel 2004, and now 24 . . . E!:a?!N+ would have been a typical way of covering c7 and stopping White's counterplay. 1 9 . . . i.xb3 20.axb3 'Vfie6 2 1 .0-0 Black has an excellent position and has several options.

78 6 45 3 2

Cl) 1 8.lLif4 This move is not dangerous but it has a drawing tendency.

1 8 ....if7 White should prefer a standard set-up here: 19 ..ih3 Focusing immediately on the light squares. 1 9 .'!Wh3 b4!+± gives Black the initiative, for example 20. 0-0 bxc3 2 1 .bxc3 'VficS!. a

2 1 . . .�h800 An interesting idea is: 2 1 . . . d5!? 22.g4!? (22.E!:fd l d4! 23.cxd4 f4 24.'!Wd5 '!W f7 25.'!Wxf7t E!:xf7+± is hardly worse for Black) 22 . . . fxg4 23.'!Wxd5 '!Wxd5 24.llixd5 gff3 ! +± Also thematic is 2 1 . . .b4 22.c4 1xb2 23.E!:a5! f4 24.llid5 '!We5 25 .'!Wxe5 dxe5!+± and Black is again at least equal. 22.b4?! 22.E!:ad l ! f4 23.llid5 E!:f7 24.�h l is unclear.

1 50

1 1 . exfS

19 ... dS! It seems that if Black wishes to play for a win he must take some risks. 20.WgS! 20.'1Wh3 ?! d4! 2 l .cxd4 (2 1 .lll e6?! ixe6 22.ixe6t �h8 23.lll xf5 ? lll g6!!-+ is disastrous for White, while 2 l .ixf7t l"1xf7 22.lll e6 '1Wd6 23.lll xd4 ixd4 24.l"1d l ixc3t 25.bxc3 '1We5+ cannot be considered a success for him either.) 2 1 . . .ixb3 22.axb3 '&d6 Black has a strong initiative.

22 ...Lb3 22 . . . '&a5t 23.�e2;!; is not a problem for White 23.axb3 Wd6 24.0-0 lLl c6!? 25.dS 25.lll h5 ih8 26.d5 lll d4 transposes. 25.l"1ad 1 lll xd4 is okay for Black.

20 ... d4!? An interesting winning attempt. The solid 20 . . . lll g6! 2 l .'&xd8 l"1axd8 22.lll exd5 (22.lll fxd5 ? f4-+) 22 . . . lll xf4 23.lll xf4 b4! 24.lll e6 (24.l"1cl bxc3 25.bxc3 l"1d6! 26. 0-0 ih6 27.g3 l"1c8 may even be worse for White) 24 . . . ixe6 25 .ixe6t= was agreed drawn in Anand - Kramnik, Frankfurt 2000, as neither side had the chance to win the resulting position with opposite-coloured bishops. C2) 18.�b3

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

Ir seems rhat Black has an interesting possibility:

2 1 . .. h6 22.Wh4! 22.'1Wg3 ixb3 23.axb3 '®xd4 24.0-0 '&xb2 looks better for Black.

1 8 ... lLig6!? The motivation behind this move is clear, it stops lll f4 (which is White's intention) and avoids exchanges. Also, it takes advantage of the

Chapter 1 2 - 1 5 id3

151

white bishop's absence from the b l -h7 diagonal to start threatening .. .f4. The only disadvantage is that Black temporarily relinquishes the fight for control of d5, but this may not be of so much importance. Let us see how things work in practice. White has the following options:

19.g3 This is considered as the main move, since White's primary concern is to prevent . . . f4. 1 9 .!"id l ?! was the first attempt here, but it does nothing to prevent Black's expansion. After l 9 . . . f4! 20.li:Jc2 iih8! 2 l .li:J d4 Kosten Kwiatkowski, Southampton 1 986, Black should have simply played 2 1 . . .if7!. It is clear that White's pieces are merely hitting thin air, while Black has all the makings of a powerful kingside attack, e.g. 22.Wh3 li:Jh4 23.li:Jf5 li:Jxf5 24.®xf5 e3!t and Black is spoilt for choice. 1 9 .f4?! does not inspire confidence with the king still uncasrled: l 9 . . . exf3 20.®xf3 (20.gxf3? f4! 2 l .li:Jg4 :8€5 22.Wxf5 ixf5 23.li:Je?t iih8 24.li:Jxf5 was the continuation in Hjelm Dovzik, Budapest 1 993, and now 24 . . . ixc3t!N 25.bxc3 ®c8!-+ would have forced White's resignation) 20 . . . f4 2 l .li:J c2 a5 22.a3

1 9 .®h3 is another way of trying to slow down . . . f4. Black's proper reaction involves advancing his a-pawn: 1 9 . . . a5! 20.0-0 a4!? 2 1 .ic2 Wc8!

22.li:Jb6 li:J f4! Introducing a peculiar tactical motif. 23 .®h4 Wd8! 24.Wxf4 Wxb6 25 .l"lad l :8ad8 26.li:Jd5 Wc5! 27.Wd2 a3! 28.bxa3 iih8� Black's two bishops ensure equaliry. l 9.g4!? A wild move that often occurs in the Sveshnikov. 1 9 . . . fxg4 20.h3! The point! 20.li:Jxg4? �h8+ is just bad for White.

� � e �• �."-· . <� .t. 6� :. �.:.\i� 5 �j�� ·�·:- ·"��1 4 ��%�%l•j� 7

.?.

.....

� � !N��ljj � �L. ?.� ��- - ;,-i � a

20 . . . g3 2 1 .fxg3 iih8! 2 1 . . .li:Je5 22.li:J f4 ixb3 23.axb3;!; is a bit better for White, due to the weakness on e4 and Black's light squares in general. 22.0-0-0 A risky but principled move. 22.ic2 if7! 23 .®g4 (23 .ixe4? Wes+) 23 . . . li:J e5 24.Wxe4 ig6 25 .Wg2 ixc2 26.Wxc2 li:J f3t 27.�e2 Wg5 gives Black great compensation for a pawn. 22 . . . if7 23.We2 Both 23 . . . a5!?00 and 23 . . . Wg5 !00 render the situation unclear, with mutual chances.

1 9 ... aS Black's counterplay is again linked with this advance. 1 9 . . . iih8 may, however, be more exact. The point is that White's counterplay associated with 20.li:Jf4 is rendered innocuous after 20 . . . li:Jxf4 2 l .gxf4 .ixb3 22.axb3 b4!, with a powerful Black initiative in Zambrana - Fernandez, Santa Clara 2003.

1 52

l l . exf5

20.We2" 20.Eldl ?! a4 2 l ..ic2 a3+ is similarly bad. So 20. Ci:J f4 Ci:Jxf4 2 l .gxf4 \Wf600 is White's best chance.

22.bxc3 !k8 23.0-0 'it>h8 24.\We2 'Wa5 25.c4 'Wc5 26.Ci:Je? !'i:c7 27.Eld5 Wxc4 28 .'Wxc4 !'lxc4 29.Ci:Jxf5 Ela4 30.Ci:Jxd6 E:xa2 3 l .Ci:Jxe4 a5� and Black's compensation was sufficient for a draw in Szczepankiewicz - Nowakowski, corr. 2008.

C3 1) 19.0-0 bxc3 20.hxc3 @hs

20 ... a4! 2 1 .Ac2 a3+ 22.Ab3 axb2 23.Wxb2 @hs� White's queenside had collapsed and Black went on to win easily in Neelotpal - Ghasi, Edinburgh 2003. C3) 1 8.�dl White has made a series of useful moves (developing pieces and controlling the d5square) and now waits for Black's reply. His next plan is to attack Black's pawn centre with either f2-f3 or g2-g4. It is also possible to play f2-f4 and then either double rooks on the cl-file or play for g2-g4. Black should seek dynamic counterplay, cutting across White's intentions:

1 8 ...b4!? The newest attempt, solving all Black's problems. This pawn sacrifice accelerates Black's queenside counterplay while diverting White's attention from the kingside. There are several options to consider: C3 1) 19.0-0, C32) 19.llJxb4 and C33) 19.cxb4!?. 1 9 .ib3 can be met in various ways. Simplest is 19 . . . Ci:Jxd5 20 ..ixd5 .ixd5 2 1 .tll x d5 bxc3

2 1 .g3 Ponomariov's choice, and an admission thac White is already struggling to equalize. 2 l .f4? lll x d5 22.Ci:Jxd5 !'lc8+ is poor for White, who is saddled with a weakness on c3 and has no counterplay. 2 l .f3?! looks thematic, yet Black may have an edge. 2 1 . . . if7!? 22.'Wh3 llJxd5 23.Ci:Jxd5 i.xd5 24.!'lxd5 \Wb6t 25.'tt> h l 'Wb2 26.ib3 e3t and the position is dangerous for White due to the thorn on e3 . 2 l ..ib3!? looks dubious after 2 1 . . ..if7! 22.'Wh3 f4! 23.lll f5 but it is not clear that Black has more than a draw: 23 . . . Ci:Jxf5 (23 . . .ixd5 24.Ci:Jxe7 'Wxe7 25 .ixd5 !'i:ae8=) 24.'Wxf5 ig6 25 .'Wg4 f3 26.g3 if5 27.'Wh5 ig6 28.Wg4 if5 29.'Wh5=

2 1 ...�cs 22.Ah3 llJxdS!?

1 53

Chapter 1 2 - 1 5 .id3

22 . . . if7?! 23.'1We2 ixd5 24.li::l x d5 li::l x d5 25.ixd5 a5 26.c4 !i:b8= V2-V2 Ponomariov Leko, Yerevan 200 1 .

30 ...'\We4t 3 1 .f3 '\W:xf4 32J';d3= With an essentially drawn position. C32) 19.lll xb4 White seeks a direct refutation to l 8 . . . b4, but there is no such thing!

23 ...fie7 24.c4 f4 24 . . . id7 25.li:Jg2! 25 ..ixe6 2s.li::l g2!? ms+ 2S ...fixe6 26.t!ll dS ieS 26 . . . !i:c5 !? or 26 . . . fxg3 27.hxg3 !i:xc4 28.li:Jf4+Âą. 27."fie2 e3 28.gxf4 E:g8t 29.'ii? h l ixf4 30.tll :xf4 30.fxe3? ixh2!!+

20.t!ll bdS t!ll xdS 2 1 .t!ll xdS E:bS 22.i.b3 22.b3 ixd5 23.E:xd5 !xc3t 24.@fl '\Wf6+ is fine for Black, mainly due to the fact that the c2bishop is inactive. 22 ... a4! 23.i.xa4 E:xb2 The black rook has broken into the enemy camp, securing a strong initiative. 24.i.b3 Black now has a solid or an ambitious continuation: 24 ... 'ii? h 8! The ambitious move, demonstrating char Black can still hope for more than a draw. 24 . . . ixd5 practically leads to a draw by force: 25 .ixd5t h8 26.0-0 ixc3 27.ie6 '\We8! By

1 54

1 1 .exf5

forcing queens off, Black relieves himself from rhe rask of defending a middlegame position wirh opposire-coloured bishops. 28.Wi'xe8 Elxe8 29.ixf5 E!:e5! 30.E!:cl (or 30.id7 d5 3 l .a4 d4 wirh obvious compensation for the pawn) 30 . . . E!:xf5 (30 . . . ia5 !?�) 3 l .E!:xc3 E!:xa2 32.f3 exf3 33.E!:cxf3 V2-V2, Van der Wiel - Cmilyte, Wijk aan Zee 2003.

entanglement of his queen means that White is completely lost. 26.Elb l ?! is best according to Rogozenko, with the aim of challenging the active rook of the opponent. However, after: 26 . . . Elxb3 27.axb3

•

87 .� � . •��. . Y, el , 6 • %�_.:---·., _Y,� , � ��a��·%UV 0 %� 4s •%•lt:) •0, .t. 1.E ... % � ,

25.0-0 25 .Wi'h3? is immediately punished by 25 . . . e3 26.tll xe3 ixb3 27.axb3 f4-+. 25 ... f4iiii White must be very careful, since it is obvious rhar Black has at least enough compensation for the pawn. However, this is easier said than done. In conjunction with the rook on b2, Black's central pawns present a terrible threat for White.

. ., /,

� � � 32 �1� � � �: %� ��;;;i�"0/�ff)3.il3'� �0, �;:;i-�

• n= e

27 . . . f3!! 28.tll e3 fxg2 29.E!:fc l ie5 30.tll g4 ixg4 3 1 .Wxg4 e3 32.Elc2 (32.fxe3?? Wi'f6-+) 32 . . . Wb6! 33.We4 exf2t 34.'tt> xg2 Elg8t 35.'tt> f3 Ele8! 36.'tt> g2 d5! 37.Wi'f5 Wi'h6! 38.h3 Wg7t 39 .Wi'g4 We7-+ White lost convincingly in Neumann Turati, corr. 2008. 26.tll b4 can be met with 26 ... E!:f5! 27.Wfg4 ic8!t 28.tll c6?! Wf8 29.tll d4 Elf6+ when, by preserving both his bishops, Black keeps the enemy queen and king under constant pressure.

26 ElfS! 27.Wi'g4 •••

26.tll xf4? loses to 26 . . . ixb3 27.tll g 6t 'tt> g8 28.tll xfS ixd l-+ with an extra piece for Black. After 26.c4?!, the reply 26 . . . Elf5 secures much more than compensation, e.g. 27.Wg4 id7! (27 . . . e3?! 28.tll xf4 Elxf4 29.Wxf4 e2 30.Wi'xd6 exd l =W 3 1 .Wxd l + gives White chances to resist) 28.tll b4 (28.tll xf4 ie5-+) 28 . . . ie5-+ and the

Chapter 1 2

27... e3!-+ Clearing the second rank. 28.gxe3 28.fxe3 :1'lg5 29.'1Wf3 ig4 30.'We4 if5 3 1 .'Wf3 :1'lgxg2t 32.'Wxg2 l"1xg2t 33.Wxg2 'Wg5t 34.Wf2 (34.Wfl f3 35.lLif4 ixc3-+) 34 . . . 'Wh4t-+ 28 ... fxe3 29.llixe3 hS! 29 . . . ixb3? 30.lLlxf5+30.Wg6 30.'Wh3 ixb3 3 1 .lLlxf5 ixd l-+

1 5 .id3

1 55

This is potentially a better option from a practical point of view, but even now White has no advantage. However, in the resulting positions ic is also very hard to detect winning chances for Black.

19 ... llixdS 20.llixdS .ixb2 Another good try is 20 . . . a5!? 2 1 .0-0 axb4 22.ib3 (22.�h3 i.c8!?) 22 . . . Wh8 23 .tt:Jxb4 ixb3 24.axb3 �b6 25.lLld5 1Mfxb3 26.li:Jf4 �f7 27.�xf7= \12-\12 , Ruben - Engelhardt, corr. 20 1 0 . 2 1 .0-0 .ieS Now White's main idea is to break up Black's centre with f2-f3, but it leads to sterile positions for both sides. 22.<ii h l A precautionary measure, aiming at f2-f3. 22.f4 ig7 23.�h3 does not seem annoying for Black after the simple reply: 23 . . . �d7 24.ib3 :1'lab8=

30 ... gf6 3 1 .Wxhst gh6 32.Wf3 Wh4 Black had finished the job efficiently. 0- 1 Fressinet - Gelfand, Enghien !es Bains 2003 . C33) 19.cxb4!?

22.ib3 is less incisive, planning :1'ld l -cl -c7, but White has no chance of an advantage without using any pawn breaks. For example: 22 . . . Wh8! 23.'Wh6 (23.l"k l if7 24.'Wh6 :1'\b8 25 .:1'\c7! ig7 26.'Wc l ie5 27.'Wh6 ig7 28.�c l = leads to a draw by repetition) 23 . . . .ig8!? 24.E:cl (24.f3 :J"\b8! 25.fxe4 fxe4= is balanced too) 24 . . . :J"\a7!? 25 .:J"\c6 E:g7!00 and Black seems at least equal as he has amassed a lot of troops on the kingside.

1 56

l l . exf5

22 ... mhs 23.f4 23.f3!? .ixd5 24.!i:xd5 !i:c8 25 .ib3 �e8= is completely drawn. 23 ...�g7 24.�h3 24.g4 j"gc8 25 . .ib3 .ixd5 (25 . . . °We8 26.�xe8 Ei:cxe800) 26.l'l:xd5 fxg4= 24 ...�d7! 25.lll b6 25 .ib3 Ei:ab8= reaches an equal position, similar to 22.f4 on the previous page. 25 ...�c6 26.lll xaS �xc2 27.!i:cl 27.l'l:xd6?? Ei:xa8 28.Ei:xe6 'Wc4!-+ 27 ... �e2 28.lll c7 �xa2ii5 The position is not at all worse for Black.

compensation for the pawn. However, I find the text move more convincing.

17.�h5 l 7.f4?! is a naive attempt to block and attack f5 , as after l 7 . . . Ci'i e7! 1 8 .ic2 ( 1 8 .Ci'ixe7 'Wxe7 l 9 .fxe5 ? °Wa7!-+ is the point of Black's play, winning a piece) 1 8 . . . Ci'ixd5 1 9 .Ci'ixd5 j"gc8 20.ib3 a5! 2 l .a3 °We8+ the pressure is defused and Black is slighcly better, Ki. Georgiev - Van Wely, Bled (ol) 2002. In the game, White made things worse by 22.ctJ e3 exf4 23.Ci'id5 'Wf7+. Another typically harmless continuation 1s 17 . .ic2 Ci'ie7 1 8 .ib3 ( 1 8 .Ci'ixe7 'Wxe7 1 9 .ib3 f4 20.ctJd5 °Wf7=) 1 8 . . . Ci'i g6! 1 9 .f4 exf4 20.Ci'ic2! (20.Ci'ixf4? Ci'ixf4 2 1 .j"gxf4 'Wb6+) 20 . . . .ie5 2 1 .ctJd4 .ig8= with approximately balanced play.

D) 1 6.0-0 This is the main line, but I chink it gives Black enough time to reinforce his weaknesses on the light squares and fight for the initiative.

Another typical treatment is 1 6 . . . Ei:a?!? l 7.a4 Ci'i e7 1 8 .Ci'ixe?t i'he7 1 9 .axb5 axb5 20.ixb5 d5 when the massive centre gives Black powerful

1 7.a4 This should be met with the typical: l 7 . . . b4 1 8.cxb4 e4 1 9.Ci'if4 .ig8 Black has a good game. 20 . .ixa6!? 20 . .ic4 Ci'ixb4 2 1 ..ixg8 i'hg8 22.°Wd2 a5! 23.Ci'ixf5 �g5= 24.Ci'ixg7 !i:xg7 25 .h4 'Wxh4 26.Ei:ae l d5 27.f3 Ci'id3! 28.Ci'ixd3 exd3 29.l'l:f2 Ei:c8 30.f4 !i:c2 3 1 .°We3 !i:xf2 Y2-Y2 , was a well played draw in Ferreira - Moura to, corr. 20 1 2 .

Chapter 1 2

This is better than 23.ctJe3 d4! when, according to Kolev and Nedev, Black gets the initiative after 24.tt'l e6 1Mlb6 25.tt'lxf8 dxe3. 23 ... 1Mf e7 24.tt'lxfS dxc4 25.tt'lxh7 i.e5 !? 26.tt'lg5 26.f4 :!:!d8! 26 . . . 1Mfxg5 27.f4 This seems to lead to a draw. 27 . . . .ixf4 28.1Mfd4t <ii h7 29 .Wd?t <ii h s 30.Wd4t=

17 ...e4 1 8.ic2 lD e7! This typical manoeuvre has been witnessed so many times that it requires no explanation. 19.gadl 1 9.tt'lf4 .if7 20.Wh3 (20.Wg5 b4!) 20 ... ie5t is fine for Black.

1 57

1 5 .�d3

22.ctJe3?! can be met by: 22 . . . .ih5! 23.:i:!xd6 f4 24.:!:!d5

.I. � � �- :� 8 �� . , .Y.�••

� :;;;: ...�. �� ' � � f""'� �� · · ·� °if r%��· ��ref · "� // . · 'r�� ti rBtt� ti r�00 �� · · " . -i= " .

�3 �1�1!.�i

24 . . . ie5!! 2 5 . ctJ d l .ig4! 26.8;xe5 :!:l:f5 27 . .ixe4 !xh3 28.!!xf5 .ixf5 29 . .ixaS .id3 30.!!e l WdS+ and Black had an almost decisive advantage in Rimkus - Korabliov, corr. 20 1 1 . Finally, after 22. \ti h 1 8;ae8+± Black had organized all his pieces and had excellent councerplay in Olsson - Spasov, Gothenburg 2005 .

22 ...Wfh4! 23.g3 In case of 23.f4 exf3 24.:!:!xf3?! (24.g3 Wc400) , White is hit by 24 . . . .ixd5! 25.El:xd5 8;ae8 26.Wd3 El:e l t 27.8;fl !e5!t and Black achieves good pressure.

19 ...if7! The best move, expelling the white queen. Black aims to secure g5 for his own queen. Aagaard only gives 1 9 . . . :!:l:c8 in Experts. 20.1Mfh3 lll xd5 2 1 .llJxd5 1Mfg5 This position is promising for Black. White has various tries, but the game is lively and he cannot effectively block the structure d6, e4, f5 . 22.1Mfe3 22.f4 fails to: 22 . . . exf3! 23.:!:l:xf3 (23.Wxf3? .ih5+ or 23 . .ixf5 1Mfxg2t 24.Wxg2 fxg2 25.'itixg2 8;ae8+) 23 . . . .ixd5 24.!''!xd 5 Wc l t 25 . .id l Wxb2+

1 58

l l .exf5

24 ... :SaeS 25.idl Â°1Wg6 26.f4 exf3 27.Wfxf3 Wi'g5 28.Wff4 Wf d8! 29.Wffl= Y2-Y2 Moeller - Jaulneau, corr. 20 1 2, shows a typical way to defuse White's slight initiative in such positions.

Conclusion

In this chapter we delved into the main line that arises at the end of the introductory sequence l l .exf5 ixf5 1 2.c3 ig7 1 3 .tll c2 0-0 1 4 .tll ce3 ie6. I believe the natural developing move l 5 .id3 to be best, and this is verified by its level of popularity. White not only seeks to enhance his light-square control but also eyes the traditionally weak spot in Black's castled position, namely h7. Moves such as Wfh5 and 1''1ad l will then be deployed to increase the pressure in the centre and on the kingside. After the universally adopted l 5 . . . f5 , the options to concern Black are 1 6.ic2, 1 6.Wfh5 and 1 6.0-0. A fourth move, 1 6.a4, unjustifiably changes White's main focus from the centre. Black should get a good game with 1 6 . . . b4 1 7.0-0 bxc3 1 8 .bxc3 Wh8, when he has a safe king, strong centre and a weakness on c3 to pile up on. Putting 1 6.ic2 under the microscope revealed that White must take some risks to avoid the draw by repetition arising after I 6 .. .f4 1 7 .Wfh5

Elf7! 1 8 .ixh7t Wf8 1 9.i.f5! Wfe8! 20.fi.xe6 Wfxe6 2 1 .Wf g4 Wfh6! 22.lll f5 Wfe6 23.lll fe3 Wfh6. Black does have a few chances of his own to play for a win by essaying the alternative 1 6 . . . e4! ? 1 7 .lll f4 if7, although the resulting positions should ultimately be equal. Subsequently, we looked at 1 6 .Wfh5 e4 I 7.fi.c2 lll e7!, when the verdict should be one of dynamic equality. White's main idea of exchanging lightÂ squared bishops comes to nothing after either 1 8 .lll f4 if7 1 9 .ib3 d5! 20.Wfg5 ! d4! ? or 1 8 .ib3 tll g6!?. In the first case Black gets good play in return for the exchange, while in the second case he simply evades it. The third possibility, 1 8 .Eld l , is met strongly by 1 8 . . . b4! ?, exploiting the power of Black's dark-squared bishop to initiate counterplay against White's somewhat abandoned queenside. It is actually White who has to be more careful in to maintain the balance here, a typical variation being 1 9 .lll xb4?! a5! 20.lll bd5 lll x d5 2 l .tll x d5 E:b8 22.i.b3 a4! 23.ixa4 E:xb2 when, as a number of games has proven, Black already has a dangerous initiative. 1 6.0-0 is safe and solid but White cannot aspire to an advantage after it. By playing 1 6 . . . Wh8! Black is ready for the customary . . . lll e7 idea, obtaining fine play in the main line 1 7.Wfh5 e4 1 8 .ic2 lll e7! 1 9 .Elad l if7! 20.Wfh3 lll xd5 2 1 .lll xd5 Wf g5 , as the reader can witness in the concluding part of the chapter.

1 1.id3 a

12.c3 Variation Index 1 .e4 c5 2.lLia tll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tll xd4 tll f6 5 .tll c3 e5 6.tll db5 d6 7 ..ig5 a6 8.tll a3 h5 9 ..ixf6 gxf6 10.tll d5 f5 1 1 . .id3 .ie6 1 2.c3 1 2 .. .i g7

1 60 161 161 1 62 1 63 1 64 1 65 1 66

A) 1 3.0-0 0-0 Al) 14J�el?! A2) 1 4. g3?! A3) 1 4.£3 B) 1 3 .tll c2 0-0 1 4.0-0 �c8 B l ) 1 5 . a4 B2) 1 5 .tll ce3 B3) 1 5.£3!?

Al) after 20.tll g3

20 . . . 1/9d7!N

B 1 ) no re ro 23.1/9h5 !

B 3 ) afrer l 8 .g4! ?

l 8 . . . fxg41

1 60

l l .id3

1 .e4 c5 2.lll f3 lll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lll xd4 lll f6 s.lll c3 e5 6.lll db5 d6 7.ig5 a6 8.lll a3 b5 9.ixf6 gxf6 1 0.lll dS f5 l 1 .i.d3 ie6 12.c3 ig7 At this point the main moves are 1 3 .'cWh5 and the interesting sacrifice 1 3 .lll xb5!?, which will be covered in the next two chapters. Here we will examine some other possibilities that should not be underestimated: A) 1 3.0-0 and B) 13.lll c2. 1 3.'cWf3?! is dubious because of 1 3 . . . ixd5! 1 4.exd5 e4 (underlining the major disadvantage of putting the queen on f3) when White has a choice of evils: a) l 5 .'cWxf5 ? exd3 1 6.dxc6 'cWe7t 1 7.'tt> fl 'cWe2t 1 8.'tt> g l 0-0!-+ is hopeless. b) 1 5 .'1We3?! b4! 1 6.dxc6 ( 1 6.lll b l lll e7 1 7.i.c4 l'k8 1 8 .Slb3 0-0+ leaves White in a state of complete passivity) 1 6 . . . bxa3 1 7.0-0 axb2 1 8 .l�fab l 0-0 1 9 .ic4 ( 1 9 .i.e2 Elc8 20.Elxb2 Elxc6 2 1 .Elb3 d5 22.Eldl '1Wd7+) 1 9 . . . d5 20.Elfd l '\Wf6 2 1 .i.xd5 '1Wxc3+ can hardly be recommended either.

White has tried several other continuations instead of l 4.lll c2 (which transposes ro variation B after 14 . . . Elc8) and 1 4 .'cWh5 , which in turn transposes to rhe next chapter. Let us examine the dubious Al) 14.:!'!el?! and A2) 14.g3?!, before focusing on the more resting A3) 14.f3.

1 4.'cWf3?! is a naive effort to stop ... ixd5, which gets punished by: 1 4 . . . fxe4 1 5 .i.xe4 f5 1 6 .lll f6t '1Wxf6 l 7.1xc6

c) l 5 .'cWg3 is the best try. Now comes:

8 .i. �· �.i. � �� " ·"� � ��·�· ·· � � !al�1��-1� � �� ;;:,��

� :3 ��r'',!� � � . '\i j /; � � � �� j,, � �mi

2 '�f' 0'% ""%8 �"� : ��'l.��, f%,,,,'l.

J ,,� a

1 5 . . . 1e5! 1 6.f4 1f6! 1 7.0-0-0 ( 1 7.0-0 b4!+ is also very difficult for White) l 7 . . . b4� Black has the better chances as the white king is relatively exposed on the queenside.

A) 13.0-0 0-0

l 4.lll e3?! is another time-consuming operation, and it is not surprising that White has 0/7 with it in tournament practice. After 14 . . . f4! 1 5 .lll d5 ( 1 5 .lll f5 ixf5 1 6.exf5 d5+) 1 5 . . .ixd5 1 6.exd5 lll e7 1 7.lll c2 f5 � Black's kingside pawn mass is ready to cause White serious discomfort. For

161

Chapter 1 3 - 1 2 .c3

example, 1 8.f3 ©h8! and in order to slow down rhe advance of the pawns, White has weakened himself on d5.

20 ... '1Wd7!N 2 1 .tt:\b4 gc4! 22.tll xa6 d5 23.tt:\b4 gg4 23 . . . d4!?f!

Al) 14.�el?! gc8!

24.@hl f4 25.f.3 gg6 26.tt:\e4 'l&d8 27.tll f2 i.e6 28.a4 28.'Dbd3 �h4--t

15.tll c2 1 5 .tll e3 f4! 1 6.'Dd5 i.xd5 I 7.exd5 tll e7 1 8 . 'D c2 f5 1 9.a4 e4 ( 1 9 .. .f3!? may be even better) 20.ifl 'D g6 gives a strong attacking position for Black, as White has lost too much time organizing queenside counterplay. For example, 2 1 .axb5 axb5 22.'Dd4 (22.i.xb5 l"lb8+) 22 . . .ixd4 23.�xd4 �g5+ and the pressure is intolerable. 15 ... fxe4 1 6.ixe4 fS 17.tt:\f4 if7 1 8.hc6 gxc6 19.tll h 5 i.hs 20.tll g3 This happened in Oker - Nicolaescu, corr. 20 1 0, and after:

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

A2) 14.g3?! Black has a typical response:

14 ...L:d5! 1 5.exd5 tll e7 The insertion of the move g2-g3 in White's set up does nor slow down Black's intended kingside pawn storm, and is in fact more of a weakness. White has an unappealing choice to make. 1 6.'1Wd2 The lesser evil, covering the sensitive squares b2, c3, and f4. 1 6.l"le l ?! allows 1 6 . . . e4 1 7 .ifl b4+, unveiling the terrible potential of the g7-bishop. 1 6.'Dc2?! is also unattractive in view of 1 6 . . . e4 l 7.ie2 f4! 1 8 .gxf4 'D g6+, and Black gets a powerful attack.

1 62

l l .id3

1 6.\Wh5?! e4 1 7 . .ic2 l"lc8! 1 8.l"lab l l"lc5 1 9.f3 \Wb6! 20.ltih l b4 2 1 .cxb4 \Wxb4t was excellent for Black in Castaneda - Munoz Pantoja, Peru 1 997. 16 . .ie2?! removes the bishop from the critical b l -h7 diagonal, relaxing the pressure on f5 and allowing Black a free hand on the kingside: 1 6 . . . \Wc8!? 1 7.\Wd2 ( 1 7.c4 b4 1 8 .tll c2 a5+)

17 ... gac8! 1 8.c4 e4 19 ..ie2 bxc4 20.ll'lxc4 ďż˝cS 2 1 . ll'l e3 aSt Black enjoys queenside pressure and easier play. A3) 14.f3

This looks like a circumspect continuation, preparing to recapture on e4 with a pawn in case of . . . &:e4 and thus keeping some control of the centre. White intends to follow up with lll c2 and a2-a4, opening up lines on the queenside.

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

1 6 ...'1Mfd7! 17.ďż˝adl! 1 7.f4?! \Wa7t! 1 8 .ltih l \Wb7+

14 ....ixdS! 1 S.exdS ll'le7 1 6.ll'lc2 '1Mfb6t!? 16 . . . \Wd7N+ may be even better.

1 7.lll c2?! l"lab8 1 8.a4 e4 1 9 . .ie2 bxa4 20.lll e3 lll g6--;

17.@hl \!Mes Black has a fine game. I see nothing better for White than:

1 7.l"lfe l ?! lll g6 1 8 .tll c2 f4--;

18.a4 Heltzel - Van der Meulen, Arnhem 1 996.

Chapter 1 3 - 1 2 .c3

1 63

1 8 ...°Wxd5N 19 . .!b e3 °We6 20.°Wc2 f4 2 1 .lDf5 .!bxf5 22..ixf5 °Wh6= With mutual chances in an approximately balanced position. B) 13.lDc2

The main disadvantage of the strategy introduced by chis move (which is to play on the queenside with a2-a4) is that it hands the initiative over to Black, both in the centre and on the kingside. Black may soon contemplate . . . ixd5, obtaining a dangerous kingside pawn mass, or the direct . . . fxe4 followed by . . . f5 , with good attacking chances in either case.

14.li::l ce3 fxe4 1 5 .ixe4 f5 1 6.ic2 can be met, as we already know, with the drawish 1 6 . . . f4 or the more adventurous 1 6 . . . e4!?. See variations B l and B2 of Chapter 1 2, starting on page 1 44, for the relevant analysis.

13 ... 0-0 In this position it is very hard for White to get an edge, as Black has the better development and the bishop pair. 14.0-0 Trying to catch up on development while getting ready for a2-a4. 14.�h5 ?! fxe4 1 5 .ixe4 f5! transposes to a line covered in the next chapter - see the note on 14.lll c2?! on page 1 69. 14.li::l cb4?! fails to achieve anything on the light squares in view of White's under-development: 14 . . . lll xb4 1 5 .lll xb4 fxe4 1 6.ixe4

After 14 . . . fxe4!? 1 5 .ixe4, Black must avoid the blunder 1 5 . . . f5 ?! 1 6.li:Jf4!± which has occurred in many games. Instead, he can play 1 5 . . . l"lc8!? 1 6.tlice3! transposing to variation B2.

1 64

l l .id3

Finally, the typical l 4 . . . .ixd5!? l 5.exd5 l:iJe7 is a safe refuge for those who wish to avoid the lines in this chapter. We have transposed to variation A of Chapter 22 - see the analysis on page 254 White has three possibilities at this juncture: Bl) 1 5.a4, B2) 15.0,ce3 and B3) 15.f3!?.

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 a

23.'Mi'h5! The best resource, preventing the black queen from obtaining access to the g5- and h4-squares. 23.1We2? led to a catastrophe for White after: 23 . . . f3! 24.1Wxe4 fxg2 25 .'1Mfxg2 CiJ f3t 26.Wh l \Wh4 27.CiJ ce3? (27.CiJ e l l:iJxe l 28.l:'i:xe l :9'.xf2 29.Eie4! :Em t! 30.\Wxfl 1Wxe4t 3 1 .1Wg2 Wb l t 32.\Wgl '1Mf c2+ would have been a better defence, although White's scattered forces could hardly avert che inevitable in the long run) 27 . . . ie5 28.l:iJg4 (28.h3 CiJ d2-+)

Bl) 1 5.a4

We are at a branching point, with White having to make an important decision:

This gives the second player a free hand on the kingside.

1 5 ... fxe4 16 ..ixe4 f5 17.axb5 1 7 . .if3 Wh8! 1 8 .l:iJce3 e4 1 9.CiJf4 ig8 20.ie2 ie5 allows Black to prepare an attack at his leisure. 17... axb5 1 8 ..if3 <ii hs 1 9.:B:a6 1 9 . .ie2 e4 20.g3 is an attempt to prevent the black pawns from rolling, yet after 20 . . . \Wg5 ! praxis has shown chat Black is okay. For example: 2 1 .CiJ f4 .ib3! 22.:9'.a3 .ixc2 23.1Wxc2 b4 24.8:a4 1Wh6 25.CiJd5 bxc3 26.bxc3 CiJ d4 27.'1Mfb2 8:c5! 28.cxd4 8:xd5 29.f4 !'!c5 30.1Wb3 8:c7= Boeken Kazoks, corr. 20 1 2 . 19 e4 20.�e2 f4 White's kingside looks completely cramped, hue the next move allows him to free himself. He just about has enough defensive resources. .•.

2 1 ..ig4! .ixg4 22.'Mi'xg4 0, es

23 .1Wh3?! 1Wg5 ! 24.:9'.xd6 0,£7 25 .:gd7 :gc6! 26.CiJe7 :gh6 27.\Wf5 \Wh4 28 .'1Mfh3 1Wxh3 29.gxh3 CiJe5 30.l:'i:b7 CiJ f3t 3 1 .Wg2 Ei:d6 32.:gxb5 l:'i:d7 33.CiJd5 l'!g8 34.Wh l

1 65

Chapter 1 3 - 1 2.c3

34 . . . .ltxc3!! 35.bxc3 Ei'.dg7 36.Ei:bS (36.Ei:bb l Ei'.g2-+) 36· · · Ei'.xb8 37.CiJd4 Ei'.gb7 38.CiJxf3 exf3 39.CiJb4 Ei'.c8 40.h4 Ei'.d7 4 1 .h5 Ei:xc3 42.h4 Ei:c4 0- 1 was an impressive display of power in Mesko - Waters, corr. 2008.

28 ...Wc5! 29.Cl:ibd3! CL!xd3 30.CL!g6t @gs 3 1 .Cl:i e?t= B2) 1 5.CDce3 fxe4 16.�xe4 f5 17.�c2

�� ·

IS' - .a. � �

,/,u

1 � u,,__ _ _ y,m • 6 i -�-.i. -U "'"�� s �/,i U_ CZJ _ i ,U 4 U,,/ U U- ·u 3 � � � - /, a

23 ... gaS! 24.gxaS Wxa8 25.CiJ cb4 25.CiJdb4 CiJ c4 (25 . . . f3!?+±) 26.'®xb5 CiJxb2 27.Ei'.al '®c8 28.Wi'd5 '®c4 29 .Wi'xc4 CiJxc4 30.CiJd5 .lte5 l/2-l/2 Cill6niz Razzeto - Epure, corr. 20 1 1 . 25 ...WcS!? With an unclear game. 26.gel 26 · b3!? '®e6 (26 . . . 'iJ g4 27.h3 'iJ f6 28.'iJxf6 .ltxf6 29.CiJd5 .ltg7=) 27.Ei'.e l CiJd7+± 26 ... e3!? 27.fxe3 £3 28.CiJf4 28.Ei'.fl '®c4 -+

�% '�� D'.I· o ;:Q � �- - - -� �m v� .:., ·� - - .

fjz 1 /,�

----

;:Q%

We have reached a position from Chapter 1 2 ( �ote o n 1 7 . .ltc2 i n variation D o n page 1 56) wuh the vital difference that Black has played th� less useful . . . Ei'.c8 instead of . . . ©h8. Black does need chis move in order to carry out an effective . . . CiJ e7 or . . . e4, and I found that he still has enough counterplay here.

17 ... CL! e? To take the sting out of f2-f4. 1 8.CDxe?t l S .a4 CiJxd5 1 9 .CiJxd5 bxa4 20.Ei'.xa4 a5= and Black obtains an acceptable game. l S.ib3 ©h8! 1 9 .CiJb4 ( 1 9.CiJxe7 transposes to the main line) 1 9 . . .ic4! makes use of the rook on c8 and is fine for Black.

1 8 ...Wxe? 19 ..ib3 1 9.a4 ©h8 20.axb5 axb5 2 1 .Ei'.a6 Ei'.cd8 looks quite unclear, for example: 22.CiJd5 Wi'b7 23 . CiJ b4 i.c4 24.l:!e l Ei:f6! 25 .E:xe5 !!g6 26.!!d5 !l:e8 27.Ei'.axd6 ixd5 28.E:xd5 l:l:ge6 29 .Ei'.d8 '®d7 ·11· 30.Ei'.xeSt E:xe8 3 1 .CiJd3 Wfe7= 19 ... @hS!m a

1 66

l l .�d3

Black does not seem too badly off. Play might continue:

20.he6! 20.Wh5 ?! a5!+ 20.a4?! f4 2 1 .ctJd5 Wf7 22.Wd3 bxa4 23.Elxa4 Elb8 24.ic2 Wh5� 20 ...Wfxe6 Y2-Y2 Cantelli - VI. Popov, corr. 20 1 0 . 2 1 .Wih3! Wg6 22.ltJdS l:kS!� Despite the strong d5-knight, Black has counterplay. B3) 1 5.f3!?

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

1 7 . . . bxa4! 1 8 .Wh l Wb6 1 9.�b l !? a5 20.Elxa4 Elb8 2 1 .ctJa3! Wxb2 22.Wxb2 Elxb2 23 . ctJ c4 Elb5 24.ltJxd6 !!xd5 25.li:'ixf5 ctJxf5 26.ixf5 Elc5= The position is equal, yet the passed a-pawn offers Black the slightly better practical chances.

17 ...'1Wd7! 18.g4!? l 8.a4? ctJxd5+ 1 8 .li:'ib4? a5 1 9.ctJc6 li:'ixd5 20.il.xb5 ctJ e3+ 1 8.Wb l ctJxd5 1 9 .li:'ib4 li:'ie7 20.li:'ixa6 d5+

A very logical move, trying to halt Black on the kingside before starting queenside proceedings.

1 5 ...ixdS Given the opportunity, Black changes the pawn structure to create imbalances. 1 6.exd5 lll e7 17.@hl !? An interesting move that was tried in the game Zhao Min jun - Kapnisis, Yerevan 1 997. l 7.a4!? is the standard procedure to open lines on the queenside. However, the king is still on g l and this allows Black t o equalize easily. H e may even have a little bit more than that:

1 8 ... f:xg4! 1 8 . . . ih6?! 1 9.We l ! Elc5 ? ( 1 9 . . .f6!?) 20.Wh4 �f4 2 1 .gxf5 f6 22.Elgl t Wh8 23.�e4± li:'ixd5 24.b4! !'!xc3 25 .ixd5 Elxc2 26.Wxf6t!! 1 -0 was the brilliant finish in the above mentioned game. 19.f:xg4 f5 Black obtains a satisfactory game.

1 67

Chapter 1 3 - 1 2 .c3

Conclusion

20 ..ixfS! 20.gxf5 ? tt'lxd5!+ 20 ... ll:\xfS 2 1 .gxfS gxfS 22.lll e3 Elf4 23.Elxf4 exf4 24.ll:\g2 W/f5 24 . . . b4 25.tlixf4 bxc3 26.bxc3 ixc3 27.lk l =

2s.Wf3 @hs! With some play for Black, although the position is objectively equal.

Chapter 1 3 introduced us to l l .id3, which is universally accepted as the strongest possibility available to White on move 1 1 . After l l . . .ie6, the logical 1 2.c3 is a common guest in tournaments, intending to bring the knight on a3 back into play. In reply to the customary 12 . . . ig7 White usually elects the aggressive options 1 3 .'Wh5 or 1 3 .tt'lxb5!?, and those moves are the subject of the next two chapters. In this chapter we instead focused on more tranquil ways of continuing White's development, involving castling on move 13 or 1 4 . Castling immediately with 1 3.0-0 preserves some extra possibilities for White after 1 3 . . . 0-0, such as 1 4.!"!e l ?!, 1 4.g3?! and 1 4.f3, but they are hardly impressive. Against 1 4.E:e l ?! Black may even contemplate 1 4 . . . E:cS!, intending to take on e4 and follow up with . . . f5 . In the other two cases the typical reaction l 4 . . . ixd5! l 5.exd5 tt'l e7 will give Black at least equal chances. In the resulting positions Black has many devices to exploit the omission of tt'l c2, such as timely . . . b4-thrust or quick pressure against d5. The reader is advised to study the relevant section carefully for a full list of these weapons. Therefore it seems that White does best to include both 0-0 and tt'l c2 on moves 13 and 14 (irrespective of the move order) when my proposed method of continuing for Black is the flexible 14 . . . E:cS, keeping both . . . ixd5 and .. .f5 available as options. I could not find any advantage for White in this position but probably the most resilient choice for him is l 5 . tt'l ce3 fxe4 1 6.ixe4 f5 1 7.ic2 tt'l e7 1 8 .tt'lxe7t Wxe7 1 9 .ib3 Wh8! 20.1xe6! Wxe6 2 1 .Wb3! with an approximately level game.

I I.id3 a

13.�hS Variation Index 1 .e4 c5 2.lLlf3 lli c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.llixd4 lli f6 s . lli c3 e5 6.lli db5 d6 7 ..ig5 a6 8.llia3 b5 9 ..ixf6 gxf6 1 0 . lli dS f5 1 I ..id3 .ie6 12.c3 .ig7 1 3.�h5

1 3 ... 0-0 A) 1 4. lli e3!? B) 14.exf5 C) 1 4.0-0 f4 C l ) 1 5.g4!? C2) 1 5 . lli c2 C3) 1 5.�fdl C4) 1 5 .�adl @hs 16.g3! �gS 17.@hl .ifS 1 8 . .ie2! �g5 19.�f3 f5!? C41) 20.exf5 C42) 20.gxf4

B) note to l 7.0ic2

l 9 . . . i!h8!

C3) note to l 7.a4!?

C I ) after 1 5 .g4!?

170 171 173 174 175 176 179 1 79 1 80

1 8 . . .�h6!!

'.:

Chapter 1 4

1 .e4 c5 2.lll f3 lll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lll xd4 ltlf6 5.ltlc3 e5 6.lll db5 d6 7..ig5 a6 8.ltla3 b5 9 ..ixf6 gxf6 10.ltld5 f5 l 1 ..id3 .ie6 12.c3 .ig7 13.'11llfh 5 This move is designed to stop . . . .ixd5 by putting pressure on f5 . The queen is active on h5 and eyeing both f5 and h7, two weak squares in the black camp. 13 0-0 Black now primarily threatens . . . £Xe4 followed by . . . f5 . But as we will see, he can vary his strategy according to White's reply. At this critical juncture we examine A) l 4.ltle3!?, the anxious (and consequently tactical) B) 14.exf5, and the most common C) 14.0-0. •••

We should also deal with some lesser alternatives for White: Trying to be clever with 1 4 .lll c7?! is not up to the task. Black answers with l 4 . . .1l:lfxc7 l 5 .exf5 d5! 1 6.f6 h6, and his centre looks like a more relevant factor than the slightly exposed position of his king. For example: 1 7 .lll c2 ( 1 7.fXg7 <±>xg7 l 8.lll c2 e4 transposes) l 7 . . . e4 1 8 .£Xg7 <±>xg7 l 9 . .ie2 8

54 3

1 9 . . . gfd8! 20.0-0 (on 20.gd l there comes 20 . . . d4! anyway) 20 . . . d4 2 1 .cxd4 lll xd4 22.lll xd4 gxd4 23.ig4!? gd5! 24.1l:ll h 3 f5! Black's bishop is more active, and also a useful defender of his king, so he shouldn't exchange it. 25 . .ih5 1l:lfe5 26.1l:lfa3 gal+ and Black has the better game, as all his pieces are more meaningfully placed.

1 69

1 3 .Wi'h5

l 4.lll c2?! This fails for tactical reasons. 1 4 . . . £Xe4 1 5 .�xe4 f5 1 6.lll f4 1 6 .1l:l!h3 1l:l!d7+ 1 6 . . . exf4 1 7.ixc6 gc8 1 8 .1l:lff3 Also hopeless is 1 8 .if3 if7 1 9 .1l:lfxf5 gxc3!-+, with the idea: 20.0-0 (20 . .ie4 failed to hold after 20 . . . Wih4 2 1 .0-0-0 '.gc5 22.Wih3 Wixh3 23.gxh3 :ge8 24.f3 d5 25 .id3 ih5 ! 26.ghfl ge3! 27.<±>b l gxf3 28.:§:xf3 ixf3 29.�m ie4 30 ..ixe4 dxe4 3 l .'.gxf4 E!:d5 !-+ in White Gramstad, corr. 2009.) 20 . . . '.gc5 2 1 .1l:ll d 3 ic4 22.1l:lf d2 ixfl 23.:§:xfl ixb2-+

·· 8 �W,�,i 'i;...,?,� ��... � � 76 � � • • il•.t. • � W/·�. %�·� 54 � �• � �"•, �� 3 �w� �� ii ef . , �� 0,"'0 ��@':{1. �

W/W/

,Y,�'/0

2 g( � r�tLi� � r� ....· %� W/mr� ... %• a

'W/

1 8 . . . d5 1 9.ib7 1 9 .lll b4 a5 20.ixd5 1l:l/d6 2 1 .lll c6 <±>h8-+ 1 9 . . . '.gb8 20.ixa6 :§:b6 2 1 .lll b4 d4! 22. 0-0 dxc3 23.bxc3 1l:ll a 8!!+ By removing the important defender on f3 , Black makes sure he will win some material. 1 4.:§:d l ?! is a logical attempt to develop the queenside and control d5, yet after: 1 4 . . . £Xe4 1 5 .ixe4 f5 1 6.ic2 b4! 1 7.cxb4 ( 1 7.lll xb4?! lll xb4 1 8.cxb4 1l:ll b 6+; perhaps 1 7.lll c4 bxc3 l 8.bxc3 lll d4!?+ is a better try for White, though his position remains worse.) l 7 . . . lll d4 l 8.ib3 gb8!t Black seems to have the better chances. 1 4 . f3?! An attempt to maintain a pawn in the centre, but Black is able to liquidate it and obtain the better game. 14 . . . £Xe4 1 5 .fxe4 f5 ! 1 6.0-0 Wid7! 1 7.'.gad l ?! l 7.lll c2 would have been better.

1 70

l 1 .id3

1 7. W h 1 is also playing into Black's hands, and after the natural l 7 . . . ixd5 1 8 .exd5 fiJ e7 l 9 . fiJ c2 e4 20.ie2 fiJxd5 2 l .a4 Elac8 22.axb5 axb5 23.Elad l 0. e7 24.fiJd4 Elb8 25.Wf g5 h6 26.Wlg3 Wh7 27.fiJ c2 d5 28.fiJe3 b4+ he eventually prevailed in Bes - Varlamov, corr. 20 1 0 . 1 7 . . . i.xd5 1 8 .exd5 fiJe7+ 1 9 .g4?! e4 20.ic2

�·

�f"',"1� .,,,,� , �•. . ,%.�if .•� 7. � 6 � �� ---- %� �� %

�.,,,,,i � �'/0.•�• �3 � % �%if//,'/i!i!i �

2 "'ti wti�- �. ��· 1 R . %arar= a

20 . . . E\f6! 2 1 .gxf5 0.xf5 22.Wfe2?! 22.�xe4 �a7t 23.Wh l fiJ g3t! 24.hxg3 Elh6+ 22 . . . Ele8 23.Elf2 �a7 24.ixe4 Elg6t 0- 1 Lago - Ljubojevic, Moron 1 98 1 ; a nice win for Black.

A) 14.0.e3!?

14 ... f4 15.tll fS l 5 . 0. d5?! f5 ! 1 6.0-0 i.xd5 l 7.exd5 fiJ e7+ is good for Black.

1.�. �"• �1%"m� eimf'

• : !.�.,.�� ., %� 54 .r. %� ��,,. "8%� . . • "• 3m . •. of 8� 1 °8�g(;�%�%m%=��. %��•

�

1 5 ... b4! It seems that Black maintains a very slight edge with this key move. It has not been played much, and looks better than the alternatives l 5 . . . �f6 1 6.g4!?00 and l 5 . . . �xf5 = . 16.tll c4 The most logical reaction, bringing the knight into play. If 1 6.0.xg7 \t>xg7+ then the early release of tension ensures Black of a superior game, thanks to his lead in development and better bishop. 1 6. fiJ c2 bxc3 1 7.bxc3 ixf5! 1 8 .Wlxf5 fiJ e7 1 9 .�h5 !k8+ 1 6.cxb4 fiJxb4 1 7.Eld l ! ( 1 7.�c4 Elc8! 1 8 .�xe6 fxe6 l 9.0.xg7 Wxg7 20.0-0 �f6+ is excellent for Black due to the huge pawn mass in the centre, and other smaller factors such as the displaced a3knight and his better-placed pieces) l 7 . . . E\b8!?+ with a slight pull for the second player.

An understandable retreat. White wishes to extricate the d5-knight from the pending threat of . . . fxe4, followed by . . . f5 , and force a decision in the centre.

1 6 ... bxc3 17.hxc3 .ixf5 1 8.WfxfS tll e7! 19.Wfh3 After: 1 9 .�h5 d5! ( 1 9 . . Jk8 20.0-0= was approximately balanced in Sprenger - Kiss, Lippstadt 1 999.) 20.fiJd2 (20.exd5 ? e4! 2 1 .i.xe4 f5+) 20 . . . f5t Black has the better play.

171

Chapter 1 4 - 1 3 .°1Wh5

16.fxg7 The most natural response.

19 ... �c8 20.0-0 �c6!+ Black has obtained an edge. 21 .�abl?! f5! 22J'Udl d5 23.exd5 l3h6 24.WO e4+

Another choice at this point is: I 6.Wf5!? Transposing to an ending. l 6 . . . e4 1 7 .fxg7 :1'1e8 l 8 .ie2 1 8 .ixb5?! ie6 1 9 .Wf4 looks appealing, but after 1 9 . . . axb5 20.Wxh6 f5 2 1 .ti:lxb5 ti:l e5+ White doesn't even have a draw. I 8 . . . :1'1e5 1 9.Wf4 1 9 .Wh3 Wg5+ 1 9 . . . Wg5 20.Wxg5 hxg5! This looks best here, partly restoring Black's pawn scructure. 2 l . ti:l c2 2 l .h4 �xg7 22.hxg5 E1xg500 2 l . . .�xg7 22.h4!? 22.ti:le3 ie6 23.:1'1dl :1'1d8 24.h4 f5 !+± also looks satisfactory for Black.

� :i - � � � '� � :-� � , --�. ! 5 � '� rt�� , , � �- ,%

B) 14.exf5

8 7 6 5 4 3 2

� , �-��"' �% ��-efW/jr.� -

43 R�

�

�1�i·��1� ..

''/

One of the oldest tries to refute the Sveshnikov, but it has been rendered innocuous by now. White sacrifices a piece, which he will regain by playing f5-f6 next move. The main purpose of his choice is to obtain a structural advancage as he will have two pawn islands compared to Black's three.

22 . . . :1'1h8 23.h5 This pawn can be both a strength and a weakness. 23 . . .f5 24.ti:le3 24.a4 should be met by 24 . . . bxa4! 25.:1'1xa4 a5+±, e.g. 26.ti:l e3 ib3 27.:1'1a3 ie6 and Black keeps both wings under control. 24 . . .ie6 25.a4 bxa4! 26.:1'1xa4 a5= The position looks approximately balanced, although there is still a lot of play.

14 ixdS 1 5.f6 h6!? This natural move has been introduced to high-class chess by lvanchuk.

16 ... @xg7 17.ti:l c2! The most logical move, bringing the knight back from exile.

..•

1 72

l 1 .�d3

l 7.'1Wf5?! '1Wg5 ! 1 8 .Wxg5t ( 1 8 .iWh?t? Wf6 leaves the queen exposed on h7) 1 8 . . . hxg5 1 9. ti:J c2 �e6 20.a4 bxa4 2 U!xa4 a5 22.Wd2 f5 23.Elha l Elab8+ gave a slightly better position fo r Black in Tokmachev - Samojlov, Serpukhov 1 999. 17 .h4!? is a serious alternative to the text, since White takes away the g5-square from the black queen and prepares gh3-g3. Nevertheless Black can defend by 1 7 . . . ie6 1 8 .g4, and now: a) 1 8 . . . b4! ? An interesting move recommended by Kolev and Nedev. 1 9.li:Jc4 ( 1 9.g5 hxg5 20.hxg5 l"1h8 2 1 ..ih7 Wf8!+ allows the black king to escape while the white pieces are poorly placed.)

23 . . . li:J e? 24.l"1h7t Wf6 25.ti:Jd5t li:Jxd5 26 . .ixd5 l"1h8 27.l'!xh8 l"1xh8+ Black had the slightly better ending in Bes - Kurgansky, corr. 20 1 0 .

18.tll e3 1 8.a4 can be satisfactorily met with: 1 8 . . . b4! ( 1 8 . . . bxa4?! 1 9.l"1xa4 a5 20.li:Je3t or l 8 .. .f5!?00) 1 9.cxb4 l"1b8! 20.b5 (20.l"1a3 li:Jxb4+ or 20 . .ixa6 li:Jxb4 2 1 .li:Jxb4 l"1xb4 22.vt/e2 '1Wa5=) 20 . . . iWa5 t! 2 1 .Wfl li:J b4� 1 8 ... dS 1 9.h4 1 9 .if5 �g5!+ or 1 9.ti:Jf5t .ixf5 20.'1Wxf5 e4+. 19 ... Wf6 20.�fS �xfS 2 1 .tll xfS t Wh7 22.Eldl 22.Elh3 Wg6! 23 .iWf3 e4 24.vt/f4 vt/f6 25.0-0-0 li:J e7 26.g400 was a better try for White.

b) 18 ... l"1h8 1 9 .ti:Jc2 Gunnlaugsson - Stoere, corr. 1 993, and at this point it seems that Black should play 1 9 . . . ti:Je?t with a similar idea to the line above.

17 ...�e6! Covering f5 and preparing . . . d5, when it seems that Black has fair chances for a complicated struggle. Another possibility deserving mention is: l 7 . . . iWg5 !? 1 8.'1Wxg5t hxg5 l 9.li:Je3 .ie6 20 . .ie4 l"1ac8 2 1 .l"1d l l"1fd8 22.h4! gxh4 23.gxh4?! (23.ti:Jf5t! .ixf5 24 . .ixf5 l"1c7 25 .l'hh4 d5= would have maintained the status quo.)

1 73

Chapter 1 4 - 1 3 .°1Wh5

White's opening strategy had failed and he had the slightly inferior endgame in Anand Ivanchuk, Linares 2002.

26.tll c2 �f4 27J'!d2 h5 28.b3 Black could have played: 28 ... �g?!?Nt Intending to pressurize c3 by means of . . . a5 and . . . b4. This would force cxd4, freeing e5 for the black knight and giving Black some chances of success. C) 14.0-0 White trusts that once Black captures on e4 and follows up with . . .f5, the move Ci:l f4 will offer him the advantage. By hitting both the e6-bishop and the c6-knight, he will force Black to weaken his pawn structure. If Black avoids this with . . . f4, blocking che position, White will be able to press by posting a rook on the d-file. He can chen initiate pressure on the queenside by Ci:l a3-c2 and a2-a4, or on che kingside by g2-g3. Black's plan will greacly depend on which rook goes to d l .

would have been with the white pawn on c4. On the other hand, this is a complex system for both sides which has been played many times in che past, and Black must play energetically in order to create counterplay. I have chosen to focus on 1 4 .. .f4 in this book, as the more radical alcernative l 4 . . . fxe4 seemed co me to offer less winning chances. White has tried various moves at this point, the majority of which are directed against Black's intended .. .f5 : Cl) 1 5.g4!?, C2) 15.tll c2, C3) 1 5.�fdl and C4) 1 5.�adl . l 5 .c4?! Obviously a bad move, as White has lost a tempo on a well-known main line. 1 5 . . . bxc4 1 6.i.xc4?! l 6.Ci:lxc4 Ci:l d4 l 7.g4!? ( 1 7.E!ac l ? 1xd5 l 8.exd5 f5+) l 7 . . . h6 is unclear, but looks promising for Black. 1 6 . . . Ci:l d4 1 7.E!ad l 1 7.E!acl f5 !t 17 ... E!bS l 8.b3 1 8.E!d2!? \t>h8

14 ... f4 This position has not been popular ac che cop level lately. The reason is chat White's set-up, involving the move c2-c3, is rather harmless for Black. The d5-knighc is somehow sensitive to che . . .f5 advance, or at least more so than it

1 8 . . . \t>h8! 1 8 . . . f5 ?! as in Liu Shilan - Arakhamia, Tuzla 1 987, allows White co create waves by: 1 9.E!xd4! exd4 20.exf5� 1 9.:E�d2 f3! 20.g3 20.Ci:lc2?! fxg2 2 1 .\t>xg2 f5 ! 22.Ci:lxd4 exd4 23.Ci:lf4 ixc4 24.bxc4 E!f6!-+ gives Black a winning attack. 20 . . . f5+ Intending 2 1 .E!xd4 exd4 22.Ci:l f4 ixc4 23.Ci:lxc4 1&e8!-+.

1 74

l l .id3

1 5 .g3 is an attempt to open lines on the kingside, but after l 5 .. .f5! it is Black who is going to profit from this: 1 6.gxf4 ixd5! 1 7.exd5 {jj e7 1 8.fxe5 dxe5 1 9 .Eiad l (After 1 9 .ic2 Black shouldn't rush with l 9 . . . e4?! in view of 20.f3!, but should instead prefer 1 9 . . . l'!f6! 20.Eiad l Eih6 2 1 .1!tife2 1!tifd6� with good attacking chances.) l 9 . . . e4� With tremendous attacking chances for Black on the dark squares. 1 5 .'it>h l Doing nothing to prevent Black's plan.

20.1!tifxe8 20.1!tifg5 'it>h8 2 1 .1!tifxf4 a5 22.{jj c6 {jj xd5 23.Wxd6 {jj xc3! 24.bxc3 l'!a6 25 .Eiab l Eixc6 26.1!tifd5 Eixc3 27.id l should be a draw too, but White still has to be careful. 20 . . . Eifxe8 2 1 .{jj c6 'it>f8= With a tiny edge for Black, although the presence of opposite-coloured bishops make the draw a distinct possibility.

Cl) 15.g4!? l 5 . . .f5! White does best to come to his senses by: l 6.{jj c2! 1 6.g3?! ixd5 1 7.exd5 {jj e7 1 8 .gxf4 e4 1 9.ic2 {jj g6+ is obviously unacceptable for White. 16 . . .ixd5 l 7.exd5 {jj e7 1 8.{jj b4!? 1 8.a4 e4 1 9 .ie2 bxa4! 20.Eixa4 a5 (20 ... Eib8!?) 2 1 .{jj a3!? (2 1 .{jj d4 ixd4 22.l'!xd4 {jj g6 23.f3 e3+) 2 1 . . .1!tifd7! 22.ib5 1!tifb7 23.f3! {jj x d5 24.�c4 'it>h8 25 .ixd5 1!tifxd5 26.fxe4 Wb3 (26 . . . 1!tifc6!? 27.Eic4 1!tifb7 28.exf5 Wxb2 29.Eic7+±) 27.Wd l Wxb2+± is messy, but Black is at least equal. 1 8 . . . e4 1 9 .ic2 Trying to draw by j umping to c6 with the knight in the next few moves. It seems that Black has a few practical chances. 1 9 . . . We8!? Looking to exchange White's active queen. 1 9 . . . 1!tifc7 is playable but I found it leads more easily to a draw.

A move employed by the French GM Bauer, looking to rule out . . . f5 . I think Black should now change course with:

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

i<==--�=--�=..:=..c=�___.1

15 ... llJ bS!! A fantastic regrouping move, found by GM Ioannis Nikolaidis in early 2008. The computers are puzzled at first, but soon realize the move's value.

Chapter 1 4

1 6.l:fadl!? 1 6.tt'lc2 tt'l d7 l 7.tt'l cb4 tt'lcSf± gives Black visible counterplay, so it is logical for White to bail out by 1 8 .tt'l c6 ( 1 8.ic2 E!:c8+) 1 8 . . .' & d7 1 9.tt'lce?t Wh8 20.�h4!? ixdS 2 1 .tLlxdS tt'lxd3 (2 1 . . .fS!? 22.ic2 fxe4 23.f3!±) 22.tt'lf6= forcing a perpetual. 1 6.c4 tt'ld7 1 7.E!.fd l ( 1 7.cxbS? ixdS 1 8.exdS e4! 1 9 .ixe4 tt'l f6 20.�fS tt'lxe4 2 1 .�xe4 ixb2+ or 1 7.b4 ixdS 1 8 .cxdS E!.c800) 17 . . . :9:c8!f± is also excellent for Black.

1 6 ... lll xb4 17.lll xb4 Allowing Black to obtain lively counterplay at the cost of a pawn:

17.i.c2 h6! 18 ..ib3! lll cS 19.8 :Sa7! 20.:Sd2 WgS 21 .WxgS hxg5= Producing a balanced ending with mutual chances. C2) 15.lll c2 f5! 16.lll cb4 1 6.a4 ixdS 1 7.exdS tt'l e7 has left White with a catastrophic score in practice, a typical formation for Black being: 1 8 .:9:fe l ( 1 8.tt'lb4 e4 1 9 .ic2 bxa4 20.ixa4 tt'l g6 2 1 .ic6 f3! gave Black strong counterplay in Feco - Stoeckert, corr. 2008.)

.i �,� �,,,,,%� ��-��

�, : '·l!·f·- �·-"' ,,,,,

5 ��ID �-::��-

4 3

16 ... lll d7 The logical follow-up.

1 75

1 3 .Wfh5

��- , , %�o.. ra-·3m tln,,�%-�or� � . . � .: , m.. , .

�

17 ... aS! 1 8.exfS After 1 8.tt'lc2 I feel obliged to propose my human idea of 1 8 . . . dS!? (the computer only mentions queen moves to c8, d7 and e8, but I'm not convinced) 1 9 .exfS if7 20.�h3 ieS! (intending . . . E!.a6-h6) 2 l .f6 E!.xf6 22.ixh?t WfSt when in all honesty, I don't see how White will survive in a practical game. 1 8 ....if7 19.Wh3 Wf6!? It seems more aesthetic to block the pawn. 1 9 . . . �d? has also been tried.

20.lll c2 Anand - McShane, Bundesliga 2003, and at this point I like: 20 ... b4!? 20 . . . :!! a b800 was also unclear in the game. a

1 8 . . . bxa4! 1 9.:9:xa4 ( 1 9.tt'lb4 e4 20.ixa6 f3�) 1 9 . . . aS 20.E!.ea l Wh8� White is hitting thin air on the queenside, while Black has a concrete plan of attack based on moves such as . . . E!.f6-h6, . . . tt'l g6, and . . . �h4 on the other flank. Needless to say, these moves can be enriched by . . . e4 and . . . f3 ideas at various points.

2 1 .cxb4 2 1 .c4 E!.ac8 22.b3? dS 23.cxdS ixdS 24.f3 E!.c3� 2 1 ...dS!iiii Black has tremendous compensation in view of his powerful central mass .

1 76

l l .id3

Two correspondence games continued:

22.ib5 e4 23.VlVg4 gfc8 24.:Sacl @hs 25.bxa5 f3 26.tlie3 ih6 27.:SxcSt :Sxc8 28.VlVh3 be3 29.fxe3 VlVxb2 30.�a6 :Sg8-+ With a winning position for Black. C3) 1 5.:Sfdl Similar to 1 5 .E:ad l in the sense it prevents l 5 .. .f5, but here White intends to play on the queenside (with a2-a4), making use of the rook still being on a l . However this plan is not dangerous for Black, who has several viable options:

26.iWh4 f3 27.id500 Y2-Y2 Moser - Kosic, corr. 20 1 1 , is yet another unclear position agreed drawn, but I think Black has excellent compensation. 23 . . . Wh8 24.�d5 Ele6 25 .ie2 25 .id3 e4 26.ic2 f3 27.g3 '1Wd7 28.lll d4 E:e5 29.iWc6 Elc8! 30.'!Wxd7 ixd7 3 1 .h4 a4 32.a3 d5?- saw Black prevail in the end in Murlasits - Dobrica, corr. 2009. 8

'� � � �� . . �-, , � �

• .i� "" '"� 25' � � 5 ��ii.!•

�. . %.�� , ,% � � �m 0, � · "m �8 3 � �� 2 ,� 8o·% · "• i�8· � ,.. . . %, 6

'/,

•

·· �

25 . . . �d7!! 26.h4 f3! 27.�xf3 e4 28 .ie2 ih3!! 29.ifl E:f5 30.'!Wc4 d5 3 1 .gxh3 Elg6t 32.ig2 Elxf2!! 33.Wxf2 1Wf5t 34.Wgl dxc4 35 .E:dSt if8 36.E:fl '!Wc5t 37.lll d4 E:g8+ Black won in Matei - Neto, corr. 20 1 0.

1 6.tlic2 This move meets with some interesting counterplay. It seems that by filling in c2 with the knight, White allows his opponent to carry out his main positional idea. The alternatives are: It is worth mentioning another idea which has been fashionable lately: 1 5 . . . Elb8!? 1 6.lll c2 '1Wd7! 1 7 .h3 f5 1 7 . . . h6!? 1 8.lll cb4 lll xb4 1 9 .lll xb4 a5 20.exf5 ixf5 2 1 .lll c6!? E:be8 22.ixb5 '1Wc7?1he computer thinks highly of White's position here, but the truth is that Black has tremendous compensation for the pawn and his attack has proven lethal in correspondence chess. 23.iWf3 23.lll xa5 E:b8 24.ic4t Wh8 25.b4 ig6

1 6.E:d2 E:g8 1 7 .ie2 ( 1 7.E:ad l ih6!) 1 7 . . . �f8 1 8 .lll c2 E:g6 1 9 .h3 ( 1 9.a4?! lll a5 or 1 9.1Wf3 ih6) l 9 . . . lll e 7!t 20.lll xe7 ixe7 2 l .a4? bxa4 22.Elxa4 iWd7+ 1 6.g3 !!:gs 1 7.Wh l if8 1 8 .ie2 E:g5! 1 9 .iWf3 f5! The standard way of obtaining play in this line. 20.gxf4 fxe4 2 1 .'!Wxe4 if5 22.'<.We3 exf4 23.lll xf4 lll e5 24.lll d5?! (24.E:gl !?) 24 . . . ih6! 25.f4 lll g4 26.ixg4 E:xg4+ 27.E:gl '!We8! ? 28.lll e7

1 77

Chapter 1 4 - 1 3 .iWh5

22.Wxf5 Eld8±) 1 9 .exf5 ( 1 9.tt'lc2!? Wf6 20.exf5 if7 2 1 .Wf3 [2 1 .Wh3 b4 22.cxb4 d5�] 2 1 . . .Wg5 !f± is another double-edged position full of dynamism.) 1 9 . . . if7 20.Wh3 Wf6! 2 1 .tt'lc2 b4!�

�� , y,ii}fef"•,, 78 �� -��-%��

�'er� � � �'£�/, ��- �,,,,,%� � � 4 ,,, ,%�:. . ..%.\WI .. � � w�f� 23 o,,w�0::<rr- l% �� "1._I � �o% o �u � � - im - = ... ,,

28 . . . Wlf7!? (28 . . .l'h7!!-+) 29.tt'lxf5 ?? Wf d5t was 0-1 in view of unavoidable mate, Smirnov Grischuk, Sochi 2004.

1 6 ... fS!? Had the knight not been on c2 White would be able to play 1 7.ic2 here, retaining control of d5 with a piece. 17.a4!? Considered to be the critical test of Black's play. White deserts control of d5 and goes all out on the queenside.

� � ,. . ,/,.�� , .%.�� a

Similar to Anand - McShane, with the insertion of the moves Elfd l and . . . 'it>h8 .1his is slightly in White's favour, yet after 22.ie4 Elad8 23 .id5 Elc8! Black is at least equal.

l 7.exf5 is the most natural reply, but things run smoothly for Black: l 7 . . . ixd5 1 8 .f6

18.'11Nh 3! Posing several problems for Black.

l 7.tt'lcb4!? tt'lxb4 1 8 .tt'lxb4 a5 !? ( 1 8 . . . Wd7 1 9.exf5 ixf5 20.ixf5 �hf5 2 1 .Elxd6 Wxd6

The computers also consider: 1 8.We2?! This seems artificial though, and can be met by:

1 78

I 1 . id3

1 8 . . . ixd5 l 9.exd5 l/'Ja5! Black already looks better an d has rich tactical pJ,y. 20.axb5 (2 l .gxf3 ill b3 22 g,b ! a 20. b4 f3'. 21 . ®e3 � <:oi 4 �4t is b3 22.g,3 b�4 2 3 . �xa bxa4t) 2 1 . . ."Ll . c . ,bo mPenor wr Blac k as che b3-kmgh< h� no prnble=. h >ttm> 20 · f3 crying to h,J, <ho ccmral ' . e · A possible ='!me . , rum the most human ch 01c · h a fi ne 20 · · 'll b 3 2 l .:§.a3 bxa4 22.E:xa4 a5+- w1c : . IO posmon c r Black. 20 . . . e4 2 l .b4 2 ! .ic4? 13-+ 2 1 . . .B.1 22 . Wf e3 22.gxB ill b3 2rn,b 1 exd3 24 '\Wxd3 Elg 8'· 26.f4 (26.@ fl 'll h 3t 27.l!le! a 25 . E:xb3 ®h4 :§.ae8t 28. tll e3 f4-+) 26 . . . 1Mfxf4 2 7 · 'tt> fl '\Wxh2 2s.ill d4 �bs + leads to a tremen dous attack for Black. 22 . . . exd3 23 . '\Wxd3 g c 8,. 24.E:xa5 Elxc3 25· 'll d2 1Mfh4! 26.Cll e l .' axb5 27.g3 27 ,.,.. �x f3,, · · E:xf3! 28.gxf3 E:g8!-+ 27 . . . �xb4 28.E:a6 f4 t " h e maten·al edge coupled Wit ·h Black has a s I ig a strong attack.

1 8 . . .Axd5 19.exd5 ltJ e7 20.axb5

�\Ul1 -a� %,��///,'d;� s '� "& !,@!%!!! ·"r"'{§?�· -1 iii. Rwad'•n iii 6 & - �- �/, "8"•A !'!i 54 ilil�:O iiiiii. •R• 'it!}%' � di&• � "• Vi� �m�."' ,,.�LJ� iJ � � ;;,,,,/,� � ��,�"o t:,�fj � 1 �

w ;;

'la'

....

•

,,,,

M d

20 e4! 2 1 .An .• . Preserving the bis hop looks best. ···

�

A< firnnhe com uters think h"ighly of 2 1 .E:xa6".. exd3 22.'\Wxd3 g6 23.ill d4 ll.xd4 24 '\Wxd4t '\Mr <t!/g8 25 .E:da l (2 5 . '\Wb4 g5! -+ ), but a�te ' <he retort:

22... E:xa 1 1�.. 23.E:xal f3!i' A reasonable attempt to create complications. I his White can cry an d bail out, b ut I do not l"ke chances:

Chapter 1 4 - 1 3 .Wh5

24 ... �xc6 25.dxc6 fxg2 26 ..ixh5 W/b6 27.c4?! .ixh2+ White is in real danger, as the c6-pawn can be easily contained whilst the counterattack against f2 promises to be lethal.

1 79

C41) 20.exfS .ixfS 2 1 .�xf4 exf4 22.Wfxc6 gc8

C4) 1 5.gadl

23.�xa6?? ie4t-+ with immediate capitulation. 23.�b7 !i:c7! 24.�g2 (24.W/xa6 ie4t-+ or 24.�d5 !i:e7!) 24 . . . �e8 25.if3

1 5 ... ©hs 1 6.g3! This direct approach, popularized by Anand, looks more logical than the slow 1 6 .tll c 2. 1 6 ... gg8 17.<ii? h l .if8 1 8 ..ie2! Guarding g4 and unveiling his intentions along the d-file. Now the mounting pressure on f4 forces Black to react quickly. 1 8 ... gg5 19.'!NO After 1 9.�h4 !i:c8! ( 1 9 . . . f5 ? 20.tll c 7!) 20.if3 b4! 2 1 .tll c4 (2 1 .lll xb4?! lll xb4 22.cxb4 ie7+) 2 1 . . .bxc3 22.bxc3 h6+± Black gets good play, as the upcoming . . . tll e7 will force exchanges in view of the . . . tll g6 threat. White's weakness on c3 is underlined. 19 ... fS!? Going for active play. Now White has two options to clarify the situation in the centre: C41) 20.exfS and C42) 20.gxf4.

23 .�g2 should be met as follows: 23 . . . �e7 24.if3 �d7 25 .g4!? (25 .�g l ig7�) 25 . . . h5! (25 ... ixg4 26.ixg4 Elxg4 27.�f3 ig7 28.tll c2 a5 29.a3 �e5 30.Elgl !l:cg8 3 1 .:gxg4 :gxg4

1 80

l l .id3

C42) 20.gxf4

32.Wd5±) 26.h3 (26.Wh3 ixg4 27.ixg4 Wxg4 28.Wxg4 hxg4= or 26.Eld4 hxg4 27.Elxf4 d5+±) 26 . . . hxg4 27.hxg4

Anand's move looks strongest.

24.gxf4 ie4 25.fxg5 Elc5 ! 26.Elg l Elxg5+

24....ig4 25.W/xg4 �xg4 26 ..ixg4

20 ... exf4 2 1 .llJxf4 .ixa2 22.c4!? The star move, cutting off the retreat of the a2bishop and creating some problems for Black. Instead, 22.exf5 Elxf5 23 .We4 Elf7 (23 . . . Elf6!?) 24.ih5 E:f6 25.c4 (25 .lll d5 Elh6t) 25 . . . lLie5 26.c5 ?! E:c8! 27.cxd6?! (27.b4+) 27 . . . ixd6+ 28 .ie2 Wf8 29.lLih5 Elxf2 30.ti:lc2 ti:l d3 0-1 was a catastrophe for White in Anand - Topalov, Monte Carlo 200 1 .

28 ... gxh2t 29.�:xh2 Wxc8� With good play for Black against the slightly exposed white king.

22 ... lll eS!? This is the move that has been recommended in various sources, attacking the queen and trying to extricate the a2-bishop.

Chapter 1 4

23.'We3 23.1Mi'c3 is much easier to cope with: 23 . . . l"i:g8 24.tll e6 (24.exf5 1Ml'g500 or 24.cxb5 6ce400 or 24.:s1gl :s1xgl t 25.:s1xg l iWh4) 24 . . .iWf6 25.lll xf8 l"i:axf8 26.f4 (26.cxb5? 6ce4+) 26 . . . lll xc4 27.ixc4 1Mfxc3 28.bxc3 ixc4 29.lll xc4 bxc4 30.exf5 :s1xf5 3 1 .l"i:xd6 l"i:a5= The position is completely level.

1 3 .'1Wh5

181

(25 .tll xf8 l"i:axf8 [25 . . . f4 26. lll xh7] 26.exf5 b4+) 25 . . . ®xf5 26.tll xf8 l"i:axf8

23.iWh3!? 1Ml'e8! 24.exf5 (24.cxb5 6ce4 25.bxa6 1Mff7 26.1Ml'e3 l"i:f5 27.1Mfxe4 :s1xa6! 28.ixa6 :s1xf4 29.1Ml'b7 Wh5 30.Wg2 lll f3 3 1 .ie2 id5 32.l"i:xd5 Wxd5=) 24 . . . Wf7 is complicated, but should be approximately equal.

23 ... ggs 24.lll hS! By controlling f6 and g7, White prepares to launch tactics on the long diagonal leading to the black king. 24.l"i:g l ?! l"i:xg l t 25.gxgl Wh4t 24.cxb5 ih6+± does not pose any difficulties for Black. More complicated is: 24.exf5 ih6 25.cxb5 axb5 26.l"i:d4 Wf6 27.lll x b5 Wxf5 28 .Wh3 (28.lll xd6 Wf6!+) 28 . . . ®xh3 29.lll xh3 ie6! 30.tll g l (30.lll f4?? ixf4 3 Uhf4 .ih3-+)

:i �� 1�i 8� � � �� !� . .%��--""'11 - . -� % 4 ��-� . . �� 23 ��-�[!J-. .� Ji, �[!J-�� -,�� %� ��5

�

30 . . . id7! 3 1 .lll xd6 ic6t 32.f3 ie3+± Black has at least enough compensation to draw. His powerful pieces are controlling the files and diagonals leading to the white king. Finally, 24.tll e6 is simply met by 24 . . . Wf6 25.exf5

25.'Wxe4 25 .l"i:g l !? requires analysis at chis point. 25 . . . l"lg6!? 26.®xe4 ®e8!? looks like an adequate answer, but more elaboration is needed. I looked briefly at 27.cxb5 (after 27.:s1xg6 lll xg6 28.iWf3! the wonderful centralization 28 . . . We5!!= provides a complete answer to the problems of the position) 27 ... axb5 28.lll x b5 l"i:b8 and I have a feeling that Black's activity should compensate for the pawn.

1 82

l l .id3

On the other hand: 25 .Ei:a l ixc4 26.lll xc4 bxc4 27.Wxe4 8

� �� -

:s f_-B.-�.-BltJ�

4 �· f•J• !'!'� �

� ��m!n•f! � � •t-� a

29.W/f5! (29 .f4?? ia4!-+) 29 . . . c3 (29 . . . ih6 30.lt:Jf6±) 30.C/Jf6 1"lc7 3 1 .id l !! Wa8t 32.f3±

27.:agrn The most challenging. By controlling g7 with one more piece, White adds impetus to f2-f4. 27.Wd4? fails to 27 ...�g5 28.l"lgl Wd2!+, exchanging White's most powerful unit. 27.f4 is logical, yet after 27 . . . �h4! Black has no problems.

27 . . . i.h6!! 28.Ei:ad l (28.f4 �h4=) 28 . . . Ei:c8! 29.f4 lll d3 30.i.xd3 cxd3 3 1 .!"i:xd3 Ei:c5! 32.f5 (32.Wd4t �g7 33.lll xg7 Wa8t 34.©gl !"i:xg7t 35 .Ei:g3 Wa7=) 32 . . . f!e5 33 .Wf3 Ei:f8 34.f6 Wa5 = is definitely a variation that should be memorized.

25 ...J.b3 Restoring the bishop. 26.:adel!? 26.f4 leads to equality after: 26 . . . ixd l 27.!"i:xd l lll g 6! (shielding h7) 28.cxb5 axb5 29.lll xb5 (29 .Wfd4t? ig7 30.lll xg7 Ei:a4!-+) 29 . . . W/e7!= 26 ....th6! An important defence, connecting the rooks. After 26 ... bxc4?! 27.!"i:g l ! Ei:xgl t 28 .l"lxg l , Black faces huge problems o n the a l -h8 diagonal. He must also be wary of the ideas W/f5 and tll f6. For example: 28 . . .i'' k 8!? (28 . . . 1"la7 29.f4 tt:J g6 30.Wd4t+-)

27... :abs! Thanks to this move Black survives. The point is that the rook is not hanging on a8 in several lines. 27 . . . �c7? allows 28.f4! lll xc4 (28 . . . Wc6 29.if3! Wxe4 30.i.xe4± shows the problem of having the rook on a8)

Chapter 1 4 - 1 3 .\Wh5

29.if3! Elaf8 30.Vfld4t ig7 3 1 .li:lxg7 Elxg7 32.li:lxc4 ixc4 33.Elg3t and Black will soon be tied to the defence of g7.

28.f4!? 28.cxb5 Vflc7 29.bxa6 Vfif7"f!28.Elxg8t Vflxg8 29.\Mi'd4 ig7= shows Black's main defensive mechanism against Ele l -g l ideas - to shield against the pressure by placing the knight on g6.

28 ...Vflh4! The only defence, but sufficient. 29.id3 29.Elxg8t Elxg8 30.Elgl Elf8! is another defensive motif.

Conclusion Chapter 1 4 has dealt with the enterpnsmg continuation I l .id3 ie6 1 2.c3 ig7 1 3 .Vfih5, which can be extremely dangerous for Black if he is unprepared. After 1 3 . . . 0-0 White has interesting continuations in 14.li:le3!?, 1 4.exf5 and 1 4.0-0, all requiring some knowledge from the second player.

1 83

The main point of I 4.li:le3!? is to conquer the f5-square for the knight, but the whole idea is time-consuming. Black should react by I4 .. .f4 1 5 .li:lf5 b4! 1 6.li:lc4 bxc3 1 7.bxc3 ixf5 1 8.\Mi'xf5 li:le7!, saddling White with a weakness on c3 and contesting the important d5- and f5-squares. This should be enough to give Black at least equality. 1 4.exf5 is an old line that has been tested extensively at top level chess. My suggestion is to adopt 1 4 . . . 1xd5 1 5 .f6 h6!?, when both 1 6.\Mff5!? and 1 6.fXg7 and should lead to comfortable positions for Black. Against the former, 1 6 . . . e4 1 7.fXg7 Ele8 1 8 .ie2 Ele5 1 9.Vflf4 Vflg5 20.Vflxg5 hxg5! makes good use of having the pawn on h6 to fix Black's pawn structure, while 1 6.fXg7 leads to a balanced position where Black is not in any danger after 1 6 . . . ©xg7 l 7.li:lc2! ie6! 1 8.li:le3 d5 1 9.h4 Vflf6 20.if5 ixf5 2 1 .li:Jxf5t ©h7. Things are more difficult after the natural 1 4.0-0, when the position requires utmost accuracy and high theoretical preparation from Black. After 1 4 .. .f4 the pressure against h7 no longer exists, but White maintains an advantage on the light squares and Black has to play dynamically to create counterplay. One thing to remember is that after 1 5 .g4!?, trying to stop . . . f5 , a nice way to equalize is 1 5 . . . li:Jb8!!, when the knight will be re-deployed to d7 before heading for c5 or f6 according to circumstance. Another move that fails to give White anything substantial is l 5 . li:l c2, because Black can hit back in the centre by means of 1 5 .. .f5! 1 6.li:Jcb4 li:lxb4 l 7.li:lxb4 a5! l 8.exf5 if7 l 9.Vfih3 \Mff6!? 20.li:Jc2 b4!? 2 1 .cxb4 d5 !�, obtaining tremendous compensation for the two sacrificed pawns. This means that White's best try for an advantage lies in putting a rook on d i , with analysis indicating that the best choice is the a l rook. After 1 5 .Elad l ©h8, White resorts to an undermining strategy with 1 6.g3!, when general ideas will not suffice. Black needs to know his theory in the sharp lines arising after 1 6 . . . Elg8 1 7.©h l if8 1 8 .ie2! Elg5 1 9 .Vfif3 f5 !?, and I hope that the concluding part of the chapter has coped successfully with the task of providing this essential knowledge. The final verdict is equality after razor-sharp complications.

I I.id3 a

13.etJxbS!? Variation Index 1 .e4 c5 2.lLi f3 tlJ c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tlJ xd4 tlJ f6 5 . tlJ c3 e5 6.tlJ db5 d6 7.�g5 a6 8.tlJa3 b5 9.�xf6 gxf6 l O.tlJ d5 f5 1 1 .�d3 �e6 1 2.c3 �g7 13.tlJxb5!? axb5! 1 4.�xb5 14 ...�d7! 1 5.exf5 e4!? 1 86 1 88 1 89

A) 1 6.'Wg4 B) 1 6.0-0 0-0 1 7.a4 ge8! 1 8.'Wg4! i>h8! B l ) 1 9.gfel!? B2) 1 9.gad l ! gc8! 20.gfel ge5 2 1 . tlJ e3 'Wf6! 22.'We2! �xf5 23.tlJxfS 'Wxf5! 24.�xd6 tlJ b8 B2 1) 25.gedl B22) 25 .h3 B23) 25.g3!?

nore ro 1 4 ... id7!

l 7 . . . e4!!

191 1 94 1 95 1 96

B I ) nore ro 20 . . .'�f6!

A) afrer 22.f4!

22 . . . gg8 ! ?

1 85

Chapter 1 5 - 1 3 .lt:Jxb 5 ! ?

1 .e4 cS 2.liJf3 liJ c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.liJxd4 liJf6 S.liJc3 eS 6.lll dbS d6 7.�gS a6 8.lll a3 bS 9.�xf6 gxf6 1 0.lll dS f5 l 1 ..id3 .ie6 12.c3 .ig7 1 3.liJxbS!? This is a tactical continuation, seeking to disrupt the normal course of the game. White will gain three pawns for a piece and, additionally, Black will be forced to retreat his bishop to d7 and defend. White's queenside passers are a long term asset, so Black must be careful and seize every opportunity to counterattack. His primary concern should be to harass White in the centre, and avoid a complete blockade on the e4- and d5-squares. The use of the g-file and of the e5square (after a subsequent ... e4) should be Black's main tools in obtaining counterplay. 13 ... axbS! Black should take the material and try to weather the storm. 14 ..ixbS .id7! This seems to be the most accurate. Moving the rook to c8 means that Black will find it more difficult to play . . . e4 and seems to reduce him to a rather passive position for this kind of structure. Even then his task is not hopeless, as the reader can witness below. 1 4 . . J:k8!? A forcing move. 1 5 .\Wa4 �d7 1 6.exf5 Now there is a choice between several continuations. The most logical move seems to be: 1 6 . . . 0-0! Developing quickly and preparing to challenge White's central stronghold. 1 7.0-0! Not the premature l 7.\We4? l"1e8 1 8.0-0 lll e7+. Black unblocks d5 under favourable circumstances as White hasn't mobilized his queenside pawn armada.

1 7 . . . e4!! This strong pawn sacrifice seems to offer excellent chances for equalization. Here is a summary of my analysis, to offer the reader a second way of handling this line. 1 8.E1fe l l 8.'1Wxe4 l"le8 can hardly be worse for Black as all his pieces have sprung to life, for example: 1 9.\Wa4 l"1e5 20.Elad l E1xf5 2 1 .Elfe l (2 1 .f4 l"lh5 22.h3 l"lh6�) 2 1 . . .'iih8 22.f4 gh5� 1 8 . . . lll e 5 1 9.!xd7 1 9 .f6 allowed Black to equalize too easily: 1 9 . . . �xb5 20.\Wxb5 �xf6 2 1 .l"lxe4 �g7 22.l"ld l l"1c5= The black queen was coming to a8 in Svacek - Scherer, corr. 20 1 0. 1 9 . . . lll xd7 20.'1Wxe4 li:J f6 2 1 .lll e7t After 2 1 .lll xf6t �xf6 22.\Wg4t rii h 8 23.Elad l \Wd7 24.g3 d5 25.l"1e2 l"lc5 26.:!"1ed2 l"lg8 27.\We4 d4 28.cxd4 l"1d5 29.b4 l"le8 30.\Wc2 l"la8 3 1 .\Wb3 \Wxf5 32.a4 rii g7 33.b5 \We4 34.f3 \We6 3 5 .rii g2 h5= Black's powerful centralization made sure that White wouldn't make any progress in Voll - Scherer, corr. 20 1 2.

1 86

1 l .id3

2 1 . . .'it>h8 22.Wff3 l'l:c7 23.Cll c6 Wa8 24.tll d4 Wfxf3 25.tll xf3 l"1b7 26.l'l:e2 l"1fb8 27.a4 l'l:xb2 28 .!i:xb2 !i:xb2 29.aS l"1b8 30.a6 l"1a8 3 1 .a7 Clie4 32.l"1a4 d5 33.tll d4 �xd4 34.cxd4 l2J d6 35 .g4 Cll c8 36.l"1a5 l'l:xa7 37.l"1xd5 tll b6= A draw soon ensued in Matei - Borzenko, corr. 20 1 2. Thus 1 6 . . . 0-0! seems to be a sound equalizer in conjunction with l 7 . . . e4!!.

1 6 ... iif8! The threat of . . . Cll e5 makes its appearance and is an awkward one to meet. 17.'\Wxe4 The critical reply. An alternative line is: 1 7.Wff4 tll e5! 1 8 . .ie2 .ic6 1 9.Wxe4 l"1a4

1 5.exfS This pawn is a thorn in Black's side and he must deal with it carefully. In practice this means constantly watching out for tactics associated with f5-f6.

.! � �· � �i}

�ntmr-76 m. �.�3�, : . �� s4 mlm�

3 � �� !Id�'•FJi�,� 1 ��L ·� ;;, , , , %

I d

""% f

1 5 e4!? This move is linked to Black's main idea for obtaining counterplay - conquering e5 for his pieces. I see no reason not to play it immediately, especially as the tactics seems to favour this aggressive thrust. Black prevents any thoughts White may have had to blockade on e4 by means ofWfdl -g4-e4. There are two main responses: A) 1 6.Wg4 and B) 16.0-0. 1 6.a4 0-0 1 7.0-0 is j ust a transposition to variation B. ..•

A) 16.Wg4 Seemingly the only genuine objection to Black's early central expansion, but Black has a strong reply:

20.Wf c2 (Clearly bad is 20.b4? tll d7-+, while 20.c4?! Wa5t 2 1 .'it>fl .ixd5 22.WxdS Wxd5 23.cxdS 'it>e7+ is almost winning for Black.) 20 . . . l"1g8! Black holds the initiacive. l 7.Wfg3 .ie5+ is similarly fine for Black, e.g. 1 8.Wfe3 ( 1 8.f4 exf3 1 9.Wfxf3 Wfb8!+) 18 . . . l"1a5t and White is constantly being annoyed by the black pieces seeking to gain space or force favourable exchanges.

17 ...'\Wa5! Creating the twin threats . . . Wxb5 and . . . l"1e8 . 1 8.0-0! Sacrificing a second piece is the only viable continuation for White. 18 ... '\Wxb5 19.f6 ih6 Black is two pieces to the good, but he will soon be forced to return one in order to parry che chreats to his uncastled king and achieve some sort of coordination. As things stand Black threacens . . . tll e5, covering everything and stabilizing the situation in his favour. However, it is Whice to move and he has the following possibilities at his disposal:

Chapter 1 5 - 1 3 . 'll xb S ! ?

1 S7

23 . . . �e6! 24.E!:ad l '!Wf5! 25 .l'hd6 ltJ dS 26.ged l ltJb7+ Black is two pieces up, and I cannot see anything resembling equality for White. 20.a4?! is an attempt to displace the queen before proceeding with '!Wh4, but it doesn't succeed in view of 20 . . . '!Wb3!. (20 . . . '!Wxb2? 2 1 .E!:fb l '!Wd2 fails to 22.ltJ bG+-, and suddenly the whole black position hangs.) After 2 1 .'!Wh4 '!Wxd5 22.'!Wxh6t \ties 23 .'!Wg7 gfg 24.gfe l t �e6! 25 .E!:ad l '!Wf5 26.E!:xd6 ltJ d8 27.'!Wg3 '!Wxf6 28.b4 E!:c8+!+, we have a situation similar to the line above, with White having only mild compensation for the two missing pieces.

20.c4! This strong move suggests itself, as it certainly makes sense to defend the precious d5-knight before attacking the h6-bishop with the queen. The only move that should be dismissed lightly is 20.ltJc7?, as then 20 . . . ga4!-+ guards everything and seals White's fate. If 2 1 .'!Wc2 '!Wa5 22.b4 '!Wxc7 23.'!Wxa4 ggs the f6-pawn looks doomed, and after its capture there is no real fight left.

20 '!Wxb2! The only logical move, gobbling a pawn and trying to maintain some contact with the kingside - and the h6-bishop in particular. ..•

2 1 .'!Wh4 '1Wd2 22.f4! Nevertheless the bishop's fate is sealed. Black has two ways to try and absorb the remaining pressure:

20.'!Wh4?! is the most obvious continuation, attacking the insecure h6-bishop but giving up the nicely placed d5-knight. White trusts that he will recover some material after the trade of pieces by entering on g7 with his queen, followed by a rook check on e l . However, his initiative rapidly disintegrates and he is at risk of being significantly worse. After 20 . . . '!Wxd5 2 1 .'!WxhGt \ties 22.'!Wg7 ms 23.E!:fe l t

22 . . . �xf4 should not be dismissed on general grounds. It is true that after 23.E!:ad l '!Wa5 24.'!Wxf4 ltJe500/'t the black queen is rather far

1 88

l 1 .�d3

B) 16.0-0 0-0

away from the action, but on the other hand there seems no clear way for White to exploit this. In fact, the position may well be better for Black.

23.1Mfxh6t White need nor be asked twice. Having said that, 23.gf2!? is nor out of the question: 23 . . . ig5!? (23 . . . '1Wd4 24.'1Wxh6t lt>d8 transposes to the main line) 24.fxg5 11tifxg5 25 .11tifxh7 tt'le5 This allows the black queen to re-establish contact with the threatened sector, leaving White nothing better than:

8 .! � � ii.! 74'� ,/,� (0% � � 76 fffjft Vlif ��·'7�A�� 1� 'i/if� � s "� QS-"""B �',. .J� 4 �� !�'' · - � � 3 �� " � �-rLSc:;, 2 �� b • • %"' fj �� -, , , v,� , , "'

iQ%

26.tt'l e7! tt'l f3t 27.Wh l '1Wxf6 28.'11tifxg8t (28 .ge l is met with the brilliant tactical shot 28 . . . gxg2!!) 28 ... \t>xe7 29.:ge2t �e6 30.:gxe6t fxe6 3 1 .'11tif h 7t d8 32.Ei:fl (32.11tif g8t=) 32 . . . Ei'.xa2! 33.gxf3 :gd2= With a positional draw.

23 'kt>es 24.gfl 1Mfd4! 25.gafl 25.gel t lt>d8 26.11tifxh7 ge8 27.gxe8t ixe8 28.11tif c2 !d7f! looks like enough counterplay for Black. •••

25 'kt>ds 26.1Mfxh7 ges 27.1Mfc2!? 27.Wffxf7 Ei'.xa2 28 .h3 gxf2 29.gxf2 ge l t 30.lt>h2 11tifxf2 3 l .'11tif f8t ge8 32.11tifxd6 Ele2! 33.11tiff8t= leads to a strange draw by perpetual. •..

27 1Mfc5+± There is a wild struggle ahead. ..•

The merits of Black's opening idea are now evident; he hinders Wff f3 (with the idea of f5-f6) , while '1Wg4 will be met with . . . tt'le5.

17.a4 This looks like a standard move, guarding the b5-bishop in order to play Wg4. 1 7.ge l Ele8 1 8.Ele3?! is an attempt to violently attack the enemy king. (Instead, 1 8 .a4 Ei'.e5 1 9.tt'le3 tt'le7 20.f6 ixf6 2 l .ixd7 Wffxd7 22.11tif g4t '.Wxg4 23.tt'lxg4 l:!e6 24.tt'lxf6t gxf6 25.Elxe4 Wf8= brings about an equal endgame.)

s 76 �3 2

.! � B.! � *� '� � '""��· ��J:�·· �: · % � �1 � �� i�� r�-/ ��%·� %� �, v,�'%� � ��. zt ��-lJc:;, �/fl�� Viii��fl�J � � a

After the simple 1 8 . . . Elc8!+, however, White's idea is nipped in the bud. The f5-pawn is hanging, and he has difficulries holding his own in the centre.

17 ... :Se8!

1 89

Chapter 1 5 - 1 3 . lll xb5 ! ?

Introducing the resource . . . l'l:e5, part and parcel of Black's strategy here. 1 7 . . . l'l:c8!? is playable, but after 1 8.'1Wg4! (less convincing is 1 8.a5 ixf5 1 9.'ll b6 when Black can secure a draw by 1 9 . . . l'l:c7 =) Black has to play l 8 . . . l'l:e8 anyway, and the main line shows that there are more important priorities than placing the rook on c8. 1 9 .l'l:ad l (also interesting is 1 9.f3!?) 1 9 . . . 'it>h8!, and we have transposed into variation B2 below.

��{t11 fBt 1111 �-1111 "11 :4 �!11,·�·'· �11 r11 �11 3 11 11n'• 11111111 ·'· 2 113 11 %B', �·�l, , /, , , � �r,�,�. . �ifm M, , ,/, , ,

1 9 . . . E?.b8 20.h3 20.'\Wf4 ie5 2 1 .'1Wh6 gg8 22.'ll e3 f6 23.'ll c4 '1We7 is okay for Black. 20.'ll e3 'll e 5 2 1 .'1Wxe4 ixb5 22.axb5 l'l:xb5 23.b4 gb8 24.l'l:a6 l'l:c8 25.gaxd6 '1Wc7= looks approximately even. 20 . . . '1Wc8 2 1 .'1We2 ixf5 22.'ll e 3 id7 23.'ll c4 ge7 24.'ll xd6 24.E?.xd6 '1Wc7 25 .gad l f5� is not much of a problem for Black either, as . . . 'll e5 is coming next. 8

� g

1 8.�g4! After 1 8 .l'l:e l !? Black seems to have at least two good ways to cope with the pressure: l 8 . . . 'it>h8 ( 1 8 . . . l'l:e5!? 1 9 .'ll e3 'll e 7! 20.ixd7 '1Wxd7 2 1 .f6! ixf6 22.'1Wg4t '1Wxg4 23.'ll xg4 l'l:e6 24.'ll xf6t l'l:xf6 25.l'l:xe4 'it>f8= is a level endgame, featured above under a slightly different move order.) 1 9.'\Wg4 ( 1 9.'ll e3 'll e5!?) We have transposed to variation B 1 . 1 8 ... @hS! A common move in such positions. Our two main tries for White are Bl) 19.�fel!? and B2) 19J;adl!. 1 9.l'l:fd l A positional idea, leaving the queen's rook on al to concentrate on a push of the a-pawn. A good way to continue seems to be:

��

� � · · 7 a ·y,·r•r--, �.;m ..... . . . �� ''""'��/,�� £�4 � � •� • •� � � �

s i, m � i. � -� 7n

� ��....z-J�.-�!i �� .... �� -%

� �c

�

24 . . . '\Wf8! 25 .�c4 'll e5! 26.�xe4 f5 27.�c2 f4 28.ixd7 l'l:xd7 29.'ll f5 l'l:f7 30.'ll xg7 �xg7 3 1 .'1We4 gg8 32.lii h l 32.a5 f1f6� 32. . . ge7 33.a5 At this point a draw was agreed in Hall Finocchiaro, corr. 2009.

Bl) 19.�fel!?

8 7 6 5

3 2 1

1 90

l l .id3

The most obvious attempt, directly atcacking the e-pawn.

19 ... :Se5! 20.lLl e3 Wf6! Preparing to attack by bringing the rook to g8. 20 ... l"i:c8!? 2 l .ll'lc4 d5 22.ll'lxe5 ll'lxe5 23 .Wfh5 occurred in Das - Kotronias, Gibraltar 20 1 1 , and here I should have played:

� ;;:;, E i

, , ,� � a � �,� �� .t � · �[j � �i'f , , , ; �[j � �� .%�� J�.�fj!� s

�

��ref""'

· ,�t · ·%� ,�t· ,,/.� ,,,, � �:.��

1 ,� a

23 . . . l"i:b8!!N 24.!!e3 (24.ixd7 Wfxd7 25.a5 ll'l d3 26.l"i:eb l ll'l f4 27.Wf g4 ie5 28.a6 Wfa7-+! may even be better for Black.) 24 . . . ixb5 25.axb5 !!xb5 26.f6 ixf6 27.l"i:h3 cj;>g8 28 .Wxh?t cj;J f8 29.b4 (29.l"lg3 Wc7-+!)

8 ��%,J�·� �• � �t� � �I •� 6 �� r��rar, �� ,· ,�, ��

7, 5

w,r,1-, , :.�,%��

�

2 1 .We2! 2 1 .l"i:ad l Ei:g8 22.Wh5!? 22.Wfe2 ih6 23.ll'lg4 Ei'.xg4 24.Wxg4 d5 transposes. 22 . . . ih6 Demonstrating an optimal attacking set-up for Black. 23.ll'lg4 l"i:xg4 24.Wxg4 d5! Black seems to have sufficient attacking chances to compensate his material deficit. 25.f3 Apparently the most critical move, trying to undermine the e4-wedge. 25.f4? !hf5 26.g3 is bad due to 26 . . . ll'le5!+. After 25 .ixc6 ixc6 26.a5 l"i:xf5 27.We2 (27.a6 Ei:xf2 28.a? Ei:xb2-+!), the fine sequence 27 . . . if4!! 28.g3 Wfg6!!� (intending . . . e3) should be sufficient for at least equality.

�i �-� � �wrAi �� .. �• � B �: a, · ·�

:.�·� ' g

29 . . . l"i:b?! 30.l"i:a6 ll'l g6 3 l .l"i:g3 ig7 32.l"i:gxg6 (32.Wh5 cj;>g8 33.h3 d4 34.cxd4 :1hb4 3 5 .d5 l"i:b5 36.l"i:axg6 1Xg6 37.Wfxg6 Wfd7 38 .l"i:g4 Wf7 39.Wfxe4 l"i:xd5=) 32 . . . fxg6 33 .Wfxg6 ixc3 34.Ei:d6 Wa8=

25 . . . ixf5 26.Wf g3 ig6! 27.ixc6 if4! 28.Wg4 28.'<Wf2 e3 29 .Wfl '<Wh4 30.g3 l"i:g5 3 l .Wfg2

191

Chapter 1 5 - 1 3 . lll xb5 ! ?

ixg3 32.hxg3 E:xg3 33.E:xe3 E:xg2t 34.\tixg2 '&g5t 35 .ltif2 '&h4t 36.ltig2 '&g5 t= 28 ... l:!g5! 29.'&c8t ltig7 30.l:!xd5 30.fxe4 ih5!� 30 . . . ixh2t! 3 1 .ltixh2 E:xg2t 32.ltixg2 With a perpetual, Efremov - Schwenck, corr. 20 1 0.

2 I . .. a:c5! 2 1 . . .l:!g8? is not good: 22.llig4 '&h4 23.llixe5 CUxe5 24.'&xe4 CU g4 25.1Mff4 ie5 26.Ei:xe5 dxe5 27.'&g3+22.:Badl .ixf5 23.b4 23.llixf5 1Mfxf5 24.'&xe4 1Mfxe4 25.Ei:xe4 d5(± looks like easy equality.

25 ... :Bc2 26.c!L\e3 c!L\xb4 27.llixf5 27.1Mfxf5 '&xf5 28.llixf5 d5 29.l:!cl is unclear after: 29 . . . :Bac8 30.E:xc2 E:xc2 3 1 .f3 �c3(± 27 ...�f4 28.:Be2!? 28.f3 exf3 29.'&xf3 iWxf3 30.gxf3 d5! 3 1 .1"\c l (3 1 .CUxg7 ltixg7 32.l:!d4 1"lb2=) 3 1 . . .E:d2 32.l:!ed l l:!xd l t 33.E:xd l �c3 34.ltif2 (34.CUd4 ltig7) 34 . . . d4 35.f4 Ei:d8=

8 7 6

45 3

2 a

B2) 19Jfadl! The most exact continuation, preparing to unveil pressure on d6.

.i � � .i �

:fii· , , , � �, ?,� ��J , , � � � �.1, ,�, 8

· im�mttm 54 �!. �.r.:. ��-�&�� J% - ��-�. ��-% �� [j' �·� �Jfl 3

23 ... :Bxc3 24.lli d5 �e5 25.�h5! 25.CUxc3 1Mfxc3+

There i s some play i n the position, but a draw is the likely result.

28 ... :Bc5! 29 ..id7 a:c1 30.:Beel llid3 3 1 .:Bfl 13xdl 32.�xd l =

� = m:a:n:a: ..

1 9 ... :BcS! Black doesn't expose his rook on e5 yet (the CU e3-c4 idea is always lurking) and instead makes a useful move with the other rook, protecting the c6-knight and thus freeing the d7-bishop for action. l 9 . . . 1"le5?! Considered best by Kolev and Nedev, hitting f5 directly. The idea is to force the knight back to e3 and then set up the pieces as demonstrated in variations examined above ( . . .'&f6, . . . 1"\g8, . . . �h6) . White is better here though, as the following analysis shows: 20.CUe3! Wf6! Alternatively, 20 ... d5?! was played against me by Parligras at the Dresden Olympiad 2008. After 2 1 .E:xd5 E:xd5 22.CUxd5 llie5 23.1Mfxe4 �xf5 24.'&xf5 1Mfxd5 25.1"\el E:d8 26.h3 l:!d6 27.E\e3! h6 28.b4 1"lg6 29.g3+- White was already winning. 2 1 .'&h5! This move, which I played against loannis Papadopoulos at the Greek Championships in

1 92

1 l .i.d3

2008, casts a doubt on the soundness of Black's position. Instead, 2 1 .�e2?! was the main move analysed by Kolev and Nedev. 2 1 . . .1':1a7 2 l . . .1':1g8 is a practical chance only. The main line goes: 22.tt'lg4! �xf5 23.�xf5 ixf5 24.tt'lxe5 tt'lxe5 25 .a5! ig4!? (after 25 . . . if6 the simplest is 26.Wh l ! ?±) 26.l'!a l ! if6!? 27.Wh l ! ie6 28.a6! 1d5 29 .a7 1b7 (29 ... iaS 30.l:fa6±) 30.ie2!± The march of the b-pawn to b6, followed by 1a6, will prove decisive. 22.f4! This creates an unpleasant situation for Black. 22 . . . )"le8 22 . . . exf3 23.gxf3 1':1e4 (23 . . . �e7 24.tt'lc4±) 24.gh3 h6 25.ml ± leads to a tremendous attacking position for White because of the wedge on f5 . 23.Wh l tt'l e7?! I brought the point home rather easily with:

78 6

20,.,ge5 2 1 .llie3 1Wf6!

22.�h5 ?! ixf5 23.tt'lxf5 l"1xf5 24.�h3 tt'le5 25.l"1xe4 l"1g8+ was better for Black in Delchev - Kotronias, France 2009, a game I went on to wm.

45 3 2

22.�g3 ?! l'l:g8---+ is also dubious for White.

24.g4! d5 25 .g5 �b6 26.ixd7 l'!xd7 27.f6 Wg8 28.�h3 �c6 29.fxg7 d4 30.cxd4 tt'ld5 3 1 .f5 l"1b7 32.g6 1-0 Kotronias - Papadopoulos, Rhodes 2008.

20J'ffe l Some correspondence games have continued 20.h3, which I do not fully understand: 20 . . . l"1e5 2 l .ltJe3 lMffS 22.b4 ih6! Attacking the e3-knight is a main theme for Black in all these positions. 23.c4 �e7 24.tt'ld5 �d8 25.f4 exf3 26.gxf3 tt'le7!!= White played 27.lM.lh4 in Emelyanov - Gromotka, corr. 20 1 2, and a draw was agreed.

22.�h3 should be answered by 22 . . . l"1c5!00, halting the pawns. After 23.c4 ixf5 Black has excellent chances, for example: 24.tt'lxf5 �xf5 25.�xf5 l"\xf5 26.:1'1xd6 id4!� 22.b4 has been debated in correspondence chess: 22 . . . l"1g8!? (22 . . . ixf5 23.llixf5 �xf5 24.�xf5 l"lxf5 25.l"1xe4 d5 26.l"1e3 d4= was level in Staroske - Cesecci, corr. 2006.) 23.�f4 ih6 24.tt'lg4 :1'1xg4 25 .�xg4 ixf5 26.�e2 tt'le7 27.a5 (27.c4 tt'lg6---+ looks horrible for White) 27 . . . tt'ld5 28.l'l:xd5 l"lxd5 29.a6 �e7 30.ic4 :1'1d2 3 1 .�h5 ig5 32.�xf7 �xf7 33 .ixf7 e3 34.fxe3 (34.f3 d5+) 34 . . . 1e4 3 5 . g3 Wg7+ Black went on to win in Southwell - Siikaluoma, corr. 2006. 22.l'i:d5 is not so critical after: 22 . . .l'i:xd5 23.tt'lxd5 �xf5 24.lMfxe4 (24.�xf5 ixf5 25 .ixc6 l'i:xc6 26.tt'le7 l'!c5 27.tt'lxf5 [27.b4 l'!e5 28.tt'lxf5 l'!xf5+]

1 93

Chapter 1 5 - 1 3 . lll xb5 ! ?

27 . . . EI:xf5 28.El:xe4 h6=) 24 . . . Wxe4 25.EI:xe4 ii.e6

8 �, �� -J· �·-· 7� ��. r.r��- - -Y.� ��·� : fi•i ��- �1 � ��?.' � % � � �n?�n� 2 �� -��= £'., !?'�6

27 . . . .if5 ? 28.Wf3+- should be avoided. 27 . . . li:J a7!?f± 28.g3 Ei:d8 28 ... .if5 29 . .ixc6 Wxc6 30.Wd4t ig7 3 1 .li:Je5 Wb7 32.Wb4! Wd5 33.c4 Wff e6 34.Wd6! Elc8�

>;,,,,%�

�--- % b

� d

----% f

26.li:Jf4 d5 27.El:e l (27.EI:e2 li:J d4!) 27 . . . li:Je5 28.li:Jxe6 fxe6 29.f4 (29.a5? EI:b8+) 29 ... li:J c4 30.ixc4 EI:xc4 3 1 J'!xe6 @g8 32.a5 l:!xf4 The result is a level ending. 22.li:Jc4 This looks dangerous for White. 22 . . . ii.xf5 23.Wg3 23.We2 Wg6 24.l:!xd6 Ele6 25.El:xe6 Wxe6+ and Black is better. 23 . . . i.h6 24.Elxd6 24.li:Jxd6 Ei:g8 25.li:Jxf5 Wxf5 ; 24.li:Jxe5 li:Jxe5

29.We2 ii.h3 30.Ei:eSt Elxe8 3 1 .Wxe8t @g7 32.We l li:J a7 33.li:Je5 Wc2 34.ii.fl ii.xfl 35 .Wxfl The ending looks even.

22 ...ix5 There are no better moves. 23.�x5 Wffx5! 23 . . . l:!xf5 ? 24 . .ixc6 l:!xc6 25.Wxe4 l:!c8 26.EI:xd6! Wffxd6 27.Wxf5 ± as in Spitz - Krivic, corr. 2003, should be avoided. 24.gxd6 � b8 24 . . . e3? 25.f4± is positionally suspect and should be avoided.

24 . . . EI:e6 25.EI:xe6 .ixe6 25 . . . Wxe6? 26.li:Jd6 is winning for White, for example: 26 . . . Elg8 27 . .ic4 Elxg3 28 . .ixe6 Elxg2t 29.@xg2 i.xe6 30.li:Jxe4+26.Elxe4 A sample idea for Black is: 26 . . . Elg8 26 . . . .id5! ? 27.Wd3 Wg6

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

1 94

l 1 .id3

A position with a passive knight on b8 has arisen, but the result is by no means decided. The main point is that two white pieces (the b5bishop and the d6-rook) are tied to keeping the knight at bay, while the black rooks are optimally placed to halt White's three passed pawns. If we add the possibility of applying pressure against f2 by transferring the bishop to c5, rhen we may conclude that the position is approximately balanced. Of course, some precision is still required by Black. We shall focus on B21) 25.E:ed l , B22) 25.h3 and B23) 25.g3!?.

3 l .E'.xf7t @g8 32.E'.cxf6 E'.d l t 33 .\Wfl gxfl t 34.ixfl E:dl 3 5 .E'.f8t V2-V2 Moreno Carretero Cimicki, corr. 2009.

27.g3 ggs Reaching a double-edged position that seems dynamically balanced. 28.E:d4 The most testing. 28.@h l is dynamically met by: 28 . . . e3! 29.f3 E'.d5! 30.E:xd5 1Mfxd5 3 1 .ic4 \Wd2 32.f4

25 .E:b6!? is an attempt to push the a-pawn by first defending the b5-bishop. After the accurate 25 . . . if6! 26.E:b7 tt:l c6 27.ixc6! (27.1''1.xf7 tt:le7 28.ic4 tt:l g6---t ) 27 . . . E:xc6 28.E:xf7 E:d6 29.h3 E:e8!= White had no advantage in Cinca Kochemasov, corr. 20 1 2, which was drawn shortly afterwards.

B2 1) 25.E:edl This is best answered by:

25 ...�f6 26.E:b6!? 26.c4 i.e7 27.g6d5 E'.xd5 28.cxd5 E'.d8=

32 . . . ixf4! 33.gxf4 �c l t 34.\Wfl �c2 35 .ie2 tt:ld7 36.E:b5 tt:l f6� Black's active pieces should enable him enough counterplay to secure a draw.

28 ... e3 29.f3 i.£4 30.E:xf4 30.E:xb8 E:xb8 3 1 .E:xf4 \Wb l t= 30 .id3 ixg3 3 1 .E:xb8 i.f2t 32.@h l �f6 33.E:xg8t @xg8 34.gg4t @f8 35 .�c4 h5 36.E:g2 E:e8+!

30 ...Wfxf4 3 1 .E'.xb8 Wff5 32.E'.xgSt ©xg8 33.©g2 E:d5 34.Wfxe3 Wfc2t 35.i.e2 Wxb2 36.©fl Wl'c2 37.We4 Wxe4 38.fxe4 E:c5= The black rook will be able to keep the pawns under control.

Chapter 1 5 - 1 3 .lli xb S ! ?

B22) 25.h3

•.�, , ;�I�%� �%�fJ·�,,

:s nfa •.•.•j•j %� .,Y,'l- %�"� � � � ,,,,, � � � ,,,, m �� -�,'f[jJ��%%m�. � ��[j, , %= 1 .,, ,%-�if'f

4 3

�

1 95

30.�e3! This is most dangerous and requires some clever defending from Black. 30.id3 f5 3 l .'<.We3 (3 l .'<.We6 tll d7!+±) 3 l . . .'<.Wxe3 32.Elxe3 Elc5! 33.g3 tll c6 34.ib5 lll e5 3 5 .b4 Eld5 = should be an easy draw, as Black has coordinated his pieces very efficiently. 30.'<.We3 Wffxe3 3 1 .E:xe3 tll c6 32.gd3 32.g4 tll e5 33.b4 h5+± 32.g3 tll e5 33 .b4 f5 ! 34.a5 ©g7 35.a6 ©f6=

25 ....ifS Also possible is: 25 . . . if6!? 26.g4! (26.'<.Wg4 Wxg4 27.hxg4 ©g7 is less dangerous, as White's kingside structure is static.) 26 . . . \Wf4 27.'1We3 Wxe3 28.Elxe3 ©g7 29.©fl Elh8! 30.gb6 EldS 3 1 .Elb7 ElcS 32.f4 exf3 33.Elxe5 ixe5 34.©f2 tll c6 35 .ixc6 gxc6 36.©xf3 Ela6 37.Elb5 ic7 38.b3 Elh6= White's plus had been neutralized in Evtushenko - Walczak, corr. 20 1 1 . 26.�d4 .icS!? 26 ... e3?! 27.f4! Ele6 28.id3± 27.�xe4 �xe4 28.Wxe4 Wxf2t 29.©hl .id6 A critical position has arisen.

33 . . . Elxc6 This should also be a draw, a typical variation being: 34.b4 ©g7 35 .a5 ©f6 36.g4 ig7! 37.b5 Elc5 38.c4 Elxc4 39.Elb3 ii>e5 40.b6 ©f4 4 1 .a6 4 1 .b7 ie5 42.Ela3 i.bS 43.a6 ia7 44.©g2 Elc2t 45.©fl Elh2 4 1 . . .Ela4 42.a7 id4 43 .Elb4 Elal t 44.ii>g2 Ela2t 45.©fl ©f3!=

30 ... lll d7!? The latest development, which I believe to be most accurate. 30 . . . \Wf4 3 1 .'<.Wxf4 ixf4±/= and Black has good chances to draw.

3 1 .�£3 lll cS

1 96

l l .�d3

B23) 25.g3!? The most natural way for White to give his king some breathing space.

32 ... ©xh7 33.gxfl ©g7 34.g4 gas 35.E:d.2 .ie7 36.jgd4 lll e6 37J�d7 37.:B:c4 :B:d8+! or 37.:B:d5 li:Jf4 38 .l"1e5 id6 39.:B:e8 :B:xe8 40.ixe8 li:lxh3=.

26.:B:d4 allows: 26 . . . :B:xb5 27.Wxb5 Wxb5 28.axb5 ixd4 29.cxd4 c;t>g7 30.:B:xe4 li:l d7= 26.c4!? is best met by: 26 . . . c;t>g7! 27.a5 ie7 28.:B:d5 (28.:B:d4 ic5 29.:e:xe4 gxe4 30.Wxe4 Wxf2t 3 1 .c;t>h l li:l c6 32.Wg4t c;t>h6=) 28 . . . li:l c6!+! In case of 26.:e:b6 ie7 27.:e:b7 li:l c6 28.b4 (28.a5 Wh3!f!) 28 . . . :B:e6+!, Black has enough counterplay. Finally, 26.c;t>g2 h5 27.:B:ed l h4 28.g4 Wg5 29.f4 exf3t 30.Wxf3 :B:d8 3 1 .:e:xdSt ixd8 32.ic4 ic7 33.h3 f6= was another model defence for Black, Y2-Y2 Moreno Carretero - Burgarth, corr. 2009.

37 ...if6 38.jgd5 lll c7 39.E:c5 lll e6 40.E:f5 E:d8 4 1 ..ic4 E:d2 42.ixe6 fxe6 43J'�b5 e5 44.gS .ixg5 45.E:xe5 'i!/g6 46.b4 E:a2 47.aS .id.2 48.E:c5 E:a3= A draw was soon agreed in Muller - Schwenck, corr. 20 1 0 .

26 ... hS!? I prefer this move, trying to weaken the defences of the white king. 26 . . . ie7!? 27.:e:d7! ic5 28 .:e:dst :e:xd8 29.:B:xdSt c;t>g7 30.c;t>g2= is quite equal and was agreed drawn ac this point in Ruefenacht - Burne, corr. 2009.

1 97

Chapter 1 5 - 1 3 .lLixb 5 ! ?

27.c4 27.b4 E:xc3 28 .11tid2 e3 29 .Wxc3 11t/xf2t 30.Wh l Wf3t= 27 ... h4 28.a5 28.g4 �f4 29.h3 ie7+± gives Black a lot of counterplay. 28.E: l d5 Wg7 29.E:xe5 ixe5 30.E:d5 hxg3 3 U''l x e5 gxf2t 32.Wfl Wh3t 33 .Wxf2 11t/xh2t 34.We3 �xe5 3 5 .Wg4t Wh6 36.'11Mxc8 f5 37.�f8t Wg5 38 .�d8t Wg4 39.11tid l t Wg3= 28.b4 hxg3 29.fxg3 fi.e7 30.E:fl 11t/g5 3 1 .E:d4 ixb4 32.E:xe4 E:xe4 33.11t/xe4 11t/g6= looks level too.

28 ... hxg3 29.fxg3 fie7 30.:!36d5 lll c6! 3 1 .a6 Ji.est

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

32.:!3xc5 32.Wg2 E:xd5 33.E:xd5 tll e5+±

32.Wh l e3! 33.ixc6 E:xc6 34.b4?! ixb4! (34 . . . ia7=) 35.a7 E:a6 36.E:xe5 11tfxe5 37.E:d8t Wh7 38 .a8=11ti E:xa8 39.E:xa8 11t/e4t+/= leads to a symbolic plus for Black.

32 ... :!3xc5 33.b4 lll xb4 34.1Mfb2t 1Mfe5 35.'11Mxb4 e3=

Conclusion I think that this chapter has dealt satisfactorily with one of the most dangerous White treatments of the Sveshnikov, namely the dynamic piece sacrifice l l .id3 ie6 1 2.c3 ig7 1 3.tll xb5!?. Black's path to equality is relatively narrow here, but there is a certain consolation in the fact chat White can also go wrong easily in the minefield of the mainline. After 1 3 . . . axb5! 1 4.ixb5 id7! 1 5 .exf5 e4!? 1 6.0-0 0-0 1 7.a4 E:e8! 1 8 .�g4! Wh8! there are several ways White can try to press by bringing his rooks in the centre. In my opinion the focus should be the kingside, thus 1 9 .E:fd 1 is the least critical of chem. Two very important positions Black must be aware of arise after 1 9 . l"lfe l ! ? E:e5 ! 20.tll e 3 11t/f6! 2 1 .11tfe2! E:c5! 22.E:ad l ixf5 23.b4 E:xc3 24.tll d5 �e5 25 .1l?ifh5! and 1 9.E:ad l ! E:c8! 20.E:fe l E:e5 2 l .tll e3 11t/f6! 22.11tf e2! ixf5 23.tll xf5 �xf5! 24.E:xd6 tll b8. In both cases Black manages to attain complete equality but general guidance won ' t help you here; if you ask me, both understanding and memorization are required. For chose players who are averse to a lot of theory I have included the extra option l 4 . . . E:c8!?, which should equalize too. The main line goes as follows: 1 5 .'Wa4 id7 1 6.exf5 0-0! 1 7.0-0! e4!! 1 8.E:fe l ll'le5 1 9.ixd7 tll xd7 20.11t/xe4 tll f6 and Black should hold in due course. An instrumental decision in both lines ( 1 4 . . . id7! and 14 . . . E:c8!?) is to play the move . . . e4! at the first opportunity. Without chis move we are getting nowhere, as the key to Black's defence is to avoid a blockade on the light squares, thus freeing the e5-square and g7-bishop. The conclusion is chat Black equalizes after 1 3 .tll xb5!? but in laborious fashion. I have won games for either side in chis variation, a face chat illustrates the importance and benefit of mastering a line inside out.

I I.id3 12.�hS Variation Index 1 .e4 c5 2.ll:if3 Cll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Cll xd4 Cll f6 5.Cll c3 e5 6.Cll db5 d6 7.�g5 a6 s.tli a3 bS 9.�xf6 gxf6 1 0.tli ds f5 1 1 .�d3 �e6 12.tvhs 12 ... �gS!

A) 1 3.0-0-0?! B) 1 3.0-0?! C) 1 3.c3 �xg2! Cl) 14.Cll c2 C2) 14.%Vf3 D) 13.f4 E) 1 3.g3 tli d4 1 4.c3 fxe4 1 5 .�xe4 �g4 1 6.%Vxh7 �g7 17.%Vh6 tlif3t El) 18.©fl?! E2) 1 8.©e2

D) note to 1 6. exf5

E l ) after 27. li'i b l

£2) after 26.li'i ce3

20 . . .i'k5 1+

27 . . J§:bS!N

26 . . . li:Jg5t!?N

1 99 200 201 202 203 204 206 207 209

1 99

Chapter 1 6 - 1 2 .'Wh5

1.e4 c5 2.lll f3 lll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lll xd4 ll\f6 s.lll c3 e5 6.lll db5 d6 7 ..ig5 a6 8.lll a3 b5 9 ..ixf6 gxf6 1 0.lll dS f5 n ..id3 .ie6 12.Whs Another major continuation, although it is currently unfashionable. White prevents . . . ixd5 by adding pressure on f5 , but neglects his development and the relocating of the a3-knight. These factors allow Black to start a counterattack:

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

A) 13.0-0-0?! Sacrificing g2 in return for quick play in the centre looks like a logical idea, yet the strange placement of the knight on a3 prevents White from doing anything constructive here.

13 .. J'hg2! There is no reason Black shouldn't rake this pawn, all the more so as a second pawn is threatened. 14.Wf3 The only move to test Black. l 4.f4 transposes to variation D. 14 .. J:gg4! The best position for the rook, keeping the important e4-square under observation.

1 5.exf5 1 5 .h3 �h4 changes little. d

12 .. J�gS! This fine move, immediately attacking a weak spot in the white camp, has superseded the passive 1 2 . . . ig?.

15 ... .ixd5 16.WxdS lll b4 Here the situation crystallizes somewhat. Black's solid structure in the centre coupled with the stranded a3-knight gives him the advantage.

At this point there are various choices: A) 1 3.0-0-0?!, B) 1 3.0-0?!, C) 13.c3, D) 1 3.f4 and the main continuation employed by White E) 1 3.g3. 1 3.@fl ?! is a strange way to cope with the pressure against g2. White's development is seriously hampered and the king is insecure on fl . After 1 3 . . . h6! (threatening to trap the queen with . . . fxe4 followed by . . . ig4) 1 4.h3 ixd5 1 5 .exd5 tlJe7+ Black is fine. The f5-pawn is immune from capture and he threatens to expand by . . . e4, forcing the white pieces into awkward positions. 1 3.c4?! is another ill-fated attempt that should be punished by either 13 . . . EI:xg2!?+ (intending 1 4.'\Wf3 EI:g4! 1 5 .exf5 ixd5! 1 6.exd5 �f4!}, or 13 . . .ixd5 14.exd5 ( 1 4.cxd5 ?! tlJ b4 1 5 .ie2 fxe4 1 6.Wxh7 �g6+) 1 4 . . . Wa5t 1 5 .@fl tlJ d4t.

17.Wb3 1 7.'1Wb7 tries to maintain some pressure on the a6, b5 pawn duo, as well as on the a8-rook. After the thematic 17 . . . d5+, however, Black has a clear advantage.

200

1 l .iid3

l 7.'\Wf3 E1f4 1 8.'\Wg2 'll xd3t l 9.E1xd3 l'k8 20.'ll b l \We?!+ and Black gains a substantial edge.

su :IU%� �•m ,,,,,%� ·----��

: Tn�m�&�� •"• "•'� 5 �.�. " � r� � � � �i'�: �� '/[!},-, %�� !!:/f[!}, �'/� , , %�,-1 ., 4 3

/,,,,,;� ,% a

�%

�

��

Obtaining a strong attack, as the following lines demonstrate:

14.h3 Trying to extinguish all danger associated with . . . ig4. 1 4.'\Wxh?? swallows the bait, and after 1 4 . . . E1g6 l 5 .'\Wh5 E1h6 1 6.'\Wdl '\Wh4-+ the white king will soon be the victim of his wife's greed! 1 4.'\Wd l ?! allows Black a fierce initiative after either 1 4 . . . ih3+ or 1 4 . . . E1cs+.

1 4.©h l ?! ig4 1 5 .'\Wxh? E1g7 1 6 .'\Wh8 E1g6 l 7.'ll x b5 axb5

17 ... E1f4!? l 7 . . . 'll xd3t 1 8.'1Wxd3 E1f4 1 9 .E1hg l E1xf2 20.E1g8 '\Wb6 2 1 .c3 0-0-0 22.'\Wd5 ih6t 23.©b l E1xg8 24.'\Wa8t ©d7 25 .'\Wxg8 ©e7 26.'\Wxh? '\We3-+ saw Black gain a decisive advantage in Groot - Beltins, corr. 2008. 18.ic4 bxc4 19.'1Wxb4 E1b8+ B) 13.0-0?! Castling into the lion's den. Black should take the opportunity to gain space. 1 4.c3?! neglects the white queen, allowing 1 4 . . . .ig4 1 5 .'\Wxh? E1g6+, for example: 1 6.g3 E1h6 l 7.'\Wg8 ie6! l 8.i.e2 'li e?! l 9.'\Wg5 ( 1 9.'ll xe??? '\Wxe7-+) 19 ... 'll xd5 20.'\Wxd8t E1xd8 2 1 .exd5 ixd5't The black bishops and weak white king tip the scales in Black's favour. After l 4.c4?!, the natural retort 1 4 . . . E1g6! was tested in a high-level correspondence game: 1 5 .cxb5 'll d4 1 6.E1fc l a) 1 6.\Wd l ? '\Wh4-+ b) 1 6.b6? loses immediately to: 1 6 . . . .ig4 1 7.'ll c?t ©d7 1 8 .'\Wxh? 'll f3t 1 9.©h l E1h6-+ c) 1 6.E1ac l ? .ig4 1 7.'ll c?t ©d7 1 8.'\Wxh? 'll f3t 1 9 .©h l E1h6 20.'\Wxf7t ie7-+

Chapter 1 6

20 1

1 2 .Wfh5

1 6 . . . !'lh6 1 7.li:lc7t Wffxc7 1 8 .!'lxc7 !'lxh5 1 9 .bxa6 <±ids+ Black went on to win in Kruger - Felytin, corr. 20 1 1 .

14 �g6 1 4 . . . !'lg5 !? .•.

15.c3 E:c8H Black threatens the standard manoeuvre . . . :gh6, followed by . . . Wffg5 . 1 6 ..ie2 1 6.li:lc2 !'lh6 1 7.Wff f3 Wff g 5 1 8 .©h2 was Janetschek - Weissenbeck, Austria 2000, and again l 8 . . . li:l e7!N+ is strong, the point being chat l 9.li:lxe7? loses instantly co l 9 . . . .ixe7! 20 . .ie2 f5 .

C) 13.c3 With chis move White covers d4 and prepares to meet . . . :gxg2 with Wif3, forking f5 and the rook . He also provides the a3-knight with a square at c2 in order to re-enter the game.

It is worth analysing Cl) 14.ll:ic2, before moving on to the aforementioned C2) 14.'Wf3.

202

l l .id3

Cl) 14.ltJ c2 f4 1 5.a4 bxa4 1 6.:!'l:xa4 �g7!

1 7.ixa6 \t>f8 1 8 .'Wf3 l:!g6 Unsatisfactory for White as Black has multiple ideas to attack on the kingside, the simplest being to invade on h4 with the queen. 1 9.i!tifd3 (After 1 9.h4 h5!?+ the h4-pawn is static and weak, and White will face even bigger problems after the exchange of the d5-knight by a subsequent . . . tll e7.)

%%, �, . , . ,.� .,,. � % "�·'?; %�� ' .!.f.fJf� � : r��%�i1 � .� %%, � � �l•w,,•w23 �w-if�. J% lt:J%%•.if�% "if�� : � s ,i � �

7 6

·:

7;.,., ?, %%,

It seems that Black maintains an edge regardless of White's reply.

17.°1Wxh7 This appears too risky, but the position is already dangerous for White. l 7.'Licb4?! 'Lixb4 l 8.'Lixb4 a5 l 9.'Lid5 l:!b8+ 20.b4? axb4 2 1 .cxb4 i!tifc8-+ is a line given by Kolev and Nedev, illustrating the problems White could face if he plays naively on the queenside.

87 �%%,�

17 _:gxa6 l:!xa6 l 8 ..ixa6 should be met by:

� '""" %%,�� ,, �� · �

-� �-a��j� %%, �I � � %%, � ·��.1 4 � , ., . ,. � %%,�p;;-�� 1� �w-it�.J% lt:J�%% �w-it�. s. %� �w 23 .. .i it�·s %%.. 6 5

� c

7:.

l 9 . . . .ixd5! 20.exd5 (20.iMfxd5 'Lie7+, to be followed by . . . d5, will unveil some pressure against the a6-bishop as well as initiate hostilities against the exposed white king.) 20 . . . tll e7+ This is also inferior for White, as Black can march with his pawn mass in the centre.

17 ... f8 It is obvious White is facing problems with his queen, which has almost been caged in. 18. fl 1 8.1Mi'h5 .ig4 1 9.'Wh7 id7!+ is certainly not a draw.

1 8 . . . i!tifb8! 1 9 .tll db4 ( 1 9 .tll cb4? ixd5-+ or 1 9 .b4 'Li e7+) 1 9 . . . 'Lixb4 20.'Lixb4 i!tifa8 2 1 .1Mi'f3 l:!g6 22.lt>d2 lt>f8+ The next step should be to activate the g7-bishop by means of . . . if6. It can then move to either d8 or h4 accordingly, followed by a harassing of White's weak kingside pawns. a

203

Chapter 1 6 - 1 2.°@fh5

18 ...E:g6 19.E:gl J.g4:j: Black will win some material by playing . . . !fo6 next, although converting the advantage is far from easy. Another way to play is 1 9 . . . Ei:xgl t 20.'it>xg l l/J e7 2 1 .l/Jxe7 iWxe7+ with a positional advantage for Black in view of his safer king. If 22.gxa6 then 22 . . . iWg5t 23.�fl gbs�, and there is an awesome defensive task ahead for White.

C2) 14.'\Wf3 White places his hopes on tactics along the h l -a8 diagonal.

Anything but that! 23 . . . a4 24.bxa4 l/J g6 25.f3 ie7 26.iWh3 l/J h4! 27.l"lhg l if6 28.l"1g3 rJJ e7 29.l"i:el l"i:b8 30.i.b3 iWa7 3 1 .l/Jc2 rJJ f8 32.l"lfl iWc5 33 .l"ld l l"i:c8 34.iWfl e4-+ and Black duly won in Foenander - Rawlings, corr. 20 1 1 . l 5 .h3 is of little use and can be answered in two ways: 1 5 . . . l"lg8 ( 1 5 . . . l"lh4!? looks like the most thematic reply, however h2-h3 acquires some value as g2 becomes available to the white queen.) 1 6.exf5 i.xd5 l 7.iWxd5 l/Je7 l 8.iWe4 ig7 l 9.iWh4 ( 1 9.0-0-0 d5 20.iWh4 iWb6!+) l 9 . . . l/Jd5!+

1 5 ...J.xdS 16.'IWxdS lDe7 Now White lacks the g2-square, so may choose between b7 and f3 . 17.'1Wb7 Trying to keep the queen in an active position. 1 7.iWb3 �h6 is fine for Black, as 1 8.f6?! l/J g8!+ simply drops the front f-pawn.

1 5.exf'5 l 5 . l/J c2?! is dearly antipositional, and Black had an easy ride in che following correspondence game: 1 5 . . . ixd5! Wich the d5-hole disappearing and an extra pawn, there is no doubt as to who is better. 1 6.exd5 l/J e7 ( 1 6 . . . e4! ? 1 7.iWxf5 E!g5 1 8.iWxe4t ge5 1 9.dxc6 gxe4t 20.ixe4 d5+ also looks good for Black.) l 7.l/Je3 Ei:h4 l 8.iWg3 ( 1 8.l/Jxf5 gf4 1 9.iWh5 l/Jxf5 20.ixf5 iWf6+) 1 8 . . . gf4 1 9.0-0-0 b4! 20.c4 l"i:c8 2 1 .'it>b l a5 22.ic2 iWd7+ 23.b3?!

l 7.iWf3 is passive. After l 7 . . . l"lf4 1 8.iWe2 iWc7

1 9 .l/J c2 '1Wb7! 20.f3 ih6+ Black is slightly better as the white king is stranded in the middle.

17 ...'\Wcs The simplest, clearing the atmosphere. l 7 . . . ig7!? looks viable as well. 1 7 . . . ih6 1 8.f6! l/J g8 1 9.iWc6t rJJ fs 20.l"ld l l"lf4

204

l l .�d3

D) 13.f4

8 7 6 5

4 3

2 1

1 8.'1Wxc8t Forced ifWhite wants to maintain a respectable game. Suicidal is 1 8 .Wb6? ctJd5 1 9 .Wa5 Wc6-+ or l 9 . . . lli f4-+ . l 8.Wf3?! Elf4+ essentially loses a tempo over the note to White's 1 7th move.

8 1. · if � -� � 7�� -,·%- i 6

��

T� - � �� s ufW '•�• � � :f- - � ��r� � � �:'//� ��,��

0�, . ,,%_R��R�� :�� . 1 ;,d""%� �• , . , %.�

3 :

1 8 ... llixc8 19.ctJc2 ctJb6:j: White is slightly worse due to his inferior pawn structure, but should hold with accurate defence. This was verified in Tyutyunnik Ponting, corr. 2009, and one subsequent correspondence game.

White sacrifices the g-pawn in a different way. Now . . . f4 is no longer an option for Black, but the fluid situation in the centre favours his two bishops. Additionally, the a3-knight cannot offer anything positive to White. An extra resource for Black is being able to jump to d4 with his knight. All the factors mentioned above should grant Black a considerable plus.

1 3 ... gxg2 14.0-0-0 This position can also be reached via the 1 3.0-0-0 move order. White wishes to crush his opponent by means of a direct confrontation in the centre. 14.llie3?! The only other possibility of any substance, forking g2 and f5 . However, after: 14 . . . Wa5t! 1 5 .@fl Eld2! The black rook is well placed on d2 and, combined with the pending queen invasion on b4, is able to wreak havoc among White's ranks. 1 6.exf5 1 6. lli b l Elxd3 1 7.cxd3 Wb4 1 8.exf5 Wxb2! ( 1 8 . . . �d7 1 9 .We2 �xf4t 20.�f2 ll'lb4!? 2 1 .ll'lc3 llixd3 22.�xf4 llixf4 23.Eldl is not so convincing) l 9.fxe6 Ela?+ is, despite White's temporary extra rook, clearly better for Black.

205

Chapter 1 6 - 1 2 .�h5

s i: �� ·�•.,%.�i �"'";:�. '!, . %�.,, � � ��:�:� � � � :3 �, "/""'"" % i �� /,'��i � • �� •.i.� �� !( . 2 .% . . st . . . Y,� =� �7

'"//,

' "'

1 6 . . . 1Wb4! 1 7.1Wf3 �d7 1 8.B:e l 1 8 .B:b l ? 0-0-0 1 9.4Jd5 1Wc5 20.b4 1Wd4-+ 1 8 . . . 1Wxb2 1 9. liJ b l B:xd3 20.cxd3 0-0-0 2 1 .B:gl d5!?+ The most human choice, opening up play for Black's bishops. It seems that White's weaknesses and insecure king far outweigh his extra exchange.

14 ... 4J d4! The knight settles on d4, exploiting a typical tactical motif. 15.lll e3 Covering g4, and forking g2 and f5 . 1 5 .c3 ixd5 1 6.exd5 b4!+ shows the motif that allows the knight on d4 to remain unassailable. 1 5 .B:hgl fxe4! 1 6.B:xg2 ( 1 6.�xe4? 4:l e2t-+) 1 6 . . . exd3+ is close to a disaster for White. Finally, 1 5 .@b 1 allows another brilliant tactical idea to come to the fore: 1 5 . . . i.xd5 1 6.exd5

1 6 . . . B:g4!+ The threat of winning the queen by . . . B:h4 will cost White the vital f4-pawn.

8 7 65 4 3 2 1

1 5 ... �f2! The rook still has an important task to fulfil along the second rank. 16.exf5 After 1 6.B:hfl (logical, to exchange Black's active rook) 1 6 . . . B:xfl 1 7.B:xfl B:c8! 1 8.@b l fxe4 1 9.�xe4 b4 20.4:lac4 it is best for Black to play:

� ... .z� . ., % ��i:�· . � � !� �,� � � � . � �� 'ii � � 5 �� . % �r' -1', � . �. -.%% � � 4 it�. -.%%�' ��.i,it / . . 3 ��-%��'%. . . ��-"" 2 8 1� 8 • . • r�. . � � � � ,� 8

�

;�

20 . . . B:c5!+ Denying White tactical opportunities. For example: 2 1 .1Wxh7 exf4 22.B:xf4 1Wg5 ! It is obvious that White cannot cover all his vulnerable points.

1 6 ...ha2 Dangerously restricting the mobility of the white king.

206

1 l .id3 .

17.fxe5 dxe5 18.lll xb5 Trying to change the course of the game.

E) 13.g3

5 4 3 2 1 a

1 8 ....ih6! A nice move, but hardly the only one. 18 . . .'®b6-+ also wins, as pointed out by my daughter Andoria. 19.ghel 1 9.'®xh6 l"lxc2t!! and mate next move is the brilliant point. 1 9 ... axb5!? 19 ... '®b6!-+ is easier.

A radical way to reduce the pressure on the g-file, but now a new weakness arises on f3 .

1 3 ... lll d4 This has long been established as the main continuation. Black has reliable alternatives in 1 3 . . . l"lc8 and 1 3 . . . l"lg4, but I saw no reason to include them in this book as Black's position is excellent after the text move. 14.c3 It is only natural to evict the knight as quickly as possible, since it may cause severe damage once it settles on d4. Most of the alternatives are simply bad. 14.ltJe3?! should be met as follows:

20 ..ixh5t @e7! 2l .'l&h4t f6 22.'l&xf2 .if7-+ All Black's pieces contributed to a winning attack in Brodsky - Kramnik, Kherson 1 99 1 .

1 4 . . .f4!

1 5 .gxf4

( 1 5 .ltJd5? h6-+)

1 5 . . . exf4

207

Chapter 1 6 - 1 2 .1Wh5

1 6.'Llf5 ( 1 6.'Lld5 gg5+) 16 . . . :gg5 1 7.\Wd l 'Llxf5 l 8 .exf5 ixf5+ 14.0-0-0?! This is best met by: 1 4 . . . :gcs 1 5 .Wb l 1 5 .\Wxh7? :gg6-+ 1 5 .f4?! gg6+ 1 6.gde l :gh6 1 7.\Wd l fxe4 1 8.ixe4 \Wa5 1 9.©b l ? b4-+ and White could already resign in Rajala - Rawlings, corr. 2009. 1 5 . . . h6 l 6.:gd2 1 6.c3? :gg5 ! 1 7.\Wh4 'Llf3-+ unveils the venom of Black's last move. 1 6 . . . fxe4 1 7.ixe4 ig4! Also possible is 1 7 . . . b4!? 1 8.'Llxb4 gg5 1 9.\Wd l d5+ and White muse lose a piece, after which the result is more or less decided. 1 8.\Wh4 \Wxh4 1 9.gxh4 f5 20.'Llf6t @f7+ Black should win. l 4.f4, stopping . . . gg5 , is relatively more resilient: 14 . . . ixd5 ( 1 4 . . . h6 1 5 .c3 b4!? 1 6.'Llxb4 fxe4 1 7.ixe4 ig4 1 8.\Wh4 \Wxh4 1 9.gxh4;!; looks okay for White, as his minor pieces are functioning properly.) 1 5 .exd5 e4 1 6.0-0-0! \Wf6 1he pawn on f4 makes a vital difference here, but Black still has sufficient resources. 1 7.:ghe l ig7 ( 1 7 . . . ©d8!?00 could be a winning try) 1 8.ixe4

loss after 1 7 . . . 'Ll f3t 1 8 .We2 'Llg5t 1 9.f3 'Llxe4 20.fxg4 \Wg5-+.

17 ... ttJat Black seems to have obtained an initiative, but the position is extremely tricky. White has two main replies in El) 1 8.i>fl?! and E2) 1 8.©e2. 1 8.ixf3?? is a colossal blunder. After 18 ... ixf3 1 9.'Llf6t ©e7-+ White does not have a check on d5, and consequently loses a lot of material. 1 8.Wd l ?! looks passive, as it fails to connect the rooks: 1 8 . . . 'Llg5t 1 9.f3

� s !, �� ·, ,,,% .,Y.�� -0 � 6 ' �� -0 �%•,j� s � I. �tt:w� 4 �� , I� � � : � � �� / • / 3

Y,"-"

,,,,,

' '"

� - ,,%�• � r�%� /�,,�r�

�-� � ,,. %� ,�� .....

1 8 . . . 'Ll e2t! 1 9 .©d2 fxe4 20.:gxe2 \Wd4t 2 1 .©e l \Wg l t 22.©d2 \Wd4t= and Black forces a draw by perpetual.

1 9 . . . !:lg6! 20.\Wh4 'Llxe4 2 1 .fxg4 'Llf2t+ An additional shortcoming of chis line comes to the fore, the knight fork wins material for Black.

14 ... fxe4 1 5.i.xe4 i.g4 1 6.\Wxh7 gg7 17.\Wh6 1 7.\WhS? is badly misguided, leading to a

El) 1 8.i>fl?!

208

1 l .!d3

Aiming to avoid a discovered check, but it hands the initiative over to Black.

8 7 6

34.Wg5t f6 35 .Wg?t ii>e6+ White doesn't have a perpetual and should subsequently succumb to Black's material superiority.

22 ... :Sg6i Black is a pawn down but has two bishops, pressure against the enemy queen and on the light squares. This should amount to more than enough compensation.

5 4 3 2 1

23.Wih4t 23.:She l ?! Wd7!t is already better for Black. 23.h3!? �f5 24.f3! �h6! 25 .Wxd8t 8:xd8� offers him at least enough for a pawn. a

1 8 ... :SgS! 1 9.tl:\f6t 1 9.Wh7 tl:\ d2t 20.©e l :Sg7+

1 9 ... �e? 20.W/h8!? 20.tl:\d5t does not force a perpetual in view of the simple 20 . . . ©d7 2 1 .tl:\f6t ©c7+, and the black king escapes to the queenside. 20 ... tl:\ d2t 2 1 .<ii g2 tl:\xe4 22.tl:\xe4 22.Cll xg4?! :Sxg4 23.f3 is evaluated as equal by the computers initially, but after: 23 . . . Wb6! 24.:Shfl (24.:Safl We3 25.fxg4 Wd2t 26.ii>h3 8:e8!+)

23 ... cii e6! 24.W/xd8 :Sxd8 Black's central pawns threaten to overrun the enemy. 25.f3 25.tll d2!? if5 26.:She l d5 27.ti:Jab 1 00 as in Silva - Kochemasov, corr. 20 1 0, may well be best. 25 ... .tf5 26.:Sadl d5 27.tl:\bl A. Sokolov - Skripchenko, France 2003. Black should play:

8 7 6

5 4 3 2 1 a

27 J3b8!N 28.tll fl b4? The opening of lines on the queenside gives Black the slightly better game, despite his pawn deficit. •.

Chapter 1 6 - 1 2 .�h5

E2) 1 8.We2

209

25.tll ce3 tll f6= should be equal, a possible continuation being: 26.a4 tll xd5 27.tll xd5 'it>e6 28.Elhd l l'faa7 29.b4 1"lh7 30.h4 ih6� 25.tll de3 tll g5t 26.'it>g2?! (26.'it>e2= looks sturdier) 26 . . . f4 27.gxf4 tll e6t 28.f3 tll xf4

It is best co keep the king active.

18 ... lll g5t 19.f3 lll xe4 20.fxg4 'Wes! It is thanks co this move that the line is playable for Black. 2 1 .'We3 After 2 1 .Wd3?? Black doesn't check on f2, but instead plays 2 1 . . .'Wb?! 22.tll f6t tll xf6 23.Wffxf6 b4!-+ with a winning position.

25 ... We6 26.lll ce3 This position occurred in D. Mastrovasilis Johannessen, Athens 2003.

2 1 .h3? is best met by 2 1 . . .l:hg4!-+ . 2 1 .tll e3 1"lg6 22.Wffh 3 d5! gives Black a strong initiative. Finally, 2 1 .Wff h 5!? Wff c 5 (2 1 . . .1"lg5!?) 22.tll e3 tll xc3t 23.bxc3 'Wxa300 is double-edged and worthy of further analysis.

2 1 . ..'Wxg4t 22.�f3 'Wxf3t 23.�xf3 f5! This move allows Black to gain space, defending actively against White's threats. 24.lll c2 24.tll e3 1"lf7 25.tll xf5 ? d5! 26.g4 ixa3 27.bxa3 1"lc8+ is much better for Black. 24... �f7 25.a4!? A logical try.

28 ...a5 29.lll c6 �b6 30.axb5 �xb5 3 1 .�a2 �c5 32.lll d st Wf6 33.h4!?

1 l .id3

210

33.!'1.fl f4! 34.gxf4 'll e 6t 3 5 .<ii h l 'll xf4f2 would have been unclear with mutual chances. For example: 36.tt:'lg2 !'1.xg2 37.!'1.xf4t exf4 38. <ii xg2 <ii f5 39.'ll b7 !'1.e5 40.!'1.xa5 <ii e4 (40 . . . ie7!?) 4 1 .<ii f2 ie7 Despite White's extra pawn, he is on the defensive. 8

In this chapter we explored the consequences of 1 2 .'1Wh5 , after the introductory moves 9.ixf6 gxf6 1 0.tt:'ld5 f5 l l .id3 ie6. Black's best response to this rather overambitious gesture is the natural 1 2 . . . l"!gS!, which gives rise to an interesting and sharp struggle with mutual chances. White has several ways to continue. In the event that White leaves the g-pawn undefended by 1 3.0-0-0?!, 1 3.c3 or 1 3.f4, Black should grab the proffered pawn with his rook, obtaining the better game. Another risky continuation for White is to castle short on move 1 3 as then Black plays the cramping 1 3 . . . f4!, initiating a strong attack against the exposed white king.

6 5

4 3

2 1

Conclusion

33 ... tll f7! 34.b4 34.'ll xf5 'll xd8 35.'ll xg7 ixg7!?00 is another unclear position. After 36.b4 axb4 37.cxb4 Black retreats his rook by playing 37 . . . !'1.c8f2, with ideas of . . . d5, . . . e4 and . . . ih6. 34 ... axb4 35.cxh4 gb5 37.tll xg? <±>xg7! 37 . . .ixg7?! 38.!'1.a?t

36.tll xf5!

tll xd8

38.ga?t <±>g8 39.ga8 39.!'1.d??! 'll e6 40.!'1.fl e4! 4 1 .!'1.f6 E!e5 42.!'1.g6t <ii h S 43.!'1.£7 ig7 44. <ii fl e3 45.!'1.e7 e2t 46.<ii e l 'll d4 47.l"1xe5 dxe5! i s a typical variation, illustrating that Black's e-pawn could also be a serious asset. 39 ... tt:'le6 40.h5 :lhb4 41 .gfl gb2t 42.<ii g l 13b3 43.gf6 13xg3t 44.@fl :!3g5 45.h6 i>h7 46.:!3xe6 ixh6= The game will be drawn.

This leaves 1 3.g3 as the only real test, but I see no reason for Black to worry, as he has at his disposal the powerful sequence 1 3 . . . ti:l d4 14.c3 fxe4 1 5 .ixe4 ig4 1 6.'1Wxh7 !'1.g7 1 7.�h6 'll f3t which gives him rich counterplay. After 1 8.<ii e2 'll g5t l 9.f3 'll xe4 20.fxg4 he needs to remember though the important move 20 . . . �cS!, which forces an approximately balanced ending after the further 2 1 .°1We3 '1Wxg4t 22.'1Wf3 '1Wxf3t 23.<ii xf3. Thus, we see no advantage for White in this chapter. In fact, in most of the lines discussed in it, Black enjoys the lion's share of the chances with excellent piece play and no real concerns about of the safety of his own king. That said, there are a few nuances that need to be mastered and/or remembered, as the variation is tactical in essence and mistakes are likely to be harshly punished.

I l.J.d3 12.c4 Variation Index 1 .e4 c5 2.lbf3 l!J c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lbxd4 l!J f6 s . lb c3 e5 6.lb db5 d6 7.�g5 a6 8.l!Ja3 b5 9.�xf6 gxf6 1 0.l!J dS 5 1 1 .�d3 �e6 1 2.c4 12 ... �aSt! 13.@fl fxe4

A) 1 4.l!Jf6t?! B) 1 4.he4

212 213

note to l 3 . . . fXe4

A) after 1 9 .�xc2

1 5 .®h5N±

1 9 . . . ®b4!

B) after l 8 .®c3 ! ?

212

l l .id3

l .e4 cS 2.tll f3 tll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tll xd4 tll f6 s.tll c3 eS 6.tll dbS d6 7.i.gS a6 8.tll a3 bS 9.�xf6 gxf6 10.tll dS f5 1 l .i.d3 i.e6 12.c4 This is an old line which sporadically makes an appearance in top-level events. It has been discarded as harmless, since White forfeits the right to cascle, a fact that outweighs any advantages entailed in the move.

8 I. � �-- �7 � �� '111 I'� I � 6 !�:-�� '"" "�.r�

�� i -��lZJW,�,,,,%�i � � � � : ��,,� � � � � 5

;-% 2 /,'b, ,,,. ;�tf!},

1 3 ...fxe4 The most clear-cut way of recommended by Kolev and Nedev.

playing,

Much weaker was 1 3 . . . b4? 1 4 .tll c2 f4 as played in Fedoseev - Firat, Kirishi 2008, because White could have now played:

tf!}, b �-� t� L. � �,

�

1 6 . . . 0-0! Black has a lead in development and great central pressure. l 7.tll f6t ( l 7.tll xd6? Elfd8+) 1 7 . . . @g? 1 8.exf5 @xf6 1 9.fxe6 Elab8!i is the lesser evil for White, although Black's initiative persists.

�r%

%�- - %� �im- - - %•� �

·----

12 ...'IWaSt! Of course! This takes the sting out of White's system, leading to a position where the uncastled white king provides Black with ample counterplay opportunities. 13.@fl The only logical move, keeping pressure on b5. 1 3.�d2?! �xd2t 1 4.@xd2 �.h6t+ forces White to disrupt the coordination of his rooks by retreating his king to the first rank, when Black's position is preferable. 1 5 .@dl bxc4!? ( 1 5 . . . ixd5 1 6.exd5! is less clear) 1 6.tll xc4

White can recapture on e4 with the dubious A) 14.tll f6 t?! or the more sensible B) 14.i.xe4.

A) 14.tll f6 t?! @e7

Chapter 1 7

Black's king isn't badly placed here, s o being unable to castle does not have any serious consequences.

1 2 .c4

213

17 ... axbS 18.tl:\c2 tl:\xc2 19.�xc2

1 5.tl:\xe4 Re-routing the knight to e4 has been time consuming. 1 5 ... tl:\d4 Black already has an edge. 16.tLlgS It looks logical to attack the e6-bishop, a piece chat covers all the sensitive light squares in the centre. 1 6.c5? d5!+ allows Black to acquire complete central domination with what should be a decisive advantage. After 1 6.�h5, the simple reply 1 6 . . . f6!+ renders the queen's excursion pointless. Another try is 1 6.cxb5 when Black should continue his development unperturbed:

B) 14.�xe4 The bishop is clearly more effective on chis square than the d5-knighc.

!:- �

0, ' /, · �6 .••.•aT.T :.!.•. 5 tfilf•�··· · 4 "•JZI· �•£• · · · · ·

�m �;:/,�'%� f%%� � ·� 2 fil: f!J [j �tf!J 8 �t� �L '·�· 3

;wj

16 ...�g7! 17.cxbS l 7.'Llxe6 fxe6!+ allows Black to open the f-file and cover the important light squares in the centre.

14 .. J'kS! A move chat has not been played much, but looks like the most circumspect way of coping with the pressure. We have reached the critical position after 1 2.c4, and it seems chat Black is doing fine. 1 5.cxbS

214

l l .id3

l 5.'2lf6t ds! This doesn't appear to pose Black any serious difficulties, as White's pieces are too uncoordinated. 1 6.cxb5 1 6.'2lxh7?! fl.el 1 7.'2lg5 ( 1 7.c5 Wi'b4! 1 8.cxd6 ih4!+) 1 7 . . . fi.xg5 1 8.Wi'xd6t id7 1 9.l"ldl Wi'c7+ is too speculative to have any real chances of success.

1 6.i"ld l ! Wi'd8 1 7.b3 ( 1 7.f4 ig7+) Now both 17 . . .fi.g?+ and l 7 . . . h6+ give Black slightly better chances.

1 5 ... llid4! A dynamic move, assuring Black of fair chances. 1 6.ďż˝cl gxcl 17.YMxcl axb5 18.YMc3!? l 8.g3?? is a colossal blunder in view of: 18 ... fi.h3t 1 9.ig2 ixg2t 20.Wxg2 1Mfa8!-+ 1 8 .Wi'g5 ?? is similarly bad after: 1 8 . . . fi.xd5 1 9 .fi.xd5 b4-+ 1 8.b4?! was played in Lukashok - Dobrov, Chigorin mem. 200 1 .

Black is clearly better. Or l 7 . . . fi.e7 l 8.'2lh5 Wi'xa6t 1 9 .fi.d3 Wi'b7+. Another move is 1 5 .1Mi'h5!?, but Black has a good reply: l 5 . . . llid4! (It is important to avoid 1 5 . . . bxc4?! 1 6.l"ld l ! Wi'c5 1 7.Ci:Jb l !? fi.g7 1 8.'2lbc3 Wf8 1 9.g4! '2l d4 20.l"lg lďż˝, when White has maintained a bind on the light squares and may even have full compensation for the pawn.)

Now 1 8 . . . Wi'a4!N 1 9.g3 ie7!+ would have given Black an edge, the point being: 20.Wg2? f5! 2 1 . '2l c7t Wf7 22.'2lxe6 Wxe6!-+

215

Chapter 1 7 - 1 2.c4

Conclusion

1 8 ...Wa4! 19.lll c2!? �e7 1 9 . . . ixd5 20.w.rcst @e7 2 1 .'!Wc7t= 20.lll c?t 20.tll b6!? '!Wxa2 2 1 .tll xd4 exd4 22.W,rxd4 0-0+ 20 ... @ds 2 I .lll xe6t fxe6 22.�d3 22.tll xd4 '!Wdl t 23.'!We l '!Wxd4 24.'!Wa5 t @e8 25 .'!Wxb5t @f7+

8 uu�� ,-, J�g ��i. ��,�-%r 65 � �� ,.�� 7

� 4 1�� - ,�� 32 ��'d'�IB """"%% ��,� B ��,� 1

w� 8 w� .. . %n%%•�•:t 8 w�ct:Jq ,,

22 ...�f6= Black has the slightly better pieces, but his winning chances are almost non-existent in view of the opposite-coloured bishops.

In this chapter we have discussed the line 9.ixf6 gxf6 1 0 .tll d 5 f5 l l .id3 ie6 1 2.c4, which seems to be quite harmless for Black due to the accurate reply l 2 . . . Wa5t!, displacing the white king. In the position arising after 1 3.@fl fXe4 Black is doing quite well after either 1 4 .tll f6t?! @e7 1 5 .tll xe4 tll d4, when his excellent centralization and better king position offer him the edge, or the more prudent 1 4.ixe4 l'!c8! 1 5 .cxb5 tll d4! 1 6.l'!cl �xc l 1 7.Wxc l axb5 1 8.W,rc3!?, through which White seeks to steer the game towards a draw. After the further 1 8 . . . Wa4! 1 9.tll c2!? ie7 20.tll c7t @d8 2 1 .CDxe6t £Xe6 22.id3 I think that the task has been successfully carried out, as the presence of opposite-coloured bishops negates Black's positional superiority based on his strong centre and slightly more active pieces. We may therefore conclude that Black has an easy game after l 2.c4, but at the same time that his winning chances seem infinitesimal if White follows up correctly, which should be a rather natural outcome for this type of opening struggle; after all, White did not do something essentially bad by adopting 1 2.c4, as the move fights for control of d5 and tries to bring the a3-knight back into play, two factors that should normally be sufficient to keep White within the drawing zone.

12.0-0 14.etJxbS Variation Index 1 .e4 cS 2.lll f3 lll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lll xd4 lll f6 S.lll c3 eS 6.lll dbS d6 7 ..igS a6 8.lll a3 bS 9 ..ixf6 gxf6 1 0.lll dS f5 1 1 ..id3 .ie6 12.0-0 .ixdS!? 1 3.exd5 lll e7 14.lll xbS .ig7 15.lll c3 1 5 ... e4 2 17 218 220 22 1 222 223

A) 16 ..ie2 0-0! 17.1Mfd2 ctJ g6 Al) 18.a4 A2) 1 8.:Sab l !? B) 1 6 ..ic4 lll g6! 17.WfhS!? bc3! 1 8.bxc3 Wff6 B l ) 1 9.f4?! B2) 19.1Mfh6!

A2) after 27.c4

82)

note to

82)

20.ï¿½b3

note to

24 .a3 ! ?

3 5 . . . l'!xh3t!!

Chapter 1 8

1 .e4 cS 2.'Llf3 'Ll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.'Llxd4 'Ll f6 S.'Llc3 eS 6.'LldbS d6 7..igS a6 8.'Lla3 bS 9.ixf6 gxf6 10.'LldS 5 l l ..id3 .ie6 12.0-0 ixdS!? The most stubborn continuation, and one of the lynchpins of our repertoire. The hole on d5 disappears, while the presence of opposite coloured bishops gives Black good chances to make up for his other weaknesses.

217

1 4 .lll xb5

A) 16.ie2 An attempt to protect the bishop from subsequent attacks, but it has its disadvantages too. It fails to shield the queenside, and at the same time makes it more difficult for White to pressurize e4 by putting a rook on e l . This would be a useful step in preventing an . . . f4 launch by Black.

1 3.exdS 'Lie? 8

4 3

2 1

14.'LlxbS This is a direct attempt at a refutation and also wins a pawn. However, Black will be able to gain several tempos for his development while saddling White with chronic weaknesses, making up for this inconvenience. 14 ....ig? 1 5.'Llc3 l 5.'Lla3? e4+ is certainly out of the question for White. 1 5 ... e4 Expanding with tempo. The disadvantages of White's operation are already becoming evident: the pressure on the a l -h8 diagonal is getting annoying for him, whilst the move . . . 'Ll g6 will create attacking opportunities by massing troops against the white king. White has two squares for his bishop: A) 16 ..ie2 and the main continuation B) 16 ..ic4.

17.Wid2 White may try to omit this move by 1 7.E:b l tll g6 1 8.@h l , but after: 1 8 . . . E:e8 1 9.f4 ixc3! 20.bxc3 '\Wa5 2 1 .g4 fXg4 22.ixg4 '\Wxc3 23.E:b3 '\Wf6 24.'\We2 @h8 25 .E:e3 �ab8 26.a3 (26.�xe4 E:xe4 27.'\Wxe4 '\Wc3! is also fine for Black) 26 . . . '\Wd4! 27.f5 tll e5

218

1 2. 0-0

28.f6! ctJxg4 29.Wi'xg4 :gg8 30.Wl'xe4 °1Wd2! 3 1 .:ge2 °1Wc3 32.Wi'e3 \Wc4 33 .°1Wf3 :gg5 34.:ge7 :gf8 3 5 .°1Wd3 1.Wxd3 36.cxd3 :gxd5 37.:1fa7 The result was nevercheless a draw in Wunderlich Forrisdahl, corr. 2009.

17 .. . tlig6 Black has easy and intuitive play. He will place his rooks on e8 and (possibly) b8, and combine play on both sides of the board. Hitting the b2and d5-squares will be one pare of his strategy, while the . . .f4 advance will be the other. The two main tries for White are Al) 1 8.a4 and A2) 1 8.gab l !?, but we shall also consider some ocher options. 1 8.:gfe l ?! ie5 ! 1 9.ifl 'it>h8---+ is a typically passive configuration for White, allowing Black to attack by means of . . . l"lg8 and . . . \Wf6 (or . . . 'Wh4) . 1 8.g3?! can be met by: 1 8 . . . '.ge8 1 9.l"lae l ( 1 9.'.gab l f4 20.i.h5 f3�)

1 8.'it>hl This is a natural prophylactic move, preparing to defend the kingside with f2-f4 if necessary. l 8 . . . l"lb8 1 9.l"lab 1 :ge8! With the following choice for White: 20.g3 Trying to reduce the consequences of . . .f4. a) 20.f4?! 'Wa5+ and White is in great difficulty. b) 20.b4 f4!� and 20. ctJ d l f4 2 1 .�xa6 °1Wg5� (or 2 l . . . 1.Wh4�) force White onto the defensive. c) 20.l"lfe l is best answered by: 20 . . . i.e5! 2 1 .i.xa6 'it>h8 22.g3 \Wf6 23 .i.b5 :ggs 24.1.Wh6! ixc3! 25.bxc3 f4 26.:!'i:fl 'Wxc3 27.Wf g5 fS 28.:!'i:b3 1Mf e5� Black had sufficient counterplay in Ljubicic - Martin Clemente, corr. 2009.

- � �� . ...Y.�• -- E ��-9� ��-'?;�•'Ill � � �i %%. %%� t·� ···· ·�£�£ �

�"//,1,� � ��-0 � � ��%� � 3 %%�·ef" %%�-�;<.t� ... %�-� 8 t� 8 ��t� tl§ --�,,.,. .

,... . ,,.,-� b

20 . . . Wa5 !� Black has good counterplay and may even be slightly better. 20 . . . f4?! 2 1 .gxf4 i.h6, may seem tempting, but after 22.1.We3 ixf4 23 .Wfh3;!; White has good chances for a successful defence.

Al) 18.a4

1 8.:gae l does come into consideration but after: 1 8 . . . :ge8 1 9 .ih5 ( 1 9.'it>hl '.gb8 20.b3 'Wa5 ! 2 1 .ctJxe4 °1Wxd2 22.ctJxd2 ic3 23.ctJf3 ixe l 24.:gxe l Elbc8 25 .i.d3 is an unclear ending which was agreed drawn at this point in Sadowski - Gusan, corr. 2009.) 1 9 . . . \Wh4 20.i.xg6 hxg6� I chink that Black has good compensation for the missing pawn.

This has been a major guest in correspondence chess and is designed to use the a l -rook (via a3) for defensive purposes. White also intends, according to circumstance, to fix the a6-pawn as a target by a4-a5 .

18 ... ge8! By defending his e4-pawn Black prepares the . . .f4 advance, initiating his usual kingside storm.

219

Chapter 1 8 - 1 4 .lLixbS

20.!'1a4 is good for Black after 20 ... f5 (20 . . . ixc3!?f±) 2 1 .'it>hl �e5 22.f3 e3 23.Wfd3 Elf8 24.lll a2 'IWgS 25.lll b4 lll h4 26.Elgl Elf6 27.lll c6 Elh6 28.tll xe5 tll g6 29.h3 tll xe5 30.Wfd4 lll g6 3 1 .°IWd l Wfg3 32.Wi'fl 'it>f7--+ as in Paredes McKenzie, corr. 2006.

20 :Sb8 Black can be extremely satisfied with his position here. ..•

19.aS Fixing a6 and giving the a l -rook a further outlet on a4. 1 9.Elfe l f4 20.�h5 e3 2 1 .fXe3 fXe3 22.Wfd3 Elb8 23.�xg6 hxg6 24.lll d l �xb2 25.lll x b2 l"i:xb2+ gave Black a pleasant edge in Bucsa - Lennartz, corr. 2009.

21 .:Sa4 2 1 .�xa6 Elxb2 22.'ll d l occurred in Felkel - Altrock, Internet 20 1 0. Now 22 . . . ElbS!N 23.Ela3 Wi'g5--+ would have given Black excellent attacking chances. 2 1 .l"la2 f3 22.gxf3 �e5 23.Elgl exf3 24.�xf3 Wff6 25 .ig4 Elxb2 26.Wfe3 l"i:xa2 27.'ll xa2 Wfd8--+ was another strong initiative in Karpenko Ilyushchenko, corr. 20 1 0.

1 9.l"la3 f4 20.l"i:b3 (20.'it>hl Wfh4 2 1 .g3 e3 22.Wf d l Wfg5 23.�f3 exf2 24.lll e4 '1Wh6+ was slightly better for Black in Roques - Scarani, corr. 2007) 20 . . . £3! 2 1 .gxf3 '1Wh4 22.lll xe4 �h6 23.l"i:e3 if4 24.lll g3 l"i:e5 25.'it>g2 Elh5 26.Elh l

22 .!Lixe4 f5 23 .!Lic3 Wfc7 24.�c4 .!Lie5 25.�xa6 :Sa8 26.�e2 :Sxa5 27.°IWcl :Sb8 28 . .!Li bS :Saxb5 29.�xbS :Sxb5 30.Wfxf4 Wf c8 3 1 .h3 :Sxd5 32.:!'l:a7 tll g6 33.Wfb4 �d4 34.Wfb3 The players agreed a draw in this approximately level position in Percze - Nekhaev, corr. 2009. •

19 ... f4 20.@hl

•

220

1 2 . 0-0

A2) 1 8.E:ab l !? With a similar idea to that of 1 8.@h l , blocking the kingside with f2-f4. Black still obtains satisfactory chances.

2 l . . .ie5� Black's kingside actacking chances are very real and seem to outweigh White's extra pawns. After l 9.b4!? "@tc8! 20.tll d l f4� Black successfully combines queenside defence with kingside aggression.

19 ...Wfb6t! 20.@hl Wfb4! 2 1 .g3 � e7! We have reached a position that ought to be a draw, as the following analysis indicates.

�� m � �� - •m 7 � , ,,,,Y,m -,y,•��r 6 �•"m �- - .. % ... ;m � ,- � %., 5 �r-,,;�� A� w s

1 8 ... E:b8! Seeking compensation in Benko Gambit style. 19.f4!? The best reply, trying to block the pending kingside attack before redeploying the c3-knight. The immediate 1 9.tll d l runs into: 19 . . . f4! 20.ixa6 (20.ih5 f3!-> is, of course, better for Black.) 20 . . . "@tg5 2 1 .@hl (2 1 .f3 e3 22."@te2 "@txd500 is a wildly complicated position that requires further analysis. 2 1 .ie2 lli h4 22.g3 e3 23.llixe3! fXe3 24."@txe3 "@txe3 25.fxe3 llig600 is unclear, despite White's slight material superiority, in view of the weakness on e3 and the tremendous power of Black's minor pieces.)

4 3 2 1

itt. , •��,j}J � ,

�• w�� 8� w[j;lZJfiiXi 8 �'§?� � ��, � ,�.,,, ,.,%� !•� a

22.:Bfdl!? 22.ixa6 "@ta5 ! 23 .ie2 ixc3!? (most accurate, although 23 . . . :gxb2 is also playable) 24.bxc3 "@txd5 25 .:gbd l (after 25 .Wfd4 :gxb l 26.:gxb l "@txa2 27.:gb7 tll c6 28."@tf6 [28."@txd6 "@txc2 29."@f f6=] 28 . . . "@txc2 29 .ih5 tll d8!= White is forced to take a draw by perpetual) 25 . . . "@txd2 26.:gxd2 :gfc8!? 27.c4 :gb2= and Black has sufficient counterplay for a draw. 22 J;fc8! 23 ..L:a6 .ixc3 24.bxc3 Wfxbl 25.E:xh l After 25 .ixc8?, the retort 25 . . . "@tb5!+ traps the bishop in broad daylight. •.

25 E:xb l t 26.�g2 :Bc5! Were it not for this move, Black would be in trouble. ..•

27.c4

22 1

Chapter 1 8 - 1 4. tLi xb5

27.fie2 a:xd5 28 .We3 a:as 29.!ic4 lt'i d5 is also fine for Black, as 30.'&d2 is answered by 30 . . . a:d l ! 3 1 .'&e2 a:c5 =.

38 ... ©g7 39.aS liJ e3t 40.©gl ltJxc4= The game should end in a draw. B) 16 ..ic4

27.©h3 a:b6 28.:Jie2 lt'ixd5 29.c4 lt'i f6 30.�d4 ©g7 = looks fairly balanced, since Black's fortress cannot be penetrated.

28.©h3! 28.cxd5 a:b2 29.©gl (The panicky reaction 29.'&e3? proves to be a winning chance for Black after 29 . . . a:cxc2t 30.©gl a:g2t 3 1 .©fl a:xh2 32.©gl a:bg2t 33.©fl a:xa2 34.©gl a:hg2t 35.©hl a:gb2 36.:Jifl a:al-+; but 29 .fid3!= should be an even easier draw.) 29 . . . §cxc2 30.W'a5! h6!? White is under some pressure, alrhough he can still draw. 28 ... e3! 29.1Mf e2 ltJ c7! 30 ..icS ltJ eS! 3 1 ..id? liJf6 32 . .ihS a:gl ! 33.1Mfxe3 l:!hl ! 34.1Mfe7! ltJg4 35.@g2 35 .�d8t ©g7 36.'&g5t= 35 ... l:!xh2t 36.@fl!? 36.©gl settles for perpetual after 36 ... §d2=. 36 ... l:!h6! 37.a4 l:!e6 38.Wfdst 38.�b7 lt'i e3t 39.©gl lt'i g4=

White wishes to cover the queenside with his bishop and leave the d l -h5 diagonal open for the white queen. On the other hand, the bishop is later exposed to attacks by . . . lt'i e7-g6-e5 or . . . m8-c8.

17.WfhS!? 1 7.W'd2 allows the black queen to invade on h4: 1 7 . . . 0-0 1 8.Ei:ae l ( 1 8 .§fe l ?! fie5-t) 18 ... 'l!Nh4! 1 9 .g3 (Weaker are 1 9.fib3?! :Jih6-t and 1 9. lt'i d l f4! 20.a:xe4 f5 2 1 .a:ee l f3-t , with a strong attack for Black in either case.) l 9 . . . Wh3 The white king is feeling the hot breath of the enemy queen on his face. An attempt to stop the threats by 20.f4 exf3 2 1 .Ei:xf3 is met with 2 1 . . .lt'i e5 22.a:xe5 (22.a:f4 :Jih6+) 22 . . . fixe5+, winning material. l 7.lt'ie2 is an attempt to avoid the doubled pawns and redeploy the knight to a better square. I like a non-committal move for Black:

222

1 2 . 0-0

8 .i ��i ��.Ji • ••• 67 � l•�'%� '%-lj)� 45 � '%• .ti"• '• 3

��

�·" ��'" �� b �·f�",�� b �f� b f� S{"""� i� ! · :" a

1 7 . . . 0-0! Black has good chances, for instance: 1 8.c3 ( l 8 .'ll d4 1Wg5 1 9 .<ii h l f4�) 1 8. , , f4�

17 ...hc3! Black gives up his powerful bishop, but weakens White's pawn structure and gains attacking possibilities down the g-file as compensation. Additionally, Black is left with the superior minor piece; the knight has the central e5-square at his disposal, while the white bishop is hampered by his own pawn on d5. 18.bxc3 Wff6

1 9.gfe l ?! is hardly an improvement for White either: 1 9 . . . 'll f4! 20.1Wf3 (20.1Wd l ?! 1Wxc3 2 i .�n 'll h3t!! 22.gxh3 ggst 23. <ii h 1 1Wg7 24.ib5 t axb5 25.ggl 1Wxgl t 26.1Wxg l gxgl t 27. <ii xgl <ii e7-+ was a disaster for White in Astengo - Pavlovic, Saint Vincent 2003.) 20 ... 1We5 2 1 .1Wg3 E!'.c8 22 . .ixa6 E!'.xc3+ Black has a powerful kingside attack in view of his wonderful centralization. 1 9.l'l:ae l was White's choice in Ehlvest - Van Wely, Aeroflot 2004. Now Black must continue in the style of Pavlovic with 1 9 . . . 'll f4!t or follow what Van Wely did with 1 9 . . . gg8!?. Here, 20.1Wh6! (20 .g3) 20, , .<ii e 7!00 was the critical continuation.

Bl) 19.f4?! Depriving the knight of the e5-square. Black should continue in typical fashion: 8

7 6

4 3

19 ... 0-0! All the other aspects of the position are in Black's favour as the following lines will indicate.

The two replies I shall analyse in most detail are the dubious Bl) 19.f4?! and the much stronger B2) 19.W/h6!.

20.i.h3 20.l'l:ae l l'l:fc8 2 1 .i.b3 Trying to keep the queen active. 2 l .1We2 1Wxc3 22.�b3 a5 23.a4 l'l:ab8t leads to a passive position for White with a bad bishop on b3. 2 l . . .E!'.xc3 22. <ii h l <ii h 8 23 .1Wg5

223

Chapter 1 8 - 1 4 . lll xb5

23.g4 is answered by 23 . . . e3! 24.\Wxf5 '.Wxf5 25.gxf5 lll h4 26.f6 Elg8+ with a depressing ending for White.

� � �� !�f 6 , � ��sl� � � · · "� " ""

: ��,,�. . . �� 3 g� · "nlr! �l�f�7�� "'�' �� .d'."" � -� ..

� c

23 . . . Wg7! 24.h3 A clear sign of distress and indecisiveness. However, if 24.g4 then the reply 24 . . . \Wxg5 25.fxg5 lll h 4! 26.gxf5 lll f3t illustrates a typical way of meeting the g2-g4 advance - by invading on f3 with the knight. In this case it is tactically justified by the fact that 27 .Elxe4? runs into 27 . . . lll d2+. 24 . . . ElgS!? 25 .Wh2 h6 26.�xf6t 26.�h5? lll h 4!-+ was completely lost for White in Manion - Shaked, USA 1 992. 26 . . . Wxf6+ A characteristic example of White slipping slowly into a hopeless ending.

20 ... Elfcs 2 1 .Wgs Or 2 1 .g4?! as in Nunn - Su. Polgar, Munich 1 99 1 , and now Black's superiority would have been evident had she chosen:

2 1 . . .Elxc3N 22.gxf5 lll h4 23 .�g5t �xg5t 24.fxg5 lll f3t 25.'it>f2 f6!+ White is extremely vulnerable on the dark squares.

2 1 . ..©g7! 22.c4 a5 23.a4 b6 24.Wg3 ©b7 25.We3

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

2s ... .!bf'81 26.g4 .!b d7 27.g5 :ags� Black has the better chances in view of his superior minor piece, although the position remains complicated. B2) 19.Wh6! Not only disturbing the coordination of the black pieces but also preventing (kingside!) castling.

224

1 2. 0-0

If 1 9 . . . l"lg8?!, White will continue with 20.l"lab l ! (20.l"lae 1 ?! We700 transposes to Ehl vest - Van Wely, above) 20 . . . mrxc3

Winkler, corr. 20 1 2, as White will not b e able to break through despite his extra pawn.

20 ... 'it>e7 Allowing the coordination of the black rooks. The position is double-edged as the black king is optimally placed for an ending, but this has yet to be reached.

20.ih3 Many correspondence games have continued with the less committal 20.ie2, which seems to pose no great danger for Black. A typical example is: 20 . . . �eS 2 1 .g3 (2 1 .l"lab l �f4!? was agreed drawn at this point in Gil - Starke, corr. 20 1 0 , and indeed the position i s balanced.) 2 1 . . .We7 22.l"lae l l"lac8 23.c4 f4 24.id3 fS 25 .ie2 l"lb8 26.Wh l l"lb2 27.g4!?

� � <� �� .. %% �%;'

� : f.� �-�·-16 !'. r < · � � ,, . . � � 8tii i � 45 �•8•.t. •8� � �� 3 %"' � ��"""� ��-0 8 �-" � ��1�-0J £ 8

Yl, ,

27 . . . Wd8!! 28.gxfS �xf5 29.�g7 �e5 30.�a7 e3! 3 Ltg4 'll f8! 32.mrxa6 (32.ih3 l"lg8 33.�£7 �e4t 34.f3 �g6 3 5 .�xf4 e2 36.�h4t WgS 37.�xgSt l"lxgS 38.8:£2 l"leS+) 32 . . . l"lg8 33.Wc8t We7 34.if3 e2 35 .E:gl l"lxgl t 36.Wxgl E:xa2 37.Wg2 'll g6 38 .mrg4 Wf6 39.fi'.xe2 fi:xe2 40.ixe2 We4t 4 Lif3 WfS 42.WxfSt Yi-Y2 Nightingale -

23 . . . WcS! 24.E:fxf3 24.h4?! is hardly anything co be feared in view of 24 . . . E:ae8 25 .fi:fxf3 E:xe3 26.WgSt Wg7 27.Wxe3 Wxe3t 28.fi'.xe3 'll xh4+ with the better ending for Black.

225

Chapter 1 8 - 1 4. l2i xb5

24 . . . ElheS 25.©fl 25.©hl Elxe3 26.Elxe3 \Wd4 27.c3 \Wf4 28.Wxf4 l.ll xf4= results in equality, although it is White who has to be more careful. 25 . . . Elxe3 26.Elxe3 26.Wxe3 Wxe3 27.Elxe3 a5+ 26 . . . a5! 27.a4 l'lbS 28.l'lf3 8:b4 29.g3 Wd4+ le seems that only White can be worse here.

21. aS A refined move, removing the pawn from any potential attack while preparing its own attack on the bishop by . . . a4. .•

22 ..ia4!? le seems prudent co preserve some mobility for the bishop. 22.a4 Elhg8! Black has a fine game as the following lines illustrate: 23.©h l A move designed co prepare f2-f3. The direct 23.f3 achieves nothing after 23 . . . l.ll e5!. For example: 24.\Wf4 (24.©h l exf3 25.gxf3 Elg6!? provides Black with excellent attacking chances against the white king.) 24 . . . exf3 25.Wxf3 Wxf3 26.Elxf3 ©f6 27.Elh3 Elae8? With a fine ending for Black. Black does best co seek a queen swap by:

Reaching complete equality, thanks to the tremendous placement of his pieces.

22 J:ghgS! Now that f2-f3 is unavailable, Black gains time to improve che position of chis rook. .•

23.@hl 23.f3?? is a colossal blunder: 23 ... Wd4t-+ 23 .. J�ab8!? The other rook is activated on an open file. The basic idea is to harass the a4-bishop, but also sometimes to invade on b2. 24.a3!? A nuance. 24.f3 Elb4! Leading to a picturesque draw after some complications: 25 . .ic6!? 25 ..ib3 a4 26.a3 Eld4 27.fxe4 (27.Ele3? \Wd2!-+; 27.Wg5t ©f8 28.fxe4 axb3= just transposes) 27 . . . axb3 28.\Wg5 t ©f8 29.exf5 tll e5 30.Wdst ©g7 3 1 .Wg5t ©f8= leads to a draw by perpetual check.

23 . . . Wf6! 24.f3 l.ll h4 25.\Wxf6t ©xf6 26.fxe4 l'hg2 27.Elxf5 t l.ll xf5 28.©xg2 ElgSt 29.©h3 29.©f2 lll h4� 29 . . . tll d4 30.Elfl t ©e5 3 1 .Elxf7 ©xe4=

25 . . . Wxc2! 26.fxe4! ? 26.Wg5t f6 27.\Wxf5 Wxg2t! 28.©xg2 lll h4t 29.©h3 l.ll xf5 30.Elxe4t l:!xe4 3 1 .fxe4 tll d4= 26 . . . l.ll e5 27.\Wh4t 27.g3 l'lb2 27 . . . f6! 28 .Wxh?t 28.l'lf2 Elxe4!= 28 ... ©fs 29.l::l g l tll g4 30.h3 l.ll f2t 3 1 .©h2 Wc3!

226

1 2. 0-0

32.\Wh6t Ei:g7 33.'!Wf4 tll g4t! 34.©h l Ei:h7!! 3 5 .Ei:gfl 35 .\Wxd6t ©g7 36.\We?t ©g8=

� � � � � � � � �' /, 6 -.,t �� 1 � � ... ��;, ;, 5 � �� ,,,,,Z��V, - �% �

��'/, 4 ! 1 � � � ,.�.�.!i .

( ''i �

,, ,,

i� ��:��

�� l� w

�

,,,,,;,� � � � � 3� � �� 3)'%��''.0. ,,, ,%� 2 �� 8 �� . 8.

, ,

Z'"" � �• ·, ,;• · �� · �� r•"""� ,,,,Y,� 4: ��;,� f��,, , 8

35 . . . Ei:xh3t!! 36.gxh3 \Wxh3t 37.©gl E1b2!= A brilliant final resource, and White must take a draw by perpetual check.

28 . . . l'!d8! 29.l"lb7 \Wc3 30.l'!fb l Cll g 8! 30 . . . Cll xc6? 3 1 .dxc6 \Wxc6 32.\Wf6 l"i:c8 33 .Ei:b8± leaves the black king horribly exposed. 3 1 .\Wf4 3 1 .\We3?! \Wxe3 32.fxe3 tll f6 33.h3 Ei:g3+ 3 1 . . .l'!g6! 32.\Wxf5 Cll f6 33.h4! h500 Black's position is solid. 34.g3 ©g7 35 .Ei:e7 35.Ei:xf7t ©xf7 36.Ei:b?t ©f8 37.\Wxg6 \Wf3t= leads to a perpetual. 35 . . . l'!f8 36.Ei:bb7 \Wxc2 37.f!:a7 \Wd2= The status quo seems unbreakable.

26 ...Wi'c3! It is thanks to this move that Black can maintain equality. It turns out that Black can sacrifice both pawns to bring his king to safety and make the most out of his passed a-pawn.

24 ...Wxa3! 24 . . . \Wd4!? may be sufficient too, for instance 25 .\Wg5t \Wf6 26.'!Wd2 Cll e 5 27.f3 exf3 28.Ei:xf3 ©f8 29.Ei:f4 \Wh6 30.\Wd4 Ei:c8 3 1 .Ei:xe5 dxe5 32.\Wxe5 Ei:g4 33.'!Wh8t Y2-Y2 Pessoa - Neto, corr. 20 1 0. 25.Wg5t ©ffi 26 .id7!? Attacking Black's weak pawn cluster. Another option is: 26.i.c6 Cll e7 27.'!Wh6t l"lg7 28.l"lb l !? 28.Ei:e3?! \Wc5 29.l'!g3 Cll g6+ 28.f3 ©g8 29.fxe4 \Wc5= •

27.'!Wxf-'5 27.ixf5 Cll e7! forces the queens off: 28 .\Wh6t (28.\Wh5 \We5 ! 29.\Wh6t is the same) 28 . . .\Wg7 29.\Wxg?t ©xg7 30.ixe4 l'!gc8�

227

Chapter 1 8 - 1 4.tt:Jxb5

The excellent placement of his pieces, in conjunction with the strong passed a-pawn, offers Black full compensation for the missing pawn. In the case of 3 1 .ixh7, as suggested by the computer, I like 3 l . . .ctJxd5!? and the knight will land on c3 .

27 ... iig? The black king is safe now.

28.1Mfxe4 gb4 29.1Mfe2 ggb8ilii The forthcoming push of the a-pawn looks extremely dangerous for White.

Conclusion In this chapter we started our examination of the main theoretical path after 9 .ixf6 gxf6 1 0.ctJd5 f5 l l .id3 ie6, which is none other than the natural 1 2.0-0. In spite of being a natural continuation, it has the obvious disadvantage of allowing l2 . . . ixd5!? 1 3.exd5 ctJ e7, when Black manages to fill the hole on d5 with a white pawn, albeit at some cost in time. There has been a heated discussion, especially in correspondence chess, as to whether White can profit from the temporarily constricted position of the black king to win a pawn here by 1 4.lLixb5, without allowing too much counterplay. As the analysis included in this chapter shows, this is a vain hope, as Black gains too much time for his development and powerful prospects on the dark squares. After 14 . . . ig7 1 5 .ctJ c3 e4 neither 1 6 .ie2 0-0! 1 7.�d2 lLig6 nor 1 6.ic4 lLi g6! l 7.�h5!? ixc3! 1 8 .bxc3 �f6 is in any way superior for White, and I would rate Black's practical chances as preferable in over-the-board play. Especially in the latter case, the positional elements are heavily in Black's favour in view of his better minor piece and control of the e5-square, and White has co play dynamically and incisively just to maintain the balance. Summing up, I cannot see any serious problems for Black in this variation.

12 .0-0 14.ihS Variation Index 1 .e4 c5 2.lt:Jf3 lt:J c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lt:Jxd4 lt:J f6 5.lt:J c3 e5 6.lt:J dbS d6 7.i.gS a6 8.lt:J a3 bS 9.i.xf6 gxf6 10.lt:JdS f5 1 1 .i.d3 i.e6 12.0-0 i.xd5 1 3.exd5 lt:J e7 1 4.WfhS e4 1 5.i.e2 i.g7 1 6.c3 0-0! 17. lLi c2 17 ... �e8!? 230 23 1

A) 1 8.�adl B) 1 8.f3!?

A) after 2 1 . tt:l b4

B ) after 30.a3

B) after 23.@h ! !

2 1 . . .tll e5

30 . . . Wxa3!

229

Chapter 1 9 - 1 4 .Wi'h5

1 .e4 c5 2.tlif3 tli c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tlixd4 tlif6 s.tlic3 e5 6.tlidb5 d6 7.i.g5 a6 8.tlia3 b5 9.�xf6 gxf6 10.tlids f5 1 1 .i.d3 i.e6 12.0-0 i.xd5 1 3.exdS tli e7 14.'l&hS A logical move. The white queen occupies h5, where she can increase the pressure on f5 with the aim of provoking . . . e4. Once the black pawn reaches e4, White will undermine the f5- and e4-duo by playing f2-f3. The idea is to induce further weaknesses while opening up lines for the pieces. 14... e4 It makes sense to advance immediately, as the white bishop looks less conveniently placed on e2 than it would be on the b l -h7 diagonal. 15.i.e2 i.g7 1 6.c3 0-0! Castling into safety before undertaking any action.

White's most testing replies are A) 18,gadl and B) 18.f3!?. 1 8.f4?! allows the tactical shot 18 ... b4!. One game continued: l 9.tlixb4 (l 9.cxb4?! Elc8+) 1 9 . . . '1Wb6t 20.iih l a5 2 1 .ttlc6 (2 1 .tli c2?! '1Wxb2+) 2 l . . .'1Wxb2 22.Elab 1

8 :i �� " �It ;a1:- -i f� �-�� i � �� -�r� r� �iV 5 ,� . ,?,� � ��,�� 3 � � . ��. %�� -.. . ?, � �� r� ttJ� 1rr£

22 . . . '1Wxa2! Creating a strong outside passed pawn is the key to obtaining winning chances. (22 . . . '1Wxc3 23.tt:lxe?t :B:xe7 24.'1Wxf5= is just equal.) After 23.:B:b7 iif8! 24.c4 a4! Black was better and went on to win in Rensch - Shabalov, Connecticut 2007. Another move is l 8.tt:le3, but it rather falls in with Black's plans. 1 8 .. .f4 1 9. ttl f5 tt:lg6!? gives good attacking chances, while 1 9 . . . tt:lxf5 20.'1Wxf5 '1Wf6 2 1 .'1Wxf6 ixf6= is a level ending.

17 .. ,ge8!? I prefer this to the more popular alternatives 1 7 .. .:1k8 and l 7 .. .f4. It is positionally well founded as it already threatens to capture on d5 and follow up with . . . Ele5 .The only disadvantage of the move is that it deserts control of f7, but Black is able to cope with this nuisance in a satisfactory manner.

1 8.Elfd l is an attempt to improve White's chances in the ending by maintaining the rook on a l . After 1 8 . . . tt:l g6!, however, it is obvious that White is missing the move f2-f4, and is thus obliged to accept the pawn sacrifice: 1 9 .'1Wxf5 Ele5 20.'1Wg4 (Or 20.'1Wh3 tt:l f4 2 1 .'1We3 i.h6! and Black has a dangerous attack, for example: 22.i.fl Elh5!� 23.'IWe l ?? '1Wh4 24.h3 tt:lxh3t! 25.gxh3 iih8-+) 20 ... h5!? 2 1 .'1Wh3 tlif4 22.1!tefe3 i.h6! 23.ifl h4! 24.iih l W/f6 25 .1!tefd4 1!tefg6! 26.Ele l (26.tt:le3 iih7�) 26 . . . Elae8 27.ttl e3 h3! 28.g3 ttl d3 29.i.xd3 exd3 30.iigl ig7 3 1 .1!tefh4 if6 32.W/xh3 ig5!+ Black eventually triumphed in Boeken - Betker, corr. 20 1 2 .

230

1 2 . 0-0

A) 1 8.gadl

l 9 . . . .ixd4! 20.l"lxd4 C/J g6 With excellent attacking chances for Black. The queen, rook and knight coordinate brilliantly here.

19 ... lll g6 Black may consider the interesting 1 9 . . . iWa5!? 20.l2Jb4 CUg6 2 1 .1Mlg4 l"lf8!? if he wants to play with che queens on. 20.°IWxdS gexd8 2 1 .lll b4 2 1 .l"lfe l l"le8 22.a3 (22.a4?! bxa4 23.l"lal l"lab8+; 22.l"la l ! ?=) 22 ... f5 23.l"lal (23 .C/Jb4!? if6 24.C/Jc6 'i!7g7=) 23 . . . CUe5 24.a4 bxa4 25 .l"leb l f3 26.gxf3 a

1 8 ... f4!? Black is not afraid to enter an ending when the queen's rook has gone to d l . 19.°!WgS White hopes to steer the game towards an advantageous ending, bur this will not be the case. 1 9.f3?! iWb6t! 20.@h l e3 2 1 .g3 (2 1 .°1Wg5 C/Jg6) 2 1 . . .CU g6t isn't particularly good for White in view of the strange placement of his queen. 1 9. C/J b4 iWb6! 20.°1Wg5 a5! 2 1 .CUc6 C/Jxc6 22.dxc6 l"le5! 23.Wxf4 '1Wxc6= allows Black to harmoniously coordinate his position with an approximately equal game. 1 9.C/Jd4 should, of course, be met by:

� .i �� i �i( 6 Ta��-�� %· ·· 4 �in?,;,••�.' ,1· 'a� �� 5

3 � � � ?,;, � 2 ��-, � � � a

ef� b

.. . .%�. . e

26 . . . exf3 27 . .ifl 'it>h8 28.l2Jd4 l"lg8 29.C/Jxf5 if6t 30.@h l C/Jg4 3 1 .'it>gl ids 32.l"lxa4 ib6 33.C/Jd4 l"laf8 left Black with an initiative in Kraft - Betker, corr. 20 1 2 .

Chapter 1 9 - 1 4 ."Mfh5

23 1

Also good is 2 1 . . .f5 22.f3 Wh8!, followed by . . . Elg8, Glaser - Dorer, corr. 20 1 1 .

22.E:fel f5+! Black is excellently placed to prevent any queenside aggression by White and consequently stands at least equal. B) 18.f3!? Considered by the computers, quite rightly, as White's first choice.

18 ... b4!? This extravagant move is most thematic and is in true Sveshnikov style. 19.fx:e4 White has nothing better. 1 9.tlixb4 iWb6t 20.Wh l a5 2 1 .tlic6 tlixd5

8 ! � �1 �t � -·�· 7- • � e��-,,,, Y, � �� ,, ��

5 J,, �� , , %�, ;,·�•l•iil

�� ,� � t�ef ' ' ". !J �' j,, . !J t� �

d , ;,� � i-� a

22.tlid4 tli f4 23 .iWg5 (23.�xf5 ? tlixe2 24.tlixe2 iWxb2+) 23 . . . tli e6 24.tlixe6 (24.iWxf5 tlixd4 25.cxd4 e300) 24 . . . fxe6 25.fxe4 fxe4= does not look at all dangerous for Black.

19 ... bxc3 20.bxc3 Wi'aS! The most flexible and, strictly speaking, only move. It attacks c3 and leaves open the c-file for rhe rooks. 20 . . . Elc8? 2 1 .tlid4! Elxc3 22.tlixf5 tlixf5 23.�xf5 iWe7 24 . .ih5 Elf8 25 .Elab l ± favours White.

2 1 .Elf3 Elac8! 22.exf5 (22.Elh3? Elxc3!-+) 22 . . . tlixd5 23 . .id3 (23.f6 �b6t 24.Wh l tlixf6+) 23 . . . Elxc3 24.f6 �b6t 25.Wh l tlixf6+ is better for Black.

2 1 . ..Wfxc3 22 ..id3 E:ab8!? Leaving the a-pawn to its fate, but Black needs to urgently find some play. 23.©hl ! 23.1'!.f3 tlig6!? 24.exf5 tli e 5 25 .Elh3 tlixd3 26.iWxh?t Wf8 27.f6 .ixf6 28 .iWxd3 iWxd3 29.Elhxd3 l!b200 does not look bad for Black. The same can be said about 23.exf5 tlixd5+!, e.g. 24.Elf3 tlif6 25 .iWh4 Elb2 and the continuing threats do not let White attack in peace.

232

1 2 . 0-0

23 ... f4! The only move, denying White most of his attacking resources. However, the pressure against e4 has now been relaxed. 24.lll el! This is the only chance for White to gain an edge. Other tries are not so clear: 24.E1xf4 lll g 6! 25.mfl (The exchange sacrifice 25.m3!? lll e5 26.lll e 3!? lll xf3 27.gxf3 should be answered by 27 . . . '1We5 ! 28.lll f5 'it>h8! 29.'1Wh4 [29.'1Wxf7 E1g8] 29 . . . .if6! 30.'1Wh6 E1g8 3 l .lll xd6!? E1g7 and Black beats off the attack.) 25 ... E1b2 26.lll e 1 E1xa2=

26 . .ixa6 (26.Elde l '1Wg5 27 . .ixa6 lll g6!? 28.Elxe8t Elxe8 29.'1Wh3 '1Wxd5= should be okay for Black with a little bit of care.) 26 . . . lll xd5 27.'1Wd3 lll c3 28.'1Wxd6t (28.Elde l '1Wf6=) 28 . . . '1Wxd6 29.Elxd6 Elb2!= The draw is near.

24 ... lll g6 The knight is doing an excellent defensive job, and is probably Black's best piece. 25.lll O .if6! 26.i.xa6 ¥Na3! 26 . . . l'!b2 27.a4± 8

6 5

4 3

Or 24.e5!? '1Wxe5 25 .'1Wxh7t 'it>f800, when there is no evident follow-up to White's attack:

27.i.c4! At first White seems to have a slight plus in view of his potentially strong passed a-pawn. However, this does not turn out to be the case. 27 ... �b4 28.lll d2 28.'1Wf5 'it>g7= or 28.Elcl 'it>g7=. 28 ....ic3 The bishop is unstable on c4. For example: 29.¥Nh3 29.lll b l '1Wa5! 30.i.d3 (30.i.b3 Elbxe4) 30 . . . if6 3 l .a3 E!:b2 may even be worse for White. 29 ... W/b2 30.a3 ¥Nxa3! 3 1 .lll b l 3 l . El (3 \1!/b2 32.E!:xc3 \1!/xd2!+

233

Chapter 1 9 - 1 4 .\Wh5

Conclusion

6 5

4 3

2 a

3 1 . .. 1M'b2 32.1M'xc3 1M'xc3 33.tlixc3 �xc4 34.tlib5 �d8 35.tlid4 g7= Or 35 . . . h5!?= and the game should end in a draw. As a conclusion it must be said that this line is an interesting shot for White, and that Black's path to equality is relatively narrow.

Continuing our examination of 9.ixf6 gxf6 1 0.tlid5 f5 l l .�d3 �e6 1 2.0-0 �xd5 1 3.exd5 liJ e7, we came to realize that the once fashionable 1 4.�h5 has nowadays run out of steam. The reason lies in 14 . . . e4 1 5 .ie2 ig7 1 6.c3 0-0! 1 7.liJc2 l'!e8!?, when Black is ready to attack on the kingside, sometimes even by sacrificing his front f-pawn by . . . liJ e7-g6. In my view, White's best option is 1 8.f3!?, even though Black is thoroughly prepared to cope with this attempted assault on his centre. Black should react incisively by 1 8 . . . b4!?, making the most out of his strong fianchettoed bishop. After the logical l 9.fxe4 bxc3 20.bxc3 �a5! Black not only attacks the newly created weakness, but also prepares to bring the queen to the defence of his kingside by placing it on the long dark diagonal. Best play continues 2 1 .l'!ad l ! 1Mfxc3 22.id3 :gab8!? 23.h l ! f4!, when Black fends off the attack and maintains the equilibrium by utilizing his control over the dark squares. Summing up, this is definitely not a line to be feared, as the bishop is rather passive on e2 and White's vulnerable queenside provides Black with a clear target for counterplay with 1 8 . . . b4!?. I may sound boring when saying that the reader is advised to study carefully the details of this line, as there are some nuances that are definitely worth memorizing, but such is the essence of chess today and unfortunately we cannot change it. On the other hand, the ideas are rather clear cut and they will require less effort from the reader than many of the chapters so far.

12.0-0 14.c4 Variation Index 1 .e4 c5 2.lll f3 lll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lll xd4 lll f6 5.lll c3 e5 6.lll db5 d6 7.�g5 a6 8.lll a3 b5 9.�xf6 gxf6 1 0.lll d5 fS 1 1 .�d3 i.e6 12.0-0 �xd5 1 3.exd5 lll e7 14.c4 14 ...�g7!?

A) 1 5 .°1Wd2 B) 1 5.�b l e4! 1 6.�e2 bxc4 17.lll xc4 0-0 B l ) 1 8.f4?! B2) 1 8.°1Wd2 B3) 1 8.f3!?

A) after 22.1Wc2!

22 . . . 1Wf6!

B2)

note to

20.f4

24 . . . �h6!!

235 238 239 240 240

B3) after 20.'it>h l ! ?

Chapter 20

1 .e4 cS 2.lll f3 t!ll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.t!ll xd4 t!ll f6 S.lll c3 eS 6.t!ll dbS d6 7.igS a6 8.t!ll a3 bS 9.ixf6 gxf6 10.t!ll dS f5 1 1 .id3 ie6 12.0-0 ixdS 13.exdS t!ll e7 14.c4 White intends to break up Black's queenside pawns to gain an advantage, but Black obtains considerable counterplay on the other flank.

235

1 4.c4

iWf6 26.Cll xd4 Cll d5 27.id3 l"lae8+ is at least slightly better for Black, as he has beaten off the attack and mobilized all his forces.

14 ...ig7!i' This keeps more options open for Black compared to an immediate . . . e4. White should choose between A) 15.�d2 and B) 15.l"lbl . 1 5 .°&b3!? e4 1 6.ie2 b4! 1 7.'&xb4 l"lb8 transposes to variaton A. 1 5 .Cll c2?! is another illogical move.

1 7 . . . 0-0!? 17 . . . ixa l 1 8.iWxal 0-0 l 9.Wd4� is not clear. 1 8.°&b3!? 1 8 .Cll c4 ixa l 1 9.'&xa l Cll xd5 transposes to 1 7.Cll c4 above. 1 8 . . . i.xa l 1 9.l"lxa l f4! 20.l"lb l 20.b7 l"lb8 2 1 .ixa6 '&as+ 20 . . . Cll f5 2 1 .b7 l"lb8 22.i.xa6 22.°&h3 '&g5 22 . . . °&a5 22 . . . °&g5 !? may be even stronger. 23 .ifl l"lfe8 24.'&h3 Cll g7 25.Cll c4 '&xa2 26.l"lb2 '&al t White seems to be in trouble, despite his proud pawn on b7, as his pieces lack coordination.

A) 15.�d2 1 5 .cxb5?! An unsuccessful exchange sacrifice. 1 5 . . . e4 1 6.ie2 ixb2 Relatively best is: l 7.b6!? Trying to preserve a strong passed b-pawn. Instead, 1 7.bxa6 0-0+ is bad for White. l 7.Cll c4 ixa l 1 8.'&xal 0-0 l 9.b6 Cll x d5 20.l"ld l Cll f4! 2 1 .ifl d5! (2 1 . . .iWg5?! 22.g3 d5 23.Cll e5t and Black was already into trouble in Lukinov - Chernenko, St Petersburg 2008) 22.Cll e3 '&xb6 23.Cll xf5 d4! 24.'&c l e3 25.fxe3

Often considered as the main try, but Black's status in this line seems to be high at the moment.

1 5 ... e4 1 6 ..ie2 The dynamic reply. 1 6 ... b4! Black diverts the white queen away from f4, and will obtain sufficient pressure for the temporary loss of a pawn by pressurizing b2. 17.Wi'xb4 Black now has two options:

236

1 2. 0-0

17 E:bs This direct move, piling up on the vulnerable b2-spot immediately, has been the choice of the super-GMs. •••

However, the alternative 17 . . . 0-0!?, played against me by Sulava, may not be bad either. Black keeps open the option of . . . E!b8 and is ready tO attack on the kingside. All the traditional manoeuvres are available to him (such as . . . tli g6, . . . ie5, and . . . ©h8) and may even be combined with the brutal . . . f5-f4-f3 advance. I analysed this in detail and found that Black can maintain the balance, but space is limited and one good option is enough.

1 8.1M'a4t 'it>IB! Black forfeits the right tO castle but this is not so important here. The king can be redeployed to g7 later, allowing the black rooks t0 get connected. White's pieces are not well placed to take advantage of Black's uncastled situation, and he has tO solve the problem of the pressure on b2.

1 9.b4? i.xa l 20.E!xal 'll g6+ is clearly a bad sacrifice. In addition to his material advantage Black will soon have a raging attack. 1 9 .c5 is understandable for White - opening files and freeing the c4-square. However, Black is doing fine. 19 . . . tlixd5 20.ic4 dxc5 (20 . . . tlif4!?) 2 1 .l':l:ad l id4. Now White should bail our to an equal major piece position by: 22 . .ixd5 (22.'ll c2?! 'll b6 23.iMfxa6 ©g7 24.b4 iM!f6 25.bxc5 ixc5 26.ib3 f4 27.iMfa5 E!bc8+ was already suspect for White in Kosteniuk - Mikhalevski, Biel 2002.) 22 . . .iMfxd5 23.tt:lc2 ©g7 24.tt:lxd4 cxd4 25.E!xd4 iMfe5=

19 .txb2 The clearest and most principled solution, opening the g-file and preparing (according to circumstance) to connect the rooks by placing the king on g7. •••

20.ll'lc2 This maintains the knight, which sets its sights on both b4 and e3 (if . . . tli g6 is played) . 20.E!fd l tli g6 2 1 .c5?! should be answered by:

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

19.E:ab l This i s the most normal reaction, unpinning and threatening b2-b4. Black is now forced tO take on b2. 1 9.'ll c2 is a transposition to continuation after 1 9 . . . ixb2! 20.E!ab L t) 20.E!ab 1 .

our main ( 1 9 . . . E!xb2

2 1 . . .dxc5! 22.'ll c4 id4 23.E!xb8 (23 .iMfc6 E!c8!+) 23 . . . iMfxbS 24.iMf d7 f4! 25.d6 ©g7 26.iWf5 E!e8+ 20.iM!c2 ie5! 2 1 .iWd2!? (2 1 .�xb8 iMfxb8 22.E!b l iM!c8+) 2 1 . . .h6!00 doesn't look dangerous for Black either. It should be noted though that 2 1 . . .E!g8?! 22.E!xb8 iMfxb8 23.E!b l iMfc7 24.iM!h6t E!g7 25 .iMfe3!t looks a bit better for White in view of the pending invasion on b6.

Chapter 20

20 ... tll g6 ! Played againsr me by Shirov. 20 . . . ©g? (keeping f5 protected in anticipation of tll e3) and 20 .. .l::1 g8!? are both viable tries too, but again one good option is enough. 2 1 .tll e3 This logical move was supposed to be my improvement over the game Leko - Kramnik below.

1 4.c4

237

2 1 . . .Ei:g8? is also bad in view of 22.ll:lfc2! l2J f4 (22 . . . t2Jh4 23.g3) 23.g3!± and Black's position is loose.

22.'!Wc2! I had considered this move to give White an edge, but Shirov proves otherwise.

2 1 .tll b4 �f6 22.tll c6 22.t2Jxa6!? 1'k8 23 .�b3 id4 (23 . . . ie5 !? 24.ttJbs ©g7�) 24.ttJbs l2Je5 25 .gfd l ic5 26.t2Ja6 ggs� looks like sufficient pressure in return for a pawn.

s �� E , , ,Y,� �� " ·"� ""

6 '�'�� -"'LJ�-� ��·� ·· �,,�

w.� � " '"�� : 1��!if� � � � � 3 ��-0 �� -0 ��-0 t!:i • � .,tw� t3J·kfr�"" : · � �-:�

...

22 . . J1e8! 23.f4 Otherwise Black can choose between . . . f4 or . . . t2Jf4. 23 ... id4t 24.©h l ©g7 25 .ih5 ic5 The position is approximately balanced and was agreed drawn here in Leko - Kramnik, Linares 2003. The rruth is that the g6-knight is quite passive, but the passed e-pawn and strong c5-bishop offer Black j ust about enough compensation in return.

2 1 . .. f4! It is thanks to this move that Black manages to equalize. 2 1 . . .ll:lfg5 ? is met simply by: 22.ll:lfc2 f4 23.gxb2 Ei:xb2 24.ll:lfxb2 fxe3 25.fxe3 ll:lfxe3t 26.©h l ll:lfc5 27.ll:lff6+-

22 ...'!Wf6! With this pawn sacrifice Black solves all his problems. Other moves are inadequate: 22 . . . bce3? is clearly bad in view of: 23.Ei:xb2 exf2t 24.Ei:xf2 E:xb2 25 .�xb2± White's heavy artillery dominates the board. 22 . . . ie5? is also questionable. My main line continues 23.Ei:xb8! �xb8 24.Ei:b l ! �d8 25.l2Jf5 f3

238

1 2 . 0-0

23 . .!Ddl The bishop on b2 is doomed, but the pawn push to f3 creates enough counterplay to hold the balance.

B) 1 5.:Sb l This looks like the most economical way of defending the b2-pawn.

23 ... f3! 24J:hb2 24.�xf3!? exf3 25.!'!xb2 (25.g3?! iig7 26.!!xb2 !'!xb2 27.�xb2 [27.li:Jxb2 �e8!�] 27 . . . �xb2 28.li:Jxb2 li:Je5�) 25 .. J'hb2 26.�xb2 iig7 27.�xf6t iixf6 28.li:Je3 �b8! 29.gxf3 li:J f4� would have allowed Black good compensation, but is what I should have played to prolong the fight. After the game continuation the draw is trivial. 24 :Sxb2 25.Wfxb2 Wfxb2 26.c!Dxb2 fxe2 27.:Sel •••

16.�e2 bxc4 Also possible is: 1 6 . . . 0-0 l 7.�d2 ( l 7.cxb5 axb5 1 8 .�xbS �b6 1 9.�d2 W/c5 20.�c6 li:Jxc6 2 l .dxc6 �xc6 was a tiny bit better for Black in Shomoev - Edouard, Moscow 20 1 1 .) l 7 . . . li:J g6 1 8 .cxb5

� �, ,,% ��, v,�··7;,; � � : !��it� � · � �� : �1�1�� 3 'flj '·8· ·''ef�{g;,r� �'.<�.t� " "' · ��·� �8 �·'18· ·� •:-" ·"·:� 8

29 ... c\Df4!? 29 . . . exf3 30.gxf3 li:Jf4 3 l .�d2± 30.:Sxe4 30.�c2? e3-+ 30 ... :Sxb2 3 1 .:Sxf4 :Sxa2 32.:Sg4t The extra pawn is of no significance, so a draw was agreed in Kocronias - Shirov, Calvia (ol) 2004.

.i. �

•••

1 8 . . .f4! 1 9.iih l axb5 20.�xbS �h4 2 1 .�e2 f3 22.gxf3 �e5 23.f4 �xf4 24.f3 f5 25.li:Jc4 �a7! 26.b4 !'!g7 27.fxe4 fxe4 28.l:'lgl e3�, Saenko Sukhodolsky, corr. 20 1 0.

17.c\Dxc4

Chapter 20

1 7.Wa4t offers nothing special here, for example 17 . . . Wd7 1 8.Wxd7t �xd7 1 9 .tll xc4 tll xd5! 20.gfd l �e6 2 1 .tll xd6 ghd8! 22.tll b7 !!dc8 23.tll a 5 tll b6= and Black is absolutely fine.

239

1 4.c4

Bl) 1 8.f4?! This doesn't seem to meet the requirements of the position.

18 ... :!:%b8 19.'ktihl l 9.Wd2?! allowed Black some brilliant tactics in the game Stefansson - Krasenkow, Gausdal 1 99 1 . After 1 9 . . . :t'&b5! 20.tll e3 Wb6!! even the best answer 2 1 .�xb5 would have not saved White from trouble, for example:

17 ... 0-0

We will now look at White's attempts to prevent the .. .f4 push: Bl) 1 8.f4?!, B2) 1 8.�d.2 and B3) 18.f3!?. 1 8.b4 has the two-fold purpose of advancing White's queenside pawns and allowing the rook to join the defence via b3. A logical continuation is: 1 8 .. .f4 1 9.Wd2 tll g6 20.gb3 Wf6 2 1 .tll a5 (2 1 .:t'&h3 :t'&fe8 22.�h l as in Fleischanderl H. Ivanov, corr. 2007, is similar.) 2 1 . . .:t'&fe8 22.�h l This was Copar - Mason, corr. 2007.

l 9.a4?! has also its defects due to l 9 . . . Wc7!+.

1 2. 0-0

240

20 ... E:b3! 2 1 .Whl 'Wb8! 22.a5 W/b4! 23.°Wxb4 E:xb4 24.tll xd6 E:d8 24 . . . tll e 7! ?oo 82) 1 8.°Wd2 A better try, refraining from the weakening f2-f4.

25.tl\xf5 �xd5 26.g4 .ixb2 27.E:fdl �xdl t 28.E:xdl

8 7 6

4 3 2 1

18 ... E:b8! 19.a4 As in Shomoev - Grebionkin, Internet 2004.

28 ... h5! 29.gxh5 tll xf4 30 ..ixa6 E:a4 3 1 ..ib7 E:xa5 32 ..ixe4= The result should of course be a draw.

1 9.b4 Elb5 20.tll e3 f4 2 1 .ixb5 fxe3 22.'1Wxe3 axb5 23.\Wxe4 tll g6? reaches an unclear position.

83) 1 8.f3!?

1 9 ... tll g6! 20.f4 Permitting an equalizing intrusion.

Again this is associated with preventing . . . f4. A critical moment has arrived, and Black's next move is very instructive:

20.b4 f4! 2 1 .Elfe l (2 1 .b5 \Wh4�) 2 1 . . .f3! 22.gxf3 exf3 23.ixf3 \Wh4 24.Ele4

18 ... a5!

Chapter 20

Intending . . . l"i:a8-c8-c5 . This is the only move to equalize here. 1 8 . . . l"i:bS?! is the standard way of hitting d5, buc it does not work in chis particular situation. After 1 9 .©h l l"i:b5 20.iWc2! Black was under pressure in Efimenko - Moiseenko, Zlatibor 2006.

24 1

1 4 .c4

20 ... Wi'cS! 2 1 .Wi'c2 tt'lxd5 22.fxe4 fxe4 23.Wi'xe4 23.l"i:f5!? does not yield anything in view of: 23 . . . tt'l e3! 24.l"i:xc5 tt'lxc2 25.tt'lxd6 tt'ld4 26 . .ic4 e3! 27.l"i:e 1 (White should probably settle for 27.tt'lxf7 e2= e.g. 28.l"i:c7 l"i:ab8.) 27 . . . e2 28.�xe2

19.a3!? Afcer 1 9 .iWd2 Black continues as planned: 1 9 . . . l"i:c8 20.fxe4 fxe4 2 1 .tt'lxa5 l"i:c5!00 The engines suggest 1 9 .iWe l !?, but after: 19 . . . l"i:c8! 20.Wg3 tt'lg6! 2 1 .fxe4 (2 1 .iWxd6 exf3! 22.l"i:xf3 [22.Wxd8 .id4t! 23.©h l fxg2t 24.©xg2 l"i:fxd8 25 .d6 tt'le5=] 22 . . . iWh4!+:!) 2 1 . . .fxe4 22.©h l (22.iWxd6 iWg5+:!) 22 . . . l"i:c5 ! ? 23.l"i:bd l f5! 24.Wxd6 Wxd6 25.tt'lxd6 l"i:c2+:! Black is at lease equal.

19 ...Wi'c7! I like chis move more than 1 9 . . . a4 20.iWc2 e3 2 1 .f4 iWc7 Lahno -Tregubov, Gibralcar 2007, where I feel White may be beccer. 20.©hl!? 20.b4?! axb4 2 1 .axb4 l"i:a2t looks suspect for White.

23 ... �ae8 24.Wi'd3 24.\Wg4 f5 25.iWf3 a4! 26.l"i:bd 1 tt'le3 27.tt'lxe3 l"i:xe3= is fine for Black. 24 .!D e3 25 .!Dxe3 25.b4 iWg5!= ..•

20.\Wc2 tt'lxd5 2 l .fxe4 fxe4 22.1Wxe4 \Wc5t 23.©h l l"i:ae8 transposes to our main line.

•

1 2. 0-0

242

A fairly drawish opposite-coloured bishops ending has arisen. This is the blessing or the curse of the Sveshnikov, depending very much on who you are playing!

Conclusion

After the usual sequence 9.ixf6 gxf6 1 O.tll d 5 f5 l l .id3 ie6 1 2.0-0 ixd5 1 3.exd5 tll e 7, a most common weapon in White's quest for an advantage has been the enterprising 1 4.c4, directly attacking Black's weak queenside pawns. Black should respond with the logical and flexible 14 . . . ig7!?, when my research indicates that he enjoys excellent equalizing chances in both of the main theoretical paths available to White. The first option is 1 5 .Â°ÂŽd2 e4 1 6.ie2 b4! l 7.'Wxb4 8:b8 1 8.'Wa4t @f8!, when Black forfeits his castling privilege while temporarily losing a pawn, but the powerful activity of his pieces and awkward placement of the white ones make up fully for the inconvenience. My game against Alexei Shirov demonstrated a good way for Black to equalize, which led me to abandon this option as White. The other main line is 1 5 .!'!b l e4! 1 6.ie2 bxc4 l 7.tll xc4 0-0, at which point l 8.f3!? seems like the most principled continuation, trying to slow Black down on the kingside before continuing with queenside play. Black definitely needs to remember the reply l 8 . . . a5 !, preparing the manoeuvre . . . !'!c8-c5 in order to put d5 under pressure. Play is rich in positional content, but my analysis indicates that there is nothing special to be feared, and Black remains well within the drawing zone. In the event of 1 9 .a3!? Black does best to attack the weakness with 1 9 . . . 'W c7! 20.@h l ! ? 'Wc5! when the most logical outcome is an opposite-coloured bishop ending and an almost certain draw.

12.0-0 14.�el Variation Index 1 .e4 c5 2.lLif3 lL! c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lL!xd4 ltJf6 5 . lLi c3 e5 6.lL! db5 d6 7 ..ig5 a6 8.liJa3 b5 9 ..ixf6 gxf6 l O.liJ d5 f5 1 1 ..id3 .ie6 1 2.0-0 .ixd5 1 3.exd5 lL! e7 14.gel 14 ... .ig7

A) 1 5.:§:b l B) 1 5.c3 0-0 Bl) 16.lL!c2 B2) 1 6.�h5 e4 17 ..ifl ge8 B2 1) 18.lLic2 B22) 1 8.:§:ad l ! :§:c8! B22 1) 19.lLic2 B222) 1 9.:§:e3!?

n o r e to

Bl)

1 8 . cxb5

2 1 . . . bxc4!N+

244 246 246 247 248 250 250 25 1

note t o

1 7.a4

26 . . .f4!!

B22 1 )

n o t e to

2 1 .'ll f5 !

1 2 .0-0

244

1 .e4 c5 2.CDf3 CDc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lDxd4 CDf6 s.lDc3 e5 6.lbdb5 d6 7 ..ig5 a6 s.t/Ja3 b5 9.ixf6 gxf6 1 0.tiJ dS f5 1 1 .id3 ie6 12.0-0 ixd5 13.exdS CDe7 14.:ael This move prepares a retreat square on fl for the bishop in anticipation of . . . e4. In that case, it will be difficult for Black to play . . . f4 as the pawn on e4 will be hanging. At the same time, White hopes chat these precautions will allow him to launch his usual queenside play without concerns about his king's defence. 14....ig7 Black poses White a problem with regards to the defence of his b-pawn. A) 1 5.:abl is exclusively associated with queenside play, and will be followed by the typical advance c2-c4. On the other hand if White chooses B) 15.c3, he keeps open the option of play on both wings. A) 1 5.:abl le

cannot be said if this is better or worse than the alternative.

��

�·m �I m �aJ: • � •

7 � ��'- 3c/�wtl- - 6 ,%m � , ,�� %•% - - · ;m

s � iU8-iU u u� - �� 3 ��r �� 2 "ll: l@.o .,o:, . %�!a �r-{,,,%w!o ·i(- -- �°iVP, � � � __

.,,,,

15 ... 0-0 16.c4 1 6.Wh5 - crying co apply the same strategy as in variation B2 below - is untested here. A good reason might be 1 6 . . . e4 1 7.ifl j"\b8! ( l 7 . . . Wc8!? 1 8.c4 b4 1 9 .tt:lc2 tt:lxd5 !=) 1 8 .c4 Wa5 ! 1 9.Wg5 ( 1 9 .j"\e3? b4+) 1 9 . . . mes 20.cxb5 axb5 2 1 .j"\ed l �f8!?00 when White's pieces are clumsily placed.

However, I wouldn't claim chat Black has the advantage as his pieces are also tied up.

16 ... e4 1 6 . . . b4 1 7.tt:lc2 j"\b8 1 8.Wh5 e4 1 9.ifl bY 20.axb3 j"\xb3 is another possibility, leading to balanced play in Adzima - Vlcek, corr. 20 1 0. 17.ifl This position can be considered one of the important tabiyas of the Sveshnikov. True to style, Black now sacrifices a queenside pawn in order to accelerate his kingside offensive.

8 -

�� m

•, 7 �� ,��_ , ., 6 IfI@. I@.. I@.�]� L,l@. � /,

,, , , ,

I@.

I@.� I@. I@.� !i If� I@.� �1@.0'-' 3 ml@.l@. I@. l@.l@. l@.0° l@. 2 5

J[j�BJlJ tJJFj� l@. % � -:m°iV�� '

!'JP

____

17 ... lDg6!? Black wants to set up the usual formation with . . . ie5 , . . . Wf6(h4) and . . . �h8, offering him a standard kingside attack. In rerurn, White grabs a pawn. 1 8.cxbS It seems like White should grab the bull by the horns, despite the apparent dangers he is facing on the other wing. 1 8.Wh5 ? Wf6 1 9.cxb5 ( 1 9 .g3?! tt:le5 20.iih l , as in Marjanovic - Vuckovic, Kragujevac 2009, is simply worse for White after 20 . . . mbS+) 1 9 . . . axb5 20.ixb5 is an inferior version of accepting the pawn. After 20 . . . tt:l f4 the white queen has to retreat empty-handed to d l while Black has strengthened the position of his forces .

245

19 ll) '5 1� •••

•

Thi < h� 'h "d� cagr nf ey�. ng d3 g4 and c6, k while also prep ari n a rnummmc by m�n< of . . . iW g 5 . I feel B l ac is at lease equal, alchough ilim a« 0' her options coo. .

· che immedi. are-· 19 . . . 1"I g5 ". . Quite . P layable is . · · 200 5 . - Volo k"nm, Erm10m . 20.�d.' tll h4! Asnan

. h m, ;<ka, I also looked at 1 9 . . . '1Wh4 , coying wit

. ie5 and . . . tll e 5 . Agam the P osicion is balanc ed :ith correct play.

Black is c1 ear1y better. 2 1 . . . bxc41N+ ·

1 8 .. . axb5 19.hb5

1 9 .'1Wb3 tll h4 20. tll x b5 ie5 2 1 .l'!e3 '1Wg5

246

1 2 .0-0

2 1 . . .®h4! (2 1 . . .ixb2 22. tll c4 ig7 23 .ic6 Ela7 24.a4 tll e5 2 5 . tll x e5 ixe5=) 22.h3 tll e5 23. l"le3 'tti h 8 24.ic6 Elab8 with a strong attack for Black. 20 .ie2 allows 20 . . . f4f! .

B) 1 5.c3 It seems that White's subsequent plans after this

move are not particularly dangerous for Black.

1 5 ... 0-0

20. tll c4 Elxa2! (20 . . . tll d300 2 1 .a4!t) 2 1 . tll x e5 ixe5 22.®h5

I consider this to be the main and safest continuation.

Bl) 1 6.lll c2, though the more common move is B2) 16.°IWhS.

White can carry on his queenside play by

Bl) 16.lll c2 There is more than one satisfactory reply for Black here. A popular move in correspondence

chess has been:

22 . . . Elxb2! (22 . . .�f6 23.id7t) 23.�xf5 ®a5 24.ifl Elxb l 2 5 . Elxb l ®xd5 26.g3 was agreed drawn in Biedermann - Hauenstein, corr. 20 1 2 . 20.®b3 ®g5 ! 2 l .®g3 tll g4! offers Black excellent chances. Finally, 20.h3 'tti h 8 2 1 .Wh5 Wf600 gives Black a

choice of queenside or kingside play.

7 6 5

4 3

1 6 ... �e8

White now has a decision to make.

17.a4 It seems logical to expose Black's queenside

weaknesses without any delay.

The correspondence player Betker has tried

to hair Black's kingside play by l 7.g3, but the results have not been impressive: l 7 . . . e4! 1 8 .ifl

tll g6 1 9 .a4 bxa4 20.l"lxa4 Elb8 2 1 . tll b4 tll e5

22. tll c6 (22.l"le2 ®g5 --+ is very dangerous for White) 22 . . . tll xc6 23.dxc6 �xb2 24.Elxa6 d5! 2 5 . :ge2 Elxe2 26.ixe2

Chapter 2 1

247

1 4. :g e l

23 . . . l"i:fS! 24.ixa6 tll xd5 2 5 .'\Wxf5 tll xb4 26.'\Wxc5 dxc5 27.cxb4 cxb4 2 8 . l"lxe4 ixb2 29.'!J.xb4= This is a dead draw in spite of White's extra pawn.

19 ... i;bs 20.�c4 tll g6 20 . . . tll c8 ! ? 2 1 .l"i:xa4 tll b6 22.tll xb6 '\Wxb6=

26 . . . f4! ! 27.'IJ.a7 The players agreed a draw in Betker - Moucka, corr. 20 1 0, in view of: 27 . . . f3 28 .ib5 '\Wb6 29 .'IJ.b7 '\Wc5 30.c7 '!J.c8

3 1 .'IJ.b8 '\Wxc7 32.'IJ.xc8 t '\Wxc8 33 .'\Wxd5 '\Wxc3 34.'\Wxe4 id4=

1 7.ifl is more refined that l 7.g3, avoiding

weakening the f3-square immediately and keeping Black guessing. A logical reaction is 1 7 . . . '!J.b8 1 8 .'\Wh5 ( 1 8 .tll b4 '\Wb6=) 1 8 . . . a5

1 9 . tll e3 f4 20. tll f5 tll xf5 2 1 .'\Wxf5 '\Wf6= with

equality.

17 ... e4

B2) 1 6.'WhS e4 17.i.fl

1 7 . . . '\Wb6?! 1 8 .axb5 axb 5 Negi - Alekseev, Kirishi 200 5 , cannot be recommended, as with l 9 .'!J.xa8 '!J.xa8 20. tll b4;!; White can secure a slight

edge.

18.i.fl bxa4 19.�e3 1 9 .l"lxa4 '\Wb6 20.l"i:b4 '\Wc5 2 1 .'\Wh5 'IJ.ab8!

22.'/J.xb8 '/J.xb8 23 . tiJ b4

17 ... :!%e8

l 7 . . . '\Wc8 is a respectable alternative and may

transpose in some variations, but l 7 . . . l"le8 gives Black more flexibility and as such is my recommendation.

248

1 2 . 0-0

White now chooses which queenside piece to activate: B2 1) 1 8.tbc2 or B22) 18.l'!adl!.

B21) 18.tbc2 This is nothing special, as Black can grab the central pawn and obtain some initiative:

28 . . . E!d6 29 .1Wc4 29 .iWaS? dxc3+

29 . . . e3 30.fxe3 dxe3 3 l . ctJ d4 3 l . ctJ xe3 :Bd2= 3 l . . . ctJ e6 32.l"!xe3 tt:lxd4 3 3 . cxd4 :Bxd4=

The above note showed the principal plans for both sides, and resulted in an approximately balanced position after the complications had cleared. Of particular importance is Black's dedication to the . . . d5-d4 breakthrough, regardless of material considerations.

1 8 ... tbxdS! 19.�xf5 l'!e5

Black obtains good attacking chances due to

his powerfully centralized pieces .

20.�g4!? The white queen only has rwo squares. 20.1Wh3 tt:l f4!

20 . . . 1Wb6!? also looks quite strong, and after 2 1 .:Bad l :Bae8 22.:Bd4 :B8e6 23.i'!ed l ctJ e7 24.ctJe3 :Bg5 2 5 . tt:l d5 ixd4! ? 26.tt:lxb6 ixb6 27.ie2 d5� Black was dictating events in

20 ... hS!

Harassing the exposed enemy queen so as to

claim the g5 -square.

20 . . . f5 is also good, a typical example being: 2 1 .iWd l tt:l b6 22.iWd2 d5 2 3 . tt:l d4 iWf6 24.f4 :Bee8 25 .i'!ad l tt:l c4 26.iWf2 f1ab8 27.ixc4 dxc4 28.a4 bxa4

Dieguez Vera - Karacsony, corr. 20 1 2 . 2 1 .1Wg4 2 1 .'1We3 ih6� 2 1 . . .'1Wf6!? 22.g3 E!g5 23 .'1Wd7 d5 24.a4 24.Wh l ? tt:l g6+ 24 . . . E!dS 2 5 .'1Wb7 if8!

Heading for the c5-square.

26.axb 5 axb 5 27.�xb 5

27.:Ba6 tt:l e6 28 .ixb 5 (28 .ih3 ic5 29.:Bfl '1We5!) 28 . . . ic5 2 9 . ctJ e3 d4 30.cxd4 E!xd4�

27 . . . d4 28 .iWa6!? 28 .iWc4 E!c5! 29.iWa2 dxc3 3 0 . bxc3 ? f1d2!-+

29.l"!al :Bed8 30.:Bxa4 iMfxd4! 3 1 . cxd4 ixd4

249

Chapter 2 1 - 1 4.�e 1 32.1':le2 ixf2t 33 .©xf2 Eld6= Dzenis - Korze, corr. 2009.

2 1 .'!Wdl '1Wg5 22.a4 laae8 23.axb5 axb5 At this moment there are three continuations

for White:

24.l"i:a7 h4 2 5 .\Wc l A strange computer suggestion that shouldn't pose any problems for Black. 25 . . . tll f4 26.g3! hxg3 27.hxg3 ih6! ? A spectacular move. 27 . . . e3!? does not look bad either.

24 . .lll e3

2 8 .\Wxf4 1Wg6! 29 .\Wxf7t!? Also drawish is: 29 .1Wh4 l'!h5 30 .ixb5 l"i:xb 5 !

This looks like the most natural reaction,

trying to block the . . . e3 advance.

24.1':la6 does not look dangerous for Black, who can keep all attacking possibilities intact with the simple 24 . . . \Wg6!. Then 2 5 . tll e3 tt:l f4 ! ? 26 .\Wc2! (26.©h l tll d3! 27.ixd3 exd3+)

( 3 0 . . . 1':lxh4?! 3 1 .ixe8 l"i:f4 32 .ic6 iig7 33 .l"i:a5 could be a bit better for White.) 3 1 . tll e3 ixe3

32.l"i:xe3 l"i:h5 33 .\Wf4 Elf5 34 .\Wh4 Elh5= With

a strange perpetual on the queen . 29 . . . \Wxf7 30.Elxf7 ©xf7 3 1 .tll d4� The ensuing ending is balanced.

24 ... .lll f4! 25.c.ilhl 2 5 .g3 Wg6! defends d6 and is fine for Black,

who intends . . . h4 next.

8 7 6 5 4

26 . . . h4!

2 8 . c±i h l

(26 . . . tll d3

1':lg5

27.Eld l ±)

29 .Elb6 ie5 !

27.Eld l

30.Elxb 5

1':18e6

l"i:f6!00,

threatening the devilish . . . tll h3, seems to grant at least a draw for Black. Indeed his attack looks quite virulent.

3 2 1

25 ... b4

250

1 2 . 0-0

25 . . . Wg6!? 26 .1Wd2 b4?

26.1.1l'fxd6

Instead,

1 9 . f3 ? ! b4! 20.cxb4 �b6t 2 1 . W h l

Wxb4+ offers Black excellent counterplay.

B22 1) 19.CDc2 �ks 20.tll e3

26.cxb4 d5� 26.c4 l"1 5 e6 27.1Wd2 �f600, with the idea 28 .l"1eb l tli d3 ! .

26 bxc3 27.bxc3 g5e6!

20.l"!d2

Wc8

2 1 .l"!ed l

Wb7

2 2 . tli a l

l"!xd5

23.l"!xd5 tli xd5 24 .Wxf5 l"1e5 25 .Wh3 e3 26.Wf3 exf2t 27.Wxf2

..•

After 27 . . . l"1c5 Black's compensation may look enough in case of the passive 2 8 . tli d l ?!. However

2 8 .g3! tli e6 29 . h4! �f6 30. tli d l ! l"1d8 3 1 .1Wa6 l"!e5;!; is less certain, even if the most likely result is a draw.

6 5

28.'Wb4 'Wf6!? 29.gedl tll d3 30.ixd3 exd3 3 1 .@gl 'Wxc3 32.'Wxc3 �xc3= The game should end in a draw.

B22) 1 8.gadl! Offering the important d-pawn the required

protection.

27 . . . tlie3! 2 8 .l"!xd6 Wc7 29.l"1xa6 l"1h5! 30.g3 tli xfl 3 1 .1Wxfl Wc5 t = was given up as a draw in

K. Johansson - Nekhaev, corr. 2009.

20 ... f4 2 1 .tlifS! 2 1 .tli g4?! f5 22.tt:Jh6t �xh6 23.Wxh6 tli g600/'t is more pleasant for Black, who has the better minor piece. An example from this position is

Marjanovic - Vuckovic, Subotica 2008, which went 24.l"1d4! Wh8 (24 . . . 1Wd7!?) 2 5 .a4 l"1g8 26.axb5 axb 5 27.Wh l l"!c7!? (27 . . . f3 is also interesting) 2 8 .l"1b4 Ei:cg7 29 .Ei:xb 5 tli h4 30.l"1a l , and now Black could have tried:

We shall consider B221) 19.CDc2, but the most interesting possibiliry available to White is

B222) 19.ge3!?.

25 1

Chapter 2 1 - 1 4.!'!e l 30 . . . lli xg2!N 3 l .ixg2 '1We8 ! ! 32.E\ba5 (32.E\b4

°1We5!+ intending 33 .ih3 E\g6 34.°1Wh5 e3-+)

32 . . . E\xg2 33 .Wf6t E\2g7 34. E\a7 Wg6 3 5 .Wxg6 E\xg6:+

Intending to attack by transferring the rook to h3. This is how the game might proceed after best play by both sides:

19 ... �cS! 20.c4!? 20.E\h3 h6 2 l .c4 as played in Van der Weide White, Liverpool 2006, can be answered (besides 2 1 . . . dxc4) by: 2 1 . . . lli g6!? 22.'l&xf5 ixb2 23 . cxb 5 (23.E\xh6 ixa3

24.E\xg6t

fxg6 25 .Wxg6t=)

23 ... E\e5 24.\Wg4 ixa3 2 5 . E\xa3 axb 5 = With a level game, as the black pieces are excellently

placed.

20 ... bxc4 21 .gh3 h6 2 1 . . .Wc7!? 22.Wxh?t c;t> f800 merits consideration if Black is playing all out for a win.

23.'l&xf6 .ixf6 24 ..id3! e3!= A sample game from this position continued:

22.llixc4 llixd5! 23.'l&xfS e3!=

Now a massive simplification is likely to occur.

24.�xdS The safest choice. After 24.fxe3 ?! White has to work miracles to save the game: 24 . . . lli xe3 2 5 .Wxc5 llixd l

26.llixd6 (26.Wd5 E\e l i ) 2 6 . . . E\e5! 27.Wc8 (27.Wc6 loses to 27 . . . E\d5 ! ! , for example 2 8 . lli e4

E\c5 ! !-+) 27 . . . \Wxc8 2 8 . lli xc8 E\e8 29.E\d3 llixb2 3 0 . lli d6!= White hangs on by a thread.

252

1 2 . 0-0

Even worse is: 24.Wf3 ? ! e2! 25 .ixe2 Ei'.xe2 26.Wxe2 li:J f4+

Conclusion

be dealt with by 24 . . . li:J f6 2 5 .Wf4 exf2t 26.Wxf2

Chapter 2 1 has dealt with 1 4 .i'!el (after 9 .ixf6 gxf6 1 0 . li:J d 5 f5 l l .id3 ie6 1 2 .0-0 ixd5 1 3 .exd5 li:l e7) , which is a useful prophylactic

position.

fl after . . . e5-e4, while hoping to keep Black's

Finally, the computer favourite 24 .id3 ! ? should

li:l e4!? 27 .ixe4 l:!xc4 = , with a fairly balanced

move, preparing to withdraw the bishop to

dangerous pawn maj ority at bay by putting e4 under pressure. After the obvious 1 4 . . .ig7 White has a choice. 1 5 .Ei:b l has the idea to follow up with c2-c4, directly challenging Black on the queenside. I decided to recommend the dynamic reply 1 5 . . . 0-0 1 6. c4 e4 1 7.ifl li:l g6!?, giving up the

b5 -pawn in return for attacking chances on the

kingside. Analysis demonstrates that Black stands fine after l 8 . cxb 5 axb5 1 9 .ixb5 li:J e 5 ! ? , as almost all his pieces have chances to join the attack.

24... e2! 25.�xe2

25 .Ei:xc5? dxc5 26.ixe2 Ei:xe2 27.g4 (27.Wb l

Wd4+) 27 . . . Ei:e l t 2 s .cj{g2 Wd l 29 .Ei:d3 Ei'.g l t 30. cj{h3 Wfl t 3 1 .cj{h4 if6t!+

25 ... �xe2 26.©fl ! �e8! 27.�e3 �xe3 28.c!ll xe3 �b5t 29.i>el �b4t 30.©fl �b5t= Th e conclusion i s that White has n o advantage

after 1 5 .c3. However, a draw is the most likely result.

This leaves 1 5 .c3 as the most serious try, shielding the pressure against b2. After 1 5 . . . 0-0 White may choose between 1 6. li:l c2 and 1 6 .Wh 5 . Both moves are of similar value, but the latter is more

complicated to handle, as it is designed to prevent . . . li:l e7-g6 . My recommendation in that case is to play 1 7 . . . l'!e8, preparing to meet 1 8 . li:J c2 with the bold 1 8 . . . li:Jxd5 ! 1 9 .'Wxf5 i'!e5 , when Black's

activity compensates for his structural inferiority. 1 8 .i'!ad 1 ! is a more pressing try, yet Black easily

holds his own by mobilizing all his forces with l 8 . . . l'!c8, when the possibility of . . . Ei:c8-c5 may annoy the first player. The conclusion is that

Black reaches equality in a not-too-laborious way.

12.0-0 14.c3 Variation Index 1 .e4 c5 2.tt:'if3 lli c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.llixd4 lli f6 5.llic3 e5 6.tt:'idb5 d6 7 ..ig5 a6 8.llia3 b5 9 ..ixf6 gxf6 10.llid5 f5 1 1 ..id3 .ie6 1 2.0-0 .ixd5 1 3.exd5 lli e7 14.c3

14 ....ig7 A) 1 5.llic2 B) 1 5 .�h5 e4! 1 6 ..ic2 0-0 17.�ae l �c8! B l ) 1 8.f3 b4! B l l) 1 9.cxb4 B 1 2) 19.lli h l B2) 18. g4!? B3) 18 ..ih3!? a5! B3 1) 1 9.tt:'ixb5 a4 20 ..idl �c5! B3 1 1) 2 1 .tt:'i d4 B3 1 2) 2 1 .�e2 B32) 19.�g5! �b7! 20.f3 h6! B32 1) 2 1 .�f4 B322) 2 1 .� g3 B4) 1 8.©hl �b8! B41) 1 9 ..ih3!? B42) 1 9.f3 B43) 19. g4!?

254 255 256 257 258 258 259 259 260 26 1 26 1 262 263 264 264 264 267

254

1 2 .0-0

1.e4 c5 2.lll f3 lll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lll xd4 lll f6 5.lll c3 e5 6.lll db5 d6 7.ig5 a6 8.lll a3 b5 9 ..ixf6 gxf6 10.lll d5 f'5 1 1 ..id3 .ie6 12.0-0 ixd5 13.exd5 lll e7 14.c3 Initiating a plan of developing pressure on the

light squares by means of Wh5, l"1ae l , .ib 1 and 4:l a3-c2-e3 .

14 ....ig7 Black continues to develop normally. The first branch in chis chapter sees White choose between A) 15.lll c2 and B) 15.'�h5. 1 5 .l"1 e 1 transposes to variation B in the previous

chapter.

A) 15.lll c2

White may choose between a passive and an

energetic defence of his b-pawn:

19.ga2 1 9 .l"1b4 gains a tempo on the enemy queen, but che rook's position on b4 is less secure.

1 9 . . . Wc5 20.4Je3 l"1ab8 (20 . . . l"1fb8= was also equal in Hebels - Chim, corr. 2009} 2 1 .Wb3

l"1xb4 22.cxb4 was Sadvakasov - Khalifman, Sochi 200 5 . Black should play:

22 . . . Wd4! 23.l"1d l (23 . .ixa6 f4t) 23 . . . Wf6!?N (De la Villa only mentions 23 . . . Wb6; 23 . . . Wxb2 24.Wxb2 ixb2 2 5 .ixa6 l"1b8=) 24 ..ixa6 f4 2 5 . 4:l c4 �g6+± With strong counterplay. Black has a variety of replies. My preference goes

to:

1 5 ... 0-0 16.a4 e4 17 . .ie2 bxa4! 18J!xa4 �b6

19 ... f4!? A well-founded move, crying to attack White

immediately.

20.�d2 .ie5 21 .gfal 2 1 . 4:l a3 Wc5 2 2 . 4:l c4 f3 ! 23.gxf3 exf3 24 . .id3 Wxd5 2 5 .l"1a5 We6 26.iih l iih8 27.4:lxe5 dxe5 28 .We3 was agreed drawn in Horvat Standke, corr. 20 1 2, and indeed the chances are approximately balanced after 28 . . . ti:J d 5 29.Wxf3 ti:l f4 = .

2 1 . .. 'it>hs 22 ..ifl

Chapter 22 22.ixa6 Elg8 23 .ifl Elxa2 24. Elxa2 'Ll f5� is quite scary for White. 2 2 . 'Ll a3 f3!� is also unpleasant.

255

1 4 .c3

34.:gxd5 ll!Vxd5t 35.©h2 el=W V2-V2 . An amazing draw in Magalhaes - Sivic,

corr. 20 1 2 .

B) 15.'11Mh5

22 ... f5! 23.lDa3

87 ��%�a�·%ef-""';��, , ,Y,��,,%

/.' ";� �;'. 6 ., ·� � ;;, , z� �,,,,,z�f' %� �% : �� ,,,�� 3 . :', �¥! %�� J�

2 ��::tZ1%_��J�""-�-.-�%.��,,,, � 8 %�!J�� i

�-,, · "-""'"-£m .... m m.

,, , . . . Y,

,,, ,,,;<

23 ... f3!! 24.c\Dc4 ll!Vd8 25.c\Dxe5 dxe5 26.:gxa6 26.g3 'Llxd5 is clearly not worse for Black in

view of his huge pawn mass on the kingside.

26.ic4 is initially liked by the computers, but after 26 . . . 'Ll g6!� they start to realize that something has gone badly wrong.

26 :gxa6 27.:gxa6 fxg2 28.ixg2 c\Dxd5

Black has also tried to keep his e5 and f5 pawn

duo intact by playing l 5 . . . '\Wd7?!, but it seems that the traditional plan of Elad 1 , ib 1 and 'Ll a3c2-e3 can then be applied with success.

..•

16.ic2 The point of Black's last move was to force the

white bishop into this modest retreat. The white knight is denied (for the time being at least) a chance to re-enter the game via c2 .

1 6 ... 0-0 17.:gael White is getting ready for ©h l followed by f2-

f3 , exposing the weaknesses on Black's kingside.

1 7.f3 ? ! b4! 1 8 . 'Ll c4 ( 1 8 . cxb4? ixb2 1 9 .Elab l ixa3 20.fxe4 Elc8-+) 1 8 . . . bxc3 1 9 .b3 '\Wc7 20.fxe4 fxe4 2 1 ..ixe4 'Ll g6+

29.'11Mh 6! :ggs 30.gd6 Was 3 1 .h3 e3 32.mh21 :gxg2t 33. mxg2 e2! 33 . . . 'Ll f4 t?? 34.©g3+-

1 7.Elad l is inconsistent with White's overall pan

of crushing the pawn duo by means of f2-f3 .

Black's best reply is l 7 . . . l"1c8 and then White has the following choice:

256

1 2. 0-0

b) 1 8 .ib l Ek5 1 9 .'Li c2 'Lixd5 20.f4 �b6 2 1 .<±>h l a5 22.a3 b4 23.axb4 axb4 24.cxb4

'Lixb4 2 5 . 'Li d4 (2 5 . 'Lixb4 �xb4 26.E!xd6 E!b5+

or 2 5 . 'Li e3 �b5 ! 26.E!xd6 'Lid5! 27.l'!xd5 E!xd5 28 .ixe4 Elc5 29.ixf5 h6+)

The best move available to Black.

Several moves have now been tried which deserve some attention: Bl) 1 8.f3, B2) 18.g4!?,

B3) 18.�b3!? and B4) 1 8.'it>h l .

1 8 .il.b 1 i s a bit slow. Th e best way t o counter is with 1 8 . . . �c5 !, pinning f2 while pressurizing the d5-pawn. After: 1 9 .<±>h l �xd5 20.f3

i: � � ,JBIJ� � ��..r,.. ;,�, �Y,�, •

6 ·� �. . �� 5 �, �,� �� £·�� 3 �, /.:•, .//,,�· �� -c:;, �·ef�-r�"""� � �� ""' �

c) 1 8 .ib3 ! ? Removing the bishop from attack along the c-file. However, it is clumsily placed and relaxes the pressure on e4, allowing Black's central pawns to advance. Now comes: 1 8 . . . f4! l 9 . 'Li c2 f5 20.'Lib4!? (20 . 'Li d4 ? �xd4 2 l .E!xd4

,,,,,

�� m � � @ b

20 . . . �e5! 2 1 .fxe4 fxe4 22 .�xe5 dxe5 23 .ixe4

E1ad8 24.l'!d l f5 2 5 .ib7 E!xd l 26.Elxd l Elf6 27 . 'Li c2 Black had a slight pull in Almasi - Leko, Monaco 2002. 27 . . . <±>£7+ would have reinforced the position nicely.

'Li g6+ was unpleasant for White in Pucher -

Bl) 1 8.f3

'Li g6= With rather balanced play, although Black's game should be the easier one.

This direct sacrificial attempt is important for the evaluation of the whole line. Black has a thematic counter:

Lautier, Montpellier 2007.) 20 . . . �b6 2 1 . 'Li c6

Chapter 22

257

l 4.c3

1 8 b4! ..•

White now has the following unappetizing choice: B1 1) 1 9.cxh4 or B12) 19 . .!Ll b l . 1 9 . fXe4? i s a n obvious blunder; after 1 9 . . . bxa3

20. exf5 Wc5 t 2 1 .Wh l '2l xd5-+ White didn't have the slightest compensation in Bromann M. Nielsen, Ringsted 1 99 8 .

B11) 19.cxb4 This is the most interesting reply, although it may not be fully adequate for equality.

19 ... ixh2 20.fxe4 ixa3 2 1 .:Se3 The other rook lift has never been considered. 2 1 .8'.f3 ! ?

I think Black should respond with:

2 l . . .ib2!? 22.E\h3 E\d8 23 .ib3 23 .ia4 ie5 24.\Wxh?t Wf8 25 .\Wh6t ig7 26 .\Wg5 \Wc4! 27.exf5 '2lxd5+ makes good use of White's failure to guard the c4-square.

23.e5?! id4t 24.Wh l ixe5 25 .!:1.xe5 'Wxc2 26 .'Wxh?t Wfs+ is even worse.

23 . . . ie5 24 .'Wxh7t wf8 2 5 .°Wh6t 2 5 . exf5 'Wxf5+ or 25.E\fl '2l g8!+.

2 1 ...�xc2! 24.�xh?t

22.:Sg3t

.!Llg6

23.:Sh3

:Sfd8!

The idea 24.exf5 '2le5 2 5 .Wg5 t Wf8 26.l"lxh7

does not work because of 26 . . . We8-+ .

24 �f'8 25.:ShS •.•

2 5 . exf5 '2le5 26.l"lxa3 We8+ leaves Black with reasonable winning chances in view of his extra

knight on e 5 .

25 ... f4!? 25 . . . '2le5 26.l"lhxf5 l"la7 27.l"lxe5! dxe5 28 .iWh8t We7 29 .°Wxe 5 t = led to a draw by perpetual in Nataf - V. Spasov, Mallorca 2004.

26.:Sf5 lll e5! 26 . . . l"la7!? 27.Wxg6 ii.cl

28 .Wh l

unclear according to Rogozenko.

Wc4

27.:S5xf4 :Sa7 28.�hSt �e7 29.Wh4t �d7!? 29 . . . We8=

30.�h3t �c7 3 1 .�xa3 a

25 . . . ig7 26.°Wg5 fXe4 ! ? 27.!:1.xe4 '2l g6 2 8 . El e l Ei b 8 White doesn't seem t o have enough for the piece, for example:

29.Elfl wg8 3 0 . a3 l'l:d7! 3 I .°Wh5 '2l f8 ! 32.id I

'Wc7 33 .°Wf5

33 .ig4 l::!. e 7 34.if5 Eibes+ 33 . . . Eie?+

3 1 .We3 Wb7 32.l"lxf7t l"ld7! 33.l"lxd7t '2l xd7

34.Wxa3 Wxe4+ also looks slightly better for Black.

3 1 . .. �bs; According to Rogozenko, the powerful knight

on e5 should be worth more than three pawns and he is right.

258

1 2 . 0-0

B12) 19.lll bl

than 20 . . . i.xc3 , as played in Asrian - Wang Yue, Khanry-Mansiysk 200 5 , and several other games.

2 1 .fxe4 The typical positional motif.

2 1 . ..hc3! 22.bxc3 Wf cSt! 22 ... 1Wxc3 ?!fZ allows 23.exf5 '&xc2 24 .'&h6! ©h8 (24 . . . tt:J e 5 2 5 .l"1e3) 2 5 . fxg6 '&xg6, when Black is under pressure.

23.©hl Wfxc3 A prelude to interesting dark-squared play with .. . f4 . White can avoid this by:

24.exf5 Wfxc2 25.Wfh6 This move may well be the lesser evil for White.

And now Black should play:

25 ... lll eS! 26.:Be3 Wf c4! 27.gg3t lll g6

19 ... bxc3 1 9 . . . ctJ xd5! ? 20.fxe4 1Wc5 t 2 1 . © h l 22.cxb4 1Wd4! 23.l"1xe3 '1Wxe3 24.exf5

ctJ e3 l"1fc8

2 5 .ctJ c3 !xc3 26. bxc3 f6fZ as played in Pellen -

Valeinis, corr. 20 1 0 , is an interesting alternative.

20.lll xc3! The best try. 20.fxe4? cxb2+ is clearly better for Black, as is 20.bxc3 ? ctJxd5 2 l .fxe4 1Wc5t 22.©h l

lLi e3+, forking the fl -rook and c2-bishop.

Maintaining the balance.

B2) 18.g4!? This is not as bad as its appearance indicates .

8 7 6

� � �- �� -� . ,,,,Y,�f �� r/1 � i m�.t. ·�B .�a. . . .t. .� �{ '� iii� f@I iii� ,,,,,

:3 iii:•//,��!Iii f''' �� -��

2 �ti-'fi ilB�� ?;,,,,/,� %""/.... /�,-d,,,,/, � 1

�: a

� c

1 8 ... b4! 19.cxb4

�� : � e

1 9 . ctJ b l bxc3 20.ctJxc3 i.xc3 2 1 . bxc3 1Wxc3 22.'1Wg5t (22.gxf5 ? ! Wff xc2 23.f6 tt:J f5 24.Wffxf5

20 ... lll g6!?N

This move improves over 20 . . . l"1b8 as given by De la Villa, and is also slightly more accurate

©h8+) 22 . . . '1Wg7!? 23.Wffxe7! (23 .\Wxg?t ©xg7 24.gxf5 l"1ac8 25 .�xe4 l"1c5� gives Black excellent compensation for a mere doubled pawn. He has

chances to play for a win in the ending due to his superior minor piece.) 23 . . . Wffxg4t 24.©h l 1Wf3t 2 5 . ©g l = leads to a draw.

Chapter 22

19 ... t!ll xdS 20.Wixf5 After 20.gxf5 the simplest road to equality is: 20 . . . ixb2! 2 1 .ixe4 ClJ f6 22.W8 (22.Wh3 gbs 2 3 . ClJ c2 ClJ xe4 24 .Wg2t cJ;>hs 2 5 .Wxe4 gb5

259

1 4 .c3

23 ... dS 24.!'le2 !'lfe8 25.!!.fel !l.xe2 26.!'lxe2 t!ll d3 27.l'!d2 t!ll f4= The game is thoroughly equal.

B3) 1 8.ib3!?

2 6 . ClJ e3 ge8 27.Wf3 gxb400) 22 ... d5! 23 .ixd5 (23 .ib l 25 .Wd4

Wc7=)

23 . . . ClJxd5

24.Wxd5

ixa3

25 . . . Wds 26 .Wc3 ixb4 27.Wxb4 Wg5 t 2s.cJ;>h 1 Wxf5 29.gg l t @hs 30 .Wb2t f6 3 1 .Wifb7 ggs 32.gg3 Wxf2 33.E:eg l Wf5 ! =

20...Wixf5 23.ib3

2 1 .gxf5

t!ll xb4 22.!'lxe4 !'lab8

23.cJ;>h l ?! as in Sax - Cs. Horvath, Lillafured 1 999, allows 23 . . . ixb2! 24.Elh4 (24.E:gl t? cJ;>hs 2 5 . f6 [2 5 . E:h4? f6-+] 25 . . . ClJ xc2 26.ClJxc2 ixf6+)

24 . . .if6 2 5 .Elg4t cJ;>hs 26 .ib3 d5+ with a better game for Black.

One of White's two principal options. The bishop is not well placed on b3, but proving this is far from easy. Having paved a way for the a3-knight to come back into play (via c2) and

protected himself against . . . b4, White now wants to play f2-f3 under favourable circumstances.

18 ... aS! A consistent and direct move which is sufficient

for equality. White has

19.WifgS!.

B3 1) 19.t!ll xb5 and the critical B32)

1 9 .g4 i s a rare move which can b e dealt with

as follows : 1 9 . . . a4 20 .ic2 'll x d5 2 1 .Wxf5 Wxf5 22.gxf5 b4 23. 'll b 5 bxc3 24. bxc3 'll xc3

2 5 . ClJ xc3 ixc3 26.l'!xe4 a3 27.l"l d l l"lfb S 2 8 . f6 ixf6 29.2"1g4t cJ;>fs 30.ixh7 ie5 3 1 .l'!e l ig7= Seuchter - Serradimigni, corr. 2009.

B3 1) 19.t!ll xb5 a4 20.idl Wfc5! This doesn't give White anything, and in fact he

must be careful to maintain the balance. There are two options available:

B3 1 2) 21 .ie2.

B3 1 1) 2 1 .t!ll d4 and

260

1 2 .0-0

B3 1 1) 2 1 .Cll d4 '1Wxd5 Black

has

centralization

regained and

difficulties .

his

lands

pawn

White

25.'1Wxd5 with in

fine

some

imagine that Black can be worse after: 28 . . . l"1b4!

29.:1'\d l

22.ďż˝e3 22.'.Wg5 1We5! 23.f3 ! ? (23.f4 '.Wf6 24.g4 d5+ was

slightly worse for White in Nunn - McShane, Hastings 1 997.) 23 .. .f4 24 .\Wh4 (24.1!Wg4 h5 !+)

Van den Doe! - Bade, Bundesliga 2002. Best would have been:

Eliminating a potentially dangerous pawn by 2 5 . bxa4 ! ? ďż˝xd4 26.cxd4 1!Wxh5 27.l"1xh5 'i>g7 28 .i.b3 has its points, although it is hard to

(29.E'!cl E'!a7!) 29 . . . f5 !+! 30.g3 'i>g6

3 l .:i'\h4 'i>g5! It is hard for White to disentangle his rook.

25 ... Cll xd5 26.ll\5 axb3 27.axb3 27.ixb3 Cll xc3 2 8 .'ll xd6 :i'\b6!+

24 . . . 'll g6! 25 .1Wh3 (2 5 .1Wf2 e3+) 25 . . . e3 26.ic2 1Wc5 27. Cll e2 l"1fb8t White is clearly suffering from the lack of space.

32 . . . Cll e3!! 33.l"1xe3 id2+ is a fantastic line, illustrating Black's tactical potential in the Sveshnikov.

Chapter 22

26 1

1 4.c3

28 geS! 29.t!Llxd6 e3! 30.fxe3 ge6!t A principled variation, showing that it is not ..•

easy for White to solve his difficulties having displaced his rook.

B3 12) 21 .i.e2

1 9 ... °1Wb7! 20.f3 h6!

White is facing a crucial dilemma, as all queen

retreats have their pros and cons. B321) 2 1 .°1Wf4 looks more natural, but B322) 2 1 .°1Wg3 is best. 2 1 .'!Wh 5 ? ! This computer recommendation looks best.

Black should play:

21 ...t!LlxdS 22.°IWgS!? 22.1Wxf5 lll xc3 23.1Wxc5 lll xe2t 24.gxe2 dxc5=

22 ... h6! 23.\Wg3 23 .1Wd2 E!:fdSoo

23 ... f4 23 . . . l"1ab8 ! ? 24.lt:Jxd6 (24 .c4 lll e7= or 24.lt:Jd4

lt:J b4 ! ?00) 24 . . . f4 2 5 . lll xe4 fXg3 26. lll x c5 l"1xb2

27.lll xa4 l"1xa2 2 8 .i.b5 lll xc3 = is dead equal.

24.\Wh4 24 .1Wg4 f5 2 5 .1Wh4 h7+

24 ... a3! 25.b4 °IWcSm The position is unclear, offering chances to both sides .

B32) 19.°IWgS!

Failing t o reinforce control of the dark squares, and not in the spirit of the position. 2 1 . . .a4 22.i.c2 b4 23.lll c4? 23 . cxb4 '!Wxb4 24.6ce4 '!Wxb2 2 5 .exf5 lll x d5

26.1Wf3 lll f6+ is perhaps a better option for White, but the position is still more pleasant for Black.

J: � � f"/ �· ,!l/tJ�I!� i� � � � 6 W,· ��Y; , , ;'.�· · ��Y,.- , 45 �• �-r�0·�·£•! tzJa • • � 3 �--"� � �/.��B �re;:.rJ ��ref"""� . . � � 2 8 ��-" J {/ � ��

�

,,,,,

�

23 . . . bxc3 24.6ce4 fXe4 2 5 .l"1xe4 2 5 . bxc3 f5 26. lll e3 °1Wb2

27.'!Wh4

l"1f7+

gives Black a rock-solid position and a clear advantage, in view of White's many queenside

weaknesses. 2 5 . . . cxb2 26. l"1g4 1Wxd5 27.'!Wxh6 lll g6+ Black obtains an indisputable advantage.

262

1 2 . 0-0

After 2 1 .\Wd2, the most clear-cut way of playing is 2 1 . . . a4 22 .i.c2 b4 2 3 . cxb4 \Wxd5 24.\Wxd5

tli xd5 2 5 . fxe4 tli xb4 26.ib I ixb2 27 . tli c4 ic3

with a fairly level position in Hoffman - Dub, Budapest 2003.

B32 1) 2 1 .�f4 Played in the game Shirov - Grischuk, Wij k aan

Zee 2003.

s i.U U ��-�

� � ii %_, ,y,, � � _ �� , , , ; � W% 6 m �� m - - -��-�•� -·��/,� ·� �- - : ''JI! llilil llit'ill!Jli -,,,, £ �� 3 0.ilr� �m 8 U 2 »�- -o - - %� �� %f£ , , /,� �c-� �� 1m ��n w-::?- - 7

/, % '"/

2 1 ...a4 22.Ac2 b4 23.cxh4! Much worse is:

2 3 . tli c4?! \Wxd5 24 . tli e3 24 . tli xd6? \Wc5 t 2 5 .©h l tli g6+

25.�f3!? This is relatively best. Shirov chose: 2 5 .\Wxf5 ? ! ixb2 26.e5 ! ? Th e passive 26. tli b l ?! i.e5!+ leads t o a worse

position for White, in view of the awkward cl-bishop and the weakness of the a2-pawn.

26 . . . ixe5 It is evident that Black is fine.

24 . . . \Wxa2! 2 5 . tli xf5

After 2 5 . fxe4 ? tli g6! White's queenside becomes a welcome prey for the black queen: 26.\Wf2 (26.\Wxd6 f4 27. ClJ f5 \Wxb2-+ or 26.\Wxf5 b3

27.ib l \Wxb2-+) 26 ... 1M'xb2+

25 . . . tlixf5 26.1M'xf5 1M'e6!t

Black has the better chances in view of White's weak queenside pawns.

23 ...�xb4 24.fxe4 Black reacted with the model retort here:

27.1M'd3 !?N 27.1M'h3 ?!

ic3

28.ixg6

fxg6

29 .1We6t

(29.�xh6?? 1M'd4t! 30.©h l \Wd3 !-+ is a nice tactical motif) 29 . . . ©h7 3 0 . ctJ c2 \Wc5 t

Chapter 22

263

l 4.c3

3 1 .ii h l ig7+ leads to a position where the superiority of Black's bishop over the knight is obvious.

Shirov's choice of 27. tli b l ?! should have left him struggling after: 27 . . . iWh4!?N 28.g3 iWc4 29.a3 '1Wxd5+

27 . . . ic3 27 . . . l"lacS ! ? 28 Jie6 iWd4t!+ Only Black can win, as all the advantages are on his side.

25 ... f4! Closing off the c2-bishop and obtaining e5 for the black pieces .

22.ďż˝c2 b4 23.ctJc4!? 23.cxb4 iWxb4

24.fxe4

f4!ďż˝

gives

Black

excellent play on the dark squares. White's best is then:

26.'We2 'Wxb2 27.ctJc4 'Wxa2 28.ctJxd6 a3"'

Kolev and Nedev consider chis position to be unclear, a fair assessment. The computers now

25 .iWd3! (2 5 .iWxf4 tl:i g6 26.iWg3 '1Wxb2 27.l"le2 iWxa2 28 .Wh l tli e 5 t was clearly bad for White in Soltau - lotov, corr. 20 1 0 .) 25 . . .ElfcS 26.e5

29.tlifS

continuation would have been 26 . . . dxe5 27.d6 tl:i g6 with an unclear position, though Black's

suggest:

V2-V2 Verhoef - T. Schmidt, corr. 20 1 0 .

However there i s a strong reply.

29 ... fifbS! This looks excellent for Black.

B322) 2 1 .'Wg3 a4! 2 1 . . . tli g6!? 22.fxe4 f4 23 .iWd3 Elab8 24.W h l

fi fe s a s played in Nilsson - Tikkanen, Skovlunde 2006, is not out of the question.

A likely

play seems easier to me.

23 ...'WxdS 24.fxe4! 24 . tl:i xd6? bxc3+

24...'Wxc4 25.exfS ctJxfS!? Recommended by Shirov. 25 . . . tli d 5 was played in Shirov - Kramnik, Wijk

aan Zee 2003, and should also be acceptable.

264

1 2 . 0-0

26.E:xfS E:ae8! 27.E:efl bxc3 28.bxc3 Wfxc3 29.Wfxc3 .L:c3 30 .ixa4 E:e5= •

Antunes - Tinture, corr. 200 5 . Thus, i t becomes clear that after 1 8 .il.b3 ! ? Black can equalize comfortably. Now we switch our attention to the other main move, 1 8 .©h l .

B4) 1 8.©hl

is on a4 instead of a6. However, that shouldn't make much of a difference in White's favour and the position is completely balanced after 24. bxa3 (24 . f6 ixf6 2 5 .l'l:xf6 l'l:xb2 26.�xg6 fxg6 27.l"i:xg6t hxg6 28.°1Wxg6t ©h8 29 .°1Wh6t=

is a draw by perpetual) 24 ... W/xc3 2 5 . fxg6 fxg6

26.°IWd l Wxa3 27.il.xa4= due to the opposite coloured bishops .

2 1 . b4 22.cxb4 E:xb4 23.fxe4 gxe4! 24.E:xe4 fxe4 25.'!Wh4 •.

This precaution looks rather necessary to avoid unpleasantries on the g l -a7 diagonal .

28.E:el ! The older continuations of 1 8 . . . b4?, 1 8 . . . l'l:e8? and 1 8 ... 'll g6?! are all beyond the scope of this survey, as

I have found them to be ineffective.

2 8 .il.b3?! Wg6 29.l'l:f2 il.e5 30.g3 'll g4 3 1 .l'l:e2

©h8!-t gives Black time for an attack.

28 Wlf6!? 29.Wle4 •••

The slower

B41) 19 ..ib3!? is not bad, but the critical lines are B42) 1 9.f3 and B43) 19.g4!?.

29.il.f3 Wxb2 30.°1Wb3 Wxb3 3 1 . axb3 l'l:cS 32.g3 l"i:c3=

1 9 .il.b 1 ?! allows Black t o carry o u t h i s plan unhindered: 1 9 . . . b4 20.cxb4 l'l:xb4 2 1 .f3 l"!xb2 22.fxe4 °1Wc3!+

29 ... ltJxdl 30.E:xdl '!Wxb2 3 1 .'ll c4 '!Wxa2 32.lll xd6 Wf e6=

B41) 19 ..ib3!? a5! 20.f3 a4 2 1 ..idl !? 2 1 .il.c2 b4 22.fxe4 bxa3 23.exf5 'll g6! reaches a position similar to the one arising in variation B42, the only nuance being that Black's pawn

The game is dead level.

B42) 19.f3 b4! White can choose between three moves, the

most critical being:

Chapter 22

��"iVB �� - � 7 .. . ...Y,� ��lfiy,9-] ' !'lr1'lr1'1r1'lr1. 'lr1 '1r1 : 'lr1 � 'lr1 Vi � 'lr1�z,;' '� s

4 �:·/{. f 'lr1 '1r1 '1r1 , , ?, /% � � � _ � � 3 ;�; w� m 8 � 21 . ��.;D I- �-8� . /,_ .. .

20.fxe4!

��,-� d

20.lll b l ?! is passive, bur White may be able to

hang on. The game Shirov - Leko, Dortmund 2002, continued: 20 . . . bxc3 2 l . bxc3 ixc3 22.li:lxc3 °1Wxc3 23 .1Xe4! f4! ? (23 . . . 1Wxc2 24. exf5=) 24.ib3 (24.ib l li:l g6 2 5 . e 5 ! = has universally been recommended as equal.) 24 . . . lll g6 2 5 . l"!. c l

�-� ��-: ,��-....:.��1� � � �•i!. � ,�� 7:. . .. %�I � ..3� �� r� 3 �� [j %""' �� :!)jt!J �m g l:t'. �\t> 8

- l 4.c3

265

24.f6 'Wd3 , should easily win for Black. b) The other rook lift, 22.Elf3, also fails due to: 22 . . . 'Wxc2 23.Elh3 l"!.fd8! 24.'Wxh?t iif8 25 . l"!.xa3 (Or 25 .'WhSt lll g8 26.E!:g3 ixb4 27.'WxgSt 'tti e7 28 .'WgS t iid7 29.'WxfSt 'tti c7-+

and the black king has been brought to safety.) 25 . . . 'Wd2! (A multifunctional move, both attacking and defending.) 26.°1Wh8t lll g8 27.'.!'lfl l"!.dc8! 28.'.!'lg3 l"!.c l ! !-+ The issue is settled.

�� · �tv � , �-· · " i � � . · ' � �, ,Y,��r:?· � 6 �, . � ;f • �-�:. � ��r� �� B �"lBWI � -��l@� 8

� % � JtJ . • . �� 3� .. �i•l• • lwt! �� %r•�

4 2 1

� a

23.'.!'lh3?

loses

22 . . . °1Wxc2 23 .'.!'lg3t

the

following

accurate

sequence: 23 . . . l"lfc8 24 .'Wxh7t iif8 25 .'Wh6t

'tti e8 26.'Wxd6 i.b2! 27.eS lll g6 2 8 . e6 lll f8 !-+ Black has defended all his sensitive points

while maintaining a two piece advantage. 23 . . . lll g6 24.l"!.h3 l"!.fd8! 25 .'Wxh7t iif8 26.l"lhS l"!.b7! 27.'.!'lhxfS lll e5

Now White doesn't have a perpetual by taking on e 5 :

25 . . . °1Wf6 26.°1Wf5 °1We7 27.Elc4 a5+ Black enjoyed a slight bur lasting plus in view of his domination on the dark squares. It is surprising that most chess engines consider White to be better here, but this is certainly not the case.

20.cxb4? This doesn't work with the rook on b 8 .

20 . . . ixb2 2 l . 1Xe4 ixa3

Black should win with precise defensive

handling. I shall give some sample lines : 22.Ele3 a) 22.exf5 Wxc2 23.l"!.xe7 'Wc3 !-+ , intending

2 8 . l"lxeS ?

2 8 . l"lgS 'tti e 8 29.Whst Wd7 30 .°1Wh3t Wc7 3 l .'Wxa3 'Wxe4+ is the lesser evil for White but

266

1 2 . 0-0

it should obviously lose in the long run. 28 . . . dxe5 29 .WhSt lt>e7 30 .Wxe5t

27 . . . E:d2! 28 .�xa3 (28 .�xa6 ?? a2-+) 28 . . . E:xd5 29 .�xa6 l''k 5 30.g4 E:fc8 3 l .g5 E:xc3 Although it

30 . . . ©d7 3 1 .E:xf7t lt>c8 32 .We6t ©b8-+

press White for a long time.

20 hxa3 2 1 .exf5 ltJg6!

23 \t>xg7

30 .Wf6t lt>e8-+

•..

•••

With this counter-sacrifice, Black shields his

king and blunts the attacking force.

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

22.£6!?

is uncertain whether Black can win, he can surely

The smoke has cleared and it is evident that the black king enjoys a good shelter. In the

meantime, White's queenside has become weak.

24.�d3!? This is superior to: 24.�b l ?! Wxc3t (intending

25 .Wf5 ? !'1xg2!)

24 Wfxc3 25.i:'!:e3! ••.

The only move

difficult

combining defence and attack.

22.E:f3? E:xb2 23 .�e4 E:e8-+ and 22.fxg6 ?! fxg6+ are senseless. 22. bxa3 Wxc3 23.fxg6 hxg6 24.�d l Wxa3 = gives roughly equal chances, although Black's position is easier to play in view of his superior bishop.

22 i:'!:xh2 23.fxg7

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

•••

23.E:e3? E:xc2 24.E:h3 �xh3! 2 5 .�xh3 should be answered by 25 . . . �hS!+. There might follow: 26.�d7 E:xa2 27.Wxd6

2S Wfd2!? •••

situation;

2 5 . . . \t>gS 26.�xg6 hxg6 27.E:xc3 gxh5 2 8 .!'1xa3 E:e8= soon led to a draw in Dominguez

- Schandorff, Esbj erg 2003.

26.°!WgS! f6 27.Wi'g3 i:'!:f/ This position is approximately balanced but it is White who has to be rather more careful.

28.i:'!:ef3!? 28 .�xa6 ? E:xa2 29.E:xa3 E:xa3 30 .Wxa3 �xd5+ leaves Black a pawn up.

28 aS .•.

Chapter 22 After 28 . . . Wb4 29.Elf5 ! Elxa2 30.Elh5 Wb2 3 1 .Ei:xh?t Wxh7 32.Wxg6t Wh8, the nice move 33 .ic4! traps che rook on a2.

29.h3 29.h4!? 1ftifh6! 30.1ftifxd6 B:xa200

Elf8

267

1 4 .c3

22.!'!gl is harmless. After 22 . . . ixb2!? 23 .Wih6 Wic3! 24.B:xe4 Wif6 2 5 .Wh3 Elg8+ Black had safeguarded his king and was in excellent shape in Topalov - Leko, Dortmund 2002.

22.Wfd l can be answered by 22 ... tlif6 23.Wxd6 !'!g8

29 ...'!Wb4 30.:gfS 30.�J5 Elxa2 3 1 .ie6 33.!'!fb l Wf4+

32.!'!b3?! Wc4

24.Wic5 Wfb7 25 .!'!e2 !'!bc8 26.Wf e3 Wxb4 27.ixe4 Elce8 28.f3 tll xe4 29.fxe4 ixb2 30. tll c2 (30.Elb l Wxa3 3 l .!!bxb2 !!d8! 32.Elb 1 Wfxe3 33.Elxe3 Eld2 is level too) 30 . . . Wc4 3 1 . tll e l f6 32. tll £3 Elg4� V2-V2 Magalhaes - Pichelin, corr. 2009.

30 ...'!Wh4 3 1 .°1Wxd6 :gxa2= The status quo will be maintained.

22.ixe4 tli f6 23 .Wif3 Elxb4= has been considered

B43) 19.g4!?

as White's best choice, yielding equality. Let's

The stiffest try, making use of che move Wh 1 by

take this a bit further:

opening up the g-file.

8 �� ·� 1 • "� • � •;r�• � ,. " ' � � j� 6 T� � � � �

�jfi�i : �:'//,��r�� %� 3 �; �� - -

2 1

;,8. ;�t,� �D �� .. . . %_ %�mi•� a

19 b4! ..•

Black must answer in an incisive manner. This

is che only way in which he can ensure thac the path to b2 will be opened.

20.cxb4 tlixd5 2 1 .gxfS 'it>h8! The star move, removing the king from the potentially dangerous g-file. White has several continuations at this point, but it seems he can get no advantage.

22.i.b3 The most serious try, intending to bring the a3-knight into play via c2 or c4.

8 7 6 5 4 3

2 1

268

1 2. 0-0

22 ... lll f4! A very strong move, which I found with the help of the engines. The idea is to capture on f5

Conclusion This chapter has dealt in some depth with 1 4 .c3,

with the queen and then launch an attack via the

which can be considered the main line after the

I had previously analysed 22 . . . tt'l f6 23 .�g5 d5,

1 l .i.d3 ie6 1 2 .0-0 i.xd5 1 3 .exd5 tt'l e7. White's last move is the most natural choice, seeking to bring the a3-knight back from exile, while

g-file.

but it didn't feel thoroughly convincing after

something like 24. tt'l c2 E!:g8 25 .E!:e3 ! ? . Also interesting is 2 5 . E!:d l ! ? '&b7 26.f3 ! ? , intending �f4 and fxe4, to break up the pawn centre.

23.Wfg4 Ae5! 24.gxe4 gg8 25.Wff3 Wlxf5i; Black has tremendous compensation for a pawn.

maintaining the option of playing on either

wing. After the normal 1 4 . . . ig?, White has a choice. 1 5 . tt'l c2 unveils White's intention to initiate

queenside action by means of a2-a4, but my research indicates that Black gets enough counter chances with 1 5 . . . 0-0 1 6 .a4 e4 1 7 .ie2 bxa4! 1 8 .E!:xa4 '&b6 1 9 .E!:a2 f4! ? , when he is prepared to

26.lll c4 26.i.c2? d5+ or 26.E!:ee l ? E!:g2+ .

8 •��J u ''.°� lliil� l m lliil� l .1m

� � :5 !�� ¥@ � � w.1 ' ��rn��'��!'-% 4 r��- : � ��w � 32 •Jr� � � � �%!� �%!' � �%!' [j if� � if� if��

1 . �-�-,.� . . ..

introductory sequence of 9.ixf6 gxf6 1 0 . tt'l d 5 f5

26 ... gg7!-+

White suddenly realizes that there is a problem

with the defence of g l , as Black is threatening to

triple his major pieces along the g-file and deliver mate. Thus we may conclude that Black stands fine, and consequently that there is no advantage

for White in the so-called tactical branch of the Sveshnikov.

land quick punches against the enemy kingside.

The outcome should be a draw after a series of tactics chat look quite scary for White, which can be considered a success for Black's opening strategy. The main focus of the chapter has been the

enterprising l 5 .iWh5 , which is designed to attack the weak point on f5 and force concessions. After 1 5 . . . e4! 1 6 .ic2 0-0 1 7.E!:ae l '&c8! White has tried to attack the e4-f5 pawn complex in several ways, bur Black holds his own against every White try. Both 1 8 . f3 b4! and 1 8 .g4! ? b4! should pose no

serious problems for Black, and in the first case he can even get the upper hand after the long sequence 1 9 .cxb4 ixb2 20.fxe4 i.xa3 2 1 .Ei:e3

Wfxc2! 22.E!:g3t tt'l g6 23.Ei:h3 E!:fd8 ! 24.'&xh?t @f8 2 5 .E!:h5 f4! ? 26.E!:f5 tt'l e 5 ! 27.E!:5xf4 Ela? 28 .iWhSt @e7 29 .'&h4t @d7! ? , which, however,

he needs to remember. A third option is 1 8 .ib3! ? , when the inspired pawn sacrifice 1 8 . . . a5! has proved its worth after both 1 9 .tt'lxb5 a4 20 .i.d l �c5 ! , and 1 9 .Wfg5 ! '&b7! 20.f3 h6! , leaving White nothing better than steering the game towards a draw.

Finally, 1 8 .@h l E!:b8! gives Black typically strong counterplay based on . . . b 5 -b4. Here too, the second player always seems to be on time to

create at least equal chances.

9 . � d5 Introduction to the Classical Variation Variation Index 1.e4 c5 2.tll f3 tll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tll xd4 tt:J f6 5.tll c3 e5 6.tll db5 d6 7.�g5 a6 8.tll a3 b5 9.tll d5 9 ... �e7 270 270 27 1 272 272 274 275 275 276 277 278 280 280 28 1

A) 1 0.tll xf6t?! �xf6 Al) l l .i.e3?! A2) l 1 .i.xf6 B) l O.tll xe7 lDxe7!? Bl) 1 1 .Wf3 B2) 1 1 .Wd3 B3) l 1 .f3 d5! B3 1) 1 2.i.xf6 B32) 1 2.exd5 B4) l l .�d3 �b7!? B41) 1 2.f3!? B42) 12.We2 tll d7! B42 1) 13.b4!? B422) 1 3.c4 B4 l ) after 1 5 .�d2

A2) note to l 2.c4

1 4 . . . ElfdS!N

1 5 . . . e4!

B422) after 1 7.@h l N

l 7 . . . ltJ g6!

270

9. lll d5

1 .e4 c5 2.lll f3 lll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lll xd4 ltif6 5.lll c3 e5 6.lll db5 d6 7..ig5 a6 8.lll a3 b5 9.lll d5 The Classical Variation of the Sveshnikov.

White usually aims to obtain a slight edge, by

After 1 2 .g3? the queenside is left deserted, and Black can capitalize on this by: 1 2 . . . ie6 1 3 .ig2 \Wa5 t ! 1 4 .\Wd2 ( 1 4 .c3 b4 1 5 . tll b l l:fabs+) 1 4 . . . b4+

securing d5 for his knights and then trying to expose and attack Black's queenside pawn

1 2 .ie2 allows 1 2 . . . ig5+, when White is simply worse.

9 ...ie7 A major tabiya for the whole Open Sicilian.

when the weakened dark squares (d4 and c5) will fall into Black's hands.

play 1 0 .ixf6 (see Chapters 25-37) to secure control of d5 for their pieces, but there are a couple of other options: A) 10.lll xf6 t?! and B)

flexible manner:

weaknesses.

Now White players almost without exception

The same happens after 1 2 .c4 b4 1 3 . tll c2 ig5+,

1 2 .c3 may not be so bad. Black should reply in a

10.lll xe7.

8 7

A) 10.ltixf6t?! .ixf6

White already has another decision to make: Al) l 1 ..ie3?! or A2) l 1 ..ixf6.

5 4

Al) l 1 ..ie3?!

A pointless move that allows Black to obtain the better chances by simply developing:

1 2 . . . l1J e7! ( 1 2 . . . ie6 1 3 .ie2 tll e7 [ 1 3 . . . ig5 1 4 . tll c2=] 1 4.ig4!) 1 3 . tll c2 d5 1 4 .id3 ib7+

12 ....ie6 1 2 . . . .ib7!?+ is another good option, intending

. . . lll d4 while supporting a future . . . d5

13.c4 1 3 .Eld l \Wc7!+

13 ... b4! Going all out for a dark-square strategy. 1 3 . . . lll d4! ? is also promising. This flexible continuation looks best.

12.'Wd2! White hurries to prevent the positional threat . . . ig5 .

14.lll c2 a5 1 5.ďż˝dl 1 5 .ie2 should also be met with the typical

manoeuvre 1 5 . . . \Wc7! 1 6 .0-0 4J d8 ! 1 7.b3 lll b7+.

1 5 ...'Wc7! 16 ..ie2

Chapter 23

27 1

Introduction to the Classical Variation

1 6.'1Wxd6 '1Wb7!+ is clearly better for Black, for

example: l 7.'1Wd2 (Or l 7.b3 gfd8 1 8 .'1Wc5 liJ d4! and White will lose material.) 17 ... gfdS 1 8 .Wc l

gxd l t 1 9 .Wxd l b3! The black queen will break into the enemy camp.

1 2 .id3

can

met

with

the

interesting

regrouping: 12 . . . liJ d4!? 1 3 . c3 liJ e6+ The knight

can then be further relocated to either c5 or f4.

1 2 .ie2 allows Black to plan a dangerous frontal

attack on the d-file: 1 2 . . . ib7 1 3 . 0-0 0-0 1 4 . c3

.i� � �El •

-·Y,• • r�� 6 fB:. B,%�, , %� 54 � ·��, , ,%-,,,,, ;o�"� �� B ;''/,; ��-f�� 30 B � 8

,�_ 0, , %Br�� , , , ,� ;� iM"" a

1 4 . . . gfdS!N ( 1 4 . . . gadS ! ? 1 5 .if3 liJ b S ! ? 1 6 . liJ c2

liJ d7 1 7.ge l liJ c5 1 8 . liJ b4 g6 1 9 . liJ d5 ixd5 20 .\Wxd5 gbs 2 1 .ged l gb6 22.gd2 E!:cS+ was better for Black in Larino Nieto - Korronias, Budva 2009, a game I went on to win.) 1 5 .liJ c2 ( 1 5 .if3 liJ e7 1 6.c4 is met with the surprising and

A2) 1 1 .i.xf6 Unj ustifiably relaxing the pressure, allowing Black an easy game. Once White had taken on f6

with the knight though, there was no way back.

1 1 . ..Wfxf6 White has several options, but the general

impression is that Black's position is preferable. The freedom enjoyed by the black queen, along with the superior bishop, gives him the better chances.

12.c4 This looks like the most critical (though not necessarily best) move. 1 2.'1Wd5? is unimpressive, and after 1 2 . . . ib7+

White has exposed his queen for no reason at all.

It is surprising that the move has occurred eight times in tournament chess!

brilliant reply 1 6 . . . liJ c6!? 1 7.cxb 5 liJ d4 t , with a strong initiative for Black. ) 1 5 . . . d5! 1 6.exd5 liJ e7+ Black will recover his pawn with the better position. 1 2 .c3 aims to bring the a3-knight back into play quickly and guard d4 against knight

invasions, but it neglects the development of the kingside. 1 2 . . . 0-0 ( 1 2 . . . Wfg6!? may be even

stronger) 1 3 . liJ c2 ib7 1 4 .id3 ( 1 4 . liJ e3 liJ e?+) leaves Black with a pleasant choice between 1 4 . . . liJ dS ! ?+, intending . . . liJ e6, or 1 4 . . . gadS 1 5 . 0-0 liJ e7 1 6. liJ e3 d5 l 7.exd5 liJ xd5 1 8 .liJ xd5 gxd5t, intending 1 9 .'1Wc2 gfd8!.

12 ... 0-0!? This aggressive recommendation of Kolev and

Nedev leads to lively play. l 2 , .. b4 is another

interesting continuation, but my preference is for the text move.

13.cxbS tll d4 14.tll c2

272

9. lll dS

There is no question that 1 4 . bxa6 �g6 1 5 .f3 ixa6t favours Black. (An additional resource is l 5 . . . d5!?+, as in Osuna Osuna - Novosad, corr.

20 1 1 .)

concentrate on: Bl) l l .�f3, l l .f3 and B4) l l ..id3.

B2) l l .�d3, B3)

l l .iMf e2 is a rather artificial way of preparing

castling that has seldom been seen in practice.

14 ... dS!i' Black breaks open the centre to expose the uncasded white monarch.

After: 1 1 . . .ib? 1 2 .f3

1 5.exd5 1 5 .tt:lxd4? exd4 1 6.exd5 Ele8t 1 7.i.e2 d3!

1 8 .�xd3 iMfxb2 1 9 .Eld l id7-+

� �% ��-?%-,Ji � • w� i · .t.m�.,•, . , , ,�

6 � % %�,�,,,,, .m,� : ��-��r�� ril � �,� � �� 2 �/�j �!��[j ,� � ��- 11 1

�r�

�, . '�r'0 a

1 2 . . . d5!N 1 3 . 0-0-0 (Premature is 1 3 .exd5 ? ! , when 1 3 . . . tt:l fxd5 1 4. 0-0-0 f6+ highlights the strange placement of White's pieces.) 1 3 . . . �c7 1 4 .@b 1 Black now has a wide choice of moves.

like: 1 4 . . . b4!? 1 5 .exd5 tt:l fxd5 1 6 .ixe7 ( 1 6 . tt:l c4 f6+) 1 6 . . . 'tt> x e7! 1 7. tt:l c4 f6 1 8 .�e l Elhd8 1 9 .id3

@f8 2 0 . ctJ e3 tt:lxe3 2 l .iMfxe3 h6= A clear-cut way of playing, with a balanced position.

Bl) l l .Wff3

B) l O.lll xe7 This is the main alrernative to 1 0 .i.xf6, seeking

a minimal advantage after 1 o . . . iMfxe7 due to the possession of the bishop pair. Our focus for this book will instead be the dynamic 1 0 . . . tt:lxe7,

which

I believe is the best way to play for a win.

10 ... lll xe?!? Recapturing with the knight is thematic as

it allows Black to control d5 . White can now

double his opponent's pawns by ixf6, but this is hardly a first-time occurrence in the Sveshnikov.

This principal continuation of l l .ixf6 is examined in the next chapter. For now we shall

Chapter 23

Introduction to the Classical Variation

0-0 1 7.c4 ti:l f4 1 8 .cxb5 axb 5 1 9 .ti:lxb5 d 5 fÂą , with good counterplay for Black in Sergeev Shablinsky, corr. 20 1 0 . With the text, Black intends t o castle and open the f-file. Thus White must act quickly, and has tried the following moves:

12.c4 This looks like a worse version of the lines arising after l l ..id3 ib7 1 2 .We2 ti:l d7 1 3 .c4, but in fact White may have nothing better. 1 2 .b4 With the usual idea of fixing the a6 and b5

pawn duo as a target, while preventing the knight reaching c5. However, the loss of time it entails might prove crucial with the queen dubiously placed on f3 .

1 2 . . . h6 1 3 .id2 1 3 .ixe7?! Wxe7 is already slightly better for Black, as 1 4 .c4 d5! 1 5 . c5 Wh4!+ allows him to win a pawn.

1 3 . . . 0-0 1 4.c4 ib7! 1 5 .cxb 5 ti:l f6 1 6. bxa6 ixe4

I 7.Wh3 ti:l c6! A crazy position has arisen. White is underÂ

developed but has an extra pawn, along with three passers on the queenside. Despite White's

scary pawns it seems to me that Black is okay;

White will find it hard to bring his king into safety

1 8.b5 1 8 . ti:J b 5 ! ? E:xa6 1 9 .a4 is a n attempt t o prevent

273

the black knight from being stationed on d4 and at the same time mobilize the pawns, yet after l 9 . . . d5t Black's centre looks like a weightier factor.

1 2 . 0-0-0

More critical than 1 2.b4. White develops with tempo and prepares a frontal attack, though

am satisfied with Black's chances. 12 . . . ti:l c5 1 3 .ie3 ti:l e6! But not 13 ... Wc7?? 1 4 .ixb 5 t ! +-.

1 4 . c4! ?

1 4 .Wg3?! 0-0+ is already excellent for Black.

1 4 .'itib l .ib7 1 5 . c4 0-0 1 6 .id3 ti:l c6!t looked artificial for White in Vitolinsh - Chekhov, Daugavpils 1 978.

274

9 .tll d5

Black's position is harmonious. Vitolinsh Ligterink, Yurmala 1 978, continued: l 7.h4 �b7 1 8 .id3 1 8 .1Mfg4 h 5 ! Now Black should have daringly played:

1 8 . . . fS !N 1 9 .h5

1 9 .1Mfh3 ?! f4!+ 1 9 . . . Ei'.fS!+

White has been landed in a difficult situation.

Thus, it seems that after 1 1 .1Mff3 ll'i d7 White has to restrict himself to conventional wisdom with 1 2 .c4 .

12 ... b4 13.ll\c2 aS 14.J.d3 0-0 1 5.0-0 lll cS= Black stands excellently, as the white queen is not well placed on f3 , but at least White does

not run the great risks that were witnessed in the variations above.

B2) 1 1 .'11Md3

1 4 . . . ixd5! 1 5 .@b l 1 5 .ll'i b l 1Mfa5 ! 1 6. ll'i c3 0-0-0! is excellent for the second player, as l 7.ll\xd5 ?! Elxd5 1 8 .1Mfb3

Elxd l t 1 9 .@xd l e4! 20.c3 Eld8tt leaves the white king rather exposed.

1 5 . . . 1Mf c7 1 6. c4 bxc4 l 7 . ll'i xc4 Eld800 The outcome is satisfactory for Black.

12 ... ifS! 13.'11Mb 3 WxdS!

A very rare continuation, once played by Anand. I am not surprised that he chose not to deploy

Black can be delighted with his position.

it again:

8 � �£��-�/,-�Ji 7 � n � •/ �� • �� %1-� . :c1 �� 6 '� r�.J,;'\�-�� .t. u��%1 �� ,,,,, /,� �� .

s 4

...

....

� -� � 32 �. ;�r��11 � � ��-f!J� b f[j b g f�[j b .....

/,� ,, /,� �

1 1 ... dS! 1 2.exdS

�=�-�

1 2 .ixf6!? gxf6 1 3 . 0-0-0

This can be well met by:

1 3 . . . ib7! ? 1 4 .exd5

1 4 .1Mfb3 d4! is sensible now, as the white queen looks misplaced after either 1 5 . f300 or l 5 .id3 0-000•

1 4 . c4 '11M e 4t 1 5 .ie3 0-0+, intending 1 6 .f3 ( 1 6.cxb 5 ? ! ll'i ed5--+) 1 6 . . . 1Mfb7 1 7.cxb5 ll'i ed5 1 8 .if2 e4!--+ is dangerous for White.

Now Leko could have played:

Chapter 23

275

Introduction to the Classical Variation

14 ... tll fxd5!? 1 5.c4 b4! 1 6.cxd5

1 1 . .. d5!

1 6 . tll b5 axb5 1 7 .cxd5 fild7+ promises only difficulties for White.

However, it seems that equality is not far away for Black.

1 6 ... bxa3 17.hxa3

White

1 7.b3?! tll x d5 1 8 .filc4 tll b4 1 9 .0-0 f6+ was

better for Black in Ruiz Gonzalez - Fluvia Poyatos, Lloret de! Mar 1 997.

8 7 6 5 4 3

has

choice

two

B3 1) 12.�xf6 and B32) 12.exdS.

captures:

B31) 12.�xf6 gxf6 1 3.exd5 �xd5! This allows Black to free his position and obtain equal chances in an unbalanced ending. Black's doubled f-pawns are compensated for by his more active and harmoniously placed pieces.

White can rry and bring his knight into play dynamically:

2 1

17 ... tll xd5 1 8.�c4 �e6 19Jkl f6! 20.�d2 Wfi 2 1 .0-0 �hcsi With a slightly more pleasant ending.

B3) 1 1 .f3 This is an attempt to solidify the centre in

preparation for c2-c4 next move, opening up the

position for the bishops.

14.c4!?

1 4 .�xd5?! Cll xd5 1 5 .c4 bxc4 1 6 . Cll xc4 file6+ is worse for White, as the black king will be splendidly placed on e7. 1 4.c3?! �c5+ is also excellent for Black, as White will have to spend time and energy to bring his king into relative safety.

14 ... bxc4 15.tll xc4 ie6 An optimal reaction, maintaining the option

of transposing to

1 4 .�xd5?! if White now

exchanges queens. In the meantime White has

weakened d4, a fact Black might try to exploit later on.

276

9. lll d5

16.�e2 This developing move looks like rhe lesser evil. White shouldn't give his opponent the initiative by taking on d5 or giving thoughtless checks . Indeed,

pointless.

1 6. tt:l d6t?!

©fS+

seems

absolutely

1 6 .'Wa4t?!

This does have an idea, bur Black shouldn't be too worried: 1 6 . . . �c6 1 7.'Wa3 !?

The point, threatening a check on d6 while preventing Black from castling.

��f � -��'-, �� /, , ,�f" �• •�•.tw � � 5�

�� - %� 4 �-��t· ?,-�� !!;�� 3 � �� 6

There are mutual chances in an unclear ending.

23.tll c5 �d5 Black is fine.

B32) 12.exd5

�· {w�"'�• � �� Y/'l!,,� �. --

/,, ,,z�)''l!

,� � a

�-'l!

��B. : e

l 7 . . . tt:l f5 !

I t seems that the weakness of d 4 i s the weightier

factor in the position. 1 8 .gc l

1 8 .id3 gd8! 1 9 .ixf5 �xc4! 20 .ixe6 fxe6!+ is

better for Black; his king will find a refuge on

f7 while his pieces are the more active. 1 8 . . . gd8! 1 9 .gc3

1 9 .id3 gd4+ 20.0-0 ? �xc4 2 1 .ixf5 'Wb6+

1 9 . . . �d7 20 .ie2 tt:l d4+

Black can boast about a concrete strategic

gain, as his unassailable knight on d4 offers him chances of serious pressure.

16 ...Wc5!? 17.tll d6t! 1 7.�d6 'Wa7+

17 ... @fS 18.lll e4 Wa5t 19.Wd2 Wxd2t 20.@xd2 ©g7 2 1 .E!hcl E!hd8t 22.@el a5!00

The universally adopted move in practice,

preserving the bishop pair.

12 ... tll fxd5 13.c4 bxc4 14.tll xc4 f6! 15.�d2 0-0 Black obtains a solid position in view of his

excellent central stance. White has the following choice:

16.�d3 This is considered best by Kolev and Nedev.

Chapter 23

277

Introduction to the Classical Variation

B4) 1 1 .�d3

1 6 .ia5 ?! has the idea of trading some wood and

freeing White from his constricted position, but it loses time and weakens f4. After: 16 . . . WieS! 1 7.lll b6 ( 1 7.lll d6 'l!fic6 1 8 .lll xc8 Ei:fxc8+ gives Black a tremendous position in return for White's

bishop pair.) 1 7 . . . lll x b6 1 8 .ixb6 'Wc6+ Black has gained enough time to build up an imposing

A natural continuation, defending the e4-pawn and preparing to develop with 'We2 or Wif3 .

White reserves the option o f ixf6 fo r a later stage if Black does nothing to prevent it.

central position, with . . . ie6 and . . . lll d5 next. Another formation featuring . . . ie6 and . . . Wif7 is also possible.

l 6.ie2?! as played in Petrov - Dobrov, Athens

2003, is too passive. Black gained the upper

hand with: 1 6 . . . .ie6 1 7. 0-0 lll b6!? ( l 7 . . . lll g6t) l 8 . lll e3 Wid4 1 9 .ic l

1 1 . i.b7!? •.

l l . . . d5 is also possible here. The choice is

largely a matter of taste; personally I prefer to develop and keep the option of . . . lll f6-d7-c5 . In

any case, after 1 2 .exd5 'Wxd5 1 3 .f3 e4 1 4 .ixf6 exd3 l 5 .ixe7 'We6t 1 6 .Wf2 'l!fib6t l 7.Wg3 'l!fic7t 1 8 .Wf2 'Wa7t 1 9 .Wg3 Wixe7 20 .'Wxd3 0-0

2 1 .Ei:he l Wic7t 22.Wf2 ie6 23 .Wie4 Ei:ad8, Black had excellent compensation for the pawn and no reasons to complain in Piccoli - Pi rs, corr. 2009.

16 ...�f5! It is important for Black to gain a preponderance

on the light squares.

17.�a5 Wd7 1 s.0-o l 8 .ixf5 ? ! lll xf5 1 9 .0-0 'Wb5 20 .°Wb3 Ei:fb8!+ is

terrible for White.

18 ...Wb5 19.b3! hd3 20.Wxd3 lll c6m Black has good assets in his agile minor pieces

and rock-like centre. If the a5-bishop retreats,

he can grab the d-file by placing a rook on d8 opposite the white queen. Thus, we may conclude that 1 l .f3 is at best equal for White.

The two main continuations now are:

B41)

12.8!? and B42) 12.We2.

1 2 .ixf6 gxf6 is considered under l l .ixf6 gxf6 1 2 .id3 ib7 - see Chapter 24. 1 2.Wif3

A weak choice in the present situation since it blocks the f-pawn, denying White the chance to support his centre with f2-f3 . Also,

the queen might turn out to be a target on f3 following a well timed . . . d5 or . . . f5 .

1 2 . . . lll d? White's best chance is:

278

9 . lli dS

1 3 .c4!

Weaker are boch: 1 3 .b4 f6 1 4 .id2 ( 1 4 .ih4 ?! tiJg6 1 5 .ig3 0-0+) 14 ... 0-0+ ( 1 4 . . . f5+)

And 1 3 .�g3 CU c5!+, incending 1 4 .ixe7?! 'fixe7 1 5 .'fixg7 0-0-0 1 6 .�g4t Wb8 1 7. 0-0-0 l"1hg8 1 8 .�f3 d5+ (l 8 ... �g5t+) .

1 3 . . . tiJ c 5 ! 1 4 .b4! Best, to extricace the queen from f3 . 1 4 .cxb 5

1 5 .i.d2

d5!

1 6. bxa6

tiJxd3t

l 7.�xd3 ixa6t emphasizes White's under

developmenc and unharmonious play.

1 4 . . . CU xd3t 1 5 .�xd3 f6 1 6 .ie3 f5 ! ? 1 7.exf5 0-000 The position is complicated but Black can face the future with confidence. 1 8 .ig5 e4 1 9 .�h3 �d7+

Another solid possibility, and one that has been unj ustifiably neglected at the top level. The best I could find was a complicated path to equality.

12 ... dS! 1 3.exd5 A necessary prelude to Black's play is:

( 1 8 . . . tiJ d5 ! ?)

1 9 .Wh l

E1fd8

20.�b3!

�b6t

id5 !

2 1 .ic4 ixc4 22 .�xc4 l':i:d2 23.l':i:ad l ! (23.b4?! tiJ d5!�) 23 . . . l"1xb2 24 . tiJ d6 �a7 2 5 .a4= with a completely level position

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

15 ... e4!

A star move; unleashing the full potential of

Black's pieces, and of the b 7-bishop in particular. After a thorough analysis I became convinced that this position is equal.

16.fxe4 It is not good to give up the light-squared

bishop by l 6.ixe4? ! , in view of the tactical line: 16 . . . CU xe4 l 7.fxe4 �h4t 1 8 .g3 �xe4t 1 9 .�e2 CU e3!+ Black gets the upper hand. 1 6.�e2 will transpose to 1 6.fxe4 after 1 6 . . . tiJ b6 ! = .

16 ... lli b6!

1 3 ... lli exdS! recapture,

maintaining

14.c4!N h6! 1 4 . . . tiJ b4 1 5 .if5± is annoying for Black.

1 5 ..id2

l 8 . tiJ xb 5

line concinues 1 7. 0-0 axb5

The most natural.

B41) 12.f3!?

A fine positional concrol of e4 .

Things run relatively smoothly afrer 1 5 .ixf6 CU xf6 1 6.cxb5 0-0 , when my main

Black's minor pieces and queen presenc an aesthetic picture of cooperation; they all hit

something in the white camp. Their concentrated

action is enough for full equality, as the following variations show:

17.'We2 This is most likely to occur in a game.

Chapter 23

279

Introduction to the Classical Variation

1 7.iaS ?! is a decentralization that promises

nothing good because it leaves several important dark squares unprotected. After 1 7 . . . lll xe4 1 8 . 0-0 Wd4t 1 9 .©h l 0-0+ Black has a dangerous pull. l 7.if4?! 0-000 is equally unpromising for White as it leaves his central pawns hanging.

White would be wise not to take any further risks here: 26.©f2 l"ld2t 27.©g3 l"lb8 28.b3 lll c3 29. lll b l ? ! 29. lll c4= 29 . . . lll e2tl Black has a strong attack.

1 7.ie3 ! ? An interesting alternative t o l 7.Wie2 and an

attempt to recover the initiative. Black should continue playing aggressively: l 7 . . . lll a4! l 8 .ie2 1 8 .l"lb l lll g4! 1 9 .We2 lll eS!? is an attempt to keep some life in the position. ( l 9 . . . lll x b2 20.l"lxb2 lll xe3 2 1 .Wxe3 WaSt 22 .Wid2 Wixa3

23.cxbS 0-0 24.0-0 l"lad8 2S .l"lb3 WcSt

26.'1Mff2 '1Mfxf2t 27.©xf2 axb S 28 .©e3 l"la8 29.a3 ic6=) 20 .ic2 lll x b2! 2 1 .0-0 lll bxc4 22. lll xc4 lll xc400 The position is unclear, as White's two bishops compensate for the pawn to a certain extent.

1 8 . . . 'IMfaS t ! 1 9 .Wd2! 1 9 .id2 ?! Wib6! prevents castling and eyes the weakened f2-square. 20.cxbS lll xe4! 2 1 .l"lfl lll xd2 22.'1Mfxd2 White.

0-0�

is clearly bad for

19 . . . Wixd2t 20 .�xd2 lll xe4 2 l .cxb5

Nothing special is offered by 2 l .�e3 lll x b2

22.cxbS (22.l"lb l lll a4+) 22 . . . 0-000 • The weakness of the c3-square in White's camp outweighs his two bishops.

1 8 .ixc4 plays it safe: 1 8 . . . bxc4 1 9 .lll xc4 0-0

20.eS lll e4 2 1 .0-0 lll xd2! ? Black will soon secure full equality by piling up on the weak eS -pawn.

18 ... bxc4 19.i.xc4 lll xe4 Another interesting position has arisen .

4 3

2 1 . . . lll xd2 22. ©xd2 0-0 23. bxa6 l"lfd8t 24.©e3 ixa6 2 S .if3 l"ld3t!?

2 1

20.0-0!?

280

9 .tll d5

A surprising piece offer, but Black can cope with it satisfactorily. 20 .ib4 �b6+! is fine for Black, who may well castle long. 20.l"ldl is the engines' first choice, but rather

pleasant

for

the

second

player.

Black has

20 . . . �h4t! 2 1 .g3 �e7 22.0-0 0-0f!, and with such a weakened long diagonal it is hard to imagine White can be better.

20 ... 1Mfxd2 2 1 ..ixf7t 'it>e7 22.1Mfxd2 lll xd2 23.E!:ael t 'it>f8! 24J!f5 After 24.l"lf4, Black harasses the enemy rook well enough to force a draw. 24 . . . g5! 2 5 .l"lf5 ie4! 26.l"lf2 l"ld8 27.ih 5 t 'it>g7 28.E!:ee2 ib l !

29.l"lxd2 ixa2= and material equality has been restored.

B42) 12.1Mfe2 The main line. A solid, developing move.

-r•. . , %•tm,�I, 6 ·- �.. . . :- . . %_ � . . . ;� Wi. 7 � ·� � .r .�� Wia�� Wia�. . .%�·I'i%["(%� � s .i m �--

4 �� ,�� 3� �m, �� m,[j..,,%,, . . . . ;��[j 2 �� [j �� [j m�� [j v� ....r,,,,%� .. �

12 ... lll d7!

Avoiding the doubled pawns and also preparing to transfer the knight to c 5 , putting the e4-pawn under pressure again. But the main

point of this retreat is to pave the way for the

f-pawn to contest the centre as well.

White has two tries on the queenside: 13.b4!? and B422) 13.c4.

B421)

B42 1) 13.b4!? An idea we have seen before, with the aim of

24 ... g6! 25 ..ixg6t!?

25 .l"lf4 g5= leads to the previous line.

25 ... 'it>g7 26 ..ihS l"lhf8! Taking advantage of the weakness of the fl square to bring the black king to relative safety.

27.gfe5 27.l"le?t? 'it>h8 28.E!:xf8t E!:xf8+

27 ... gabS 28.l"le7t ©h8m The position is close to equal, but it seems it is White who has to be more careful .

taking c5 away from the black knight and fixing b5 as a target. White intends to follow up with c2-c4 .

1 3 ... f6 14.id2 f5 Black has fully-fledged counterplay however,

that will lead to enhanced control of the light squares for him:

1 5.c4! Weaker is l 5 . f3 ? ! fxe4 1 6. fxe4 0-0+ when

White cannot castle.

1 5 .exf5 0-0 1 6 .c4 (but not 1 6 .0-0?! d5+ with

wonderfully centralized pawns and pieces for Black)

1 6 . . . i.xg2! ? ( 1 6 . . . li:ixf5

1 7.ixf5 E!:xf5

Chapter 23 - Introduction to the Classical Variation

28 1

1 8 . 0-0=) 1 7.Elgl ih3 !+ also looks better for Black, despite White's temporary initiative.

2 5 .°!Wxb6 d4! 26.f3 was bad for White in Yemelin - Krasenkow, Elista 1 99 5 . The best way for Black

1 5 0-0!?

(27.Elf2 id5+) 2 7 . . . ia6 28.E1f2 E\fc8+ with total domination.

.•.

An interesting pawn sacrifice. The usual continuation is: 1 5 . . . 6ce4 1 6 .ixe4

ixe4 l 7.'1Mfxe4 0-0! 1 8 .cxb 5 ! Accepting the pawn is the best White can do. 1 8 . . . axb 5 1 9 . Ci:J xb5 '1Mfb6 20 .'1Mfe2 Elfb8! 2 l . 'i:l c3 1Mfxb4 Black has

to exploit his advantage was 26 . . . '!Wd7! 27. Ci:l e l

19 ...gxf5 20.0-0 llJ b6! This direct move gives the best chances to Black.

recovered his pawn with a fully equal game. One

2 l .bxa6 gxa6! 22.liJc2 llJ c4 23.f3

24.Elfd l Elxb l 2 5 . Elxb l Ci:ld5 26. Ci:l b 5 Y2-Y2 Alekseev - Avrukh, Biel 2004, in view of the

2 3 . lt:l e3 'i:l xe3 24.fXe3 Elxfl t 2 5 .'\Mfxfl '1Mf a8!� and Black has excellent compensation on the

continuation was 22. 0-0 'i:l c5 23.Elab l '\Mf d4!

forced variation 26 . . . 1Mfe4 27.'\Mfxe4 'i:lxe4 2 8 .ie l

light squares.

E1xa2 29.f3 = .

16.cxb5! 1 6 .0-0?! 6ce4 1 7.ixe4 ixe4 1 8 .'1Mfxe4 bxc4+ forces White to capture on c4 with the queen, and leads to slightly worse positions for him as discussed below.

1 6 ... fxe4 17.i.xe4 d5!? The other major possibility, and perhaps a

better winning chance.

l 7 . . .ixe4 1 8 .1Mfxe4 axb5 = is j ust a transposition to the note on l 5 . . . 6ce4 above.

26 ... gh5!? 27.i.el '°!Wg5 28.'°!Wd2 Black can surprisingly trade queens:

28 ...'Wxd2 29.bd2 1'3f5 30.@hl The game should now end in a draw.

30 ... l'!gf6 3 1 .Wgl l'!g6 32.hl = B422) 13.c4 a

18.i.c2 lDf5 i.xf5

1 9 .0-0?! Ci:l d4 20 .'\Mfd3 'i:l xc2 2 1 . lt:l xc2 axb5 22 .°!Wxb5 Ci:J b6� 23 .ig5 ?! '!Wd6! 24 .ie7 '\Mfxe7

Considered as best, setting up a Maroczy wall in

the centre. This has been a Morozevich speciality.

13 ... b4 14.llJc2 aS 1 5.0-0 llJ c5

282

9 .lll d5

This posmon is surprisingly considered as slightly better for White. The idea is to stabilize

e4 with f2-f3 , and then proceed to apply

pressure on d6 with 8:fd l , Wd2 and �fl . Once

Black gets tied to the defence of d6, White proceeds with gac l and lli c2-e3-d 5 . After the forced capture on d 5 , he will take back

with the c-pawn and try to pile up on the c5knight. This will be done by doubling his rooks

on the c-file and transferring his dark-squared bishop to f2 . Quite impressive indeed! In my opinion, however, this plan cannot materialize.

Black can generate counterplay by preparing . . .f5 .

1 6 . . . Wb6!

Stopping

( 1 7.gfd l

lli g6

f2-f3 .

1 8 .ig3

0-0

After:

l 7.ixe7

1 9.@hl

llixd3

20.Wxd3 f5 ! 2 1 .exf5 lli f4 22.ixf4 Wxf2!t is excellent for Black.) 1 7 . . . @xe7 1 8 .lli e3 ghe8 1 9 .gfd l ( 1 9 . lli f5 t @fs 20 .�h5 @gs) 1 9 . . . @f8= Black has castled artificially and has a good game.

1 6 .E1fd l Wc7! ( 1 6 . . . f6 1 7.ih4 0-0 1 8 . f3 lli g6 1 9 .ig3;!; is what Black is striving to avoid.) l 7.f3

1 6.f3 This move, employed by Morozevich against

Radjabov, must be best. 1 6 .@h l ? ! f6

1 7.ih4?! (to keep . . . f5 under

restraint) fails to 1 7 . . . h5! 1 8 .h3 g5! 1 9 .�g3 g4! ,

and Black opens lines against the white king.

20.h4? only makes matters worse due to 20 . . . f5 ! 2 l .exf5 e4-+ . 1 6 . lli e3 can be met by: 1 6 . . . f6 1 7.ih4 h 5 ! 1 8 .f4

lli g6 ( l 8 . . . exf4!? l 9 . lli d5 lli xd3 20.Wxd3 lli g600)

1 9 . lli f5 llixf4 20.8:xf4 exf4 2 1 . llixg7t @d700 With unclear play, as the black king will be safe on the queenside. 1 6 .ih4 should be answered by:

l 7 . . . lli g6! The bishop's retreat to h4 has been cue off and Black enjoys excellent play. The white

knight cannot j ump to e3, which means Black has enough time to prepare . . . f5 .

1 6 ...�b6! This move cuts across White's intentions. 16 . . . f6 1 7.ih4! lli g6 1 8 .ig3;!; is what White

wants, as . . . f5 will be impossible to carry out after lli e3 . White will be free to build up pressure on the d-file and the queenside.

Chapter 23

Introduction to the Classical Variation

White was similarly happy after 16 ... �c7 1 7.�d2! 0-0 1 8 . lb e3 b3 1 9 . Elfd l f6 20.ih4 a4 2 l .a3;!; as Black had no counterplay m Morozevich - Radjabov, Kerner 2007. 16 . . . 0-0 1 7.�fd l f6 has been played in a few games but now 1 8 .ih4!?;!; N is the right choice, trying to follow the plan we have outlined above for White.

283

19 ... Wi'c6! 20.:!�fdl :Sad8 2 1 ..ifl f5! 22.exfS :Sxf5 co Opening the f-file has granted Black fine piece play. I can conclude that there is no advantage for

White in this variation either.

Conclusion

Chapter 23 has been an introduction to the

variation 9.lbd5 fi.e7, which forms one of the two

main branches of the Sveshnikov. This variation is usually characterized by positional play arising

after the standard capture 1 0 .ixf6, but in this chapter we delved into the intricacies of less popular options like 1 0 .lll xf6t?! and 1 0 .lll xe7.

I attached an ?! to the move 1 O. lll xf6t?!, because

it merely develops Black without achieving

anything substantial. Black obtains the easier game due to his superior bishop and greater

flexibility. More to the point is 1 0 .lll xe7 lll xe7!?, when White at least surrenders his powerfully centralized knight to obtain something concrete. In the resulring positions he may choose

1 7 .ie3 Womacka - Krasenkow, Germany 1 997, 1 7 . . . 0-0?.

between maintaining the bishop pair or giving it up to inflict a weakness upon the enemy pawn structure, but Black should be fine in both cases as he has chances to contest control of the light squares in the centre.

17 ... lb g6! 18 ..ie3 0-0 1 9.1Mi'd2

In this chapter I chose to explore the first

possibility, namely the situation where White

resorts

bishop-pair-maintenance

mode.

Typically satisfactory positions for Black arise

after either l l .f3 d5! or l l .id3 ib7 ! ? 1 2 .�e2 lll d7! as his light-squared bishop functions perfectly while the dark squares are covered by his other pieces and pawns. Summing up, I cannot see any problems for

Black in these lines and this is actually the type of game he should be happy to obtain as his play is free and easy.

9 . �dS a

1 1.ixf6 Variation Index 1 .e4 c5 2.tll f3 lll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lll xd4 tll f6 s.lll c3 e5 6.lll db5 d6 7.�g5 a6 8.tll a3 h5 9.tll d5 �e7 1 0.tll xe7 lll xe7!? 1 1 .�xf6 1 1 . .. gxf6

A) 12.�f3 f5! Al) 1 3.0-0-0 A2) 1 3.exfS B) 12.c4 �b7 B l ) 1 3.cxhS?! �xe4 B l l) 14.�a4?! B l 2) 14.bxa6 B2) 13.�d3 �g8! B2 1) 14.cxbS?! B22) 14.� g l ! C) 12.�d3 �b7 Cl) 13.�e2 C2) 13.�hS!? Al) after 1 7.�h3

C2) after l 8 .il.g4

B 1 2) after 1 5 .�e2

l 7 . . . lll g6!

285 285 286 287 287 287 289 290 290 29 1 292 292 293

1 5 . . . lll g6!

1 8 . . . e31

Chapter 24

1 .e4 c5 2.t2Jf3 t2J c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.t2Jxd4 t2Jf6 5.t2Jc3 e5 6.t2Jdb5 d6 7..ig5 a6 s.t2Ja3 b5 9.t2Jd5 fi..e7 1 0.t2Jxe7 t2Jxe7!? Having examined the interesting alternatives,

ir is now rime to move to the main continuation.

i. %. .i. S9m �� 7 jJij --� • •• 6 �� . . %�r�,,'af "• . ,,�f�

l!ij.l!ij !l!ij m 5 � � f,�, . %� � "'"" ��. � � � l!ij l!iji . : �l!ij �� l!ij-,,,, ��-,,,, 2 ,

285

1 l .fi..xf6

1 5 . . . t2J c6! 1 6.gxf6 ( 1 6. f3 <Jle7 1 7.gd2 if5+) 16 . . . ti:l b4 1 7.f3 ( 1 7. f4?! <Jle7 1 8 . fxe5 gac8t)

17 . . ..ig6 1 8 .f4! <Jle7! 1 9 .fxe5 .B:ac8t Black has some initiative, but White should be able to

draw with precise play.

A) 12.Wff3 Developing with a tempo, but Black can react actively and stop his opponent from wresting rhe initiative:

;,,, , , , , ;�f ,,,,

� � f{j � ffj � f[j % , , �� i=lL-� /, , , , Y,

/,, , ,,%

l 1 ..ixf6 gxf6

Black may have the worse pawn structure but the possibility of pawn breaks by . . . d5 and .. .f5 , in conj unction with the half-open c - and g-files, offer him good prospects . In addition, his king is safe behind the central pawn mass.

At this point White has a choice between:

A) 12.Wff3, 8) 12.c4 or C) 12 ..id3.

The idea behind 1 2 .�d2 ! ? is predictable - to castle queenside and apply pressure against d6.

After 12 . . . ib?! 1 3 .0-0-0 ixe4 1 4.�xd6 �xd6 1 5 .gxd6

Al) 13.0-0-0 fi..b7! 14.fi..d3 1 4 .�d3 ?! is certainly an admission that putting the queen on f3 was wrong, and after 14 . . . fxe4! 1 5 .�xd6 �xd6 1 6 .gxd6 gg8!+ Black has acrive

play while it is not easy for White to develop the rest of his army.

14 ... 0-0!? It is safe to castle kingside, as White doesn't have enough firepower to attack with his knight so far away.

1 5.:Shel An attempt to unpin by 1 5 .�g3t @hS and 1 6 .exf5 leads to some interesting play: 1 6 . . . ggs

286

9. tll dS

1 7.11>lfh4 ixg2! 1 8 .l"l:hg l ! ( 1 8 .1Wf6t?! is actually bad because after 1 8 . . . l"l:g7 1 9 .l"l:hg l li:l g8!+ Black

forces the trade of queens under favourable

conditions .) 1 8 . . . li:l d5 1 9 .'iWxdS l"l:axd8 20.l"l:xg2! !l:xg2 2 1 .ie4

� ii �� ""�.Bi. �� -%%��0./� : T��"�-:t�b �� 5 ��i �'!Al3 � �� -��.i. �f�-� [j � �f� [j f�� z,. ,,,

�

2 1

�

.....

%�·y,,,�� z

� .: � d

.....

%� ... . � g

2 1 . . .l"l:xh2! ? 22 .ixd5 !l:xf2 23 .ib7!? (23 .c4 bxc4 24.li:lxc4 !l:xf5+) 23 . . . d5 24.ixa6 b4 2 5 . lll c4!

7 6 5

4 3

obj ectively be close to a draw, yet I would think that the onus of proof is on White.

15 ... @hs 16.©b1 The direct 1 6 .\Wh5 should typically be met

with: 1 6 . . . fxe4 1 7.ixe4 ixe4 1 8 .l"l:xe4 li:l g6 1 9 .1Wh6 ( 1 9 .l"l:e3 1Wf6 20 .l"l:h3 11>lrg7+) 1 9 . . .f5 20.l"l:e3 !l:f6+ Black has everything under control,

rendering his space-gaining effort on the kingside sound.

1 6 ... f6! It seems that White's position is slowly running out of steam and that Black can gradually try to obtain the initiative.

17.'&h3 l 7.c4 bxc4 l 8 . li:l xc4 d5! 1 9 .exd5 e4+ is fine for

Black.

1 7 .11>lfh5 li:l g6! 1 8 .g3 fxe4 1 9 .l"l:xe4! ? f5 ! 20.!l:ee l

1Wf600 leaves White still in anxiety about the future of the a3-knight.

17 ... ll:\g6! 18.'&h6 fxe4 19 ..L:e4 .L:e4 20.gxe4 f5 21 .ge3 gf6m/; Black's big centre is slowly pushing White

back.

A2) 1 3.exfS .ixfS 14 ..id3 .ie6!

l"l:a8 26.ib7 l"l:xa2 27. �b l l"l:a7 28 .ixd5 l"!xf500

With a highly unbalanced ending that should

This bishop is a powerful supporter of Black's central pawn mass and should not be exchanged.

1 5.0-0 1 5 .0-0-0 ?! :8c8+ is risky for White.

6 5

4 3

2 1

1 5 ... d5!?

Black intends to castle on the queenside. 1 5 . . . 0-0 1 6 .c4!? bxc4!? 1 7.ll'ixc4 f500 is also good for Black.

Chapter 24

1 6.:Badl ffc7 17.fff6 0-0-0m Black has a safe king on the queenside and attacking chances down the g-file, meaning that the opening has been a success for him. Thus, 1 2 .�f3 poses no problems for the second player.

B) 12.c4 This had been the main line for many years, but

Black's position has withstood the test of time and by now it is considered less topical. Black has two good ways to continue:

White can now try either:

Bl2) 14.bxa6.

Bi l) 14.ff a4?! or

B i l) 14.Wia4?! White sends the queen over to the queenside in

order to back the passers and prevent Black from castling. However, this seems to neglect his own kingside and leads to a difficult position.

14... d5 15.bxa6t 1 5 .b6t iif8 1 6.b7 :8b8 1 7.ii.xa6 is worse for

his pawn with a tremendous position.

1 5 ... @f'8

White has lost nearly all of the games played from this position despite the computer's evaluation of +0. 1 6 . Let us have a look at some of the reasons why:

4 3

16.f.3

It seems natural to defend g2 so as to be able to

12 ....th7

bring the fl -bishop out. On the other hand this helps the manoeuvre . . . ii.e4-f5-c8, attacking the pawn on a6.

The traditional recipe, which has been seen

in more than a hundred games. Black is willing to sacrifice the queenside in order to acquire hegemony in the centre. l 2 .. .f5 ! ?

Kasparov's

recommendation and

has occurred less often. Although it offers

many practical chances, there are also certain

lines leading to equality and forced draws. For this reason, combined with White's ability to transpose to the following variations with 1 2 . .id3 , I have chosen to focus on 1 2 . . . ib7.

287

l l .txf6

White in view of 17 . . . :8g8! 1 8 .l'!gl ( 1 8 . f3 ? l'!xg2! 1 9 . fxe4 �b6-+) 1 8 . . . d4+ when Black recovers

now

have

two

branch

quick succession, firstly:

B2) 13 ..id3.

variations

l 6.h4?! was featured in the first game with

this variation and things turned out grimly for

White: 16 . . . l"lgS 1 7 .f3 if5 1 8 .g4 ii.cs 1 9 .0-0-0 �b6 20.'kt>b l ©g7 8

6 5

4 3

Bl) 13.cxb5?! and a

Bl} 13.cxb5?! .ixe4

2 1 . ttJ c2 ixa6 22 .�b4 �e6 24.g5 d4 2 5 . gxf6t ©xf6

23.ixa6 l"lxa6 26.f4 �xa2t

288

9. tll d5

27. © c l l'!c6 2 8 . fxe5t ©e6-+ White soon resigned in lzvozchikov - Sveshnikov, Riga 1 97 5 . 1 6 .�b4?! i s intended t o prevent the black queen

from reaching b6, but it loses time and also weakens the defence of the a-pawn. In a top level game play continued 1 6 . . . l'!g8 1 7. f3 if5 1 8 .g4 ic8 1 9 . 0-0-0 ixa6 20.©b l ©g7 2 1 . tll b 5 lll c6 22 .�c5 �a5!+, with a quick disaster for White, Lj ubojevic - Adorjan, Riga 1 979.

1 6 . tli c2?! Designed to offer the precious a-pawn extra

protection by tll b4. Black does best to quickly connect his rooks : 1 6 . . . ©g7! l 7. tll b4 1 7.a3 �b6 1 8 .�b4?! �c7+

d2. I think it is best for Black to connect his rooks.

1 6 . . . ©g7!? Play could continue: l 7.ie2!?

1 7. f3?! .�.f5 1 8 .b4 �b6+ 1 7.ib5 �b6 1 8 .0-0 tll c6! 1 9 .©h l tli d4t

1 7 . . . �b6 1 8 .l'!d2 No relief is offered by 1 8 .�b5 l'!hb8! 1 9 .�xb6 l'!xb6 20.l'!d2 if5!+ when Black maintains

good pressure in the ending. 1 8 .b4!? l'!hb8 1 9 . b 5 might be the lesser evil. Computers see no more than a draw after 1 9 . . . tll g6! 20.f3 lll f4! 2 1 . fxe4 tli xg2t 22.©fl

1 7 . . . �b6 1 8 .a3 1 8 .�b 5 ? is bad due to 1 8 . . . �d4+ .

- � • �.i'

.i�

1 6.l'!d l A logical move, but not much different from 1 6 .f3 . White wants to put d5 under some pressure and perhaps defend his b-pawn from

tll e3t 23.©e l tll g2t = with a perpetual check.

�,. ,/,-�.' �%�g{ ... , ��B ,. . . :•. " %�j�. �� 1��. ;��,, � ��-· �- , � � �• c0i � �L.�%�.. �=lft 8

. . . . . %�

. ..

-�

� h

1 8 . . . l'!hc8! An important move. Preparing to exchange the b4-knight by . . . tll c6 according to circumstance. 1 9 .�b5!

1 9 .�d l ?! tll c6! 20.tlixc6 l'!xc6 2 1 .b4 l'!c3!+ is

clearly better for Black. 1 9 .ie2 allows 1 9 . . . tll g6 20.�b5 �a7!+!.

1 9 . . . �d600 With satisfactory compensation. 20.l'!d l

20 .�e2 tll c6!+! again challenges the b4-knight,

giving White problems along the c-file. 20 . . . lll f5t

The knight's entrance on d4 will surely cause severe inconvenience to the white camp.

16 ...if5 None of White's options are particularly appealing:

17.ie2 Trying to bring the king into safety.

1 7.tll c2 is nothing special and can be met by:

1 7 . . . ©g7 1 8 . tli b4 ( 1 8 . l'! d l l'!b8! 1 9 . tli b4 �b6 20.a3 �e3t 2 1 .ie2 l'!hc8+) 1 8 . . . �b6 1 9 .�b5

�d6!� With splendid compensation.

Chapter 24 1 7.gdl should be answered by l 7 ... \t>g7!+.

17 .. J%g8 18.0-0

14... 0-0 Leaving White with the following choice:

1 5 ..ie2

1 8 .g3 °1Wb6+

1 5 .�b5 \t>h8! 1 6. 0-0 ( 1 6 . f3 �f5 l 7.°1Wd2 d5

1 8 . 0-0 �c8 allows Black to quickly recover his pawn, with fine play.)

�

?.I �

�

78 �r;,�". . .%.,�.,Y,��· '��1. ·.i% ' ";�1. . ·�. %� � 5 ��.i��. �� _:/•/� �� :ff[J;,-� �� WM �c.J �� 8 'effj%

6 5 4

?.I �

1 8 ... llig6 19.i.bS llif4 20.'Wb4t!

20.g3? '1Wb6t 2 1 .\t>h l tll e6+ is rather too weakening for White.

Black recovers his pawn, with a slighcly better position due to his broad pawn centre. Thus, we may arrive at the conclusion that l 4 .�a4?! is extremely risky for White.

1 6 . . . °1Wb6! 1 7. \t> h l ( 1 7.ge l d5! 1 8 .°1Wd2 gg8

1 9 .i.fl tll f5 � gives Black a powerful attack.) l 7 ... gg8 1 8 . f3 �f5 l 9.°1Wd2 d5t At least equal

and then enjoy the benefits of his strong centre.

Black was similarly not worse after 1 5 .l'! c l d5 1 6 .i.b5 \t>h8 1 7.0-0 f'lg8 1 8 .g3 ctJ f5 1 9 . b4oo, when a draw was agreed in Mesko - Mlynarcek, corr. 20 1 1 .

B12) 14.bxa6

rd ..%� ;•:•. .

for Black, who can continue with . . . �f5-c8xa6

20 ... @g7 2 1 .@hl i.cB+

289

l l .i.xf6

Relatively best. Black can continue with a natural move.

1 5 ... llig6! 1 6.0-0 llif4 17.f3 i.f5+±

Black stands well, as the a6-pawn will fall.

290

9. lll dS

B2) 13.i.d3 :!3g8!

� . 7 , ��. .%�·� �i 6 �-�,,%_ :.. . . . %...� 5� 4 �-�-8"� �� E

S9 � E .

32 -� :�� ; �� 8 'ef[j �- � 8 � /-----%-v=- - - %•� %'

.. , , .

�r

The best move, activating the rook and hitting the g2-pawn.

We shall examine two moves of contrasting

quality for White:

14.:!3gl !.

B21) 14.cxbS?! and B22)

1 4 . 0-0 ?!

This looks weak:

1 4 . . . bxc4 1 5 . 'Ll xc4

1 5 .'@a4t ic6 1 6 .'@xc4 f5 1 7.f3 '@b6t 1 8 .§:f2 fXe4 1 9 . fXe4 f5 20 .'@c2 fXe4 2 1 .i.xe4 d5

22.ixh7 ms 23.§:afl e4 24.'@b3 ib 5 ! was soon advantageous for Black in Rebord -

Chim, corr. 20 1 0 . 1 5 . . . d5

20.exd5

20.§:fc l §:ab8t 20 ... 'Ll f4 2 1 .i.e4 §:ad8 22.g3 ixd5 23 .ixd5 §:xd5 24. 'Ll c4 We6

Black's impressive piece placement outweighs his structural weaknesses. 1 4 .g3 is a logical defence of the g-pawn, but it

gives Black counterplay down the long diagonal.

14 . . . f5 ! 1 5 . f3 fXe4 1 6. fXe4 '&a5 t 1 7.°&d2 '@xd2t 1 8 .Wxd2 f5 ! 1 9 .§:he l fXe4 and a draw was agreed in this balanced ending, Sanchez R6denas - Pirs,

corr. 20 1 0 .

B21) 14.cxbS?! This also looks dubious, as White allows his kingside pawn structure ro be ruptured without gaining any clear benefits in return.

Black takes over the initiative and White must be extremely careful.

14 ... :!3xg2 1 5.bxa6 i.xa6 1 6.i.xa6

This is an effort co avoid surrendering the long diagonal. 1 6 .exd5 ?! '&xd5 I 7.f3 ( l 7.ie4? §:xg2t!

16 ... :!3xa6 17.tlic4

1 6 . 'Ll d2

1 8 . W h l §:xf2!!-+ won material in Andriasian

- Harika, Yerevan 2006.) 17 . . . §:d8t Black had

a powerful initiative in Kupreichik - Chekhov, Minsk 1 976. l 6 . . . 'Ll g6 This looks threatening and White does best to

1 6 .Wfl l'!g6 1 7.'&a4t '@d7 1 8 .'&xd7t Wxd7+

1 7.'&d3 ? '&b6! 1 8 .°&b5t '&xb5 1 9 . 'Ll xb 5 Wd7

20.a4 f5 ! 2 1 .exf5 §:g4 22.b3 §:b4+

17 ...fS! The correct break, ro create a passed pawn in the centre.

exchange queens.

18.exfS

With a slight advantage for Black due co his active pieces. For example:

20.exf5 (20 . 'Ll xf5 ? 'Ll xf5 2 1 .exf5 allows the beautiful tactical shot 2 1 . . .°&b 5 t 22 .'&e2 Wfc6

1 7.'@a4t Wf8 1 8 .'&b4t '@e7 1 9 .'@xe7t Wxe7+

1 8 . ctJ e3 ? ! fails to

1 8 . . . '&a5 t !

1 9 .Wfl

§:g7

Chapter 24 23.!':l:gl El:xa2!+) 20 . . . d5t and the white king is in peril.

18 tiJxf5 1 9.WdS !

29 1

l l .!xf6

25 ... @e7 26.tiJe3 tlJxe3 27.fxe3 f5 28.E:d3! After 28.El:b I ?! d5 29.a3 El:e4 30. <ii f2 f4 3 l .exf4

El:xf4t+ Black's pawns are more advanced.

..•

1 9 .Wif3 ? ! Wlg5 !+

1 9 ...WaS Perhaps even better is: 19 . . . Wfh4!? 20.El:fl {20.Wfxg2 Wfxc4+ leaves White with a difficult defensive cask ahead.) 20 . . . E:g4! 2 1 .Wib 5 t i>f8 22.Wlxa6 E:e4t---t

28 ... @e6 29.a3 E:b7 30.b4 Zhang Pengxiang - Ni Hua, Tiayuan 200 5 , and now correct is:

30 ... dS 3 1 .gb3 d4t With a beccer position for Black.

B22) 14.E:gl !

20.Wxa8t E:xa8 The ending looks better for Black, although he

should be wary of White's queenside passers.

2 1 .©fl

It seems to me that White should passively defend this pawn with che rook, instead of castling or

giving ic away.

2 1 .a4 E:g4+

21...E:g4 22.E:gl !? To trade Black's active rook. 22.tiJe3? tll xe3t 23.fxe3 E:b4 24.E:gl <ii e 7 25 .E:g2

l"1b3! 26.Ele2 f5+ leads to a passive position for White. 22.b3 <ii e7+

1 5.exf5 e4 16.ic2 tiJxf5 17.Wd2! l 7.cxb 5 ? ! Wlh4---t

17 ...WgS!? 18.WxgS! Worse is 1 8 .cxb 5 ? ! e3 1 9 . fxe3 tll xe3 ---t , and the

white king is kept in rhe middle.

18 .. J:hgS 19.0-0-0 l 9 . cxb 5 ? ! tll d4t

24.b3 E:b4 25.E:dl 2 5 . tll e3 tll d4+

19 ... b4 20.tiJbl dS!? 2 1 .tiJ d2! 2 l .cxd5 Elc8�

292

9 .lll d5

2 1 . .. �cS 22.@bl liJ d6 23.cxd5 �xd5=

Here we notice the primary advantage of 1 2 .id3; White may now play 1 3 . c4 and transpose to l 2 . c4, while avoiding the sharp 1 2 .. . f5 ! ? . However, we have already concluded

that Black stands fine after 1 2 .c4 ib7 1 3 .id3,

so there is no reason to worry.

As mentioned above, White has two possible squares for his queen:

Cl) 13.�e2 and C2) 13.�h5!?.

l 3 . c3 ? ! Ei:g8+ already surrenders the initiative to Black, as White has difficulties in defending

g2 without any major concession. For example,

1 4 . 0-0 f5 1 5 . f3 tll g6--+ and the white king is endangered.

Cl) 13.�e2

The position looks equal. Further confirmation

of this was provided by:

24.�gel @f8 25.Ab3 �d4 26.liJfl :gxdl t 27.:gxdl @e7 28.Ad5 bd5 29.:gxd5 f'5 30.g3 �f8 31 .@cl f4= A draw was agreed some moves later, in

Cordoba - Di Luzio, corr. 2009.

q 12.Ad3

This should be met by a central break:

1 3 ... d5!? It is not clear who is helped by the insertion of the moves 1 3 . . . :Elg8 1 4. f3 . White cannot prove any advantage i n view o f the following variations:

14.exd5 Trying to open lines while Black is still

uncasded.

1 4 .0-0 ?! looks dangerous . Black should play

1 4 . . . Ei:g8 1 5 .W h l Wfb6! 1 6.Ei:ad l 0-0-0t , when he appears to control the game in view of his

kingside initiative.

After 1 4 .c3 f5 ! 1 5 .exf5 e4 1 6 .�c2 tll xf5 = Black is nicely coordinated. The b7-bishop is not bad as it is protecting the sensitive point on d5 .

A correspondence game continued: l 7.Wfg4 Wff6 1 8 .Wff4 h5 1 9 .id l :§h6 20. tll c2 Ei:d8 2 1 .'.Bc l h4 22.0-0 tll d6 23.Wfxf6 :Bxf6 24.ie2 tll c4 2 5 .ixc4 dxc4 26.:Bfd l '.Bd3 27. tll e l Y2-Y2 Millstone Ruggeri Laderchi, corr. 20 1 1 .

12 ...Ab7

1 4 .0-0-0! ? is best met by 1 4 . . . Wfb6, which seems to be a good square for the black queen in such

positions . Then l 5 . exd5 ( l 5 . f4 f5 ! ; l 5 . f3 Wf e600)

Chapter 24

1 5 . . . lli xd5 1 6.ie4 lli f4 1 7.'&f3 ixe4 1 8 .'&xe4 0-0= is balanced, as the misplaced a3-knight

1 3 ... lDg6!?

kingside.

14.g3

outweighs Black's structural weaknesses on the

14 ... liJxd5 1 5.0-0-0 We7! 16.ie4 liJf4! 17.Wf3 ixe4 1 8.Wxe4 :B:c8 19.g3 1 9 .iib l 0-0 20.c4 '&c5ďż˝

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 I

293

l l .ďż˝xf6

The knight eyes f4 and also shields the kingside.

The most natural reaction. 1 4 .'&g4? f5 !

1 5 .exf5 ( 1 5 .'&xf5 lli f4

1 6 .'&g4

'&a5t 1 7.iifl '&b4 1 8 .l'l:b l '&d4 1 9 .'&d l d5 !+) 1 5 . . . '&h4! 1 6 .h3 h 5 !+ is careless. The position is clearly in Black's favour.

1 4. 0-0-0 can be met in the following way:

1 4 . . . lli f4 1 5 .'&h6 ( 1 5 .'&g4 h 5 !00 intending 1 6.'&g7? iie7!+; 1 5 .'&f3 f5 1 6 .iib l 0-0+) 1 5 . . . 8:g8 1 6 .g3 lli xd3t 1 7.cxd3 f5 1 8 .\Mi'xh7

\Mi'g5 t

1 9 ... liJ e6 20.f4 lDc5 2 1 .Wf5 We6 22.Wxe6t fxe6 23.fxe5 fxe5= With a fairly level position in Zatonskih Cmilyte, Tallinn (rapid) 2000.

C2) 13.Wh5!? An aggressive move that is considered to be White's best attempt at gaining an initiative.

14...Wa5t! It is thanks to this move that Black can obtain

equal chances.

1 5.d d5 The correct time for this standard break.

16.0-0! 1 6 .exd5 b4 1 7. lli c4 '1Mi'xd5 1 8 .0-0-0 bxc3

1 9 .ixg6 cxb2t 20.iib l '&xc4 2 1 .ixf7t '&xf7

22 .'&xf7t iixf7 23.8:d7t iig6 24.8:xb7+ is a bit

better for Black, but essentially drawish.

1 6 ... dxe4 17 ..ie2!

294

9 . 4.:l d5

Reserving c2 for the knight. Now Black, despite being a pawn up, is threatened with a clamp. The knight is set to settle on e3, where it

blocks Black's kingside and dangerously eyes f5 .

17 E:gS!? I like this dynamic move, luring the bishop to .••

the insecure g4-square and unsettling the normal course of events .

1 7 . . . 0-0 1 8 .'ll c2 W/b6 1 9 . 'll e3 gad8 20.gfd l !

(20.gad l W/c6!00) 2 0 . . . icS (20 . . . W/c6 2 1 .ifl l"M3 22 .ig2± looks a bit better for White despite the pawn deficit, but can be examined further. )

2 1 .ig4±

2 5 .'ll e3 !! fxe5 26.:§:d l t c;t>es 27.�xe5t c;t>fs

28 .W/d6t=

19 '11lrb 6 ...

Material is equal but both kings are slightly exposed.

20.@fl!? The king steps away from the g-file in

anticipation of tricks with . . . 'll f4 .

20.'ll c2 'll f4! 2 I .'Wf5 ! (2 l .gxf4 'Wc6 22. 'll e l

W/e4!+) 2 1 . . .h5 22.l"i:f2 (22.if3 :§:g5 23 .'Wh7 ixf3 24 .gxf3 0-0-0�) 22 . . .hxg4 23.exf4 W/c6

20.gae l 'll f4! 2 l .gxf4 W/e6 22.h3 (On 22.f5 ?! the cold blooded 22 . . . Wfxa2! yields a position with better chances for Black.) 22 .. .f5 23.fxe5 fxg4

24.h4 0-0-0 is fine for Black, too.

22 . . . 'll f4! 23.gxf4 W/xf3 24.:§:xe5t! c;t>dS!? (24 . . . fxe5 25 .W/xe5t c;t>ds 26.W/d6t c;t>es 27.:§:e l t ie4=)

Chapter 24

20 ... tlJ e7! 2Uďż˝adl ie4 22.gfel gg6= The correct move, safeguarding the king and

maintaining the option of . . . f5 . Chances are level.

22 . . . l"id8 23 .l"ixd8 t Wxd8 24.l"id l Wb6 2 5 .id?t <;t>f8 26 .Wh6t l"ig7 27.ih3 id500 is another

possibility, with an unclear game.

Conclusion

Chapter 24 has dealt with the complicated

variation 1 O. lll xe7 lll xe7!? 1 l .ixf6 gxf6. Play is very sharp in this position as Black's worse pawn structure is compensated for by an open g-file and the possibility to contest the centre by means of . . . d5 or . . . f5 .

White has several possibilities after l l . . .gxf6

but I think that the most critical ones are 1 2 .c4

and 1 2 .id3 . Ir is very likely that these two moves will transpose to each ocher as I believe it is dangerous for White to start grabbing pawns by means of 1 2 .c4 ib7 1 3 .cxb 5 ? ! ixe4 1 4 .bxa6, due to his under-developed state and mobile central pawn mass of the second player.

Thus, the two important positions of chis chapter

are 1 2 .c4 ib7 1 3 .id3 l"ig8! and 1 2 .id3 ib7 1 3 .We2/h 5 . In the first case Black has excellent chances to play for a win; his rook is very active

on the g-file and the modest 1 4.l"ig l ! can be

answered by 14 . . . f5 ! ? 1 5 .exf5 e4 1 6 .ic2 lll xf5 , blasting open the centre and creating rich play for the black pieces. The second option is better for White from

a safety viewpoint and it should lead to equal positions . After 1 3 .We2 the simple 1 3 . . . d5!?

gives Black a good game, while against 1 3 .Wh5, 13 . . . lll g6! ? seems to do che trick. After 1 4 .g3

Wa5 t ! 1 5 .c3 d5 1 6. 0-0! dxe4 1 7.ie2! l"ig8!? l 8 .ig4 e3! Black gets enough play on the long diagonal, guaranteeing him sufficient chances.

1 l .ixf6

295

IO.J.xf6 1 1th Move Alternatives Variation Index 1 .e4 cS 2.lll f3 lll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lll xd4 lll f6 S.lll c3 eS 6.lll dbS d6 7.i.gS a6 8.lll a3 hS 9.lll dS i.e7 1 0.i.xf6 10 ...i.xf6 A) 1 1 .h4 B) 1 1 . g3 C) 1 1 .i.d3 D) 1 1 .i.e2 E) 1 1 .lll b l El) E2} E3)

297 299 300 30 1 302 302 303 304

gb8!? 1 2.a4 12.b4 12.lll d2

E) note after l l . . . l'l:b8!?

14 . . . ï¿½xd5!

E3) after 2 1 .0-0

E2) note to 1 3 . . . l'l:c8!

1 4 . . . tll xb4!

Chapter 25

297

1 1 th Move Alternatives

1 .e4 c5 2.lll f3 lll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lll xd4 lll f6 5.lll c3 e5 6.lll db5 d6 7.£1.gS a6 8.lll a3 b5 9.lll d5 .ie7 10.Lffi The positional choice, gaining undisputed control over d5 for the time being.

10 ....ixf6

intends . . . fXe4 followed by . . . �J5, and White cannot profit from 1 4 .if3 in view of . . . ttJ d4.) 13 ... ctJ e7! 1 4 . ctJ xe7t �xe7 1 5 . 0-0 ( 1 5 .if3

ib7 will probably transpose) 1 5 . . .f5 ! 1 6 .if3 ib7! 1 7.�ae l d5!t Black has a tremendous

position due to his bishops and powerful centre.

b) 1 2 .g3 0-0 1 3 .ig2 leads to a typical edge for Black after the standard: 13 . . . ctJ e7! 1 4. ctJ xe7t ( 1 4. 0-0 ?! ctJ xd5 1 5 .�xd5 ie6 1 6 .�d3 �cs+ is terrible for White) 14 . . . ixe7! ?+ Black will

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

continue with . . . �b6. 1 2 . . . ih6 1 3 .g3

Pointless is 1 3 .ie2 0-0 1 4 .g4?!, in view of 1 4 . . . if4!+ .

1 3 .c3 is too slow, and after 1 3 . . . 0-0 1 4 .g3 ctJ e7! 1 5 .ctJ xe?t �xe7 1 6 .ig2 �c7! Black has a pleasant position.

1 3 . . . 0-0 1 4 .ih3

In this position, White mainly tries to bring the exiled knight into play by means of: ctJ b 1 (relatively uncommon) , c2-c4 (enjoying great

popularity at present - Chapters 26 to 28) and

the traditional c2-c3 (Chapters 29 to 37) . The last two options are a natural prelude to ctJ c2, but their objectives are different as we will see later on. We will first examine some less significant

A) l 1 .h4, B) l l .g3, C) l l ..id3, D) l 1 ..ie2 and E) 1 1 .lll b l . alternatives:

I would also like to demonstrate the best ways to proceed if White attempts to develop his queen prematurely. 1 l .�d3 ?! A dubious set-up.

l l . . .ig5 ! It seems that the only logical plan is to follow with:

l 1 .�f3 looks like a more respectable try. After: l l . . .ig5 1 2 .c3 0-0 1 3 .id3 ctJ e7 1 4 .ctJxe7t �xe7

1 5 .ctJ c2 f5 1 6 . ctJ e3 ixe3 1 7.�xe3 f4! ? 1 8 .�f3 ie6+ Black has some kingside pressure but White should be able to defend with precise play.

1 2 .h4

A) 1 1 .h4

Intending g2-g3 and ih3.

a) 1 2 .ie2 ?! 0-0 1 3 .c3 ( 1 3 .0-0 ? ! f5+ is a typically bad situation for White. Black

This move is to prevent . . . ig5 , which usually consticutes

good

redeployment

for

the

298

1 0 .ii.xf6

f6-bishop. It may also be a preparatory step for g2-g3 and .ih3, seeking to exchange Black's

l 7.c3? looks natural, bur after l 7 . . . lll xe2 1 8 .Wxe2 .ib7 1 9 . lll b6 gb8! 20.c4 We6!+ White's knight is clearly in trouble.

l l ...hl4!?

1 7.id3 ib7 1 8 .c3 ( 1 8 .lll b6 ixg2+ and White must worry about the h-pawn) l 8 . . . lll e6 l 9 . lll b6 gb8 20.c4 ixg2 2 1 . lll d5t ixd5 22.cxd5 lll f4+

light-squared bishop.

This brutal recapture, recommended by Sveshnikov, cuts across White's positional

intentions. The resulting position is sharp and Black may not be clearly better, but White has to overcome a lot of practical problems.

12.gxh4 '!Wxh4 13.tlic7t <Jle7 14.tlixaS '!Wxe4t 1 5.°1We2 l 5 .ie2 ? lll d4 1 6 .lll c7 ib7-+ is bad for White.

8 � �,

�%/, �i,j.P"

:5 �TalJli•� :- _ , , /,- �-

� � � 4 �:'/�� 32 �: � � �l,�,0_ , , /, 8-108 / � �=�� 1

1 5 ...'!Wxe2t!

is bad for White.

1 7 .id 1 fails to solve White's problems: l 7 . . . ib7 1 8 . lll b6 ixg2 1 9 .c3 lll e6 20.f3 lll f4 2 1 .Wf2 gb8

22. lll d5t lll x d5 23.<ii xg2 lll f4t+ Black has three pawns for the piece, and a fantastic knight on f4. Finally, 1 7.gd l .ib7 1 8 .lll b6 ixg2 1 9 .c3 lll f3t 20.ixf3 .ixf3 2 U�d3 ie4 22 .ge3 f5+ leaves

White struggling.

17 ... dS!? Trying to stop c2-c4, freeing the a8-knight. Also possible is 17 . . . .ib7 1 8 . lll b6 ixg2 1 9 .c4

gb8! 20. lll d5t ixd5 (20 . . . Wd7!?) 2 1 .cxd5 b4

22. lll b l lll xe2 23.Wxe2 l"1b500 with a good position for Black, although it is hard to imagine him winning without a great deal of help from the opponent.

Going into the ending looks like the safest

option for Black, as he is ensured of gaining a

third pawn for the piece whilst maintaining some pressure.

1 6 ..ixe2 The clumsy 1 6.Wxe2 is met by: 1 6 . . . d5 l 7. lll c7 Wd6 ( l 7 . . . d4!?) l 8 .lll axb 5 t axb5 l 9 .lll xb5 t Wc5 20.a4 d4+ Leading to a slightly better position for Black in view of his central superiority.

16 ... tli d4 17.l:!cl ! A difficult move to find. 1 7. lll b6? loses immediately to 17 . . . ie6-+ .

1 8.b3!

Insisting on c2-c4 is the motif that saves White.

1 8 .ib? .••

Chapter 25

299

1 1 th Move Alternatives

18 ... b4 1 9 . tt:l b l tt:lxe2 20.Wxe2 i.g4t 2 1 .f3 i.xf3 t 22.gxf3 i"lxa8 23.c4 bxc3 24.tt:lxc3= isn't

very impressive for Black, although the odds of a draw are high.

19.l2Jb6 gbs 20.c4! dxc4 2 1 .bxc4 .ixg2 22.c5 l2J e6 22 . . . ie4 can be met with 23. tt:l b l !? and Black has nothing.

.i �.� ·- }. � ��B .t. • .t. 1 8

� J� r•��-�-. 5 •

4 3

l �Wi• � � B � �-�W!J �� "· · · %�'!. . �� m IS'� �• :

' L. % � � a

1 6 . .ixb S ! ? axbS

1 7.tt:lxbS �aSt

l 8 . c3 0-0!

1 9 .Wxc6 .ixg4� leads to a double-edged position, but this could be a reason for Black to prefer 1 1 . . . 0-0 .

12 ..ig2 1 2 .h4 .ie6 1 3 . .ig2 ( 1 3 .ih3 tt:l d4!t is excellent

23.f3!

This leads to a draw.

23.ig4 tt:lxcS 24.!1xc5 Elxb6 2 5 . f3 (25 . !he5 t Wd6+) 2 5 . . . fS 26.ixfS ixf3 27.�xh7 i"lh6+ should also be a draw bur unnecessarily complicates White's task.

23 ... lt:Jxc5 24.ihc5 gxb6 25.gxe5t ge6 26.gxe6t @xe6 27.l2Jc2 @d6 28.l2Jb4! a5 29.l2Jd3 .th3 29 . . . gS=

30.l2Jf4 .id? 3 1 .l2Jh5= Th e draw is trivial.

B) 1 1 .g3 White fails to create any problems for his opponent after this.

1 1 . .. 0-0 1 l . . .ig5 1 2.h4!? ih6 1 3 .g4!? if4 1 4 .tt:lxf4 exf4 1 5 .WdS Wc7

for Black) 1 3 . . . tt:l d4! 1 4 .tt:lxf6t Wxf6 1 5 .c3 b4! 1 6. cxd4 ( 1 6.cxb4?! Elab8 1 7.0-0 i"lxb4 1 8 .b3 i"lc8+ looks like a huge positional advantage for Black in view of his superior minor pieces.) 16 ... bxa3 1 7. bxa3 exd4 1 8 . 0-0 i"lac8t White is worse. He has weak points along the c-file, while the d4-pawn can be dangerous with so many

pieces still on the board.

12 ...j.e6! 1 2 . . . ig5 ! ?

1 3 . 0-0

tt:l e7

1 4 . tt:lxe?t

Wxe7

1 5 .h4! i.h6 1 6.c4! b4 1 7. lt:J c2 a5 1 8 .Wd300 as in So. Polgar - Manor, Tel Aviv 1 99 8 , is what

Black usually tries to avoid. The d6-pawn seems permanenrly weak and his dark-squared bishop cannot be deployed to b6 via d8 anymore.

Additionally he has no knight to j ump into d4, so it appears that White can steadily increase

the pressure on the cl-file. However, appearances might be deceiving in this case as Black can

organize counterplay by . . . a4. Consequenrly, chances should be approximately level after 1 8 . . . ie6 1 9 . b3 We?!.

13.0-0 1 3 .c3 .igS+

13 ...j.g5 14.f4

300

1 0 .ixf6

1 4 .c3 tt'l e7!+ is now good for Black as he controls c4, depriving White of the plan she employed in Polgar - Manor. It is exactly for this reason that 1 4 .�d3 also fails: 14 . . . l"lcS! 1 5 .h4 �h6 1 6 .l"lad l tt'l e7!+ Black holds

the advantage.

12.c4!? White's most annoying attempt, with drawish tendencies. 1 2 . tt'l e3 ? ! �g5+ is certainly unpleasant for White. 1 2 .c3 is surely not the most testing, but it is very likely to occur in a tournament game: 1 2 . . . .ixd5! 1 3 .exd5 tt'le7 1 4 . tt'l c2 0-0 1 5 .a4 bxa4! 1 6.l"lxa4 �b6 1 7.l"lb4 �c5 1 8 .tt'l e3 �g5 1 9 .l"lc4 �b6 20.l"lb4 �c7 2 1 .�h5 (2 1 .l"lc4 �a?+)

2 1 . . .h6+ This was excellent for Black in Bogaerts

- Krasenkow, Ostend 1 99 0 .

12 ...Wfa5t! 13.Wfd2 Wfxd2t 14.iixd2 .ig5t 1 5.iidl 1 5 .'it>c3 ? ! l"lcS+

1 5 ....ixd5 1 6.exd5 �b4 17 ..ie2 1 7.'it>e2 gives a slight plus for Black after 1 7 . . . tt'lxd3 1 8 . 'it>xd3 'it>d7!, intending 1 9 .cxb5

l"lhb8!+ or 1 9 .h4 �f6+.

17 ... iie?!? 1 8.h4

C) 1 1 .�d3 This is playing into Black's hands.

18 ....if4! A fine nuance. Black either prevents the h 1 -

rook from coming into play via h3, o r secures e5 for the bishop.

19.g3 Or 1 9 . tt'l c2 tt'lxc2 20.'it>xc2 l"lhc8 2 1 .l"lh3 e4!+ and Black has created some play.

Chapter 25

30 1

1 1 th Move Alternatives

19 ....ih6 20.g4 g6! 21 .cxbS axb5 22.tll xbS e4!iii Black definitely has strong compensation.

D) l l ..ie2 The problem with this move, as with l l .g3 and

l I .id3 , is that control of d5 will somehow slowly

vanish, allowing Black an easy game. Sometimes quiet measures are not even enough for equality when the basic aspects of strategy are neglected especially against the Sveshnikov.

1 1 . .. 0-0 12.0-0 .ig5 13.c3 1 3 .c4! b4 1 4 . lll c2 a5 is a better try for White, bur this is dealt with in Chapter 27 concerning

l l . c4, 1 3 .ie2 .

1 6.a4! I 6.Wd3 E:b8! 1 7.g3 a5 1 8 .lll c2 lll e 7+!

16 ... aS 17.tll c2 bxa4 From now on it's pure tactics, bur it appears that White can hold by the skin of his teeth.

1 8Jďż˝xa4 .ixd5 19.WxdS tll f4 20.Wdl Wb8!? 20 . . . Wb6 2 1 .b4 Wc6 22 .1''!:xa 5 E:xa5 23.bxaS Wxe4 24.if3 Wa4 2 5 . lll b4 Wxa5 26.Wxd6 E:d8 27.Wc6 lll g6 2 8 .Wc4 lll e7= is another draw.

14.tll c2 lll e7! 15.tll cb4! White must reinforce his control of d 5 . Both 1 5 .a4 !xd5 1 6.exd5 bxa4+ and 1 5 . lll xe7t

Wxe7 1 6.Wd3 d5! I 7.exd5 E:ad8 1 8 .lll e3 e4! t ,

threatening an avalanche of the f-pawn, leave White suffering.

1 5 ... tll g6! Leaving the white knights strangely placed, but there is a way out:

2 1 .b4 axb4 22.:Sxb4 Wc8 23J'k4!

23 .ic4?! gives Black a few chances after: 23 . . . ie7! 24.id5 (24. lll e3? d5 25 .ixd5 lll xd5 26. lll xd5 !xb4 27.cxb4 Wb7+) 24 . . . lll xd5 2 5 .WxdS Wxc3 26.E:c4 Wa5 27. lll e3+

23 ...We6 24.:Sc6!

302

1 0 .!xf6

But not 24.'Ll b4?! Ei: a l 2 5 .1Wc2 Ei:fa8 t .

24... tlixe2t 25.'Wxe2 gac8 26.tlib4 �xc6 27.tlixc6 dS 28.exdS 'WxdS= It's down to skin and bones, as the e5- and c3-

pawns will disappear.

8 g a ��• r 7 -�- �- ,,Y. -� , , % � � � � 6 � �� , � � �p � � � �'ifw �� ,�, , %� m 4 � ill � iM illill %illil �l � , � � , % � � � 2 m �� V �..� , , %%:8,��, , s

,,,,,

�

� -g� c

29.tlixeS .tf6 30.gel ges 3 1 .£4 Black can easily simplify:

3 1 . .. heS 32.fxeS !ks 33.'We3 'WcS 34.'WxcS gxcS The draw is trivial.

out of the a2-a4 advance. At this point White has

several continuations, but in view of his time

consuming manoeuvre it seems that he already

has to start thinking about maintaining the balance: El) 12.a4, E2) 12.b4 and E3) 12.tlid2. 1 2 .g3 is inconsistent wirh White's original plan

of queenside play. After 1 2 . . . 0-0 1 3 .ig2 ie6 1 4 .0-0 8

6 5 4 3

2 a

1 4 . . . ixd 5 ! 1 5 .exd5 ( 1 5 .'t.Wxd5? tli d4 1 6 . .!i:l a3 b4 1 7. 'Ll c4 't.Wc7! 1 8 . .!i:l e3 Ei:b5 1 9 .1Wc4 't.Wxc4

20 . .!i:lxc4 Ei:c5+ leads to a dismal ending for White.) l 5 . . . .!i:l a5+ Black was slightly better in Hoffman - Yakovich, Munich 1 99 3 .

E) 1 1 .tlibl This knight retreat paves the way for a2-a4 . As

for the knight itself, it will seek a better future

on d2 or c3 .

The correspondence player Vetter has chosen

to play 1 2 . .!i:lxf6t on several occasions, but this appears too simplistic to pose Black any real

problems. After: 1 2 . . . \Wxf6 1 3 . .!i:l c3 0-0 ( 1 3 . . . 't.Wg6

1 4 .f3 0-0 1 5 .\Wd2 ie6 1 6 .a3 .!i:l d4 1 7 .id3 fS 1 8 .0-0 f4 1 9 . .!i:le2 .!i:lxe2t 20 .ixe2 Ei:fd8 2 1 .'t.WaS 1Wf7= was approximately balanced in Vetter -

7 8

6 5 4

Neto, corr. 2004, the point being 22.'t.Wxa6?? 't.Wc7! and the queen is trapped.) 1 4.id3 ie6 1 5 .0-0 Ei:fc8 1 6.a4 b4 1 7 . .!i:ld5 ixdS 1 8 .exdS .!i:l d4 1 9 .1Wd2 't.We7 20.Ei:ae l 't.Wa7 2 1 .'t.We3 Ei:a8+

Black had a positional advantage and went on to

win in Vetter - Martin Clemente, corr. 2006.

El) 12.a4

1 1 . .. gbs!? An interesting move, designed to take the sting

This hasty move is basically designed to clear up the queenside and force a draw.

Chapter 2 5

303

1 1 th Move Alternatives

13 ... 0-0!

12 ... bxa4 White can either recapture on a4 immediately

or go after the d6-pawn by

ttJ b 1 -d2-c4 :

Perhaps the only winning try. 1 3 . . . )"!xb2!?

13.llid2

1 4. ctJ c4

)"!b8

1 5 . ctJxf6t

Wi'xf6

1 6.Wi'xd6! i!tifxd6 1 7 .ctJxd6t We7 1 8 . ClJ xc8t )"!hxc8

1 9 .ixa6 )"!c7 20.0-0 and Black's advantage is

The most logical course. 1 3 .)"!xa4 ?!, continuing with the strategy of overall liquidation, is dubious. Black will now obtain the better pawn structure and two bishops. After

1 3 . . . )"!xb2 no continuation is entirely satisfactory

for White, for example: 1 4 . ctJ a3 ! ? (after 1 4 .ixa6, the impulsive 1 4 . . . ig4 ! ? seems promising no matter how White reacts; 1 4.'\Wc l is probably even worse, because after 1 4 . . . )"!bS 1 5 .ixa6 ig5

1 6 .Wid l ig4 White is forced to weaken himself with 1 7. f3 id?+.) 1 4 . . . 0-0 1 5 .ixa6

only optical, as the a-pawn will fall.

14.tlic4 i.g5 15.�xa4 tli e7!? Transposing

variation

considered to be good for Black.

E3 ,

which

E2) 12.b4 A strange-looking move, but it has some logic; it

fixes the structure on a6 and b5 so as to attack it subsequendy by a2-a4 .

12 ... i.e6 White now has several options:

13.llibc3 1 3 .ctJxf6t ?

bad.

Black

continues

with

1 3 . . . Wixf6! 1 4.'\Wxd6 )"!c8 1 5 .id3 '1Wg5!+ and

White will lose material without significancly improving his position.

1 3 .a4 ixd5 1 4 .exd5 e4 1 5 .l:!a3! ( 1 5 .c3? ClJ e7!+) 1 5 . . . tt:Jxb4 1 6 .c3 ctJ d3t 1 7.ixd3 exd3 1 8 .0-0

0-0 1 9 .i!tifxd3+ is slighdy better for Black, bur

with correct play it should end in a draw.

�� J.. S• � �� .. . , Y, , . , , /, ,_. , � � � � Wi� m¥ ' 6 ' � 4i)fi% m � ""'�� 5 /,� 2t5� 4 �� "8'�� 3 �� 2 ��t�% � %'ID"//,/. ��t�.%� � �-tfJ,,,, � v=� 1�"'. . /,/,� /, /,•� "' 7

�

. .

6 5 4 3 2 7

304

1 0 .i.xf6

13 :E!:cS! This looks like a strong and natural move, intending . . . t2J xb4.

1 7 . . . ii.b3! 1 8 .id3 'Wxb4 1 9 . 0-0 axb5 20.Elxb3 Elxb3 2 l . cxb3 0-0+ With some advantage for Black, alrhough the odds of a draw are high due

Rogozenko tried 13 . . . 0-0, and made use of a neat tactic after 1 4.a4?! ( 1 4 .ii.d3 would have

14 ... 0-0

•••

been correct) .

to the opposite-coloured bishops.

Black should still be able to boast an edge in the ensuing positions, for example:

1 5.id3 1 5 .a4?! a5!t

14.E:bl This looks relatively best, since the complications are in Black's favour as can be seen below:

l 4.id3 ? is a blunder on account of l 4 . . . t2Jxb4+.

1 4 .a4?! allows the same tactical shot as in

the Motylev - Rogozenko game: 14 . . . t2J xb4! 1 5 .tLixb4 'Wa5 ! 1 6 .Elb l ! ( 1 6.'Wb l ?! Elxc3 1 7.axb5

Elb3! 1 8 .cxb3 'Wxb4t 1 9 .e2 axb5+ is almost lost for White because of his poorly placed king.) 1 6 . . . Elxc3 l 7.axb5

E3) 12.liJd2

Chapter 25

305

1 1 th Move Alternatives

It seems prudent to resume development.

However, after such a move, any chance for an initiative has obviously gone askew as White's control over d5 decreases considerably.

12 .igS 13.a4!i' ••.

It's now or never. 1 3 .td3 t:/J e7 1 4 .t:/Jxe7 '1Wxe7+ led to a slight advantage for Black in Stefansson - Schandorff, Copenhagen 1 994.

13 ... bxa4 14.tlic4 0-0 15.�xa4 1 5 .h4?! ih6 1 6 .g4 if4 only weakens White's

kingside: 1 7.E&xa4 �e6 1 8 .E&xa6 �xd5 1 9 .exd5

t:/J b4 20. E&a3 E&b5!t Black already has a strong

initiative.

16.tlixe7t There is nothing else.

1 6 ...W/xe7 17.i.d3 i.d7! Seeking to deploy the bishop actively on b 5 .

1 8.�a2! 1 8 .:gxa6?! allows 1 8 . . . d5! 1 9 .exd5 ib5 !+ and Black will win material. 1 8 .E& a l gives Black the chance to play 1 8 . . . a5!

1 9 .E&xa5 ( 1 9 . t:/J xa5 E&xb2+; 1 9 .b3 a4! 20. bxa4 d 5 ! 2 1 .exd5 iWb4t 22.iifl e4 23 .ie2 ixa4t; 1 9 .0-0 a400) 19 ... ib5= when he is at least equal, e.g. 2 0 . t:/J e3 ixd3 2 1 .cxd3 ixe3 22.fxe3 :gxb2

2 3 . 0-0 'Mrc7.

18 ... dS! 19.exd5 e4 1 9 . . . iW c5 will probably transpose.

20 .ie2 .ih5 2 1 .0-0 •

2 l .'1Wd4 ? E&fc8+

l 5 . . . f5 ! ? 1 6 .id3! t:/J d4 ! ? l 7.exf5 ! t:/Jxf5 ( 1 7 . . . '1We8 ?! 1 8 .c3!±) 1 8 . 0-0;!;/ = is tenable, but could be slightly better for White thanks to his control of e4. 1 5 . . . ib7! ? is toying with . . . t:/J e7 or . . . t:/J d4, but

things are not that rosy after: 1 6.id3! t:/J d4 1 7.0-0! t:/J e6 1 8.b4!? t:/J c7 1 9 . t:/Ja5 ia800 My feeling is that White could be slightly better, although there is certainly a lot of play ahead.

2 1 ...WicS!

Black has deployed his forces wonderfully and has excellent compensation. This is how play might proceed:

22.h3 22.t:/Je5 ixe2 23 .'Mfxe2 'Mfxd5 24.t:/Jc4 :gbc8!

A key move, forcing b2-b3 and improving the

position of the rook. 2 5 . b 3 iWe6= results in finely balanced play.

306

1 0 .ixf6 .

Conclusion

This chapter was an introduction to the 9.'2ld5 id.el variation proper, with White choosing

the logical main option 1 o.ixf6. After the

universally played 1 o . . . ixf6 White has a wide

choice of non-standard continuations and I think

that the analysis presented here convincing(�· demonstrated that they are harmless for Black.

2 a

26.f3 ! ? (to create a weakness on e4) 26 . . .f5

27.Elaa l id.e7 2 8 . fxe4 fxe4 29 .Elae l id.c5 t 30.iih l Elxfl t and Black should have no problems with a pair of rooks gone.

22 ... �fdS 23.llid2!

For example, an attempt to cramp the f6bishop by 1 1 .h4 can be met by 1 1 . . .id.xh4� ? 1 2 .Elxh4 Wxh4 1 3 . '2l c7t 'it>e7 1 4 .'2lxa8 Wxe47 1 5 .We2 Wxe2t! 1 6 .ixe2 '2l d4, as the resulting

ending is not inferior for Black and in fact it is

White who has to display the most care in order to maintain equality. Another option is l 1 .g3 but then 1 1 . . . 0-0 1 2 .ig2 ie6! 1 3 . 0-0 ig5

23.d6 is harmless due to 23 . . . id.f4!= e.g.

1 4 . f4 exf4 1 5 .gxf4 id.h6 leaves White with an inferior version of the g2-g3 formation examined

25 ... Wxd6 26.Eld l Wh6 27 . .ixb 5 Wxh2t 28.'it>fl Wh l t 29.'it>e2 Wh5t with a perpecual to come.

needs to have his pawn on c4 to have any chances of an advantage. I also examined solid developing moves like 1 l .id.e2 and 1 1 .id.d3, concluding that Black

24.Wa l (24.We l Wf5 ! 2 5 .Wc3 Wg6 26.Wh3 1xd6=) 24 . . . Elxd6! 2 5 . '2l xd6 (25 .g3 ? ! Elg6!-+)

23 ... .ixd2 24.Wfxd2 �xd5 25.Wf f4! �e5 26.c4!? 26.Ela5 Wc3!=

in a subsequent chapter as in such a position he

stands fine against each of them as he can easil�·

challenge White's control over the critical d5-

square. For example, after l l .id.e2 the logical continuation 1 1 . . . 0-0 1 2 .0-0 id.g5 leaves White

nothing better than transposing to a subsequent chapter by 1 3 . c4! as the feeble 1 3 .c3 can be answered with 1 3 . . . id.b7! 1 4 . '2l c2 '2l e7! 1 5 . '2l cb4'. '2lg6!. Black has a slight initiative and intends

to push his opponent back with . . . a5 and reintroduce pressure against the hotly contested central field.

Finally, the logical 1 1 . '2l b 1 was examined too, but obviously such a way of playing is time consuming and White can't really hope to get an

26 ...ieS 27.Wi'gJ e3! 28.idl a5 29,ge2 exf.2t 30.Wxf.2 Wxf.2t 3 U'Uxf2 gxe2 32Jhe2 gd8 33 ..ic2 .ic6= Thus, it seems that 1 1 .'ll b l is not such a bad

move after all, and should lead to equal positions after correct play by both sides.

advantage after it. The clever l 1 . . .Elb8!?, posing obstacles to the natural follow up a2-a4, seems to be a good antidote, securing an excellent game for Black.

1 1.c4 Introduction and 13th Move Alternatives Variation Index 1 .e4 c5 2.ttJf3 tfJ c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.ttJxd4 tfJ f6 5.tfJ c3 e5 6.ttJ dbS d6 7.ig5 a6 8.ttJa3 b5 9.ttJdS ie7 1 0.ixf6 ixf6 1 1 .c4 b4 12.ttJ c2 12 ... aS 308 309 310 31 1 312 313 314 316 316

A) 13.tfJxf6t?! B) 13.h3 C) 13.h4 D) 13.id3 E) 13.cS!? F) 13.�d3 G) 1 3.�f3 ie6! 14.�dl a4!? 1 5 .ie2 h3! 16.axb3 �b8! Gl) 17.tfJxf6t G2) 17.b4N

E ) after l 8 .gxc5

A) after 20.li.Jb5

20 . . . li.J g 5 ! ?

G2) after 28 .gxd5

28 . . . :tl:dS!

308

1 1 .c4

1 .e4 c5 2.lll f3 lll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lll xd4 ll\f6 5.lll c3 e5 6.lll dbS d6 7.igS a6 8.lll a3 b5 9.lll dS ie7 1 0.ixf6 ixf6 1 1 .c4 This is a fashionable and well-founded continuation. White attacks b5 and thus forces . . . b4, after which the pawn structure becomes

very concrete. White will have a weakness to

exploit on d6 and chances to expand on the kingside with f2-f4, while

Black will have

compensating play on the queenside by using the c5- and (perhaps) d4-squares.

1 1 b4 12.lll c2 .••

This reply is almost forced. 1 2 .Wa4?! wins a pawn, but surrenders d4 to Black

while neglecting development. Black replies with 1 2 . . . ii.d? 1 3 .lt'ixb4 lt'i d4 1 4 .\Wd l l'l:b8!, bringing White to the verge of collapse: 1 5 .Wd2 ( 1 5 .CU d3 ic6 1 6 . f3 0-0 leaves White horribly exposed to

a subsequent check on h4 followed by .. .f5 . Any attempt to reduce its consequences by 1 7.tll c2 fails to 17 . . . ia4!! 1 8 .b3 Wa5 t ! 1 9 .Wf2 lt'ixc2 20 .'1Wxc2 ixb3!+ when Black not only regains his

pawn bur also saddles his opponent with further weaknesses.) 1 5 . . . ig5 1 6 .Wc3

square control on the queenside, in return for his structural weakness on d6. At this point

White must devise a plan of how to build up the pressure, and his best tries to do so are: 1 3 .�e2 (Chapter 27) and 1 3 .g3 (Chapter 28) . In this chapter we will examine some less principled attempts: A) 13.lll xf6t?!, B) 13.b3, C) 13.h4, D) 13.id3, E) 13.cS!?, F) 1 3.1Mfd3 and G) 1 3.1Mff3

1 3 . CU ce3?! also looks irresponsible as it leaves control of d4 to Black, and makes it more difficult for White to play a successful a2-a3 . After 1 3 . . . ig5 1 4 .ii.d3 0-0 1 5 .0-0 ii.b7! ? 1 6.a3

bxa3 1 7. l'l:xa3 tll d4+ all Black's minor pieces are better placed than their white counrerparrs, and

he threatens to increase the pressure by . . . lt'i d4e6-c5 followed by a timely capture on e3. 1 3 .Wh5 ? ! , although originally liked by the engines, has no point at all. After: 1 3 . . . 0-0

1 4 .ii.e2 ( 1 4 .id3 ie6 1 5 . 0-0 ig5 1 6 .l'l:ad l g6 1 7 .'1We2 tll e7+ is a clear demonstration of planless

opening play by White.) 1 4 . . . ie6 1 5 . 0-0 ig5 8

6 5

4 3 2

1 6.ig4 g6 1 7.'1Wh3 ixd5 1 8 .cxd5 lt'i e7+ It is clear that White has placed his pieces clumsily

and his "plan" has backfired.

A) 13.lll xf6t?! 12 ... aS This can be considered as one of the two main tabiyas for the Positional Variation of the

Sveshnikov. Black has gained space and dark-

White

deprives

himself of any dynamism

associated with the position, and is also left with the inferior bishop.

13 ...1Mfxf6 14.ie2 0-0 1 5.0-0 �b7

Chapter 26

Introduction and 1 3th Move Alternatives

Black's position is preferable, as the following

lines demonstrate:

1 6.if3 ? ! '2l b 8 1 7.a3 ? ! b3! 1 8 . '2l e3 a4 I 9 .�d2 '2l c6! 20.'2lf5 E\fd8 2 1 .Elfd l as in Wittmann G. Timoshenko, Bratislava 1 996, would have

been worse for White after: 2 l . . .ic8! 22.Elac l

(22 . ctJ xdG? ? '2l d4 23.c5 '2lxf3t 24.gxf3 ih3-+)

22 . . . E\aG!+

1 6.ig4 is a computer suggestion to stop . . . '2l c6b8-d7-c5 or . . . '2l c6-d8-e6-c5 by controlling d7

and e6 respectively, but it looks rather unnatural. 1 6 . . . '2l d8 1 7. f3 icG 1 8 . ctJ e3 ctJ b7!+ is a possible continuation.

16 ... tLl d8! The same motif again.

17.i.f3!? l 7.f3 as played in Galkin - G . Timoshenko,

St Petersburg 1 996, can be answered with the immediate 1 7 . . . lll eG!+ as 1 8 .�xdG? loses to : l 8 . . . E1ad8 1 9 .�bG l':1d2-+

17... :Sa6! 18.a3 1 8 .ig4 icG followed by . . . '2l b7.

309

18 ... bxa3 19.tLlxa3 tLl e6 20.tLl bS Wittmann - Gerhold, Austria 2007. And now

Black has an unexpected move:

B) 13.b3 A fairly respectable move, but on the other hand

it has the disadvantage of inviting counterplay by . . . a4 at a later stage.

310

l l . c4

14.h4!?

17.�xf4 exf4 1 8.Wf3 a4f±

Intending to drive this bishop out of play.

1 4 .g3 0-0 1 5 .ig2 gives White an inferior

version of the popular line 1 3 .g3 0-0 1 4 .ig2 ig5 , where there is no sense in playing b2-b3

instead of castling. Black is fine after 1 5 . . .ie6 or l 5 . . . 'll e7.

This position deserves further analysis, but on first inspection it looks good for Black.

19Jkl 1 9 .0-0-0 axb3 20.axb3 E:a2! 2 1 .\Wxf4 'll e5f±

14 ...ih6 1 5.g4!? This wild advance of the pawn is interesting.

1 5 ...if4 It seems that although Black is going to lose a pawn, the . . . a4 advance will give him sufficient counterplay:

16.gS Played to gain space and safeguard this pawn from attack, but it invites . . . h6 at a later stage. l 6. 'll xf4 exf4 1 7.\WdS ib7 l 8 .\Wf5 is another

important variation. Black can continue:

.i �

�� S• ,.... %� � ��ref�.!" ....

�� 1 �� : �'"1 � � % � � %��p � t""�"-� 88! t� 8 �t�,, � . . � � � �1 ,�!i�� -��: .. �� =� ·

19 ... axb3 20.axb3 h6!? 2 1 .gxh6 l'hh6 22.Wxf4 �a2= Black has excellent compensation for the

pawn, as White is under-developed and has insecure king.

5L.� f

" "

1 8 . . . a4! 1 9 .0-0-0 ( 1 9 . E:d l ? doesn't work now

in view of 1 9 . . . axb3 20.axb3 E:a2-t) 1 9 . . . axb3 20.axb3 'll e5 2 1 .\Wxf4 0-0� With excellent compensation for the pawn in an unclear position. 1 6 .ig2 ie6 l 7. 'll xf4 exf4 l 8 . 'll d4 'll e5f± should be okay for Black too.

1 6 ....ie6! By threatening to terminate the d5-knight Black forces the issue.

C) 1 3.h4 Another interesting idea, White wants to prevem the f6-bishop from becoming active on g5 . Actually this is a principled move, although Black is able to come up with a nuance:

Chapter 26

31 1

Introduction and 1 3th Move Alternatives

1 3 ... �bS!?

19.lll xf6t

Black now threatens the pawn on h4, and can thus open the b-file by playing . . . b3 next.

1 9 .CiJ a l ?! displaces the knight for no big deal: 1 9 . . . :!! b 7! 20.CiJ xf6t gxf6 2 1 .b3 :!! fb8 22.:l!d2?! (22 .f4 ig4+) 22 ... CiJ d4! 23.:l!xd4 exd4 24 .'1Wxd4

14.g3 b3! 1 5.axb3 �xb3 1 6.�a2 0-0 17 ..ig2 Putting the bishop on g2 looks safer. 1 7.ie2 ie6! 1 8 .�d2 (Neither 1 8 .0-0 ?! ixh4! 1 9 .gxh4 '1Wxh4� nor 1 8 . CiJ xf6t '1Wxf6 1 9 .'1Wxd6 :l!c8 20.h5 (20. 0-0 '1Wg6!] 20 . . . :l!b7!� should

worry Black.) l 8 . . .ixd5 l 9 . cxd5 CiJ b4 20 . .ic4 CiJ xc2t 2 l .'1Wxc2

a4! 2 5 . bxa4 '1Wxa4 26.'1Wxf6 :!! b l !+

19 ... gxf6:t:

Black is slightly better here, as White has two

pawn weaknesses (c4 and b2) and one weak square (d4) to constantly keep under surveillance.

D) 13 ..id3 The main virtue of this move is that it protects e4 and hinders . . . f5 plans, but on the other hand

there are significant disadvantages entailed to it. The d-file is blocked, the possibility of seeking a

light-squared bishop exchange becomes remote, and the bishop might be hit later on by a black knight arriving on c5 .

2 1 . . .:l!b4 22.b3 '1Wc7 2 3 . 0-0 id8!+ Black has a trifling edge.

17 ... .ie6 1 8.0-0 Wfd7!? It took me a lot of time to understand that

Black can afford the doubling of his pawns. But he can, and chis represents a good chance to play for a win.

8 7 6 5 4 3

13 ....igS!

The bishop stands fine here and runs no

dangers of getting sidelined.

14.0-0 Not 1 4 .h4? ixh4! 1 5 .:!! xh4 '1Wxh4 1 6 . CiJ c7t @e7 I 7.CiJxa8 ig4!+ and Black will be a pawn up.

14 ... 0-0 The chances are about balanced but Black's

game is easier.

312

1 l . c4

15.b3

E) 13.cS!?

1 5 . a3 ?! b3! 1 6 . ll'i e l ll'i d4 1 7.h3 a4 1 8 . ll'i f3 ll'i xf3t 1 9 .Wxf3 .ie6 20.:Sad l , as in Gusev Kurilin, Bogorodicsk 20 1 1 , is clearly better for Black after 20 . . . ixd5+.

Black also has a fine game in case of 1 5 .Wf3

:Sb8 1 6.b3 ie6 1 7.a3?! ( 1 7.:Sad l ll'i e7= was preferable) 1 7 . . . id2! 1 8 .'IM!g3 ic3! 1 9 . ll'ixc3 bxc3t when he eventually prevailed in Ruckus Supino, corr. 20 1 0 .

Finally, 1 5 .We2 ie6 1 6 .b3 g6 V2-V2 was Butkiewicz - Brodowski, Wroclaw 2009. I would rate Black's chances as at lease equal here.

1 5 ... :Sb8 1 6.Wie2 .ie6 17.a3 bxa3 1 8.:Sxa3 :Sb7 19.lll c3 g6 20.lll bS iihs 21 .Ei:dl :Sd7 22.Wiel We have been following Dragiev - Cheparinov, Bankia 2003, and now I like the solid:

6 5

4 3

2 1

This is a move with an independent character;

White wants to open up the fl -bishop as quickly as possible. However, it leads to massive simplification and an easy game for Black.

1 3 ... dxcS 14..ibS .ih7 15.lll ce3 Now White will recover his pawn with Ei:ac l ,

but Black has developed satisfactorily and the only question is whether he can acquire a slight plus.

15 ... 0-0 16 ..ixc6 .ixc6 17J'!cl .ig5 1 8.Ei:xcS 8

7 a

22 ...W/b6!=

White has no easy plan.

The game continued 22 . . . f5 ?! 23. exf5 ixf5

and Black gradually outplayed his opponent. However, at chis point the position is at least

equal for White after the correct 24 .ixf5 ! . For example: 24 . . . gxf5 ? ! (24 . . . :Sxf5 2 5 . ll'i e3 ixe3 26.Wxe3Âą) 2 5 . b4!t The rook on a3 is free to act, a fac e chat should grant White the initiative.

6 5

4 3

2 1

1 8 ....ixe3!?N

18 . . . l'!c8 was about equal in Vachier-Lagrave - Ni Hua, Turin (ol) 2006. The text move is a better try for an advantage and I have not found a route to complete equality for White.

Chapter 26

313

Introduction and 1 3th Move Alternatives

19.�xc6 i.d4 20.!k2!

14 ... 0-0 15.lll de3?!N

Weaker is 20.b3? �h4!+, threatening 2 1 .�e2 ixf2 t ! .

20.0-0 ?! ixb2+ or 20 .�c2 f5 t won't help White much.

This has never been played. Indeed, White's last move is a clear violation of opening rules and it leads him to a worse position. Nevertheless, Black must play accurately to prove chis assessment.

20 ... �bS!?

1 5 ... a4!

20 .. . f5 2 1 . ttJ c7! 20 . . . �h4 2 1 .�f3 B:fcS 22.g3 �dS 23.i:'!d2! !!cl t 24.'tt> e 2=

Encouraged by White's naive play, Black marches forwards on the queenside. There is already the threat of . . . b3 in the air, while b2-b3 by White would allow the black rook to penetrate

down the a-file.

16.i.e2

24 . . . Elxb3? 2 S .Elc8!

This looks like the lesser evil.

25.lll e3

1 6.�xd6? loses to: 16 . . . b3! 1 7.axb3 ( 1 7.'@fxc6

2 5 .b4 ElbS!+

25 ... �xb3 26 . .!D c4 �b4i Black is slightly better as the c4-knighc is not

totally stable.

'@faS t 1 8 .'tt> e 2 bxc2 1 9 . lli xc2 ig4t! 20.f3 ie6 2 1 . ttJ e3 i:'!abS 22.Eld2 ElfcS-+ leads to a massacre.) l 7 . . . axb3 1 8 . ttJ a3 �xd6! Simplest. ( 1 8 . . . �aS t 1 9 .�d2 �cS+ is less convincing.) 1 9 .B:xd6 lli d4 20.EldS ie7 2 1 .cS ie6 22.ElxeS ElfcS-+ and there is no salvation for White, as

F) 13.Wid3

his queenside is about to collapse like a house

of cards.

1 6 .b3?! axb3 1 7.axb3 i:'!a2t leads to a position

where Black has a strong initiative without any material investment. If 1 8 .ie2 ( 1 8 .�xd6 ixe3 l 9 . ttJ xe3 �xd6 20.i:'!xd6 ttJ d4+ is a disastrous

ending for White) , then 1 8 . . . ixe3 1 9 . fxe3

Coupled with the next two moves, this is a

rather suspect attempt to attack the d6-pawn.

1 3 . ..igS 14J&dl .

White

can

already

renounce

his

time

consuming idea and continue with 1 4 .ie2. The resulting position is about equal, as we shall see in Chapter 27.

1 9 . . . '@fh4t ! 20.g3 1Mff6 2 1 . i'!fl 1Mfh6 22.Elf2 ie6 23.if3 ttJ aS 24.Elb l lli b7!+ and White is close to los e.

314

1 1 .c4

16 ... b3! The mosr incisive. Wirh a pawn sacrifice, Black manages co break into rhe whire camp.

This is a relatively new idea. White aims to pur his rook on d 1 and press d6.

17.axb3 Wi'a5t! 1 8.�fl !'!b8! 1 8 . . . axb3 1 9 .�xb3 Elb8 20 .�c3+ 1s not as strong for Black.

1 3 . . . ig5 ?! 1 4. h4 ih6 1 5 .g4! f6 1 6.Elgl ( 1 6.g5 � '.

fxg5 1 7.�h5t lt>f8 1 8 .ih3;!:) 1 6 . . . 0-0 1 7.�g3;

l 9 . . . Elxb2 20 .�a3 !00 renders the position unclear.

gave White a strong initiative in Morozevich Carlsen, Moscow (blitz) 2007.

14.!'!dl

1 9 . . . �xa4 was my preference several years ago when I analysed the position for rhe first time.

This position looks a bir arrificial for Whire. Kolev came up with the interesting idea:

22.tll d l ie6 23.h4 id2!t 24. Ela6! White should be able to save himself eventually.

14 ... a4!?

However, after 20.Elal �b3 2 1 .�xb3 Elxb3

20 . .!lixe3 !'!xb2 20 . . . ti:l d4 2 l .tll c2 Elb3 22 .�d2 �xd2 23.Elxd2

1''i'.xb 2 24.id l Eld8 2 5 . lt> e l ti:l b3 26.Ele2 Elb l

27.f3 'Li c5 2 8 . 'Li e3 'Lixa4+ also leaves White struggling.

2 1 .Wi'a3 !'!d2 22J!xd2 Wi'xd2 23.Wi'd3 '1Nb4 24.h4 ie6 25.g3 lli d4 26.©g2 Wi'xa4 27.!'!bl Wi'c6i White hasn't quite equalized yet.

G) 13.Wi'O!?

This move is fully in accordance with Blacks

space-gaining strategy in rhese variations. Black may already be rhrearening . . . Wi'a5 (followed b�· . . . b3t and . . . !d8) , or even . . . b3 immediately. Ir

seems that White will have to play accurately co try for an advantage here.

1 5 ..ie2 This looks like the most plausible move, trying to evacuate rhe king to safecy. 1 5 . c5?!

doesn't

work

here.

After

1 5 . . . �aS :

1 6 . li:l xf6t gxf6 1 7.Eld2 b3 1 8 .axb3 axb3+ White is on the verge of an opening disaster.

315

Chapter 26 - Introduction and 1 3th Move Alternatives

l 5 . lLl cxb4 Allowing Black terrific compensation:

1 5 . . . \Wa5 ! 1 6 .a3 1 6.\Wc3 lLlxb4 1 7.lLlxb4 \Wc5 ! 1 8 .\Wd2 ( 1 8 .!e2 i.d8 1 9 .0-0 i.a5 20.a3 0-0�) 1 8 . . . 0-0 1 9 . a3

E:fb 8 ! 20 .i.e2 i.d8! 2 1 .\Wxd6 \Wxd6 22. l"lxd6 i.e7+± may even be better for Black.

· � �.i � 7 E� ��·-·% · �� 1�!•· · � � � 5 ta.,%�� "�%. •tE•,,,,, ;s , ,,, � � �� if ; %� .1 W'" � �W'% lf� � 2 ..... z�f%� � r,. . %� r=t�8 r,if�� s

4 3

1 6 . . . i.d8! 1 7 .i.e2 l 7.\Wc3 ltJ d4 1 8 .i.d3 0-0 1 9 .0-0 \Wc5!� leads

to a position where Black's minor pieces are slowly outdoing their white counterparts.

l 7 . . . lLi d4 l 8 .\Wd3 0-0 1 9 .0-0 E:c8 20.l"lc l

20.lLlc2 !xd5 2 1 .exd5 ib6t gives Black powerful play against b2 and a3.

20 . . . \Wa7� Ir is clear that the black initiative is worth at least a pawn.

l 5 . lLl dxb4 A better way to capture on b4, keeping d4 protected by the cl-knight. l 5 . . . lLi xb4 1 6 .lLlxb4 \Wb8! l 7.a3 0-0

Black stands excellently in any case, as the e7-

bishop is about to be redeployed via d8 to a powerful diagonal.

1 8 .i.e2 ids 1 8 . . . l"lc8 ! ? 1 9 . 0-0 id8 = is also good. 1 9 .0-0 !b6 20 .\Wc3 ? ! 20.l"ld2 E: c 8 2 1 .l"lfd l !c5� 20.lLld5 ixd5 2 1 .l"lxd5 ic5 22.l"lb l \Wc7=

20 . . . ic5 2 1 . @ h l \Wb7! 22.f4?! exf4 2 3 . e 5 ? 2 3 . lLl d3+

23 . . . dxe5 24.\Wxe5 ixb4 2 5 . axb4 \Wxb4

Black already had a decisive advantage in Zolotukhin - I. Papadopoulos, Budva 2009, and went on co win. l 5 . lLl xf6t

Black should reply with the scandard recapcure: 1 5 . . . gxf6! White has several cries: 1 6 .\Wd3 This looks like che most serious way to diverge.

1 6 .ie2 b3! l 7.axb3 E:b8! transposes to the

main line. 1 6 .b3 is inferior due to 16 . . . axb3 l 7.axb3 l"la2 1 8 .1Wd3 ( 1 8 .!d3? E:b2+) 1 8 . . . l"lgS! 1 9 .g3 ( l 9.h3?! E:b2 20.g4 lLl a5 2 1 . lLl a l lLl b7+)

l 9 . . . E:b2! 20 .!g2 lLl a5 2 1 . lLl a l 1Wb6 22.0-0

@e7+ with a more harmonious position for Black.

,,, ,/,� �% �.i, 7 �E ��%��S't! � �� j �i� .i.i� �� Wil, , , 3� , , 5 ��-, �r, �%r,, , % � �� 8

�-%

8 •� 8 •�� .t. r.1 , , /,� � ·s� � �ifw·�s � 8 if��-� 8 wi'/,�llJ �

. . . -� lm.r•� b

'/,

1 6 . . . \Wb6! 1 7.b3 axb3 1 8 .axb3 !1g8 1 9 .g3 lLl a 5 ! 20 .i.g2 20.\Wxd6 \Wxd6 2 1 .l"lxd6 lLi xb3 22.ltJxb4 @f8!oo

20 ... lLl b7 2 1 .0-0 @e7 22.l"lal

22 .\Wd2 lLl c5 23.l"lb l l"la2! 24 .\Wxb4 \Wxb4

2 5 .lLlxb4 E:a3 ! = 22 . . . lLlc5 23 .\We3 l"lxa l 24.l"lxa l l"lb8!= With a thoroughly equal game.

15 ... b3! 16.a:xb3 l3b8! White can now choose becween

or the immediate

G2) 17.b4N.

Gl) 17.'Llxf6t I am sacisfied

with Black's chances for at least equalicy in each line, although some accurate moves are required.

316

1 l . c4

Also equal is l 7. bxa4 l"lxb2 l 8 .Wc3 Wa5 l 9 .Wxa5 'i:l xa5 2 0 . 'i:l ce3 ig5 2 1 . 'i:l c?t Wd7 22. 'i:lxe6 ixe3 23 . fxe3 Wxe6 24 .ig4t We? 25 .c5 'i:l c4 26. cxd6t 'i:l xd6 27. 0-0 Ela8 28 .Eld5

20 ...'1Wa5t! This check disorganizes the white forces.

2 1 .l3d2

Elxa4 29 .Elxe5t Y2-Y2 Lang - Guiot, corr. 2009 .

2 1 .Wfl ! ? We? 22.Elxd6 Elxb5 23 .l"lxe6t fxe6

GI) 17.tll xf6 t

White. He probably has to play: 26.g3! i'.:lf d2 27.if3! (27.ih5 i'.:lfc2!) 27 . . . ElcS! 28 .Wg2 Elc2 29 .l"lfl Elxb2 30.Wxa4 Ela2 3 1 .W d l (3 1 .Wc4 l"lc2=) 3 1 . . .Wxd l 32 .l"lxd l E:b2 3 3 . l"l a l 'i:lxb5 34.E:aS 'i:l d6! 35 .E:hS 'i:l c4! 36.Elxh?t (36.ih5 'i:l e3 t 37.Wf3 'i:l d l !=) 36 . . . Wd6=

7 6 5

24.cxb5 'i:l d4 25 .Wa3t Wd7! is not better for

2 I . .. i>e7! 22.'1We3 lll d4! Black is continuing to play only moves - but

they are good enough!

23.lll xd4 exd4 24.\Wxd4 '1Wc5! 25.\Wxc5

- I . Papadopoulos, Halkidiki 2008 . Kolev and Nedev point out that after:

At this point a draw was agreed in Movsesian

17 ... gxf6 18.b4!?

1 8 . bxa4 l"lxb2 1 9 .Wc3 i'.:lfa5 ! 20 .i'.:lfxa5 'i:l xa5 2 1 . 'i:l e3 We? 22 .id3 ElhbS 2 3 . 0-0 E18b4ï¿½ is hardly problematic for Black, whose pieces are dominating the board.

1 8 ... lll xb4 19.lll a3 The point, trying to gain an advantage by shielding the b-file.

19 ... lll c6 20.lll b 5 It might seem that White has a clear edge, but Black is in the nick of time:

25 ... dxcS 26.0-0 l3b4 27.gcl l3hb8 28.l3cc2 f5! 29.f3 29 . e5 f4

29 ... fxe4 30.fxe4 i>f6iiii Black has full compensation.

G2) 17.b4N .ixdS 18.l3xd5 lll xb4 19.lll xb4 :Sxb4 At first I thought that Black would be comfortably equal here, but it is not so simple.

Chapter 26

Introduction and 1 3th Move Alternatives

20.Wa3! An interesting idea by Andrew Greet. Black

has to work a bit to get his draw.

317

any progress for White, as Black has managed to successfully carry out his plan.

32 ...Wfxc6!? 33.bxc6 f5 34.�dSt Wf8 35.f'3

20 ... Wb6 21 .0-0 0-0 22.gbS! gxb5 23.cxbS Wfd4 24.b3! 24.l"id l Wfxe4 2 5 .if3 Wfc4= is not a problem.

24 ...Wfxe4 25.�f'3 Wfd3 26.Wxa4 dS! This is the point of Black's defence, forcing a

rook trade.

3 5 .b4 e4=

Conclusion

27.gdl! 27.b6!? e4 28 . .ig4 e3 29 .g3 .id4 30.b7 Wf e4 3 1 .if3 Wfxf3 32.Wfxd4 e2 33.l"ib l l"ie8 34.Wfe5

Wife4 3 5 .Wifxe4 dxe4 is apparently an easy draw.

27 ...Wf c2! 28.gxdS 2 8 . b6 e4 29.ig4 g6? is j ust unclear.

Chapter 26 was an introduction to the popular variation 9. tll d5 fi.e7 1 0 .fi.xf6 fi.xf6 1 l .c4 through which White seeks to enhance his

control over d5 and render static the position in the centre. After 1 l . . . b4 1 2. tll c2 a5 he has several

continuations to choose from and in this chapter we focused on a few sidelines that should in no

way be underestimated. Such a continuation is 1 3 .b3 which should be answered with 1 3 . . . fi.g5 ! as the advance l 4.h4!? need not be feared. After 14 ... ih6 1 5 .g4! ? if4

White has weakened himself, and even winning

a pawn will not yield him an advantage as Black

has counterplay by utilizing the possibility of . . . a4 at the right moment. Another topical sideline is 1 3 .h4, trying to

prevent the bishop from becoming active on g5 .

28 ... gd8!

The key idea: the queen and bishop combination is the one which suits Black best in his quest for a draw.

29.gxd8t �xd8 30.g3 g6 3 1 .Wf a8 Vl!c7 Now Black's plan is . . . Wg7, followed by . . . Wif c7d6-f6 and . . . fi.d8-b6.

32.Wfc6 After 32.Wg2 Wg7 33 .id5 Wf d6 34.Wl'b7 Wff6 3 5 .Wf c6 ib6 36.f3 h5 37.h4 id4 I cannot see

But in chat case Black secures significant play by 1 3 . . . l"ib8!? 1 4.g3 b3! 1 5 .axb3 l"ixb3 1 6 .l"ia2 0-0 as his pressure against b2 in conj unction with control over the d4-square can be important

assets.

Finally, a line that stands out is 1 3 .Wff3 ie6! 1 4 .l"id l a4! ? 1 5 .ie2 b3! 1 6 .axb3 l"ib8!, when the important new idea l 7.b4N initially gave me grounds for concern. After 1 7 . . . ixd5 1 8 .l"ixd5 tll x b4 1 9 .'2lxb4 l"ixb4 20 .Wfa3 ! Wfb6 2 1 .0-0 0-0 22.l"ib5! l"ixb 5 23 .cxb5 Wf d4 24.b3! Black equalizes with the accurate 24 . . . Wifxe4 2 5 .if3

Wfd3 26.Wfxa4 d 5 ! 27.l"id l ! Wfc2! 28.l"ixd5 l"id8! and this is an idea definitely worth remembering.

1 1.c4 a

13.ie2 Variation Index 1 .e4 cS 2.ll:if3 � c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.�xd4 � f6 5 . � c3 eS 6.� dbS d6 7.i.gS a6 8.�a3 bS 9.�dS i.e7 1 0.i.xf6 i.xf6 1 1 .c4 b4 12.�c2 a5 13.i.e2 0-0 14.0-0 14 ...i.gS

A) 1 5 .i.g4 B) 1 5.�d3 i.e6!? Bl) 1 6.�fdl B2) 1 6.a3 B3) 16.�adl

note t o

319 320 320 32 1 32 1

1 4. 0-0

1 7 . . . b3!

B 1 ) after 1 7 .a3!?

l 7 . . . bxa3

83) after 1 8 .b3

1 8 . . . g6!

319

Chapter 27 - 1 3 .ile2

1 .e4 cS 2.lll f3 lll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lll xd4 ltlf6 S.lll c3 eS 6.lll dbS d6 7.igS a6 8.lll a3 bS 9.lll d5 ie7 1 0.h.ÂŁ6 ixf6 1 1 .c4 b4 12.lll c2 aS 13.ie2 White elects a set-up which involves moving

A critical j uncture. The following continuations are available to White: A) 15.ig4 and

B) 15.'Mfd3.

1 5 . lll ce3 ?! is pointless, and is clearly the worst

the queen to d3 and applying pressure on the

choice of all. After: 1 5 . . . ixe3 ! ? 1 6.lll xe3 lll d4

According to the existing circumstances h e might

for Black, since after l 9 .ixe6?! fxe6 20.f3 '\Wb6t 2 1 .'iti h l gadSt White does not have time to stabilize the position in the centre.) 17 . . . ib7 1 S .f3 ( 1 S .'1Wd3 '1Wg5 1 9 .:gad l :gads+ is awkward

d-file by subsequently placing a rook on d l .

consider a2-a3 too, adding some pressure to the queenside. However, this plan is too one sided to enj oy any real chance of success. The bishop is passive on e2 and the possibility of a kingside

expansion with f2-f4 has been rendered difficult. Therefore Black can count on an easy game.

1 3 ... 0-0 14.0-0 1 4 .'\Wd3 ig5 1 5 . :g d l ie6 1 6 . lll de3 ?!

As usual this is weak. 1 6. 0-0 will transpose to variation B3. 1 6 . . . a4! Black obtains a strong initiative. l 7. lll f5

1 7 .'\Wxd6? b3+ 1 7.0-0 is White's most prudent course, but

1 7.ig4 ( 1 7.lll c2 lll e6! 1 S .ig4 ib7+ is better

for White too.) 1 S . . . '\Wb6 1 9 . ii h l g6! ?+ White

might face problems on both flanks. The c4pawn will become weaker after a subsequent . . . b3, while a well-timed . . . f5 could cause difficulties on the kingside. Although White should be able to defend, the strange placement of the g4-bishop makes his task difficult.

l 5 .b3 is designed to stabilize c4, but it is too slow. After: 1 5 . . . ib7! 1 6 .'Wd3 ?! ( 1 6.a3 bxa3 1 7.:gxa3

lll bS!+ is also slightly better for Black but ac least

gives White freer play.) 1 6 . . . lll bS!

after l 7 . . . '1Wb6!t Black holds the initiative firmly in his hands.

1 7.md l lll d7 l S .lll e l lll c5+ Black was at least

slightly better in Frolov - Kramnik, Sochi 1 990,

with options of combining play on both wings.

A) 1 5.ig4 A logical attempt to exchange White's bad bishop, or at least improve it. Black does best to avoid the swap.

14....igS

1 5 ...ib7 1 6.'1Wd3

320

l l .c4

At this moment there is a choice of two plans; challenging the d5-knight or ignoring it. I have

2 1 . .. ixdS 22.°WxdS gxal 23.gxal 'Wxb2 24.gdl g6 25.g3

1 6... .!Llbs I think this is quite correct, although the

25 ... hS 26.id7 ie7

chosen to concentrate on the latter.

position remains drawish.

25 .'1Wxd6 E1a8� =

White is only optically better and in fact the

position is a dead draw.

B) 15.°Wd3

17.a3! 1 7.E1fd 1 ?! tli a6+ The standard choice.

17 ... .!Ll a6! This looks good enough for a draw. For example:

1 8.axb4 axb4 19 . .!Ll cxb4 .!Llxb4 20 ..!Llxb4 'Wb6 21 ..!LldS After

2 1 . tli c2

E1xa l

22.tlixa l ! ? ,

both

22 . . . E1a8 ! ?� (intending to meet tli b 3 with . . . E1a2) or 22 . . . '1Wxb2 23.:8b l '1Wa2 24.:8xb7 'IWxa l t= are sufficient for equality.

1 5 ...ie6!? Now there is no i.g4 option anymore, this

natural move appears besc. White must now

decide whether he will go for a break on the queenside or focus on central strategy:

Bl) 1 6J�fdl This seems rather harmless as it weakens

renders f2-f4 impossible.

16 ... �c8

17.a3!?

f2 and

1 6 . . . E1b8 1 7.b3 g600 is also good now.

l 7 . tli de3 i.xe3 1 8 .'1Wxe3 '1Wc7 l 9 .E1d2 E1fd8 20.E1ad l tli bS 2 1 .b3 tli a6 22.f4 f6 2 3 . fxe5 fxe5 =

was fi n e for Black in Nepomniachtchi - Wang Yue, Sochi 2009.

2 1

Bl)

16.gfdl, B2) 16.a3 or B3) 16.gadl .

321

Chapter 27 - 1 3 .�e2

17.:Sxa3 l 7.lDxa3 is rather easy to cope with: l 7 . . . lD d4 l 8 . lD b 5 ixd5! l 9 . lD xd4 i.xc4 (l 9 ... i.xe4=)

20.Wi'xc4 equality.

exd4

2 1 .Wi'xd4

i.f6= With plain

After l 7.Wxa3 the reply l 7 . . . l'!b800 gives Black an excellent position.

l 7.bxa3 ! ? guards b4 and prepares an invasion of the white rooks via the b-file. In that case, I

think the untried l 7 . . . a4!� renders White's plan

harmless and allows Black to seize the initiative.

17 ... bxa3 1 8.Wxa3 gb8!? Black stands continuation is:

17 ... gbg 1 8.b3

excellently.

possible

Now 1 8 . . . f5 is possible, but first I prefer:

18 ... gb7! 1 9.:Sdl

1 9.b3

1 9 .i.f3 Wfd7!00

1 9 .c5 dxc5 20 .'\Wxc5 Wi'c8 =

19 ...Wc8 20.lll c3 lll b4 2 1 .Wfb2 lll xc2 22.Wfxc2 Wies 23.:Sd3 :Sb4 24.Wfdl gfbg 25.lll bS a4 26.:Sxa4 :Sxa4 27 .bxa4 Wfxc4= Yielding easy equality.

19 ... 5 20.tll de3

20 .i.f3 f4! ? � , intending . . . Wb8, should also be fine for Black.

20 ...he3 2 1 .tll xe3 2 1 .Wi'xe3 f4 22 .'\Wd3 �d700

B2) 1 6.a3 Perhaps the first move one would consider.

1 6 ... bxa3 White can now capture in four different ways:

7 6 5

4 3

2 1

B3) 1 6.gadl

322

l l . c4

This move is the most common in the position,

emphasizing play in the centre and on the kingside. The idea a2-a3 becomes more remote

and White will base his strategy on preparing f2f4, while an exchange of light-squared bishops may still be possible via g4 .

8 1.m � �� •/, 7 �-,_, , /,� ,,Y,� i 6 �� %� : � �- - - ��t� �, � � � F � �tZJr� � 4 ,,,,, /,�� li/,� ,,,,.�� 3 ��'''� � � /, �! �� ' /, 2 8 W�tlJ�..t � �� 8� 1 •, , , /,� rarm, , , ·;,;

,�

16 ... �a7!?

I like this multipurpose move. It allows Black to defend the weak d6-pawn by . . . i':!:d7, prepares

2 1 .g3 g6 22.h4 ih6 23.Wg2 ©g7 24.iWb S ! ? iW c S ! 2 5 .\Wa4 lll e7= The chances were level i n Karjakin - Timofeev, Khanty-Mansiysk 2009,

and a draw was soon agreed.

17.h3 This has been played by Kamsky. The idea is to

exchange light-squared bishops. l 7.f4

nothing special

now in view of

17 . . . exf4 1 8 .lll xf4 \Wb6t 1 9 .Wh l ixf4 20.i':!:xf4

lll e5 2 1 .iWd4 \Wxd4 22.i':!:xd4 l"lb8+± with a good

ending for Black.

l 7.a3 bxa3 l 8 .lll xa3 i':!:d7 1 9 . lll b S ixd5! 20.exdS

(20 .iWxd S ? ? lll b4-+ ; 20.cxdS lll b4+±) 20 . . . lll b400

produces a wildly unbalanced position with chances for both sides. l 7.b3 i':!:d7! is solid enough, for example: 1 8 . f4!?

(freeing the e3- and d4-squares for the c2-knight) 1 8 . . . exf4 1 9 . lll xf4 ixf4 20.l"lxf4

to apply pressure on the b-file by means of . . . \Wb8 and . . . b3, and also maintains the option

of . . . lll c6-b8-a6-c5.

However, the simplistic 16 ... ixdS does not look

bad either: 1 7.\WxdS ( 1 7.cxdS lll b8 intending . . . lll d7-c5) 1 7 . . . \Wb6 1 8 .i':!:d3 ! ? ( 1 8 .iWbS \Wc7=; l 8.b3 E!:fd8 1 9 .g3 \Wc5 20 .\WxcS dxc5 2 U '1d5 ie7 22.ig4= was agreed drawn in Nepomniachtchi -

Wang Yue, Sochi 2009 .) 1 8 . . . E!:ac8 1 9 .E!:fd l l"lfd8 20.l"lf3 l"lc7

20 . . . iWgS !

2 1 .:Bffl

(2 1 .l"lf2

1Wc5)

2 1 . . .iWcSt

22.Wh l l"le8 23.lll e3 lll e5 24 .\Wd2 f6= With an optimal defensive formation and the better bishop guaranteeing equal chances for Black.

Finally, 1 7.if3 iWbS!? 1 8 .b3 E!:d7 1 9 .g3 ( 1 9 . h3 lll d8!? 20 .ig4 lll b7 2 1 .iWg3 lll c5 22.ixe6

fxe6 23 .WxgS exd5�) 1 9 . . . idS ! ? 20.iWe3 ixd5 2 1 .i':!:xdS ib6 22 .iWd2

323

Chapter 27 - 1 3 .ie2

�z

· � �-�· · 7 ��·;;··�· · 8

6 · ·�� - � · · % %•%� .I' a:� ��·�-

3 ��-""'"'·%�,�

2 � -llJ� . ,=�. , ., ./,.� 1

1 9 .'ll e l ih6! 20.'ll f3 f6 2 1 .l':'lfe l \Wes 22.h4 mhs 23.Wc2 'll bs 24.h5 'll a6 25.hxg6 hxg6t was better for Black in Petersons - Jong , corr. 20 1 0.

�

1 9.'ll de3 is hardly harmonious. After 1 9 . . . l':'ld7 20.'ll d5 \t>g7!? 2 1 .l':'lfe l (2 1 .ig4 h5 22.ixe6 fxe6 23. de � \Wb �+) 2 1 . . .h5!+ White lacked any constructive ideas m Istomin - Deev, corr. 20 1 0 .

22 . . . ic5!! 23.\t>g2 (23 .l':'lxc5 ? 'll d4! 24.'ll xd4 dx� 5-+) 23 . . . Wa? 24.ig4 l':'ldd8= was fully satisfactory for Black in Galkin - Van den Doe! ' Bratislava 1 993.

17... l'!b7!? It looks as though it is in Black's favour to force b2-b3 as this makes it more difficult for White to carry out a2-a3.

1 9.ig4 ixd5! 20.Wxd5! (20.cxd5 li:J bS+ intending . . . h7-h5 and . . . 'll b8-d7, is less than impressive for White. 20.exd5 'll a7!!+ is also better for Black, who has stopped c4-c5 and can aspire to exploiting his kingside pawn majority after due preparation.) 20 . . . Wb6 2 l .g3 hS 22.�e2 h4 23.\t>g2 l':'ldS is clearly nothing for White:

1 8.b3 1 8.ig4 allows the nice tactic 1 8 . . . b3! 1 9.axb3 'IWbS 20.b4 ixd5! 2 1 .Wxd5 'll x b4= with complete equality.

24 · f4 .ih6 25.f5 'll e7 26.Wd3 gxf5 27.exf5 d5 28.f6 'll g 6f! Black has a lot of play.

19 ... e:xf4 20.llJ:xf4 l'!d7 2 1 .lDxe6 fxe6 22.� g4 l'!xfl t 23.l'!xfl This is a balanced position, with Black having a choice of queen moves.

1 9.f4 Probably the only try to create something.

23 ... We7 Also possible is 23 . . . WeS!? 24.'ll d4 'll xd4 25.Wxd4 h5 26.ie2 e5 27.Wd5t \t>g7 28.l':'lf3 idS! 29 .'<.Wb5 V!ff e7 30.\t>h2 l':'lb7 3 1 .Vfic6 l':'lc7 32.Wd5 l':'lc5 33 .®'d l h4= 34.g3 ®'e6 35 .l':'ld3 hxg3t 36.\t>xg3 \Wf7 37.m3 We6 38.l':'ld3 Y2-Y2 Kazanrsev - Ilyushchenko, corr. 20 1 1 .

324

1 l .c4

Conclusion

7 6

4 3

24.h4 tli e5 25.Wh3 llixg4 26.Wxg4 i.f6 27.hS 'it>g7 2s.hxg6 hxg6 29.g3 ic3 30.ďż˝gz gds 3 1 .Wez ghs 32.We3 Wd7 33.Wf3 Wes= The chances were level in Michal - Mishin, corr. 20 1 1 .

In chis chapter we delved deeper into the posicional line 1 0 .ixf6 ixf6 l l .c4 b4 1 2. ti:l c2 a5 by examining che topical continuation 1 3 .ie2. Afcer 1 3 . . . 0-0 1 4 . 0-0 ig5 White has a variety of choices buc I chink chat the clearly thematic moves are l 5 . .ig4 and l 5 .Wd3 . l 5 . .ig4 has the clear-cut aim of exchanging light-squared bishops, but Black should evade the exchange by 1 5 . . . ib7 when he stands quite satisfactorily as the g4-bishop is hitting thin air. After 1 6.'1Wd3 an instructive move is 1 6 . . . ti:l b8, planning to regroup the knight to c5 and practically forcing the sequence l 7.a3! ti:l a6! 1 8.axb4 axb4 1 9.ti:lcxb4 lll xb4 20.ti:lxb4 '1Wb6 2 1 .ti:ld5 ixd5 22.'1Wxd5 Elxa l 23.Elxal '1Wxb2 with a drawish outcome. 1 5 .Â°1Wd3 immediately is a better option; White takes a first step towards generating pressure on the d-file while keeping the undermining possibility a2-a3 ac hand. Still, after l 5 . . . ie6!? Black should have no problems at all as he is well developed and can always consider going into an opposite-coloured bishop position by a timely exchange on d5. A characteristic line is 1 6.Elad l Ela7!? 1 7.h3 Elb7!? 1 8.b3 g6! 1 9.ig4 ixd5! 20.'1Wxd5! Wb6 2 1 .g3 h5 22.1e2 h4 23.'it>g2 Eld8 with approximately equal chances, which should be the usual evaluation for the variation as a whole.

1 1.c4 13.g3 Variation Index 1 .e4 cS 2.llif3 lli c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.llixd4 lli f6 S.llic3 eS 6.lli dbS d6 7.i.gS a6 8.lli a3 bS 9.llidS i.e7 I O ..txf6 i.xf6 1 1 .c4 b4 12.llic2 aS 13.g3 13 ... 0-0! A) 14.h4 B) 14.i.g2 i.gS 1 5.0-0 lli e7! B l ) 1 6.b3?! B2) 1 6.f4 B3) 16.llide3 B4) 1 6.h4!? BS) 1 6.llixe7t B6) 1 6. lli ce3

B) after 1 5 .0-0

326 327 328 329 329 330 330 332

B3) after 20.b3

20 . . . g6!

B6) after 28.h4

326

1 l . c4

1 .e4 c5 2.lll £3 lll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lll xd4 lll f6 5.lll c3 e5 6.lll db5 d6 7.i.gS a6 8.lll a3 bS 9.lll dS i.e7 10 ..ix.£6 .ix.f6 1 1 .c4 b4 12.lll c2 a5 13.g3 This is a logical and widespread concinuation, seeking to overprotect e4 by ig2. White will then play in the cencre and on the kingside, with a possible f2-f4 expansion at some poinc. He may also consider h2-h4, followed by offering an exchange of light-squared bishops on h3. 13 ... 0-0! A well founded move that will be our main line continuation; Black does not commit the f6-bishop to g5 yet, in order to avoid the consequences of the above-mencioned plan with h2-h4 and ih3, as he may end up weaker on the light squares. A) 14.h4 is a critical alternative to the standard choice of B) 14.i.g2. A) 14.h4

1 5 .i.g2 ie6 1 6.0-0 b3 1 7.lLlce3 tll d4 1 8.axb3 tll x b3 l 9.!'!a3 id7 20.tll f5 i.c6! and Black gets fine chances by sacrificing his cl-pawn, as seen from the variation: 2 1 .lLlb4 (2 1 .tll xf6t Wxf6 22.Wxd6 Wxd6 23.tll xd6 l"\fd8 24.:gd l !'!ab8�) 2 1 . . .i.eS 22.Wxd6 (22.lLlxd6 ie7+) 22 . . . Wxd6 23.tll xd6 ie7 24.c5 tll xc5 25.tll f5 id8+± Also possible is: 1 5 .ih3 ie6! White cannot get an advancage no matter how he concinues. 1 6.ixe6 Thematic, but the momentum is on Black's side. 1 6.@fl ! ? b3! 1 7.axb3 axb3 1 8.tll ce3 !'!xa l 1 9 .Wxal tll d4 20.@g2 Wd7 2 1 .tll xf6t gxf6 is unclear. 1 6.b3 i.xd5 ( 1 6 . . . ti:J d4!?f±) 1 7.cxd5 tll d4 1 8.tll xd4 exd4 1 9.0-0 !'!e8 20.Wd3 We7= looks quite level. 1 6 . . . fxe6 1 7.tll dxb4 lLlxb4 1 8.lll xb4 Wb6 1 9.Wd2 1 9.lLld3 Wd4+

Taking away the importanc g5-square from the black bishop. This is how play may evolve:

15.lll cxb4 It looks logical for White to grab a pawn but, as it turns out, Black gets powerful counterplay.

15 ... lll xb4 16.lll xb4 Wb6 17.a3 l 7.lLld5 Wxb2 1 8.lLlxf6t ( 1 8.!'!b l Wxa2 1 9.:gal Wb2 20.:gb l Wa3+) 1 8 . . . gxf6 1 9 .id3 ( 1 9.ie2 f5 !+) 1 9 . . . ie6+ looks like a slight but solid edge for Black, as White has structural weaknesses on the queenside.

Chapter 28

327

1 3 .g3

22 ...ďż˝d7! 23.ifl ig4 24.ie2 ie6!t Black's strong pressure on the b- and f-files more than outweighs White's extra pawn. Thus, it can safely be concluded that 1 3 . . . 0-0 should be answered by the main continuation I 4.ig2 rather than I 4.h4. B) 14.ig2 ig5 1 5.0-0 With the bishop on g5 White is ready to carry out f2-f4, so Black's next move is designed to take the sting out of this idea:

18.id3 I 8.ig2 ie6 1 9.l'k I Wb8! 20.o-o tb6 2 I .ďż˝h2 .ic5 22.We l Y2-Y2 was Bos - Pirs, corr. 2009, but in my opinion Black is slightly better and could have played on. 1 8.Wd3 ie6 1 9 .ih3 Wc5! 20.ixe6 fxe6 2 1 .0-0 ia5 22.l"\ad l l"\fd8= is at least equal for Black. 1 8.ih3 ixh3 1 9.l'hh3 Wc5t is unimpressive for White.

18 .. .'11*/h7! 19.0-0 ih6! 20.lD dS id4 21.El:hl ih3 22.El:el

1 5 ... lD e7! The established way, seeking exchanges and reducing White's attacking potential by defusing his control over d5. 1 5 . . . .ie6!? Another interesting continuation, for those who like simple positions. 1 6.Wd3 ixd5 1 7.cxd5 1 7.exd5 tll b8 1 8 .c5 dxc5 1 9.d6 Ela6 20.Elad l c4 2 I .Wd5 c3 22.bxc3 bxc3 23.tll e3 l"\c6 24.l"\d3 c2 25.l"lcl ixe3 26.fxe3 Wb6 27.d7 l"\d8 28 .Wxe5 Ele6 29.Wc3 tll xd7 30.Elxc2 tll f6= is level too. 17 . . . tll bs l 8.a3 1 8.h4 was played in Jakubowski - Bobras, Poland 2009, but I believe it changes little after the correct 1 8 . . . ih6!=. 1 8 . . . lll a6 1 8 . . . bxa3= is also good.

328

l l .c4

s i, ��.,,,,,/, �� · ,�"'- ' �� . , .,/,� 6 A)) ��"-- - - %�.P" �-,, 5 �%. •@,� 8 t,� �/,� � .,., Y,� 7

�� ts 2 t�� t��f :, . , . , � � , , % � �

,ef · ,%� �" 3 %��-" •!•�-J�-��-" %,

Dubious, as it allows Black strong counterplay down the a-file.

16 ... tll xd5 17.Wxd5 ie6 1 8.Wd3 Wb6! 19.@hl a4 20.f4 axb3! 2 1 .axb3 gxal

4 1

1 9.axb4 tt'ixb4 20.tt'ixb4 axb4 2 1 .h4 Ah6 22.Ah3 22.iWc4!? can be answered by 22 . . . g6 23 .Ah3 (23.iWxb4 :!'1b8=) 23 . . . b3! 24.1!!i'x b3 Ad2! 25.iig2 iig7 26.E!fd l :gxal 27.:gxa l V!fc7 28.1!!i' d3 ib4;; when White's extra pawn is meaningless. 22 . . . 1!!i' b6 23.Ad7 b3 24.Ac6 :!'1a2 25.:!'1xa2 bxa2 26.1!!i' a3 :!'1b8 27.'1Wxa2 The players agreed a draw in Anand - Gelfand, Moscow (5) 20 1 2 . Anand did not re-enter the Sveshnikov for the remainder of the match, a fact that speaks volumes for the merits of the system. We have reached a second branching point for this chapter. As is often the case, some moves are more critical than others: Bl) 1 6.b3?!, B2) 1 6.f4, B3) 16.tll de3, B4) 1 6.h4!?, B5) 16.tll xe7t and B6) 16.tll ce3.

26.gdl Wfl! 27.gfl Wfh4 28.Ag2 ge8 29.tll e3 Ah3! 30.tll d5 Axg2t 3 1 .@xg2 ga8! 32.'11Mg3 Black had outplayed his opponent in Movsesian - Tregubov, Dagomys 2008, and could have crowned his efforts with:

Bl) 1 6.b3?!

32 ... ga2tN 33.gfl '11Mxg3t 34.hxg3 ga3 It is highly unlikely that White can survive.

Chapter 28

35.eS 3 5 .lll xc3? bxc3 36.b4 El:b3-+ 35 .E:c2 E:xb3 36.e5 dxe5 37.c5 @f8 38.c6 @es+ 35 ... dxeS 36.cS ga5 37.lll xc3 bxc3 38.b4 gb5 39.gc2 gxb4 40J�xc3 exf4:+ White is a pawn down without compensation. B2) 1 6.f4 Allowing Black to open up the position for his bishops:

17.'IWxdS l 7.fxg5 'Wb6t 1 8 .@h l ( 1 8.E':f2 lll c?+) 1 8 . . . lll e3! 1 9 .lll xe3 'Wxe3 20.'Wc l (20.'Wxd6 'Wxg5+) 20 . . . 'Wc5 2 1 .b3 a4 22.'Wd2 axb3 23.axb3 E:a3+±, with strong counterplay, looks fine for Black. 17....ie6 18.'1Wd3 exf4 19.gxf4 .if6 20.gab l 20.lt:Jd4?! ig4 2 1 .if3 'Wb6 22.E:ad l ixf3 23.E:xf3 E:fe8+± leaves White with certain worries about his e-pawn. 20 ... a4! From this position it seems the best White can hope for is equality.

329

1 3 .g3

2 1 .ClJe3 A principled move, bur all the same Black manages to at least equalize. 2 1 . b3 allows strong coumerplay after: 2 1 . . .axb3 22.axb3 E:a2 23.:1'1bd l (23.lll e3 'Wb6 24.�h l .id4+) 23 . . . .ic3 24.lll e3 El:b2+ 2 1 .cJih l Wb6 22.b3 (22.e5 dxe5 23.ixa8 E:xa8 24.'We4 E:c8 is okay for Black) 22 . . . axb3 23.axb3 El:a2 24.E:bd 1 !? (24.lll e3 id4) is slightly different from the above variation as Black has played . . . 'Wb6 instead of . . . .ic3, bur the evaluation still doesn't change:

2 1 ...'1Wb6 22.@hl .id4 23.f5 .ixe3 24.fxe6 fxe6 25.eS! gxfl t 26.gxfl gds 27 ..ie4! dxe5 2s ..ixh7t @hs 29 ..ig6 @gs= With a draw, as White has nothing better than repeating with .ig6-h7t. B3) 16.ctJde3 An attempt to initiate pressure along the d-file, but such moves rarely work.

16 ... '1Wb6 17.'1Wd3 .ie6 1 8.!Udl 1 8 .E:ad l .ixe3 1 9.lll xe3 lll c6 is excellent for Black. 1 8 ... gfdS!

330

l l . c4

1 8 . . . !xe3?! 1 9.lll xe3 lll c6 20.lll fS l"i:fd8 2 1 .�e3! �c7 22.l'!d2 l'!ab8 23.l'!ad l gave White a strong initiative in Pierzak - lsigkeit, corr. 20 1 2.

17 ...Wl'b6 1 s.Wfd3 gds 1 8 . . . g6!?= looks even better to me. 1 9 .l'!ad l l'!d8 transposes to the game without allowing the variation noted on White's next move.

19.'DfS Black has nothing to fear:

19.gadl 1 9 .lll fS !? ixf5 20.exfS l'!ab8 2 1 .lll e3 (2 1 .b3 d5+) 21 ... ixe3 22.fXe3 f6+± leads to unclear play.

19 ...Wi'cS 20.b3 20.h4?! ixc4+

19 ... g6 20.b3 ie6 2 1 .©h2 a4 22.ih3 axb3 23.axb3 Jakovenko - Tregubov, Sochi 20 1 2 . Black should have preferred: 23 ...ixe3!? 23 . . . l'!a2?! 24.ixe6 fxe6 happened in the game, and here 25.l'!a l ! l'!da8 26.l'!xa2 l'!xa2 27.iih3!;!;, intending l'!d l , gives White an edge. 24.CDxe3 tlJ c6= With a level position. BS) 16.'Dxe7t This direct move is hardly dangerous for Black.

1 6...Wl'xe7 White now has a choice of moves: B4) 1 6.h4!? ih6 17.'Dde3 A slight modification of the idea in variation B3, played in a relatively recent high-level game.

Chapter 28

Queenside play by 1 7.b3 Vf1c7 1 8.a3 is no better for White. ( l 8.h4 seems rather pointless when the bishop can return to d8, for example: 1 8 . . . id8 1 9.'Lle3 [ 1 9.a3 bxa3 20.'Llxa3 id7=] 1 9 . . . l'!a6 20.Vf1e2 Vl1a7 2 1 .l'!ad l a4?) 1 8 . . . bxa3 1 9.'Llxa3 id7 20.'\Wd3 Vf1c5 2 1 .l'!fd l a4 22.Vf1xd6 '\Wxd6 23.l'!xd6 ie6 24.b4 ie7 25 .l'!b6 (25 .l'!xe6 fxe6 26.c5 l'!fb8+) 25 . . . l'!fb8= 1 7.h4 ih6 1 8 .b3 is a sly positional method of playing, keeping Black guessing. White may opt for either a2-a3 or Wh2 and ih3, according to circumstance. A sufficient answer is l 8 . . . ie6 1 9.Vf1d3 ( 1 9.a3 bxa3 20.'Llxa3 a4 2 1 .b4 l'!fc8=) 19 . . . g6! 20.l'!fd l (20.Wh2 lii h 8! 2 Lih3 f5?) 20 ... l'!fc8!? 2 1 .Vf1xd6 Vf1xd6 22.l'!xd6 if8� and Black gets magnificent compensation for the pawn:

33 1

1 3 .g3

2 1 .f5 ib7 22.h4! 22.llie3 ig5 ! 23.'Llg4 h5 24.h4 hxg4 25.hxg5 f6 26.g6 l'!c8+ 8 7 6

5 4 3

22 . . . a4 23.'Lle3 1:l:b8 24.Wh2 b3! 25.axb3 25 .a3 l'k6 26.Vf1e2 ia6? 25 . . . ic6 26.bxa4 l'!xb2 27.l'!b l l'!xb l =

1 8 ...WcS 1 9.gadl ga6!= This fine move, keeping both rooks in optimal positions, gives Black equal chances. 20.@hl ih7 2 1 .f4 if6! Black should not capture on f4 now.

23.l'!d3 (23.l'!dd l a4�) 23 . . . l'!d8 24.l'!ad l l'!xd3 25.l'!xd3 a4?

17...Wc7! It is best to keep the c8-bishop flexible for the time being. 18.b3 Black is not worse after: 1 8.l'!ad l !? Vf1c5 1 9.Whl l'!a6! 20.f4 if6! A positional crap is 20 . . . exf4 2 1 .gxf4 if6 22.b3 a4 23.a3! axb3? (23 . . . bxa3 24.b4 Vf1c7 25.'Llxa3±) 24.axb4 Vf1a7 25 .Vf1xb3±, when I was lost in Nisipeanu - Kotronias, Aix-les Bains 20 1 1 .

22.fS 22.'Lle3 allows an immediate 22 . . . a4?, and in view of the passive g2-bishop White cannot really undertake anything. For example: 23.'Llf5 (23.f5 l'!fa8?) 23 . . . l'!d8 24.Vf1f3 exf4 25.Vf1xf4 lii h 8= 22 .. J;ras1 22 . . . a4?! 23.a3! bxa3 24.b4± 23.h4 ids! 24.@h2!? 24.f6?! ixf6 25 .l'!xf6 gxf6 26.Vf1f3 Vf1c8! 27.'Ll e3 a4 28.Wh2 Vf1f8+ 24.'Ll e3 f6= 24.Vf1d2 a4! 25.'Llxb4 l'!b6 26.'Ll d3 Vf1d4 27.c5 dxc5 28.'Llxc5 Vf1xc5 29.Vf1xd8t l'!xd8 30.l'!xd8t Vf1f8 3 1 .l'!xf8t Wxf8 32.bxa4 l'!b4=

332

l l .c4

s ,i �

� -·�

Df•" '•TE.i �� . , , /,� r� � 5 . s 'm!� �• " m' ' 8 ' • zr• . ,. �� 0¥' � ''�1 .�. 1 � �.r.r. 1 6

W,j

24 ... f6! Black has completed a nice regrouping, granting him equal chances as the following variations show: 25.g4!? 25 .1:'1d2?! ib6!+ 25 .@h3 Wes 26.lLie3 (26.g4 @hS) 26 . . . .ib6 27.ctJd5 WdS 2S.lLixb6 Wxb6= and Black seems quite okay to me.

25 ...Wfcs 26.c;t>h3 @hs 27 ..if3 27.1:'1d2 ib6 2S.g5 ic5 29.gxf6 gxf6 30.1:'1f3 a4 3 l .1:'1g3 axb3 32.axb3 Wf8 33.ctJe3 1:'\al =

8 7

2 a

27 ... .ib6! 28.Wfxd6 .id4 29.Wfe? g8a7 30 . .!Lixd4 .ixe4 3 1 .Wfxa? gxa7 32.he4 exd4 33.gxd4 gd7 =

B6) 16 . .!Ll ce3 Reinforcing White's control over d5.

8 .i - .i.� ��-� � �- , -.• •• , , 0, /,� �- - -'%- -� �� /,/ /, %0' �� , , , /, �/, m�� ltJW /, 8 , 4 ,, , � �;"/-�/�� % ,,,,,/,� 3 � � �;�: ��W� 2 8��•/. . . n ; il� 1 d., , .%� -l•t=r- - · /, 7

,, ,,/,

�

''/,

,,,,.

16 ....ixe3! There is no point in delaying this capture. Black gets a fairly even game, as his weakness on d6 is compensated for by a superior bishop and space on the queenside. 17 . .!Llxe3 .ie6 1 8.Wfd3 Wfc7! The best square for the queen. 1 S . . . Wb6?! is not so good because of 1 9.ctJf5!;!;.

19.gadl It seems logical to double rooks on the d-file. However, practice has also seen: 1 9 .1:'\acl 1:'\fdS! 20.ctJd5 After 20.1:'\fd l tt:l c6 2 1 . lLi f5 a4! 22.We3 :ga5! 23.:gd2 ixf5 = a draw was agreed in Silva Schwenck, corr. 20 1 0, as 24.exf5 tt:l d4 25.f6 gxf6 26.Wh6 d5 27.Wxf6 :gc5 should lead to a perpetual sooner or later. 20 . . . Wa7! Black seems to have no problems at all. 2 1 .We3 lLi c6 2 1 . . .Wxe3 22.fxe3 tt:lxd5 23.exd5 id7 24.c5 dxc5 25.1:'1xc5 :gdcS= was also level in Bubir Ko leak, corr. 20 I 0. 22.c5 dxc5 23.1:'1xc5 tt:l d4 24.mc I h6 2 5 . ttl c7 :gabs 26.lll xe6 lll xe6 27_:gd5 1ltixe3 2S.fxe3 @fs

Chapter 28

29.Eixe5 Eid2 30.l'' m We8 3 1 .l':l:xa5 l'!c8 32.Eif2 l'!xf2 33.Wxf2 l'!c2t 34.Wgl Elxb2= The inevitable draw was soon agreed upon in Shpakovsky - Schwenck, corr. 20 1 2 .

333

1 3 .g3

and then dominate the posmon with heavy pieces. See the game Balogh - Reinderman, Beijing 2008, for a perfect illustration of the face chac befalls Black if he becomes too static. b) 2 1 .lD f5! Ela? 22.l'!d2t

2 1 .E:dl 2 1 .lDd5 Ci:Jxd5 22.cxd5 id7= or 2 1 .Ci:J f5 Ci:J c6=. 21. .. l!J c6 22.E:fdl axb3 22 . . . t2J d4 23.Ci:Jc2 Ci:Jxc2 24.l'!xc2 is another example featuring an exchange of knights, hue I am sceptical of the benefits. 24 . . . axb3 25.axb3 l'!a3 26.h4 �c5 27.Wh2 !g4 and Black went on to draw in Jacot - Mooij , corr. 20 1 0, but at this point 28.l'!b l ! ?N is more critical than the game continuation of 28.f3 . 23.axb3 Fabri - Domancich, corr. 20 1 3 .

20.b3 20.f4 f6 2 1 .Eld2 (2 1 .if3 �c5 22.Wg2 Ci:J c6 23.ig4 !xg4 24.Ci:Jxg4 Ci:J d4� is also excellent for Black) 2 1 . . .a4! 22.b3 axb3 23.axb3 tD c6 24.l'!fd l l'!a3 25.Ci:Jc2 �a7t 26.Wh l l'!a2= and Black had fully equalized (perhaps even a bit more than chat) in Ki. Georgiev - Halkias, Subotica 2008. 20 ... a4! 20 . . . �c5 is noc che mosc exact because it allows Ci:J f5 . In this type of position Black should, in principle, try to avoid the exchange of knights:

23 13a5!N To dominate both c5 and the a-file. •..

a) 2 l .l'!d2 is not the best, but is worth mentioning for an instructive game chat follows. 2 1 . . .Ci:J c6 gives Black an excellent version of what he wanted: 22.l'!fd l Ela? 23.h4! Ci:Jd4?! (23 ... a4! 24.Ci:Jc2 axb3 25.axb3 l'!a2 is slightly better for Black as White is going nowhere on the kingside.) 24.t2Jc2 Ci:Jxc2 25.Elxc2 White plans to exchange light-squared bishops via h3

24.l!Jc2 24.h4 h6 25 .Wh2 (25 .Ci:Jf5 ixf5 26.exf5 Ci:J d400) 25 . . . �a?! (25 . . . �c8 26.Ci:J c2) 26.ih3 l'!a3 27.Ci:Jc2 l'!a2 28.ixe6 fxe6= 24...'V:Va7=

334

l 1 .c4

This is equal. With many pieces still on the board (especially the knights) , White will always have to watch out for his b3-weakness.

25.Wf e2 Wies 26.l::! d3 26.l:'1al tll d4 27.Wfd3 E1xa l t 28.tll xal E1a8 29.ctJc2 tll xc2 30.�xc2 l:'1al t+ 26.h4 l:'1a2 27.©h2 tll a 5 and White starts to suffer on b3.

26 ... :E!:a2 27.:E!: l d2 g6 28.h4 28.�d l E1da8 29.E1xd6? tll d4+

28 ... :Ei:b2!? 28 . . . h5 is less appealing due to 29.�d l ©g7 30.©h2±. 29.Wf dl :E!:a8 30.hS :E!:aa2 3 1 .h6 3 1 .E1xd6 E1xc2+ 3 1 ... ©fS 32.©h2 32.E1xd6 E1xc2 33.E1d8t ©e7-+ 32 ... ©e7=

Conclusion In this chapter we have dealt with the rather important variation 9.ctJd5 fie? 1 0 .ixf6 fixf6 1 l .c4 b4 1 2 .tll c2 a5 1 3 .g3, concluding that Black is in excellent theoretical shape. However, it has to be stressed that this is a line where White's plan is simple and easy to carry out in practical play while Black has to master several nuances in order to keep the equilibrium. After 1 3 . . . 0-0! White has two main continuations, namely 1 4.h4 and 1 4 .!J.g2. I think that in the first case Black equalizes relatively easily with the pawn sacrifice 1 4 . . . a4!?, because after 1 5 .tll cxb4 tll xb4 1 6 .tll xb4 �b6 1 7.a3 id8 1 8 .!J.d3 �b7! 1 9 .0-0 ib6! the dark-squared bishop is redeployed to an excellent diagonal from where it can hardly be evicted. This leaves 1 4.!J.g2 as our main concern, when Black should reply with I 4 . . . !J.g5 1 5 .0-0 tll e7!, fighting for control of the d5-square. Then White has to choose between taking on e7 or reinforcing the d5-knight. I think that 1 6 .tll xe?t is hardly dangerous for Black if he follows the recipe proposed in this chapter, illustrated by the line 16 . . . ®xe? 1 7.®d3 ®c7! 1 8 .E1ad l !? ®c5 1 9 .©h l E1a6! 20.f4 if6! 2 1 .f5 ib7 22.h4! a4 23.tll e3 E1b8 24.©h2 b3! 25.axb3 ic6 26.bxa4 E1xb2 27.E1b l E1xb I = . Black's plan looks nice and simple, but I remember that I spent quite some time trying to discover the most harmonious piece configuration, combining queenside counterplay with kingside restriction. The other main possibility, namely 1 6 .tll ce3, allows Black to remain with the slightly better bishop after I 6 . . . ixe3! 1 7.tll xe3 ie6 1 8.�d3 �c7!, but he still needs to display some care as White controls more space and wants to attack on the kingside. I think that the line 1 9 .E1ad I :gfd8! 20.b3 a4! 2 1 .E1d2 tll c6 22.E1fd l axb3 23.axb3 E1a5! 24.tll c2 ®a7= exemplifies in the best possible manner how Black should continue, as his queenside operations are a severe annoyance for White and keep him at bay.

1 1.c3 Introduction Variation Index 1 .e4 cS 2.tlJf3 tlJ c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tlJxd4 tiJf6 S . tiJ c3 eS 6.tiJ dbS d6 7 ..igS a6 8.tiJa3 bS 9.tiJdS .ie7 l O ..ixf6 .ixf6 l l .c3 1 1 . .. 0-0! A) 1 2.h4 .ie6! 1 3 . tlJ c2 .ixdS! 14.WfxdS tlJ e7 Al) 1 5 .Wfd3 A2) 15.Wfb3!? B) 12 ..id3 igS 13 ..ic2 tlJ e7!? B l ) 14.0-0 B2) l 4 ..ib3!? C) 12.tlJ c2 .igS Cl) 1 3 . tlJ ce3 .ixe3!? 14.tlJxe3 tlJ e7 C l l) 15 ..id3 C l 2) 1 5 ..ie2 C2) 1 3 ..id3 C3) 13 ..ie2 tlJ e7 14. tlJ cb4!? aS 1 5.tlJxe7t Wfxe7 16.tiJdS Wfb7! 17.Wfd3! Ei:b8 1 8.0-0 .ie6 C3 1 ) 1 9.Ei:adl C32) 1 9.Ei:fdl

336 336 337 337 338 338 339 339 340 34 1 342 342 343 344

336

l l .c3

l .e4 c5 2.lll f-3 lll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lll xd4 lll f6 5.lll c3 e5 6.lll db5 d6 7.�g5 a6 8.lll a3 b5 9.lll d5 ie7 I O.ixf6 ixf6 l 1.c3 0-0 We are beginning our coverage of the main line. In this chapter we shall concentrate on: A) 1 2.h4, B) 12.�d3 and C) 12.lll c2. A) 12.h4 This move is intended to prevent . . . ig5 for good, before relocating the knight to c2.

12 �e6! A logical method of fighting for d5, which should be sufficient for equality: ..•

13.lll c2 ixd5! 14.1Mxd5 lll e7 White has a choice of queen retreats: Al) 15.1Md3 or A2) 15.Wb3!?.

7 6 5

4 3

1 8.g4!? 1 8.id3 g6 1 9.g4 E!ac8 20.'1Wf3 ig7 2 1 .@bl f5 ! 22.gxf5 gxf5 23 .ie2 E!fdS 24.h5 @hs 25 .'1Wg3 if6 26.h6 e4 27.l"lxdSt l"lxd8 28.l"ld l l"lxd l t 29.ixd l iWdS 30.ih5 l/Jg8= was level in Cardona Costa - Lucki, corr. 20 1 1 .

Al) 15.1Md3 d5 1 6.0-0-0 1 8 g6 19.g5! �g7 20.lll e3 This was B. Kosic - Korosec, corr. 2009, and at this point I believe Black has a strong response: .••

1 6.l:'!d 1 ?! as played in Magrifin - Schevnin, Vladimir 2009, should be answered by: 16 . . . Wa5! 1 7.exd5 Wxa2 1 8.d6 l"lfd8 1 9 .Wf3 e4! 20.Wxe4 l/Jg6 2 1 .'\Wb4! a5 22.Wa3 '\We6t 23.ltJe3 ixh4 24.l"lh3 b4t

20 ... !!adS!? 2 1 .�g2 h5!= Fixing White's kingside pawns on dark squares while stopping any attacking ideas. 22.1Mb7 White tries to go to an ending with this move, but Black need not necessarily comply:

Chapter 29

22 \1;!fc5!? 22 ... 'l!Nxb7 23 . .ixb7 a5 24.gxd8 gxd8 25.gdl �hd l t 26.c;t>xd l tlif5 27.tlixf5 gxf5 should be equal. .•.

23.\1;!fxa6 1:'M4!? 24.\t>bl �f4? A powerful idea, with strong play against White's kingside weaknesses.

A move by Jon Amason that has fallen into oblivion. With this manoeuvre, White discloses his intention to not relinquish control of d5. The problem is that time is lost and the a3-knight remains on the rim, a fact Black will subsequently exploit.

s K

2 e

�

� 3 � �� - �2 ,..... �_;D%_ ifm !Irt!t ; =�� ----%� 1 ,

8 7 6 5 4

�f

;

1 6.exd5 'l!Nxd5 1 7.Wi'xd5 tlixd5=

,,,,,

%�p

1 6.g4 tli g6!? l 7.g5 .ie7�

Wia� , , ,%� ��Y, -� �� .i.S

:5 ,��,�.- .. �,., ef'� � � CZJ��%- � · -�4 ��-

A2) 15.\1;!fb3!? d5 16.�dl!?

337

Introduction

1 6 ... d4 17.cxd4 exd4 1 8.f4! We have reached a position which is hard to evaluate, but my original impression that it looked more pleasant for White was probably an illusion. The mobile pawn mass on the kingside looks threatening, bur Black shouldn't panic. 1 8 ... �cS! 19 ..id3 l 9.g3 tli c6+ 19 ... lll c6 20.eS i.xh4t 2 1 .\t>e2 h6? Black has possibilities of sacrificing a piece on e5, which should yield him excellent counterattacking chances. B) 12.J.d3 .ig5 13 ..ic2

,,,

13 ... tlie7!? This looks like the best move for Black. He keeps open the possibility of trading the d5knight, when the misplacement of the a3-knight will be strongly felt. Subsequently he must opt for . . . f5 , and in doing so should avoid an exchange of light-squared bishops. Another continuation which is not at all worse for Black is: 1 3 . . . gb8 1 4.'l!Nd3 .ie6 ( 1 4 . . . b4!? 1 5 .tlic4 bxc3 1 6.bxc3 tli e7 17.tlixe?t= Y2-Y2 was Amason - Van der Wiel, Haninge 1 989.) 1 5 .Eld l Wfd7! ( 1 5 ... f5 1 6.exf5 .ixf5 1 7.'l!Ne2::t/= is what Whice aspires co.) 1 6.0-0 Elfc8! Black had equalized in Amason - Vukic, Bela Crkva 1 983. White can try Bl) 14.0-0 and B2) 14.J.h3!?. l 4.tlixe7t 'l!Nxe7 l 5 .i.b3!? This facilitates .. .f5 . 1 5 .0-0 st>h8! 1 6 . .ib3 ( 1 6.'l!Nd3 f5 i s given below) 1 6 .. .f5 1 7 . .id5 Elb8 1 8.exf5 .ixf5 1 9.tlic2 a5 transposes to 1 5 . .ib3 . 1 5 . . . c;t> h 8 1 6 . .id5 El b 8 1 7.tlic2 a 5 Black i s all sec t o carry out his attacking thrust:

338

l l .c3

1 8 .0-0 f5 1 9.exf5 1 9 .'!Wd3 f4! 20. lli e l if6+! 8

5 3

. ..t. � �� . �� . .Y.. �- . . ••• •. __ . fj � .t �. %� 1 1. •-� .....Y.� • %� . . "' �� • � r • � ,

./,

� , ·.

.•

2 C��l�. . � d a

ifmtm . d

1 9 . . ..ixf5 20.1Mle2 1Mla7 2 1 .llie3 ig6= Black intends: 22.�ad l b4 23.c4 b3 23 . . . e4! ? 24.axb3 '!Wc5+! With balanced play.

Bl) 14.0-0 ci>h8! Black toys with the idea of . . . f5 or . . . llixd5, while White struggles to find a useful move. For example:

15.Wfd3N l 5.ib3 f5!+! is a favourable version of Black's intended advance as the bishop is well placed on c8, far from the reach of a potential exchange with the b3-bishop. It is examined under l 4.ib3.

1 5 ... f5! As is so often the case, this pawn thrust is the best move. 1 6J3adl!? 1 6.llixe7 1Mfxe7 1 7.�ad l ( 1 7.exf5 ixf5 1 8.'!We2 e4!) 1 7 . . . m6! 1 8.exf5 ( 1 8.1Mle2 f4--+) 1 8 . . . ixf5 l 9 .1Mf d5 l'faf8 20.ixf5 �xf5+! with a fine position for Black. 1 6 ...Ab7! Now that White cannot capture on e7 this is possible. In subsequent play Black will refrain from exchanging his knight and play for the initiative. t7.Ab3 1 7.llixe7 ixe4 1 8.llig6t hxg6 1 9.'!Wxd6 ixc2 20.llixc2 1Mfxd6 2 1 .�xd6 l"\fd8 22.�fd l �xd6 23.�xd6 ic l + 1 7... fxe4 1 8.Wfxe4 gcs Black is at least okay, and may play . . . l"\c5 to fight for d5. B2) 14.Ab3!? Trying to reinforce d5.

1 5.0-0

Chapter 29

1 5 .li:Jxe7 V!ffxe7 1 6.li:Jc2 a5 1 7.0-0 f5 1 8.li:Je3 ( 1 8.idS gb8= has been analysed under 1 4.li:Jxe7t V!ffxe7 1 5 .ib3) 1 8 . . . fxe4 1 9 .�dS gbs 20.ixe4 ixe3 2 l .fxe3 gxfl t 22.Vfixfl ie6= is pretty even. 1 5 .h4 is a risky try: 1 5 . . . ih6 1 6.g4 f6! 1 7.Vfie2 ( l 7.ti:Jc2 allows Black more than enough counterplay after 1 7 . . . aS 1 8.a3 ib7) 1 7 . . . gbs

339

Introduction

17.�e2 gbs Black has good chances in this thematic Sveshnikov middlegame. Just one of many possible continuations is: 18.tlJc2 aS The most logical. Black does not take on d5 as this exchange would improve the white bishop voluntarily. 19.tlJce3 �g6 20.tlJxe7 �xe7 2 1 .gadl b4! 22.cxb4 axb4 23.h3 23.ti:JdS V!ffa7oo 23 ...h6 Black is well placed and it is difficult for White to improve his position. C) 12.tlJc2 igS

1 8.gd l ( 1 8.ti:Jc2 a5 is good for Black) 1 8 . . . ti:JxdS 1 9.ixdS id7 20.ti:J c2 a5? The position is complicated, with chances for both sides.

1 5 ... f5 1 6.exfS

Again, we shall split the analysis here: Cl) 13.tlJce3, C2) 13.id3 and C3) 13.ie2.

Cl) 13.tlJce3 This ancient attempt should not cause Black any difficulties. The following is a principled way to play:

13 ...ixe3!? 14.tlJxe3 tlJ e7 Black has a lead in development and is almost ready to contest the centre by carrying out . . . d5 . White can decide where to place his light squared bishop: CH) 15.iJ..d3 or C12) 15.il..e 2.

340

1 l .c3

1 5 .a4 is a premature attempt at queenside activity chat brings no dividends: 1 5 . . . ib 7 1 6.axb5 axb5 1 7.E1xa8 ixa8 1 8.id3 ( 1 8.ixb5 ixe4 1 9 .id3 ic6+) 1 8 . . . d5 ( 1 8 . . . b4!? 1 9.cxb4 d5 is another fine possibility.) 1 9 .0-0 d4! ( 1 9 . . . dxe4? 20.ixb5± is better for White.) 20.cxd4 '.Wxd4= Black is at least equal. 1 5 .g3 This demands dynamic play from Black. 1 5 . . . ib7 1 6.ig2 f5 1 7.exf5 l 7.'.Wd3 ?! f4! l 8.tlid5 lll x d5 1 9.exd5 Schulenburg - Schiefer, Germany 20 1 1 , 1 9 . . . g6 20.ie4 Wg?+. l 7.'.Wb3t Wh8 1 8.exf5 ixg2 l 9.tlixg2 lll xf5 20.0-0 1"lb8 2 1 .a3 a5+± l 7 . . . .ixg2 1 8.tlixg2 lll xf5 Now White's only real attempt to develop pressure is:

"""� , � - - -V.. :�,�"". � % � � ..... %.1. � �� -J� �� .% : ,��--f!j �wti. lwrJ"t!iWfJ � - - %�- • ;=- -%��

8 7 6

.i � �

� ��·

CU) 1 5 ..id3 .ie6 Allowing Black easy equality no matter how White continues. For example:

1 6.WhS Trying to avert . . . d5 by putting pressure on h7. 1 6.'.Wf3 poses no threat to Black, who can methodically prepare . . . d5: 1 6 . . . 1.Wb6! 1 7.0-0 1"lad8 1 8. l"lfd l 1"ld7 1 9.1"ld2 ( 1 9.a3 1"lfd8 20.Wh5 h6 2 1 ..ic2 a5!+±) 19 . . . l"lfdS 20.a4 d5= 1 6.ic2 d5 1 7.exd5 ( 1 7.'.Wd3?! d4+) l 7 ... tlixd5= is equal, as the following attempt gets nowhere: 1 8 .'.Wh5!? g6 1 9.'.Wxe5 lll xe3 20.fxe3 1"le8 Black has enough activity to recover the pawn. White's most challenging continuation is 2 l .'.Wf4 ic4 22.l"ld l !, but after 22 . . . '.We7 Black gains an important tempo and material will soon be equal. 23.Wf2 ixa2 24.1"ld6 1"lad8 25 .l"lhd l ic4= The position is level, as the isolated e-pawn is balanced out by the slight weakness of Black's dark squares.

1 9 .'.Wd5tN ©h8 20.0-0 Black has a good answer: 20 . . . b4!? Not forced, but it seems to work. 2 1 .cxb4 '.Wb6 22.a3 a5 23.bxa5 23.b5 a4= 23 . . . '.Wxb2! 24.f4 24.tlie3 lll xe3 25.fxe3 '.Wc3 26.'.Wxd6 '.Wxe3t 27.©h l 1.We4t= 24 ... exf4 25 .l"lab 1 '.Wxa3 26.1"lxf4 lll e7 27.l"lxfSt 1'hf8 28.'.Wb7 tli g8 29.'.Wb4 '.Wa2 30.tlif4 30.'.We l lll f6 3 1 .l"lal Wb2 32.a6 1"la8= 30 . . . 1"lf5 3 1 .l"ld l 1"lxa5=

17.Wh6 l 7.'.Wg5 f6! ( l 7 . . . d5 l 8.'.Wxe5 tli c6 l 9.Wg3 d4 20.lll d l !t) 1 8.Wg3 ©hs! 1 9.0-0 f5 20.f4 '.WcT 2 1 .l"lad l 1"lf7!+± looks excellent for Black.

Chapter 29

17 ...�b6 1 8.0-0 1 8.h4 f6 merely leaves the white queen suffocated. 18 ... d5 19.exd5 1 9.a4 l"1ad8 20.axb5 axb5= intending 2 1 .lll f5 ? ixf5 22.exf5 e4t. 19 ... tlixd5 20.tlixd5 �xd5 2 1 .:Sfel :Sae8!= Black has equalized and is ready to exploit any extravagant measures by White, such as: 22.:Se3?! �b7! 23.:Sh3 f5!t C12) 15.�e2 White wants to deploy the bishop to f3 in order to prevent the liberating thrust . . . d5, but Black can easily equalize against this artificial manoeuvre.

1 5 ...�b7 1 6.�f3 d5! This temporary pawn sacrifice equalizes completely.

Introduction

34 1

1 7.lll xd5 ? lll xd5 1 8 .exd5 e4 1 9.ie2 iWg5 20.0-0 ixd5+ hands the initiative over to Black.

17...�d6 1 8.g4 1 8 .1Wb3 f5 !t 1 8 .. J'�ad8! 19.�d3 :Sd7 20.�e4N The best try. 20.0-0-0?! :Sfd8 2 1 .lll f5 is a common sense measure. (2 l .1'i:d2?! \Wf6! 22.ie4 lll xd5 23.lll xd5 ixd5 24.ixd5 1'i:xd5 25.'fffxd5 1'i:xd5 26.l"1xd5 h5! 27.gxh5 \Wxf2+ is better for Black thanks to his two passed pawns.) 2 1 . . .lll xf5N (2 1 . . .\Wf6?! 22.lll xe?t 'fffxe7= was level in Gaprindashvili - Timoshchenko, USSR 1 977) 22.\Wxf5 g6t would have been an attempt at wresting the initiative. 20 ... g6 2 1 .g5 2 1 .0-0-0 l"1fd8 22.g5 f5 ! 23.gxf6 '1Wxf6 is at least equal for Black.

For those hating early liquidations, the following alternative might be of help: 1 6 . . . iWc?!? 1 7.0-0 ic6! Directed against a2-a4. 1 8.l'!cl l"1ad8 1 9.c4 bxc4 20.iWc2 g6 2 1 .:Sfd l �g7

22.lll xc4 d5 23.exd5 ixd5 24.ixd5 li:lxd5 25.g3 Ei:fe8 26.a3 'fie? 27.!'!d2 'fffe6 28.Ei:cd l 1'i:e7 29.b4 1'i:ed7= and Black had comfortable equality in Kurgansky - Dessaules, corr. 20 1 1 .

17.exd5

23.0-0 23.1'i:fl �g7 24. 0-0-0 'ffff4 25.Ei:d2 ixd5 26.ixd5 Ei:fd8 27.l'!fd l lll xd5 28 .iWfl lll f6 29.'fff g2 Ei:xd2 30.1'i:xd2 l"1xd2 3 1 .�xd2= 23 ... tlixd5 24.�xd5t

342

l l . c3

24.tll xd5 Wefe6 25 .l"!ad l fi:fd8 26 . .ig2 Wif7! (26 . . . �xd5? 27.�h3+-) 27.Wef g3 ixd5 28.Wefxe5 �xg2 29.l"!xd7 fi:xd7 30.'it>xg2 l"!d2=

24 ....ixd5 25.ll:)xd5 Wfe6 26.:!! fdl e4 27.Wfd4 'Wg4t 28.�fl :!! fS 29.c4 bxc4 30.Wfxc4 :!! dxd5 3 1 .WfcBt= C2) 13 ..id3 This move does not pose any serious problems to Black.

14 ... a5 1 5.iilxe?t Wxe7 16.ll:)d5 Wb7 17.Wfh5 .ids 1 8.�dl .ie6 19 ..ic2 b4 20.0-0 hxc3 2 1 .hxc3 This position arose in Guliyev - Shirov, Venaco (rapid) 2005. After the correct:

8 7 6 5

4 3 2 a

2 1 . ..°WcS!N Black would have stood fine.

22.°We2 22.h3 Wef c4!+ is more than satisfactory for Black. 22 ... .ig4!? 23.f3 �e6 24.�hl Both 24.�b3 a4 25 .�c4 Wefc5t 26.'it>h l l"!b8+ and 24.'\M!e3 a4+ concede an edge to Black. 1 3 . . . ie6 is playable but not quite so convincing, due to: 14.0-0! l"lb8 ( 1 4 . . . ixd5 1 5 .exd5 tll e7 1 6.a4 bxa4 l 7.l"lxa4 might be a trifle better for White.) l 5 .a4! Almost certainly the only try for an advantage. l 5 . . . bxa4 1 6 .tll db4! tll xb4 l 7.tll xb4 ib3 1 8.Wie2!? Wefc8 1 9 .tll xa6 l"lb6 20.tll b4 Wefc5 2 l .l"!a3± leads to a position that might be slightly better for White - who is planning to sacrifice an exchange on a4.

14.iilcb4 l 4.tll ce3 ie6= does not trouble Black. 1 4 .tll xe7t Wefxe7 1 5 .tll b4 Wefb7!= is similar to the Shirov game below.

At this point Black can be happy after both 24 . . . Wic5= and 24 . . . l"!bS!? 25 .ib3 ig5+1=.

C3) 1 3 ..ie2 A quiet, non-committal move, keeping the d-file open in order to support the d5-knight with pieces.

13 ... iile? The fight will revolve around d5 from now on. White will try to end up with a piece permanently posted there, while Black hopes to fill d5 with a white pawn. 14.iil cb4!?

343

Chapter 29 - lnt<oduction

. 14 . t;l ce3 ixe3 1 5 . l2:J xe3 ib7= is a position we've alread Y 1ooked at.

14... a5 15.tll xe7t VNxe7 16.tll d5 VNb7! 17.Wfd3! gbs 1 8.0-0 �e6

;

20.iW g3 attacks th e bishop . on 5 whil' ili o ," preparin � g4. How""· ,r," O . . . h6 2 1 . ig4 (2 i .,3 , sansfactorily met by both 2 1 . . .:gcS= and 2 1 . . .b4"-) · · - 2 1 . ..b4! 22 cxb4 •axb4 . 23 .h4 (23 .ixe6 fxe6 24 . l2:J d 'Il e? <' ) 23 . . . '"1.d8 1t tums . om Whi<e cannot capture on e6 with • mp = i<y, .! an d a sensibl me li h 24.lil d 'I'! e7., 25.lil fl i< ,, (25 .L'6 25 . . . .Lf; 26 · �s �c6 27.h5 _ +) . ilb6+ I �"' hcm • lighdy worse m view 0 f h is " less "' . p posefully placed bishop. •

rx,:�

. Black can continue with th e chematic.

20 .. J:k5! 20 . . . idS!?

23 ... h6! . . his Trying to provoke White into weak enmg . . position. 24.h4 24.ig4 l''l c 4! 24...�d8 25.f4!? An interesting try.

344

1 l .c3

25 .ig4 Elc4! 26 ..fl.xe6 fx:e6 27.tll e3 Elxc3 28.Elxd6 �xe4+

25 ...il.xd5! 26.gxd5 il.f6 The position remains balanced, as the mutual weaknesses compensate for one another. C32) 19.gfdl This has been the main preference in tournament play.

30 . . . �d7!? keeps a slight edge, although the position is certainly drawish. 8 7

�� , .i

. , . ,Y,� �� "�-·�

�! -0 �£��• �� l�.i.l.I�

�--%�%� �� -�%� �·-l:t)� 4 ��-0 �� <"'"!""

6 5

� ��lf!i;,%•� .i�-� �%� .

... .

...

�- - ?.� :. ?,, ...

....

2 1 . . .ids 22.a3 22.ig4 was Navara - Moiseenko, Khanry Mansiysk 20 1 1 . Now 22 . . . b4!N 23.cxb4 � d7!� looks perfectly acceptable for the second player. 22 . . . Elc5 23.b4 As in Kaiumov - Yagupov, Alushta 2002, and now there is a simple retreat: 23 . . .l:'kc8 Black is level, with an easy position to play.

1 9 ... gfcS Again, the standard reaction.

20 ... h6! A good move, giving the king some space and defending che g5-bishop in anticipation of �g3.

20.a3 A typical preparatory move, aimed against . . . b4 thrusts.

2 1 .g3 Preparing to kick the g5-bishop away.

20.b4 axb4! (20 . . . a4!? 2 1 .�f3 Elf8!? deserves attention) 2 1 .cxb4 �c6!= allows Black to control the c-file when, again, he should have no difficulties.

2 1 .b4 leads to equality after: 2 1 . . .ixd5 22.�xd5 �xd5 23.Elxd5 axb4 24.cxb4 Elcl t! 25 .Eld l (25 .E:xc l ixc l ) 25 . . . B:c2! 26.'it>fl id2 27.�d3 Elb2 28 .E:db l Elxb l t 29.Elxb l ic3! 30.g3 'it>f8 3 1 .'it>e2 id4=

20.�g3 h6 This poses no problems whatsoever for Black. 2 1 .h4!? The best try. 2 1 .b3 Elc5 22.c4 ixd5 23.Elxd5 Elxd5 24.cxd5 Elc8 25 .�d3 Elc5 26.g3 .fl.c l 27.a4 b4 28.�d l ib2 29.Elb l id4 30 .ic4 was Tiviakov - Van Wely, Leeuwarden 2003, and at this point

2 1 . .. .idS!? In anticipation of b2-b4. Black defends a5 and eyes b6, a better square for his bishop. 22.h4!? This was Almasi's improvement over his previous game in this line.

Chapter 29

After 22.:Eld2?! White had set himself up for an unfavourable exchange of minor pieces: 22 . . . Wa?! 23.c;t>g2 :!! c 5! 24.'ll e3 ig5! 25 .h4 ixe3 26.Wxe3 We? 27.:Elad l 8:c6 28 .c;t>h2 ib3 29.:Elgl ic4 30.:Elgd l ixe2 3 1 .Wxe2 b4+ Black was in command in Almasi - Topalov, Monte Carlo 200 1 . However, there are other moves fo r White as well. 22.b4N looks harmless, with a5 defended, in view of: 22 . . . ixd5 23 .Wxd5 :Elxc3 24.bxa5 (24.'\Wxd6 axb4 25.axb4 :Elc2 26.id3 ic7=) 24 . . . ixa5= with the idea 25.a4 :Elc2� . The slightly odd 22.:Elab l !?N, suggested by several engines, is well mer by 22 . . . Wa?!? 23.c;t>g2 :Elc5 24.b4 :Elcc8 when play remains roughly equal.

22 ... i'!c5!? Trying to force matters by threatening to take on d5. 23.b4 23.Cll e3?! leads nowhere after 23 . . . ib6 24.:Eld2 (24.'\Wxd6? :Eld8; 24.b4 l"lcc8) 24 . . . l"ld8+. No better is the anti-positional 23.if3?! ixd5 24.exd5 Wd7!?+.

345

Introduction

24.i'!acl!? This is logical now that g5 is inaccessible to the d8-bishop. 24.a4 does not quite work in view of: 24 . . . axb4 25.cxb4 bxa4 26.l"lxa4 l"la8! Most accurate. 27.:Ela6 (27.:Elxa8 :Elxa8 28.b5 :Ela2�) 27 . . . l"lxa6 28.'\Wxa6 ixd5 29.l"lxd5 :Elcl t 30.c;t>g2 Wxb4 3 1 .:Elxd6 (3 1 .Wxd6 Wxd6 32.l:hd6 ic7 33.l"ldS c;t>f8=) 3 1 . . .ixh4!! 32.gxh4 1Mfe l ! 33.l"ld l ! l"lxd l 34.WcBt= 24.l"lab l is not so good anymore due to: 24 . . .ixd5 25 .Wxd5 Wxd5 26.l"lxd5 l"lxc3=

24...Wd7! 25.Wf3 ©hs 26J�hl!= The black position is knitted together perfectly and White does well to choose this sensible waiting move. After the committal 26.Cll e3?!, the strong reply 26 . . . ib6 27.'ll d5 ia7! prepares .. .f5 wich a dangerous initiative. On 28.g4?! there follows 28 . . . h5! 29.gxh5 l"lf8 30.bxa5 f5 -+.

8 �� i. �,� � � � 7 •, , , ,,Y,mii-iE' ,,,,,%�,""� �� , % �� 6 � r�..t. � ri 5 �·� ltS� � 4 ,�'a a Dzi; ' a �'(ff/�,,,, % ,,,, '(/f /% � 3 �� ,,,,,% r� ,, , , % ,,,,,% �-�r� 2 � � �ow ��wr£�% • %'

�'>0

�

,,,,,

?/,

1 �MmM- = %

23 ... i'!ccS!?N 23 . . . l"lc6 was Almasi - P. H . Nielsen, Germany 2004.

26 ...1M/e8!= Overprotecting the rook on b8 in case of b4xa5, followed by a doubling of White's rooks on the b-file. In that case, I do not see any progress for either side.

346

Conclusion

1 l .c3

This chapter introduced us to the realm of the Ultimate Sveshnikov, characterized by the moves 9.'ll d5 ie7 1 O.ixf6 ixf6 1 l .c3 0-0. As has been convincingly demonstrated at the beginning of the chapter, 1 2.h4 is innocuous because of the logical 1 2 . . . ie6! 1 3 .'ll c2 ixd5! 1 4.1Ml'xd5 t'i:Je7, sufficiently contesting d5, while 1 2.id3 ig5 1 3 .ic2 'li e?!? is too time consuming to pose Black any real problems. Consequently, the biggest part was devoted to White's lesser 1 3th move options after the standard 1 2 .'ll c2 ig5 . The move 1 3 . t'i:J ce3 rather plays into Black's hands because it allows him to exchange his 'bad' bishop. Although a bishop can hardly be bad in an open position, it certainly feels right to play 1 3 . . . ixe3!? 1 4.t'i:Jxe3 'li e?, controlling d5 and extinguishing all problems. Another non-critical move is 1 3 .id3 as Black replies 1 3 . . . 'll e7! 1 4 . t'i:J cb4 a5, obtaining a good game after the thematic continuation 1 5 .'ll xe?t 1Ml'xe7 1 6.t'i:Jd5 1Ml'b7 l 7.1Ml'h5 ids 1 8 .Eldl ie6 1 9 .ic2 b4 20.0-0 bxc3 2 1 .bxc3 1Ml'c8! 22.'We2 ig4!? 23.f3 ie6. The concluding part of the chapter was devoted to the line 1 3 .ie2 t'i:J e7 1 4.'ll cb4!? a5 1 5 .t'i:Jxe?t 1Ml'xe7 1 6.'ll d5 'Wb7! 1 7.1Ml'd3! Elb8 1 8.0-0 ie6 when Black has arranged his pieces optimally and should have no problem equalizing.

1 1.c3 13.g3 Variation Index 1 .e4 c5 2.ll'if3 lli c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.llixd4 ll'i f6 5.llic3 e5 6.ll'i db5 d6 7.ig5 a6 8.llia3 h5 9.llid5 ie7 1 0.ixf6 ixf6 1 1 .c3 0-0 1 2.ll'i c2 ig5 13. g3 13 ... ll'i e7! A) 14.lli cb4 B) 14.ll'i ce3 C) 14.h4 ih6 1 5 . ll'i cb4 ie6! Cl) 1 6.ih3 C2) 1 6.a4 C3) 1 6.ï¿½d3

A) after 23 .ith'g4

348 349 350 35 1 352 352

C2) after l 7. 1Lixd5

C3) after 20 . .il.h3

348

1 l . c3

l .e4 c5 2.tlif'3 tli c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tlixd4 tlif6 5.tlic3 e5 6.tlidb5 d6 7.ig5 a6 8.tlia3 b5 9.tlid5 ie7 IO.ixf6 ixf6 1 1 .c3 0-0 12.tlic2 ig5 13.g3 A purely defensive set-up. White wishes to increase the safety of his king (after he castles) by fianchettoing his light-squared bishop, but in doing so relinquishes the prospects offered by the a2-a4 advance.

6 5

.i �%� .i.�. ,% ��·� �- �. ,, %. �� . -./, � � , �'Slt� l-•�w� %w � - �� - w�� %� ,,,,,%� �

··y,•r m

,,,,.

4 ��r�� -� 3 � t� � t� ef"" %� �0. ·ef"" %0. 2 .��· l J�m. -�� J 1 /� �°il�il � :s: '/,

1 3 ... tli e7! Business as usual. Black wishes to soften White's control over d5 and, if possible, force him to fill the square with a pawn. Black will then ideally try to exchange minor pieces down to one set of opposite-coloured bishops, as this will enhance his chances on both sides of the board and reduce White to passivity. We will analyse the following tries for White: A) 14.tli cb4?!, B) 14.tli ce3 and C) 14.h4. The direct 1 4.lll xe7t?! also plays into Black's hands. After 1 4 . . . �xe7 1 5 .ig2 a5 1 6.0-0 Elb8 17.�d3 ie6 1 8.lll e3 ixe3 1 9.�xe3 b4 20.l"lfc l Black had the easier game i n lvanets - Kabanov, Khanty-Mansiysk 20 1 1 , and by playing 20 . . . a4!+ he would have ensured himself of lasting pressure. 14.ig2?! lll xd5 1 5 .�xdS 1 5 .exdS a5 1 6.0-0 id7 1 7.h l �b6 1 8.a3

Elae8 1 9.�d3 g6!? 20.l!ae l h5! 2 1 .f4 exf4 22.gxf4 Elxe l 23.lll xe l if6 24.ie4 g7 25.fS (25 .l!gl l!e8! 26.ixg6 �xgl t! 27.xg l Elxe l t 28.f2 ih4t-+) 25 . . . g S 26.�f3 l!e8+ left White helpless in Panayotov - Spasov, Plovdiv 20 1 3 . 1 5 . . . ie6 1 6.�d l a 5 1 7.0-0 �b6 1 8 .h4 1 8.if3 b4 1 9.cxb4 axb4 20.b3 l!fc8 2 1 .lll e l g6 22.h4 ih6 23.hS l"lc3 24.hxg6 hxg6+ Black dominated the board in Milovic - Amura, Istanbul (ol) 20 1 2.

�� . . , , .Ji£� f•�'2��-� 54 �. ;<�·� �� w� �%� �� r%�� nl �:?i.J�� .Jf!J�� !'::i �� j,, � gi · . %� '��i�·,;� s ,i � � �-· . Y,�.i'% : �r,·: ��-� � �.I 3

. .

""'

1 8 . . . ih6 1 9.l!e l b4 20.cxb4 axb4 2 1 .lll e3 g6 22.lll dS �c5 23.:i"i:e2 ixd5 24.exdS l!fc8+ This was Zvan - Solak, Murska Sobota 2007. A perfect illustration of what White should try to avoid, as Black has achieved the optimal position with opposite-coloured bishops.

A) 14.tlicb4 This also plays into Black's hands by allowing him to carry out his customary strategic idea:

14...ie6 15.ig2 There is nothing better. l 5 .h4 ih6 transposes to variation C. 1 5 .a4 lll x d5 1 6.lll x dS �b8! 1 7.axbS axb5 1 8.:i"i:xa8 Wxa8 1 9.h4 ixd5 20.exdS (20.�xdS ? �a l t 2 1 .e2 (2 1 .�d l �xb2 22.hxgS Ela8-+) 2 1 .. .�xb2t 22.f3 id2 23 .ixbS ixc3 24.g2 id4+) 20 . . . ih6 2 1 .ixbS �a2!+ transposes to variation C2.

349

Chapter 30 - 1 3 .g3

19.exdS 1 9.'\Wxd5 '\Wxd5 20.exd5 f5+ is, as we know, a typical endgame advantage for Black, all the more so as the bishop stands on g5 and not on h6. 19 ... h4 20.c4 20.iWb3 gabs+ 20 ...Wi°cS!? 20 . . . gacS!? 2 1 .Wi'e2 Wi'cS 22.�hl 22.�g4 ie7 23 .�d7 ga7 24.�c6 gc7 25 .�xc5 gxc5+

18.0-0 There doesn't seem to be anything better. l 8.a3?! is a prophylactic move that does not meet the requirements of the position. Black has several good moves, and it seems to me that 1 8 . . . i'!ac8 is the most natural one. Black is preparing himself to dominate the c-file by exchanging on d5, followed by a well-timed ... b4.

22 ... a4 22 . . . f5 !? 23.Wi°g4 .ie7!N 23 . . . ids 24.�d7! ga7 25 .�c6 ib6 26.f4 gcs 27.'\Wxc5 ixc5 28.fxe5 dxe5 29.b3 axb3 30.axb3 ga3 3 1 .:!:l:ad I 00 unnecessarily complicated matters in Asrian - Ni Hua, Istanbul (ol) 2000.

1 8 ...�xd5 The simplest solution, immediately clarifying the central structure.

B) 14.lLice3 a

The most reasonable move under the present circumstances, despite the fact that it allows Black a desirable exchange of minor pieces.

350

1 l .c3

14 ....ie6 The most principled move.

14 ....ih6 15.lDcb4 This is Zapata's Variation.

1s.ig2 �ks 1 6.0-0 1 6.h4 ixe3 l 7.tt:lxe3 iWb6+! should be okay for Black too.

l 5 .ig2? will most likely transpose to the Zvan - Solak game on page 348 at the start of this chapter after: 1 5 . . . tt:lxd5 1 6.Wefxd5 ie6 1 7.iWd l a5 1 8.0-0 Vfff b 6+

16 .. Jk5 17.h4 1 7.a4 ixd5 1 8.tt:\xd5 tt:lxd5 1 9.exd5 Wefb600 or l 9 . . . f500• l 7.tt:lxe7t Vfffxe7 1 8 .tll f5 ixf5 1 9.exf5 e4+! or l 9 . . . d500• 17 ....ixe3 18.lDxe3 Wefc7! Now play is approximately balanced, albeit somewhat static. 19.Wid3 1 9.iWd2 a5 20.l'!fd l l'!d8 2 1 .Ei'.ac l a4!? 22.a3 Cll c6+!

22.E:d2 22.Ei:ac l a4!? 22 ... lD cS!+! C) 14.h4 An attempt to force the bishop to choose a diagonal immediately, before proceeding accordingly.

1 5 .Cll xe?t?! Vfffxe7 1 6.ig2 a5 1 7.0-0 ie6+ is hardly any good for White either. l 5 .tll ce3?! is rather less logical when the pawn stands on h4 instead of h2. After 1 5 . . . ixe3 1 6 .Cll xe3 ib7 1 7.ig2 f5 1 8 .exf5 ixg2 1 9.tt:lxg2 Ci:lxf5 20.iWd5t! (20.0-0 d5+) 20 . . . @h8 2 1 .0-0 Vfff b 6 22.@h2 :!'hd8 23 .:!'hd l as in Hjarcarson Anand, Glicnir (blitz) 2006, Black could have claimed an advantage by the original manoeuvre: 23 . . . tt:le7 24.Vfff e6

1 5 .ih3?! This move seeks to exchange light-squared bishops and should thus be treated with respect. Indeed, it was once chosen by Nigel Short. However, after: 1 5 . . . ixh3! Black realizes that the time invested by White and the displacement of his rook are more important factors than a slight weakening of the light squares. 1 6.Ei:xh3 a5! 1 7.@fl Elc8!i

35 1

Chapter 30 - 1 3 . g3

Black had a strong initiative in Short - Topalov, Wijk aan Zee 2005. 8

1 5 ...Ae6! This is very convenient, as chis way of deploying the bishop was already suggested against the immediate 1 4 . li:l cb4?!. It also happens to be the best move in the position. White can choose between Cl) 1 6 ..ih3, C2) 1 6.a4 and C3) 16.�d3.

Cl) 16.�h3

3 2

This move has rarely been tried but it could have some venom if Black reacts incorreccly. a

1 8.lt>g2 Matters were made worse in the game by 1 8.li:lce3?!. After 1 8 . . . .!ixe3 1 9.li:lxe3 1lft'd7 20.g4 �fd8 2 1 .h5 1lft'c6! White was drifting to a position with many weaknesses and no counterplay to show for them. Play continued 22.1lfiff3 d5 23.exd5 li:lxd5 24.li:lxd5 �xd5 25.�el h6 26.lt>g2 1lfif e6 27.Wf5 Wxf5 28.gxf5 f6+ and Black won the ensuing ending comfortably. 1 8 . . . li:lxd5 1 9.Wxd5 �c5 20.Wd3 f5 2 1 .�e l fxe4 22.Wxe4 Wc8! 23.�e2 b4 24.cxb4 d5 25 .Wd3 e4+ 26.Wd l 26.Wb3?? Wg4-+ 26 . . . axb4 27.li:lxb4 Wf5-t This also looks grim, but at least Black will have to work harder to gain the full point.

1 6 ... c!LlxdS!? I chink chis is the best move, luring the knight to d5. In Mainka - Mastrokoukos, Ano Liosia 1 995, Black played 1 6 . . . a5 . However, l 7.Jixe6! fxe6 1 8.li:lxe7t Wxe7 1 9.li:ld3! reached a static position chat is not to my caste.

18.�d3! 1 8.li:lb4 �c4t is excellent for Black, and so is 1 8.Jixe6 fxe6 1 9 .li:lb4 �c4 20.We2 Wa8 2 1 .f3 a5 22.li:ld3 �a7 23.lt>fl b4t .

352

l l .c3

1 8 .. J'ks 19 ..ixe6! 1 9.b4?! gc4 20.a4 can be met with the extraordinary 20 . . . �a8!t, when White has no rime for 2 1 .axb5 ? due to 2 1 . . .gxe4t-+.

This position is a bit better for Black but obviously there is not much play left. A likely way to press could be:

19 ... fxe6 20.ltJeJ .ixe3 2 l .'Wxe3 gc4 22.0-0 'Was 23.gfe l = White has managed t o equalize, bur there is still play left for both sides. C2) 1 6.a4 lLixd5! An extremely important move. 1 6 . . . bxa4? l 7.ixa6 f5 ( l 7 . . . liJxd5 ?! l 8.exd5 id? 1 9.ib7) 1 8.ib?!;!; is better for White, who will follow up with liJxe7t and id5 .

17.lLixdS This keeps things relatively simple. l 7.exd5 id? l 8.liJc6 produces a posmon where the weakness of h4 is likely to show up: 1 8 . . . �b6 1 9.ig2 f5 20.0-0 gae8! (20 . . . gf7 2 1 .axb5 �xb5 22.b4 e4 23.ga5 �b7 24.�d4 g6=) 2 1 .axb5 axb5+ with the idea 22.'Wb3 f4! 23.gxf4 gxf4 24.�a3 �c7-+ .

23 ... g6i Or 23 . . . e4 24.�a l '11h' b 3 2 5 .�b l �f3+. CJ) 16.'WdJ This is an interesting, yet seldom played, move . White prepares to support d5 while increasing pressure on the critical b5- and f5-squares, discouraging . . . a5 and . . . f5 respectively.

8 7 65 4 3 2 1

1 8 ... axbS 19.l3xa8 �xa8 20.hbS .ixd5 2 1 .exdS 'Wa2 22.0-0 'Wxb2 23.c4

16 ... aS! It seems that this is the best move for Black after all, and it gives the second player chances to play for the win. Let us see how play could evolve:

Chapter 30 - 1 3 .g3

17.tll xe7t Vflxe7 1 8.tll d5 Vfla7 Black cannot put his queen on b7 for now, but a7 is not a bad square either.

353

1 9 f5!? There are other moves as well, but this tries to exploit White's slightly backward development. ••.

1 9 ..ig2 Again there seems to be nothing better than this pedestrian move. l 9.'Mfxb5? runs into: l 9 . . . Elab8 20.Vfle2 ixd5 2 l .exd5 'Mfb7+ 1 9.g4?! is rather extravagant: 1 9 . . . f6 ( 1 9 . . . ixg4!? 20.'Llf6t gxf6 2 1 .l'!gl ©h8 22.Elxg4 Elad8+ also looks a bit better for Black.) 20.ih3 ©h8 2 l .a3 (2 l .g5 fxg5 22.ixe6 1Mfxf2t 23.©d l 1Mfg2 24.Ele l gxh4+) 2 1 . . .Elab8 22.0-0 Vfld7 23.f3 Elfc8 24.Elfb l 1Mfb7+

l 9.a3 can be met by either l 9 . . . f5!?t, or l 9 . . . Elac8 intending . . . Elc5 . 1 9 .Eld l does not pose any problems for Black here. My preferred continuation is 1 9 . . . l'l:ab8!?, protecting b5 in order to carry out ... l'l:f8-c8-c5 . For example: 20 . .ig2 (20.a3 Elfc8 2 l . .ig2 Elc5+) 20 . . . b4 2 l .c4 ig4! 22.if3

2 1 .:Bdl ! fxe4! 22 ..ixe6 exd3 23 ..ixflt :Bxf7 24.:Bxd3 .icl ! A wonderful point, transferring the bishop to a better diagonal. 25.b3 .ia3! 26.0-0 .ic5 27.i>g2 Best is probably: 27 ... e4!? 27 . . . b400 and the position is unclear. 1 9.ih3 b4 20.c4 (20.©fl .ixd5 2 l .Vflxd5 bxc3 22.bxc3 Elab8! 23.©g2 Elb2 24.l'l:hfl Eld2! 25 .1Mfc4 ie3t) 20 . . . Elac8!? (20 . . . l'l:ae8 2 1 .l'l:dl Vfld7 22.'Llb6 Wfc6 23 .'Lld5 'Mfd7 24.'Llb6=)

28.�d2 b4 29.:Be2 :Be8 30.c4 a4+± With excellent counterplay for Black.

354

1 l .c3

Conclusion In this chapter we examined the rather passive set-up arising after 9.ctJd5 ie7 1 0.ixf6 ixf6 l l .c3 0-0 1 2.ctJc2 ig5 1 3 .g3. The typical reaction 1 3 . . . ctJ e7! leads to the type of position that is more pleasant to play as Black, who can contest control of d5 with many forces, hoping to fill that square with a white pawn and acquire a 4-3 majority on the kingside. I believe that the second player has the better chances overall in this chapter, perhaps with the exception of the final line, which runs as follows: 1 4.h4 ih6 1 5 .lt:Jcb4 ie6! 1 6.Wifd3 a5! 1 7.ctJxe7t Wifxe7 1 8.lt:JdS Wifa7 1 9.ig2 f5 !? 20.ih3 Wif7! 2 1 .:gd l ! fxe4! 22.ixe6 exd3 23.ixf7t i'!:xf7 24.1"!xd3 ic l ! . White has managed to exchange the light-squared bishops, but at the cost of allowing our remaining bishop a better future than it can usually expect. The last position is approximately balanced, but this is not the only way to play for Black. He has a wide choice of ideas and possible improvements, whereas White's arsenal is restricted due to the fact he is not controlling the light squares in the centre with his bishop. Thus, we should actually be pleased to enter this territory, and please remember: oppositeÂ coloured bishops usually favour Black when the e4-pawn has been promoted to d5, as his kingside mass gives good attacking chances and his dark-squared bishop becomes the superior minor piece.

1 1.c3 13.h4 and I 4.g4 Variation Index

1 .e4 c5 2.lbf3 lb c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lbxd4 lb f6 5 . lb c3 e5 6.lb db5 d6 7 ..ig5 a6 8.lba3 b5 9.lbd5 .ie7 1 0 . .ixf6 .ixf6 l l .c3 0-0 12.lbc2 .ig5 1 3.h4 .ih6 14. g4 14 ....if4 A) 1 5.lbxf4 B) 1 5 . g5!? .ie6! 16.lbxf4 exf4 17.1,&d2!? 1,&a5!? Bl) 1 8.1,&xf4 B2) 18.lbd4 C) 1 5.1,&f3 .ie6 Cl) 16 ..ie2 C2) 16.ï¿½dl C3) 16 ..id3 C4) 16.lbxf4 exf4 17.1,&xf4 lb e5 C4 1) 1 8. g5 C42) 1 8.lbe3

A) note to 1 6.f3!?

C4 1 ) after 20.g6!?

1 7 . . . txg4N

356 357 358 359 359 360 361 362 363 364 366

20 . . . dS!N

C42) after l 9 . cxb4

356

1 l .c3

1 .e4 c5 2.lll f3 lll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lll xd4 lll f6 s.lll c3 e5 6.lll db5 d6 7..ig5 a6 8.lll a3 h5 9.lll d5 .ie7 10 ..ixf6 ixf6 1 1 .c3 0-0 12.lll c2 ig5 13.h4 ih6 14.g4 An aggressive plan, but this idea rarely succeeds in the Sveshnikov. It reached its peak in popularity a few years ago when it was successfully used by Volokitin.

1 6 .'Wd5?! This looks like a shot in empty space after: 1 6 . . . \Wc7 1 7.0-0-0 Alonso Macias - Recuero Guerra, Mondariz 2007, and now, instead of the diffident game continuation l 7 . . . E!d8?!, Black should have taken the bull by the horns with:

E-.i.� •� �� m ,�i � 6 T. . t �:--j�·�• �� 'w �,,,, 5 �� /, 4 m m�m� � 3 ��-��o ��-�� -��- ---- %�� 2 � r�lt:J- r� s

,, , , ,

1 /�- - - %-,=�� : a

14 ...if4 The three options we will cover in this chapter are A) 15.lll xf4, B) 15.gS!? and C) 15.�f3. 1 5 .a4 bxa4 l 6.l'!xa4 a5 is examined as variation C2 of Chapter 32.

The immediate capture frees e5 for the c6knight and gives Black a lot of opportunities. My analysis runs as follows:

5 4

1 5 ... exf4 1 6.8!? This is probably the only way to justify White's previous move.

A) 15.lll xf4

1 6. 4J d4? is a blunder. 1 6 . . . 4Jxd4 1 7.�xd4 ixg4 1 8.:ggl �xh4 1 9.ie2 f5 ! 20.0-0-0 was A. Forgacs - Jezt, Veszprem 1 996. 20 . . .f3! 2 1 .id3 E!ae8+ and Black is material up for nothing. 1 6.'Wf3?! is excellent for Black after the obvious: 1 6 . . . 4Je5 l 7.'Wxf4 ixg4 1 8.4Jd4 f5 ( 1 8 . . . b4!?t) l 9.exf5 (l 9.4Je6? 'We7 20.4Jxf8 E!xf8+) l 9 . . . 'Wd7t

3 2

16 ...�e7!? It is probably better for Black to maintain control of d4 for the time being. He also retains chances of using . . . b4 at a later stage to open up lines on the queenside and weaken White's pawn structure. After 1 6 . . . 4Je5 1 7.ie2 ie6 1 8.�d2 \Wc7 1 9.�xf4! ,

357

Chapter 3 1 - 1 3 .h4 and 1 4 . g4

the proof of the pudding lies in the eating: 1 9 . . . d5 20.0-0 dxe4 2 1 .fxe4!00 Black has some compensation for the pawn but the position is not clear, Reina Guerra - Dader, corr. 20 1 0 .

17.ie2 Hitting f4 directly by l 7.'l1Md2 allows the following counterplay: l 7 . . . d5! l 8.Wxd5 ( 1 8.0-0-0 dxe4 1 9 .'!1Mxf4 f5!?+) 1 8 . . . l"ld8! 1 9.'l1Mg5 (l 9.'l1Mxc6? ib7) l 9 . . . \&d6 20.'l1Md5 'l1Mxd5 2 1 .exd5 l'!xd5 22.ie2! (22.a4 ib7 23.axb5 Ele8t 24.ie2 l'!xb5 25.l"la2 l"ld5�; 22.l"ld l ie6!t) 22 . . . h5!? 23.gxh5 (23.g5 if5t) 23 ... if5t Black is, if anything, slightly better. 17...�e6 18.lll d4!? This is best, challenging the strong black minor pieces immediately. On 1 8.'!1Md2?! there comes 18 ... d5! 1 9.\&xf4 dxe4 20.fxe4 b4 and Black establishes lasting compensation.

18 .. J'l:acS! This gives Black excellent chances. Now best is:

26.Wf e4 Wifl 27.Wfd5=

19.Wfd2! Too slow is: 1 9.a4?! d5!?t 20.lll xe6 (20.lll xc6 Elxc6 2 1 .axb5 axb5 22.exd5 l"ld6+; 20.axb5 axb5 2 1 .e5 lll xe5 22.lll x b5 :B:b8!+) 20 . . . fxe6 2 l .axb5 axb5 22.exd5 l"lfd8! 1 9 .lll xe6?! is the wrong move order, handing the initiative over to Black. 1 9 . . . fxe6 20.'l1Md2 b4! and White is facing definite problems. Play is likely to continue 2 1 .cxb4 d5 22.exd5 lll xb4 23.d6 '!1Mb7 24.d7 (24.l"lcl l"lxc l t 25 .\&xc l lll d 3t 26.ixd3 \Wxf3+) 24 . . . lll c2t 25 .©f2 \Wb6t 26.�g2 lll e 3t 27.©h3 l"lc6 28 .l"lac l Eld6 29 .1Wc3 Elxd7 30.\&c6 and now safest is: 30 . . . \Wxc6!? 3 1 .l"lxc6 l"ld2 32.l"lh2 l"lb8 33.b3 Elxa2 34.ixa6 Elal + With an initiative for Black persisting into the ending.

19 ... d5!? Opening up the position in order to highlight the insecurity of the white king. However, White seems able to hold by the skin of his teeth:

B) 15.g5!?

A move that has been underrated. In fact Black must be precise here. 8

6 5

4 3

2 1

1 5 ....ie6! I think this logical retort is best.

358

1 l . c3

16.tll xf4 The dark-squared bishop must be terminated.

1 8 .a3 can be met with 1 8 . . . \Wa4!, when White has the following choice:

1 6.ctJce3 Here, I prefer the immediate: 1 6 . . . ctJe?! Already eyeing f4. 1 6 . . . l"ic8!? is also pretty viable. A clear-cut continuation is: 1 7.ih3 1 7.ig2? ixe3 1 8.ctJxe3 CU g6+ 1 7 . . . ixe3 1 8.ctJxe3 d5! 18 ... CU g6?! is surprisingly not so good, because after 1 9.ixe6 fxe6 20.\Wd2 White has a plan to plant the knight on g4 and then follow up with h4-h5-h6, which he can combine with pressure along the d-file. 1 9.ixe6 1 9.exd5 ixd5!? 20.ctJxd5 ctJxd5 2 1 .if5 ctJ f4 22.Wxd8 l"iaxd8 23.l"id l g6 24.ie4 Wg?+ 1 9 . . . fxe6 20.Wb3 20.Wg4 Wd6 20 . . . \Wb6! Black is at least equal.

a) 1 9.f3?! d5!+ b) 1 9 .id3 ig4t c) 1 9.ig2 CUe5 20.ctJ d4 (20.0-0-0 ctJ c4--+) 20 . . .ic4 2 1 .ifl l"iae8--+ d) 1 9.0-0-0 is relatively best. Black should accept the proffered pawn by 1 9 . . . Wxe4 20.f3 We500 with good chances in the ensuing unclear position.

Bl) 1 8.Wxf4

16 ... exf4 White now has two ways to attack the f4-pawn: 17.Wd2!? After an immediate 1 7. ctJ d4, I like l 7 . . . ctJxd4!? 1 8.\Wxd4 ( 1 8.cxd4 f5 !t) 18 ... l"ic8+! when Black stands pretty well. Black has easy play after: l 7.Wf3 b4!? 1 8.ctJxb4 ctJxb4 l 9.cxb4 \Wb6 20.a3 Wd4 2 1 .ig2 \Wxb2 22. 0-0 We5 23 .l"ifd l f6 24.Wd3 l"iad8+! (or 24 . . . f3!? when his position is at least equal.)

17 ... WfaS!? A very interesting move.

1 8 ... b4! 1 9.Wfd2 gab8 20.tll xb4 20.cxb4 also gave White nothing after 20 . . . \We5! 2 1 .0-0-0 ctJxb4! 22.ctJxb4 Wxe4 23.!d3 \Wxb4 24.Wxb4 l"ixb4 25 .a3 l"ic8t 26.W b l l"ib3 27.l"id2 l"ixd3 28 .l"ixd3 if5 29.l"ihd l l"ic4 30.Wa2 ixd3= Y2-Y2 Ilyasov - Shabaev, corr. 20 1 0.

White can respond with either Bl) 1 8.Wxf4 or B2) 18.tll d4.

20 ... tll xb4 2 1 .cxb4 gxb4 22 ..id3 Wfb6 23.b3 dS! 24.exdS ixdS 2S.ixh7t @xh7= The computers claim that this position 1s equal, a fact the following analysis verifies:

White lands in trouble after: 1 8 .Wxd6?! l"ifd8! 1 9.\Wxf4 ( 1 9 .\Wxc6? l"iac8+ or 1 9.Wa3 \Wb6t) 1 9 . . . b4ï¿½

26.WfxdS gds! 27.WffSt 27.Wxf7?? Wb5! 28.l"ih3 \We5t-+

359

Chapter 3 1 - 1 3 .h4 and 1 4 .g4

27 ... ©g8 28.@fl 28.Eldl Elxd l t 29.©xd l Eld4t 30.©e2 g6 3 1 .iWf3 iWbSt 32.©e l Eld5� 28 ... g6 29.WO Wbst 30.We2 30.©g2 Eldd4�

22 ...il.b3 23.gd2 d5! 24..td3 dxe4 25 ..ixe4 E!bd8 26.Wfl E!xd2 27.Wxd2 a5 28.E!el! 28.iWd3? b4+

30 ... Wds 31 .gh3 Wf5 32.@g2 32.Elf3 iWdS 32 ... ge4 33.WO gg4t 34.gg3 :Sf4 35.We3 Wdst 36.@h3 Wd7t 37.©g2 Wc6t 38.@gl :Sxh4 39.WO :Sd5!= B2) 18 . .!Li d4 �xd4 1 9.Wxd4 Once more the following lines are quite forcing: 1 9.cxd4 could be met by 19 . . . iWb6!?.

19 ... :Sfe8 20.f3 20.hS b4! 20.ig2 ic4 2 1 .hS iWd8 22.g6 fxg6 23.hxg6 hxg600 (23 . . . iWgS 24.gxh7t ©h8 25.if3 d5 26.0-0-0 dxe4 27.f1hgl iWe7 28 .EldeU)

3 1 . ..Wc4= Or 3 1 . . .iWb6=. C) 1s.Wf3

20 ,gab8! A strong move, intending to provoke a weakening of the b3-square. ••

2 1 .a3 Wc7! 22.0-0-m This is a narrow path to equality.

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

1 5 ....ie6 Challenging the d5-knighr. White has now tried several moves in practice: Cl) 16 ..ie2, C2) 1 6.:Sdl, C3) 16 ..id3 and C4) 16.ll'lxf4.

360

l l .c3

1 6 .'ll de3? is at least susp1oous and not in accordance with White's plan co exploit the position of the f4-bishop. After 1 6 . . . .ltxe3 1 7.'ll xe3 b4! White's position seems co be beyond repair. 1 8.c4 tries to keep the position closed, even at the cost of a horrible hole on d4. If White keeps a pawn on c3, then . . . bxc3 followed by . . . �a5 will give Black great chances.

s ,i � �-- - �·�r�· , �lw��f�% .?-� 6 f� 5 ��-��-�"., , ?,�.j �.��·� -� � � 1i1, : �!� 1,�i�.'l8, , .;� fj �. �

�- - ?,� ��1.: a

1 8 . . . 'll d4 1 9 .�d l b3! 20 . .te2 (20.axb3 �b6+ with a virtually winning position for Black) 20 . . . El:bS 2 1 .a3 �f6 22.�d3 !lbc8 23.!lcl �f4+ leaves White in a depressing state.

I also analysed l 7 . . . Cll e7 which looks more natural, but it has shortcomings: the e7-knighc might end up dominated by a bishop on d3 and che queen is not pressuring g5 anymore. The position is about equal, but I will refrain from giving the analysis here as l 7 . . . Cll a5 !? is good enough. 1 8 .Cll e3 1 8.id3 f5 ! 1 9 .'ll b4 ( 1 9.gxf6?! �xf6 20.�e4 �h6t) 1 9 . . . �b6+ looks fine for Black as the white monarch has no good hiding place. 1 8 . . . !lc8!? 1 9.id3 ixe3 20.fXe3 Cll c4 2 1 .!lh2 �a5! 22.Wt'e4 g6 23.!lb l �d8 24.iie2 !lc5+ The position looks better for Black in view of che ideas . . . 'll b6 or . . . �a8, but more analysis is required here.

Cl) 16.i.e2 Preparing co capture on f4 under better circumstances as both the queen and g4-pawn are defended.

16 ....ixd5 17.exd5 However, Black has an impressive response:

1 6.'ll ce3?! ixe3 is similar to the above line, unless White cries che recapture 1 7.fXe3. Black now has two equally appetizing continuations: 17 . . . b4!?N Strong and perhaps best ( 1 7 . . . !lbS has been the standard move in practice, and should be sufficient for a Black edge.) 1 8.'ll xb4 ( 1 8 . c4 Cll a 5 1 9.b3 Cll b 7+) 1 8 . . . 'll xb4 1 9.cxb4 !lb8 20.a3 a5 2 l .b5 a4� With excellent compensation for Black according co Rybka. 22.!ld l (22.iif2 .ltd7+ or 22.�dl Wt'b6 23 .!lh3 h5+) 22 . . .�cS 23.E':gl .ltb3 24.!la l �d8! and it is obvious chat White's play has landed him in trouble. 1 6.g5 A logical move which, surprisingly, has appeared only once in practice. 1 6 . . . ixd5 1 7.exd5 This occurred in Gelferboim - Schlosberg, Bechhofen 1 998, and now Black chose: l 7 . . . 'll a5!? Probably best.

1 8 ..id3 The common sense move.

361

Chapter 3 1 - 1 3 .h4 and 1 4 .g4

1 8 .lll b4 �b6 1 9 .1d3 transposes t o our main line. 1 8.�e4?! invites .. .f5, which Black can prepare with 1 8 . . . �b6!?. After 1 9.1d3 ( 1 9.lll b4 l"i:ac8) 19 . . . g6 20.h5, Black calmly attacks the d5-pawn with 20 . . . �c5+. Play might continue 2 l .�g2 a5 ! when it is evident chat White cannot create any attack on rhe kingside. Black can place his pawn on h6, averring any danger, and after the rather obligatory 22.a3 can switch his attention to the centre by 22 . . . l':'laeS 23.1e4 h6, with the better chances.

20.tlJg2 After 20.h5 I see nothing wrong with 20 . . . �c5 2 1 .l':'ld l l':'lac8!+. 20 ...ih6 2 1 .gS ig7t Black is simply better, as White has no attack and his king is rather exposed. C2) 16J'gdl This should be met as follows:

8 6 5 4 3 2 1 7

1 8 ...Y:!fb6 l 8 . . . g6! ? is playable too. 19.ctJe3 A centralization, although it fails to keep b4 under observation. l 9.lll b4 g6! 20.h5 (20.lll c6? lll xc6 2 l .dxc6 d5! 22.�xd5 e4!+ and 20.1e4? f5+) is best met with the typical 20 . . . l':'lae8!, e.g. 2 l .�h3 h6! 22.hxg6 fXg6 23 .1e4 �g7+ and Black has the better game.

1 9.h5 g6! will transpose either to 1 9.lll b 4 or l 9.lll e3.

16 ...ixdS! 17.exdS After l 7.l':'lxd5, a strong response is l 7 . . . �a5! l 8.a3 !c l !+. 17... tlJ e7! This move is good with the rook on d l , due to a tactical detail uncovered below.

8 6 5 4 3 2 1 7

18.i.d3 1 8 .lll b4 f5 1 9 .lll c6!? ( l 9.gxf5 lll xf5 20.lll c6 �b6 is fine for Black, as the natural 2 l .1d3? is bad in view of the resource 2 1 . . .lll g3!-+) Black is slightly better after: 1 9 . . . �c? 20.gxf5 l':'lxf5 2 l .�e4 l':'laf8 22.1d3 1h6 23.h5 l':'l8f6!t

1 9 ... g6! A good defensive measure, also granting the f4-bishop a retreat square on h6.

1 8 ... f5! 1 9.gxf5 tlJxf5 20.tlJe3 Relatively best. The point is that 20.�e4?! does not tie Black up in this position in view of20 . . . g6!+, intending 2 l .h5?! lll g3!! 22.fXg3 1xg3t 23.�d2 �g5t 24.lll e3 E:f4-+.

362

l l . c3

78 6 5 a

20 . . . l:!a7! 2 1 .Wg4 l:!af7+ At this point, after White's reply with 22.l:!h3, a simple and strong continuation would have been 22 . . . tll h 6 23.Wfg2 Wfc8�. Finally, 20.ie4 l:!a7 2 1 .tll b4 �af7� is also excellent for Black.

20 ....ixe3 2 1 .fxe3 2 1 .ixfS ih6 is very awkward for White.

An alternative is 1 6 . . . �e8 1 7.tll xf4 exf4 1 8 .Wfxf4 tll e5 1 9 .0-0-0 i.xg4 20.l:!d2 We7 with unclear play in Dziedzina - Caire, Internet 2009.

17.gS Gaining space, although it has the disadvantage of sometimes allowing the . . . f6 break. 1 7.tll xf4?! exf4 1 8 .Wxf4 tll e 5+ is weak. 1 7 .a3 can be met by either the standard 1 7 . . . aS, which will probably transpose to our main continuation, or 17 . . . Wd7 1 8 .gS ixd5 1 9.exdS tll a5f± .

1 7 a5!? My idea, which I believe is a principled way to continue. •••

1 8.a3 After 1 8 .tll xf4 exf4 1 9.Wxf4 tll e 5 ( 1 9 . . . b4�) 20.ie2 b4 2 l .cxb4 ig4!� Black gets tremendous compensation. 1 8 b4!?N This is a novelty over: 1 8 . . . i.xdS 1 9.exdS tll e7 20.Wf e4 g6 2 1 .tll e3 (It is not clear why Volokitin did nor repeat 2 1 .Wg2!? ©g7 22.tll e3 b4 .•.

C3) 16 ..id3 Volokitin's choice.

363

Chapter 3 1 - 1 3 .h4 and 1 4 .g4

23.axb4 axb4 24.c4 iWb6 25 .'1We4 Eia8 26.i>e2 h6?! 27.gxh6t .ixh6 28.Eixa8 Eixa8 29.h5 f5 30.iWh4 g5 3 1 .iWh3t with an initiative in Volokirin - Eljanov, Ordzhonikidze 200 1 .)

21. ..Wi'c8!? A multipurpose move, eyeing g4 and covering c6. Ir seems to lead to excellent practical chances. 22.i.e2 cj{bs! 23.Wi'd3 f5 24.gxf6 �xf6 An interesting alternative is 24 . . . gxf6!?, bur the text move is simpler.

7 6 45 3 b

2 1 . . .h5! 22.ltJg2 (22.gxh6 f5 23.'1Wg2 e400) 22 . . . '1Wd7 23.Eid l b4 24.axb4 axb4 25.c4 Eibe8 26.'\t>fl '1Wa4! 27.Eib l b3 28.ltJxf4 exf400 With complicated play in Volokitin - M. Pavlovic, Valle d'Aosra 2002.

19.axb4 axb4 20.ltJ cxb4 20.cxb4 .ixd5 2 l .exd5 lLixb4 22 . .ixh7t i>xh7 23.'1We4t '\t>g8 24.lLixb4 '1Wd7 25.i>fl '1Wb5t 26.ltJ d3 Eibc8 27.Eia4 f5 28.gxf6 Eixf6� should be at least equal for Black, e.g. 29.i>g2 iWd7. 20 ... ltJxb4 21.liJxb4 We have reached a double-edged position.

C4) 1 6.liJxf4 A common occurrence in tournament play.

16 ... exf4 I prefer this move, since it leads to a complicated middlegame. 16 . . . iWf6 1 7.g5 '1Wxf4 approximately equal.

1 8.iWxf4

exf4=

17.Wi'xf4 ltJ e5 Black's piece play grants him dangerous compensation.

Also possible is 17 . . . EibS 1 8.a3 a5 19 ..ie2 b4 20.axb4 axb4 2 1 .lLid4 lLie5 22.iWg3, as played in Smerdon - Mikhalevski, Queenstown Classic 2009. Ar this point Black should have preferred 22 . . . 'WcS! 23.lLif5 .ixf5 24.gxf5 bxc3 25.bxc3 Eib3?, with sufficient counterplay due to the open position of the white king.

364

1 l . c3

There are several continuations here, with the most crucial being: C41) 18.gS and C42) 18.tll e3. 1 8.ie2?! does not really defend the g4-pawn in view of 1 8 . . . ixg4!+. 1 8.f3 makes White's already poor development even poorer: 1 8 . . . Wfc7! 1 9.°&g3 E:ae8 20.llJd4 (20.0-0-0?! ixa2 2 l .g5 ib3 22.f4 llJ d7! 23.f5 lll c5 24.'&xd6 Wfxd6 25.E:xd6 llJxe4 26.E:xa6 llJg3 27.ixb5+ leaves White struggling.)

�.t. t! �-1 1 � ��""' •� r� .t. 8

- -%� r� . ./,.r� � !� � �� ""'� � �w� �/,�,'°, ../dY��

4 � ID 8 �8 r£5 3 � ��- - -�-,,,,

�/,0 ,,,,%. �� ...%. �-, , %�

%,�'• : ,,

20 . . . b4!? (20 . . . ic400) 2 l .cxb4 '&b6 22.llJc2 E:c8 23.E:h2 E:c7 Despite being two pawns down temporarily, Black has a tremendous initiative. The careless 24.'&f2? loses at once to 24 . . . !!xc2! 25 .'&xb6 llJxf3t 26.©dl E:xh2� with a terrific attack for Black. 1 8.0-0-0

Suggested by some engines. 1 8 . . . ixa2 However, the white king seems to be in jeopardy. 1 9.h5 b4!? 1 9 ... !!c800 20.cxb4 20.llJxb4 ib3 2 l .llJc2 '1Wa5! (2 1 . . .ixc2? 22.©xc2 !!b8 23.h6 Wla5 24.E:b l E:fc8 25 .!!h3;!; and White has defended everything) 22.h6 !!fb8! 23 .°&d2 '&a2!+ This is bound to lead to a disaster for White. 20 . . . ib3 Black seems to have sufficient counterplay: 2 1 .E:h3 2 1 .°&e3 .ixc2 22.c;tixc2 !!b8 23.f4 lll xg4 24.\Wd4 '&b6 25 .'&xb6 E:xb6 26.:1:1d4 tll e 3t 27,c;tid3 llJxf1 =

� �� ·� �. 7 .i. � �r�.rr 6 !�� -..%.-�... %, . %� 8 � _ , . ,/,. . � � .... �rm� 45 ��w�� £5� - 8 �� 8 � 3 �W-1:f� /,� .. . � 11 �� '0�� W-'0� 8

/, ,

it& et:J•

�&

�- - %�i��

� h

2 1 . . ..ixc2 22.©xc2 '&b6 23 .'1Wd2 After 23.E:b3, the retort 23 . . . '1Wc6t 24.©b l '&a4 25 .°&g3 a5 26.b5 '1Wxe4t should suffice for at least equal play. 23 . . . lll xg4 24.E:g3 lll xf2 25.E:xg7t ©xg7 26.'&g5t ©h8 27.'&f6t ©g8 28.h6 E:fc8t 29.©b l ©f8 30.E:xd6 '1Wxb4 3 l .'1Wg7t ©e8 32.°&e5t ©f8 33 .°&g7t= This line was given by Rybka.

C41) 1 8.gS This move is given as best by most engines but it is not too scary.

18 ... f6! White is entering into difficulties.

Chapter 3 1 - 1 3 .h4 and 1 4.g4

365

An alternative that has been successfully adopted in correspondence chess is l 8 . . . :9'.e8!?.

19.lll d4 .ig4 Von Wantoch Rekowski - Hagarova, Germany 2006, is the only game from this position. 20.g6!? An interesting attempt, but I have found a strong reply. After the more pedestrian 20.\We3, Black's chances are at least equal. 20 . . . fxg5 2 1 .hxg5 \We7! and White's choice is not so appetizing. My main line continues: 22.f4 lll g6 23.f5 ixf5 24.Ci:Jxf5 :9'.xf5 25.0-0-0 \Wxg5 (25 . . . :9'.xg5!?) 26.\Wxg5 :9'.xg5 27.:gxd6 Ci:le5ft Obviously Black can play to win chis, with a strong knight and two connected passers. 24 ... @xg7 25.hS=iWt @xhs 26.'!Nh6t @gs 27 ..ie2! Axe2 28.@xe2! 28.!!gl t i.g4 29.f4 Ci:l f3t 30.Ci:lxf3 dxe4t 3 1 .Ci:ld4 e3t 32.d3 \Wd7 33.f5 \Wg7+ 28 ... lll g4 29.'Wg6t @f8 30.ggl ! 30.\Wxg4 \We7!

20 ... dS!N With a good game for Black; he is intending . . . \Wd6 and the chances look about equal. I shall give one main line, with some important alternatives in the notes, showing the type of exciting battle that could arise from this position. 20 . . . hxg6N is originally advocated by the computers, but I do not like ic so much on account of 2 1 .iWg3!.

2 1 .l:'l:gl B:e8! 22.gxh?t @hs 23.@d2! 23.ie2 ixe2 24.@xe2 \Wc7! 25.fl \Wc4t 26.g2 Ci:l d3 27.'!Ng3 E!a7!t

3 1 .lll xf5 3 1 .'!Nxf5t \Wf6! 32.:9'.xg4 \Wxf5 33.Ci:lxf5 !!xe4t 34.!!xe4 dxe4=

366

1 l .c3

31 ... E:xe4t 32. ©d2 '1Wf6 33.E:xg4 '1Wxg6 34.E:xg6 ©f7 35.h5 E:e5 36.ctJh6t ©e7 37.tll gSt= C42) 18.ctJe3 This is the most common move in practice.

1 8 ... b4 19.cxh4 1 9.c4 is more popular, but 1 9 . . . 'Wa5 ! 20.b3 'Wa3 gives good counterplay. A possible continuation is: 2 1 .h5!?N (2 1 ..ie2 'Wb2 22.l':'i:d 1 'Wxa2 23.l':'i:xd6 'Wa l t 24.l':'i:d l 'Wc3t 25.'it>fl Skouvaklis - Bellahcene, Geneva 2009, when after 25 .. .f6N Black would have been ready to take on b3, with plenty of counterplay.) 2 1 . ..'Wb2 22.l':'i:dl 'Wxa2 (22 .. .f6!? 23.E:d2 '1Wc3) 23.h6 'Wxb3 24.hxg7 'Wc3t 25 .gd2 l':'i:fe8 26.'Wh6 �c l t 27.:!l:d l �c3t 28.8:d2 �cl t= Leading to a draw. 27.ctJfl �k2 28.ctJe3 E:d2=

Conclusion

2 1 .b5 d5 22.'1Wg3 dxe4 23.�e2 23.0-0-0 is problematic due to 23 . . . .ib3 24.8:d2 l':'i:c8t 25.'it>b l 8:c5 26 . .ie2 'Wc7!. 23 ...E:ds 24.o-o gd2 24 . . . 'Ll d3 25 .'Wxb8 Eiaxb8 26.a4 'Llxb2 27.gfc l l"id400 i s also playable.

This chapter examined the aggressive 1 3.h4 .ih6 1 4.g4, which has been used successfully by Volokitin. Black reacts by moving his bishop to f4, giving White three options. The first two of them should hold no fear for the second player. 1 5 . 'Llxf4 frees the e5-sq uare for Black's knight, and a further opening of the centre sees White struggling for equality. If White plays 1 5 .g5!?, Black should continue with 15 ... .ie6! 1 6.'Llxf4 exf4 1 7.'1Wd2!? �a5!?. This leads to some forcing lines which are ultimately equal, but it is often White who has to work harder to prove this. l 5.'\Wf3 is the most testing of White's replies, and again I believe l 5 . . . $.e6 to be Black's strongest move, with the plan of . . . .ixd5 and . . . 'Lle7 often proving effective if White fails to put his bishop on d3 immediately. 1 6 . .id3 was the choice of Volokitin, but I believe that after 16 . . . E:bS! 1 7.g5 a5 !? l 8.a3 b4!?N Black should have excellent chances in the double-edged positions that arise. The final branch of the chapter after 1 6.'Llxf4 exf4 l 7.'1Wxf4 'Lle5 gives rise to some wildly complicated variations, but a careful study of the two main lines presented should convince the reader rhat Black maintains equality.

13.a4 Introduction Variation Index 1 .e4 c5 2.lbf3 tb c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lbxd4 lb f6 5 . tb c3 e5 6.lb dbS d6 7.i.g5 a6 8.lba3 h5 9.lbd5 i.e7 1 0.i.xf6 i.xf6 1 1 .c3 0-0 12.lLJc2 i.g5 13.a4 bxa4 14.:Sxa4 14 ... aS! A) 1 5.b4?! B) 1 5 . lb ce3 C) 1 5.h4 i.h6 Cl) 16.lbce3 C2) 16. g4 C3) 16.i.c4 C4) 1 6.i.hS

A) afte r l 7 . li'lcxb4!

l 7 . . . Elxa4N

368 369 372 372 373 374 375

Cl)

note to

l 7.b3N

C4)

n o t e to

16 ... .\tb?!?

368

1 3 .a4

1 .e4 c5 2.lll f3 c!b c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lll xd4 lll f6 5.lll c3 e5 6.c!bdb5 d6 7.Ag5 a6 8.lll a3 b5 9.lll d5 Ae7 IO ..ix.f6 .ix.f6 l 1 .c3 0-0 12.tlic2 .ig5 13.a4 The most principled attempt to gain an advantage, breaking up Black's queenside. 13 ... bxa4 14.!!:xa4 a5! A logical alternative is 1 4 . . . Wh8, bur 1 4 . . . a5 ! is the most widespread and critical continuation. In this chapter we shall concentrate on the following moves for White: A) 15.b4?!, B) 15.lll ce3 and C) 15.h4. The main line of 1 5 .ic4 can be found in Chapters 34-37.

1 988.) 1 8 . . . d5 1 9 .ie2 ( 1 9 .id3?? dxe4-+) 1 9 . . . dxe4 20.0-0 iWd5! 2 1 .c4 (Or 2 1 .ic4?! iWc5 22.E:e l lll c8!+ and Black has a much superior game.) 2 1 . . .iWd2+ 1 6.h4 is a practical chance, but only if Black reacts imprecisely. After 1 6 . . . ih6 l 7.b5 ixd5! 1 8.iWxd5 ti:'i e7 1 9 .Wfb3 d5 20.ie2 dxe4 2 1 .0-0 we get a position examined under 1 6.b5, with the moves h2-h4 and . . . ih6 thrown in. The insertion of the move h2-h4 weakens White's kingside, so Black should focus his attention there. 2 1 . . . ti:'i f5!? is probably best. (2 1 . . .iWd5 is possible but is not as good here, because the h6-bishop has lost contact with the b6- and c5-squares) The main idea is to answer 22.gxe4 with:

A) 1 5.b4?! This move neglects development and weakens c3 .

8 I: � .i.� �� ·� m m•m• 7

�0 � �- �� , , ·�,%� �m ·� �%% �qjr� � 4 "i�%%� ·tr� , , ,l<� � � . ,i f/ %� 3 �%% � � � %% ��r[j·� �� ·rl50 2 mqjm 1 ·� v=if� ·:

�,, , , % �r

�

1 5 ...Ae6! 16.Ac4!? White's situation is already difficult if he chooses one of the alternatives listed below. The almost untested text move seems to offer him good drawing chances. 1 6.b5 has been the most popular move in practice and now 1 6 . . . ixd5! looks best, trying to exploit White's underdevelopment. l 7.iWxd5 (l 7.exd5 ti:'ib8 l 8.ti:'ib4 li:l d7 l 9.ti:'ic6 iWb6+) l 7 . . . ti:'i e7 l 8.iWb3 ( 1 8.iWd l d5i Wittke - Hoyer, Germany

22 . . . if4! 23.g3 ixg3! 24.fxg3 li:lxg3 25.gxe5 ti:'ixfl 26.ixfl iWxh4i Black has excellent chances.

16 ... axb4 17.tli cxb4! 1 7.gxa8 Wfxa8 Slightly better for Black as the following variations illustrate: 1 8.cxb4! Relatively best. a) 1 8 .li:lcxb4? ti:'ixb4 1 9 .cxb4 loses to 1 9 . . . l"1c8. b) Also weak is: 1 8 .lll c7? bxc3!! 1 9 .lll xa8 ( l 9.$.xe6 id2H or 1 9.0-0 iWb8 20.lll xe6 fxe6 2 1 .ixe6t Wh8+) 1 9 . . . id2t 20.Wfxd2 (20.Wfl ixc4t 2 1 .Wg l gxa8-+ or 20.We2 ixc4t 2 1 .Wf3 ib3!-+) 20 . . . cxd2t 2 1 .Wxd2 gxa8+ c) 1 8 .h4?! id8 1 9.cxb4 li:lxb4! 20.ti:'icxb4 ia5+

Chapter 32

78 6 45 3 2

369

Introduction

The game is approximately level as there is not much Black can do to improve here.

B) 15.llJce3 This is a perfecdy viable, albeit uncommon, move order. The knight makes an early commitment to the e3-square, where it is subject to capture.

1 5 ie6!? This is a rare move, intending to make use of the b8-square for the manoeuvre . . . 'Li c6-b8d7-c5 . I found the idea myself, but also later found some games where it had been played. •••

l 8 . . . 'Lixb4! A stunning blow. 1 9.'Licxb4 1"ic8! 20.h4 20.0-0! ? 1"ixc4 2 1 .'Lib6 Wi'b7 22.'Lixc4 ixc4 23.'Lid5! �xfl 24.©xfl + is perhaps the lesser evil for White. 20 . . . 1"ixc4 2 1 .hxg5 1"ixb4 22.'Lixb4 Wi'xe4t 23.©fl Wfxb4+ White should be able to draw this, but has some distance to go before he restores his coordination.

18.'!Wxa4 '!Wa5!? 19.'!WxaS llJxa5=

1 5 . . . 1"ib8 is also playable, and is likely to transpose to the theoretical main lines.

1 6 ..ic4 1 6.'Lic4 'Li e?! is excellent for Black, e.g. 1 7.'Lixe?t Wi'xe7-;!. . 16 ... llJbS! The point, although there are still some obstacles on the way to equality.

17.llJfS!N Too casual is 1 7.0-0 'Li d? 1 8.Wi'c2 ( 1 8.b4? ixe3, when 1 9.fXe3+ V Nguyen - Tran, Ho Chi Minh City 200 1 , is better than 1 9.'Lixe3? 'Li b6+) 1 8 . . . 'Li c5 1 9.1"ia2 ( 1 9.1"ia3 a4+) 1 9 . . . a4 20.:r"idl ©hs 2 1 .f3 1"ib8 22.Wi'e2 Wi'd7 23.'itih l g6 24.'Lib4 ixe3 25 .ixe6 Wxe6 26.Wxe3 f5

370

1 3 .a4

27.exf5 gxf5 28.Wi'd2 l"i:f6+± and Black stood fine in Van Hentenrijck - Lorin, corr. 2006.

17 ... � d7 1 8.h4!? l 8.Wi'g4?! creates a one-move threat that is easily parried by 1 8 . . . ©hS!, when White has to retreat in confusion: 1 9 .Wi'e2 ( 1 9.h4 if6+) 1 9 . . . g6 20.tt'lg3 tt'lc5+ l 8.tt'lxd6 is best met by the straightforward 1 8 . . . tt'l c5 1 9 .l"i:al ©hs 20.h4 ih6 (20 . . . Wi'xd6 2 1 .hxg5 tt'lxe4 22.Wi'h5 if5f±) 2 1 .tt'l f5 tt'lxe4 22.tt'lxh6 gxh6+± with excellent play for Black. 1 8 .b4 This should be met with the standard response. 1 8 . . . l"i:cS! Now the path divides:

20 . . . tt'l c5 should be met by 2 1 .h4!, although Black should be okay after 2 1 . . .if6 22.tt'lxd6 i'!a8. 2 1 .exf5 lll f6=

18 ... .if6! 19.b4 Most thematic. l 9.tt'lxd6 tt'l c5 Black has good chances to play for a win: 20.l"i:al 20.i'!a2 ©h8 2 1 .tt'lxf6 (2 1 .tt'l e3 ie7+) 2 1 . . .�xf6 22.ixe6 �xe6 23 .�d5 tt'ld3t 24.©d2 tt'lxf2 25 .�xe6 fxe6 26.l"i:hal l"i:ad8 27.©e2 tt'l g4! 28.tt'lc4 l"i:f400 8 7

6 5 a

1 9 .ib3 This is the most solid option, although the resulting position looks dead level. 1 9 .tt'lxd6 l"i:c6! 20.tt'lb7 is more complicated: 20 . . . Wi'cS 2 1 .h4 if6 (2 1 . . .l"i:xc4 22.tt'ld6 l"i:xe4t 23.tt'lxe4 ixd5 24.Wi'xd5 tt'l b6 25 .�d3 id2t 26.Wi'xd2 tt'lxa4 27.0-000) 22.tt'lc5 (22.tt'lxf6t tt'lxf6 23.ixe6 fxe6t 24.tt'l c5 axb4 25.cxb4 tt'lxe4!) 22 . . . tt'lxc5 23.bxc5 ids 24.l"i:xa5 ixd5 25.exd5 ixa5 26.dxc6 ixc3t 27.©fl Wi'xc6 28.Wi'd5= 1 9 . . . axb4 20.l"i:xb4 20.h4!? ixf5 ! 2 1 .exf5 ih6 22.i'!xb4 tt'l f6 23.0-0 tt'lxd5 24.Wi'xd5 l"i:xc3 25.l"i:dl Wi'f6= e.g. 26.g4 icl ! 20 . . . ixf5

20 . . . a4� 20 . . . ©h8 2 1 .tt'lxf6 �xf600 Black has fixed two weaknesses on b2 and e4: 2 1 .�d2 2 1 .g3 l"i:b8 22.l"i:b l ©h8 23.tt'le3 ie7+ 2 l . . .ixh4 22.�e2 ixd5 23.ixd5 �xd6 24.l"i:xh4 l"i:ab8 25 .l"i:h3 l"i:b6 26.l"i:d l = Play is double-edged here. 1 9.i'!a2 tt'l c5 20.�c2 a4 is similar, unless White plays the committal 2 1 .g4!?. After 2 1 . . .g6 22.g5 ©h8! 23.tt'lfe3 ie7 24.l"i:al (24.ib5 f500) 24 . . . l"i:bS 25.i'!dl h5!? (25 . . . �d7=) 26.0-0= the position is unclear, although chances are probably balanced. Instead, the piece sacrifice 26.lll f5 ?! gxf5 27.exf5 ixd5 28.ixd5 �d7! does not work for White. 1 9 .l"i:al is another move anticipating . . . tt'l c5

Chapter 32

followed by . . . a4. Although 19 . . . tt k5ï¿½ might still be possible, a more concrete plan of action runs 1 9 . . . ixf5 20.exf5 Ek8!?. There is a bit of life in the position but it is still roughly equal.

371

Introduction

35.Ela7 iWc2t 36.Wfl hxg3 37.Elxf7 Wh8 38.ElxfSt ixf8 39.fxg3 iWd3t=

24 ...i.xh4! 25.b6 25.iWh5 ? Elxc4+

25 ...i.g5! Forcing things. 20.tt:lfe3 20.ib3 is also possible, but after 20 . . . axb4 White must play 2 1 .Elxb4! (2 l .cxb4?! lLl b6 22.Ela6 [22.lll x b6? ixb3-+] 22 . . . lll x d5 23.ixd5 ixd5 24.exd5 Elc4+ is better for Black) . For example 2 1 . . .lll c5 22.lll fe3 g6 23.lll xf6t iWxf6 24.id5 h5 25 .g3= with a balanced game. 20.ia2 is an attempt to improve which leads to a forced draw after the sequel: 20 . . . lll b6 2 1 .Elxa5 (2 1 .lll x b6 '1Wxb6+) 2 1 . . .lll xd5 22.ixd5 ixf5 23.exf5 e4 24.0-0 ixc3=

26.b? After 26.iWb3 ixd5 27.exd5 Elb8 28.b7, best is probably 28 . . . e4!?. For example, 29 .ia6 Ele8 30.0-0 e3 3 l .g3 h5! and White's advanced b-pawn is outweighed by the weak position of his king. 26 ... Elxc4! 27.Elxc4 \Wa5t 28.@e2 28.Wfl iWa6+

20 ... axb4! Again, very clear cut. 2 1 .cxb4 ft:l b6! Clearing the air a bit. 22.tt:lxb6 \Wxb6 23.ft:l d5 \Wd8 24.b5! 24.ib3 leads to an approximately equal position after 24 . . . ixd5 25 .ixd5 '1Wb6 26.iWd2 (26.g3 iWb5) 26 . . . iWb5 27.Ela5 Elcl t 28 .iWxcl iWxb4t 29 .iWd2 iWb l t 30.We2 iWxh l 3 1 .g3 g5!= e.g. 32.Ela3 gxh4 33 .iWh6 ig7 34.iWh5 iWb l

372

1 3 .a4

28 ... fS! 29.:Ei!b4 �a2t 30.@fl fxe4 3 1 .lll f6t gxf6 32.b8=� :Ei!xb8 33.:Ei!xbSt @g7 34.:Ei!b?t Af7"' This is a highly unbalanced position requiring deeper analysis. It does not look worse for Black. q 1s.h4 Ah6

Cl) 1 6.lll ce3 :Ei!b8 This is different from the immediate l 5.llice3, as the move h2-h4 has been thrown in. This makes Black's plan of . . . g6 and .. .f5 more problematic, in view of the h4-h5 advance. White has three options:

17.b3N This looks like the most testing. 1 7.lll c4N Hitting a5 and d6, but this is outweighed by the loss of time and the reduced control over d5. l 7 . . . lll e7 1 8.lll xe7t V1/xe7 Black has free play due ro his powerfully placed pieces, as the following variations show: 1 9.V1/c2 After 1 9.l"lxa5 ie6 the best White can do is:

20.id3 ixc4 2 I .ixc4 l"lxb2 22.0-0 V1/xh4 23 .V1/xd6 vtfxe4=/+ 1 9 . . . ie6 A fighting chance for White would be: 20.lll xa5 20.id3 d5!? gives Black a lot of activity. 20 . . . V1/d7 2 1 .l"lal d5 22.l"ld l 22.id3 dxe4 23 .ixe4 f5 24.ic6 vtf e7� 22 . . . d4 23.cxd4 l"lfc8 24.lll c4 exd4 25 .!e2 25 .!d3 V1/b5 26.b3 V1/xb3 27.V1/xb3 l"lxb3 28.lll e5 l"lcc3t 25 . . . V1/b5 26.l"lxd4 Wfb4t 27.�fl g6� 1 7.l"la2 Weaker than l 7.b3, as the rook is more passive on a2. l 7 . . . ixe3 l 8.lll xe3 lll e 7 l 9.ic4 �h8 The position is level. Black should, in general, try to trade off all minor pieces: 20.b3!? 20.0-0 allows Black easy equality after: 20 .. .f5 2 l .exf5 lll xf5 22.lll xf5 ixf5 ! Most clear cut. 23.b3 (23 .g3? ih3 24.l"le l l"lxf2!-+ or 23 .V1/d5 ? Wfxh4+) 23 . . . ie4! 24.id5 ixd5 25 .vtfxd5 V1/xh4!? (25 . . . l"lc8!N is perhaps even more accurate, but the result should be equality either way.) 26.l"lxa5 V1/f6 27.l"la6 e4! 28.E!:xd6 V1/xc3 29.V1/xe4 '.Wxb3 Y2-Y2 Asrian Khalifman, Bled (ol) 2002. 20 . . . f5 2 1 .exfS lll xf5 22.lll xf5 ixf5 23.Wf d5!? The only challenging move. Soto - Harper, corr. 2008. 8

7 6 54 3 2 a

23 . . . ig6!N 24.vtfxa5 Wff6 25.0-0 25.Wf d5 if7 26.'.We4 ixc4 27.bxc4 vtff4

Chapter 32

28.'Wxf4 Ei'.xf4= 25 . . . 'Wxh4 26.'Wc7 26.Ei:d l ie4 27.Ei'.xd6 Ei:a8 28.Ei:a6 Ei:ad8 29.ifl Ei:f5--+ 26 ... Ei:bd8 27.Ei'.d2! 27.Ei'.dl ie4 28.ifl Ei:f5--+ 27 . . . ie4 28.f3 'Wh6! 29.Ei'.ff2 ia8 30.'Wb6 'Wf6 3 1 .Ei'.d3 'We? 32.l'!fd2 Ei:f6=

17 ...ixe3! This move is best now, reverting to the plan with . . . tfJ e7 and .. .f5 . 1 7 . . . tfJ e??! leaves the wrong set o f pieces o n the board: 1 8.tfJxe?t 'Wxe7 1 9.tiJd5 'Wd8 20.g3 �e6 2 1.. �c4 Wh8 22.0-0 f5 23.exf5 ixf5 24.Ei:e l Ei:b?;!; Black can probably hold with a perfect defence but the position is obviously more pleasant for White, who may proceed to organize a push of the b-pawn.

18 . .!lixe3 .!li e7 19.ic4 h8 We have transposed into a position that commonly arises from the 1 5 .ic4 l"1b8 1 6.b3 move order. See variation Bl of Chapter 35 on page 402 for the possible continuations from here. C2) 1 6.g4 if4 This cannot be so good for White with the b-file already open. However, it seems that Black cannot gain the advantage:

17.ibS Developing with tempo, although the bishop provides a target on the b-file later on. l 7.tfJa3 proved betcer for Black after 17 . . . Ei:bS 1 8.tfJb5 tfJ e7! l 9.tfJxf4 exf4 20.Ei:d4 tfJ c6 2 1 .Ei'.xd6 'We? 22.f3 tfJe5 23.Ei'.d2 tfJxg4! 24.tfJd4 id? 25 .'We2 tfJe5 26.'Wh2 f5+ in Urban - Vesely, corr. 20 1 1 . l 7.tfJ ce3 runs into 1 7 . . . tfJ e?!? 1 8 .tfJxe?t (worse is 1 8.ic4 ixe3 l 9.tiJxe3 Ei:b8 20.b3 tfJ g6!) 18 . . . 'Wxe? 1 9.tfJd5 'Wb7 20.b3 (20.b4 axb4

373

Introduction

2 1 .Ei'.xb4 'Wa?+) 20 . . . id? 2 1 .Ei'.al ie6 22.ic4 Ei:fc800 and Black should be at least equal. 1 7.ic4 :i!b8! Giving Black strong counterplay, even after White's best move: 1 8.b4!? More passive is: 1 8.b3 tfJ e7 1 9.liJxe?t ( 1 9.tfJce3 ixe3 20.tfJxe3 tfJg6) 1 9 . . . 'Wxe? 20.Ei:xa5 'Wb7! 2 1 .Ei'.d5 (2 1 .id5 ? 'We? 22.'Wa l ixg4+) 2 1 . . .i.e6 22.tfJb4!+ 18 . . . axb4 1 9.tfJcxb4 tfJxb4 20.l"1xb4 20.cxb4 id? 2 1 .Ei'.al h6 22.g5 (22.Wfl i.e6 23.b5 'Wd7+) 22 . . . ie6 23.b5 hxg5 24.l"1a7 ixd5! 25 .'Wxd5 'Wf6 26.hxg5 ixg5+ is slightly better for Black as the h-file can always be shielded by . . . i.h6. 20 . . . ie6 2 1 .Wfl 'Wd7 Forcing a concession. 22.ie2 22.f3 ixd5 23.'Wxd5 Ei:xb4 24.cxb4 'Wa4+ 22 . . . Ei:b?!? The star move, activating the rooks in harmonious fashion. 23.Wg2 :i!a7f± Black is ready to penetrate, with excellent chances. 8

6 5

4 3

17...i.h7!? Now White must consider where to place his queen, in anticipation of pressure along the b-file as well as against . . . tfJ e7.

374

1 3 . a4

18.Wfe2 Most logical. Worse is: 1 8.Wd3 ?! !!b8! 1 9.b3 ( 1 9.ic4 ic8!; 1 9.E1a2 etJ e7 20.lll xe7t Wxe7 2 1 .!!xa5 We6� gives Black powerful compensation.) l 9 . . . etJe7 20.etJxf4 (20.ic4? etJxd5 2 1 .ixd5 ixd5 22.Wxd5 Wc8-+) 20 . . . exf4 2 1 .etJd4 d5 22.e5 etJg6t 1 8.Wf3 Also allowing strong counterplay after: l 8 . . . !!b8+± There are several tries for White: 1 9.ic4 Natural, but Black will have strong pressure by offering a pawn sacrifice. Instead, 1 9.b3 lll a7 20.ic4 ixd5 2 1 .ixd5 Y2-Y2 was A. Volkov - VI. Popov, corr. 2009. Here I like Black's position after 2 1 . . .lll c8!+±. 1 9 .id3 ic8 20.b4 is probably best: 20 . . . axb4 2 1 .etJcxb4 (2 1 .cxb4 etJ e7! 22.etJxf4 exf4 23.iMl'xf4 etJ g6 24.Wfg3 etJe5�) 2 1 . . .id7 22.:E1a6 etJxb4 23.cxb4 ic8! 24.E1a7 ie6 25.b5 ixd5 26.exd5 !!c8= Black's slight initiative will probably be defused. 1 9 . . . etJe7! 20.etJxe7t Wxe7 2 1 .!!xa5 iMl'c7 22.!!a4 ic8 23.b3 ie6�

18 ... �bS! Also possible is 1 8 . . . etJa7!? 1 9 .id3 ixd5 20.exd5 etJ c8 2 1 .l'!a l ?! Wi'b6 22.etJ a3 etJ e7 23.etJc4 Wc5+ when I believe that Black prematurely agreed to a draw in VI. Popov - Dobrica, corr. 2009. 19.id3 l 9.E1a2 etJ e7 20.lll xf4 exf4+ 1 9.ic4 ic8 20.b3 ie6= is fine for Black, who may even consider . . . ixd5 followed by . . . etJ e7 instead of the standard . . . !!e8 and . . . etJ e7.

19 ... ll'l e7! 20.ll'lxe?t Wfxe7 2 1 .�xaS Wf d8! 22.�al dS 23.ll'lb4! 23.E1d l ?! dxe4 24.ixe4 Wc8!t

C3) 16.ic4 A logical developing move.

16 ... gbs White has three options: 17.b4 17 .g4 if400 has been examined in variation C2 above, in the note to l 7.ic4 l'!b8 .

1 7.b3 is a common-sense move: 1 7 . . . <±ih8! 1 8 .etJce3 ( 1 8.g4 if4 1 9.etJce3 etJ e7 20.etJxe7 iMl'xe7 2 1 .lll d5 iMl'd8 looks balanced.) 1 8 . . . ixe3! 1 9.etJxe3 lll e7= We have transposed to a position analysed in variation C l . 8

7 6

4 3

2 1

Chapter 32

17 ...id7! A flexible move. White now has the following options at his disposal: 1 8.:Ba3 1 S.b5?! loses a pawn for very little: 1 S . . . tll a7 1 9 .iWa l ixb5 20.ixb5 l"lxb5 2 1 .ctJa3 l"lc5 22. tll c4 tll c6+ l S.l"la l !? is another plausible retreat, safeguarding the first rank by covering c l . However, it seems Black is slightly better after l S . . . �hS 1 9.g4 f6!? 20.ie2 axb4 2 1 .ctJcxb4 tll xb4 22.cxb4 �c6+. 1 S.l"la2 leaves the rook susceptible to a potential pin along the gS-a2 diagonal: l S . . . �hS 1 9.g3! ( 1 9.g4 if4 20.�e2 axb4 2 1 .cxb4 .ie6! 22.b5 tll e7 23.tll cb4 l"lcS+; 1 9.0-0 f5 20.iWe2 fxe4 2 1 .g3 axb4 22.tll cxb4 tll a5 23.l"le l e3 24.fxe3 tll xc4 25.iWxc4 g5h) 1 9 .. .f5 20.exf5 ixf5 2 1 .00 iWcS 22.bxa5 tll xa5 23.�d3 ig4 24.�e2 ixe2 25 .iWxe2 tll b3+ Black has a tiny edge.

1s ... @hs 19.g4! Now this move is strongest. 1 9 .g3 does not work so well with the rook on a3 : 1 9 . . .f5 20.exf5 ixf5 2 1 .0-0 iWcS! 22.b5 (22.bxa5 ?! tll xa5 23.Elxa5 [23 .id3 fails to 23 . . . �xd3 24.\Wxd3 tll c4+] 23 . . . iWxc4+) 22 . . . ie4! 23.l"lel tll d4! 24.l"lxe4 'Wxc4+

19 ... f6!? Another option is: 1 9 . . . if4 20.ie2 axb4 2 1 .cxb4 �e6 22.b5 ixd5 23.exd5 tll e7 24.tll b4 f5 25 .g5 l"lb7 26.tll c6 \Wes 27.iWb3 iWf7 2S.O-O h6! 29.tll a5 l"lbbS 30.tll c6 l"lb7= 20.ie2 axb4 2 1 .lll cxb4 lll xb4 2 1 . . .l"lcS 22.l"lal .ie6 23.tll xc6 l"lxc6= 22.cxb4 ic6+! With an unclear game. C4) 1 6.ibS ib7!?

375

Introduction

In the present situation this might be a worthwhile alternative to the customary . . . tll e7. White's point can be seen in the following lines: 1 6 . . . tll e7 l 7.tll xe7t!? Less critical is l 7.tll cb4 tll x d5 l S.tll xd5 l"lbS!? (l S ... �e6+± looks fine for Black too) . 1 7 . . . '1Wxe7 1 S .tll b4 Black lacks the tactical resource . . . ih3 in view of the insertion of the move h2-h4. 8

6 5

4 3 2 a

l S . . . iWdS! 1 9 .iWd3 1 9 .tll c6 '1Wc7+ or 1 9.0-0 1.1ilxh4+±. 1 9 . . . �hS+± The position is unclear. A game shedding some light on the position continued: 20.0-0 ib7 2 1 .ctJd5 iWxh4 22.tll b6 E!ad8 23.tll d5 E:bS 24.b3 ixd5 25 .iWxd5 if4 26.g3 ixg3 27.fxg3 '1Wxg3t 2S.�hl iWh3t Y2-Yz lvanovic - Blank, corr. 2009.

17.0-0 l 7.tll ce3?! is probably worse for White in view of 1 7 . . . ixe3! 1 8.tll xe3 iWb6!+. For example: 1 9.'We2 tll d8 20.ctJd5 ixd5 2 1 .exd5 tll b7 22.0-0 (22.ic6 ctJ c5) 22 . . . ctJc5 23.E!a3 l"lab8!? (23 . . . l"la7 24.E!fal :Bb8 25.c4 a4 26.l"l l a2 f5 27.ixa4= finished as a draw in VI . Popov - Kurgansky, corr. 20 1 0.) 24.c4 f5-+ 1 7.iWd3 tll e7! This looks okay for Black: 1 S .ic4 After 1 8.tll ce3 a clever retort is 1 S . . . �h8!?, preparing . . .f5 according to circumstance.

376

1 3 . a4

White still cannot castle with impunity as h4 in hanging. For example: 1 9. '2l c4 ( 1 9.'2lxe7 ixe3!; 1 9.ic4 ixe3 20.'2lxe3 f5 ! 2 1 .exf5 d5�) 19 . . . ixd5! 20.exd5 f5 2 l .h5 e4 22.'1Wd4 '2lg8! 23 .ic6 l"lb8oo 1 8 . . . Wh8! 1 9 .'2lxe7 1 9.'2lce3 ixe3 20.ll'ixe3 f5 is similar to a line given just above. 1 9 . . . Wxe7 20.id5 f5 ! 2 1 .exf5 2 1 .0-0 ixd5 22.'1Wxd5 �xh4+ 2 1 . . .ixd5 22.�xd5 �d7! 23.l"le4 l"lab8!+± Black has enough counterplay to hold the balance.

2 1 .�xd8 l'!fX.d8 22.'2lxe3 g6 23.l'!e 1 l"ld2 24.ll'ig4 ig7 25.'2lxe5 l"lxb2=

18 ....ic6 19.ga2 lll xd5 20 ..ixdS 2 1 .Wi'xdS Wi'xh4 22.lll el .if4 23.g3 23.ll'if3 Wh5+±

hd5

23...Wg4 24.gxaS gxa5 25.WxaS h5 26.lll g2 .igSm The position remains extremely unclear.

Conclusion

Chapter 32 begins our discussion of 1 3 .a4 bxa4 1 4.E:xa4 a5!, exploring some 1 5th move alternatives for White. The first try with l 5.b4?! is too weakening, and the lines presented show he will do well to reach equality. ll'i ce3 is a common move in the Sveshnikov, but it's usage in this exact position is rare. My suggested plan is to re-route the black knight to c5, via b8 and d7, when Black should be able to obtain a satisfactory position by maximizing his piece activity. These lines are relatively untested, and there is certainly scope for fresh ideas and analysis in the future. The final position arising from this variation is especially worthy of a deeper examination.

17 . . . Wxh4 1 8. '2l ce3! ( 1 8.Wd3 ?! �d8 1 9.ll'ice3 ixe3 20.'2lxe3 '2l a7! 2 1 .ia6 ic6 22.l"la2 '2l c8!=) 18 ... ixe3 1 9.ll'ixe3 ll'i a7 20.ic4 '2l c8 2 1 .id5 ixd5 22.ll'ixd5 l"lb8 23.We2± is slightly better for White despite the pawn count.

1 8 ..ic4!? 1 8.'2lce3 '2lxd5 1 9.'2lxd5 �xh4 cannot be worse for Black. 1 8.ll'ide3!? is the suggestion of Rybka, and here I like the principled response 1 8 . . . d5!. A likely continuation is: 1 9.exd5 ll'ixd5 20.�d3 '2lxe3

1 5 .h4 ih6 leads us to the main bulk of the chapter, with White having four main options to choose from. The inclusion of h2-h4 gives Black something else to think about, so my suggestions in reply to 1 6.ll'ice3 are different to those against the same move on White's 1 5th. The main line transposes to a variation examined in Chapter 35. White's other 1 6th moves all have their respective merits, and there are no easy answers for Black. I have offered some flexible ideas in each line, leading to some highly interesting and imbalanced positions.

13.a4 15.ihS Variation Index 1 .e4 c5 2.tiJ f3 � c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.�xd4 �f6 5 . � c3 e5 6.� db5 d6 7.i.g5 a6 8.� a3 b5 9.�d5 i.e7 10.i.xfG i.xf6 l l .c3 0-0 12.�c2 i.g5 1 3.a4 bxa4 14,:gxa4 a5 15.i.hS 1 5 ... � e7! 378 379 379 379 380 38 1 382

A) 1 6.� ce3 B) 1 6.�xe7t ffxe7 Bl) 17.0-0 B2) 17.�b4 C) 1 6.� cb4 i.h3 17.�xe7t �xe7 Cl) 18.i.c6 C2) 1 8. � dS

B l ) after 20.l':le l

A) after 1 9 .c4

1 9 .f5 ! ..

20 . . �e7! .

C2) after 24.exd5

24 . . �b?!?N .

378

1 3 .a4

1.e4 c5 2.lll f3 lll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lll xd4 lll f6 5.lll c3 e5 6.lll db5 d6 7 ..ig5 a6 8.lll a3 b5 9.tll d5 .ie7 1 0 ..ixf6 .ixf6 1 1 .c3 0-0 12.lll c2 .ig5 13.a4 bxa4 14.gxa4 a5 15 ..ib5 This is one of the two main continuations available to White, albeit the more harmless. Although it develops with tempo, it fails to challenge control of d5. 8

A) 16.lll ce3 This should not bother Black in che slightest.

16 ....ixe3! 17.lll xe3 YNb6! A harmonious idea, tying up the white pieces. 1 8.YNd3 gbs 19.c4 Now the b5-bishop has been cut off from the kingside.

7 6

4 3

2 1

1 5 ... lll e?! Black immediately seizes the chance to challenge d5 himself. The three main lines for White are: A) 16.lll ce3, B) 16.lll xe?t and C) 16.lll cb4. 1 6.0-0?! could already be worse for White. 1 6 . . . tt'lxd5 l 7.Wxd5 .ie6 l 8 .Wd3 Wb6 l 9.tt'le3! ( 1 9.c4?! f5 20.tt'le3 fxe4 2 1 .�xe4 :§:a7 22.tt'ld5 Wc5-t} 19 ... i.xe3 20.fxe3 ib3 2 1 .:§:a3 a4t and Black has che initiative in view of his better pawn structure. Losing a tempo to get back in the fight for d5 by 1 6.ic4?! is hardly acceptable. After: 16 . . . %!b8! ( 1 6 ... .id7 1 7.%!a2 :§:c8 1 8 .�d3 tt'lxd5 1 9 .ixd5 a4= is a recommendation of Kolev and Nedev.} l 7.b4 ( l 7.:§:a2 tt'lxd5 1 8.ixd5 .ia6!+ looks fine for Black.) 17 . . . tt'lxd5 1 8 .ixd5 axb4 1 9.tt'lxb4 ( 1 9.cxb4 .id7 20.:§:a7 .ic6!+) 1 9 . . . .id7 20.%!a3 ib5+ It is evident that Black has taken over the initiative.

19 ... fS! 20.exfS 20.0-0 fx:e4 2 1 .�xe4 .�.f5! 22.tt'lxf5 tt'lxf5 23.�c6 tt'l d4 24.�xb6 %!xb6 25.%!xa5 %!fb8 26.%!d l @f7= and play will soon peter ouc co a draw. 20 ... lll xfS 2 1 .lll xfS .ixf5 22.We3 Seeking chances in an ending in view of the weakness of che a5-pawn. Black has at lease enough counterplay due to the activity of his pieces: 22 ....id3!? 22 ... d5 is possible, although 23 .�xb6 %!xb6 24.%!xa5 (24.b3 is also about equal) 24 . . . id3 transposes co 22 . . . i.d3 anyway. 23.'iNxb6 23.YNxd3 Wxf2t 24.@dl YNxg2 25.%!el Wg4t 26.�e2 Wd4t 27.�d2 Wg4t 28.�e2 Wd4t= 23 ... E:xb6 24.gxa5 d5 25.b3 e4! 26.h4

Chapter 33

379

l 5 .ib5

26.Ei:a2 dxc4 27.bxc4 iihS 28.Ei:a4 E\bf6 29.E\a2 E\b6=

played correspondence game provides further confirmation that Black stands fine:

26 ... :Bbf6 27.:Ba2 Ahl 2s.:aa1 28.Ei:b2 .id3 29.:i:!a2 ib l =

2 l .b4 i.b6 22.:Beal 22 . .ic6 !=facS 23.b5 f5 24.lll e3 fxe4 25 .ixe4 iihS! is excellent for Black, the point being 26 . .ixh7?? �h4-+.

28 ...i.d3= White has nothing better than to repeat. B) 1 6.tll xe7t V!fxe7 White has a choice between: Bl) 17.0-0 and B2) 17.tll b4.

22 ...V!fc7! 23.V!fd2 i.xc4! 24.i.xc4 V!fxc4 25.bxaS V!f c6! 26.h3 i.c5= 27.�d3 :Bfb8 28.a6 �a7 29.tll e3 �b2 30.�c4 g6 3l.�la2

Bl) 17.0-0 This way of trying to infiltrate via the light squares does not offer "White anything in particular.

l 7 V!fb7 1 8.Vlfd3 1 8.�e2 .ie6 1 9.c4 f5f± •.•

18 ...i.e6 1 9.c4 i.d8! 20.:Bel 20.'.Wxd6 '.Wxe4 2 l .ClJe3 (2 I ..ic6?? '.Wxc2 22.ixaS �xa4-+) 2 1 . . .Wd4 22.Wa3 .ib6 23.E\d l ic5 24.E\xd4 ixa3 25 .E\d2 ib4 26.:i:!d l E\fdS 27.E\aa l as in Smyslov - Sveshnikov, Leningrad 1 977, would have left Black with a slight edge after 27 . . . E\abS+.

A draw was agreed in Wilhelmi - Masarik, corr. 20 1 0 , as White has no way to make progress.

B2) l 7.tll b4

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

Apparently similar to the immediate 1 6.tlicb4, but the improved position of the queen on e7 presents us with a nuance that is rather favourable to Black:

20 ...V!fe7!= The dark-squared bishop will find a worthy position on b6. The following accurately

380

1 3 .a4

17 ...�c7! This is the point. The queen is heading towards c5, and at the same time vacates d8 for the g5bishop. 1 8.lll ds This looks most natural. After 1 8 .0-0 �b8! 1 9 .i.c6 ga7 20.li:ld3 (20.li:ld5? '1Wxb2 2 1 .gal i.e6 22.gb l '1Wa3+ is clearly pointless) it is evident that the knight has landed on an unnatural square and that Black is slightly better by playing the simple 20 . . . ie6+.

25 ...�xhS 26.�g4 ids 27.l!dl g6; Black has an extra pawn and will be able to exert some pressure, although White will probably hold. C) 16.lll cb4 This is perhaps the most testing continuation.

18 ...�cS!r 18 ... '1Wb7 is also playable, but the text is more aggressive and in keeping with Black's strategy. The following lines show how well the queen controls proceedings from her current vantage point: 19.�d.3 1 9.c4?! i.b7! 20.li:lc3?! f5+ 19 ... gbS!i' 1 9 . . . ie6 20.'1Wc4!00 20,gxaS 20.c4? f5+

16...ih3 And this is considered to be the best and most active reply. Another completely sound way of playing the position is provided by 1 6 . . . i.d?!?. One example continued: 1 7.li:lxe7t ixe7 1 8 .ixd7 axb4

Chapter 33

17.tll xe7t 1 7.gxh3!? axb4 1 8.llixb4 This has been rather underestimated. It seems that Black should react in the following way: l 8 . . . :!l:b8! The safest method to gain good play. Black is now at least equal. 1 9 .�d3 No better is 1 9.'\1;1fe2 �c8 20.�d3 ©h8t. Nor 1 9.c4 fS 20.exfS llixfS! 2 1 .llic6 �f6 22.�dSt (22.llixb8 lli d4-+) 22 . . . ©h8 23 .�f3 (23.llixb8 lli e3!-+; 23.:!l:a3 e4!+) 23 . . . !!be8�.

,,,,

s ,, . ,/,�f��·� ·Y,�· 7 ��.Y,� � � .%� 6 ��W' ..% . ; ��-. . � • E 4s �.,t� rm�� zr� . . .�� 3 �,�, -J;w��IB�B 8 � � &�� J � f&�- -- � �-� �-,, 8

381

1 5 .ib5

White must choose which minor piece to move, attacking a8 or e7: Cl) 18.ic6 or C2) 1 8.tildS. 1 8.gxh3 axb4 1 9.:!l:xb4 cannot be worse for Black after 1 9 . . . �e6�, 1 9 . . . �f4� or 1 9 . . . g6�.

Cl) 1 8.ic6 :gac8 19.:gxaS Perhaps White should consider 1 9.llidS �d8 20.gxh3 !!xc6 2 1 .�g400, but Black can combat the instalmenc of the knight on dS and the transfer of the king to g2 by a combination of the moves . . . g6, . . . !!cS, . . . ©h8 and an evencual . . . fS .

,,,,.

�

1 9 ...ixg2 20.ggl ih3 As played in several games, due to the exposed nature of the white king's position. At this poinc, clearly the best move for White is:

_____

1 9 . . . ©h8! 20.0-0 20.:!l:a6 fS 2 1 .!!xd6 �aS+ 20 . . . fS 2 1 .exfS e4! 22.�e2 dS� Black's conquest of the cencre gives him dangerous attacking chances against White's ruined kingside.

17...Wxe7

2 1 .�h5! 2 I .!!a6 is strongly met by 2 1 . . . �f6!t, incending 22.�hS �h4+. 2 1 .llidS '\1;1fd8 22.!!a6?! g6! (22 . . . i.h4!?) 23.b4 can be answered by 23 . . . Wh8 24.bS i.e6 25 .�f3 fS 26.�h3 ih4�.

382

1 3 .a4

22 ... g6 White should opt for the most natural move: 23.tll d5! 23.'>We3?! is a rather strange retreat. The queen was at least exerting some pressure on Black's position while on h6, and the manoeuvre 1Wd l h5-h6-e3 turns out to b e a waste o f time. After 23 . . . ie6 24.E:a7 1l{eff6! it becomes dear that White is worse due to the positioning of his king. Black eventually won in Korneev - Shirov, Pamplona 2006. 23.id5 ?! takes away the vital d5-square from the knight. If either 23 . . . �e6+ or 23 . . .1M/f6 24.1Mf e3 E:b8+ Black looks better.

23 ... V:Vds 24J3a6 ie6 A peculiar situation has arisen; White's king is weak but his queen ties down the enemy forces. The result is a balanced position. 25.©e2! Connecting the rooks. 25.b4? :1:lxc6! 26.:1:\xc6 ixd5 27.exd5 1M/f6-+ and 25.c4?! E:b8+ are weak.

26.b4 V:VcS! 27.b5 ixd5! 28.exd5!? 28.ixd5 E:xb5 is a draw, e.g. 29.E:xg6t (29 .:1:la8 E!:b2t 30.©d l 1Mfxa8 3 1 .E!:xg6t hxg6 32.1Mlxg6t @h8 33 .1Mlh6t @g8 34.'&g6t @h8 35 .1Mlh6t=) 29 ... hxg6 30.'&xg6t @h8 3 1 .'&h6t @g8=. 28 ...idS! 29.V:Ve3 V:Vf5 30.©fl 30.E!:gal e4 3 1 .@fl ib6!?= 30 Jhb5! 3 1 .ixb5 'IWbl t 32.©g2 V:Vxb5 33.�gal \Wxd5t? If anyone can be better it is Black. .•

C2) 1 8.tll d5 '1Wb7 19.ic4 Suspect is: 1 9.gxh3?! 1Wxb5 20.E!:gl !d8! 2 1 .b3 (2 l .c4?! 1l{ifxb2+ Gouliev - Cheparinov, Linares 2002, or 2 1 .b4 :1:\a6!+) 2 1 . . .Ei:b8 22.b4 @h8t 1 9 .'&d3?! ie6 20.0-0 ixd5 2 1 .exd5 ?! (2 1 .'&xd5 '&xd5 22.exd5 E:ab8+) 2 l . . .E!:ab8 22.E!:xa5 id8 23 .�c6 V:Vxb2t Lujan - Spassov, Santa Cruz de la Palma 2005. 1 9.c4 ie6=

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

1 9 ...id7! 1 9 . . . ie6 20.b3;!;

20J3a2 An important moment. Most exact is now: 20 ... �fcS!

Chapter 33

20 . . . a4 has been more popular, but after 2 1 .0-0 I am not convinced that Black can equalize due to his weak a-pawn.

2 1 .'?Ne2 2 1 .Wd3 Wc6 22.b3 a4 23.0-0 axb3 24.ixb3 l'!xa2 25 .ixa2 ie6= 2 1 ...'?Nc6 22.i.d3 i.e6 23.0-0 i.xd5 24.exdS

After 24 . . . Wxd5 25.l'!fal White quickly regained his pawn in Sarcinelli - J. Jordan, Internet 20 1 1 , although a draw was soon agreed.

25.gdl i.d8! 26.i.bS '?Nb6 27.i.d7 E:cb8 28.i.c6 E:a7 29.E:d2=

383

1 5 .ibS

The position is level but there is still lots of play, especially if Black can establish his bishop on the a7-g 1 diagonal.

Conclusion

This chapter introduced one of White's most popular 1 5th move attempts in 1 5 .ib5 , although I believe Black holds excellent chances. The continuation 1 5 . . . lll e7 serves Black well by immediately challenging the d5-square, a strategy which has been a common theme throughout our exploration of the Sveshnikov. Reinforcing the d5-knight by 1 6 .lll ce3 leaves Black with nothing to fear. 1 6 . . . ixe3! 1 7.lll xe3 Wb6! is my suggestion, leaving Black's pieces well-placed. A subsequent opening of the f-file with . . . f5 will afford Black even more space, and though White maintains equality it can hardly be considered a critical test. Exchanging the knight on e7 followed by castling offers White litcle, and I presented a correspondence game to prove this point. After 1 6 .lll xe7t Wxe7 17.lll b4, Black players should note the excellent resource l 7 . . . Wc7!. The queen is heading for c5, and her control on the queenside gives Black a pleasant edge. 1 6.lll cb4 is the most critical try for White, when my main line continues l 6 . . . ih3 l 7.lll xe7t Wxe7. The positions which arise after 1 8 .ic6 l'!ac8 1 9.l'!xa5 are often highly imbalanced, with White's active queen roaming the board while his king is vulnerable in the centre. I am satisfied with Black's chances here, and my analysis shows that he should be at least equal. After the variation 1 8 .lll d5 Wb7 1 9.ic4 id7! 20.l'!a2 l'!fc8! 2 1 .We2 Wc6 22.i.d3 .ie6 23.0-0 ixd5 24.exd5, I gave the interesting move 24 . . . Wb7!?N. The ensuing positions are level, but there are plenty of opportunities for Black to press.

1 5.ic4 a

16th Move Alternatives Variation Index 1 .e4 c5 2.lll f3 lll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lll xd4 lll f6 5.lll c3 e5 6.lll db5 d6 7 ..ig5 a6 8.lll a3 b5 9.ltld5 .ie7 l O ..ixf6 .ixf6 1 1 .c3 0-0 12.lll c2 .ig5 13.a4 bxa4 14.B:xa4 a5 1 5 .ic4 •

1 5 ... B:b8 A) 1 6.b4 B) 1 6.�al q 16.B:a2 Wh8! Cl) 17.h4 C2) 17.b4 C3) 17.0-0 f5 1 8.exfS .ixfS C3 1) 1 9.�e2!? C32) 1 9.lll ce3 .ig6 C32 1) 20.�a4 C322) 20.f3 C4) 17.lll ce3!? .ixe3! 18.lll xe3 lll e7 C41 ) 1 9.b3!? C42) 1 9.0-0 f5 20.exfS lll xfS C42 1 ) 2 1 .lll xfS!? C422) 2 1 .lll d5

385 386 388 388 388 389 389 390 39 1 39 1 392 392 394 394 395

Chapter 34

1 6th Move Alternatives

l .e4 cS 2.lll f3 lll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lll xd4 lll f6 S.lll c3 eS 6.lll dbS d6 7.i.gS a6 8.lll a3 bS 9.lll dS i.e7 10.i.xf6 i.xf6 l l.c3 0-0 12.lll c2 i.gS 1 3.a4 bxa4 14.laxa4 aS 15.J,c4 The most critical continuation, intensifying control over d5. Black should now refrain from challenging d5 and concentrate instead on carrying out . . . f5 , an advance that would allow his bishops freedom of action. Black's strategy can be described by the expression "playing around the d5-knight" , rather than playing to exchange it.

385

2 1 .i.d3 ie6! (2 1 . . .e4!? 22 . .ie2 liJ c6 23.Ei:a6 \We800) 22.liJ cb4 :1l:c8 23.ie4 (23.\Wh5 i.h6 24.\We2 Ei:c5 25.c4 \Wh4�) 23 . . . liJ c4 24.Ei:a2 ih6! 25.Wf d3 Wh4! 26.f3 ig5 27.We2 Wh6= was equal in J. Polgar - Lautier, Dos Hermanas 1 995.

1 5 ... i:l:bS Black attacks the b2-pawn and leaves White with four options, three of which make up our current chapter: A) 1 6.b4, B) 1 6.Wfal and C) 16.i:l:a2. 1 6.b3 is examined in Chapters 3 5-37.

A) 1 6.b4 This advance is premature and should lead to liquidations and an easy draw.

1 6 ...i.d7! 17.laal 1 7.Ei'.a2 axb4 1 8 .cxb4 liJe7 1 9.0-0 liJxd5 20 . .ixd5 \Wc8 (20 . . . 'it>h8!?} 2 1 .\Wh5? (2 1 .\Wf3=) 2 1 . . .id2!+ was better for Black in Quparadze Nigalidze, Poti 20 1 1 . The rook is rather displaced on a3 : l 7.Ei'.a3 'it>h8! Black should not exchange on b4 too early. 1 8.0-0 f5 1 9.exf5 ixf5 20.bxa5 (20.id3 ie6 2 1 .ie4 ixd5 22.ixd5 axb4 23.Ei:a4=) 20 . . . liJxa5

18.0-0 f5 19.exfS 1 9.f3 yields easy equality after 1 9 . . . axb4! 20.liJcxb4 (20.cxb4 liJ e7�) 20 . . . fxe4 2 l .fxe4 Ei:xfl t 22.i.xfl (22.\Wxfl liJa5 23.ia2 (23.id3 liJb3) 23 . . . ib5�) 22 . . . liJe7=. 19 ...i.xfS 20.Wfe2!?N The engines initially like 20.b5?! M. Atanasov - Ilchov, Sunny Beach 2008, but after 20 . . . liJa7+, intending 2 1 .l"l:b l liJ c8! followed by . . . liJ b6, only Black can be better. The passed a-pawn is a useful trump. 20.i.d3!?N is worthwhile: 20 . . . ie6! 2 1 ..ie4 axb4 22.liJcxb4 liJxb4 23.liJxb4 l''k 8 24.Ei:a6 Ei'.xc3 25.:1l:xd6 Wf e8 26.\Wa l (26.liJd3 ic4 27.\Wa l l"l:b3=) 26 . . . l"l:c4! 27.\Wxe5 i.f4 28.\Wxe6 l"l:xb4 29 .Wxe8 l"l:xe8 30 . .ic6 ixd6 3 1 .ixe8 ic5=

20 ...i.xc2! Now the draw is unavoidable.

21 .bS! lll e7!? 2 1 . . .liJ a7 22.Wxc2 liJxb5 23 .id3 g6 24.g3�/=

386

1 5 .ic4

22.lll xe7 fixe7 22 . . . ixe7 23 .°Wxc2 °Wb6= 23.fixc2 e4 24.:Sael :Sbe8 24 . . . e3 25.fxe3 ixe3t 26.Wh l l"lxfl t 27.ixfl 1Wf6 28.id3 l"lf8 29.'.Wb l Wfh6=

17 ...g6! Although the computers do not initially appreciate chis move, it is best.

25.g3 f!e5= B) 16.fial Defending the b2-pawn while pressuring the a5pawn. Nevertheless, the move makes a strange impression as removing the queen from the centre and kingside cannot normally be good.

1 6 ... �h8 The most flexible and logical continuation, intending . . . f5 .

8 �� j_� �� .. . , v.B , ,,,/B.iv.•i =� �·0 � �,,, , /,%j�'0 jjjj �� -0"� �%@ � -ltJr� m 4 "iulu·�/u ., , �� 3 � �� 0/,� ef ""v.%@ �tW.-� � [3J �� 2 �t�·�l;tj1 •,, , /,u�m,, , /,•:t /, ' "

/''/ J'/,

�--;:,,

" 'l.

6 s

·0

20.°Wa3 was Schild - Kausch, corr. 2009, and here I would have definitely preferred to play the dynamic 20 . . . e4. 20 . . . e4 2 1 .ifl 'Wes 22.l"ld2 .if7+ The black bishops are dominating the white knights.

17.lll ce3!? 1 7.0-0 f5 ! 1 8 .exf5 ixf5 Black seems co already be better. l 9.ctJce3 ig6! 1 9 . . . ie4!? 20.ie2 ixe3 2 1 .l"lxe4! ic5= is also excellent, but it is not better for Black. 20.l"ldl 20.°Wa2 °Wd7+ was agreed drawn in Almarza Maco - McClain, corr. 2009, just at the moment it was getting interesting for Black. He could consider . . . e4 on the next move, playing for the attack.

18.0-0 White muse cascle. 1 8.h4? ixh4 1 9 .g3 ig5+ leaves White without serious compensation for che pawn as his queen is far away from che kingside and he has not even played b2-b3, the usual prelude to the manoeuvre l"la2, f2-f4, l"lh2.

1 8 ... fS 1 9.i.d3!? Defending e4 and preparing to attack a5. The alternative 1 9.exf5 gxf5 20.l"ld l prepares co pile up on d6, but gives Black a mobile centre and an open g-file. After 20 . . . f4 2 1 .ctJfl e4 (2 1 . . .'1:!le8!?-t or 2 1 . . .l"lg8!?-t are good alternatives) 22.ctJd2 e3 23.ctJf3 (23 .fxe3 fxe3 24.tll e4 if5 25 .ie2 ixe4 26.l"lxe4 l"lf2+) 23 . . . ig4 24.ie2 ixf3 25.ixf3 ctJe5-+ all the black pieces are superbly placed and the white king is in peril.

Chapter 34

1 6th Move Alternatives

19 ...ih6!?N Making spatial inroads for the black queen. Black intends to keep the a5-pawn under observation by not committing che queen to d7 too early. 1 9 . . . ie600 is perfectly viable after: 20. tLl c4 '1Wd7 2 1 .tll xa5 ixd5 22.exd5 tll e 7!? (22 . . . tll xa5 23.Ei:xa5 e4 24.ie2 if4± gives Black some compensation but ic is noc clear whether chis is enough.) 23.c4 (23.tll c4 e4�) 23 . . . if6 24.Ei:a2 e4 Black had strong counterplay for the sacrificed pawn in Tenev - Kadaoui Hachi, email 2008.

20,:gdl After 20.tll c4, 20 . . . fxe4!? 2 1 .ixe4 ia6! is a peculiar tactical resource. Rybka considers 22.g3!? (22.'1Wa2 ib5 23.Ei:a3 '1Wh4!+) 22 . . . ib5 23.b3 ixa4 24.'1Wxa4 tll e7 25.tll xa5 lll x d5 26.ixd5 '1Wb6 and White has j ust about enough compensation for che exchange.

387

2 1 ...fxe4! Also possible is 2 1 . . .'1Wh4!? but the main line is stronger. 22.ixe4 :gxf2! 23.lll xa5 White is in poor shape after 23.ii>xf2 '1Wh4t 24.ii>gl Wxe4 25.lll xd6 '1Wc2!+. 23 ... lll xa5 24.©xf2 lll b3 25.�h l lll d2! An accurate shot. Afcer 25 . . . ixd5?! 26.ixd5 '1Wb6t 27.ii>g3 '1We3t 28.if3 ll'l d2+ Black is only slightly better.

26.Wc2 26.Ei:xd2 i.xd2 27.1Mfd3 l'!xb2 (27 . . . Wh4t 28.1Mlg3 1Mlh6 29.ii>gl i.xd5 30.i.xd5 i.f4 3 1 .1Mlh3 Wxh3 32.gxh3 Ei:b5+) 28.ii>gl !e l + is hardly an improvement.

20 ...ie6 2 1 .lll c4? The most principled course. However, ic is mec wich a nice caccical refutation. The correct 2 l .ic2! should be met by 2 1 . . .fxe4 22.ixe4 tll e7! . For example: 23.Ei:xa5 (23.tll c4? ixd5! 24.i.xd5 '1Wc7+ or 23.'1Wa3 tll xd5 24.tll xd5 ixd5 25 .i.xd5 '1Wb6 26.if3 d5! 27.Ei:xd5 ie3!+!) 23 . . . tll x d5 24.tll xd5 (24.ixd5 '1Wh4+!) 24 ... '\Wh4!? (24 ... Ei:xb2=) 25.f3 ixd5 26.Ei:axd5 ie3t 27.ii>hl if4 28.g3 ixg3+! Black is at lease equal.

29 ... Wg5t 30.iih3 e4! 3 1 .ixe4 3 1 .Ei:xd2 Wf5t-+ 3 1 ...lll xe4 32.'\!;Ve2 32.Ei:xe4 1Mlf5t 33.ii>g3 if4t 34.ii>f2 Ei:xb2-+ 32.1Mfxe4 �h5t-+ 32 ... d5--+ a

388

1 5 .i,c4

Black has a material advantage and a strong attack, two faces which give White only slim survival chances.

C) 1 6.:1!a2 This move looks more passive than 1 6.b3, but on the other hand it reserves more options: it leaves open che possibility of advancing b2-b4 in one go, it avoids putting the pawn on b3 where it might prove more exposed, and it keeps the d l a4 avenue open fo r the white queen.

This move can hardly be a nuisance for Black as the pawn will be en prise lacer on. Play will now transpose co a previous chapter:

17 ...�h6 18.tll ce3 The only move cried in practice. 1 8 .g4?! if4+ looks weakening for White. 1 8 .Vff e 2!? sets a crap chat a Sveshnikov novice might easily fall into. 1 8 . . . 'Ll e7! (not 1 8 . . .f5 ? 1 9.exf5 ixf5 20.g4! ixc2 2 1 .Vffxc2 if4 22.'\We4±) 1 9.'Llce3 ib7! 20.'Llxe7 ixe3! 2 1 .'Lld5 ic5 22.g4 ic8 23.b3 ie600 gives an unclear position where chances seem roughly balanced. 8

7 6 5

3 2 1

Playing an immediate l 7.vtf e2 actually allows Black co carry out . . .f5 (in contrast to 1 8.Vff e2!? in line C l below) . The point is chat after 1 7 . . . f5 1 8 .h4 ( 1 8.exf5 ixf5 1 9.0-0 is examined under the 1 6.l"\a2 Wh8 1 7.0-0 f5 1 8.exf5 ixf5 1 9 .Vff e2 move order) Black has, amongst others, 1 8 . . . ic l !?+. This is how play might continue in chat case: 1 9.b3 ( 1 9.0-0 ih6! 20.exf5 Vffxh4 2 1 .ib5 id7-t) 1 9 . . . fxe4 20.vtfxe4 if5 2 1 .'\We2 ie6t

18 ...�xe3 19.tll xe3 tll e7 This position is level and has already been examined under 1 5 .h4 ih6 1 6.'Llce3 l"\b8 1 7.l"1a2 ixe3 1 8 .'Llxe3 'Ll e7 1 9.ic4 iih8, which amounts to a direct transposition. See variation C l of Chapter 32, note on 1 7.l"\a2, on page 372, for further analysis. C2) 17.b4 This move has only been played in che game Van Riemsdijk - Matsuura, Sao Paolo 2006. It offers White nothing, and he must be careful to maintain the balance.

Cl) 17.h4 17... fS!

Chapter 34

1 6th Move Alternatives

389

l 7 ... axb4 1 8 .lll cxb4 i.b7 1 9.0-0 lll xb4 20.cxb4 i.xd5 2 1 .i.xdS Elxb4= was dead level in the aforementioned game.

1 9.b3 '1Wd7 is analysed in variation C of Chapter 36, under the move order 1 6.b3 @h8 1 7.0-0. 1 9 . . . i.g6!? is also perfectly playable.

C3 1) 19.'1We2!? More flexible, but it doesn't offer any advantage.

1 8 ... fxe4 19.'1We2 Black has an extra pawn, but the d6, e5 and e4 cluster takes away important squares from his pieces. 19 ... axb4 20.lll cxb4 lll xb4 2 1 .cxb4 �b7 Nothing much changes after 2 1 . . .e3!? 22.fXe3 Elxfl t 23.\Wxfl i.e6=.

22.'1Wxe4 �U4 23.'1We2 i.xd5 23 . . . Eld4 24.Eld l Elxd l t 25 .\Wxd l Elc8 26.Elc2± is not a good winning try. 24.hd5 :!'!fxb4 25.g3= Black's advantage is rather symbolic. C3) 17.0-0 This move is considered to give Black more freedom of action than l 7.lll ce3.

17 ... £5 1 8.exf5 i.xf5

19 ...'1Wd7! White now has the following choice: 20.b3 A logical move, but it grants Black some time. 20.Eldl e4 2 1 .lll de3 is best met by 2 1 . . .i.g6! 22.lll d4 (22.\Wg4?! iWdS) 22 . . . lll eS! when Black initiates tactics. For example, 23.tll e6

390

1 5 .ic4

23 . . . l"1xf2!! 24.Wi'xf2 (24.iixf2 i.xe3t 2 5 .iixe3 ih5! 26.Wi'xh5 lll xc4t 27.iif2 1Mfxe6 28 .Wi'e2 d5 29.iigl h6�) 24 . . .i.xe3 25 .1Mfxe3 lll xc4 26.Wi'h3 i.f7! 27.lll g 5 Wi'a7t 28.iih l ig8 and it is clear that Black enjoys fantastic compensation for the exchange. Perhaps White should take the draw in the way the engines indicate: 29.b3! (29.lll xe4? lll xb2+) 29 . . . l"1xb3 30.l"1e2 e3 3 1 .lll xh7 ixh7 32.1Mi'c8t i.g8 33.'!Wh3t= 20.tt:lce3 Posing Black a dilemma that is most clearly dealt with by: 20 . . . ie6! Indeed, this transposes to 20.b3: 2 1 .l"1d l Another way to transpose is 2 1 .b3 e4 22.l"1d l . 2 1 .f3?! is not a good idea in view of 2 1 . . .a4! 22.l"1xa4 lll d4 23.'!Wd l lll b3! 24.:1'1a2 ixd5 25.lll x d5 lll d2+. 2 1 .l"1aal requires investigation. 2 1 . . .e4 2 l . . .1Mi'f7!? may also be good, e.g. 22.f3 (22.g3?! e4 23.h4? Borkowski - Czerniawski, Wroclaw 20 1 1 , 23 . . . lll e5! 24.hxg5 lll f3t 25 .iig2 ih3t!!-+) 22 . . . e4! 23.fxe4 lll e5�. 22.b3 See 20.b3 i.e6 2 1 .lll ce3 e4! 22.l"1d 1 below (22.ib5?? ixe3-+) .

2 1 ...e4!N 22.l:!dl Wff7! 23.lll fl a4! 24.l:!xa4 24.b4 .if6� 24 lLi eS 25.lLife3 he3 26.Wfxe3 lLig4 Black's pressure yields a clear draw: •••

27.Wfd4 27.'1Wg3 lll xf2 28.l"1fl ixd5 29.l"1xf2 '1We6 30.l"1a7 l"1g8 3 l .ixd5 Wxd5 32.b4 l"1a8= 27 ....ixdS 28.ixdS Wff4 29.g3 Wfh6 30.h4 lLixfl 3 1 .�fl lLi h3t 32.@g2 l:!xfl 33.@xfl Wfcl t 33 . . . 1Mi'g6 34.Wxe4 Wxg3 3 5 .Wf5 Wgl t 36.iie2 1Mfh2t 37.iiel lll g l 38 .Wfe400 34.@g2 l::U8 35.i.f7 e3! 36.Wfxd6 Wfgl t 37.@xh3 Wfl t 38.©g4 Wfe2t 39.@h3= C32) 19.lLice3 This is a common move in practice, in order to free the queen's path to a4.

1 9 ....ig6

20 ....ie6 2 1 .lLi ce3 Lastin - Voitsekhovsky, Tula 200 1 . The immediate 2 1 .:1'1dl allows 2 1 . . .ig4 22.f3 i.h5 , e.g. 23.l"1e l ?! e4! 24.'1Wxe4 l"1be8 25 .Wi'd3 lll e5--+.

White can bring the queen out immediately with: C321) 20.Wa4 or instead play C322) 20.£3. 20.Wi'e2 e4!� is fine for Black, as has been shown in a few games.

Chapter 34

391

1 6th Move Alternatives

C321) 20.'Wa4 'Wc8! I believe that this gives Black good play. For example:

2 1 .:ad1 Principled. 2 1 .b4 was Papadopoulos - Kolev, Kavala 2007. Play is completely equal after: 2 1 . . .axb4 22.ia6! (22.cxb4 ixe3 23.fxe3 gxfl t 24.ixfl if7 25 .gd2 ixd5 26.:B:xd5 tll xb4+) 22 . . . Wi'd7 23.ib5 (23.tll xb4 ie8 24.ib5 Wi'f7!) 23 . . . ie8 24.tll xb4 Wi'f7! 2 5 .tll bd5 Wi'b7= 2 l .ib5 ie8! 22.Wfc4 (22.tll c4 gxb5!) can be met either by 22 . . . tll b4!? or 22 . . . Wfb7. The solid 2 l .ie2 does not threaten Black. After 2 1 . . .ixe3 22.fxe3!?N (22.tll xe3 gf4 23.Wi'a3 if7 24.gaa l d5+ Forchert - Bobras, Bad Wiessee 2005.) 22 . . . gxfl t 23.ixfl Black has a few playable moves, the most forcing being:

7 6 5 4 3 2 8

26.tlide3 26.ie2 Wi'h4 27.tll g3 (27.g3 Wi'h3) 27 . . . tll g4! 28.h3 tll e3!� 26 ...he3 27.tlixe3 tlif3t! 28.�hl �f4! Creating tension that proved too much for White to cope with in Socko - Krasenkow, Plock 2000. C322) 20.f3

8 7 6

5 4 3 2 1 a

20 ...�d7! 21.tlig4!? A logical follow-up to White's previous move. The intention is to have strong control over the important d5- and e4-squares after a subsequent tll f2.

23 . . . ib l !? 24.gal l:hb2 25 .Wi'a3 :B:d2! White has no more than equality.

2 1 . .. e4! 22.b3 if7 22 . . . id8!?N 23.�a3 �d7 24.tlifl!? 24.Wfa4!? Wi'b7 25 .Wi'a3= 24... tli e5!? 25.'Wxa5 �g4;!; This yields excellent compensation for a pawn. One possible continuation was:

2 1 .b3 Wi'a7 22.Wi'e l if7 23 .Wff2 was Aseev Eljanov, St Petersburg 2000. The right idea now is 23 . . . ig8!f!, when after 24 . . . e4 25.f4 tll e5 Black is exploiting rhe position of the whire queen on f2.

2 1 ...tlie7 Whire has removed a piece from the control of d5, and so Black should challenge the square immediately. 22.tlif2 22.gxa5 ? gxb2+ 22 ... tlixd5 23.ixd5

392

1 5 .ic4

White plans lll e 4, but it is not clear whether Black has to trade that knight. I think the following idea is worthwhile:

1 8.h4! ixh4 1 9.g3 ig5!? ( 1 9 . . . i.f6 20.b3! i.g7 2 1 .f4 exf4 22.gxf4 !'le8 23.'1Wf3 'it>g8 24.!'lah2 h5!? 25 .Wfg2!±) 20.f4! exf4 2 1 .gxf4 ih4t 22.'it>fl f5 23.b4! fxe4 24.E!:ah2 g5 25 .'it>e2! !'lf7

23 ...ie3 24.@hl

24 ... i.xf2?! 25 .!'lxf2 '&b5 26.!'la l e4 27.!'le2 (27.'&d4 e3! 28.ic4 '&e5 29.'&xe5 dxe5 30.!'le2 e4 3 l .fxe4 !'lf2 32.!'lxe3 !'lbxb2 33 .h3 !'lxg2 34.!'lxa5 !'lh2t 35 .'it>gl !'lbg2t 36.@fl h5 37.i.e2 i.£7;:;) 27 . . . exf3 28.i.xf3;!; was slightly better for White in Alekseev - Radjabov, Halkidiki 2002.

25.lll e4 id4! 26.c4 Wfb4 27.Wfc2 h6 28.E:bl ie8!= Both sides have impressively placed pieces and a status quo has arisen. C4) 17.lLice3!? This move has a reputation for leading to barren, drawish positions.

17 ixe3! Black should opt for this safe equalizing method. ••.

Unfortunately, the double-edged alternative l 7 . . . g6?! falls short to an almost forced line:

26.b5! '1Wf8 27.bxc6 !'lb2t 28.'it>fl !'lxf4t (28 .. J!xh2 29.!'lxh2 ilg3 30.'1Wd4t '&g7 3 1 .!'lh5 gxf4 32.lll g2±) 29.'it>gl if2t (29 ... !'lff2 30.'&d4t '1Wg7 3 l .'1Wxe4 '&e5 32.'l.Wxe5t dxe5 33.lll d l !'lxh2 34.fi:xh2±) 30.!'lxf2 !'lfxf2 3 l .'1Wd4 t Wig? 32.'1Wxe4 !'lf7 33.i.d3!± According to the database this first occurred in Van der Hoeven - Glazman, corr. 2005 , and has since resulted in many more painful defeats for Black, who is helpless against accurate play in the long run. Needless to say, I spent endless hours trying to make the whole line work and examining all possible deviations for Black, but the result was disappointing. Thus we have to restrict ourselves to the modest text move.

1 8.lLixe3 lLi e7 Kolev comments that any exchange of minor pieces brings Black closer to a draw in this structure and it is hard to disagree. White should strive to avoid exchanging too many pieces in order to exploit his slightly superior pawn skeleton, as the draw should be trivial for Black with only heavy artillery remaining on the board. White's options here are C41) 19.b3!? and C42) 19.0-0. C41) 19.b3!? An attempt to keep all four minor pieces on the board.

Chapter 34

1 6th Move Alternatives

393

23 .. Jk5! I think this is most consistent, keeping the knight on f5 for the time being and reducing the activity of the white queen. Instead, 23 . . . tt'lh4 24.Eld l Elc5 (24 . . . h6?! 25.\Wg3 ctJf5 26.\Wg4 Elc5 occurred in Karjakin - Topalov, Wijk aan Zee 2006, and here White could have obtained a slight plus by means of 27.b4!) 25 .'.Wg3! gives Black something to worry about as the relocation of the white queen contains Black's kingside counterplay. The best answer is 25 . . . tt'l f5 26.\Wg4! tt'l e7! when Black should eventually draw, although he still has to play accurately to neutralize White's pressure.

21. ..�h7 22.0-0 gcs A good idea, keeping up the pressure. The rook can often go to the excellent c5-square. The immediate 22 . . . tt'l h4!? transposes to variation C422 below and is also perfectly feasible.

23.Wd.3 Preparing to attack the a-pawn and safe guarding the c4-bishop against any . . . a4 ideas. 23 .\Wd2 Elc5 is also fine for Black. After 24.Eld l tt'lh4 25 .<;t>h l = a draw was agreed in Noble Kubicki, corr. 20 1 0.

24.Eld l ! ? was Kudrin - D. Fernandez, San Diego 2006, when Black has a pleasant choice berween 24 . . . \Wg500 or 24 . . . \Wc8!?00•

24...Ld5!? This is by no means forced but is an acceptable way of continuing nevertheless. 25.Ld5 tli e7 26.�f'3 d5 27.b4 axb4 27 . . . Elc4!?

28.cxb4 gc4!+± Black seems to have good counterplay based on a kingside attack. He can gain space by . . . e4 and perhaps utilize the manoeuvre . . . tt'l e7-g6-f4 to mount some pressure against the enemy king, especially if White fails to annoy him quickly with a push of the b-pawn. Still, this position requires some further investigation.

6 5

4 3

2 1

24.h3!? 24.b4 axb4 25.cxb4 is a direct attempt to create a passed pawn. After 25 . . . Elc8 26.ia6 Ela8 27.Elfal ic6 28.b5 ixd5 29.\Wxd5 '.Wb6 30.h3 Elab8+ a draw was agreed in Ruggeri Laderchi Forrisdahl, corr. 2009. Black should have slightly the better of it in the final position as the a6bishop is cut off from play.

29.Wd2!? a

1 5 .ic4

394

Not the only move here, but it allows me to demonstrate a possible simplification:

22.i.dS!? Initially I liked this move for White, but then I realized there are no real chances for an advantage.

30 Wd6 3 I .b5 c!lif5 32.Wa3 Wxa3 33.:Sxa3 :Sb4 34.hd5 :Sxb5= White only has a nominal bishop vs knight advantage, and this can hardly be exploited due to the reduced material on the board. .â&#x20AC;˘.

C42) 19.0-0 f5 20.exf5 c!lixf5 Black is ready to carry out more exchanges and White has the difficult task of avoiding them while at the same time freeing himself from the burden of protecting his b-pawn. It seems that White's tasks can hardly be accomplished. His attempts come in the form of: C421) 2 1 .c!Llxf5!? and C422} 2 1 .c!Lld5.

C42 1) 2 1 .c!Llxf5!? .ixf5 Black is ready to carry out the manoeuvre . . . if5g6-f7, exchanging the light-squared bishop and heading towards a draw. None of the options available to White promise anything:

22.b3 ie4! 23.id5 23.Eld2 Wg5 ! 24.g3 (24.f3? Elxf3!+) 24 . . . if3 25 .ie2 ixe2 26.l'!xe2 \Wd8 27.Eld2 Elf6 28 .l'!d5 \Wb6= also leads to plain equality. 23 . . . ixd5 24.\Wxd5 \Wc7! The pawn weaknesses on the opposite camps balance each other: 25.l'!xa5 25.l'!cl \Wb6= 25.c4 h6 26.h3 (26.l'!a3 l:!f4!=) 26 . . . l'!xb3 27.c5 l:!b5 28.cxd6 Elxd5 29.dxc7 l:!c5 30.Elfal Elxc7 3 l .Elxa5 Elc2 32.f3 l:!b8=

Chapter 34

395

1 6th Move Alternatives

36.'<.Wxa8t �h7 37.'<.Wd5 1Wf6= There was nothing left to play for in Carlsen Van Wely, Schagen 2006.

22 ... Wfb6!? The best choice, although Black must still exert some care. 22 . . . ig6, going for an immediate . . . if7, should lead to equality as well.

23.b3 After 23.'<.Wd2 a4!? Black threatens to post his bishop on d7 and a rook on f6, practically forcing the following trade of pawns: 24.:gxa4 1.Wxb2 25 .1.Wxb2 :gxb2 26.:gfal h5!?= Black is safe as his kingside structure looks impenetrable. 23 ... �f6! 24.Wfd2 �e6 25.�xe6 �xe6 26.�b lN 26.:ga3 e4 27.'<.We3 �g8 Y2-Y2 Plomp - Nickel, email 2007.

C422) 2 1 .lLidS A suggestion of Kolev and Nedev. 8

6 5

4 3

21. .. lL! h4! I like this dynamic possibility here. After a thorough investigation I couldn't find the slightest edge for White. 2 1 . . .llJ e? exchanges the knights on White's terms. White can preserve a microscopic edge, although Black can hold with accurate play. 22.lll xe? (22.b3!? lll xd5 23 .ixd5 ib7=/;!;) 22 . . . 1.Wxe? 23.b3! '.We? 24.1Wd2! id?! 25 .id5 ic6, and now most accurate is 26.c4!?. Black cannot easily trade queens and all the major pieces stay on the board: 26 . . . l"lxb3 27.l"lxa5 ! h6 28.h3 ixd5 29.l"lxd5 '<.Wxc4 30.l"lxd6 :gc3=/;l; Although the position is objectively equal, the likelihood of Black blundering here is larger than in previous lines.

22.b3 22.lll e3 can be met by 22 . . . lll f5 !?=, simply repeating. 27 ...Wfxe3 28.fxe3 l:'!e5 29.b4 29.c4 �g8= 29 ... l:!ebS 30.gd2 axb4 3 1 .gxb4 l:!xb4 32.cxb4 �xb4 33.�xd6 @gs 34.�d4 l:!xd4 35.exd4 @f7 36.@fl ©e6 37.©e2 @d6=

22.�h l ? is a blunder on account of 22 . . . 1.Wg5!+, intending 23.lll e 3 ib7 24.id5 ixd5 25 .1Wxd5 Wxe3-+. 22.f4 is risky after 22 ... ie6!�, with the idea 23.fxe5?! Wg5 24.b3 dxe5t.

396

1 5 .ic4

22.f3 ie6! 23.b3 tt:lg6 is fine for Black, who has arranged his pieces most harmoniously. 22.°Wd3 is met most concretely by 22 . . . Ei:f3!. After this move White does best to take a draw with 23.tll e3 (23.°Wd2? allows the stunning 23 . . . ih3!! 24.gxh3 E!f4!! 25.Whl [25 .°Wd3 ? lll f3t 26.Wh l 'Wh4-+] 25 . . . E!xc4+) 23 . . . ih3! 24.gxf3 'Wg5t 25.tll g4 ixfl 26.Wxfl 'Wc l t 27.We2 tll g6 28 .'Wd2 tt:l f4t 29.We3 lll g 2t 30.We2 tt:l f4t=.

25 . . . Ei:c5! This multipurpose move frees the black queen for action. 26.'Wd2 26.tt:l e3 lll f4 27.Ei:d2 'Wg5 28.E!xd6 e4t 26.i'!d2 a4 27.tll e3 'Wh4! 28.Ei:xd6 axb3 29.ixb3 Ei:xc3?

22 ...ib? This is the same set-up Topalov used in his game against Karjakin, featured in line C4 l above.

26 . . . 'WcS! 27.E!eal 27.lll b 6 'Wd8= 27 . . . �xd5 28 .�xd5 tt:l f4 29.ic4 d5 30.ifl E!xc3 3 l .ic4 d4!00 Black has a good game.

23 ... :gf3! 24.Wfd2 Sferle - Kainz, corr. 2007.

23.f3!?N Ir is natural to block the radius of the b7bishop. 23 . . . lll g6 24.©h l 24.E!e l lll f4 25.lll xf4 E!xf4 26.i'!d2 'Wb6t 27.©h l E!f6= 24 . . . E!cS Ir seems Black stands well here: 25 .E!e l There is no advantage after other replies either. 25 .°Wa l E!c5 26.E!d l Ei:e8? 25 .°Wd2 e4 26.f4 tt:l e7? (26 . . . Ei:c5?) 25.Ei:d2 a4=

Chapter 34

1 6th Move Alternatives

397

Conclusion After the popular continuation of 1 3.a4 bxa4 1 4.l"1xa4 a5, White's most important option is 1 5 .ic4, when the standard reply of 1 5 . . . l"1b8 forces White to react to the attack on the b2pawn. Apart from the main line of 1 6.b3, which is the subject of the remainder of the book, White has three main alternatives for which we must be ready.

An interesting posmon requiring deeper analysis; Black's best choice seems to be:

29 ...Wd3!? After 29 ... lll xf3 30.iWg2 e4 3 1 .c4!;!; there are too many weaknesses to protect. 30.:Saf2 30.iWc l l"1xb3 3 1 .'IWd l iWxd l 32.l"1xd l l"1xc3= 30 ... lll f5 ďż˝

1 6.b4 is playable but premature, and after the accurate 1 6 . . . id7! 1 7.l"1a l Wh8! Black has no problems. 1 6.iWa l is a bit more challenging, but removing the queen from the centre has some drawbacks, and Black manages to create excellent counterplay in the centre. l 6.l"1a2 is by far the most serious theoretical branch of the chapter, and can be considered a genuine alternative to 1 6.b3. Black continues with the standard 1 6 . . . Wh8!, when White has tried several moves, the most important being 1 7.0-0 and 1 7.lll ce3!?. 1 7.0-0 is a decent move, but it has the drawback of allowing Black to venture an immediate 1 7 . . . f5 1 8 .exf5 ixf5 without suffering any repercussions. I found no major problems for Black in any of the lines from here. l 7.lll ce3!? is a bit trickier to handle, but the noÂ nonsense reply l 7 . . . ixe3! 1 8 .lll xe3 lll e7 seems to do the trick. Black will play . . . f5 next, freeing his position and preparing to exchange some minor pieces, in which case White's winning chances would all but disappear. If White wishes to play ambitiously then he should avoid exchanging pieces, but this in turn allows Black to generate fine counterplay, a good example being the main C422 variation, where a knight on h4 and rook on f3 lead to some splendid tactics where Black holds his own.

1 5.ic4 a

16.b3 Variation Index 1 .e4 cS 2.tll f3 tll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tll xd4 tll f6 s.tll c3 eS 6.tll dbS d6 7.igS a6 8.tll a3 hS 9.tll dS ie7 10.ixf6 ixf6 1 1 .c3 0-0 12.tll c2 igS 13.a4 bxa4 14.E!xa4 aS 15.ic4 E!b8 16.b3 16 ... hs A) 17.Wfe2!? B) 17.h4 ih6 Bl) 18.tll ce3 B2) 18.\We2

A) note to 2 l .Â°@c2

399 40 1 402 403

A) note to 27.Wh3

B2) after 22.l'ld5

22 . . . l:'!xb3!

399

Chapter 3 5 - 1 6.b3

l .e4 c5 2.l2Jf;3 lDc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lDxd4 l2Jf6 5.lDc3 e5 6.lD dbS d6 7 ..igS a6 8.lDa3 b5 9.lDdS i.e7 1 0 ..txfG ixf6 l l .c3 0-0 12.lDc2 .igS 13.a4 bxa4 14.:gxa4 a5 15.ic4 :gb8 1 6.b3 The standard move nowadays. White accepts a looseness in his queenside pawn formation and loses the possibility to advance b2-b4 in one go, but on the other hand he now firmly controls a4 and keeps his rook on an active square. 1 6 ... ©hs Black gets ready for his standard form of counterplay by .. .f5 . We shall analyse: A) 17.'!We2!? and B) 17.h4. A) 17.'l!Ne2!? Not the main move, but it hides some venom; White controls e4 and makes the d l - and a l squares accessible co his king's rook once short castling has taken place. Additionally, White gets ready to combat .. .f5 with an advance of his kingside pawns.

17 ... fS 18.h4!? Here lies the point. The g5-bishop is slightly uncomfortable and has to retreat to a less attractive position.

2l .'!Wc2 2 1 .E\a2?!N gets the rook out of possible discovered attacks but relinquishes the fight for e4. Black is fine after 2 1 . . .e4! 22.\Wc2 tlie5 23.Wfxe4 :Best, as castling loses White an exchange. In this type of position a2 is the worst square for the rook as it neither defends b3 nor protects the first rank. 2 1 .tlixf6 is an undesirable exchange of minor pieces, after which Black can hardly have any problems. The computers doubt rhar he can be better either though: 8 7

2 1 . . .\Wxf6N 22.0-0 \Wxh4 23.:Bdl tli e7 (23 . . . '!Wf6!? or 23 . . . \Wh6!?) 24.:1l:xa5 :1l:f6 25.g3 \Wh3 26.'IWfl \Wh5 27.'.We2 '1Wh3=

2 1

19.exf5 Axf5 20.l2J ce3 .id7 White has managed to gain some control over the central light squares by forcing the black bishops into slightly awkward positions. On the other hand, the h4-pawn is a weakness and it is questionable as to whether he can actually consolidate his light-squared control. Normally he would redeploy his bishop to d3 in order to do this, but then the loose positions of the a4rook and b3-pawn will offer Black counrerplay opportunities.

1 8 ....if6 1 8 . . . .ih6? 1 9.exf5 ixf5 20.g4! ixc2 2 1 .Wfxc2 if4 22.\We4 \Wd7 23 .id3± as in Morais Rodrigues, Gaia 2004, is bad for Black.

2 l .id3 is a principled move bur it fails to secure an edge due to tactical reasons: 2 1 . . .tli e7 22.tlixe7 (22.:Ba3 ie6 23.ie4 tlixd5 24.ixd5 ixd5 25.tlixd5 \Wc8!= is about equal, but it is White who has to be more careful.) 22 . . .\Wxe7

400

l 5 .ic4

23.'ll d 5 1Mff7 24.l'!xa5 (24.1Mf e4?! g6 25 .h5 ig5 26.f4 if5+) 24 . . . id8 25.�h7 1Mf xd5 26.l'!xd7 l'!xb3= J. Polgar - Kramnik, Wijk aan Zee 2005, was dead level.

2 1 . .. e4!? 22.'Wxe4 ltJ e5 22 . . . l'!e8!? 23.1Mf c2 (23.1Mff3?? 'll e 5-+) 23 . . . 'll eS� may be even better. An example from correspondence chess continued 24.l'!a3 'll xc4 25.bxc4 a4 26.g3 ie5 27.0-0 g5!? 28.'ll g2 and in this unclear position a draw was agreed in De Souza - Rawlings, corr. 20 1 1 . 23.�a3!? lvanchuk's choice. 23.l'!al l'!e8! 24.'ll xf6! (24.id3? is unplayable here because it leaves b3 en prise: 24 . . . 'll xd3t 25 .1Mfxd3 l'!xb3+) 24 ... 1Mfxf6 25 .1Mfd4 ic6! 26.id5 (26.0-0 also leads to equality after 26 . . . 'll f3t! 27.gxf3 1Mfxf3 28 .id5 i.xd5 29.1Mfxd5 l'!xe3 30.1Mfxf3 l'!xf3 3 1 .l'!fd l =) 26 . . . l'!b4! 27.1Mf d2 ixd5 28 .1Mfxd5 l'!xb3!N (28 . . . 'll f3t? 29.'tt> e 2! 1Mfxc3 30.'tt> xf3+- was a colossal blunder in Charbonneau - Radjabov, Mallorca 2004) 29.0-0 (29.1Mfxb3? 'll d3t-+) 29 . . . l'!xc3= and the game is totally level.

23 ... ge8!N Shirov failed to realize that after 23 . . . 'll xc4?! 24.1Mfxc4 the bishops are a bit static, and he slowly drifted into a slightly worse position which he nevertheless held: 24 . . . ie5 25.1Mf d3 Preparing to bring the king to safety. 25 . . . ib5 26.1Mfd2 l'!b7 27.g3! l'!f3 28.c4 ic6 29 .1Mfxa5 1Mfxa5t 30.l'!xa5 l'!xb3 3 1 .0-0± Ivanchuk - Shirov, Izmir 2004. 24.id3!? This was probably lvanchuk's intention. 24.ie2 'll g4 25.1Mf c2 'll xe3 26.'ll xe3 l'!c8! 27 .c4 id4t is better for Black. 24.h5 'll g4 25.1Mf d3 'll e5= should be about equal, as White cannot avoid a ruining of his pawn structure ifhe wants to avoid the repetition. 24 ltJg6! Insisting on not taking the bishop! .•.

25.�f3 .ic6! 26.0-0 26.ixg6?! ixc3t 27.'tt> fl hxg6 28.h5 g5 29.h6 g6+ is better for Black.

Now Black should have reacted in the following dynamic way, which I worked out with the cooperation of some engines:

27.°1Wh3 On 27.1Mfh5, 27 . . . g6 28 .�g4 l'!e5! 29.c4 ixd5! forces 30.cxd5. Then comes 30 ... l'!b4! 3 1 .1Mfh3 l'!d4+! when Black's fantastic piece centralization offers him at least equal chances.

40 1

Chapter 3 5 - 1 6.b3

27.1iWg3 ie5! 28.f4

32.1iWxd8 Elexd8 33.tlixd5 B:f8 34.g3 (34.B:xa5 ixd5 35 .ixd5 ixf4 36.B:f3 g5 37.g3 ie5=) 34 ... ixd5 35 .ixd5 g5 36.fxg5 (36.B:xa5 gxf4 37.g4 f3!=) 36 . . . ixg5 37.Elxf8t B:xf8 38.Elxa5 id2 39.\t>g2 ixc3=

29 ... g6! 30.gf:2 30.g3? Elxe3! 3 1 .tlixe3 1iWb6 32.gxh4 B:e8+ 30 ... ig7 3 l .g3 id4! 3 l . . .B:xe3?! 32.tlixe3 lli f3t 33.i"!xf3± a

28 . . . ixc3!! 29.tlixc3 1iWb6 30.llicd 1 llixg2 3 1 .1iWh3 g6 32.ixg6 Ele7 33.b4! axb4 34.B:d3 Elg8 (34 . . . llixe3!? 35.B:xe3 B:g7 36.f5 b3 37.B:f2! id7! could be a winning try) 35.f5 ib5 36.\t>h2! ixd3 37.tlid5 1iWd4 38.lll xe7 llih4! 39.llixg8 ixfl 40.1iWxfl \t>xg8= This wild and woolly line ends in a draw.

27 ...ig5! 28.f4 .ih6! We have reached an important crossroads: 29.c4 29.g4 g5! 30.f5 Ele5 3 1 .c4 (3 1 .ic4 a4 32.b4 1iWd7 is at least equal for Black) 3 l . . .ig7 32.ic2 (32.f6? ixf6! 33.llixf6 1iWb6+) 32 . . . if6+ is better for Black. 29.ic4!? results in equality after 29 . . . tli g6 30.B:aa l (30.1iWg3 Elf8 3 1 .B:aa l a4 32.b4 [32.bxa4!? 1iWc8+±] 32 . . . 1iWd7+± looks okay for Black too) 30 . . . tli e7 3 I .1iWh4 llixd5

6 5

4 3

32.gxh4 ic5! 33.h5! ixa3! 33 . . . g5 ? does not work in view of 34.1iWf5! Elb7 35 .b4!! axb4 36.B:a8!+-. 34.hxg6 �b7 35.gg2 gxe3! 36.lll xe3 ixg2 37.@xg2 '1Wd7 38.lll f5 '1We6 39.@h2 '1Wf6! 39 . . . 1iWxg6?? 40.lll e7 +40.'IWf.3 40.1Mi'h6 ib2= 40 ... ga7= B) 17.h4 Since the immediate l 7.1iWe2 in conjunction with l 8.h4 does not achieve anything, White reverses the move order so as to first force the bishop to h6.

17 ...ih6

402

1 5 .ic4 .

20.0-0 20.\Wa l ?! f5 2 1 .l"!xa5 ib7t

6 5

I analysed Bl) 18.Cll ce3 before continuing to the move order reversal which I mentioned above: B2) 1 8.'!Mfe2.

1 8.g4?! has been played in a lot of games but it is antipositional, all the more so as White already has a potential weakness on b3. l 8 . . . if4 1 9 .'1Wf3 ie6! 20.lll ce3 ixe3 2 1 .li:lxe3 was Carras - Manescu, Eforie Nord 2007. 2 l . . .ixc4N 22.l"!xc4 li:l e7t would have seen Black take over the initiative.

20.h5 h6! 2 1 .0-0 f5 22.exf5 (22.'1Wd3 was played in Macusek - Pommrich, corr. 20 1 0 , but I don't think it poses any problems for Black after the correcc 22 . . . f4! 23.li:lc2 li:l gS!+±.) 22 . . . li:lxf5 23.li:lxf5 Erdogdu - Agopov, Novi Sad 2009. (23.l"!e l id? 24.E!a2 ic6 25.l"!d2 '1Wg5 = was agreed drawn in Savchur - Gavazov, corr. 20 1 0.) 23 . . . ixf5N 24.\Wd5 (24.E!a2 ie4 25 .id5 ixd5 26.\Wxd5 '1Wc7= is comfortable for Black) 24 . . . id?! 25 .E!a2 ig4 26.\Wxa5 '1Wg5 27.id5 ixh5= is balanced.

20 f5 2 1 .exf5 tt:lxf5 22.Cll xf5 ixf5 The insertion of che move h2-h4 weakens the white king and leads to equal chances, as the following variations illuscrate. •.•

23.'IMfdS 23.g3? ih3 24.E!e l E!xf2! 25 .'it>xf2 \Wb6t 26.l"!e3 E!fSt 27.'1Wf3 E!xf3t 28.Wxf3 id?+

Bl) 1 8.Cll ce3 This is only enough for equality.

18 ... he3 19.Cll xe3 Cll e7

23 ...ig6! Angling to exchange bishops. .

24.'!MfxaS No better is: 24.l"!fal '1Mfxh4 25 .\Wd2 ieS! 26.E!xa5 ic6+± Of course not 24.E!xa5 ?? if7-+ .

403

Chapter 3 5 - 1 6.b3

B2) 18.°11M e2

White would create slight problems for himself after 24.g3 ? ! ie8! 2 5 .Elaa l if7! ? (25 . . . a4 26.bxa4 :Ek8::;; is another way to temporarily sacrifice

a pawn) 26.'Wxa5 d 5 . Black is usually out of danger (to say the least) if he succeeds in pushing his d-pawn in the Sveshnikov. 27.ib5 'Wf6:=;; occurred in Onischuk - Filippov, Batumi 1 99 9 .

��L. 7 �� -f , , ,v,� %� � � 6 �• �r�-�. . .�� "'";�� it• , , ,, / , %� 4 ��- - - "��• �� ·ef"" 3� • � � % . . wtf . . � �� [j""%� � � .,= 8

�

��

Black has strong pawns in the centre and good attacking possibilities on the kingside, while White needs some time to bring back his pieces.

As a result of this Black has good compensation for the pawn, although objectively White is still okay and the game was later drawn.

24 ...°11Mxh4 25.�a2N The best, according to Rybka. Equal chances arise after 2 5 . '<Mfa7 Cilloniz Razzeto

- Salcedo Mederos, email 2008 . 25 . . . Wd8!?N 26.l"\a2 ie4! 27.We3 ib7 2 8 .Ei'.a7 d5 29.Ei:d l W/f6 30 .ixd5 ixd5 3 1 .Ei:xd5 Elxb3 32.l"la l =

Now White is set to prevent . . . f5 , but it turns out that Black is not in a hurry to achieve this advance due to the weakness of the pawn on h4.

6 5

4 3

1 8 . . . id7!? is what Kolev and Nedev recommend.

probably okay, but the position is not so clear.

19 . .!Llxe7 '1Mxe7 20.:gxa5 White must accept the pawn, otherwise he is

simply weak at both b3 and h4.

25 ... :gf5!? 26.g3

26 ...°11Mf6 27 ..id5 h5 28.:ga4 :gf8 29.°11Mb 6 .if7 30 ..ig2 d5 3 1 .°11Mxf6 :gxf6 32.�el e4 33.c4 dxc4 34.bxc4 .ig6=

Now after 1 9 .!'lal a4 20.b4! (20.bxa4 Ei:b2:=;; ) 20 . . . tlJ e7 2 1 .tlJxe7 'Wxe7 22 .id5 Black is

29.ixe4 'Wxe4=

This looks most accurate.

26.'Wc7 Ei:e8 27.g3 Ei:g5 28 .id5 (28 .'Wd7 l"lg8! 29 .id5 ie4 30.ixe4 'Wxe4= is similar) 28 . . . ie4

18 ... .!D e?!N

25 .Ei:b4!?N Elbd8! 26.'Wb6 '<Mff6 27.:gb5 ie4 2 8 .f3 ia8 29 .id5 Wg5! 30.c4 (30 .ixa8 Ei:xa8 3 1 .'Wxd6?? 'We3t-+) 30 . . . h6 3 1 .'Wf2= is also level.

4 3

404

1 5 .�c4

20 ... fS!?m 20 . . .Wc7 2 1 .gal gxb3 22.ixb3 Wxc3t 23.@fl Wxb3= should be about equal. After 20 .. .f5!? I went on to study the following lines. I present them with little comment, but hope the reader will derive as much enjoyment as I did from working through the complexities of the variations:

2 1 .exfS 2 1 .llib4 fxe4 22.llid5 (22.Wxe4 gf4 23 .We2 [23.Wd5 WfS+J 23 . . . Wc7� should be fine for Black, e.g. 24.ga4 ib7 25.0-0 gxh4 26.llid5 if4!=) 22 ... WdS 23.ga2 e3!? 24.fxe3 (24.llixe3 ixe3 25 .Wxe3 ib7�) 24 . . . ie6! 25.g4 g5 26.hxg5 (26.h5 Wd7 27.ggl e4�) 26 . . . Wxg5= is approximately balanced. 2 1 ...Wc7!? 22.:!! dS 22.b4 ixf5 23.llia3 d5 24.gc5 Wa7 25 .Ela5 Wc7= is equal.

28 . . . ig4! 29.Elc4! 29.llic2 Wb7 30.Wa6 Wb l t 3 1 .Wfl ElbS!� 29 ... Wb l 30.We4 Wd l ! 3 1 .@fl 3 1 .g3 ie2 32.@g2 ie3!! 33.fxe3 ifl t! 34.gxfl We2t= 3 l .ga4 ie2 32.Wb4 @gs 33.l"la2 e4 34_gh3 h5 35 .�c3 e3 36.gxe3 ixe3 37.Wxe3 Wxe l t 38.@h2 Wxf2 39.Wxf2 Elxf2 40.@g3= 3 1 . . .id2 32.g3 h5 33.@g2 Wb3 34.gc5 ixe l 35 .Wxe l if3t 36.@h2 ixh l 37.@xh l Wf3t 38.@gl Eld8 39.gc3 gd l =

27...Wa4! This strong move keeps up the pressure. 28.lDd3 28.@gl ig4! 29.f3 ie6� 28 ...�xd3! 29.Wxd3 29.gxd3 e4 30.l"ldl ig3=

variations: 28.gc6 28.Eldl ig4! 29.8 Wb6t 30.@fl ig3� 28.Eld5 ig4! 29.gb5 Wc3 30.llif3 Wc6� a

Chapter 35 - 1 6.b3

29 ...i.e3!! 30.f3 e4 3 1 .'1We2 exB 32.gxf3 Wc6 33.l:!h3 Wg6 34.Wg2 34.�xe3 �g4! is also level. 34 ...Wa6t 35.We2 '1Wg6= Wonderful stuff!

Conclusion

In this chapter we began our study of the main theoretical path involving 1 6.b3, which we answer with 1 6 . . . \tih8 in order to prepare our standard counterplay with . . . f5 . Before studying the main lines of 1 7.0-0 and 1 7.tt:lce3, which can be found in Chapters 36 and 37 respectively, it was necessary to consider two significant sidelines. 1 7.� e2!? f5 1 8 .h4!? is a rare but tricky line. Black should be okay, but it took an improvement on move 23 - over a game between Ivanchuk and Shirov, no less - along with some precise follow up play, to prove it. We then considered an attempt by White to reverse the move order by playing l 7.h4 ih6 before choosing how to deploy his pieces. 1 8 .tt:lce3 ixe3 1 9 .tt:lxe3 tt:l e7 gives Black relatively easy equality, but 1 8.�e2 is a bit trickier. Here I improved on existing theory with l 8 . . . tll e7!N, sacrificing the a5-pawn in order to obtain dynamic counterplay with a quick . . . f5 . Some wonderfully complex variations ensue, with equality the correct result after accurate play - a typical verdict for the Sveshnikov.

405

1 5.i.c4 a

17.0-0 Variation Index 1 .e4 cS 2.tlJf3 tlJ c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tlJxd4 tlJ f6 S.tlJ c3 eS 6.tlJ dbS d6 7 .igS a6 8.tlJ a3 hS 9.tlJdS .ie7 lO ..ixf6 .ixf6 l 1 .c3 0-0 12.tlJc2 .igS 1 3.a4 bxa4 14.:§:xa4 aS 1 S ..ic4 :§:b8 1 6.h3 @h8 17.0-0 •

17 ... f5 A) 1 8.f3 B) 1 8.:§:el fxe4 19.:§:xe4 .if5 20.:§:e2!? .ig4! 2 1 .f3 .ihS! Bl) 22.@hlN B2) 22. tlJ e l !? C) 18.exf5 .ixf5 Cl) 19.'l&e2 C2) 19.tlJce3 .ig6 C2 1) 20 ..id3 C22) 20.:§:el C23) 20 ..ie2 C24) 20.'l&e2

B2) after 22.ill e l ! ?

22 . . . �g6!N

407 408 410 41 1 41 1 412 414 415 416 416 418

C24) after 2 1 .ma l

C l ) after 20.Eld l !?

20 . . . B!b?!N

2 1 ...h5!N

407

Chapter 36 - 1 7.0-0

l .e4 c5 2.c!Lif3 c!Ll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.c!Llxd4 c!Lif6 5.c!Llc3 e5 6.c!Lldb5 d6 7.J.g5 a6 8.c!Lla3 b5 9.c!Lld5 ie7 IO.ixf6 J.xf6 1 l .c3 0-0 12.c!Llc2 ig5 13.a4 bxa4 14.l3xa4 a5 1 5.J.c4 E:b8 1 6.b3 @hS 17.0-0 A standard move, but not as dangerous as l 7.'Llce3, which can be found in Chapter 37.

20 ... 'IWb6tN 2 1 .©h l fXe4! (2 1 . . .ia6 22.c4) 22.'1Wxe4 if5 23 .'1We2 '1Wc5+ 1 9.b4?! leads to a good position for Black after 1 9 . . . 'Llxd5! 20.ixd5 axb4 2 Uhb4, as played in the game Norgaard - Zavalza Ramirez, Morelia 2007.

17 ... f5 Black has been able to play this move without weakening his second rank (and consequently his king) by resorting to . . . g6. I am satisfied chat he has equalized here. Now White has a choice between caking on f5 or supporting his e4-pawn: A) 1 8.0, B) 18.E:el or C) 1 8.exf5.

A) 1 8.8

This should be harmless for Black as it allows him to open up the f-file by . . . £Xe4 at an appropriate moment. In addition, that capture will saddle White with a weak pawn on e4.

8 7 6 5

2 1 . . .1"1xb4N 22.'Llxb4 ie3t 23.©h l f4t would have been interesting, with an attack similar to chose arising from King's Indian positions. 1 9.1"1a l N 'Llxd5 20.'1Wxd5! (20.ixd5? '1Wb6t 2 1 .©h l ia6! 22.1"1e l 1"1bc8+) 20 . . . ib7 2 1 .'1Wd3 '\Wb6t 22.©hl fxe4 23.fxe4 1"1f2! is optically better for Black, although White should be okay if he is careful. 1 9.exf5N 'Llxd5 ( 1 9 . . . ixf5!?) 20.ixd5 ixf5 2 1 .©h l 1"1c8 transposes to Korbut - Kochetkova in the note to 1 9.f3 in line C on page 4 1 2.

1 a

1 8 ... c!Lie?! This move keeps the tension for the time being. 19 . .!Llxe? 1 9 .'1Wd3 ? gives Black the advantage after 1 9 . . . 'Llxd5 20.ixd5 . This was Loehnhardt - Haasler, Internet 2004, and now I like:

19 ....ixe?!? l 9 . . . '\Wb6t 20.©h l ixe7 2 l .1"1al ! fxe4 22.fxe4 ib7 23 .'1Wd3 '1Wc6! is another way of reaching the same position as below, but 1 9 . . . ixe7 sets some traps for White to avoid. 20.E:al! The best move, equalizing. 20.b4 is tempting, but after 20 . . . Wc7 2 1 .'1Wd3 axb4 22.'Llxb4 fxe4 23.fxe4 1"1xfl t 24.'\Wxfl id7!? 25.1"1al 1"1f8 26.'1Wd3 1"1c8 27.'Ll d5 Wc5t 28.©h l it is obvious that only Black can be better. He can force a draw if he likes by:

408

1 5 . .!c4

2 1 . . .fxe4 2 1 . . .if4!? 22.fxe4 E:xfl t 23.Wxfl ib7 24.Wd3 Wf6 25.l:!al Wf4 26.id5 ixd5 27.Wxd5 Wf2 28.Wd3 Wd2 29.Wxd2 ixd2 30.l:!xa5 ixc3 3 1 .E:a4 <ii g8 32.b4 l:!c8+ After 20.l'!al the most likely continuation is: 8

20.exf5 ixf5 2 1 .l:!a2 is dealt with by 2 1 . . .a4! 22.l'll b4 (or 22.b4 l:!c8 23.l'll a3 ig6! with a strong Black initiative) 22 . . . axb3 23.Wxb3 ig5+. 20.Wd3 fxe4 2 1 .fxe4 l:!xfl t 22.Wxfl ib7 23.Wd3 Wb6t 24.<ii h l could be a bit better for Black after either 24 . . . Wf2+ (intending 25.l:!xa5 Wf4) or 24 . . . ic6 25.E:al Wb7 26.l:!e l l:!f8 27.b4 E!:f4+. 20. <ii h l Allowing Black to highlight a n important difference between this move and 20.E:a l ! by uncorking:

� ••��""!itai Y, 6 ��-,, }�� -;,� 5 ��-.. %�!� 4: - ��-r��%� %�� 1!� � �1�� 1�r�� .i.�

. .

�

, .. . , %

20 . . . ig5! White is in some bother. The lesser evil is: 2 1 .Wd3! 2 1 .E:al if4! 22.We l (22.g3 ig5+) 22 . . . Wg5 ! 23.E:d l (23 .l:!xa5 Wh6! 24.g3 id2+) 23 . . . Wg6t with some initiative.

6 5

4 3

2 1

20 ...i.b? 2 1 .Wfd3 fxe4 22.fxe4 Wb6t 23.©hl Wc6! 24.i.dS i.a6! 25.:!'!xffi t :!'!xffi 26.We3 We? 27.CLJa3 h6 28.CLJ c4 a4!= B) 1 8.i;el 8

7 6 5

4 3

2 1

This move was introduced by lvanchuk but it looks artificial. Black should react in the following way:

409

Chapter 36 - 1 7. 0-0

1 8 ... fxe4 19.:Bxe4 �JS White has a choice of retreats.

is also well protected by the a2-rook, leaving the ocher rook free to attack.

20.:Be2!? White's idea is to follow up with lll ce3 and l"1ea2. Instead, 20.l"1e 1 transposes to 1 8 .exfS ixf5 l 9.l"1e l .

2 1 .f.3 �h5! Now . . . e4 is a constant worry for White. Additionally, Black is ready to challenge d5 under the best possible circumstances by means of . . . 'li e7. The two replies we shall analyse in most detail are: Bl) 22.WhlN and B2) 22.tll el!?. 22.lll ce3? e4+ shows the point behind forcing f2-f3 in the most primitive way.

22.b4?! This is premature and White will now be weak along che c-file: 22 . . . axb4 23.lll cxb4 Daulyce - Novak, Turin (ol) 2006. 23.cxb4 Kobayashi - Chua, Singapore 2007, 23 . . . lll e7!N 24.lll xe7 W'xe7+.

4 3

2 1

20 ...�g4! Forcing a weakening of the e3-square chat will enable Black to create tactics along the g l -a7 diagonal. Inducing the move f2-f3 also creates the possibility of an . . . e4-chrusc lacer on. 20 . . . W'd7?! was played in Ivanchuk Johannessen, Saint Vincent 200 5 . This allows White to implement his idea without making any pawn weaknesses on the kingside. 2 1 .lll ce3 i.g6 22.:Bea2 e4 23.ifl ! is a new concept in the present theoretical line: che bishop goes co fl , che rook to the a-file and the queen remains on dl to protect b3. White can combine targeting a5 (by means of lll c4) with the creation of the passed pawn on the b-file. 23 . . . idS is designed to free the knight from c6, but with the next move White makes it look useless: 24.b4! (24.h3 'li e5;!; or 24.lll c4 i.£7) 24 ... axb4 25.cxb4 lll e5 26.W'd4 W'e6 27.b5 if6 28.tt'lxf6 W'xf6 29.h3± In the aforementioned game White was clearly better, as Black's pawns are well blockaded while the b-pawn is always a potential danger. The f2-pawn

... ..Y.� ,,, . ,/,� . . ..Y,_, � . ..%� 6 � �� 1-�� P' �� % � . . . � �j_ 54 •CZJ� rmr�"- . %� ,;., Y,� 3 -, . . ��,� �.«. . %·�'·'� ��: �rril"" �� B ��

23 . . . W'c8!N 24.id3 24.ia6 W'd7 25 .id3 'lixb4 26.:Bxb4 (26.cxb4 l"1fc8+) 26 . . . W'a7ti 24 . . . lll e7 25.tt'lxe7 ixe7 26.W'c2 W'c5t 27.Wh l :Ba8 28.:Bxa8 :Bxa8 29.l"1e l d5!+ Intending 30 . .ixh7 e4� . 22.l"1e4N is an attempt to restore the coordination among White's forces, but Black has been given time to press d5: 22 . . . 'li e7! 23.Wh l (23.tt'lxe7 ixe7+) 23 . . . lll x d5 24.ixd5 W'b6! Stopping the knight from coming to e3. 25.b4 (25 .lll a3? ie8! 26.'lic4 '1Wxb3 27.:BaH) 25 . . .ig6 26.:Be2 axb4 27.tt'lxb4 W'c5! 28 .l"1a3 l"1b5 29.:Bea2 id8ft and Black is, if anything, slightly more comfortable.

410

1 5 .ic4

22.:l"la3!?N offers the b-pawn protection in preparation of ii.c4-d3-e4, but after 22 . . . tll e7 Black is again fine, e.g. 23.tll xe7 ixe7 24.id5 �b6t 25.'it>h l �c5! 26.b4 axb4 27.tll xb4 ig5 28.:l"lea2 i.g6 29.g3 h6 30.h4 (30.'it>g2 i.f5 and nothing much changes.) 30 . . . i.d8 3 1 .'it>h2 i.f5 32.'Wd2 ib6=.

Bl) 22.'it>hlN

variations are an example of how play might continue:

24.We2 24.tt:l ce3 e4! 24 ... e4!? Despite White's best efforts Black plays this move anyway!

Ir looks sensible to take the king away from checks, but at the same time this is a sign that White's plan has lost its poison.

25.fxe4 .ih4! 26.�fl ! 26.g3?! ixg3! 27.hxg3 �h3t 28.'it>g l ? tll e 5-+

22 ...i.g6 23J�el Black has prepared . . . e4, while White's response attempts to prevent it.

26 ... �xfl t 27.Wxfl i.xe4 28.lli ce3 We6! 29.\Wf4 29.tll f4 �e5 30.id3 ixd3 3 1 .�xd3 if6 32.tll fd5 'We6=

23.tll ce3 allows 23 . . . e4! 24.fxe4 when all three possibilities, 24 . . . i.xe400, 24 . . . tll e 5!?� and 24 . . . i.h5!? 25.g4 if7�, are good for Black. 23.�al can be answered by the typical 23 . . . E!b7! when Black is guaranteed a good game. For example, 24.tll ce3 e4! 25.fxe4 can be met by 25 . . . tll e 5+± or 25 . . . ixe3!? 26.tll xe3 (26.E!xe3 tll e5 27.h3 tt:lxc4 28.bxc4 :l"lbf7 29.'it>h2 Elfl t) 26 . . . i.xe4=.

6 5

4 3

2 1

29 ...\Wg6!? 30.Wxh4 hd5 3 1 .�al 3 1 .h3 ixc4 32.'Wxc4 tll e 5 33.'Wd5 'Wb l t 34.'it>h2 Wxb3 35 .�xb3 Elxb3 36.E!xa5 h6= 3 1 . ..hc4 3 1 . . .ie4= 32.\Wxc4 lli e5 33.\Wc7 �ffi 34.�fl 34.�xa5 �d3= a

23 ...Wd7!? I believe this waiting move is worthwhile here, especially since White does not appear to have a clear-cut plan of his own. The following

34... �xfl t 35.llixfl h6 36.WxaS Wbl 37.WhS Wal = Thus we may conclude that lvanchuk's idea, while interesting, does not pose a serious threac to Black.

Chapter 36

B2) 22.tlJel!?

41 1

1 7. 0-0

24 .if7!= Preventing �d3-e4. It is difficult for White to undertake anything constructive, because 25.'2ld3?! has been ruled out in view of25 . . . ixd5 26.ixd5 '2l e7+. To sum up, White's problem after 22.Cll e l is the reduced control over d5 and Black keeps the equilibrium by capitalizing on this fact. ..•

This was played in Tasic - Alava Moreno, corr. 2006. It is strategically justified, but the tactical nuances prevent White from gaining an edge.

C) 1 8.exf5 We have reached the main course for this chapter.

1 8 ....ixf5

22 ....ig6!N White is facing problems.

23.�ea2! In keeping with Black's earlier choice of placing the rook on e2, and in any case better than the following alternatives: 23.'2ld3? e4+ or 23 .�d3?! �e8! 24.�e4 (24.l:!al '2le7+) 24 ... '2l e7 25 .�aa2 (25 .Eia3 '2lxd5 26.�xd5 Wef c7+) 25 . . . '2lxd5 26.ixd5 Wef c7t . 23 ...�d7 24.�e2 24.�d3 �f7! 25 .�e4 Wfb7!?+±

This position can be considered as one of the tabiyas of the Sveshnikov. Practice has shown that Black obtains comfortable equality. White's two main moves are: Cl) 19.�e2 and C2} 19.tlJce3. The other knight move to e3 is unnatural: 1 9 .'2lde3?! tg6 The computers now indicate that White's best move is to return to d5 with the knight! 20.WfdS? 20.�d3? simply loses a pawn, since after 20 . . . �xd3 2 1 .Wfxd3 :Bxb3 22.Wfc4 the double attack is parried easily by 22 . . . Wefb6 23.'2ld5 Wib5!+. 20.�d5 ? '2le7+ underlines the bishop's commitment to defending b3. The only other logical attempt seems to be 20.g3!?, but then 20 ... '2l e7+ already challenges White's control over d5.

412

1 5 .�c4

�� . . .v. � ... . z� �� . . .v.••,

� � 6 �'%� i� �r�t R%� '! . . %�.%� ��

� -�t� � .. · · · 45 : � · �r:. �� -0 �% ,,,% ��

3 ��m�.��-0 -�-� ��J� � � � ..

2 i

M f

20 . . . 'Lie7! 2 1 .'if!ixa5 d5 22.ib5 'iffixa5 23.:B:xa5 Black already had a considerable plus in Z. Szabo - Adorjan, Hungary 1 999, and now the most accurate configuration of his pieces was: 23 . . . gbc8!N+ 1 9 .id3 is rare, but I see no refutation. The best I could find was: 1 9 . . . ixd3 20.'if!ixd3 gxb3 2 1 .'iffi c4 !!b2 22.'iffixc6 gxc2 23.'iffi b 5N (23.'Lib6?? !!cxf2 0-1 Serrano Felipe - Valmana Canto, Mislata 2003.) 23 . . . 'if!ic8 24.l"i:xa5 l"i:d2!+ With a slight kingside initiative for Black, though the position is basically drawish. 1 9.l"i:e l prepares the transfer of the c2-knight to g3 via fl but appears to have no independent significance after l 9 . . . ig6, as the natural reply 20.'Lice3 transposes to variation C22. Instead, 20.l"i:a2 occurred in Ehlvest - Shabalov, Liepajas (rapid) 2004, and now all three logical moves available to Black seem good: 20 . . . :B:b7!?00, 20 . . . !h4!?+:! or 20 . . . 'iffi d 7= l 9.!!a2 can be answered with the flexible l 9 . . . 'iffi d 7. For example: 20.'Li ce3 (20.'if!ie2 ie6!+±, with counterplay against the neglected d5- and b3-points, has already been analysed in variation C3 l of Chapter 34 on page 390.) 20 ... ig6! 2 1 .'iffie2 A few games reached this position via transposition.

The best continuation is 2 1 . . .e4! and Black has acquired the typical counterplay. 22.'Li c2 (22.ib5!? 'if!ib7 23.ixc6 'iffixc6 24.'if!ic4= is a safe choice for White, with a likely draw) 22 . . . idS! 23.ib5 'if!ib7 24.c4 'Lie5 25.'Lid4 if7! 26.'iffixe4 ib6! 27.ia4 ig6 28.'if!ih4 id3 29.'Lie6 ixfl 30.'Lixf8 l':!xf8 3 1 .'itixfl ic5 32.'iffi e4 'iffi f7 33.'Lie3 'iffih 5 34.h3 'if!ig5 3 5 .'itigl g6 36.!!e2 l"i:f4 37.'iffi c2 l"i:xf2!= was soon agreed drawn in Hauenstein Voll, corr. 20 1 2 . 1 9.f3 'Lie?! 20.'tti h l (20.'Lice3 ixe3t 2 1 .'Lixe3 'iffi b 6 22.!!e l id7 looks better for Black) 20 . . . 'Lixd5 2 1 .ixd5 occurred in Korbut Kochetkova, St Petersburg 200 5 .

0·� � .f·� -� · "'w i · · · "� . ·"� �� . . %. � �� . 6 �� . . ·0 �� . %�. . ·0. % ��. .-� UJ.t�.i.� � . . . % 4 M ��w0 �� .%� 3 � � f[j - � �� ltS � �� [;W{f �� 1 1-� 0��

� %

��

� �

2 1 . . . !!cSN 22.c4 'if!ib6 is about equal, but the onus is on White. He must find 23.b4 axb4 24.:B:xb4 'iffi a 5 25 .l':!b5 'iffi c3 26.'Lib4 E1b8 27.'iffi a l != when Black does not have real chances to benefit from his active pieces.

Cl) 19.�e2

413

Chapter 36 - 1 7. 0-0

Given as the mam alternative by Kolev and Nedev.

1 9 ...�g6 This standard reply is best. l 9 . . . �d7!? is also possible, and gives similar positions to those analysed under l 6.E!a2 - see variation C3 l of Chapter 34. The idea is that the bishop is often well placed on e6, challenging control of d5 and creating pressure against b3 once the queen has been committed to e2. 20.�dl!? An attempt to stop ... e4 by pressing along the d-file. It sets a concealed positional trap which even Carlsen has fallen into. But let us first witness the alternatives:

20 .. J::& b7!N After a painstaking analysis of the position, I have reached the conclusion that this is the most useful reply for Black - leading to balanced play.

20.'ll ce3 transposes to variation C24 below. 20 . .id3 i.e8!? (20 . . . i.xd3 2 1 .�xd3 transposes to the note on 1 9 .id3 on page 4 1 2.) 2 l .E!a3 (2 1 .�e4 g6!? or 2 1 . . .ig6=) 2 1 . . .'ll e7 22 . .ie4 'll xd5 23 .i.xd5 �b6+ was J. Polgar - Topalov, Wijk aan Zee 2003. 20.f3!? was Ibarra Chami - Tristan, Montevideo 2009, trying to take the sting out of . . . e4, but it is rather drawish: 20 . . . 'll e7!N 2 1 .lll ce3 ie8! 22.i:'la3 i.c6! 23.l=!d l ixe3t! 24.�xe3

. /,lif ""-·i Y. � . . ./,� 6 ��!-.,, ��'! . . � � � 5 �% -�� . ��•� 4 .... ��z •·•· �� 3 �. . � 1�% ii . .Y.� . � . �� I� r�·�. .

. .. ��

. %�.,,

After 20 . . . e4? 2 1 .'ll d4 Black cannot avoid the exchange of the knight, his best attacking piece. 2 1 . . .'ll xd4 22.E!xd4± perfectly illustrates the point of keeping the knight on c2, lvanchuk Carlsen, Moscow 2007. 20 . . . �c8 was played by Kramnik against lvanchuk at Monaco 2005. After 2 1 .lll ce3 (2 1 .lll a3!?) 2 1 . . . e4 22 . .ib5 (22.h3 ih4) Kramnik failed to spot 22 . . . ixe3!N 23.fxe3 (23 .'ll xe3 'll e5) 23 . . . �f5!t, which would have given him an excellent game. 20 . . . h5!?N could also be a convenient waiting move .

24 . . . i.xd5! 25 .ixd5 'll f5 26.�f2 �c7! 27.ic4 (27.i:'ld3 'll d4!+) 27 . . . lll e7!= The twin threats of . . . d5 or . . . e4 easily guarantee equality.

2 1 .lll ce3 White has nothing better. 2 1 .f3!? is answered by: 2 1 . . .'ll e 7! 22.'ll ce3 (22.ll!xe7 E!xe7t) 22 . . . e4 23 .f4! (23.fxe4 i.xe4=) 23 . . . ixf4 24.'ll xf4 E!xf4 25 .�d2 E!f6 26.E!da l ! (26.ll!g4 ih5 27.'ll xf6 ixd l 28.�xd l gxf6 29.�d4 �b6=) 26 . . . i.£7! Black's bad bishop must be exchanged. 27.E!xa5 ixc4 28.bxc4 E!b8 29.E!a6 (29.�c2!? E!e6 30.�d l 'll c6! 3 1 .i:'lb5 i:'lc8!=) 29 ... lll g6!= and Black looks equal.

414

1 5 .�c4

2 1 . .. �bt7 22.�fl!? 22.f3 e4 23.fxe4 ixe4= 22 ... e4 We have reached an important crossroads:

25 . . . if5!? 26.ih5 26.lll xf5 i'!xf5 27.c4 lll b4! 28.lll xb4 axb4 29.ig4 �xf2! 30.�xf2 ie3 3 1 .if5 Vfjf6 32.cii g2 ixf2 33.Vfjxf2 g6 34.�xb4 gxf5 3 5 _Vfjf4 �e8 36.Vfje3 Wlg7= 37.�b5? f4! 38.Vfjxf4 e3-+ is a line showing the tactical resources inherent in Black's position. 26 ... g6 27.ig4 ixg4 28.lll xg4 lll e 5! 29.lll xe5 dxe500 23.lll c2 is a logical redeployment, requiring accuracy from Black: 23 . . . ih4! 24.g3 ig5 25.lll de3 �c7! (25 . . . i'!e7 26.�fal Wie s 27.lll d4±) 26.�fal h5! 27.lll d4 lll xd4 28.cxd4 ixe3 29.Vfjxe3 i'!f3 30.Vfjd2 d5 3 l .ie2 e3! 32.fxe3 l='k2 33 .Vfjxc2 i'!xg3t 34.hxg3 ixc2 3 5 .if3 Wc7ft Only Black can be better.

23.b4!? Trying to take advantage of the rook's position at f7.

After 23.b4!? Black equalizes by forgetting the kingside attack:

23 axb4 24 .!lixb4 �c7 25 .!li edS �c8 26 . .!lixc6 �xc6 27.E:fal 27.i'!a7 l='1c5 and 27.g3 i'!c5 are both level. •••

•

23.Wa2 This misplaces the queen. 23 . . . ih4! 24.g3 ig5 The hole at f3 promises Black strong counterplay: 25 .ie2 25.b4? axb4 26.lll x b4? E1xf2-+ is out of the question. After 25 .ib5 Black replies 25 ... lll e5 26.ie2 Vfjc8!-t.

C2) 19 . .!li ce3 a

The most widely adopted move, but now White's control over e4 decreases.

415

Chapter 36 - 1 7. 0-0

Nothing is offered by 20.'1Wg4 h5!?N 2 1 .®'e2 (2 1 .'1Wh3 e4 22.ie2 h4 23.id l 'll e5?) 2 1 . . .e4 22.gfa l ih4 23.g3 ig5 24.Wif c2 @h7 25 .ifl 'll e5! 26.gxa5 gb7! 27.ga? gxa7 28.gxa? h4 Black has a strong attack. 20.f3 lt:l e7 2 1 .'1We2 ie8!?N 22.l"i:a3 ic6! 23.l"i:d l ixe3t! 24.®'xe3 ixd5 25 .ixd5 'll fS 26.®'f2 ®'c7= is typically equal.

C21) 20 ..id3 This move brings about mass exchanges:

20 ....ixd3 2 1 .'Wxd3 .ixe3 22.fxe3 22.lt:lxe3? gxb3 23.®'c4 '1Wb6+ Smetank.in Eljanov, Polanica-Zdroj 200 1 . 20.b4?! axb4 2 1 .cxb4 'll d4+ is perhaps very slightly better for Black. 20.:1h2 e4 2 1 .'IWa l h6 22.'ll g4 '1Wd7 23.h3 if5 24.'\Wd l ig6 25 .'1Wc2 '1We8 26.'1We2 id8= Bauer - Feco, corr. 20 1 2 . 20.h3 ®'d7 (20 . . . h6!? 2 1 .®'e2 ih7 22.l:! d l e4 23.'ll g4 ®'d7 24.lt:lde3 �h4 25.g3 ig5? may well be a good alternative.) 2 1 .'1Wg4! '1Wd8! a

22 .. Jlxfl t 23.Wifxfl l"i:xh3 24.l3c4! �h5! 25.e4 25.'ll c? l"i:b6 26.'ll dS gb5= is a repetition. 25 .. .!kS 26.�xcS dxc5 White has enough activity to regain his pawn, but he will not get any advantage. 27.'flfl 27.WifbS ®'d6 28.@f2 h6 29.@e2 @h7 30.@d3 'lie? 3 I .'1Wb6 '1Wd7 32.®'xcS 'll xd5 33.exd5 ®'f5t= was equal in Nowak - Milani, corr. 2003. 27.'1Wa6 'll b8 28.®'a8 h6= also offers White nothing.

416

1 5 .ic4

2 1 .i.d3 2 1 .lll fl l'!bf7 22.l'!a2 e4 23.tlig3 ih4 24.tlie3 (24.tlixe4 ixe4 2 5 .l'!xe4 ixf2t 26.Wh l ic5=) 24 ... l'!f4 25 .:B:d2 tlie5 26.:B:xd6 Wb8;3 Sharapov Sabuk, Poland 2009, or 26 . . . \Wg5!?N.

7 6

21. ..bd3 22.Wfxd3 i.xe3 23.fxe3 :Sxb3 24.Wc4 i'!b2! 25.Wxc6 Wg5! 26.l£if4! 26.g3?? 1Mfh5 27.E:h4 Wf3-+

4 3

27... h6 2S.We6 Was 29.Wi'd7 a4 30.liJb6 Wbs 3 1 .Wi'xc6 a3 32.Wfxc5 Wfa7 33.l£ia4 Wfxa4 34.Wf8t cii h7 35.Wf5t @gs 36.Wf e6t @£8 37.Wf5t @gs 3S.Wcst @f7 39.Wf5t @gs Y2-Y2 Kasimdzhanov - Gelfand, Tashkent 20 1 2 . C22) 20J;el This move has been played by Anand and we shall follow his game as our main line. Black can continue as follows:

26 ... exf4 27.:Sxf4 :SfbS= Anand - Kramnik, Wijk aan Zee 2005 . C23) 20.i.e2 8

7 6

4 3

20 ... :Sb7!? 20 . . . e4 is another interesting possibility. 2 1 .tlifl !? (2 1 .ie2 ixe3 22.tlixe3 tlie5 23.tlid5 l"lb7=) 2 1 . . .tlie5 22.tlig3 e3!? 23.tlixe3 1Mlb6!= and the engines think it is equal!

""""'""-----"'"""'--=--"""'===.....=«---1

The other major possibility available to White, switching the bishop to f3 for defensive purposes. Black must now redeploy his bishop as well, directing its fire against b3.

Chapter 36 - 1 7. 0-0

20 ....if7! 2 1 .lD c4! Unpinning the d5-knight, since the black bishop will no longer be hitting the b3-pawn. 2 l ..if3 is not critical because after 2 l . . . .ixe3 White is forced to recapture with a pawn on e3, loosening his structure: 22.fx:e3 t/J e7 The most principled continuation, challenging the d5knight immediately. 23 ..ie4 .ixd5! 24.:gxf8t Wxf8 25 .�xd5 '&d8! 26.'&d3 (26.ie4 Wb6 27.Wd2 d5 28 . .ic2 e4 leaves White struggling for equality.)

417

move .if3 . A complicated fight now arises where Black is by no means worse:

22.iihl Nothing tangible is offered by 22.f4 exf3 23 . .ixf3 t/Je5! 24.t/Jxe5 (24.t/Jxa5 ? :gb5 !-+) 24 . . . dxe5= Rigo - Doghri, Nove Zamky 1 999. The impending transfer to opposite-coloured bishops makes the position level. 22.b4 axb4 23.cxb4 ixd5 24.Wxd5 t/Jxb4 25 .Wxd6 Johansen - Murer, Internet 2007. Here my first choice would be 25 . . . .ie7N 26.'Wxd8 (26.'We5 iLi d3 27 . .ixd3 exd3+) 26 . . . :gbxd8 27.g3 .ic5 28.<>t>g2 g6=. Still, the above options look better than 22.<>t>h I .

22 ....igS! 23.E!a3 23.f4 exf3 24.:gxf3 (24 . .ixf3? l"lb5+) 24 . . . EleS 25 .Ela2 :B:b5! 26.t/Jce3 :gc5 27.c4 h6+ is already better for Black in view of his strong bishops. a

26 . . . Wb6! White now had to play either 27.c4= or 27.h3N 4J xd5 28.Wxd5 Wxe3t 29.<>t>h2 '&xc3 30.'&xd6 '&xb3 3 1 .Wxe5=. Instead, 27 . .if7?! d5! led to problems for White in Grau - Blank, email 200 1 .

23 ... lDe7!? 23 . . . l"1b500

24.l!Jce3?! Better is 24.t/Jxe7 flxe7 25.t/Jxa5 'Wb6N or 25 . . . Wc7� Grimsweeper - Mutz, Internet 2002. 24... llJxdS 25.lDxdS E!f5! 26.c4 .ixdS 27.cxdS 'Wb6

418

1 5 .!c4

With a pleasant initiative for Black, Leko Gelfand, Polanica-Zdroj 1 998.

C24) 20.'1We2

2 1 . .. hS!N I think this brilliant novelty is the solution to the problems of the position. Black needs to cover g4 as will be seen below. The rash 2 1 . . .ih4?! 22.g3 ig5 (22 . . . tll e5?! has been played by Hagarova, but after 23.tt::l f4!N E1xf4 24.gxf4 tt::l f3t 25.hl '\Wf6 26.tll g2! '\Wf5 27.tt::l xh4 tt::l xh4 28.E1xa5+- Black is simply lost) has been the usual choice in practice, but after 23.h4!! Black is forced to prematurely give up his bishop and fall into a worse position. The best I could find is 23 . . . he3 24.tt::l xe3 '\Wf6!? but even this is not enough. White has the following sequence at his disposal: 25.tll d5! '\We5! M. Gonzalez - Merrow, corr. 2009.

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

The most critical idea, quickly mobilizing the heavy artillery with a plan to attack the a5-pawn.

20 e4 2 UUal The standard move, going after the a5-pawn as mentioned. •..

After 2 l .E1d 1 N Black employs the manoeuvre 2 1 . . .ih4 22.g3 ig5 and should be equal. 2 1 .tll c2 should be answered as follows: 2 1 . . .1Mi'c8 22.tll d4 tt::l xd4 23.cxd4 id8 24.1Mi'e3 '\Wg4 25 .h3 1Mi'h4 26.E1a2 h6 27.E1e l ig5 28 .'\Wg3 1Mi'xg3 29.fxg3 ih7= Bellmann - Fischer, corr. 20 1 0.

26.1Mi'd2!N E1f3 27.tll e3 E1bf8 28 .E1fl tt::l e7 29.1Mi'd4! 1Mi'xd4 30.cxd4 tll f5 3 1 .E1xa5 tt::l xd4 (3 1 . . .tt::l xe3? 32.fxe3 E1xg3t 33 .h2 E1gf3 34.E1xf3! exf3 3 5 .g3 ie4 36.f2±) 32.E1a6t with a better ending.

22.i.bS lb eS 23Jha5 .ih4! White is under attack. 24.tll dl Trying not to weaken himself. 24.g3 ig5 25 .Wc2 (25 .l3a6? h4 26.b4 1Mi'c8! 27.g2 tt::l d3+) 25 . . . Wc8 26.ifl h4 27.b4 tt::l f3t 28. h 1 ih7! leads to complications with mutual chances: 29.ig2 We6 30.1Mi'e2 Wh6 3 l .h3!? (3 l .g4 h3 32.ixf3 exf3t or 3 1 .tt::l g4 �g6 32.tt::l de3 ig8 33.ixf3 exf3 34.Wt'fl id8 35.E15a3 '\Wh5!�) a

419

Chapter 36 - 1 7. 0-0

Conclusion

3 1 . . .hxg3 32.fxg3 .ig8 33.'ll g4 ®g6 34.®c2 .ie6 35.'ll f4 .ixf4 36 . .ixf3 Wh7 37.i.xe4 Wxh3t=

In this chapter we continued our examination of the popular l 5 .�c4 Ei:b8 1 6.b3 c;tihs branch of theory, by exploring 1 7. 0-0 . Castling is a natural move, but it has the drawback of allowing Black to play l 7 .. . f5 without suffering any ill effects . l 8 . f3 tt'l e7! is completely harmless for Black, and it is actually White who must play accurately to equalize.

1 8 .Ei:e l looks like a

surprising choice, but any move which has been chosen by Ivanchuk should not be underestimated. I found a good answer in 1 8 . . . fxe4 1 9 .:!:l:xe4 �f5 20.Ei:e2! ? �g4! 2 1 . f3 �h5 ! when, having provoked a weakening of White's kingside, Black has satisfactory play.

25.g3 liJ eS 26.tiJb4!? 26.gxh4?? lll f3t 27.Wfl Wxh4-+

White's most popular continuation has been the loses for

White.

26.lll f4?! :8xf4 27.gxf4 'll f3t 2s.©h 1 ®fs 29 .We3 .id8!---+ also looks nasty. 26.'ll l e3 ig5! an d Black does not lose a tempo over the position arising from 24.g3 �g5 above.

natural l 8 . exf5 �xf5 . Many moves have been tested from this position, but 1 9 . lll ce3 �g6 is certainly the most natural continuation. From this position I analysed four main options, and it is noticeable that three of those main lines followed games in which Gelfand (twice) and Kramnik maintained full equality against world-class opposition. The final option of 20 .We2 is an idea of the correspondence realm, but after 20 . . . e4 2 1 .:i'!fal I found an important improvement in 2 l . . .h 5 !N to maintain the dynamic balance.

1 s .Ac4 a

17.etJce3 Variation Index 1 .e4 c5 2.lt:Jf3 tlJ c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tlJxd4 tlJ f6 5.tlJc3 e5 6.tlJ dbS d6 7 ..ig5 a6 8.tlJa3 b5 9.tlJ dS .ie7 1 0 ..ixf6 .ixf6 1 1 .c3 0-0 1 2.tlJ c2 .igS 1 3.a4 bxa4 1 4.�xa4 a5 1 5 ..ic4 �b8 1 6.b3 @hs 17.tlJ ce3 tlJ e7! 1 8.tlJxe7 ffxe7 19.tlJdS 1 9 ...fids A) 20.f!al B) 20.0-0 f5 Bl) 2 1 .f3 B2) 2 1 .exfS .ixf5 22.ffe2 .id7 23.�a2 .ie6 24.�dl �c8! B2 1) 25.fiel B22) 25. g3

A) after 22.1'ha5

22 . . . �c2!

B22) after 26.We l

B2) after 24.gd l

24 . . . gc8!

42 1 423 424 426 426 428

26 . . . ig4!

Chapter 37

42 1

l 7 . ctJ ce3

1 .e4 c5 2.lll f3 lll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lll xd4 ltlf6 s.lll c3 e5 6.lll db5 d6 7.i.g5 a6 8.lll a3 b5 9.lll d5 i.e7 I O.i.x.f6 hf6 1 1 .c3 0-0 12.lll c2 i.g5 13.a4 bxa4 14Jl:xa4 a5 1 5.i.c4 :Bb8 1 6.b3 @hs 17.lll ce3 lll e7!

22 . . . exf2t 23.�xf2 d5!? 24 . .ixd5 :Bfd8 25.:Bxa5 A blunder is 25.c4? Wc5t 26.�g3 :Be8 27.E1f3 \Wd6t-+ and White is suddenly lost. 25 . . . :Bxb3 26.\Wf3 :Bbb8 27.:gfa l Vfic7 28.g3 �f6 29 .:ga8 .ixc3= A draw was soon agreed in Rodi Maletich Saglione, corr. 2008.

My original intention was to recommend l 7 . . . g6, but I found some problems for Black in the complications arising after the sharp 1 8.h4!?.

18.lll xe7 1 8.0-0 'Lixd5 l 9.'Lixd5 f5 transposes to variation B with one less move played. 1 8 ...'!Wxe7 19.lll dS 1 9.'Lif5 ixf5 20.exf5 e4 2 1 .0-0 This offers White no more than a draw. A typical example continued: 2 l . . .e3 2 l . . .if6 22.Vfid2 Vfie5 23 .Vfid5 \Wxd5 24.ixd5 V2-V2 Sargissyan - Khovalyg, Moscow 2008, is hardly better for White after 24 ... e3 25.fxe3 1xc3= . 22.Vfid3 22.fxe3 Vfixe3t 23.�h l Vfixc3 24.V!ixd6 has led to a number of draws in correspondence chess, one example being 24 . . . :Bbe8 25.:Baal :Ba8 26.Wc7 f6 27.:Bfd l id2 28.:Ba2 V2-V2 Doh Moreira, corr. 20 l 0.

19 ...'!Wd8 Black retreats his queen, leaving White with two replies. We will first analyse A) 20.'!Wal , putting pressure on the queenside, before moving on to the more common B) 20.0-0. A) 20.V!ial I believe that Black has two good responses here. We shall follow a correspondence game through to the late middlegame as our main line, while the following note shows an equalizing idea found during my home analysis.

422

1 5 .ic4

20 ... f5 20 . . . 1Mf d7!? is quite playable too, an example being: 2 1 .0-0 (2 1 .E:xa5 '!Mfg4 22.0-0 1Mfxe4+± is interesting as well; Black wanes to pull his queen back to g6 in order to start a counterattack by pushing his e- and f-pawns, with an unclear game.) 2 1 . . .id8 22.f4 '1Mra7t 23.Wh l id7 24.1"i:a2 exf4 25.lll xf4

��

-,, , Y,• I•'iY,-, T � , ,, 6 � � � , �� , %� 1

� %� �� 4 , , %�! 'z, , ;� � ��,%��!� � ,�� r1�� ,5

23.b4 imcs 24.1Mfa2 ie4 25.f3?? (25.0-0 ixg2 26.©xg2 img4t=) 25 . . . ixd5 26.1"i:xd5 1"i:f4 0-1 Hough - Greig, corr. 20 1 3 . 23.E:a3 ie4 24.0-0 id2! 25.f3 (After 25.1"i:a2 Wifg5 26.g3 '!Mfg4! 27.f4 exf4 28 .'Mfd l [28 .1"i:xd2?? fXg3-+ obviously wins for Black] 28 ... Wefxd l 29.E:xd l ixd5 30.1"i:axd2 ixc4 3 1 .bxc4= there is nothing left to play for.) 25 . . . ixd5 26 . .txd5 '!Mf c7 27.c4 (27.b4 E!:fc8= was agreed drawn in Lucki - lsigkeit, corr. 20 1 2.) 27 . . . ib4 28.E!:a8 ic5t 29.Wh l E!:xa8 30.ixaS imbs 3 1 .id5 Wefxb3 Black has anchored his bishop on the powerful c5-square while restoring material equality. In Ilyin - Fees, corr. 20 1 3, the players agreed a draw after a few uneventful moves.

23 ...Lb3 24..ixb3 :Sxb3 25.E:a7 This attempt to play for the better minor piece ending is met accurately by:

This was Pereira - Schellmann, Dresden 2008, and here the accurate 25 ... 1Mf c5N 26.lll e6 .txe6 27.ixe6 if6 28.E:xa5 1Mfxc3 29.1Mfxc3 ixc3 30.1"i:af5 f6= leads to equality.

2 1 .exfS .ixf5 22.:SxaS Black now has an excellent response:

22 ....ic2! Equalizing fully. 23.0-0

2s.imb4 28.c4 h6 29 .Wid3 (29.g3 e4 30.h4 .td2 3 1 .Wg2 1Mfd4=) 29 . . . id8!= is also equal as the bishop is on its way to the a7-gl diagonal and 30.lll e3 Wef d4! 3 l .'!Mfxd4 exd4 32.lll d5 ia5 ! 33.:I'l:al ic3 is j ust a draw. 28 ...'i;Yfl 29.'We4

423

Chapter 37 - l 7 . lli ce3

B) 20.0-0 f5

29.c4 '&g6! 30.g3 h5 3 1 .'&b l '&xb l 32.i'hb l h4 33.:B:b6 :B:c8= looks equal too.

�� 7 � �- -wl-'i %�-��---6 �� ---�p �-ltJW% ��,•� � � Ill! 4� , , ,�� v llll'l ll � llll llll Ill! 3 llll 2 llll ��-�-A_,!'lll //,, ��---- l! �-�'Ill! � M= �

�

29 ... i.dB! 30.g3 '!Wa7 3 1 .'!Wb4 i.c7 32.'IWbS The players agreed a draw in Kalinin Boesenberg, corr. 2008. Play might have continued: 32 ...i.bB Black completes a successful regrouping of his bishop. 33.iig2 Again Black has a powerful reply:

We have reached yet another critical position, and now White can choose between Bl) 2 1 .f3 and B2) 2 1 .exf5. 2 1 .id3 Hardly a critical try, as the following examples show: 2 1 . . .ie6 Black was also doing fine after 2 1 . . .ib7!? 22.ic2 ic6 23.:B:al a4 24.b4 fxe4 25.ixa4 ib7 26.ic2 '&c8 27.ixe4 '&c4 in Selin Petrov, corr. 20 1 2 . In fact, a draw was agreed here. 22.ic2 g6 23.:B:a2 :B:f7 24.c4 Opening the position almost always frees Black's hands. The same happened after 24.exf5 gxf5 25 .c4 :B:c8 26.f4 ih6 27.'&h5 ixd5 28.cxd5 :B:f6 29.ixf5 '&b6t 30.'ii h l :B:cf8 3 1 .fxe5 dxe5 32.Wh3 Wd4 33.g4 Wxd5t 34.'\!!!l g2 Wxb3 35.:B:xa5 if4= when Black had an easy ride towards the draw in Marez Sikorsky, corr. 20 1 1 . 24 . . . f4 25.f3 :B:a7 26.tt:'ic3 Another quick draw was agreed at this point in Reyes Maldonado - Gudkov, corr. 20 1 3 . I think Black's chances are fully satisfactory after: 26 . . . '&b6tN 27.'ii h l id8= Intending to place the rook on d7 and activate the dark-squared bishop via b6.

424

1 5 .�c4

Bl) 2 1 .f3 �d7 This leads to an equal position, as the following lines indicate:

Further exchanges will be forced, leading to a draw. 25.°Wxfl After 25.©xfl gas 26.ib5 ie6 27.g3 ih3t 28.©gl 'Wc8+± Black has more than sufficient counterplay. 25 . . . ic6 26.°Wf3 a4! 27.b4 ln case of27.bxa4 ixd5! 28 .ixd5 Wb6t 29.@fl ie7� Black has dangerous compensation, as the white king has been forced out in the open. 27 . . . ib7 28 .Wfl ixd5 29.ixd5 gxc3 30.gxa4 ie3t 3 1 .©h l gel 32.°Wxc l ixc l 33 .ga8 Wxa8 34.ixaS ©g8= The opposite-coloured bishops guarantee dry equality.

22.ga2 Black can now make his defensive task considerably easier:

6 5

4 3 2

23 . . . fxe4!N 24.fxe4 gxfl t 25.°!Wxfl h5!=

22 . . . gc8!N Play may continue as follows: 23.°Wd3 23.exf5 ixf5 24.°We2 (24.id3 ie6=) 24 . . . ie6 25.gdl gc5! 26.b4 axb4 27.cxb4 gc6 28.b5 (28.g3 Wf c8+±) 28 ... gc5= is completely equal. 23 . . . fxe4! 24.fxe4 gxfl t

23.°Wd3, as in Lupo - Dieckmann, email 200 5 , i s similar. 23 . . . fxe4! 24.fxe4 gxfl t 25.gxfl h 5 ! 26.©h l h 4 27.°Wd l ih6 28.h3 ig8= Th e same solid set-up has arisen. White cannot make any progress in view of his king position.

23 .. J%xf5 24.°Wd3 :Sf8 25.'it>hl �f7 26.:Sfdl :ScS In this important position, I couldn't find a way for White to push his b-pawn without allowing either a draw or a favourable exchange

Chapter 37

of light-squared bishops for Black. The following lines will show this clearly.

� .r•, �� • iii�' -�'iii iii . 6 iiliil . . % %�,,,,; � �� 'SI � .a. �ev�%

'SI� :&�§

,, , , ,

l 7. 'll ce3

425

33 ... g6 34.id3 l"lxa l 3 5 .l'hal l"lcl t 36.l"lxc l �xcl t 37.g2 ie3= with the same typical sterile equality. After 30.'1Wd3 Black should react as follows:

� , , ,� . . % -�w � .�. . % m

�

·,,,;

4 � � � � �� 3 � {j � . . % �- 8 s

% . .

2 �� r;W/j I

�iiliil rill iii·� .

27.'1*fe2! After an immediate 27.b4 axb4 28.cxb4 ih6! Black already intends . . . �h4 with a good game. If White tries to prevent it with 29.g3 (29.�e4 ig6 30.�e2 e4 3 1 .fxe4 �h4�) then 29 . . . ih5� observes the new weakness, giving sufficient counter-chances. 27... gcS! Stirring up a crisis, as Black now intends . . . �c8 with his a-pawn protected.

33 ...AxdS 34.i:l:xdS gh6= Black's reply to the next move will illustrate his plan nicely.

28.b4 I cannot see anything else for White.

35.'1Wd3 35.g3 '1Wb7 36.�d3 ie3!= gives comfortable equality for Black.

28 ... axb4 29.cxb4 E!c6 In this position, in spite of the time lost, Black equalizes comfortably because the enemy b-pawn is as much a weakness as it is a strength. 30.'1Wd3 Neither this nor any of the alternatives pose a real threat to Black. 30.b5 l"lc5= and again the b-pawn is rather weak and cannot advance further. 30.ia6 should be answered simply by 30 . . . ixd5 3 1 .l"lxd5 �c7 32.l"ldd l l"la8 33.g3 (33.b5 l"lc5=)

426

1 5 .ilc4

35 ... :Elf4+! White's forces are rather tied-up, and the b4pawn is feeble.

Khalifman's book refers to a game with 23 . . . ic6, bur the text move is better because it enables Black to use the c-file.

B2) 2 1 .exfS

24.:!:':ldl 24.l'!fal V!ff c8 25.!'!xa5 id8!= led to an easy draw for Black. 26.l"\5a2 ixd5 27.ixd5 V!ffxc3 28.V!ff d2 ia5 29.Wfxc3 ixc3 30.!'!cl id4 3 1 .!'!c6 !'!fc8 32.!'!ac2 !'!xc6 33.!'!xc6 ms 34.if3 ic5 35 .!'!a6 g5 36.gas @g7 37.!'!xf8 @xf8 Y2-V2 Huber - Kainz, corr. 20 1 0.

8 �� , 7 , , ,Y,� ,,,,,/,� , , ,Y,.� 6 ��.fa ' � �� ----?'.�.r0 ��-� �� •llJr� m '

The main move; saddling Black with three pawn islands while White has only two.

2 1 .. ..ixfS 22.�e2 A logical, developing move. There seems to be nothing else of any real substance. 22.b4N is answered by:

/".

/.:/ /.,//,

z "''/,

4 - - - /, r-- - - /---,- �� !}!%�� 3 �ri�� 0!%�0!"' ��JfJ 2 � �� .,, 1 � m �- � s

24 ... :gc8! The black rook eyes the c5-square, and brings us to our final branch of the chapter. We will analyse B2 1) 25.�el and B22} 25.g3. 25.!'!a4 invites a draw by repetition with 25 . . . id7 26.ib5 ie6 27.ic4 id7=. 25.f3 is approximately equal after the typical 25 . . . !'!c5 . If 26.b4N (26.!'!a4 V!ff e 8 Y2-Y2 Lirvinenko - Saviano, corr. 2006) 26 . . . axb4 27.cxb4, then both 27 . . . !'!c6= and 27 . . . !'!c8= should suffice. My preference goes to 27 . . . !'!c6 though; I believe it is good to tempt the b-pawn's advance to b5 (provided it cannot get any further) as it gives us the c5-square.

B21) 25.W/el This sets a slight positional trap which Black can sidestep easily:

Chapter 37

l 7.tll ce3

427

White has a small initiative, but Black is able to nullify this with accurate moves.

28 ... l:!xb3 None of the following lines leads to an advantage for White: 29.cxd6 Most critical.

25 ...i.g4! This move is annoying for White.

25 . . . !'lc5 allows 26.tll e3! icS (26 . . . ixe3 27.ixe6Âą) 27.!'lad2 l'l:f6 2S.l'l:d5!;!; when White had a small initiative in Kilgour - Bures, corr. 2009.

26.i.e2 26.f3 ie6= Granski - Kurgansky, corr. 20 1 1 .

Trying to get the pawn to c6 can only lead to problems for White after either 29.c6 ixd5 30.l'l:xd5 \Wb6? , or 29.ic4 !'lbs 30.c6 !'lcS 3 l .ib5 WeS! 32.!'lb2 (32.!'lxa5 \Wf7 33.tll e 3 d5t) 32 ... Wfl 33.tll b 6 !'lbS 34.tll d7 ixd7 35.cxd7 e4 36.Wxa5 (36.!'lxd6 a4+) 36 . . .Wf5 37.Wa4 d5? with strong pressure for Black. The pawn on d7 isn't going anywhere.

29 ...\Wxd6 30.liJf4 30.ic4 a4!?? 30 ...\Wb6 3 1 .liJxe6 '.Wxe6 32.g:xaS \Wf6 White's advantage is only nominal, for example:

26 ...i.e6 27.c4 l:!b8 This was played in Nizky - Sikorsky, corr. 20 1 0. Here it would have been interesting for White to try:

33.gd3 33 .ďż˝d3 E'.b2= or 33.!'la4 Wg6=.

28.cS!N An escalation of the tension has occurred.

A clever way to exchange pieces on Black's terms.

428

l 5 .Ac4

B22) 25.g3

(32 . .ie2 l'l'.xb3 33.B:d l ic2=) 32 . . . 1Wf3 33.B:xe4 1Wxe4 34.h4 ih6

Trying to give the king some breathing room, and also annoy Black with the idea of h2-h4. However, the light squares now become weak.

� .i. � �� E

�� "� , , /,�• 6 �� n� ��;;"• 7 "

After 26.h4 there comes 26 . . . ii.xh4! 27.gxh4 '1Wxh4 28.tll e3 ih3! 29.f3 a4! and Black is at least equal. For example, 30.B:xa4? e4! 3 1 .fxe4 '1Wg3t 32.tll g2 .ixg2 33.1Wxg2 '1We3t-+, or 30.bxa4 e4! 3 1 .fxe4 '&g5t with the idea 32.tll g2 ixg2 33 .'&xg2 '1Wc5t+, or 30.b4 '1Wg3t 3 1 .tt:lg2 B:xf3i.

·��-j�m� : -� �i·��

�m�� 32 � �A 8 � i� ,,,,,/,� iwr1",,/, � �'0,,fwtf 1 � � �� .

25 B:bS!? Black has other moves, bur this is the least provocative. Now that White has weakened himself with g2-g3, Black does not need to play . . . B:c5 anymore. •..

26.We1 I can't see anything else for White.

26.B:dal is answered strongly with the customary 26 . . . \Wc8! 27.B:xa5 .ig4 28 .\We l .if3+±. The position should be approximately equal after the following line:

29 .B:a6 '1Wh3 30.\Wfl \Wf5 3 1 .B:xd6 .ie4 32.B:e l

26 ...Ag4! 27.B:dal Wes 28.B:xaS Af3 29.B: la2 Wh3 30.Wfl Wf5 3 1 .b4 This position is equal. We shall follow a correspondence game to see how things may unfold:

Chapter 37

429

l 7 . llJ ce3

Conclusion

3 1 . . .h5 32 .i.e2 i.d8 33 .li:l e3±

32 ..ie2 .ids 33.tll e3 .ixe2 34.�xe2 Wi'd3 35.�dS Wi'xc3 36.l'!xd6 '!Wxb4 37.l'!dl Wfe4 38.�kl .if6 39Jik4 Wi'd3 40.�el 'Wxfl t 41 .�xfl

this,

l 7. lll ce3 ,

the final chapter, we dealt with which may be regarded as the

ultimate main line of the Sveshnikov according to current theory. After exhaustively analysing the various options available, I concluded that Black's soundest response is to exchange a pair of knights with l 7 . . . lll e7! 1 8 . lll xe7 'Wxe7 l 9 . lll d5 Wi'd8 . In the ensuing position, 20 .Wi'a l is a sensible try. The main 20 . . . f5 line seems reliable enough for Black, although it is important to follow it up correctly. The less common 20 . . . Wi'd7!? looks like a viable way to escape some theory. White's main line by far is 20.0-0, when 20 . . . f5 reaches another important position.

20 10.

2 l . f3 is not too threatening, but 2 l .exf5 i.xf5

A draw was agreed here in Riccio - Moll, corr.

draw.

Even if White wins the e-pawn it is just a

22 .Wi'e2 .id7 23.Ela2 .ie6 24.Eld l Elc8! is rather critical. It feels odd to have a branching of variations at move 2 5 , and the great maj ority of tournament players will not need to memorize anything more than this. However, I felt it important to check that the position was still working. After 2 5 .'We l I found an interesting way for White to improve on a correspondence game, but Black nonetheless has sufficient resources. 2 5 .g3 is another logical move, but the subtle 25 . . . E\ b 8 ! ? works well, followed by playing on the light squares . The Riccio - Moll correspondence game currently stands as the template, and after analysing it carefully I see no major problems for Black.

Key to symbols used !

:j:

Âą

ďż˝

White is slightly better Black is slightly better White is better Black is better White has a decisive advantage Black has a decisive advantage equality with compensation with counterplay unclear

--+

t ?? !! !? ?! #

with an attack with an initiative a weak move a blunder a good move an excellent move a move worth considering a move of doubtful value mate novelty

Bibliography

Aagaard & Shaw: Experts vs the Sicilian (2nd ed.) , Quality Chess 2006 Cox: Starting Out: Sicilian Sveshnikov, Everyman Chess 2007 De la Villa: Dismantling the Sicilian, New in Chess 2009 Emms & Palliser: Dangerous Weapons: The Sicilian, Everyman Chess 2006 Khalifman: Opening for White According to Anand I 0, Chess Stars 2007 Kolev & Nedev: The Easiest Sicilian, Chess Stars 2008 Rogozenko: The Sveshnikov Reloaded, Quality Chess 2005 Yakovich: The Complete Sveshnikov Sicilian, Gambit 2002

Periodkals New in Chess Yearbooks Electronic/Internet resources ChessBase Magazine Chess Publishing

Chapter 1

Variation Index

1 .e4 c5 2.tlif3 tli c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tlixd4 tlif6 5.tlic3 e5 A) 6.ti:lde2 ib4 7.a3 ia5 6 A l ) 8 .b4?! 6 A2) 8 . f3 6 A3) 8 .ig5 ! ? 7 B) 6.ti:Jf5 8 C) 6.ti:lxc6 bxc6 13 C l ) 7.ig5 ?! 13 C2) 7.f4?! 14 C3) 7.id3 15 C4) 7.ic4 16 D) 6.ti:Jf3 ib4! 17 0 1 ) 7.id3 17 D2) 7.ic4!? 18 E) 6.ti:Jb3 ib4! 21 E l ) 7.id2 22 E2) 7.id3 23 E3) 7.ic4 24

Chapter 2 1 .e4 c5 2.tlif3 tlic6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tlixd4 tlif6 5.tlic3 e5 6.tlidb5 d6 A) 7.ti:la3 28 B) 7.ie3 a6 8 . 'li a3 :1:1b8!? 9.ti:ld5 ti:lxd5 1 0.exd5 ti:l e7 29 B l ) l l .c3 29 B2) l I .ic4 29 B3) l l .c4 30 B4) l l . b4! ? 31 C) 7.a4 a6 8 . ti:l a3 ig4! 32 C l ) 9 .ie2 32 Cl) 9 . f3 ie6 34 C2 1 ) 1 0.ie3 ?! 34 C22) 1 0 . ti:l c4!? 35 C23) 1 0.ig5 ie7 35 C23 1 ) 1 I .ic4 36 C232) I I .ti:l c4 36 C24) 1 0.ic4 :1:1c8 37 C24 1 ) I I .ti:Jd5 37 C242) 1 1 .0-0 38

Chapter 3 1 .e4 c5 2.tlif3 tLJc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tlixd4 tl)f6 s.tLJc3 e5 6.tLJdb5 d6 7.tlid5 tLJxd5 8.exd5 tLJbs A) 9 .Wf3 a6 1 0 .Wa3 ie7 42 A l ) l I .id2 0-0 42 A2) I I .ig5 ! ? f6 1 2 .id2 0-0! 1 3 .ib4 Wd7! 44 Al l ) 1 4 .id3 45 A22) 1 4 .ie2 45 B) 9 .ie3 ie7 1 0 .Wd2 a6 1 l .ti:l a3 ti:l d7 1 2.ti:lc4 0-0 46 B l ) 1 3 .ie2 46 B2) 1 3 .a4 47

432

Grandmaster Repertoire 1 8

The Sicilian Sveshnikov

Chapter 4 l.e4 c5 2.tll f3 tll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tll xd4 tll f6 s.tll c3 e5 6.tll dh5 d6 7.tll d5 tll xd5 8.exd5 tll b8 9.c4 a6 A) 1 0 .iM!a4 liJ d7 56 A l ) l 1 .1Mla3 56 A2) l l .c5 ! ? 57 A3) l l .ie3 59 B) l O. liJ c3 fie? 60 B 1 ) l l .ie3! ? 0-0 1 2.1/Jrd2 f5 l 3 . f3 i2J d7! 60 B l 1 ) 1 4 .ie2 60 B l 2) 1 4 .id3 ! ? 61 B2) l l .id3 0-0 1 2 .0-0 f5 62 B2 1 ) 1 3 .f4 i2J d7 62 B2 1 l ) 1 4.ie3 63 B2 1 2) 1 4.'!Wc2 63 B2 1 3) 1 4. © h l 64 B22) 1 3 .f3 li.J d7! 65 B22 1 ) 1 4 .ie3 65 B222) 1 4.©h l 66

Chapter 5 l .e4 c5 2.tll f3 tll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tll xd4 �f6 s.tll c3 e5 6.tll db5 d6 7.tll d 5!? tll xd5 8.exd5 tll b8 9.c4 a6 10.tll c3 ie7 I l .i.e2 0-0 1 2.0-0 fS! A) 1 3 .a4 71 B) 1 3 . b4 72 C) 1 3 .a3 73 D) 1 3 .E':b l ! ? 73 E) 1 3 .E':e l 74 F) 1 3 .f4 75 G) 1 3 .f3 li.J d7 78 G l ) 1 4.El:b l 78 G2) l 4.ie3 79 G3) 1 4.©h l 81

Chapter 6 1 .e4 c5 2.tll f3 tll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tll xd4 tll f6 5.tll c3 e5 6.tll db5 d6 7.ig5 a6 8.tll a3 b5 A) 9 . li.J ab l ie7 1 0 .ixf6 ixf6 l l .a4 b4 1 2. i2J d5 ig5 84 A l ) 1 3 . li.J d2 85 A2) 1 3 .ic4 85 B) 9 .ixf6 gxf6 1 0. li.l ab l f5 ! 86 B l ) l l .a4! ? 88 B2) l l .id3 89

Variation Index Chapter ? 1 .e4 c5 2.tll B tll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tll xd4 tll f6 5.tll c3 e5 6.tll db5 d6 7.ig5 a6 8.tll a3 b5 9.ixf6 gxf6 10.tll d5 f5! A) l 1 .Wd3 ?! fxe4! 1 2.Wxe4 J.g7 92 A l ) 1 3 .lll f6t 93 A2) 1 3 .lll e3!? 93 B) l 1 .lll xb5 ? ! axb5 1 2.ixb5 ib7! 1 3 .exf5 l'!c8 94 B l ) 1 4.c3 95 B2) 1 4.0-0 96 C) l l .c4 97

Chapter 8 1 .e4 c5 2.tll B tll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tll xd4 tll f6 5.tll c3 e5 6.tll db5 d6 7.ig5 a6 8.tll a3 b5 9.J.xf6 gxf6 10.tll d5 f5 l l .J.xb5!? axb5 12.tll xb5 Jfa4! A) 1 3 .b4?! 99 B) 1 3 . lll dc7t?! @d7 1 4.0-0 Elxe4 1 5 .Wd5 Wf6 101 B l ) 1 6.a4 1 01 B2) 1 6.lll a8 ! ? 1 02 C) 1 3 .lll bc?t @d7 1 4.0-0 Elxe4 1 03 C l ) 1 5 .c4 l'!g8!N 1 03 C l 1 ) 1 6.g3?! 1 03 C l 2) 1 6.Wa4!? 1 05 C2) 1 5 .Wh5 lll d4 1 05 C2 l ) l 6.f4!? 1 06 C22) 1 6.Wxf7t 1 01 C23) 1 6.c3 lll e2t 1 7.@h l @c6! 1 8 .g3 @b7 1 9 .a4!? Elc4! 1 07 C23 1 ) 20.Wxe2 1 09 C232) 20.lll b5!? 1 1 0

Chapter 9 1 .e4 c5 2.�B � c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.�xd4 �f6 5.�c3 e5 6.�db5 d6 7.ig5 a6 8.� a3 b5 9.ixf6 gxf6 10.tll d5 f5 1 1 .g3 fxe4 12.ig2 ie6 1 3.ixe4 ig7! 14.Wh5! l'.k8! A) 1 5 .0-0 tll e7 1 14 A l ) 1 6.lll xe7 1 1 4 A2 ) 1 6.l'!ad l 1 15 B) 1 5 .c3 1 1 6 C ) 1 5 .Eldl 1 1 7

Chapter 10 1 .e4 c5 2.�B � c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.�xd4 �f6 5.�c3 e5 6.�db5 d6 7.J.g5 a6 8.tll a3 b5 9.J.xf6 gxf6 10.�d5 f5 A) l l .c3 120 B) l l .exf5 ixf5 121 B l ) 1 2 .Wf3?! 122 B2) 1 2 .id3 123 B3) 1 2 .c3 ig7 125 B3 1 ) 1 3 .Wf3 ?! 125 B32) 1 3 .tll c2 0-0 126 B32 1 ) 1 4.a4 127 B322) 1 4 .ie2!? 128

433

434

Grandmaster Repertoire 1 8

The Sicilian Sveshnikov

Chapter 1 1 1 .e4 cS 2.tll f3 tlic6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tll xd4 tll f6 5.tll c3 eS 6.tll dbS d6 7.igS a6 8.tll a3 bS 9.ixf6 gxf6 10.tll dS f5 1 1 .exf5 ixf5 12.c3 ig7 13 .!lic2 0-0 14.tlice3 .ie6 â&#x20AC;¢

A) 1 5 .a4?! 132 B) l 5 . g4?! 133 C) l 5 . g3 f5 ! 135 C l ) 1 6.ig2 136 C2) 1 6.ih3 ! ? 137

Chapter 12 1.e4 cS 2.tll f3 tll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tll xd4 tll f6 5.tll c3 eS 6.llidbS d6 7.igS a6 8.llia3 bS 9.ixf6 gxf6 10.tll dS f5 1 1 .exf5 ixf5 12.c3 ig7 13.llic2 0-0 14.tll ce3 ie6 1 5.id3 f5 A) 1 6.a4 142 B) 1 6.ic2 143 B l ) 1 6 . . . f4 144 82) 1 6 . . . e4! ? 1 7 .tll f4 if7 145 82 1 ) 1 8 .0-0 146 B22) 1 8 .ib3 146 B23) 1 8 .tll h5!? 148 C) 1 6.'Wh5 e4 1 7.ic2 tll e7! 148 C l ) 1 8 .tll f4 149 C2) 1 8 .ib3 150 C3) 1 8 .B:d l b4! ? 152 C3 1 ) 1 9 .0-0 152 C32) 1 9 .tll xb4 153 C33) 1 9 .cxb4!? 155 D) 1 6 .0-0 156

Chapter 1 3 1 .e4 cS 2.tll O tll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tll xd4 tll f6 5.tll c3 eS 6.llidbS d6 7 ..igS a6 8.tll a3 bS 9.ixf6 gxf6 10.tll dS f5 1 1 .id3 ie6 1 2.c3 ig7 A) 1 3 .0-0 0-0 160 A l ) 1 4 .B:e l ?! 1 61 A2) 1 4 .g3?! 1 61 A3) 1 4.f3 1 62 B) 1 3 . tll c2 0-0 1 4 . 0-0 B:c8 1 63 B l ) 1 5 . a4 164 B2) 1 5 .tll ce3 1 65 B3) 1 5 .f3!? 1 66

Chapter 14 1 .e4 cS 2.llif3 llic6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tll xd4 tll f6 S.llic3 eS 6.llidbS d6 7 ..igS a6 8.llia3 bS 9.ixf6 gxf6 10.tll dS f5 I I .id3 ie6 12.c3 ig7 13.'!WhS 0-0 A) 1 4 .tll e3!? 1 70 B) 14.exf5 1 71 C) 1 4.0-0 f4 1 73 C l ) 1 5 .g4!? 1 74 C2) l 5 .tll c2 1 75 C3) 1 5 .B:fd l 1 76

Variation Index

43 5

C4) 1 5 .l"lad l lt>hs 1 6.g3! l"1g8 1 7.lt>h l �JS 1 8 .ie2! l"1g5 1 9.Wf3 f5! ? 1 79 C4 1 ) 20. exf5 1 79 C42) 20.gxf4 180

Chapter 15 1 .e4 c5 2.tlif3 lll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tlixd4 tlif6 5.tlic3 e5 6.lll db5 d6 7.ig5 a6 8.tlia3 b5 9.ixf6 gxf6 10.tlid5 f5 1 1 .id3 ie6 12.c3 ig7 13.tlixb5!? axb5! 14.ixb5 id7! 1 5.exf5 e4!? A) 1 6.Wg4 1 86 B) 1 6.0-0 0-0 l 7.a4 l"1e8! 1 8 .Wg4! lt>hS! 188 B l ) 1 9.me l ! ? 189 B2) 1 9 .:!! ad l ! E:cS! 20.l"1fe l l"1e5 2 1 .lll e3 Wf6! 22.We2! ixf5 23.lll xf5 Wxf5 ! 24.E:xd6 lll b8 191 B2 1 ) 25 .l"\ed l 194 B22) 25 .h3 195 B23) 25 .g3!? 196

Chapter 16 l .e4 c5 2.lll f3 lll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tlixd4 tlif6 5.lll c3 e5 6.tlidb5 d6 7.ig5 a6 8.tlia3 b5 9.ixf6 gxf6 10.tlid5 f5 1 I .id3 ie6 12.�h5 E:g8! A) 1 3. 0-0-0?! 199 B) 1 3.0-0?! 200 C) 1 3 .c3 l'l:xg2! 201 C l ) 1 4 . lll c2 202 C2) 1 4 .�f3 203 D) 1 3.f4 204 E) 1 3 .g3 'll d4 1 4.c3 fxe4 l 5 .ixe4 ig4 1 6.�xh7 l"1g7 l 7.Wh6 'll f3t 206 E l ) 1 8 .lt>fl ?! 207 E2) 1 8 .lt>e2 209

Chapter 17 1 .e4 c5 2.tlif3 tlic6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tlixd4 tlif6 5.tlic3 e5 6.tlidb5 d6 7.ig5 a6 8.tlia3 b5 9.ixf6 gxf6 10.tlid5 f5 1 1 .id3 ie6 12.c4 �a5t! 1 3.@fl fxe4 A) 1 4 .'ll f6t?! 212 B) 1 4.ixe4 213

Chapter 18 1 .e4 c5 2.tlif3 lll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tlixd4 tlif6 5.tlic3 e5 6.lll db5 d6 7.ig5 a6 8.tlia3 b5 9.ixf6 gxf6 10.lll d5 f5 1 1 .id3 ie6 12.0-0 ixd5!? 13.exd5 tlie7 14.tlixb5 ig7 15.tlic3 e4 A) 1 6.ie2 0-0! 1 7 .Wd2 'll g6 217 A l ) 1 8 .a4 218 A2) 1 8 .l"1ab l !? 220 B) 1 6.ic4 'll g 6! 1 7.Wh5!? ixc3! 1 8 .bxc3 Wf6 221 B I ) 1 9.f4?! 222 B2) 1 9.Wh6! 223

Chapter 19 1 .e4 c5 2.tlif3 tlic6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tlixd4 tlif6 5.tlic3 e5 6.tlidb5 d6 7.ig5 a6 8.tlia3 b5 9.ixf6 gxf6 10.tlid5 f5 I l .id3 ie6 12.0-0 hd5 13.exd5 tli e7 14.�h5 e4 1 5.ie2 ig7 16.c3 0-0! 17.tlic2 l"1e8!? A) 1 8 .l'l:ad l 230 B) 1 8 .f3!? 231

Grandmaster Repertoire 1 8

436

The Sicilian Sveshnikov

Chapter 20 1 .e4 cS 2 . .!i::i f3 .!i::i c6 3.d4 cxd4 4 . .!i::i xd4 .!i::i f6 S . .!i::i c3 eS 6 . .!i::i dbS d6 7.igS a6 8 .!i::i a3 bS 9.ixf6 gxf6 10 . .!i::i dS f5 1 1 .i.d3 ie6 1 2.0-0 ixdS 1 3.exdS .!i::i e7 14.c4 1g7!r •

A) 1 5 .Wi'd2 235 B) 1 5 .:i'lb l e4! 1 6.1e2 bxc4 1 7.ti:lxc4 0-0 238 B l ) 1 8 .f4?! 239 B2) 1 8 .1Mid2 240 B3) 1 8 .f3!? 240

Chapter 2 1 1 .e4 c S 2 .!i::i f3 .!i::l c6 3.d4 cxd4 4 .!i::l xd4 .!i::i f6 S .!i::i c3 e S 6 .!i::i dbS d6 7.i.gS a6 8 . .!i::i a3 b5 9.ixf6 gxf6 10 .!i::i dS f5 1 1 .id3 ie6 1 2.0-0 1xd5 1 3.exdS .!i::l e7 14.l:!el ig7 •

•

A) 1 5 .:gb l 244 B) 1 5 .c3 0-0 246 B l ) 1 6.lll c2 246 B2) l 6.1Mlh5 e4 l 7.1fl ges 247 B2 1 ) 1 8 .lll c2 248 B22) 1 8 .gad l ! gc8! 250 B22 1 ) 1 9.tll c2 250 B222) 1 9.l:!e3!? 251

Chapter 22 1 .e4 cS 2 .!i::i f3 .!i::i c6 3.d4 cxd4 4 .!i::i xd4 .!i::i f6 S .!i::i c3 eS 6.tll dbS d6 7.igS a6 8 .!i::i a3 b5 9.ixf6 gxf6 10 .!i::i dS f5 1 1 .fd3 fe6 12.0-0 fxdS 1 3.exdS .!i::l e7 14.d i.g7 •

•

A) l 5 .lll c2 254 B) 1 5 .1Mlh5 e4! 1 6.i.c2 0-0 1 7.:gae l 1Mfc8! 255 B l ) 1 8 .f3 b4! 256 B l 1 ) 1 9.cxb4 257 B l 2) 1 9.lll b l 258 B2) 1 8 .g4!? 258 B3) 1 8 .ib3!? a5! 259 B3 1 ) 1 9.lll xb5 a4 20.id l 1Mlc5 ! 259 B3 1 l ) 2 1 . lll d4 260 B3 1 2) 2 1 .1e2 261 B32) l 9 .1Mlg5! 1Mlb7! 20.f3 h6! 261 B32 1 ) 2 1 .1Mlf4 262 B322) 2 1 .1Mlg3 263 B4) 1 8 .Whl :i'lb8! 264 B4 1 ) 1 9 .1b3!? 264 B42) 1 9.f3 264 B43) 1 9 .g4!? 267

Chapter 23 1 .e4 cS 2 . .!i::i f3 .!i::i c6 3.d4 cxd4 4 . .!i::i xd4 .!i::i f6 S .!l'l c3 eS 6 .!i::i dbS d6 7.fgS a6 8 .!i::i a3 b5 9 .!i::i dS i.e7 •

A) 1 0.lll xf6t?! ixf6 270 A l ) l l .ie3 ?! 270 A2) l 1 .1xf6 271 B) 1 0 .lll xe7 lll xe7!? 272 B 1 ) l 1 .1Mlf3 272

•

Variation Index B2) l 1 .1Mid3 274 B3) 1 1 .f3 d5! 275 B3 1 ) 1 2.ixf6 275 B32) 1 2.exd5 276 B4) l 1 .id3 ib7!? 277 B4 1 ) 1 2.f3!? 278 B42) 1 2 .1Mie2 lll d7! 280 B42 1 ) 1 3.b4!? 280 B422) 1 3.c4 281

Chapter 24 l .e4 c5 2.c!lif3 c!li c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.c!lixd4 c!lif6 5.c!lic3 e5 6.c!lidb5 d6 7.ig5 a6 8.c!lia3 b5 9.c!lidS ie7 10.c!lixe7 c!lixe7!? l l .ixf6 gxf6 A) 1 2.1Mif3 f5! 285 A l ) 1 3 .0-0-0 285 A2) 1 3 .exf5 286 B) 1 2.c4 ib7 287 B l ) 1 3.cxb5 ? ! ixe4 287 B l 1 ) 1 4 .1Mla4?! 287 B 1 2) 1 4.bxa6 289 B2) 1 3 .id3 Elg8! 290 B2 1 ) 1 4 . cxb5?! 290 B22) 1 4.l"i:g l ! 291 C) 1 2.id3 ib7 292 C l ) 1 3 .'1Mle2 292 C2) 1 3.1Mih5 ! ? 293

Chapter 25 l .e4 c5 2 . .!lia c!li c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.c!lixd4 c!lif6 s . .!lic3 e5 6.c!lidb5 d6 7.ig5 a6 8.c!lia3 b5 9.c!lid5 ie7 1 0.ixf6 ixf6 A) 1 l .h4 297 B) l 1 .g3 299 C) 1 1 .id3 300 D) l 1 .ie2 301 E) 1 1 . t/J b 1 ElbS!? 302 E l ) 1 2.a4 302 E2) 1 2.b4 303 E3) 1 2.lll d2 304

Chapter 26 l .e4 c5 2 . .!lia c!lic6 3.d4 cxd4 4.c!lixd4 .!lif6 s . .!lic3 e5 6.c!lidb5 d6 7.ig5 a6 8.c!lia3 b5 9.c!lid5 ie7 10.ixf6 ixf6 1 l .c4 b4 12.c!lic2 a5 A) 1 3 .lll xf6t?! 308 B) 1 3 .b3 309 C) 1 3.h4 3 1 0 D ) 1 3 .id3 3 1 1 E ) 1 3 .c5!? 312 F) 1 3.1Mid3 313 G) 1 3 .'1Mff3 ie6! 1 4.Eld l a4!? 1 5 .ie2 b3! 1 6.axb3 l"i:bS! 314 G l ) 1 7.t/Jxf6t 316 G2) 1 7.b4N 316

4 37

438

Grandmaster Repertoire 1 8

The Sicilian Sveshnikov

Chapter 27 1 .e4 c5 2 . .!Lif3 .!li c6 3.d4 cxd4 4. .!Lixd4 .!Liffi 5 . .!lic3 e5 6 . .!lidb5 d6 7.ig5 a6 8 . .!lia3 b5 9 . .!lid5 ie7 10.ixf6 ixf6 l l .c4 b4 12.tlic2 a5 13.ie2 0-0 14.0-0 ig5 A) 1 5 .ig4 319 B) 1 5 .W/d3 ie6!? 320 B l ) 1 6.l"lfd l 320 B2) 1 6.a3 321 B3) 1 6.l"lad l 321

Chapter 28 1 .e4 c5 2 . .!Lif3 .!lic6 3.d4 cxd4 4..!Lixd4 .!Liffi 5.tLlc3 e5 6 . .!lidb5 d6 7.ig5 a6 8 . .!lia3 b5 9.tLld5 ie7 10 ..ixf6 .ixf6 l l .c4 b4 12.tlic2 a5 13.g3 0-0! A) 1 4.h4 326 B) 1 4.ig2 ig5 1 5 .0-0 lll e7! 327 B l ) 1 6.b3?! 328 B2) 1 6.f4 329 B3) 1 6 .lll de3 329 B4) 1 6.h4! ? 330 B5) 1 6.lll xe7t 330 B6) 1 6.lll ce3 332

Chapter 29 l .e4 c5 2 . .!Lif3 .!lic6 3.d4 cxd4 4 . .!Lixd4 .!Liffi 5 . .!lic3 e5 6 . .!lidb5 d6 7.ig5 a6 8 . .!lia3 b5 9 . .!lid5 ie7 10.ixf6 ixf6 l l .c3 0-0! A) 1 2.h4 ie6! 1 3 .lll c2 ixd5! 1 4.Wxd5 .!li e7 336 A l ) 1 5 .Wd3 336 A2) 1 5 .Wb3!? 337 B) 1 2.id3 ig5 1 3 .ic2 lll e7!? 337 B l ) 1 4 . 0-0 338 B2) 1 4 .ib3 !? 338 C) 1 2. tl'i c2 .ig5 339 C l ) 1 3 .lll ce3 ixe3!? 1 4 . tl'i xe3 tl'i e7 339 C l l ) 1 5 .id3 340 C l 2) 1 5 .ie2 341 C2) 1 3.id3 342 C3) 1 3 .ie2 tl'ie7 1 4 .lll cb4!? a5 l 5 .lll xe7t W/xe7 1 6 .lll d 5 '1Wb7! 17.'1Wd3! E1b8 1 8.0-0 ie6 342 C3 1 ) 1 9.E(ad l 343 C32) 1 9.l"lfd l 344

Chapter 30 l .e4 c5 2 . .!Lif3 .!lic6 3.d4 cxd4 4.c!i'ixd4 c!i'iffi 5.c!i'ic3 e5 6.c!i'idb5 d6 7 ..ig5 a6 8.c!i'ia3 b5 9.c!i'id5 ie7 10.ixf6 ixf6 l l .c3 0-0 12.c!i'ic2 ig5 13.g3 c!i'i e7! A) 1 4. tl'i cb4 348 B) l 4 . tl'i ce3 349 C) 1 4.h4 ih6 1 5 .lll cb4 ie6! 350 C l ) 1 6.ih3 351 C2) 1 6.a4 352 C3) 1 6.Wi'd3 352

Variation Index Chapter 3 1 l .e4 c 5 2.c!Llf3 c!Llc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.c!Llxd4 c!Ll f6 5.c!Llc3 e5 6.c!Lldb5 d6 7.ig5 a6 8.c!Lla3 b 5 9.c!Lld5 ie7 IO.ixf6 ixf6 1 1 .c3 0-0 12.c!Llc2 ig5 13.h4 ih6 14.g4 if4 A) 1 5 .lll xf4 356 B) 1 5 .g5!? ie6! 1 6.lll xf4 exf4 1 7 .'Mfd2!? Wa5! ? 357 B l ) 1 8 .Wxf4 358 B2) 1 8 .lll d4 359 C) 1 5 .Wf3 ie6 359 C l ) 1 6.ie2 360 C2) 1 6.E:d l 361 C3) 1 6 . .id3 362 C4) 1 6.lll xf4 exf4 1 7.1Mfxf4 lll e5 363 C4 1 ) 1 8 .g5 364 C42) 1 8 .lll e3 366

Chapter 32 1 .e4 c5 2.c!Llf3 c!Ll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.c!Llxd4 c!Llf6 5.tlic3 e5 6.c!Lldb5 d6 7.ig5 a6 8.tlia3 b5 9.tlid5 ie7 IO ..ixf6 ixf6 1 1 .c3 0-0 12.c!Llc2 ig5 1 3.a4 bxa4 14.E:xa4 aS! A) l 5 . b4?! 368 B) l 5 .'ll ce3 369 C) l 5 . h4 ih6 372 C l ) 1 6.'ll ce3 372 C2) 1 6.g4 373 C3) 1 6.ic4 374 C4) 1 6 . .ib5 375

Chapter 33 I .e4 cS 2.c!Llf3 c!Llc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.c!Llxd4 c!Llf6 5.c!Llc3 eS 6.c!LldbS d6 7.igS a6 8.c!Lla3 b5 9.c!LldS ie7 IO.ixf6 ixf6 1 1 .c3 0-0 12.c!Llc2 ig5 13.a4 bxa4 14.E:xa4 aS 15.ib5 c!Ll e7! A) 1 6.lll ce3 378 B) 1 6.lll xe7t 1Mfxe7 379 B l ) 1 7.0-0 379 B2) 1 7 .lll b4 379 C) 1 6. lll cb4 .ih3 1 7 .lll xe7t Wxe7 380 Cl) 1 8.ic6 381 C2) 1 8. 'll d5 382

Chapter 34 I .e4 cS 2.c!Llf3 c!Llc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tlixd4 c!Ll f6 S.c!Llc3 eS 6.tlidbS d6 7.igS a6 8.c!Lla3 bS 9.tll dS ie7 IO.ixf6 ixf6 1 1 .c3 0-0 12.tll c2 ig5 1 3.a4 bxa4 14.E:xa4 a5 IS ..ic4 E:b8 A) 1 6.b4 385 B) 1 6.Wa l 386 C) 1 6.E:a2 @h8! 388 C l ) 1 7.h4 388 C2) l 7.b4 388 C3) 1 7.0-0 f5 1 8 .exf5 ixf5 389 C3 1 ) 1 9.'Mfe2!? 389 C32) 1 9 .lll ce3 ig6 390

439

440

Grandmaster Repertoire 1 8

The Sicilian Sveshnikov

C32 1 ) 20.°Wa4 391 C322) 20.f3 391 C4) l 7.ll'ice3!? i.xe3! l 8. Cll xe3 Cll e7 392 C4 1 ) 1 9.b3!? 392 C42) 1 9.0-0 f5 20. exf5 Cll xf5 394 C42 1 ) 2 l .Cll xf5 ! ? 394 C422) 2 l .Cll d5 395

Chapter 35 l .e4 cS 2.tll f3 tll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tll xd4 tll f6 5.tll c3 eS 6.tll dbS d6 7 ..igS a6 8.tll a3 bS 9.tll dS .ie7 10 ..ixf6 i.xf6 1 l .c3 0-0 12.tll c2 i.gS 1 3.a4 bxa4 14.1"1xa4 aS 15 ..ic4 1"1b8 16.b3 Wh8 A) l 7.°We2!? 399 B) l 7.h4 ih6 401 B l ) 1 8 .ll'ice3 402 B2) 1 8 .°We2 403

Chapter 36 l .e4 cS 2.tll f3 tll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tll xd4 tll f6 5.tll c3 eS 6.tll dbS d6 7 ..igS a6 8.tll a3 bS 9.tll dS .ie7 10.i.xf6 ixf6 1 1 .c3 0-0 12.tll c2 i.gS 13.a4 bxa4 14.:!"1xa4 aS 1 5.ic4 :!"1b8 16.b3 Wh8 17.0-0 f5 A) 1 8 .f3 407 B) 1 8 .Ele l fxe4 1 9.Elxe4 if5 20.Ele2!? i.g4! 2 1 . f3 i.h5 ! 408 B l ) 22.Wh l N 41 0 B2) 22.Cll e l !? 41 1 C) 1 8 .exf5 ixf5 41 1 C l ) 1 9.°We2 412 C2) 1 9. ll'i ce3 i.g6 414 C2 1 ) 20.i.d3 415 C22) 20.l"!e l 41 6 C23) 20.i.e2 416 C24) 20.°We2 418

Chapter 37 1 .e4 cS 2.tll f3 tll c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tll xd4 tll f6 5.tll c3 eS 6.tll dbS d6 7.i.gS a6 8.tll a3 bS 9.tll d5 ie7 10.i.xf6 i.xf6 1 l .c3 0-0 12.tll c2 igS 1 3.a4 bxa4 14.:!"1xa4 aS 1 5.ic4 :!"1b8 16.b3 Wh8 17.tll ce3 tll e7! 18.tll xe7 Wxe7 19.tll dS Wd8 A) 20.°Wa l 421 B) 20.0-0 f5 423 B l ) 2 1 .f3 424 B2) 2 1 .exf5 ixf5 22.°We2 i.d7 23.l"!a2 i.e6 24.l"!d l l"!c8! 426 B2 1 ) 2 5 .°We l 426 B22) 25 .g3 428

GAMES/CHESS

Va s s i l i os Kot ro n i a s

The Sicilian Sveshnikov

The Sve s h n i kov i s o n e of the m o st a c t i ve a n d d y n a m i c v a r i a t i o n s o f t h e S i c i l i a n , a n d h a s b e e n u s e d s u cc e s s fu l l y b y p l a y e r s o f a l l a b i l i t i e s fro m c l u b l eve l t h ro u g h to wo r l d c h a m p i o n s . I n

G ra n d m a ster R e p e r t o i re 1 8, o p e n i n g co n n o i s se u r Va s s i l i o s

Kot ro n i a s p l a ce s t h i s b o l d syste m u n d e r t h e m i c ro s c o p e a n d

p rovi d e s a w o r l d - c l a ss re p e rtoi re fo r B l a c k.

A sharp and ambitious Black repertoire with hundreds of novelties Written by a world-renowned theoretician

Covers all lines after 1 . e4 cs 2.<£J f3 <£Jc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.<£Jxd4 <2Jf6 s.<£Jc3 es

Va s s i l i o s Kot ro n i a s i s a n i n e -t i m e G re e k C h a m p i o n a n d m a i n stay of the Gre e k n a t i o n a l tea m , as b o t h a p l aye r a n d a coa c h . He i s

•

fea red fo r h i s p rofo u n d o p e n i n g p re p a ra t i o n .

€24.99

I S B N 978-1 -907982-92-7

·�

�

QUALITY CH ESS

www.q u a l ityc h ess.co. u k

$ 29.95 5 2 9 9 5

9 781 907 982927