9s -t ' M id' clless
Special Editor:
1M Vladimir Barskiy
Technical Editor:
1M Sergey Soloviov
Translation by:
GM...
501 downloads
7859 Views
6MB Size
Report
This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!
Report copyright / DMCA form
9s -t ' M id' clless
Special Editor:
1M Vladimir Barskiy
Technical Editor:
1M Sergey Soloviov
Translation by:
GM Evgeny Ermenkov
Cover design by:
Kalojan Nachev
Copyright © Victor Bologan
2009
Printed in Bulgaria by "Chess Stars" Ltd. ISBNI3: 978 954 8782 71 5
-
Sofia
Victor Bologan
The King's Indian A Complete Black Repertoire
Chess Stars
Bibliography Understanding The King's Indian by M.Golubev, Gambit Publications, 2006 Openings for White According to Kramnik (la, 1b) by AKhalifman, Chess Stars 2006
Other CHESS STARS Books Repertoire books: Opening for White According to Kramnik l.c!ilf3 by A Khalifman Volume 1a: Old Indian, rare lines in the Classical Variation, 2006 Volume 1b: The Classical Variation, 2006 Volume 2: Anti-Nim-Ind, Anti-Queen's Indian, English, Knight Tango, 2008 Volume 3: Maroczy, English (l ...cS), Modern, Dutch Volume 4: Queen's Gambit Accepted, Slav, Semi-Slav Volume 5: Queen's Gambit Declined Opening for White According to Anand 1.e4 by A Khalifman Volume 6: The French Defence 3.tLlc3 dxe4, 3...tLlf6, 2006 Volume 7: The French Defence 3.tLlc3 Ab4, 2006 Volume 8: The Sicilian, Paulsen-Kan and rare lines, 2006 Volume 9: The Sicilian, Paulsen-Taimanov and other lines, 2007 Volume 10: The Sicilian, Sveshnikov, 2007 Volume 11; The Sicilian, Dragon, 2009 Opening for Black According to Karpov by Khalifman
Current theory and practice series: Challenging the Sicilian with 2.a3! by Bezgodov, 2004 An Expert's Guide to the 7.Bc4 Gruenfeld by Sakaev, 2006 The Sharpest Sicilian by Kiril Georgiev and At. Kolev, 2007 The Safest Sicilian by Delchev and Semkov, 2nd rev.ed. 2008 The Queen's Gambit Accepted by Sakaev and Semkov, 3rd. rev. ed., 2008 The Easiest Sicilian by Kolev and Nedev, 2008 The Petrosian System Against the QID by Be1iavskyandMikhalchishin, 2008 Kill K.I.D. by Semko Semkov, 2009
Games collections My One Hundred Best Games by Alexey Dreev, 2007 Bogoljubow. The Fate of a Chess Player by S. Soloviov, 2004 Shirov's 100 Wms by Soloviov 316 p., inteIViews, biography, oolour photos, 2003 Leko's 100 Wins by Soloviov 340 pages, biography, colour photos, 2003 More details at www.chess-stars.com 4
Contents Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Part 1. Minor Variations
l.d4 ltJf6 2.c4 g6 3.ltJc3 !g7 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 10
4 . .lgS . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 4.ltJf3 0-0 S ..lgS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 7 4.ltJf3 0-0 S.!f4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 4.e4 d6 S.!gS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 4.e4 d6 S.h3 0-0 6 ..ld3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S6 4.e4 d6 S.h3 0-0 6 ..ie3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 4.e4 d6 S.h3 0-0 6 ..igS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 4.e4 d6 S.h3 0-0 6.ltJf3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 4.e4 d6 S.ltJge2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . lOS 4.e4 d6 S ..id3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
Part 2. Averbakh Variation
1.d4 ltJf6 2.c4 g6 3.ltJc3 .lg7 4.e4 d6 S.ie2 0-0 6.!gS 11 12
6 ... ltJa6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122 6 ...h6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
Part 3. Saemisch Attack
1.d4 ltJf6 2.c4 g6 3.ltJc3 .lg7 4.e4 d6 S.f3 0-0 13 14 lS 16
6.ltJge2 140 6 . .lgS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . lS0 6 . .ie3 c5 7.dc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . lS7 6.!e3 cS 7.dS; 7.ltJge2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167 .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Part 4. Four Pawns Attack
l.d4 ltJf6 2.c4 g6 3.ltJc3 .ig7 4.e4 d6 S.f4 0-0 6.ltJf3 cS 17 18 19
7.ie2; 7.dc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183 7.dS e6 8.de; 8.ie2 ed 9.cd ig4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194 7.dS e6 8 ..le2 ed 9.cd �e8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201 S
Part 5. Classical Variation
l.d4 ttJf6 2.c4 g6 3.ttJc3 J.g7 4.e4 d6 S.ttJf3 0-0 6.�e2 eS 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
7.de; 7.0-0 ttJc6 B.de . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211 7.�e3 ttJg4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221 7.dS as 236 7.0-0 ttJc6 B . .te3 ttJg4; B.dS ttJe7 9 ..tgS; 9 . .td2; 9 ..te3; 9.a4 . . . . 245 7.0-0 ttJc6 B .dS ttJe7 9.b4 ttJhS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 251 7.0-0 ttJc6 B.dS ttJe7 9.ttJel ttJd7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265 7.0-0 ttJc6 B.dS ttJe7 9.ttJd2 c6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2B3 7.0-0 ttJc6 B.dS ttJe7 9.ttJd2 as . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2BB .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Part 6. Fianchetto Systems
l.d4 ttJf6 2 .c4 g6 3.ttJf3 J.g7 4.g3 0-0 S . .tg2 d6 6.0-0 ttJc6 2B 29 30 31
7.dS; 7.ttJc3 a6 without B.h3, B.dS, B.b3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29B 7.ttJc3 a6 B.h3 .td7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 311 7.ttJc3 a6 B.dS ttJaS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 320 7.ttJc3 a6 B.b3 l3bB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 332 Other Fianchetto Systems
Double Fianchetto for White 32 l.ttJf3 ttJf6 2.g3 g6 3.b3.tg7 4.J.b2 d6 S.d4 c5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 339 Fianchetto without c2-c4 and ttJc3 33 l.ttJf3 ttJf6 2 .g3 g6 3.d4 .tg7 4 . .tg2 0-0 5.0-0 d6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 342 King's Indian English 34 l.c4 ttJf6 2 .ttJc3 g6 3.g3 .tg7 4 . .tg2 0-0 S.e4; 5.0-0 . . . . . . . . . 345 .
6
.
This book is dedicated to a remarkable man, my "life-long" coach Zigurds Lanka, who uncoveredfor me the mysteries of the King's Indian Defence!
PREFACE
The King'sIndia nHouseh old The King's Indian Defence is probably the most romantic response to l.d4. It has survived the test of time and has been played at the high est level even to the present day .. Black gives his opponent complete freedom of choice in how to control the center and just develops quietly within his King's Indian liousehold, relying on his powerful fianchet toed bishop.
This position arose in the first recorded game (in the latest compu ter database) with the King's Indian Defence. It took place in Leipzig back in the year 1879 and one of the most eminent theoreticians of the 19th century, Louis Paulsen, was playing with Black. The Hungarian Adolf Schwarz was White and he was probably quite amazed why his opponent, despite all of the principles of playing in the opening at that time, did not fight for the center at all. He was so happy that he pushed forward all his four central pawns outright! His impressive pawn-chain was soon attacked from both sides of the board, however, and Black seized the initiative. Ironically, the outcome of the game was decided by a black passed pawn right along the central d-file. 7
This was all just a whim of destiny, since neither Paulsen, nor Schwarz knew then that they had been playing the Four Pawns At tack. It is still fashionable today. The name of the variation appeared about forty years later thanks to the famous GM, Savielly Tartakower - mostly due to his witty vocabulary. Right then, during the 1920s, the King's Indian Defence became a part of the opening repertoire of the future world-champion Max Euwe. The challenger for the world crown, Efim Bogoljubow, often played it too. Later, Muguel Najdorf, Andre Lilienthal and another future world-champion Vassily Smyslov all became King's Indian exponents. The present burst of popularity is due to the period of the 40' s and 50' s of the past century, when it was thoroughly analyzed by some outstanding theoreticians and powerful practical players such as Isaak Boleslavsky, David Bronstein and Efim Geller. They had to face some magnificent opposition from the White side and it would be enough to mention here two world-champions - Mikhail Botvinnik and Tigran Petrosian. (The latter once remarked , in the ironical style so typical for him, that he had fed his family thanks to the King's Indian Defence for many, many years . . . I). The theory of this already very popular opening began to develop like an avalanche. It was almost refuted at times, de scribed as "an incorrect opening" by many, but then it would resurrect itself like Phoenix from the ashes. The poet and chess-player Evgenij Iljin even wrote a poem about it: So many efforts and notes Were devoted to it It was buried so many times "For ever disputed . . . !" Was this witchcraft Or dark-squared magic . . ? .
Well, you need to be a romantic deep in your soul and something of a poet in order to play the King's Indian Defence well! . You have to believe in the power of your bishop on g7 and in your kingside attack to enable the triumph of spirit over matter! We will have to interrupt this short historical and lyrical escapade; otherwise, we may not even come to the essence. The book, which you are holding in your hands, is a personal endeavour. This is not just a monograph about a popular opening; it can be called "The King's In8
dian Defence According to Bologan" as I am trying to explain to you how I understand and how I play this opening. My relationship with the Kings Indian began when I was just a child, during the 1970' s. My first coach, Ivan Jakovlevich Solonar, made a very reasonable decision that he should build up the opening reper toire of his pupils according to Fischer! The King's Indian Defence was an integral part of the armoury of the eleventh World Champion since more than 10% of his games started with it. The statistical result, as could be expected from Bobby Fischer, was absolutely terrific for him: 66 40 in his favour. Meanwhile, the result of another super-cham pion and devoted King's Indian player Garry Kasparov is also superb: 91 53 in his favour, with the inclusion of some rapid chess games. -
-
Frankly speaking, I did not remember so well those first lessons, be cause at that time the opening was not the main focus of my attention. I simply wanted to learn to play chess well. Still, the foundations re mained and later on the process was running smoothly. The Moldavian players were very fond of The King's Indian Defence. I was coached only for a month by 1M Nikolay Popov (presently a famous sports com mentator), but I remembered well how to play against the Fianchetto system. My understanding of the King's Indian Defence was enriched im mensely by the concepts of the outstanding Moldavian coach Vjacheslav Andreevich Chebanenko. His ideas were entirely different from the contemporary classical axioms and he used to respect the past when, at the dawn of the appearance of the opening, players had preferred to develop the knight to the d7-square. His recommended schemes were a bit passive, perhaps, but they brought us excellent practical results. Some of them, for example 7 . . . lLlbd7 in response to the Gligoric system, are modern even today. Still, at present, I play the King's Indian Defence according to the Latvian GM and theoretician Zigurds Lanka. I have tried to recollect everything which he showed me at the beginning of the 90' s and after seeing the notes in the old notebooks and after having compared his variations with what I play now, I see no difference whatsoever. The main lines are all the same. Lanka's schemes proved to withstand the test of time in an amazing fashion!
9
We have already come to the subject of the concept of the book. It is understandable that one book cannot include everything which has been introduced and analyzed by numerous generations of players for a period of more than 100 years. I therefore have suggested a repertoire for Black only. I wished to follow Lanka's example and have tried to re veal to you the true spirit of the King's Indian Defence - to uncover for you its secrets and to show you its typical resources. The Yugoslavian "Chess Encyclopedia" devotes almost a half of Volume 5 to the K.I.D., with indexes from E60 up to E99. However, I did not feel bound by these frames, despite their size, and I have tried to explain to you when Black should direct the fight in the spirit of the Benko Gambit or the Modem Benoni. In the final part of the book, I have mentioned how to furnish your "King's Indian Household" in case White acts in the spirit of the King's Indian English, the King's Fianchetto without c2-c4 and lbc3, or the Double Fianchetto. I realized that one could never conquer infinity; nevertheless in the process of my work on the book, I wished I did just that! The King's Indian Defence is a living entity and is in a state -of con stant development. The evaluations of its various lines change con stantly and sometimes quite dramatically at that. I feel I should warn my readers that the book does not contain all the answers to every question. You can go, however, with this book under your arm to your next tournament with confidence. (This is, of course, an abstract as sessment, since if you do accept this advice literally; there might be unwanted consequences . . . ). The book is written for chess players of all levels, since the princi ples of the King's Indian Defence are equally applicable to the ama teurs as well as to the super-grandmasters.
Victor Bologan Moscow 2 0 0 9
10
Partl Minor Variations 1.d4 �f6 2.c4 g6 3.�c3 J.g7
We will begin our survey of the King's Indian Defence with the so-called "sidelines". Their name implies that they are not at the focus of the modern theory and they are only seldom played in the contemporary tournament practice, so they should not be that dangerous for Black. This. might be however, a hasty and principally wrong assumption! For example, the set-up, which we analyze in our chapter four, is regularly played and success fully at that by a very aggressive White player like the Dutch GM Ivan Sokolov, while the plan, we deal with in chapter six, has been
employed quite effectively by the twelfth world champion Anatolij Karpov. Fashion in general, in cluding chess, is very volatile and sometimes narrow paths turn into highways, while well-trodden roads are covered by grass ... The main systems against the King's Indian Defence, like the Classical, Saemisch, Averbakh and the Four Pawns Attack were recognized (and named! ) during the middle of the past century. The "sidelines" were introduced later and they remained in the shadow for a long time. The au thor does not plan to invent new names of variations of the type "The Sokolov Attack", or "The Karpov System" etc. I will leave this task to the professional theo reticians. I intend to suggest re liable ways for Black to obtain counterplay in the super-popular schemes, as well as in the semi forgotten lines. Some day, who knows 0), they may become the arena of theoretical discussions even at the highest level.
11
Chapter 1
1.d4 �f6 2.c4 g6 3.�c3 J.g7 4 . .ig5
White still does not wish to clarify what his plans are concern ing his e-pawn and the knight on g1. It is evident that he might be eyeing castling long with his last move and he also keeps the pos sibility of transferring to the Sae misch Attack. In chapter two, which is also devoted to the development of the bishop to gS, we will deal with an other move-order, which is more typical for the Smyslov variation: at first 4.ttJf3 0-0 and only then S.igS. A) 4 B) 4
•••
• • •
d6 c5
A) 4 d6! ? After this move, there arise • . .
12
variations connected with 4 . . . cS; the only difference being that Black cannot play d7-dS in one move. In case of 4 . . . 0-0 S.ttJf3, we reach a position, which we ana lyze in Chapter2 (after 4.ttJf3 0-0 S.igS). 5.c!Llf3 Following S:�d2, it deserves attention for Black to clarify im mediately the situation with the bishop on gS by playing S . . . h6. For example: 6.if4 ttJhS 7.ie3 ttJc6 B.ttJf3 eS 9.dxeS dxeS 10. 0-0-0 �xd2 1l.!xd2 ie6 12 .e3 0-0-0 13.ie2 ttJf6 14.h3 ttJd7= Galinsky - Kosikov, Kiev 200S, or 6.ih4 ttJbd7 7.ttJf3 0-0 B.e3 eS 9.dxeS dxeS lOJ�d1 geB 11.�c2 c6 12 .ie2 V!Jc7 13.0-0 as 14.ttJa4 b6 1S.gd2 ttJfB 16.ttJc3 ifS 17.�cl ttJBd7 with a double edged position, Troi anescu - Hort, Venice 1969. After S.e4, the game trans poses to the variation with S.igS, which will be analyzed in chapter four. In case of S.e3, Black has at his disposal another tricky idea S . . . c6 ! ? (planning �aS and ig4). 6.id3 (After 6.ttJf3, Black equaliz-
1.d4 liJf6 2.c4 g6 3. liJc3 ig7 4. ig5 es by playing 6 . . . �aS 7.�d2 .tg4= Smyslov - Geller, USSR 1969, or 7.�a4 �xa4 8.liJxa4 h6 9.!h4 gS 1O . .tg3 liJhS=, or 7.id3 ig4 - see 6 . .td3. White does not achieve anything much after 6.�c2 �aS 7.liJf3 .tg4=) 6 . . . �aS 7.liJf3 ig4 8.ih4 �hS (The exchanges are unavoidable.) 9.�b3 (9 ..tg3 .txf3 1O.�xf3 �xf3 1l.gxf3=) 9 . . .b6 (It would be too risky for Black to play 9 . . . .txf3 1O.�xb7.) 1O . .hf6 .hf6 1l . .te2 �aS 12.liJd2 ixe2 13. 'it>xe2 0-0 14.liJde4 .tg7 IS.h4 hS= and the game is equal. S h6 It is also possible for Black to try here S ... O-O 6.e3 c5 (6.. . liJbd7 7 . .te2 c6 8.0-0 h6 9 . .th4 gS 10 . .tg3 liJhS l1.�c2 liJxg3 12.hxg3 e6 13J�fdU) 7.dS with a transposition to the variations with 4.liJf3. In this situation, it is not so good for Black to play S ... c6, because White can advance his pawn to e4: 6.e4 �aS 7. .td3 .tg4 8 . .te3;t 6 .th4 •••
•
gS Or 6 ... liJbd7?! 7.h3 ! liJhS 8.e3
6
gS 9.liJd2 liJdf6 1O.ie2 gxh4 1l . .txhS;t 7 .tg3 liJhS 8.e3 c5 After the placement of White's dark-squared bishop has been clarified, Black can begin the fight for the weakened squares. 9 . .te2 In case of 9.dS, we can recommend to Black to follow the plan of Vasily Ivanchuk, connected with the creation of a piece-coun terplay on the queenside: 9 ... �aS 1O.�c2 liJd7 1l . .te2 liJb6 12.liJd2 liJxg3 13.hxg3 Ad7 14Jkl liJa4 IS.liJdl bS? Jussupow - Ivanchuk, Dortmund 1998. Black has nothing to fear after 9.dxc5, which was proved even in the early games of Tigran Petro sian: 9.dxc5 liJxg3 10.hxg3 dxcS 11.�xd8 'it>xd8 12.0-0-0 Ad7 13 . .te2 liJc6 14.liJd2 (14J!d3 'it>e8 ISJ''!:h dl .te6 16.liJdS �c8 17.liJh2 hS? Kramer - Petrosian, Leipzig 1960) 14 ... b6 IS.liJdbl e6 16.Af3 �c8= Smyslov - Petrosian, Bled 19S9. •
••.
9
•••
cxd4 1 0 .liJxd4 liJxg3 11. 13
Chapter l bxg3 �c6 - Black has solved completely all his opening prob lems, Anstad - S.Soloviov, Co penhagen 1991.
B) 4 c5 I believe this energetic counter strike in the centre suits best the spirit of the position. •••
5 ... 0 - 0 6.d5 In case of 6.liJf3, Black can fol low with a spectacular exchange combination in the centre: 6 ... cxd4 7.exd4 dS! 8.ixf6 ixf6 9. liJxdS (or 9.cxdS liJd7 1O . .ic4 liJb6 1l . .tb3 ig4 12.0-0 liJc8 13.liJe4 i.g7 14.�e1 liJd6= Allan - Nunn, Szirak 1987) 9 ... ig7 1O.liJc3 (After the retreat 10.liJe3, White can try the sharp piece-sacrifice, as well as the transition to an approxi mately equal endgame after: 10 ... �aS 11.�d2 �xd2 12.'it:;>xd2 �d8=, or 1O ... liJc6 1l.dS .Axb2 12.dxc6 �aS 13.'it:;>e2 �d8 14.�e1 .ic3 1S. �c1 bxc6GG) 1O ... ig4 1l.i.e2 liJc6 12.dS .ixf3 13 . .ixf3 .Axc3 14.bxc3 liJeS= M.Gurevich - Bekker Jensen, Antwerp 1999.
Bl) 5.e3 B2) 5.d5 White does not pose any problems to Black with the line: S.�f3 cxd4 6.liJxd4 liJc6 7.liJxc6 (7.e3 0-0 8 . .!e2 d6 9.0-0 �e8 1O.M3 liJeS 1l . .!e2 .!d7 12.liJdS liJe4 13 . .!f4 e6 14.liJb4 as 1S.liJbc2 �c8? Yousefzadeh - Wu, Canada 2002) 7 ... bxc6 8.�d2 h6 9.ih4 �b8 10.�b1 �aS 1l.e4 liJhS 12.�c1 gS 13.i.g3 d6 14.b3 .ie6= Dorosiev - Bojkov, Bulgaria 2 00S.
Bt) 5.e3 White postpones the decision to close the centre. 14
6 b5! This is just classical economy of resources. Black has played only the strictly necessary moves in order to begin his queenside of fensive without doing anything in excess. 7.cxb5 In the game Erofeeva - K.Koz•••
1.d4 ttJf6 2.c4 g6 3. ttJ c3 .ig7 4 . .ig5 lov, played on the Internet in the year 2002, White tried to place immediately a wedge in his oppo nent's position with the move 7. d6! ? and after 7 . . ..ib7? B.cxbS \WaS 9.dxe7 :BeB lO.'�a4 \Wb4 11. 0-0-0, Black had serious problems. It had been much stronger for him however to play 7. . .bxc4! , for ex ample: B ..ixc4 (B.dxe7 \Wxe7 9. ttJdS \WeS�) B ... .ia6 9 . .ixa6 ttJxa6 10.dxe7 (10.ttJf3 ! ?) 1O . . .\Wxe7 11. ttJf3 :BabB 12 .\Wd2 h6 13 . .ixf6 \wxf6= and Black had nothing to be afraid of. 7 . . . d6 In case of 7 . . . a6, White has the rather unpleasant resource B.d6 ! ? and h e can rely o n obtaining the advantage in the opening thanks to his control over the dS-square. For example: B ....ib7 9.ttJf3 axbS 1O . .ixbS exd6 11.0-0 (l1.\Wxd6 ttJe4! 12.ttJxe4 \WaSco) 1l . . . \Wb6 12 .a4 :BeB 13.\Wd3 :Be6 14 . .ic4 .ia6 IS ..ixf6 .ixc4 16.\Wxc4 .ixf6 17.ttJdSt B.lLlf3 lLlbd7 9.e4 a6 1 0 . bxa6 ha6 1l.ha6 :Bxa6 12. 0 - 0 §ta B
13. :Bel gb B 14.ge2 h6 15. .ih4 g5 16 .ig3 lLlh5 , and Black has obtained an excellent position from the Benko Gambit, Gagarin - B. Savchenko, Moscow 2006. •
B2) 5.d5
5 . . . h6 Now, after the long diagonal is opened for the bishop on g7, it is advantageous for Black to trade his knight for White's dark squared bishop . 6 .ih4 6 ..if4 d6 7.e4 \Wb6 (It is pos sible for Black to try a transition to one of the variations of the Nimzo-Indian Defence, but still it is insufficient for him to equalize after: 7 . . . ttJhS B . .ie3 .ixc3 9.bxc3 \WaS 1O.\Wb3 ttJd7 1l . .ie2 ttJhf6 12.f3 eS 13.dxe6 fxe6 14.:Bdl \Wc7 IS.ttJh3t Chernyshov - Svidler, Voronezh 2 003.) B.\Wd2 (B.\Wc2 ttJa6) B . . . gS (White's bishop is again exchanged.) 9 ..ig3 ttJhS 1O . .ie2 , Oral - Slekys, Olomouc 1996, 1O . . . ttJf4 ! 11..ixf4 gxf4 12. ttJf3 ttJd7 13.0-0 ttJeS= •
15
Chapterl
6.id2 d6 7. �c1 e6 8.dxe6 .Axe6 9.e4 �c6 10.f3 �d4 1l.id3 �d7 12.f4 �h4 13.g3 �e7 14.�ce2 l':!c8 15. <.t>f2 f5t S.Nikolic - Lanka, Old enburg 2001. 6 �a5 7.ti'd2 d6 8.e4 After 8 .e3, Black will gradually prepare b5, reaching favourable positions from the Benko Gam bit. For example: 8 ... a6 9.�f3 0-0 1O.h3 g5 1l . .ig3 �bd7 12.id3 b5 13.0-0 bxc4 14 . .Axc4, Sko morokhin - Kalashnikov, Mos cow 2008, 14. . . �b6 15 . .ie2 �a4!+ 8 g5 9 .ig3 �h5 1 0 .ie2 In case of lO.id3, Black should not be in a hurry to exchange on g3 and he should at first prepare the blockade of the kingside. For example: 1O ... �d7 1l.�ge2 �e5 12.l':!b1 �xg3 13.hxg3 g4 (Black prevents the move f4.) 14.a3 .id7 15.�f4 �xd3 16.�xd3 0-0-0 17. �e2 �xd2 18.<.t>xd2 , draw, Olsen - P.Hansen, Helsingor 2008. •••
•••
•
•
10 ... �f4 This is more precise than 10 ... �xg3 1l.hxg3 �d7, since White then has the possibility to fight for the dark squares after 12.f4 gxf4 13.gxf4 a6 14.�f3, Chilingirova - Richtrova, Wuppertal 1990, 14 ... b5 15.cxb5 axb5 16.hb5 l':!b8 17.hd7 hd7 18.0-0;!;. White will gradually parry his opponent's di rect threats and his control over the centre and his extra pawn should prevail. 1l.hf4 gxf4 12.�f3 .ig4 Black will annihilate the piece controlling the e5-square. 13. 0 - 0 .bf3 14. J.xf3 .ie5= Letelier - Perez Perez, Cuba 1963.
Black has only good pieces left and this does not apply to White's light-squared bishop. Black can even play for a win in this posi tion.
16
Chapter 2
1.d4 tl)f6 2.c4 g6 3 .tl)c3 J.g7 4.tl)f3 0-0
S.,igS In case of the rather tentative move S.e3 (White fortifies his centre and he completes his de velopment without being too am bitious.) Black has at his disposal several good plans to create coun terplay and they are about equally strong: S . . . d6 6.b4 (6.,ie2 lDbd7 7.0-0 ge8 8.'lNc2 c6 9.a3 eS 1O.dxeS dxeS 11.e4 'lNc7 12.b4 lDf8 13.ib2 lDe6 14.lDdl lDf4+ Grabovets Bodnaruk, Moscow 2008; 6.id3 lDbd7 7.0-0 eS 8.h3 'fie7 9.'lNc2 ge8 1O.lDgS c6 1l.b3 dS! 12.cxdS lDxdS 13.e4? lDb4 14.'fie2 exd4=F Edward - Lahno, Turin 2006) 6 ... c6 7.ib2 lDbd7 8.ie2 as 9.bS a4 1O.gc1 'lNaS 11.0-0 cS 12.lDd2
lDb6 13.lDce4 lDxe4 14.lDxe4 cxd4 1S.exd4 dS 16.lDd2 lDxc4 17.lDxc4 dxc4 18.ixc4 ifS+± Dreev - Ka simdzhanov, Moscow 2007; S . . . dS - After this move, the game transposes to a line from the Gruenfeld Defence in which Black has no problems at all. 6.cxdS lDxdS 7.ic4 lDxc3 8.bxc3 cS 9.0-0 'lNc7 1O.lDd2 b6 11.idS lDc6 12 .'lNa4 id7 13.'fia3 cxd4 14.cxd4 eS 1S.ib2 exd4 16.exd4 'fif4+± T.Mamedjarova - Maslak, Pardubice 2 007. S c5 White has determined the placement of his dark-squared bishop a bit too ea rly and he has thus weakened his queenside. I believe that the best way for Black to counter this is to attack immediately the enemy centre with the help of his c-pawn in or der to open the long diagonal for his bishop on g7 and to try to or ganize counterplay on the queen side. 6.dS We have dealt with the move 6.e3 in Chapter 1 after the move order 4.igS cS S.e3 0-0 6.lDf3. •••
17
Chapter 2 A) 6
d6 B) 6 h6 • • •
. • .
The gambit idea 6 . . . bS 7.cxbS a6, does not work well here in view of 8.e4 d6 9.lLld2 (9.a4 ! ? h6 1O . .if4 gS 11 . .icl!;) 9 . . . h6 10 . .if4 e6 11 . .te2 exdS l2.exdS axbS I3 ..hbS lLlhS 14 . .te3 fS IS.lLlf3 lLld7 16.0-0 l3b8 17.a4 lLldf6 18.l3el gS 19 . .id2 - White has manoeuvred quite well and he has neutralized his opponent's initiative remaining with a solid extra pawn, I.Sokolov - Nijboer, Breda 2000. A) 6 d6 This move is quite in order, since Black can counter success fully the immediate pawn-ad vance e2-e4, while in case of e2e3 he can either attack the enemy bishop with the move h6, or he can play e6, entering positions in the spirit of the Benoni system. • • •
7.e3 About 7.e4 h6 - see variation B. 7 e6 • • •
18
After this undermining move, we reach positions with the Beno ni pawn-structure. About 7 . . . h6 8 . .ih4 - see variation B. Whenever White's pawn is on e3, it is quite reasonable to have in mind the gambit idea, since White's pawn on dS is weaker in comparison to the variations with e4. So - 7 . . . a6 8.lLld2 bS 9.cxbS axbS (9 . . . lLlbd7 lO.e4 e6 11.dxe6 fxe6 12 . .ic4 lLleS 13.0-0 h6 14. .ih4 gS IS . .ig3 lLlxc4 16.lLlxc4 dS 17.exdS axbS 18.lLlxbS exdS 19. lLlcd6± Sargissian - Conquest, Barcelona 2 000.) 1O . .hbS .ia6 1l.a4 lLlbd7 12.0-0 h6 13 ..ih4 .hbS I4.axbS �xal lS.�xal gS 16. .tg3 lLlb6 17.e4 lLlhS;\;. Still, Black does not have full compensation for the sacrificed pawn. 7. . . eS 8.lLld2 h6 9 . .ih4 lLla6 10. .id3 lLlc7 11.0-0 YGd7 12.a3 lLlh7 13.f4 exf4 14.exf4 fS. White must be better in similar positions, since he has a space advantage and the outpost on e6, being on the only open file, forces Black to protect it additionally. IS.�c2 b6 (Black cannot solve all his prob lems with IS . . .bS 16.lLlxbS lLlxbS 17.cxbS .ib7 18.�ael lLlf6 19 ..ic4 �ae8 20 ..ixf6 .ixf6 21.�e6;\;) 16. l3ael lLlf6 17.h3 (17.g4!?) 17 ... .ib7 18.g4 bS 19.9xfS bxc4 20.liJxc4 lLlcxdS 21.�e6 lLlxc3, Speelman Cramling, Pamplona 1996 and here White had to continue with 22 .bxc3 �ad8 23.�fel �c6 24. �h2±. Black's initiative has been
l.d4 tiJj6 2.c4 g6 3. tiJc3 i.g7 4.tiJ/J 0 - 0 5. i.g5 c5 6.d5 neutralized, while White's threats are quite serious.
8.i.e2 White can try to play a little trickier - B.tiJd2 ! ?, in order to counter the routine reaction B . . . exd5? ! with 9.cxd5 tiJa6, obtain ing besides the move 1O.i.e2, the additional possibility 1O.i.c4 ! ? For example: 1O . . . tiJc7 11.0-0 h6 12.i.h4 a6 13.a4 b6 14J�bl �d7 15.�e2;t Piskov - Kotsur, Muen ster 1995. Still after B . . . tiJa6 (Black can play this immediately, or after he includes B . . . h6 9.i.h4.) 9.i.e2 exd5 10.cxd5, it all comes down to a transposition of moves. 8 exd5 9.cxd5 ge8 1 0 . tiJd2 This is a quite typical maneuver for this pawn-structure. White's knight has nothing much to do on the f3-square, therefore he wishes to redeploy it on c4, or eventu ally on the e4-square. Meanwhile, after the knight retreats to d2, it frees the way for the f-pawn, so that White can support the future advance of his e-pawn.
1 0 tiJa6 The best square for Black's queen knight is c7, because it at tacks White's d5-pawn from there and it helps the advance b7-b5, or b7-b6 followed by i.a6 and the exchange of the light-squared bishops. On the other hand, if it occupies the d7-square, it can go to the beautiful e5-square, but it can hardly remain there for long (as we have already mentioned, White has freed the way forward of his f-pawn) and on d7 it will then stand in the way of Black's other pieces impeding even the possibility for his queen to protect the d6-pawn. 11. 0 - 0 tiJc7 12.e4 So, contrary to the main lines of the Benoni system, White had to advance e2-e4 in two moves. The position is open, so each tempo is very important, so Black succeeds in obtaining a good counterplay thanks to the extra tempo. • • •
• • •
12 b6 White has some space-advan tage, therefore the exchange of an • • •
19
Chapter 2 additional couple of pieces will be definitely in Black's favour. In the next game however, he played too passively and he al lowed his opponent to seize the initiative for long: 12 .. JMfe7 13.a4 i.d7 14.l:!a3 'l;¥f8 15.l:!b3 l:!ab8, Efi mov Karl, Saint Vincent 2003, 16.l:!eU 13.f4 White is threatening with the pawn-break e4-e5, followed by llJde4. 13 h6 It will be useful for Black to repel White's bishop to the h4square. White might have the idea to try to open the f-file with f4-f5 (either immediately, or in some lines after e4-e5 d6xe5 and then f4-f5). In this case, after f4f5, Black will have the possible resource g6-g5, blocking the king side. 14 .th4 'l;¥d7 15 .bf6 White provokes an immediate crisis, while his opponent is a bit behind in development. 15 .bf6 16.e5 dxe5 17. llJde4 �g7 18.d6 -
•••
•
•
This is the essence of White's idea. He has already deployed one of his knights in the centre (on e4) and he wishes to place the other one on d5 creating numer ous threats. Meanwhile, after the retreat of Black's knight from c7, White will have the simple coun ter measure 19.i.b5, winning the exchange and maintaining all the pluses of his position. Therefore, Black is forced to sacrifice a piece for which he obtains three pawns and he activates all his pieces. 18 exf4 19.dxc7 'l;¥xc7 2 0 . �fJ .td4 21.�h1 .ta6 22.ge1 �g7 23.'l;¥a4 �b7 24.llJd2 ge3? Pedersen - McShane, Saint Vin cent 2005. •.•
B) 6 h6 Black wishes to clarify imme diately the position of his oppo nent's bishop in order to make up his mind about his further plans depending on this. •••
• • •
B1) 7.J.h4 B2) 7.i.f4 20
1.d4 lfJj6 2.c4 g6 3. lfJc3 Ag7 4.lfJ/J 0 - 0 S. J.gS c5 6.d5 In answer to the melancholic move 7.Ad2? ! Black can under mine immediately the d5-pawn with the move 7 . . . e6 and he ob tains a very comfortable game. For example: B.dxe6 (B.e3 exd5 9.cxd5 d6 10 . .id3 lfJa6 1l.a3 lfJc7 12 . .ic4 b5 13.lfJxb5 lfJcxd5 14.0-0 lfJb6 15 ..ie2 lfJe4t Ousatchij Shestoperov, Lignano 2005) B . . . dxe6 9.g3 lfJc6 1O.Ag2 e 5 1l.J.e3 V!Je7 12.lfJd2 J.f5 13J:!c1 lfJd4+ Con quest - Shirov, Reykjavik 1992 .
B1) 7 . .ih4 d6 This is not the right moment for the sacrifice - 7. . . b5 B.cxb5 V!Ja5 9.lfJd2 V!ib4 1O.e4 V!Jxb2 1Uk1 V!Jb4 12.a3 V!Jxa3 13.e5 V!Jb4 14.exf6 exf6 15.ic4 f5 16.lfJa2 geB 17. 'it>f1 V!Jb2 1B.d6± Tomashevsky - Ko valev, Pardubice 2006.
hc3 14.bxc3 V!Jxc3 15.gb1 lfJd7 16.gb3 V!Jd4 17.gd3 V!Jf6 1B.0-0 lfJe5+ Bruzon - Arencibia, Santa Clara 2 005. The variation B.lfJd2 g5 9 . .ig3 lfJh5 1O.e3 will be analyzed later see 10.lfJd2. 8 ... g5 9 . .lg3
9 lfJh5 Black can also complete here his development with tempi: 9 . . . V!Jb6 1O.V!Jc2 (10.V!Jc1 .if5) 1 0 . . ..if5 1l.e4 J.g6 12.J.d3 lfJh5 13. 0-0 lfJd7 and the game is equal. 1 0 .id3 The sacrifice 1O.lfJxg5? would not work in view of 1O . . . lfJxg3 1l.hxg3 hxg5 12.V!Jh5 J.f5 and his compensation for the piece is evi dently insufficient. In case of the thematic, but a bit too slow move - 10.lfJd2, Black organizes counterplay with the line: 1O . . . lfJxg3 1l.hxg3 e6, for ex ample: 12 . .id3 exd5 13.cxd5 lfJd7 14.V!Jc2 lfJe5 15 . .ih7 'it>hB 16.J.f5 V!Jf6 17.hcB gaxcB 1B. 0-0 c4f± Dinstuhl - Kasimdzhanov, Ger many 2000. •••
•
8.e3 The careless move B.e4 ena bled Black to seize quickly the initiative in the following game: B . . . V!Ja5 9.lfJd2 g5 10.J.g3 lfJxe4 1l.lfJdxe4 f5 12.lfJd2 f4 13 . .ie2
21
Chapter 2 After the seemingly elastic move 1O.'I¥fc2 (White does not de termine yet the placement of his light-squared bishop.) Black can begin immediate kingside actions and in the centre too with the move 1O . . .fS. Later, there might follow: 11.!e2 (In case of 11.!d3, Black does not exchange the bish op on g3, but instead he should try to trap it: 11 . . . eS 12.dxe6 he6 13.l'!dl ll'lc6 14.!e2 f4 IS.exf4 g4 16.ll'lh4 ll'lxf4 17.0-0 ll'ld4 18.�e4 dS 19.�e3 ll'lfxe2 20.ll'lxe2 l'!e8+ Lysyj - Bragin, Tula 2 003.) 11... ll'lxg3 (Black fell into a simple but beautiful trap in the next game: 11 . . . ll'ld7? 12.ll'lxgS! ll'lxg3 13.ll'le6 ll'lxe2 14.ll'lxd8 ll'lxc3 IS.ll'le6 ll'le4 16.g4+- Speelman - Polzin, Ger many 2002.) 12.hxg3 eS 13.dxe6 ll'lc6 14.l'!dl he6 IS.a3 �e7 16.ll'ldS �f717.ll'ld2 hdS I8.cxdS ll'le5� Bru zon - Arencibia, Santa Clara 2005. 1 0 f5 This is not aggression (Black is not threatening to win the bishop with fS-f4 anyway.), it is prophy lactic, since he must cover the bl h7 diagonal, which leads all the way up to the shelter of his king, particularly because with a white bishop on d3, the above men tioned tactical strike lLlxgS has become a real threat. On the oth er hand, Black does not wish to exchange deliberately his some what hanging knight on hS for the bishop on g3, because White then obtains the h-file and he can or ganize a powerful attack (He can • • •
22
leave then his king in the centre, on el, or fl, or he can also evacu ate it to the queenside.).
1l. ll'ld 2 After 11.0-0, Black should not worry too much about his king, since White's rook has aban doned the h-file. Instead, Black must play actively in the centre and he will exchange on g3 at the most appropriate moment: 11 . . . eS 12 .dxe6 he6 13.l'!bl ll'lc6 14.ll'ldS ll'lxg3 IS.hxg3, Speelman - Na taf, Esbjerg 2001 and here the position will be approximately equal after IS . . . �d7 16.�d2 �f7 17.e4 hdS 18.exdS ll'lb4. White's knight does not have any reliable squares in the centre and after the unavoidable exchange of the bishop on d3, the vulnerability of Black's kingside will be practically immaterial. The retreat of White's knight to d2 forces Black to exchange on g3, opening the h-file, but af ter this he should not worry any more about tricks like ll'lxgS and their terrible consequences.
l.d4 11Jj6 2.c4 g6 3.11Jc3 i.g7 4.11Jj3 0 - 0 5. i.g5 c5 6.d5 1l l1Jxg3 12.hxg3 l1Ja6 In principle, Black could have started with 12 . . . e6, for example: 13.Wc2 l1Ja6 14.a3 I1Jc7 15.dxe6 he6 16.0-0-0 (The vulnerabil ity of Black's kingside might be come dangerous only in a position with opposite sides castling. It is too harmless for White to follow with 16.0-0 �f6 17.e4 f4 IS.gxf4 �xf4= Henrich - Richter, Ger many 2000.) 16 . . . �e7 17.e4 fxe4 IS.l1Jdxe4 gadS 19.9del b5 !? Black begins his counter offensive on the queenside just in time and now White's monarch cannot feel safe at all. 13.e4 White wishes to either open the bl-h7 diagonal, or (in case of 13 .. .f4) to stabilize the situation in the centre in order to complete calmly his development and then to break systematically Black's kingside. 13 e6 This is the correct reaction - Black's bishops need space and White's pawn on d5 cramps Black's position. 14.dxe6 I1Jb4 15.i.bl f4 The e6-pawn is nor running away and in principle Black wish es to establish a blockade on the dark squares and then to deploy his knight on d4 and the bishop on e5, or vice versa. 16.gxf4 gxf4 17.e5!? This is absolutely necessary; otherwise White's bishop on bl will look and act like a pawn. .••
17 he6 18 .te4, Sargissian - Inarkiev, Kerner 2007 and here Black could have simply captured on e5. 18 dxe5 19.We2 (19.0-0 I1Jc6 2 0.l1Jd5 I1Jd4+) 19 �c7 2 0 . 0 - 0 - 0 gad8 21.a3 I1Jc6 22. I1Jd5 I1Jd4 23.Wd3 'ti'd6. White has sufficient compensation in or der to maintain the dynamic bal ance thanks to his pressure along the h-file and his control over the light squares, but this is all he can brag about. • • •
•
• • •
• • •
• • •
B2) 7 .tf4 •
B2a) 7 l1Jb5 B2b) 7 d6 • • •
• • •
23
Chapter 2
B2a) 7 �h5 ! ? I t i s interesting t o ask White's bishop where it is heading right now in case it is attacked? 8 .td2 The exchange of the dark squared bishops does not guar antee any advantage for White: B.J.eS J.xeS 9.ti)xeS d6 1O.ti)f3 eS 11.dxe6 J.xe6, Blees - Nij boer, Amsterdam 1996, 12.�d2 rllg 7 13.ti)e4 ti)c6 14. 0-0-0 'M>6 lS.�c3 rllgB 16J�xd6 gadB� 8 ... d6 9.e4 e5 White has fortified reliably his pawn-centre, therefore Black must try to focus the fight on the flanks. He plans to proceed with the standard break for the King's Indian Defence f7-fS, and his knight on hS is headed for the f4square. 1 0 .g3 White prevents the activation of Black's knight. 1 0 a6 The move 1O .. .fS would not work for Black, because of the simple response l1.exfS. Natu rally, he does not wish to present his opponent with an outpost on e4, meanwhile after 11 ... i.xf5 , it is very good for White to play 12.ti)h4 and after 11 ... gxf5, White's stand ard reaction would be 12.lLlxeS, exploiting the defencelessness of the knight on hS. The move 10 ... a6 protects just in time the bS square and Black plans to follow with �eB and f7-fS (After the pawn-exchange on fS, the knight • • •
•
• • •
24
on hS will be protected by Black's queen). Additionally, the queen on eB supports the pawn-break b7-bS, which might become pos sible, for example after J.fl-g2.
1l.�h4 This move is aimed against f7-fS and at the same time White wishes to postpone his decision concerning the future of his bish op on fl. For example after 11 ... �eB, he can follow with 12.ie2 and the knight on hS will have to retreat. 1l rllh7 12 .td3 lLlf4 Black succeeds in redeploying his knight to a more active posi tion, thanks to this small tactical trick. Note that Black has waited patiently for the development of White's bishop on fl and he has played his last move with tempo. 13 .tc2 ti)h3 14.�e2 Castling short has become impossible, so White begins the preparation of castling long. 14 ti)d7 15.a4 In case of lS.0-0-0?! it •••
•
•••
•
1.d4 CiJf6 2.c4 g6 3. CiJ c3 �g7 4. CiJj3 0 - 0 5.j,g5 c5 6.d5 would be rather unpleasant for White to counter the move 15 ... b5 (This is what the move 1O ... a6 was about... ), opening files on the queenside. 15 gb8 16.CiJg2 CiJf6 Black creates the rather un pleasant tactical threat CiJg4 and he also frees the d7-square for the bishop. 17.CiJe3 .i.d7 18.b3 White decides to leave his king in the centre for the time being, since after 18.0-0-0?! it might easily come under attack. • • •
18 �h8 Black does not have enough space and there are still numer ous pieces and pawns left on the board. Accordingly, each piece should mind its own maneuvers, so that it does not impede the mo bility of the other pieces. Present1y' Black has freed the h7-square for his knight and after this the pawn-break fl-f5 will become possible. 19.f3 CiJh7 2 0 .�g2 CiJ7g5 The knight on h3 is quite an-
noying for White and of course Black does not wish to retreat it from there. 21.gfl :f5!? Black has ful filled his plan and he has obtained excellent counter chances, Ghaem Maghami - Rathnakaran, New Delhi 2008. -
B2b) 7 d6 8.e4 If now White manages to com plete calmly his development (j,d3, 0-0 etc.), then he will have the advantage thanks to his extra space. Therefore Black must play very energetically in order to ob tain good counter chances. •••
• • •
8 e5! This typical sacrifice of the d6pawn is also encountered in the Averbakh system. It is worse for Black to play 8 ... b5 9.cxb5 a6 1O.CiJd2, since he thus enters the course of actions in the game I.Sokolov - Nijboer, Breda 2000, which we have al ready analyzed after the move or der 6 . . . b5 7.cxb5 a6. On the other hand, it is always • • •
25
Chapter 2 interesting for Black to try the move: S . . . ttJh5 9 . .te3 e5 1O.dxe6 (In case White does not capture en passant, then Black maneuvers in the spirit of the variation B2a and it would not be quite clear whether White's bishop is better placed on e3, or on d2.) 1O . . . he6 11.�d2 \t>h7 12J''1d 1 'lMfb6 13 . .te2 ttJc6 14.0-0 l"1adS 15.b3 ttJf6 16.h3 �a5 17.l"1c1, draw, Kanep - Nataf, Dresden 2007. 9.dxe6 he6
1 0 .hd6 In case of 1O.�d2, Black has an excellent reply - 10 ... �a5, pro tecting indirectly his h6-pawn. For example: 11..te2 (1l . .txh6 .txh6 12 .�xh6 ttJxe4 13.ttJg5 ttJxg5 14.�xg5 ttJc6=) 11...g5 12 . .tg3 ttJc6 13.0-0 ttJh5 14.hd6 l"1fdS:::g Silva - Damaso, Portugal 1996. 1 0 )3e8 1l . .te2 The loss of the second pawn should not be dangerous for Black: 11.hc5, Lengyel - Kava lek, Tel Aviv 1964, 1l ... �a5 12 .b4 �a6 13.l"1c1 ttJbd7 14 . .te3 (14 . .td4 hc4 15.b5 �e6+) 14 . . . l"1acS 15.b5 • • .
26
�a5=. He has already completed his development and the problem with regaining the pawns on e4 and c4 seems to be almost a sure thing in the future. 1l . . . �b6 This is a multi-purpose move. The queen attacks the b2-pawn, it protects the c5-pawn and it also frees the dS-square for the rook.
12.hb8 White's bishop is very unsta ble on d6 and it might be pinned there, so he decides to get rid of it. Still, after this the powerful King's Indian bishop on g7 remains without an opponent and Black obtains an excellent game despite being a pawn down. It would be harmless for Black if White plays 12.0-0 l"1dS 13.e5 ttJeS 14.ttJd5?! (White should bet ter continue here with 14.�d2 ttJxd6 15.l"1ad1 .tfS 16.exd6 l"1xd6 17.ttJd5, maintaining the balance.) 14. hd5 15.�xd5 ttJxd6 16.l"1ad1 .tfS 17.exd6 l"1xd6 1S.�e4 l"1e6 19.'lMfc2 ttJc6+ Chekhov - Dydy shko, Tallinn 19S0.
l.d4 0,f6 2.c4 g6 3. 0,c3 i.g7 4. 0,j3 0 - 0 5. i.g5 c5 6.d5 White's only serious alterna tive to the move in the text is 12. eS, but then Black has a sufficient counterplay by attacking the eS pawn. 12 . . . 0,fd7 (Black can even capture a pawn: 12 .. .'�xb2 ! ? 13. :gc1 0,fd7 14.0-0 0,c6 lS.0,dS 0,dxeS 16.0,c7 :ged8 17.0,xa8 :gxd6 18.'�xd6 �xe2 19.0,xeS i.xeS 20. �d1 �xa2. Black is in fact two ex changes down, but he has two pawns and White's knight on a8 is out of the actions, so Black's pros pects are superior.) 13.0,bS (13.0-0 0,c6 14.0,a4 �aS lS.a3 0,cxeS 16.0,xeS 0,xeS 17.b4 cxb4 18.axb4 �d8 19.:gc1 0,c6 2 0.0,cS i.c8 21.i.f3 0,d4 22.i.g3 �b6 23. 0,e4, Alburt - Hebden, Hastings 1984, 23 . . . �xb4! ? 24.0,d6 :ge7, or 24 . . . 0,xf3 2S.�xf3 :ge7 26.0,bS �aS?) 13 . . . 0,c6 14.i.c7 (14.0-0 :gac8 1S.�d2 0,dxeS 16.0,xeS 0,xeS 17.i.xeS i.xeS+ Grigorov - Maslak, Internet 2006; White can capture the exchange with the move 14. 0,c7, but he fails to keep it: 14 ... 0,dxeS lS.0,xeS 0,xeS 16.0,xa8 :gxa8 17.i.xeS i.xeS 18.0-0 i.xb2 - 18 . . . :gd8 ! ? 19.�c2 �xb2 20. �xb2 i.xb2 21.:gab1 :gd2 and Black's counterplay is quite suffi cient - 19.:gb1 i.fS 20.�d2 i.xb1 21.fub1 i.c3 22.fub6 i.xd2 23.fub7 :ge8 24.mfl as= Yatneva - Ersho va, Serpuhov 2003.) 14 . . . �a6 lS. 0-0 :gec8 16.�b3 (16.b3 0,dxeS 17.0,xeS 0,xeS 18.�d2 �c6 19.i.xeS i.xeS 2 0 .i.f3 �b6=) 16 . . . 0,dxeS 17.0,xeS 0,xeS 18.i.xeS i.xeS 19. :gfe1 �b6 20.i.f3 i.g7 21.0,c3 :gd8=
Neishtadt - Nesis, corr. 1984. 12 . . . �axb8 13.�c2 �h5 It is not acceptable for White to let the enemy knight to the f4square, so he needs to weaken his kingside. 14.g3
14 . . . hc3 White's knight on c3 was not threatening to go to dS in the next few moves, so maybe Black did not need to exchange it. Instead, he could have played for example 14 . . .i.h3 ! ? Meanwhile, Black has an excellent game after the move in the text as well. 15.bxc3 In case of lS.�xc3, Black re gains his pawn by force and he equalizes: lS . . . i.h3 16.eS i.g2 17. :ggl i.xf3 18.i.xf3 �d6 19.mfl �xeS 2 0.�xeS :gxeS 2 1.mg2 (21.:ge1 :gxe1 22.mxe1 0,g7=) 21...0,g7 22.:gge1 fuel 23.fue1 mfB 24.:ge3 b6= Tuk makov - Gufeld, Moscow 1983. 15 . . . i.g4 Black frees the e6-square for his queen in order to regain his sacrificed pawn. 27
Chapter 2 16.h3 White can hold the pawn with the move 16.tLld2 as well, but this move seems too risky. After 16 . . . h:e2 17.'�xe2 'lWe6 18.f3 1!bd8 19. 1!hfl 'lWh3 20.1!f2 f5 21.1!e1 fxe4 22.fxe4 1!e6 23.�d1 tLlf6 24.e5 tLlg4 25.1!fe2 'lWh5, in the game Agzamov - Chekhov, Telavi 1982, the opponents agreed to a draw. The computer programme Rybka however, asserts that Black had been better . . . . 16 .hf'3 17 .hf'3 'lWe6 18. 0-0-0 18.�fl tLlf6 19.1!e1 \1;\1xc4 20. �g2 b5 21.e5 tLld7 22.1!e4 \1;\1e6 23.1!he1 h5 24.'lWd2 c4 25.\1;\1h6 tLlc5f± Goriatchkin - Kurnosov, Orsk 2001. 18.0-0 'lWxh3 19.1!fe1 tLlf6 2 0 . .ig2 'lWh5 21.f3 \1;\1g5 22.\1;\1f2 \1;\1e5 23.1!e3 b5f± Muse - Nowak, Poznan 1986. • • •
28
•
18 b5!f±. The game Yermo Hnsky - Kindermann, Groningen 1997, followed later with 19.9he1 b4? ! 20.e5 'lWa6 21.1!d7 tLlf6 22.1!d3 \1;\1a3 23.'lWb2 'lWa6 24.1!e2 tLlh7 25 . .id5 and White obtained the advantage. It was much stronger for Black to have played 19 bxc4 !, opening files against the enemy king immediately. After 2 0 .bh5 gxh5 21.h4 'lWa6 the position would be double edged. • • •
••.
•
Chapter 3
1.d4 tLlf6 2.c4 g6 3 .tLlc3 i.g7 4.tLlf3 0-0
Black's attempt to wait for White's bishop to come to f4 and then to chase it will not be suc cessful: 4 ... d6 S.M4 ltJhS 6.i.gS h6 7. .te3.
5.J.f4
In principle, White's ideal set up would look like this - pawns on e3, d4 and c4, knights on f3 and c3, bishops on e2 and f4, queen on c2 and his king's rook on dl, so that Black will have great prob lems advancing both c5 as well as eS, while White could increase his pressure on the queenside with b4 and c5. 5 d6 After S ... dS, there arises one of the variations of the Gruenfeld Defence. • • •
A) 6.h3 B) 6.%Yd2 C) 6.e3
The pawn-move 6.e4 does not seem to combine well together with the development of the bish op on f4: 6 . . . i.g4 7 . .te2 ltJfd7 8.0-0 .txf3 9.hf3 eS 1O.J.e3 ltJc6= A) 6.h3 White wishes to save his dark squared bishop from its being exchanged and he ensures the h2square for its retreat. This move is a bit too slow however. 6 ... c5 In general, if Black wishes to obtain equality in this system he must almost always go for the pawn-break c7-c5. The plans with c7-c6 and b7b6 seem to be too slow, for exam ple: 6 ... c6 7.e3 a6 8.J.e2 (Black can counter 8.a4 with the typical reply 8 ... aS. His pawn has reached the as-square in two moves indeed, but he obtains an excellent posi tion mostly because of his control over the b4-square. 9.i.e2 ltJa6 9 ... ltJfd7! ? - 10.0-0 ltJd7 ll.ti'd2
29
Chapter 3 eS 12 . .!h2 Yffe 7 13JUd1 geS 14.if1 llJb4 lS.gac1 e4 16.llJe1 llJf600 Al burt - Kristiansen, Reykjavik 19S6.) S . . .bS. This plan is not so dangerous for White however, since it does not solve Black's main problem - to fight for the centre. 9.0-0 (9.itJd2 ib7 lO.O-O itJbd7 1l.ig3 llJb6 12.�b3 llJfd7 13.a4;!; Zacurdajev - V.Onischuk, Narva 2 006) 9 . . . itJbd7 lO.gel geS 1l.ih2 �aS 12 .itJd2 ib7 13.cS dS 14.a3 eS lS.b4 Yffd S 16.itJb3;!; Ser geev - Folk, Usti nad Orlici 2006; 6 . . .b6 7.e3 cS S.dS bS. This is something like the Benko Gambit in a rather slow version. In the next game Black failed to obtain complete equality: 9.cxbS a6 lO.a4 YffaS 1l.llJd2 ib7 12.e4 Yffb4 13. Yffb3 llJbd7 14.J.e2 axbS lS.ixbS ia6 16.0-0 gtbS 17.Yffc 2 ixbS lS.axbS;!; Drozdovskij - Kasim dzhanov, Ajaccio 2006.
White has three possibilities with his pawn on d4 - to go the side, to go forward and to keep it there. 30
Al) 7.dxc5 A2) 7.d5 A3) 7.e3 Al) 7.dxc5 dxc5 8.Yffxd8 gxd8 9.itJb5 This attack on the flank can be easily parried by Black. 9 tLle8 1 0 .J.e5 tLlc6=i= Black's pieces are better mobilized and therefore his chances are better in this symmetrical position. .••
A2) 7.d5 Now, Black has again the per fect possibility to enter the Volga Gambit with the ridiculously looking moves for White like if4 and h3. 7 b5 8.cxb5 In case of S.itJxbS, it is very strong for Black to play S . . . itJe4 ! , opening the diagonal for the bishop on g7 and cutting off the ways of retreat of the knight on bS. After 9.iel, Iljin - Novikov, Moscow 200S, 9 . . . a6 lO.itJa3 �aS 1ViJd2 fS 12.e3 f4, Black's initia tive is very powerful. 8 ... a6 • • •
l.d4 CiJf6 2.c4 g6 3. CiJ c3 �g7 4. CiJj3 0-0 5. �f4 d6 9.bxa6 After this straightforward move Black's game is easy and quite understandable. His queen goes to as, the bishop goes to a6, his queen's knight to d7 and his rooks occupy the a and b-files. White will be faced with a rather unpleasant defence in the middle game as well as in the majority of the endgames. It would be trickier for White to play 9.e3, trying to win several tempi in order to develop his piec es. Black must then capture on bS only after careful preparation, for example: 9 . . . CiJbd7 10 .�d3 Wfa5 11.Wfb3 l:'!b8 12.0-0 axb5 (This is the right moment, because if White recaptures on b5, his piec es will be pinned.) 13.CiJxb5 (In case White does not recapture, he will have problems again, be cause Black will have a powerful initiative in a position with mate rial equality.) 13 . . . �a6 14.a4 CiJb6 15.e4 c4! 16.hc4 CiJxe4+. White's extra pawn is absolutely immate rial, his pieces are hanging and his pawns on d5 and b2 are weak. Black can counter 9.a4 with 9 . . . �a5, creating the threats axb5 and CiJe4. After 1O.�d2 axb5 11. CiJxb5 Wfb6 12.CiJc3 (This is a smart resource for White, but Black is not forced to capture on b2, iso lating his queen from the actions.) 12 . . . �a6 (but not 12 ... Wfxb2? 13. l:'!b1 �a3 14.�c2 and 15.�c1) 13. Wfc2 CiJbd7+. The end is more or less similar - White is noticeably
behind in development, he has numerous weaknesses and his ex tra pawn is meaningless. 9 ... �a5 1 0 .�d2 ha6 11.g4 This move seems to be too slow and artificial. White should better follow with 11.e3, complying with the loss of his castling rights. 1l .tc4! Black attacks immediately White's pawn on d5, which has run away from the pack. 12.l:'!dl �4 Black's initiative is developing quite effortlessly. White saves his pawn on a2, but he must weaken his flank. 13.a3 %Yb3 14.e3 CiJbd7-F F. Portisch - Kozma, Budapest 1992 . Black's next move will be l:'!fb8 and White's pawns will start fall ing like ripe apples. • • •
A3) 7.e3
7 cxd4 Denis Yevseev demonstrated an interesting plan of quick un• • •
31
Chapter 3 dermining of White's centre: 7 . . . �a5 ! ? B.i.d3 cxd4 9.exd4 e5! ? This move has become possible because of the placement of Black's queen on a5 and also due to the fact that White's king is still in the centre. 1O.i.d2 (White loses after 1O.dxe5 dxe5 11.ttJxe5? l:!eB.) 10 . . . exd4 1l.ttJxd4 l:!eB 12. ttJce2 �6 13.0-0. White has managed to complete his devel opment somehow, but his pieces are rather uncomfortably piled up in the centre. 13 . . . ttJc6 14.i.e3. If White exchanges on c6, Black will get rid of his only weakness cover ing the d5-square. White does not wish to retreat his night from the d4-square either, since Black's knight will continue with its maneuver with tempo (14.ttJb3 ttJe5). Black succeed in finding a tactical solution to the move in the text: 14 . . . ttJg4! 15.hxg4 ttJxd4+ Zacurdajev - Yevseev, St. Peters burg 2006. 8.exd4 d5
on f6 and later on d5, therefore Black should not mind the loss of a tempo. 9.a3 White's attempt to occupy ad ditional space on the queenside is not dangerous for Black, be cause White cannot stabilize his position in view of his lag in de velopment: 9.eS b6 1O.b4, Horak - Hadraba, Decin 1997, 1O . . . ttJe4 1l.l:!c1 bxc5 12 .bxeS ttJc6 13 . .tb5 ttJxd4 14.ttJxd4 �a5 15.i.c6 ttJxc3 16.�d2 ,txd4 17.�xd4 ttJe4 18.�d1 .b6! t This is why White has played 9.a3 in the first place - in order to prepare eS and b4. In case of 9 . .te2 ttJc6 10.0-0 dxc4 1l.,txc4, White's bishop comes to c4 in two moves and Black manages to mobilize his forces for a successful fight against his opponent's isolated pawn. For example: 11.. .ttJa5 12 . .td3 .ie6 13.l:!c1 l:!cB 14.i.e5 ttJc4 15.�e2 ttJxe5 16.dxe5 ttJd5 17.ttJxd5 �xd5 1B.b3 �a5= Gonzalez - Ortega, Linares 199B. 9 tOc6 l O .c5 tOe4 11 .ie2 • • •
Now, contrary to the variation with i.g5, White cannot capture 32
•
l.d4 tiJf6 2.c4 g6 3. tiJ c3 i.g7 4. tiJj3 0-0 5. i,{4 d6 White has taken preventive measures against the undermin ing move b7-b6, but instead of this, now he is faced with a power ful counter strike in the centre. 1l lOxd4! 12.lOxd4 eS 13. �e3 exd4 14.hd4 lOxc3 IS. bxc3 ti'gS+ White can hardly complete his development without consider able material or positional con cessions. • • •
ing 1l . . . lOxe4.) 1l . . . i.a6� Welling - Hebden, Caleta 2 005. 7 ... �6 8.ti'xh6 cxd4 9.lOxd4 lO c6 The position is of the semi open type and Black is consider ably ahead in development, since White has lost too much time ex changing the dark-squared bish ops. He has no chances of creat ing real threats against the king on g8, so he should better think about maintaining the equality. 1 0 .ti'd2 lOxd4 11.ti'xd4 .te6
B) 6.ti'd2
6 cS The inclusion of the move 6 . . . a6 looks a bit slow: 7 . .th6 c5 8.hg7 @xg7 9.g3 lOc6 1O.i.g2 i.g4 1l.dxc5 dxc5 12 .ti'e3 tiJd4 13.0-0-0 hf3 14 . .hf3 ti'c7 15.g4 @g8 16.h4 �ad8 17.h5:t Wu Wen jin - Li Shilong, China 2006. 7.i.h6 We can recommend to Black to counter 7.d5 with motives of the theme of the Benko Gambit: 7. . . b 5 8.cxb5 a 6 9.e4 axb5 1O.hb5 ti'a5 1l.i.e2 (Black was threaten. • .
12.e3 White should not be eager to play 12 .e4, when only the light squared bishops are left on the board. Instead, he wishes to bring his bishop to the f3-square after a while and to exert positional pres sure on the queenside. Black how ever succeeds in reducing the ten sion in the centre and he equalizes completely. 12 :\WaS 13 .te2 �Uc8 14. 0 - 0 , Wu Wenjin - Wang Pin, China 2006, 14 dS! lS.cxdS lOxdS= ••
•
• • •
33
Chapter 3 e) 6.e3 c5 The chase after White's bishop - 6 . . . ttJhS 7.j,gS h6 8.j,h4 gS would not lead to success in view of 9.ttJd2 ttJf6 1O.j,g3. Black weak ened his kingside deliberately and he did not obtain any compensa tion for this and accordingly this had to be quite bad for his pros pects in the subsequent fight. For example: 10 . . . ttJc6 (10 . . . cS 11.dS ttJbd7, Evdokimov - Khismatul lin, Serpuhov 2003, 12.�d3 ! ?;!;) 11.h4 g4 12.hS eS 13.dS ttJe7 14.e4 ttJh7 1S.�4 j,f6 16.hf6 ttJxf6 17.j,e2 �h8 18.ttJf1;!; Benjamin Rao, Chicago 1986.
el) 7.d5 e2) 7 .te2 •
About 7.h3 - see variation A3. It would be harmless for Black if White plays 7.dxcS dxcS 8.j,e2
ttJc6 9.0-0 �xd1 (Black is not forced to exchange queens and he should not have any problems in the endgame either. There are no weaknesses in his position 34
and his pieces are harmoniously deployed.) 1O.�fxd1 j,fS 11.ttJeS ttJxeS 12.heS �ad8 13 . .if3 �d7= Finegold - Scholseth, Saint John 1988.
el) 7.d5 White reduces the tension in the centre prematurely and Black obtains excellent counter play thanks to his offensive on the flanks. 7 . �b6 .
.
8.gbl 8JWb3 �xb3 9.axb3 ttJa6 10.e4 ttJb4 11.0-0-0?! ttJg4 12.j,g3 fS 13.h3 fxe4 14.ttJxe4 ttJh6 (14 ... ttJf6 ! ?) 1S . .id3 ttJfS 16.j,h2 j,d7 17.�he1 bS't Anastasian - Kruppa, St. Petersburg 1993. 8 e5 ! This is a spectacular move, but Black could have continued even simpler with 8 . . . �aS 9.j,d3 (9.�d2 j,g4 1O . .ie2 �a6 11.0-0 hf3 12.gxf3 ttJbd7=) 9 ... ttJhS 10.0-0 ttJxf4 11.exf4 j,g4= 9.j,g5 It would be too risky for White • • •
l.d4 0,f6 2.c4 g6 3. 0, c3 i.g7 4. 0,./3 0-0 5. i.f4 d6 to grab a pawn, because after 9.dxe6 .he6 1O.�xd6 0,c6 11.�d1 i.f5, Black would have a huge lead in development and a very power ful initiative. 9 ... i.f5 1 0 .J.d3
extra space, so these pluses and minuses are approximately bal ancing each other. 16.f4 f5 = Now, Black only needs to bring his knight to f6, having played be fore this rJlh8 (so that he does not blunder his f5-pawn, because of the pin) in order to be completely happy about his position.
C2) 7.J.e2
1 0 e4! ? The straightforward exchange of the light-squared bishops does not guarantee complete equal ity for Black: 10 . . . .hd3 11.�xd3 0,bd7 12.0,d2 gae8 13.a3 a6 14.f3 V!!c7 15.J.h4 0,h5 16.g4 (16.0-0 f5) 16 . . . e4!?, Ivanchuk - Radjabov, Sochi 2008, 17.0,cxe4 f5 18.gxh5 fxe4 19.fxe4 0,e5 20.V!!e 2 gxh5 21.J.g5 gO 2 2.J.f4;!; 1l ..hf6 exf3 12.hg7 fxg2 13.gg1 .hd3 14.�xd3 rJlxg7 15.�g2 0,d7 The forced play has ended and the position has been simplified considerably. White's king is vis ibly more endangered than its counterpart and in addition he must worry about the e5-square in the nearest future. Meanwhile, White has preserved a very pow erful pawn-centre and he has • • •
7 �h5 We will see soon that follow ing the inclusion of the moves 6 . . . c5 7.J.e2, the chase after White's bishop should be crowned with success. It is not so good for Black to play 7 . . . 0,c6, because after 8.d5, he will need to retreat with his knight to the edge of the board - 8 . . . �a5 and this will be exactly the case illustrating the correct ness of the famous principle of Dr. Tarrasch concerning the knight at the edge of the board. For exam ple: 9.gc1 J.d7 1O.0-0 lLlh5 1l.J.g5 h6 12 . .!h4 f5 13.lLld2 lLlf6 14.a3 • • •
35
Chapter 3
b6 15.b4;!; Klauser - Zueger, Len zerheide 2006 and Black's knight will have to go to the pathetic b7square. In case of 7. . . cxd4 8.exd4 d5 9.cS, Black fails to break his op ponent's position. For example: 9 ... ltJe4 10.0-0 ltJc6 1l.h3 (After White has castled short, Black's possible strikes against his centre of the type ltJxd4 and e5 are not so dangerous for White any more.) 1l ... .tf5 12.'fMa4, Milos - Lee, Sao Paulo 2007 (12J!e1 l:!c8) 12 ... .td7! 8 .lg5 h6 9 .lh4 g5 1 0 .lg3 In case White's knight retreats - 1O.ltJg1, Black has the important intermediate move 10 ... cxd4! (at tacking the knight on c3). If now 1l.exd4, then Black plays another move with tempo 1l ... ltJf4+ and this provides him with a power ful initiative, Nielsen - Burgess, Denmark 1992. •
•
Black can play even more ag gressively - 10 . . .f5, but White can react quite calmly to this 1l.dxc5 ltJxg3 12.hxg3 dxc5 13.Wc2 ltJc6 14J�d1 'fMe8 (14 ... 'fMa5) 15.a3 Wfl 16.0-0 .le6 17.ltJd5 l:!ad8= Golod - Bologan, Romania 1994. 1l.ltJxd4 This move forces Black to ex change on g3. In case of 1l.exd4, Black has interesting additional possibili ties like ll ... .lfS, or 1l ... ltJc6. 1l ltJxg3 12.hxg3 •••
•
12 ltJc6 It looks a bit dangerous for Black to have given his opponent an open file against his king in deed, but just because of this he must play actively in the centre. Meanwhile, his dark-squared bishop is a quite reliable defender of his king. 13.'fMd2 'fMa5 14.gdl .td7 15. ltJd5 'i'xd2 16.�d2 gae8= Ar duman - David, Leon 2001. •••
10
36
•••
cxd4
Chapter 4
1.d4 �f6 2.c4 g6 3 . � c3 Jog7 4.e4 d6 5.J.g5
A) 5 �bd7? ! , This is not a good move for Black, because White can simply enter quite advantageously the Saemisch variation. This is the most precise and principled move and it creates numerous problems for Black. Meanwhile, I would like to warn the readers who would not agree with the evaluations of the author and would like to try S . . . lLlbd7 i n practice anyway that even after the simple developing move 6.lLlf3 , Black's task would be very difficult as well. The main drawback of his set-up is that he has committed his queen's knight to the d7-square a bit too early. It is rather passively placed there and Black would be incapable of exerting any pressure against his opponent's pawn-centre. 6 ... c6 The other possible attempt to create counterplay on the queen side would not be effective either: 6 . . . cS 7.dS 0-0 S.�d2 a6 (After S . . .l'!eS, White's centre is so pow erful that he can begin an imme diate offensive on the kingside •••
This move looks rather simple and straightforward, but it re quires from Black a good opening preparation and a precise play. The idea behind the move for White is to either provoke h6 and then to transpose into a favour able line from the Saemisch At tack, or to consolidate the bishop on gS after �d2 and this would be in principle rather unpleasant for Black. You will soon notice in our book that Ivan Sokolov is one of its main exponents and he is fa mous for being a very aggressive White player.
A) 5 B) 5 C) 5
•••
•••
•••
�bd7 h6 0-0
37
Chapter 4 with 9 . .th6 �8 10.h4 ! ? .!Dh5 11.l3h3t. He has covered the g3square and he can follow this with g2-g4 continuing with the pawn onslaught.) 9 . .!Dh3 (Black has demonstrated his wish to organ ize a queenside counterplay even tually sacrificing a pawn, there fore White should take care of his rapid development.) 9 . . .b5 lO. cxb5 �a5 11 . .!Df2 (This waiting can be quite typical sometimes - nei ther side wishes to waste a tempo capturing a pawn.) 11.. . .!Db6 12. .!Dfdl axb5 13 . .!Dxb5t. White has regrouped his forces quite favour ably and Black's compensation for the sacrificed pawn is insuffi cient.
first place - to avoid sacrificing a pawn.) 10.l3dl �a5 11.a3 l3b8 12 . .te2 bxc4 (It is much more fa vourable for Black to exchange here after White has played a2a3 : his b-pawn is vulnerable on this semi-open file both on b2 and b4. It would be best for White to place it on b3, under the protec tion of the a2-pawn, but this is already impossible.) 13.,txc4 c5 14 ..te3 ttJb6 15 . .ta2 .te6 16.d5 .!d7 17.0-0 .!Da4== Ibragimov - Yur taev, Calcutta 2000 . 7 a6 8. 0 - 0 - 0 �a5 9 .th6 0-0 After 9 . . ..txh6 lO.�xh6 b5 11. �bl l3b8 12.�d2, White parries his opponent's threats quite easily and he maintains the advantages of his position. He dominates in the centre and on the kingside and he has plenty of space for piece maneuvering. 1 0 .h4 b5 11.�bl b4? ! It would be a bit better for Black to play 11 . . . l3b8 ; since it is not reasonable for him to block deliberately the queenside, be cause he is in fact stronger there. 12 .!Dce2 .bh6 13.�xh6 c5 14 .!Dh3 White demonstrates his quite straightforward intention to checkmate the enemy king. 14 cxd4 15 .!Dg5 .!Dc5 16. .!Dxd4± - Black's defence seems to be very difficult against White's simple but dangerous threats, Rajkovic - Dokimakis, Iraklion 1994. •••
•
•
7.�d2 White plans to evacuate his king to the queenside and then to begin a massive kingside offen sive. It would be too slow for him to play 7 . .!Dh3 a6 8 . .!Df2, ena bling Black to create counterplay 8 . . . 0-0 9.�d2 b5 (This is why Black has played a6 and c6 in the 38
•
•••
•
l.d4 0,f6 2.c4 g6 3. 0, c3 �g7 4.e4 d6 5. �g5 B) S h6 • • .
suffer in the end because of this. Meanwhile, he will also need to retreat soon his knight from the g4-square, since it is vulnerable there.
B1) 7 eS B2) 7 cS • • •
• • •
Bl) 7 eS S.dS f5 • • •
It was considered for a while that Black could not only win a tempo with this move, but he could equalize easily. This is not quite true, however. White can gradually compensate for the lost time and his set-up turns out to be rather sound in the long run. Still, the original analysis of the author shows that Black can reach a quite playable position. 6 .ie3 It is not good for White to play 6.�h4, because of 6 . . . c5 7.d5 '\1;I[a5 8.�d3 0,bd7 9.f4 b5! t and after the retreat of his bishop to the h4square, it cannot come back any more to d2, or c1 in order to join in the protection of the queenside. 6 tLlg4 It is only a transposition of moves after 6 . . . e5 7.d5 0,g4 8.�cl. 7 .tc1 The escapade of White's bish op to g5 and back was not exactly a loss of time. Black has weak ened his kingside and he will .
• • •
.
9.exfS White pushed aggressively his g-pawn in the following game, but he failed to reap any great dividends out of this: 9.�e2 0,f6 1O.exf5 hi5 11.g4? ! (We will show you later in our notes to the move 9 . . . gxf5, that it is stronger for White to continue with 1l.0,f3 ! , this position arises after the move-order 9.exf5 hi5 10.�e2 ! 0,f6 11.0,f3.) 1l . . . �d7 12 .'\1;I[c2 e4 (Black wishes to trade his e-pawn for his opponent's g-pawn in order to open the diagonal for his dark squares bishop.) 13.g5 (It would not be so attractive for White to opt for 13.0,xe4 0,xg4, but still it deserved attention to try 13.h3, 39
Chapter 4
preserving the control over the fS-square.) 13 ...hxgS 14.hgS .tfS lS.�d2 tilbd7 16.h4 tileS. It becomes obvious that Black has seized the initiative. There fol lowed: 17.tLlh3 �d7 18.tilf4 tilh7 19.0-0-0 tilxgS 2 0.hxgS �e7 21. �xh8 .bh8 22.tilbS a6 23.tild4 �xgS 24.tLlfe6 �xd2 25. i>xd2 i>t7 26.�h1 �g8 27.�h7 j,g7 28.tilxc7 �h8 29J'!xh8 .bh8+ I.Sokolov Volokitin, Silivri 2 003. 9 gxf5 In case of 9 ... i.xf5, White fails to use effectively the weak ening of the e4-outpost: 1O.j,d3 0-0 11.i.xf5 (After 11.tilf3?! e4 12.tilxe4 �e8 13.tilfd2 �h4! He has great problems to worry about.) 11 ... gxfS 12.h3 tilf6 13.tilf3 tila6 14.0-0 tileS lS ..te3 tilfe4 16.tilxe4 tilxe4 17.�c2 as and White's edge is only symbolic. He should try to act smarter in stead: 1O.j,e2 ! tLlf6 11.tilf3 (threat ening 12.tilh4) 11 ... gS. Now, after White has provoked the move g6gS, he should set about exploiting the e4-square: 12.j,d3 '.Wd7 (12 ... e4? ! 13.tild4) 13.0-0 tila6 14.�e1 0-0-0 lS.hiS �xf5 16.tLlbS i>b8 17.j,e3 b6 18.a4± Opinca Shcherbina, Ilyichevsk 2 006. 1 0 .j,e2 tilf6 1l .lh5 White's too academic play in order to weaken and then occupy the e4-outpost would not be suc cessful: 11.h3 as 12.g4 tLla6 13.gxfS i.xf5 14 . .tg4 �d7=. Here however, despite Black's impressive centre, his king is a bit unsafe. .••
•
40
1l
•••
�.'l:xh5 12.�xh5 i>f8 13.
f4 In one of his first games in this line, GM Ivan Sokolov tried to provoke the pawn-advance fS-f4, so that he could establish a firm control over the e4-square, but he failed to pose any serious prob lems to his opponent: 13.tilge2 '.We8 14.tilg3 tila6 15.0-0 j,d7 16.h4 i>g8 17.�b1 i>h7 18.tLlbS gf8 19.�xe8 �axe8 2 0.tilxa7 j,a4 21.j,d2 j,c2 22.gbc1 Ad3 23.gfe1 e4, draw, I.Sokolov - Ivanchuk, Linares 1995. This move 13.f4 looks more up to the point, since White tries to reduce the scope of action of Black's bishop on c8.
13 �e8 Black's main task now is to ensure the safety of his king. His prospects in the endgame seem quite promising thanks to his powerful bishops and excellent pawn centre, while in the mid dle game, he might come under a crushing attack. His alternative is 13 ... e4 14. •••
l.d4 CiJf6 2.c4 g6 3. CiJ c3 �g7 4.e4 d6 5. �g5 CiJge2 �e8 15.�xe8?! (White should better preserve the queens on the board with: 15.�h3 !;!;) 15 . . . �xe8 16.i.e3 l:!g8 17.0-0 CiJa6 18.i.d4 i.d7 19.1:!adl CiJc5 2 0.l:!d2 �f7 21. hg7 l:!xg7 22.CiJd4 a5 23.CiJdl a4f± Banikas - Fedorov, Dresden 2008. 14.�h3 Naturally, White should avoid the trade of queens. 14 CiJa6 15.CiJge2 CiJb4 16.0-0 •••
Black's knight is doubtlessly placed beautifully here, but it does not have any bright prospects and White can always exchange it if he so wishes. 19.9d2 gg8 2 0 .td4 This is an excellent example on the theme of advantageous and disadvantageous exchanges. Black's bishop on g7 is very good, so White should better get rid of it, depriving his opponent of his two-bishop advantage in the process. 2 0 a6 21.CiJdl h:d4 22. CiJxd4 �f6 White is threatening to play 23.CiJe3, wining the f5-pawn, so Black must force his opponent to occupy the e3-square with his queen. 23. �e3 .td7 24.CiJf2 White's knight has found an other quite useful square and again the forthcoming exchange is favourable for him. 24 CiJxf2 25.gfxf2;!; •
• • •
16 e4 If Black plays something else, he should worry about the possi ble exchange sacrifice on f5 after fxe5. It might be equally unpleas ant for him if White plays for a positional pressure with CiJg3. Generally speaking, Black should keep the f-file closed. 17.�e3 The move 17.l:!bl, which White played in the following game turned out to be just a loss of time: 17 . . . i.d7 18.i.e3 l:!g8 19.i.d4 �g6 2 0.hg7 l:!xg7 21.a3 CiJd3 22.CiJc1 CiJc5= Psakhis - Nijboer, Vlissin gen 2000. 17 �g6 18.gadl CiJd3 •••
• • •
• • •
White enjoys the typical ad vantage of a knight against a bish41
Chapter 4 op, so he has the edge, Nikolaidis - Netzer, France 2 0 04.
B2) 7 cS • • •
B2a) 9 eS B2b) 9 lLlf6 • • •
• • •
B2a) 9 eS 1 0 .dxe6 It is worse for White to play 1O.lLlb5, in view of 1O . . . lLlf6 (at tacking the e4-pawn) 11.f3 hh3 12.gxh3 lLlh5oo and Black succeeds in establishing a blockade on the dark squares. 1 0 .txe6 1l .ie2 White's hasty attempt to get rid of the bishop on d4 with Il.lLlb5, turns out again to be wrong: 11 . . . lLlc6 12.lLlxd4 lLlxd4 13.lLlf4 �h4 14.g3 �f6 15 . .ie2 lLle5+ 1l �h4 12. 0 - 0 lLlc6 13. lLldS 0 - 0 - 0 Black can try to continue the game with a "centralized" king, but this might be dangerous, for example: 13 ... �d7 14 . .if4 lLlge5 15 . .ig3 �dB 16.�b3 E:bB 17.lLlhf4 h5 IB.h3 h4 19 . .ih2 etc. The situ ation in the centre is absolutely unpredictable, but still White is better, because of his safer king. 14.i.f4 It is worse for White to opt for 14.lLldf4 lLlge5 15.lLlxe6 fxe6 16.�hl g5 17.f4 gxf4 1B.lLlxf4 E:dfB 19 . .id2 . Black was dominant in the centre in the game I.Sokolov - Solleveld, Netherlands 2001. Here, he had better occupy sim ply the g-file, generating numer ous threats with 19 . . . E:hgB+ 14 gS In case of 14 . . . lLlf6, White has the powerful argument 15 ..ig3 �xe4 16 . .if3 (It is only a repeti• • •
• • •
8.dS The transfer into an endgame with the line: B.dxc5 dxc5 9.�xdB �xdB, does not create any serious problems for Black, but he still needs to play accurately in order to obtain a good game, for exam ple: 10.h3 (1O.f4 lLlc6 11.h3 hc3 12.bxc3 lLlf6=) lO . . . hc3 11.bxc3 lLle5 12.f4 lLled7 13 . .ie3 b6 14. 0-0-0 .ib7 15 ..id3 lLlc6 16.lLlf3 �c7 17.f5 g5 IB . .if2 f6 19 . .ig3 lLlce5= Kovacevic - Mrva, Steinb runn 2 005. 8 ... .td4 9.lLlh3 Black has two active pieces at the moment, but they seem to have reached their maximal po tential. White has a solid centre and a space advantage, so he must complete calmly his development and repel gradually his opponent's pieces. Black's task is to maintain by all means the position as sharp as possible. 42
• • •
• • •
•
l.d4 liJf6 2.c4 g6 3. � c3 !i.g7 4.e4 d6 S. !i.g5 tion of moves after 16.!i.d3 �g4 17 . .te2 �e4.) 16 . . .�fS 17.�hf4 gS 18.�e2 .teS 19.�e3 �g6 20.i.xc6 bxc6 21.�a4t and White's initia tive for the sacrificed pawn is very dangerous. 15 ..tg3 �h5 16.gblt
neously in the process - against the e4-pawn and the knight on h3. 1 0 .�d3 In case of 1O.f3 ixh3 1l.gxh3 �b6, Black protects his bishop on d4 just in time and he succeeds in blockading the position. For ex ample: 12.�bS a6 13.�xd4 cxd4 14.b3 eS ! ? 1 0 �bd7!? This move has not been tried in practice yet. In one of the games, Black acted in the spirit of the Benoni Defence and he transferred his knight to c7 - 1O . . . �a6 1l.a3 �c7. It remained idle on this square though and it also precluded the placement of his queen to b6: 12 .�e2 eS 13.�xd4 cxd4 14 . .te2 as IS.f4 ixh3 16.gxh3 �a6. Black's knight-maneuvers at the edge of the board are not impres sive at all. Meanwhile, White has succeeded in the completion of his development and he is ready to open the position: 17.0-0 �c5 18.�f3 �cxe4 19 . .tdl �b6 20.fxeS dxeS 2 1..tc2± Ibragimov - Kazh galeyev, Nice 2000. We should also mention here that the dis covered check 21...d3 is harmless, because of 22 . .te3. 1l.f4 �b6 12.�b5 g5! oo (diagram) This original position is quite interesting and it deserves a thorough analysis, nevertheless the first impression is that Black should not be worse at all thanks • • •
Black's counterplay has reached its dead end, while White can continue calmly with his queenside offensive.
B2b) 9 ... �f6
Black follows his opponent's example and he retreats his piec es, creating two threats simulta-
43
Chapter 4
to his control over the dark squares in the centre. C) 5
• • •
0-0
6.Yfd2 About 6 . .te2 �a6, or 6 . . . h6 see Chapters 11-12. About 6.f3 - see Chapter 14. As for 6.�f3 - see Chapter 20, 6 ..tg5. The overly ambitious move 6.f4 enables Black to begin imme diate actions in the centre and on the queenside with 6 ... cS 7.d5 'lWa5 8.'lWd2 b5 9 .cxb5 a6 1O.bxa6 ha6 11.ha6 �xa6 12.�f3 gfe8. As a result, he has obtained an excel lent version of the Benko Gambit. 44
White's pieces are not well coor dinated and his queenside needs additional protection. Black has defended his e7-pawn with his last move, since White's only rea sonable plan is connected with the central break e4-e5. 13.0-0 gab8 14.e5 �d7 15.gae1 �c7 16.ge2 �b6 (Black has regrouped suc cessfully his forces and he exerts pressure against the d5-pawn.) 17.b3 c4 18.gd1, draw, Svetly Pribyl, Czech Republic 2003. Black's other standard plan includes the undermining move 8 . . . e6, for example: 9.dxe6 fxe6 1O.i.d3 �c6 11.�ge2 �g4 ! ? (This is the beginning of a quite origi nal maneuver. Black could have played instead routinely 11 . . . i.d7, followed by �d4.) 12.h3 �h6 13. 0-0 �f7 14 . .th4 �d4 15.gad1 .td7 16 . .tf2 gac8 17 . .te3, Belozerov Pokazanjev, Novokuznetsk 2008 and here, instead of the very bad exchange on e2, Black had better complete what he had begun, by playing 17 . . . �d8 with the idea to follow with �dc6. White should avoid being squeezed and he will have to sacrifice a pawn with the line: 18.f5 exfS 19.�g3oo with a double edged position. 6 c5 7.d5 b5! This classic resource exploits the fact that White's knight on c3 must protect the e4-pawn He is forced to capture on b5 with his pawn and this enables Black to seize the initiative on the queen side. •••
1.d4 CfJf6 2.c4 g6 3. CfJ c3 �g7 4.e4 d6 5. Ag5 8.cxb5 a6 White has a wide choice of possibilities here. We should be acquainted with them thoroughly, in order to understand better the plans of both sides in this typical pawn-structure for the King's In dian (pawns on d5 and e4 against Black pawns on c5 and d6).
a development of his knight to the e2-square 1l.CfJge2 �b6 12.0-0 l:!tbB 13.l:!abU) 1l . . . c4 12.0-0 �c5 13. '\!!
