Botvinnik - Volume 3.pdf

BOTVINNIK'S BEST GAMES Volume 3: 1957 -1970 Mtkhatl Bolvinnik

Mikhail Botvinnik

BOTVINNIK'S BEST GAMES

Volume 3: 1957-1970

(Analytical & Critical Works)

Translated and Edited by Ken Neat

Olomouc 2001

Published in the Czech Republic in 2001 by PUBLISHING HOUSE MORA VIAN CHESS P.O. Box 101, 772 11 OLOMOUC 2 Czech Republic

This book is an authorised translation ofMM Botvinnik Analiticheskie i kriticheskie raboty 1957-1970 (Moscow 1986) ©English translation copyright Ken Neat 2001

Chess Agency CAISSA-90

All rights reserved ISBN 80-7 1 89-405-2

Contents

From tournaments and matches - to understanding the essence of the game ...

7

Selected Games 1957-1970 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 26 1 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 27 1 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 28 1 282

Botvinnik-Smyslov, 1 957, 5th match game Botvinnik-Smyslov, 1 957, 9th match game Botvinnik-Smyslov, 1 957, 1 1th match game Botvinnik-Smyslov, 1 957, 13th match game Smyslov-Botvinnik, 1 957, 18th match game Smyslov-Botvinnik, 1 958, 1 st match game Botvinnik-Smyslov, 1 958, 2nd match game Botvinnik-Smyslov, 1 958, 6th match game Smyslov-Botvinnik, 1 958, 7th match game Smyslov-Botvinnik, 1 958, 9th match game Botvinnik-Smyslov, 1 958, 12th match game Botvinnik-Smyslov, 1 958, 14th match game Botvinnik-Smyslov, 1 958, 16th match game Smyslov-Botvinnik, 1 958, 21st match game Smyslov-Botvinnik, 1 958, 23rd match game Botvinnik-Raizman, 1958 Citrone-Botvillllik, 1 958 Botvinnik-Pomar, 1 958 Botvinnik-Alexander, 1 958 Botvinnik-Duckstein, 1 958 Uhlmann-Botvinnik, 1958 Botvinnik-Donner, 1 958 Tal-Botvinnik, 1 960, 3rd match game Tal-Botvinnik, 1 960, 5th match game Botvinnik-Tal, 1 960, 8th match game Tal-Botvinnik, 1 960, 9th match game Botvinnik-Tal, 1 960, 20th match game Tamburini-Botvinnik, 1960 Tarnows!Q-Botvinnik, 1960 Neikirch-Botvinnik, 1 960 Portisch-Botvinnik, 1 960 3

22 25 27 29 32 36 40 44 48 49 53 58 63 66 68 71 73 75 81 83 85 87 90 93 96 99 102 105 107 . 108 111

283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 3 12 3 13 3 14 315 316 3 17 3 18 3 19 320 321 322 323

Botvinnik-Schmid, 1 960 Botvinnik-Paclunan, 1 960 Botvinnik-Tal, 1 961, 1st match game Botvinnik-Tal, 1 961, 3rd match game Botvinnik-Tal, 196 1 , 7th match game Botvinnik-Tal, 1 96 1, 9th match game Tal-Botvinnik, 1 96 1 , 1 0th match game Botvinnik-Tal, 1 96 1, 1 1th match game Botvinnik-Tal, 1 96 1 , 1 3th match game Botvinnik-Tal, 1 96 1, 1 5th match game Tal-Botvinnik, 1 96 1 , 18th match game Botvinnik-Tal, 1 96 1, 2 1st match game Botvinnik-Paclunan, 1 96 1 Botvinnik-Unzicker, 196 1 Botvinnik-Wade, 196 1/62 Littlewood-Botvinnik, 1 96 1/62 Robatsch-Botvinnik 196 1 /62 Botvinnik-Bisguier, 1 96 1 /62 Skold-Botvinnik, 1 962 Botvinnik-Lundin, 1 962 Botvinnik-Soderborg, 1 962 Unzicker-Botvinnik, 1962 Filip-Botvinnik, 1962 Botvinnik-Robatsch, 1 962 Botvinnik-Fischer, 1 962 Petrosian-Botvinnik, 1963, 1 st match game Botvinnik-Petrosian, 1963, 4th match game Botvinnik-Petrosian, 1963, 8th match game Botvinnik-Petrosian, 1963, 10th match game Petrosian-Botvinnik, 1963, 1 3th match game Botvinnik-Petrosian, 1963, 14th match game Botvinnik-Petrosian, 1963, 16th match game Krutikhin-Botvinnik, 1 963 Gipslis-Botvinnik, 1963 Taimanov-Botvinnik, 1 963 Kholmov-Botvinnik, 1 963 Botvinnik-Van Scheltinga, 1 963 Botvinnik-Donner, 1 963 Botvinnik-Petrosian, 1 964 Botvinnik-Smyslov, 1964 Botvin,nlk-Stein, 1964

4

1 12 1 15 1 17 1 20 1 22 125 1 29 132 135 137 141 143 146 1 49 153 155 1 57 160 162 165 1 67 169 171 174 177 184 1 87 1 89 1 93 1 95 1 98 203 206 208 2 10 2 13 217 219 22 1 225 227

324 325 3 26 327 328 329 330 33 1 3 32 333 334 335 3 36 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 3 46 34 7 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364

Botvinnik-Medina, 1 964 Letelier-Botvinnik, 1 964 Aloni-Botvinnik, 1 964 Yanofsky-Botvinnik, 1 964 Botvinnik-Gligoric, · 1 964 Ciocaltea-Botvinnik, 1 964 Botvinnik-Larsen. 1965

Trifunovic-Botvinnik, 1 965 Botvinnik-Donner, 1 965

Botvinnik-Langeweg, 1965 Gipslis-Botvinnik, 1965

Botvinnik-Tolush, 1 965

Yudovich-Botvinnik, 1 966 LiberLon-Botvinnik, 1 966

Botvinnik-Szilagyi, 1966 Sz.abo-Botvinnik, 1966

Botvinnik-Pomar, 1 966

Botvinnik-Zuidem� 1 966 Botvinnik-Robatsch, 1 965 Botvinnik-Smyslov, 1 966 Botvinnik-Keres, 1966

Spassky-Botvinnik, 1 966

Botvinnik-Balashov, 1 9666/67 Liberzon-Botvinnik, 1 967 Levit-Botvinnik, 1967

Botvinnik-Polugayevsky, 1 967 Taimanov-Botvinnik, 1 967

Botvinnik-Boleslavsky, 1 967 Botvinnik-Toran, 1 967

Medina-Botvinnik, 1967 Botvinnik-Diez del Corral, 1 967 Botvinnik-Bednarski, 1 967

Gligoric-Botvinnik, 1967

Botvinnik-Matulovic. 1 967 Donner-Botvinnik, 1967 Botvinnik-Larsen, 1 967

Botvinnik-Padevsky, 1968 Botvinnik-Larsen, 1968 Benko-Botvinnik, 1 968

Botvinnik-Portisch, 1 968

Botvinnik-Kholmov, 1969

5

230 232 234 238 240 245 247 250 253 257 259 262 264 266 269 27 1 273 275 279 28 1 285 287 29 1 294 297 2·99 302 305 308 311 3 13 3 15 3 19 32 1 324 .326 330 333 336 338 341

365 Ostojic-Botvinnik, 1969 36.6 Botvinnik-Ree, 1969

·

367 Botvinnik-Van Scheltinga, 1969 368 Medina-Botvinnik, 1969 369 Botvinnik-Lombardy, 1969

353 357 359

370 Ciric-Botvimtlk. 1969 371 Langeweg-Botvinnik, 1969

362 365

372 Botvinnik-Kavalek, 1969 373 Botvinnik-Kurajica, 1969 374 Matanovic-Botvinni� 1969

368 372 377

375 Botvinnik-Ostojic, 1969 376 Matulovic-Botvinnik, 1969

380 383

377 Botvinnik-Suttles, 1969 378 379 380 381

344 348 351

387

Matulovic-Botvinnik, 1970 Botvinnik-Spassky, 1970 Botvinnik-Larsen, 1970 Spassky-Botvinnik, 1970

389 391 396

Training Games Postscript Tournament and Match Cross-tables

401 428 429

Summary of Tournament and Match Results (1957-1970)

457

Translator's Notes

459

Index of Openings

463

6

From tournaments and matches - to understanding the essence of the game ...

from my final competitive appearances. This was a highly intense period. Over a

return match. The question was - should this right be used? Pressure was put on me - they tried

period of 14 years I played five matches

to persuade me to give up the return

Collected in this book are the games

for the World Championship, and I took

match. But the decision depended on

part in many international tournaments,

one thing alone: could I be confident

four Olympiads, and also other team

that I would be successful in a new

competitions.

encounter?

In parallel with this I continued my

After analysing the games from the

scientific work in the field of electrical

match I decided that 'a cat may look at a

engineering, and from 1960 in the field

king', and that it was possible to com­

of cybernetics. I also directed a junior

pete with the new champion: The return

chess school, and a considerable amount of time was taken up by writing. It all began with a failure in a World Championship match. The battle pro­ ceeded with alternating successes, but then I failed to withstand a difficult test, and Vasily Smyslov brilliantly won the

match took place in the Spring of 1958.

I made complete use of my analytical powers and was excellently prepared. It was easy to prepare - the lost match had given a wealth of preliminary infor­ mation. The champion, moreover, was over-optimistic, and also he had become accustomed to searching only when

title of champion. Possibly I underestimated my oppon­

sitting at the chess

ent - much to my cost! In the period

board during a

game ...

By the 15th game I already had an

from 1953 to 1958 Smyslov did not know any failures; this was the summit

advantage of four points, and this game

of his chess achievements. At the end of

was adjourned in a position that was hopeless for White. It only remained for

the event I was aiming only to 'rid myself of the match as soon as I could.

m� to go off to my dacha for a night­

It was no longer possible to save it, but by the FIDE rules then in force a

time analysis - this procedure had invariably proved · successfhl. But the

defeated champion had the right to a

difference in the scores had its effect: I 7

stayed in Moscow, analysed super­ ficially, and during the resumption became rattled. Even so. when ·1 was considering my 55th move, there were probably still hopes of winning.

I learned about this when the FIDE Congress of 1959 abolished the right of the champion to a return match (begin­ ning in 1963). Although this decision was against the interests of the chess world, on egotistical grounds I did not protest - how long can one go on fight­ ing for the chess crown! Two years passed� and I faced a new opponent in a match (Vasily Smyslov had twice won the Candidates Tourna­ ment, but on the third occasion he was unsuccessful). In the late 1950s Mikhail Tai stag­ gered the chess world with a series of brilliant tournament successes. He won enormous popularity not only with his competitive results, but also his except­ ionally lively and clever play. His first prizes in two USSR Cham-· pionships, the Interzonal Tournament and the Candidates Tournament were fully justified. All this was crowned by Tai' s victory in our 1960 match, which brought him the title of World Champion, a result which was fully expected by chess enthusiasts. However, if one analyses things from the creative viewpoint, our match also gave a wealth of material for studying the deficiencies in the young champion's play. Even when it was not in the spirit of the position, Tal would aim for open play. He would go in for difficult positions, merely in order to obtain great mobility for his pieces, when his unique ability to calculate variations might tell, as well as... the opponent's lack of time for thought. Such a utilitarian approach . to chess secured the achievement of his goal, but

Botvinnik

Smyslov The resumption had taken a tense course, but finally the queens had been exchanged, and I breathed a sigh of relief - a feeling which arises when the time control has been reached. And so here I decided that the right number of moves had been made, and... I over­ stepped the time limit! Instead of being five points ahead, I had to be content with three. My mood was spoiled, of course, but the title of champion was regained. My colleagues (and not only they) were unhappy about this. They realised that in a match it was possible to defeat the old champion� but in a return match the art of preparation might still tell ... And behind my back a campaign to abolish the return match was begun.

8

at a high price. It led to a prejudiced style of play, to a narrowing of his creative possibilities, and harboured the possibility of future failures. A year later, in the return match, I was able to demonstrate that the creative defects in the young Latvian ' s play were more significant than his phenomenal calculating ability. In the first match I had been able to demonstrate this only once - in the 9th game. The return match was coming to an end. To general surprise, the young world champion, who everyone regard­ ed as a genius, was losing. . . Towards the end of ·the match some curious things happened. Before the 20th game the score was 1 1 Y2-7Y2. White had the advantage, but after the first adjourn­ ment I was able to analyse the position better, and I could have gained equal chances. But I made an incorrect move, and Tal again achieved a winning position. Then in a rook ending White played insufficiently energetically, the game was adjourned for a second time, and again analysis was required. I faced a second successive sleepless night. For a few hours the position seemed hopeless. The f5 and c6 pawns are weak, and the passed a6 pawn is powerful. But the thing that Black has to fear most is the possibility of the white king invading at b6 .. Even so, by morning an unexpected tactical chance was found: if White were to go in for a natural variation, Black would be saved by stalemate! And again the agonising search continued: what if White were to notice this stalemate? Finally, here too drawing chances were found.

Botvinnik

Tai I was in no doubt that my opponent would have slept peacefully all night. But Tal was Tal, and even at the board he might have noticed this tactical trick and chosen the correct, stronger contin­ uation. In order to lull my opponent's vigilance, when the game was resumed I did not take with me my usual thennos flask of coffee - to suggest that within a few moves I would be resigning. And so the game was resumed. 89 90

�a2 a7

l:lb5

My analysis had shown that the strongest continuation was to lure the black rook to a6: 90 l:f8 %%.a5+ 9 1 �b3 llxa6 92 llxf5 �d7 93 l:t f6 J:l.a l 94 f5 .D.d l 95 'ittc3 l:c l + 96 d2 :!fl 97 l:tt7+ 'it>d8 98 'it>c3 l:tb 1 .

Even so, it would appear that here too Black gains a draw, e.g. 99 f6 :n 1 00 'it>b4 'it>e8, or 99 c2 llb4 100 �d3 l:.b3+ 101 �e2 :h3 102 f6 l:th4 103 e3 l:.e4+ 104 @d3 : r4.

90 9

•

•

•

lla5+

91 92

@bJ

.D.f8

ci>b7 llb5+

95 96

It is important here to force White to decide where .to take his king, since it is on this that Black's further actions depend. For example, if 93 �c3 there would have followed 93.. Jla5. in order to attack the enemy king from the side (93 ... �xa7 94 l:.xf5 :as 95 :n+ a6 96 1lc7 or 95 ... b8 96 'iti>b4 :b5+ 97 �a4 is bad for Black) 94 l:.xf5 rl;xa7 95 :n+ (95 l:tf6 e4 e6

Now White must be forced advance his e5 pawn. Therefore

to

li)c6 li)e7

Now the g5 pawn is lost, but Black improves the position of his king:

'iti>c5 a5 d6 e5

75 76 77 78 79

'it>e5 �6 'iti>xg5 .i.b3

Portisch

White is preparing zugzwang.

When Portisch was sealing his move, it seemed to me that Black had every chance of gaining a draw, but during dinner Geller gave me some unpleasant news: Black would lose due to zug­ zwang. 'Excuse me', I tried to object, 'can't the black king blockade the white e-pawn?'

79 80 81

.i.al .i.bJ!

a4 a3

Here we both fell silent and sank into thought. Indeed, what can Black do? If he moves his king, White will occupy f6, and if the knight moves, the white king will break through via g6 ... 'Paul Petrovich', I remarked timidly� 'there is one drawn.position: if White's

14

king is at f7 and his pawn at g5, Black can play .. . @e5-f5, and after g5-g6 give check with his knight from e5, with a draw . . . Only how can this be achieved? Keres, an experienced study com­ poser, immediately formulated the idea:

Only here did Portisch deviate:

83

�g7

83 84 85 86 87

g5 h6 .la2 h8 1 6 h5 g5, after which the possible exchange sacrifice on e6 would have led to him seizing the initiative. 15 1fe2 .i.h6

16

xf'S with an easy game for Black.

13

14

During the game this seemed to me to be the most subtle and energetic continuation, but in fact it allows Black to seize the initiative. As for the alternative 14 exf6 trucf6, it seemed harmless for Black. A definitive evaluation of the position can be given only by a practical testing of the variation 14 g4 ! hxg4 1 5 0--0-0 ; which may prove favourable to White. It is interesting that this recommen­ dation, which I published soon after the return match, was tested a quarter of a century later in a correspondence game Omelchenko-Heemsoth. There followed 15 . . . fxe5 16 fxe5 'iia5 17 hS i:xe5 18 hxg6 .i.xc3 19 l:hS+ ! .i.xhS (after 1 9 . . . xhS 20 .i.d4+, in view of the inevitable 2 1 'i'h6+ it all ends in mate) 20 Wxa5, and White won. After 14 g4 Black should probably reply 14 . . . fxe5 1 5 fxe5 .txe5, with unclear complications.

.

hxg4 g5!

Black must preserve at any cost the white h-pawn, since_ �n it will become

f6 . 50

22 Jbg4+ �h8 This is where the h5 p�wn comes in · useful !

the only pawn covering . . . the black king! After . t�mporarily strengthening in 1 his way his ·castled position� and with his control of the centre and also his extra pawn, Black will laWlch a counter­ offensive. Now it appears that, in view of the inevitable (immediately or later) . . .i.f4 Black will simplify the game, retaining his material advantage. 19 .i. xg5 it'd6

23

. .

.

20

�bl

Accurately played - Smyslov is in his element. Of course, the immediate 23 l:tg6 was bad in view of 23 . .t.f4, but now even after 23 . . . .tlab8 it is possible to play 24 l:g6 ! After 24 . . . llxb2+ White does nof accept the sacrifice (25 'iti>xb2? .i.xc3+ 26 1fxc3 l:tb8+), but wins by 25 tlra l ! Therefore Black must gain control of g6. ltg8 23 Now Black could have hoped for the better endgame after the obvious 24 l:r.g6 .tlxg6 25 hxg6 r:i;;g7 26 llh l %lh8 27 :xhs �xhs 2s 'i'h6+ gs 29 'ilh7+ @fS, but here too Smyslov finds a remarkable method of defence.

:h4

•

After lengthy reflection White finds a plan that saves the game. First of all, it transpires that he has no reason to fear the exchange of the bishops and even the queens. After 20 . . . .if4 2 1 .txf4 'i'xf4 22 1ixf4 (or even 22 :el ) 22 :xf4 23 �e2 l:a4 2 4 b 3 :xa2 2 5 �bl :a6 26 1=txg4+ �h7 27 l:tg5 or 27 �dg l Black has no advantage. How­ ever, this variation was not part of my intentions. I was aiming to return the extra pawn, but in the process to force the advantageous exchange of bishop for knight.

• •

...

20 21

. • •

.i.xf6

24

:lb4!

White defends against the combined attack on his king along · the b-file and the al-h8 diagonal (24 l:ab8 25 l:.b3 ), the b2 square is ·securely defended, and he obtains a good gam�. It should not be forgotten that the position of the black ...

ti)f6 1'xf6 51

king is less secure, and knight and queen (after the exchange of rooks) are nonnally more dangerous than bishop and queen . . . Therefore Black takes the logical decision to exchange the minor pieces, to spoil the opponent's queenside pawns, as well as one pair of rooks, to gain play on the b-file. It is extremely doubtful whether the alternative plan - 24 ... ltg3 25 �2 ltg2 26 1ie3 - was more justified. 24

•

• •

a5!

By creating the possibility of the further advance . . . a5-a4, Black does not allow the enemy rook to establish itself at b3, and White will be forced to concede the b-file. 25

ltb6

26

bxc3

.i.xc3

29 30

•eJ a3

ltg4

The immediate 30 'ifilb2 could have been met by 30 . . . ltb4+. l:e4

JO 31

1i'd3

32

lifi>b2

lteJ

33 34

•d4 cxd4

'ffxd4

• • •

.e5

26 tLlxdS was tlrreatened, but this merely hastens the implementation of Black's plan.

Also after 3 1 . . . ifd6 32 b2 lta4 33 Ila 1 it is not apparent how Black can strengthen his position.

The .match situation forced White to avoid simplification if possible, which is why he did not play 26 'iixc3 .

The threat of 3 3 :g 1 is unpleasant, and Black forces the exchange . of queens.

26 27 28

.

. •

ltxb8 g7 34 . . . e5 was simpler and stronger. 35 %1.gl+ t:Rf7

Here the king is safer than at c 1 . Now Black's possession of the b-file no l:th3 36 h6 longer gives him anything. White is 37 llg7+ �6 J:lb4 threatening to play 29 :g1 with 38 J:lh7 counterplay, which Black prevents. White now stands slightly more 28 llg8 actively, and Black goes for a repetition This position, with its insecure kings · of moves. 39 'iftcJ and mutual pawn weaknesses, must be considered roughly equal. Before ex­ If 3 9 c3 there would have followed changing queens it is dangerous for 39 . . . a4, while if 39 :th8 %Ixd4 40 h7 Black to advance his e7 pawn, as this 'l;g7. J:lh3 39 would expose the seventh rank. ·

•

• •

• • • :

52

ilh4 40 'it?b2 Draw agreed:' A good game! Game 262 Botvinnik-Smyslov

World Championship Return Match Moscow 1958, 12th game Reti Opening

1 2

c4 gJ

2 3 4

thfJ bJ

11

1fc2

11 12

.i.c3

Following the example of Reti, here White could have employed the manoeuvre 1 1 l:kl-c2 followed:by Wal (�a2 has also been played, with the same idea of allowing the queen into the comer). But he decided to follow the example of. . . Smyslov, perhaps a rather naive psychological ploy. As a result, Black handles the opening very confidently!

/i)f6 .

White avoids 2 �c3 , to give some variety to the play. Without much hesitation, Smyslov transposes into a well-known variation of the Reti c >pcning, since theory quite justifiably considers it to be safe for Black.

.i.h7

c6! d5 .i.f5

This was played by Emanuel Lasker

w i th Black against Reti back in 1924.

.i.g2 .i.b2 7 ·0-0 8 d3 5

6

e6 lhbd7 h6 i.e7

A similar plan (White intends b3-b4 or 'ib2) was carried out by Smyslov in a game with Durasevic ( 1956), but there the plan was fully justified, since Black had developed his queen at b6 (instead of 1 1 . . . .i.h7). Here, on the other hand, Black has the possibility of advancing his b-pawn and obtaining satisfactory play. However, the other continuations that have occurred (12 tLle5, 12 cxd5, 12 l::tadl, 1 2 J:acl) have also not achieved anything significant for White.

In the afore-mentioned game the hi s hop was developed at d6, but

subsequently it was shown that the 1 1 1 1dcfended bishop on this square merely aids White's e2-e4. Therefore fo r a long time now . Black has been pl aying 8 .. .i.e7, or occasionally x �c5, to provoke 9 d4. .

. . ..

9 10

�bd2 a3

0-0 a5

Too direct. A more subtle contin­ uation occurred in a game Panno­ Karpov ( 1 973) - l'O ... .i.h7 1 1 b4 a5, and B l m.:k seized the initiative.

12

• •

•

b5·?

It should be mentioned that in a game with Hartoch ( 1970) Polugayevsky 53

played 12 . . . 'iibs , and after 1 3 ifb2 1 3 . . . li.d6, also achieving a satisfactory position. ·

. 13 14

cxb5 b4

•

•

.

9b2

li)bJ!

17 18 19

axb4 llxal

i.e5

21 22

l:bct+

22

li)xcl

•

• •

li)e8

A careless move, all the more surprising for the fact that Black spent a. long time considering it. Simple and good was 22 . . . 'i'cS (or 22 . . . 'i'b7) followed by . . . ttlf6-d7-b8-a6 (or c6). In this case White's queen's bishop would have been driven from e5 without any weakening of Black's pawns, and the pressure on the b4 pawn would have intensified. Now, however, it is rather White who will have some initiative.

Wc7

Black gains an important tempo by threatening i5 . . . l:tfc8.

15 16 . 17

llc8

Essential, although it involves a significant loss of time. If 2 1 .i.h3 , then 2 1 . . . 'i'b7 ! (with the threat of 22 . . . ttld7) is highly unpleasan� and since Black controls the c-file, the b4 pawn will be more difficult to defend.

cxb5

A serious error. By preventing . . . b5b4 in the most primitive way, White is saddled with a weak pawn at b4 without any compensation, and .the initiative passes to Black. It is surprising that, although I expressed this opinion long ago, Psakhis, annotating a game of his with Ubilava in lnformator No. 37, attaches an exclamation mark to 14 b4 without any substantiation, and eval­ uates the resulting position in favour of White. This episode once again demon­ strates that modem grandmasters are not interested in games from the past. It is also clear that chess information should be created with the help of computer technology. Meanwhile, by continuing 14 i.d4 (in order to answer 14 . ..b4 with 15 a4 !) and if 14 . . . ttJe8 - 1 5 i.h3, White would possibly have retained some advantage.

14

20 . ifd2 21 l:lcl

li)b6 W'd7

The best way out. With the help of a tactical trick, White forces his opponent to clarify the position.

23

axb4 l:lxal li)a4

li)d4!

This move proves possible in view of the fact that 23 . . . f6 24 i.h3 is extremely dangerous for Black. He should have reconciled himself to the fact that it was not possible · 10 drive the bishop at e5

If 1 9 . .. i.xb4 White would not have played 20 i.xf6, but 20 'i'd4 !, winning a piece. 54

from its centralised position, and played, for example, 23 . . . /£Jc7, when all would have turned out well. But Smyslov is so canied away by the plan of driving away the bishop by . . . il-f6, that he undertakes artificial manoeuvres, merely in order to achieve . . . a serious · weakening of his own position ! 23 f8 Renewing the threat of 24 . . . f6. •

Now parried.

.i.hJ

25 26

lLldb3 .i.al!

. . . ti-f6

.i.g8

can no longer be

f6

26 .i.d4 was worse because of 26 . . . 'ifc7 ! The truth is that there are dt�fects in Black' s pawn formation. After the inevitable d3 -d4 White's control of c5 will be highly unpleasant for Black on account of the weakness of his e6 pawn, whereas the occupation of c4 by a black knight is not dangerous for White. Incidentally, when White establishes a knight at c5, this will also automatically solve the problem of the defence of his b4 pawn. .

.

•

d4

1fa7 lLld6

Many commentators criticised Black for this move and suggested playing 27 . . . 1:£Jb6. This recommendation would not have changed the evaluation of the position. As the reader already knows, due to the. weakness of the e6 pawn and the inevitable invasion of his knight at c5, White stands better.

28 29

adv�tage. This knight move is prema­ ture. I was afraid that 29 t'Dd3 would be met by 29 . . . li'a6 !, but then 30 .i.c3 followed by .i.el would have retained all the advantages of White's position.

• •

24

26 27

t o rise to the occasion and lets slip his

'lfa2 lLlc5

29 30

• • •

.i.xc5

dxc5

Alas ! Initially White had been intending to play 30 bxc5, but then he had to reject this in view of 30 . . . 'i'a5 ! 3 1 � tDd2+ 3 2 �g2 t'Dc4 (or 32 . . . tDe4) 33 t'Dd3 'ifd2, when the white bishop at a l is in danger. But now . . . e6-e5 is llllavoidable, and the game becomes equal.

JO

.

.

•

e5

Over-hasty. Simpler was 30 ... 'i'fi! (3 1 'i'c2 'ifb5 32 .ig2 e5), since the black queen is already needed on the kingside. Now White again seizes the initiative.

31

t!lbl

The queen will take up an active position at f5 .

lLlc4

31

After his error on move 1 4 White has achieved much, but now he again fails

• •

•

d4

It would have been more prudent to refrain from opening the hl -a8 diagonal.

55

,

1fc7 32 1lf5 Of course, not 32 ... lllxc5 in view of 33 'if c8+ c3ilf7 3 4 bxc5 'ifxal 3 5 .i.e6+ g6 36 We8+ with inevitable mate.

33

was still unfavourable in view of 3 9 .i.xc3 dxc3 40 'i'al c2. .4. 1. J1i'c l . . But this entire variation is an obvious delusion. This became · known to me a few months after the game, when in November of that year I was playing in the Dutch town of Wageningen. In a conversation with Lodewijk Prins, the Dutch master told me that back on 1 7th May he had published a newspaper article entitled 'The height of chess skill', in which he had given an analysis of this highly interesting position.

�d3

Bringing the last piece into play (not counting the bishop at a l , which, like the knight at a4, is firmly shut out of the game). 33 'i'd7 'i'xd7 34 ..i.xd7 would have been a mistake on account of 34 . . . lDa3 3 5 c6 �e7.

33

• • •

.i.f7

3 3 . . .'i'c6 appears to be stronger, but this could have become dangerous after 34 f4 (34 . . . t'De3 35 t'Dxe5 !). 34 1t'h7 Of course, the black king must not be allowed to move to a safer position at g8 or h8.

34

·

.•

.i.g8

In time trouble Black plays un­ inventively, but it is already hard to offer him any good advice. Also after 34 . . . 'ile7 White would have occupied the long diagonal with his queen.

'it'e4!

35

Now the white queen breaks into the enemy position.

35 36 37

11a8+ .i.g2

However, first it should be mentioned that 3 8 f4 is necessary, since otherwise it is impossible to open up the position of the enemy king and to bring into play the bishop at a 1 . But at the same time f2-f4 weakens the a7-g l diagonal, and to exploit this Black should have immediately played 3 8 . . . t'Dc3 ! It transpires that, because of the weakening of this diagonal, the variation 3 9 fxe5 fxe5 (but not 3 9 . . . tlJxe5 40 tlJf4) 40 il.xc3 dxc3 4 1 1lfa l c2 42 'ii'c l i s completely harmless for Black in view of 4L . .i.c6 (or 42 . . . 'i'd7) 43 .i.xc6 'ifxc6 44 ttJe 1 ife4.

.ll.f7 .i.e8

The h 1 -a8 diagonal is completely under White's control ! 37 @e7 37 . . . t'Dc3 is hopeless in view of 3 8 i.xc3 dxc3 3 9 11'al. -

.

38

• • •

f4!

I must confess to the readers that initially I made a quite different com­ ment on this move · than the one that I am now giving. I was sure that 38 . .. t'Dc3

56

II

And yet 3 8. f4 is not a mistake! Only, after 3 8 . . . ltJc3 39 fxe5 fxe5 White must exploit the latent pe�sibility 40 c6 ! !

40 ltld6 41 e3 (it is important to retain this pawn) 41 e4 42 lDc5 1fxc6. If 42 . . . ttJe2+, then 43 'it>fl d3 44 .i.xe4 ! ttJxe4 45 'i'b7 5, or 42 . .. ii.xc6 43 'i'g8. 43 1fa7+ f6 44 h4 (44 . 'i'd5 45 b8 45 'i'e4.

.•.

c2 46 i.xg6 on account of the perpetual check pointed out by Konstantinopolsky (46 . . . c 1 'if 4 7 ltle4+ �d5 48 ifxc7 'i'c2+ 49 @f3 'iid l +), but 45 ifxb5 ! 'i'f7+ 46 .tD ! e4 47 l2Jxe4+ i.xe4 48 'i'c5+, or 44 . . . 'i'f7+ 45 �e2 ! (but not immediately 45 'it>e l c2 46 l2Je4+ �e6 47 .i.h3+ 1if5 ! or even 47. . . �d5 !) 45 ... 1i'h5+ 46 'it>el c2 47 ifb8+ 'it>e7 48 'iic7+ e8

a4

A natural, but� apparently, inaccurate move: it was hardly worth preventing . . . b7-b5. It was more important to

11 12

.txe6

J:(f1

fxe6

Since the a7-gl diagonal is open,

prevent the activation of Black, s central

kingside castling is dubious ( 12 0-0

quently this continuation was analysed in detail by Boleslavsky).

After the exchange .of bishops the

.i.c5+ 1 3 xe6 and 1 7 . :d4, Black's initiative would have grown. However, Smyslov finds a s��nsible defence. 15 lldl! In this way White gets ri d of his weak e4 pawn. Black is obliged to occupy the d-file� but it is dubious to do this inunediately: after 15 ... l:ad8 16 Zlxd8 :xd8 1 7 fxg6 ! hxg6 18 %tf3 lDg4 I 9 :g3 White would have gained a pawn majority on .the kingside. There­ fore he must fir$$. ex�hange on f5. 15 gxf5 . .

Here Smyslov offered a draw, and after, in accordance with the rules then in force, I had asked my opponent to make a move� he played: 23 li)dt Now Black does not achieve any­ thing with the natural 23 . . . lDg4 24 :g2 l%xh4 25 h3 ! �6 26 %lg7 (26 . . . l:xh3 27 lhb7), but by 23 . .. %lxh4 24 lDe3 l:h3 he would have maintained some pressure. However, here too White, of course, has every chance of gaining a draw. But how could Black reject the opportunity to take his score to 12

...

. .

.

• •

67

points, leaving himself with the task of adding just half a point in the remaining three gaJlles? And Black accepted the offer without much hesitation.

Game 266

World Championship Return Match Moscow 1958. 23rd game

Reti Opening

q)fJ gJ b4

ltlf6 g6

It is well known that this opening, which occurred back in the game Reti­ Capablanca (1 924), and which caused a sensation at the time, does not bring White any particular gains. Smyslov chose it at a decisive moment in the match, hoping that the author of these lines would have forgotten the above game. However, my opponent was un­ lucky: during the Return Match I made a thorough study of 3 b4, in the hope of employing it as White. It need hardly be added that in the opening Black felt quite confident!

3 4 5

..lb2 thaJ

.i.g2 0-0 c4

ltlc2 d3 e4 t£le3

•c7 lhbd7 · e6

Smyslov considers himself obliged to prevent . . . d6-d5, but perhaps there was no need for this. Moreover, he apparently wanted to sacrifice the b4 pawn, although the capture of this pawn would probably have been not a bad plan for Black. However, the conse­ quences of the refusal of the sacrifice also had to be envisaged!

12 13 14

.i.xg7 fxeJ

thg4 lhxeJ ciixg7

b6 !llb7

The position has simplified, and the doubled e4 and e3 pawns restrict White's offensive possibilities; it is now Black who has a positional advantage.

Reti developed his queen's knight at d2. The move· in the game has its point, since .from a3 the knight can easily be transferred to a strong position - at e3.

5 6 7 8

9

10 11 12

Smyslov-Botvinnik

1 2 3

then advanced his central pawn ( . . . e7-e5); the text move is, of course, more circumspect.

15

..lg7 0-0 d6 c5

q)gS

This two-move threat (16 :xt7+ and 1 7 tllxe6+) is easily panied. · l:lae8 15 ·

16

Capablanca first played . . . illbd7 and

68

a3

dS!

As is well known, doubled pawns are bad not only because it is hard to attack with the� but also because they are easy to attack. In the given case White cannot exchange in the centre - then the l!-file is opened.

17

bxc5

bxc5

Such an occurrence (and Black made t h is move after 20 minutes' thought! ) is one that could be seen only . . . in the last ga me of a match! Black spent a long t i me studying the variation 17 . .. ilxc5 I x d4 ! 'fle7 (18 . . . 'ifxc4 19 I:.c l and 20 tl:c7) 1 9 h4, and failed to notice that w ith 1 9 . . . h6 he could have won the i mportant central e4 pawn . . .

18

11i'b3

exd4

c5

20 21 22

lCif3 ltact

h6 e5 .i.c6

Even now White's position is dif­ ficult: he can play only with his pieces, his centre is fixed, and his d3 and c5 pawns are weak. Black' s position, meanwhile, is without any defects.

Cleverly played. White wants to acti­ va te his game somewhat, using the t h reat of 1 9 exd5 exd5 20 cxd5 followed hy d5-d6 (for example, after 20 . . . l:.xe3). Therefore Black blocks the centre, after w hich White's pawns in the centre and his bishop become passive, an attack by h i m on the king is not possible, and any 1..� 1 1dgame will favour Black.

18 19

20

If the black knight were at c5, block­ ading White's c4 pawn, he would be in a desperate position. Therefore the pawn sacrifice is sensible, especially since its . acceptance after 20 . . . tDxc5 2 1 :tac 1 (or 2 1 'i'c4) 2 1 . . .'i'eS 22 'ifb5 would allow the white pieces to become active. Black, naturally, avoids the opening of the posjtion.

23 24

ltlh4

ifdl

llb8 1i'd8!

After playing his queen onto the d8-h4 diagonal, Black can always parry 'i'g4 with . . . 'ifg5.

25 26 27 28

d4! cxd4

28 69

li.hJ ltlf3 1ic2 ltld2

thf6 1!fe7 :lb7

llc7!

Of course, not 28 . . . llfb8 because of 29 tDc4 ! 'i'xG5 30 tlJxe5. Now, how­ ever, 29 l2Jc4.-. is not possible, and it is inevitable that White will have prob­ lems over the defence of his c5 pawn.

29 30 31

tJJo

ttlh7 :bs �g5

32

ttlxg5

hxg5

1i c4

l:f2 This exchange is also in Black's favour, since one of White's few active pieces disappears from the board. 32 . . . 'ii'xg5 would perhaps have been stronger.

33 34

a4 .li.g4

Here White sealed his move; his position is difficult, but on this occasion Black did not repeat the mistake made in the 1 5th game, when he took a light­ hearted approach to the analysis of the adjourned position. I worked almost right through the night and for several hours during the day - it was demon­ strated that White's position was lost. My second found the most crafty move for White: 4 1 h3, in order to exchange the bishops by .i.g4. How­ ever, in this case Goldberg rightly thought that Black would gain a decisive attack on the king: 4 1 . . . .i.xh3 42 g4 l:lxc5 43 'i'xc5 ltxc5 44 l:lxc5 'i'f6 ! (threatening 45 . . . 'i'f4) 45 'i;h2 i.fl . And after 4 1 'ib3 (4 1 'i'a6 :l.xc5 42 'i'xc8+ ltxc8) 4 1 . . � (41 . . .l:txc5 42 'i'a3) 42 'i'c4 (if 42 'ib6 there follows 42 . . . i.xa4, while after 4� 11i'a3 i.e6 ! and then . . . l:tb8-b3 White is helpless) 42 . . . ii'e6 ! (with the threat of 43 . . . 'i'xc4 44 lhc4 .i.e6) 43 ifxe6 .i.xe6 44 c6 f1

• . .

�et �ed3

38

ltl3b2

i.h5

bishops are attacking the helpless white knights, neither of which can now move.

ft b6 f3 White resigns Game 269

Botvinnik-Pomar Olympiad, Munich

1958 Caro-Kann Defence

.i.a3

1· 2 3 4 5

It was easy for Black to act - such positions were played in masterly fashion by Akiba Rubinstein.

75

c4 e4 exd5 d4 lhc3

c6 d5 cxd5 ltlf6 e6

6

ttlfJ

resulted from 1 1 h4 with the threat of 12 ltJxb6 t'.Llxb6 1 3 i.xh,7+, and if l l . . .f5 1 2 ltJg5, or l l . . .h6 1 2 fl.h3 .

!i.e7 ·

Later, by the efforts of many grand­ masters, in particular Tigran Petrosian, it was · shown that the simplest is 6 i.b4 (b.y analogy with the Nimzo­ Indian Defence), when Black has a comfortable game.

11 12

...

7

After 12 . .txc5 (Black loses immed­ iately in the variation 12 . ltJxc5? 1 3 t2Jxc5 .ilxc5 1 4 .i.xh7+ 'it>xh7 1 5 liJg5+) 1 3 .i.xh7+ lttxh7 14 liJg5+ lttg 8 15 ltlxc5 White has good prospects of an attack. .

• • •

13 14 15

0-0

1O

b4 ltJa4

e4 ltlxd7 exf3

c6 cxd7 0-0

In the afore-mentioned game Sokolsky played 1 5 . . i..f6, after which White retained · some advantage. Apparently for this reason Pomar chooses a different way. 16 • xf3 lLle5

il.d3

In the event of 8 b4 Black had the reply 8 . . . t'.Lle4, but even so this was the most logical continuation. 8 ilf4 also came into consideration. Now, however, Black gains the opportunity to under­ mine the opponent' s pawn chain.

8 9

.

..

c5

A committing move. Perhaps White should prefer 7 cxd5 exd5 (if 7 . . . tiJxd5 8 j/_d3) 8 i.b5+ .i.d7 9 .ixd7+ t'.Llbxd7 1 0 'itb3, when he has a slight, but enduring advantage.

7 8

.. ' . bxc5 e5 dxc5

•

.

17

1i'g3

17 18

1fxd3

Of course, not 17 i.xh7+ lttxh7 18 'i'b5+ lttg8 1 9 1fxe5 on account of 1 9 . i.f6.

b6 a5 liJfd7

.

.

lLlxdJ .i.d6

With the prosaic threat of l 9 . .i.xh2+ ( 1 9 . 'i'h.4 20 f4) 20 �xh2 'i'h4+ 2 1 . .

..

lttg l 'i'xa4. However, ·several years later in a correspondence game Sokolsky­ Simagin the more interesting 1 8 . . . d4! was played, with approximate equality.

19

i.aJ

19 20 21 22

.i.xd6 11fd1 ltlcJ1;

Tying the bishop at d6 to the defence of the rook at f8.

11 ' b5

A continuation which was lrnown from the gam� Kopaev-Sokolsky ( 1.950). Complicated play would have

llb8 1fxd6 .le6

Naturally, the ..white knight should occupy the d4 square, but for the 76

go in for the exchange of the queenside pawns and to pin his hopes on the strong position of his lalighi in comQination with his active rooks. At this point Pomar, evidently taking account of his opponent's shortage of time, offered a draw. But the game continued . . .

moment White wants to consolidate his queenside r;dvantage with · a2-a4. It stands to reason that Pomar prevents this.

·

29 30 31

22 23 24 25

ltabt l1b3 ttle2

28

ttld4 lta3 11re3

i.d7 i..xb5

1f a3 ltfc8 1lc5

Wc2

If 25 . . . d4 White could have replied 26 :b2. If White's knight is able to take up a dominating position in the centre with material equal, and with him also having a protected passed b5 pawn, tltlngs will be hopeless for Black. Therefore he takes the opportunity to eliminate the a2 pawn, since 26 a4 loses to 26 . . . .i.f5 ! Nevertheless White is prepared to sacrifice a pawn

26 27

1fd2 lh:a5 bl

31

32

lta7

.li.e6

It is hard to suggest anything better. For example, 32 ... :eds is not possible

9xa2 1i'c4 l:te8

on account of 3 3 :cl Wb4 34 'i'xb4 lixb4 3 5 l:xd7.

By skilfully manoeuvring, Black has retained his material advantage. The obvious 29 :c1 leads after 29 . i..d7 30 iid2 11b4 to. a worsening of White's position (he also has to reckon with the threat of 29. . . i..g4). Therefore he has to .

i.. d 7

A serious mistake, as a result of which White regains the .pawn and invades by force with his rooks onto the seventh rank. 3 L.:b7 3 2 :c 1 1id3 33 'lb4 .i.c6 etc. was correct.

33 34 35

.

llcl 11'xb4 lhxe6

11b4 ·:xb4 fxe6

llcc7

:h4

Black is forced to give up the g7 pawn.

36 77

Finding the only way of defending the h-pawn.

37 38 39 40 41

lbg7+ �h2 .D.ge7 f3 %lad7

'it>h8 litf8 lth6

sacrificing a pawn, . by answering 4 1 .. JUI6 with 42 g4 :xf3 .43 �g2 1:.f8 44 !it>g3 followed by llg7+ and g4-g5, but it soon transpired �t with 43 lUu6 ! 44 %tg7+ � 45 ltxh7 :r? ! Black can defend satisfactorily. Closer to midnight I found something approaching zugzwang, but my analysis companions Keres, Kotov and Flohr quickly dispelled all my illusions. When it became clear that, with the four rooks on the board, White could not achieve anything real, positions with one pair of rooks were studied. It was only around four o'clock in the morning 1hat I finally ' suspected' that one of these positions was won. An hour later everything had become ' clear', and I was able to go off to sleep, but a consultation with Flohr was set for seven o'clock in the morning . . . The analysis was approved, and all that we had to decide was the practical aspect: how to conduct the resumption psychologically, in order to win in the most certain way this point that was so important for the team? It was decided to divide the resumption into three stages: 1) mark time initially, so that the opponent should gain the impression that no winning plan had been found; 2) then imperceptibly try to create a position of fictitious zugzwang, and finally, if nothing positive was achievect, then 3) as if despairing of success, exchange one pair of rooks and switch 'to the real plan. Such tactics would cause Black the maximum disorientation, and a mistake on his part was probable. When at ten o' clock ·the game was resumed, the Spanish master (now ..

...

g8

It seemed to me that White had a great advantage, but Black has good defensive possibilities.

This last move was sealed at the adjournment. The first impression is that White should win easily: his rooks have complete control of the seventh rank, whereas Black's rooks are tied down. One of them has to keep watch on the h-file, guarding the h7 pawn, while the other has to safeguard the king against mate on the back rank. In addition the e6 pawn is weak. However, analysis showed that in the event of passive defence by Black ( . . . l:f8-f6-f8-f6) it is not so easy for White to strengthen his position. The whole problem is that the white pawns cannot advance . . It is true that as soon as the analysis of, the adjourned position began, Flohr . suggested immediately

78

grandmaster) had p.o suspicion, of course, of our cunning plot He played quickly and cqnfidently.

41 42 43

:tr6

.

ltg7+ l:lge7

gJ

llf6 llf5

l:tb g6

:rs

�xf8

Black can no longer save the game.

'&t>g8

The advance of this pawn forces White in the end to release the black king from the back rank.

· Intending 57 .. Jid5.

57 58 59 60

Thus, White has managed to create a position in which Black can no longer routinely ·continue 50 :t'S in view of 5 1 l1xd5, and 50 ... lthg6 is also bad because of 5 1 :as+. However, the zugzwang is, alas, only apparent: by continuing 50 . .l:t�5 ! (pointed out by Keres) Black wowp have maintained a defensible · position: After this reply ...

.

79

Ital

ltd2 �

e4

b7 ..

Tal's hopes of gaining an advantage in

this variation of the Caro-Kann Defence were not realised.

In time trouble White might have tried 37 .ta6+ 'it>xa6 38 'i'c6+ a5 39

10 11

c3 ,

since here only one move 3 9 . . . 'i'e2 leads to a draw (40 'i'c7+ �b5 41 'i'b7+).

[

37

•

..i.d6

game

Keres-Olafsson

World Championship �Match Afoscow 1960, 5th game

suggested itself. with sufficient compen­ sation for the sacrificed pawn.

11 12 13

Caro-Kann Defence

_______,

c6 d5 dxe4 .tf5 .i.g6

lhgh5 tllxh5

ll'lbd7 il'lxh5

It is easy to understand that Tal

considered this position to be in his

favour : after the natural reply 1 3 . . . 0-0

White would have gained chances of an

attack on the black king. But Black finds another possibility.

More often this knight is played to f4 which, of course,

does not

change anything.

6

...

7

h4

e6

A subtle point of this variation is that

if 7 lDf4 is played immediately, and if

7 . . . ..t d6 - 8 h4. then after 8 . . . Vc7 the position of the knight at f4 is insuffic­ iently secure. Now. however, Black has time to ensure a retreat for his bishop to h7. 7

8 9

h6

�f4 i. c4

( 1 961).

Although after 12 . . . fxe6 the opening battle developed satisfactorily for Black, .i.xd7 lbxd7 instead 12 . . . 0-0 13

Game 275

via h3,

.

. .

Tal-Botvinnik

e4 d4 lbc3 lbxe4 lhgJ lhte2

.

.te3

11 i. xe6 is refuted by 1 1 . 0-0, e.g. 1 2 .i b3 .r!e8 1 3 i..e3 .txf4. After 1 1 c3 tDbd7 the sacrifice 1 2 .i xe6 was made

b8 Draw agreed

in the

1 2 3 4 5 6

1ie2

In the 9th game (No.277) Tal played 1 0 0-0, which is also not dangerous for Black. It can be definitely' stated that

.i.h7 lbf6

13 93

• • •

ll.g8!

Starting with the present game� this became . a standard way of defending Black· s' g7 in the given situation. Black will castle queenside, where he has nothing to fear, since White too can only castle on that side.

14 15

g4 g5

20

ifc7 .i.g6

!tlgJ i.xg5

21 22 23

•

.

•

23 24

1i'h6 ff Black had ex­

ii.dJ l:hd3 'ifxh6

.il.xd3 1£lb6

•

.

•

:o

gxh6

Provoking . . . f7-f5, in order to gain counterplay.

hxg5

f5 l:td6 llg4

24 25 26 27

lle1 c3 ltle2!

27 28 29

l:thl l:tg3

tL\d5 l:td8 l:lxg3

30 31

fxg3 d2

lt g4

The only possibility. Black. of course, must avoid the variation 27 :;m4 28 t2Jf4 c.fi>d7 29 ltJg6 :112 30 t2Jf8+ @e7 3 1 l:xf5 .

i.f4+

i.xf4

. . .

After 1 9 '.t>b 1 ii..xg5 20 hxg5 the g5 pawn would have been weak.

19 20

.

Otherwise there would have followed . . . tiJd5-f4.

After 1 8 hxg5 Black would have had a pleasant choice between 18 . . . i..xg3 and 18 ... :hs.

18 19

•

changed queens on:-e3., White's position would have been preferable. Now, however, after the practically inevitable exchange on h6 the g-file is opened, and White's weak f- and h-pawns cause him considerable trouble.

Now 16 gxh6 is not possible in view of l 6 . . . 'ii'a5+. 16 0-0-0 0-0--0 Now too the h6 pawn is indirectly defended, since if 1 7 gxh6 gxh6 1 8 Jtxh6 there follows 1 8 . . . l:th8. The knight at h5 proves to be out of play, and White is obliged to improve its position.

17 18

.

A necessary fineS.$P.

1i'xf4+ 11t'e3

This improves White's pawn for­ mation, but Black rejected 29 . . J�dg8 30 .:t.hg 1 , since he wanted to keep one pair of rooks on the board.

1lg8

A loss of time. Black should have immediately advanced his· 'king to d6 and then played . . . b7-b6 and . . . c6-c5, intensifying the pressure on the enemy position. After the manoeuvre of . the rook to e4 it will occupy a pretty, but less active position, than at g8.

94

32 33 34 35

d7 lie4 d6

If my opponent had thought for a little longer, he would undoubtedly have seen the clanger awaiting him after the natural reply 41 e4+. It was this that I examined in the 17 minutes before I sealed my move. but I did not find a win. This is what could then have happened: ••.

In the knight ending too Black· s chances are better, but the exchange of rooks eases White's defence.

35 36 37

@xel 'it>e2

38 39 40 41

cxd4 d3 �e2 a4

l:txel c5 cxd4

42 'it>c4 b6!

It is very important to take control of the c5 square. Both in his night-time analysis before the resumption, and in his detailed comments, Tai missed some subtleties in the resulting position and gave only the variation 42 . . . a5 43 b4 axb4 44 xb4 liJf6 45 tiJf4 tbd5+ 46 liJxd5 ®xd5 47 �c3 with a draw. Meanwhile. by continuing 44 . . . �d5 (instead of 44 . . . liJf6) Black would have won: 45 a5 ( 45 @c3 b6) 45 . . . e3 46 �c3 �e4 47 @c4 (4 7 d5 d3 @es 49 @xe3 lLJxg3 50 l"Dxg3 f4+ etc. 9) 47 . . . �f3 48 �d3 ltixg3 . Therefore White must reply to 42 . . . as with 43 b3 ! 43 ...b6 44 b4 axb4 45 �xb4 liJf6 46 b5, with sufficient counter-chances in view of the weak­ ness of the b6 pawn.

37 . . . c4 would have created greater difficulties for White.

�f6 �h5 e5

A moment typical of Tai' s match tactics. He played this quickly, merely in order to force Black to seal his move, in the hope that after five hours of play it would not be easy to find the strongest reply. I personally do not like such methods, and I prefer moves that are in keeping with the logic of the position. I th.ink that, from the �·practical viewpoint too� this is the soundest way.

95

7 . . . d6 8 e3 h6 9 .i.h4 g5 10 .i.g3 tiJh5 1 1 i.b5+ ( 1 1 . . . .td7 . 12 i.xd7+ 'i'xd7 1 3 l'he5), but now · the . manoeuvre . . . lDh5 is parried even more simply.

43 b4 a6 44 d5!

There is no other possibility.

44 e5 45 as bxa5 46 bxa5 ti:)f6 47. lbf4 e3 48 dJ with a draw. •••

Also taking account of the fact that Tai had not exchanged on e5, obviously fearing the centralisation of the black king, I sealed another move, thus mis­ sing this chance, which unexpectedly could have appeared after 4 1 . . .e4+ 42 rbc4 b6 or 42 . . . a5 . Alas!

41 42

42 43

lDf6

dxe5+ g5 4 7 .i.e2 'iii>h5 48 h3) 44 d6 �6 45 i.xg6 ! (this is . where the weakness of the g6 pawn tells) 45 . . . @xg6 46 'itixe5 ..ic3 47 'itie6 g4 48 e5 .i.b4 49 d7 xdl

And so, the planned exchange of heary pieces has taken place.

gxf6

How the position has changed within just a couple of moves! Black is left with weak pawns, and the ending (with or without the rooks) will be difficult for him. Now it would perhaps have been best to try and restrict the enemy knight by 24 ... �d5. 24 25

28 29 30

31

lDd4

c5

32 33

bxc5 lDb5

bxc5 a6

3 2 e4 was threatened.

Or 33 ... as 34 ltJc3 ..i.c6 35 d2. and. the white king penetrates unhindered to c4. 34 35 36 37 38

It is possible that 28 �xd7 :!xd7 29 'it>e2 (but not 29 f3 iii view of 29 . . . :d3) 29 . . . .i.d3+ 30 f3 was even stronger. 1 19

lDc7 lDe8 h4 ttld6 gJ

-*.c4 f5 @f8

.i.fl

All Black' s pawns are isolated, and his bishop is unable to defend them. Before beginning the 'gathering of the harvest', · White places nearly all his pawns on dark squares.

38 39 40 41

was already at b3, thanks to the fact that the bishop had reached c4 not in two moves, but in one.

hl , but not without reason he avoided it, since Black has no compensation for the piece. Or perhaps he hoped that I would be afraid of this continuation?

by the fact that Black's knight has no

36 37 38 39

.i xf5

It can only be assumed that, when he

h6 %lc5 �c4 �e5

51 52

ttlc4

lte3 lie8

52 llb3 would have led to a repetition, allowing Black to claim a draw.

52 53 54 55 56

ttld2 c.t>f6

l:te5

Jlf5+ :Ie5 .i.h5

�g6

c.t>t"6 llc3

. The next time control has been reached, and White, after calm reflec­ tion, can begin advancing his pawns, without which he cannot get by.

57 h4 58 .to 59 ·JL d5 60 .i.f3

1 28

, llc4 .:cc2 lla4 .

hiaa2

·

61 62

:et h5

l:!a4 J:l.c3

on the clock, and in addition, the advance g3-g4-g5 can no longer be avoided. These are more than sufficient reasons for Black to curtail his resistance.

Game 289

Tal-Botvinnik Ulorld Championship Return Match Afoscow 1961, 1 0th game Caro-Kann Defence

The black rooks have finally left the second rank, in order to hinder the advance of the white pawns. But at the same time this relieves the white pieces of any concern about the e2 pawn.

63 64 65 66 67

·

.i.g2 l:r.dl .i.d5 el .i.g2

:c2

%ta4 l1.d4

1bd4 f2

.i.e4 l:.f5+

lld5 @f3

ll:\bJ lbxd4 tDe6

:b2 rl;g7 'i&>f6

Black resigns

Tai satisfied himself that White was not intending to inake any error. Besides, from the 73rd move the two players had each gained an extra hour

e4 d4 e5

c6 d5

For many years this continuation was considered to be harmless for Black. White's next move reveals that it has some positional basis.

3 4

lla3

The pin inevitably leads to the exchange of one pair of rooks, which is useful for the conversion of the material advantage.

67 68 69 70 71 72 73

1 2 3

... h4

.i.f5 h6

4 . . . h5, which looks more active, is also often played, as, for example, in the 14th game of the Return Match. However, the text move is quite logical. Black wants to play . . . e7-e6, after which he will be out of danger. There­ fore it is not surprising that White immediately takes vigorous action.

5

g4

Here Boleslavsky recommended the quieter continuation 5 �d3 .itxd3 6 'i'xd3 e6 7 h5.

5

...

.i.d7

After 5 . .Jth7 6 e6 fxe6 White would have had a certain compensation for the pawn, which was confirmed, in par­ ticular, in the game Gufeld-Spiridonov ( 1 96 1) : ·7 .td3 .ixd3 8 'i'xd3 'i'd6 9 f4. .

.

6

1 29

h5

12

This too is useful, in order to prevent . . . h6-h5. However, in the 1 8th game (No. 293) Tal refrained from this move, restricting himself to the prophylactic 6 c3 , while in the same year Bronstein played 6 c4 against Portisch. Now Black must not delay his attack on the centre.

12

6 7

8 9

c3 i..h3

9 10

...

libJ

1'b6

Usually Tai avoids the exchange of queens, but here he changed his habit, and wrongly so, since in the given situation tl1e exchange favours Black.

10 11

iixb6

11

...

•

•

•

cxd4

After 1 1 cxd4 �b4+ 12 tLlc3 liJxd4 1 3 'i'd 1 .i.c5 White would have lost a pawn.

axb6

•

.

•

l£la5

But now, of course. Black avoids the win of a pawn ( 1 2 . . . tbb4 1 3 �d2 l:xa2 1 4 I:txa2 ti:)xa2), since then the initiative would have passed to the opponent. Instead of this he rapidly advances his b-pawn, imitating the plan that Capa­ blanca demonstrated in his encounter with Janowski ( 1 9 16). This game was given by the third World Champion in his book Afv Chess Career.

c5 l£lc6 e6

..ieJ Inconsistent, to say the least. 9 f4 . came into consideration. to place the knight at f3, from where it would have securely defended the central d4 pawn.

cxd4

lJ 14

lDcJ .ifl

b5 b4

14 . . .t:Dc4 could also have been played, but Black has no objection to the white knight occupying an insecure position at b5 and even penetrating to d6 . All this will merely assist the mobilisation of Black· s forces.

15

l£lb5

�d8

A rather rare occurrence, when by the 1 6th move none of the kingside pieces of both White, and Black, have left their initial squares. . It is true that the white bishop left its post at fl for a · short ti.me, but then thought it best to return.

1 30

bxc3 b3. White is therefore forced to give up a pawn, so that his bishop can participate in the blocking of Black's queenside pawns.

16

ltlfJ

lbc4

Again rejecting, and not without reason, the win of the a2 pawn (16 . . . lt:\b3 17 !!bl lixa2), since it would be hard to Black to bring his bishop at f8 into play.

17 .i.xc4 18 lt:\d6

23 24 25 26 27

dxc4 .i.xd6

There was no point in sacrificing the exchange (18 ... SLc6 19 �xf7+ �e8 20 lDxh8 i.x:f3 etc.), since in any case Black's position is good enough.

19 exd6 20 lt:\e5

exd5 lbf6 �d7 @e6 xc3 �xa4+ 27 �c2 are good for White.

24 f6 l:tc8

37 38 39 40 41

d7 rld8 .lxc4 ltlc5 :n+ @g5 .tb5 fxe4 fxe4 Black resigns Game 292

Botvinnik-Tal World Championship Return Match Moscow 1961, 1 5th game King's Indian Defence

..ixa4+

If 30 . . . ttlc8 there would now have followed 3 1 f4 - a possibility which would have been excluded by the preparatory exchange 29 . . . fxe4 30 fae4.

1 2 3 4 5 6

ltlxa4

31 ltlxa4 32 l:tb8+

.:1b7+ d6 �xb7+ 11xh7

Or 3 6 . . . l:.c6 37 d7 lld6 3 8 hc4 ttlb6 39 l:If7+ �g5 40 i.b5.

.i.c8 .i.d7

•

33 34 35 36

d4 c4 lhc3 e4

f3

lhf6 g6 .i.g7 d6 0-0 c6

..te3 Avoiding the exchange of queens which occurred in the 13th game after 6 . .. e5 (No.29 1). The situation in the return match obliged Tal to think only in terms of winning.

32

•

•

•

'

�g7

It is already known that if 32 . . .l:f8 there would.have followed 3 3 f4.

7 i.d3

e5

8 lhge2

exd4

Usually after 6 . . . c6 Black transposes into the variation involving . . . a7-a6 and . . . b7-b5. This was how Smyslov played against me in the 8th game of our 1958 return match (No.259), as did Larsen in · Leiden ( 1970) - see No. 3 80. This exchange can hardly be ap­ proved, since White can advantageously 1 37

Only after his rook has left the comer square does White make · this move, strengthening his c4 pawn, since now the weakening of the al-h8 diagonal is of no significance.

recapture with his bishop. 8 ...lLlbd7 was better. 9

.i.xd4

14 15 ii.bl

9

•

•

•

c5

Black takes on too great obligations. Such a plan would have chances of success, if he could compensate for the defects of his position in the centre with piece pressure, but he has no such prospects, in view of the fact that he is behind in development. 9 ... tDbd7 I 0 0-0 lDe5 1 1 f4 tDxd3 1 2 'ifxd3 also cannot be recommended for Black. Subsequently this variation occurred in the game Hiibner-Gligoric ( 1973 ), and the Yugoslav grandmaster demon­ strated the correct method of play for Black: 9 . . . d5 10 cxd5 cxdS 1 1 e5 ttJfd7 12 f4 tDc6.

10 11

ilf2 0-0

tbc6

White ignores the threat to exchange his bishop ( ...l£lc6-e5xd3), which would merely be playing into his hands.

11 12 1id2 13 l:.ad1 14 bJ

�ab8 llfd8

16 f4!

At this point, when the two sides have completed their development, White, 'as is his right', is the first to begin active play. There is immediately the prospect of an attack on f6 (f4-f5, ..ih4 etc.). In order to parry it, Black decides on an exchanging operation, as a result of which White gains the advantage of the two bishops, and also a very active position in the centre and on the kingside. It need hardly be said that the dis­ appearance of the queens signifies the wrecking of Tai' s plans, made in his preparations for the game!

16 17 18 19 20

a6 i.e6 'lfa5

138

hJ it)xel :xd2 ll'igJ

.i.g4 i.xel 1ixd2 :eS

Naturally� Black would have been quite happf to exchange his d- and c­ pawns for the . white e- and f-pawns (20 e5 dxe5 2 1 ..txc5). To avoid this, White has to make a rather awkward move. i..f8 The variation 20 . . hS 2 1 �xd6 h4 22 li:Jhl ltJxe4 23 .i.xe4 I:txe4 24 ..i.xc5 (or 24 i.xh4) would have led to the loss of a pawn� therefore Black is forced to spend a tempo defending his d6 pawn.

20

.

21 Itel 22 t[}fl

lie6

22 23 :de2

libe8 J.g7

At the first opportunity the knight leaves the g3 square, since at the given moment it is not needed for the defence of the e4 pawn.

White's coming offensive have been hindered by 23 . . . h.5 .

should

26 lDh2

t[}f8 All Black's efforts are concentrated on occupying the d4 square. Meanwhile, in such situations this manoeuvre does not play any particular role, and it is unable to prevent the development of White' s initiative on the kingside (cf., for example, Game 87).

27 J.h4 2s .:n

lDe6 ll d7

A serious error, after which Black's position becomes difficult to defend. One can understand Tal not wanting to restrict his most active piece, the bishop at g7, but 28 . . .f6 was nevertheless necessary. Then White would have had a choice between 29 f5 liJed4 30 llef2 and 29 i..g3 f5, in both cases with counterplay for Black. Apparently my opponent evaluated the position somewhat routinely, and did not sense just how dangerous it was. Later Tai said that he lost the return match, not imaging that the former champion would act so decisively.

29 g5

24 g4

White .not only restricts the space available to the opponent's pieces, but he also prepares the activation of his own king.

24 lDd7 25 ��2'_.�,... lt6e7

After this seemingly · · paradoxical move� shutting in the bishop at h4, 139

White forces the exchange of his opponent's bishop at f6� after which it is doubtful whether Black can save the game.

29 . . .

h5

30 gxh6 31 lDg4

i.xb6 .i.g7

32 33 34 35

..i.xf6 lf)g7 lDh5 l:r.ed8

Preventing ttJg4 for one instant. After 29 . . . b5, which, incidentally, Black was also free to play earlier. the develop­ ment of events would not have changed. After 3 1 . . . lbxf4+ 3 2 ltxf4 i.xf4 3 3 t'ill'6+ White would have won a piece.

lDf6+ -*.xf6 nd2 ll.cJ

40 f6 41 l:td5 42 bxc4 43 f3

b5 bxc4 ltb7 :b4

44 .i.xb4 45 .i.xb5 46 exd5

lDxb4 lDxd5 gxh5

This exchange sacrifice also does not save Black: White immediately takes play into a won rook ending, rejecting a material advantage.

47 .:bt

The last move in the game that required accuracy!

Black has no useful moves, and he can only passively await the outcome.

36 37 38 39

i.c2 i.dl Jl.g4 f5

�

f'4 �el %ba6 d3

�g6 i:tf5+ l:h5 llxh4 �5

7

Checks to the white kiiig do not help, since he hides from them at a4.

11h2 59 :Ic6 60 llxc5 %lxa2 61 l:tc7 �xf6 ci>e5 62 lld7 63 lle7+ Black resigns. Naturally, he

could not be satisfied with either 63 . . . �6 64 d6, or 63 . . . 'itd6 64 l:.xf7.

Game 293

World Championship Return Match Moscow 1961, 18th game Caro-Kann Defence

e4 d4 e5 h4 g4 cl

• •

e6

8

lLle2

8 9

lLlaJ

8 ltJa3 would perhaps have been safer, to prevent the black bishop from reaching the fl -a6 diagonal. •

..

.i.b5

But now this is simply unfavourable, since it allows Black to force useful exchanges. 9 .i.e3 should have been played.

9 10 11fxe2 11 cxd4 12 bxa3

Tal-Botvinnik

1 2 l 4 5 6

•

So, in the centre we have a pawn formation, typical of a variation which was employed in the 1 9th century by Steinitz, and in the 20th century by Nimzowitsch. The analogy can be con­ tinued with the fact that now Black does not experience any opening difficulties.

.i.xe2 cxd4 .i.xa3

c6 d5 .i.f5 h6 il.d7

In the 10th game Tai played 6 h5, preventing . . . h6-h5 . But now he had evidently decided that after 6 . . . h5 he could well accept the pawn sacrifice. For the same reason Black prefers to avoid this continuation.

6 7 .i.g2 • • •

c5

White aims to provoke . . . e7-e6 as soon as possible, to rid him of his con­ cerns about the g4 pawn. However, at g2 the bishop has' no particular future. 14 1

A semi-open position has been reached, in which the black knights will be no weaker than White's bishops, which are condemned to defending his numerous weaknesses (a3 , c4, d4, g4).

12

• •

•

lLlc6

13 .i.e3 14 'iWl

lia5+

14

lDge7

For the moment White avoids the exchange of queens, hoping to develop an attack. Over the course of several moves Black does not take the a3 pawn (and White does not defend it)� both players rightly consider tliat it is more important for them to complete their development.

15 l:t.bl 16 .i.bJ

l:tb8

16 17 Itdl

11a4

A loss of time. This square would be better used for the rapid inclusion in the play of the rook at h 1 .

knight to c4, or to exchange · queens and play a cheerless ending. In the latter case the doubling of the enemy pawns cannot provide any consolation, since in the end the exchange of rooks on b6 will be inevitable, and Black's pawns will resume their normal form.

19 20 21 22

'if xa6 h5 l:tbl gJ

bxa6 d7 ltb6 lDa5

23 :xb6 24 f4

axb6 li)c4

Let the move 22 . . .l�hb8 remain in reserve.

Of course. the d4 pawn had to be defended, but not in such a passive way. Therefore 1 7 d2 tiJa5 should have been played, although this continuation did not look very tempting for White.

'if

17 18 �g2

'ilxaJ Wa6!

25 ..i.cl

White tries to retain the two bishops, which are his only consolation in this position.

25 26 27 28 29

This sets White a difficult choice: either to allow Black to transfer his

lldl aJ f5 ltxct

tDc6 li)b4 lDa2 tDxcl

So, White has also been deprived of his last trump - the tWo bishops.

.. . b 29 5 ..i>loiting the weak d3 square. ·

dxc4 l£ixd5 .i.f6

Since 1 4 l£ixf6+ 'i'xf6 followed by . . . l:tfd8 and . . . lDd4 is quite safe for Black, White cannot prevent 14 . . . .ild4. Ten years later another plan for Black, 1 3 . . J:k8 14 :c 1 b5, was tried by Spassky in a game with Taimanov, but with 1 4 'ifd2 followed by Itfd l White could have gained a clear advantage. 1 4 ttlf4, a s suggested by Polugayevsky, i s also good.

17 .i.xe4 ttlxd4 17 . . . 'iixd4.. then White has

If instead

a pleasant choice: 18 'i'xd4 �xd4 1 9 �xc4, or 18 .i.xc6 'i'xdl 1 9 llixd l bxc6 20 l::t.xc4. in both cases with an imposing advantage.

14 :ct

i.d4

15 .txd4

..lxd5

lDe6

18 .:.xc4

Black retreats his knight and assumes that after 1 9 .ixb7 l:tb8 he will be able to regain the b2 pawn. However, my opponent overlooked a tactical subtlety.

14 'I'd2 would also have been answered by 1 4 . . . .i.d4, and if 1 5 lDf4 'i'b6 16 .t.xd4 lD.xd4 !

14 . . .

17

'l!!' ;.�;:.y.: A ;:r1;· J;:

: (::

..

;;�,w.� �

I

;;;,' /?,'� ��*

Of course. not 1 4 . . . .txb2 1 5 :xc4, and White' s initiative increases.

�}rtJ iJ��:-W%-. JJ'f/, � �:}PJ' ffx�%ffl!"' : :),� �JrtJ

:M.f(4, ,-, .-/.-..

..

f

Wr ·�-'.;/N/ e :;(.::'/,.' t

19 W'c2! Defending the b2 pawn with gain of tempo, after which one of the black pawns - b7 or h7 - is lost.

16 e4!

17

19 20 .i.xb7 21 il.g2

Exchanges - 16 i..c5 .llxg2 'it>xg2 :es l1xc4 1fxd 1 1 9 l:.xd 1 Ihe2 could in no way have satisfied White.

18

16 . . .

i.xe4

g6 llb8

When the opponent' has a queen and knight, a fianchettoed bishop covers best of all the approaches to the king's position.

1 50

21 . 22·. · . bl 23 11e4 24 l:tel

1!ff6 tt:\d4 i!fd8 tt:\f5

25 l:tc6 26 l:tc2

'ifb2

29 .i.d5

The enemy rook must not be allowed to go to e6.

29 30 .ic4 31 '9e4

In this situation it is unfavourable for Black to win the queen for two rooks (24 . l:le8?). . .

1fb5+ 'ifd7

A prophylactic move. Since the bishop is no longer defending its king, instead the long diagonal is covered by the queen.

The place for this rook is at e2, about which, however, I soon forgot!

l:ld6 31 32 J:ce2 lhd4 �f5 33 l:e3 34 ll3e2 �d4 35 :b2 Not agreeing to a draw . . . 'lfhJ+ 35 36 1ig2

Va3 26 . . . 27 'i'e5 Intending to continue 28 ct.d5. 1i"b4 27

A natural move but 36 'it?gl was preferable. In the game Black could have developed an initiative by 36 . . . ii'h5, forcing, in view of the threat of 37 tDfl , the reply 37 .i.e2. ,

...

28

'iff5

xh4 �d7

Alas, Black has nothing else. lhf5+

thg4

57 l:la6 57 58 .id5 59 .i.e4

'it>h5 the5

With the deadly threat of 58 :g6.

Black has achieved his aim, but only apparently. The tragedy is that his king is not only cut off from the queenside, but may also be in danger.

Threatening 60 :as. Black has several possible moves, but they all merely · worsen his position. For example: 59 . . . @h4 60 11116 mate, or 59 . . . tt\f7 60 i.f3 + 'iti>h4 6 1 :as, or 59 . . . tt\g4 60 i.f3 .:tf7+ 6 1 g3. As for the rook, it has to guard the knight and the pawn. It follows that mate or loss of material is unavoidable, and so

'!J.e7

Trying, in tum, to cut off the white king from the queenside, for where, however, it is not aiming. f3 After 54 !tf7 55 i.c4 the black rook would have been unable to defend simultaneously the knight and the pawn.

tlJg6

54

56 @£4

The rook ending after 56 . . .�xc4 57 bxc4 would have been hopeless for Black, while after 56 . . .ttJg6+ 57 fs his knight would have been shut out of the game.

Preventing . . . a7-a5-a4 and tempting Black to exchange · the kingside_ pawns as quickly as possible.

. . .

Black

resigned.

55 il.c4

Grune 297

Botvinnik-Wade Hastings 1961162 Ruy Lopez

e4 thf3 3 .i.b5 4 i.a4 5 .ixc6

1 2

Here it can now be guessed that White is intending to encircle the enemy king. For this it is important to take control of the f7 square, after which the white king can no longer be driven off the f-file.

55

.

..

e5 thc6 a6 thf6

A continuation that was employed many times by Flohr, and then also by Kholmov. In recent years it has gained a nwnber of other supporters.

tbe5+

5 dxc6 6 d3 6 0--0 or 6 lDc3 is equally good. 6 . thd7 • • •

.

153

•

The most sensible way of defending the e5 pawn.

. 7 lhbd2

f6

In the Exchange Variation of the Ruy Lopez, this is usually played before . . . liJf6. Here, however, for the moment the e5 pawn is not threatened and . . . f7-f6 weakens Black' s position. 7 . .. J.e7 or 7 . . . g6 was preferable.

8 0--0

.*.c5

It will not be possible to maintain the

bishop on this square, and hence White gains a further tempo.

9 c3 10 d4 11 tLlbJ

exd4 �b6

Black probably thought that White would be forced to take on d4 with his paw� but his main concern is to hinder the exchange of the opponent's doubled pawn.

kingside, which will aid the develop­ ment of his initiative . l£lg6 Of course, not 12 . c5 (in the hope of exchanging queens) because of 1 3 lDxc5 .i.xc5 14 'i'h5+.

12

.

•

•

..

13 .i.eJ

0-0

13 . . . c5 could now have been played, but after 14 li:lf5 the c5 and g7 pawns would have both been attacked.

14 11fc2 15 tLlf5

W'e7

The exchange on f5 is unavoidable� and White seemingly devalues some­ what his pawn majority. But on the other hand, for his other knight he acquires an excellent strongpoint at e6.

15 16 exf5 •

•

•

.i.xf5

lDe5

Perhaps Black should have gone in for 16 . . . i.xe3 1 7 fxg6 i.a7 1 8 gxh7+ �h8, since in time the h7 pawn would be lost, he would retain his active bishop, and the white knight would no longer be able to reach e6.

17 .i.xb6 18 l£td4 19 lDe6

12 tLlfxd4!

After 12 cxd4 .i.g4 Black would have achieved a comfortable development. Now. however, for the moment his light-square bishop has no future, whereas White has a clear pawn majority in the centre and on the

1 54

cxb6

llti

19 20 :ret

llfc8 b5

20 . . tbd7 followed by .

into consideration.

21 22 23 24

lleJ l:tael f4 %lh3

.

The position is such that, despite the

. . �f8 came

Wear

material equality, White' s forces a

to be more numerous. Now he is threat­ ening to take the c5 pawn, arid for the

c.ti>b8 .S:g8 tDg4

moment Black indirectly defends it.

31 32 11'g2

11'c6 1Fd7

After the exchange of queens Black

It is obvious that the black knight

would have similarly been llllable to

will have to retreat to h6, to weaken the

avoid soon losing material. He evidently

opponent' s pressure on the rook' s file.

thought that after the exchange of rooks

But this signifies that it will be shut out

he would gain some hopes of perpetual

of the game.

24 25 26 27 28

1fe2 g4 l:td3 �fl

check.

liae8 lDh6 1id7 'ifc8

33 34 35 36

tDxc5 1if7 llxe8 :.xe8 lhe8+ 'ifxe8 'ife4 'i'd8

Now it is obvious that Black must . . . g7-g6

avoid the exchange of queens - he is

threats to his king may arise along the

already one pawn down, and the loss of

g-file. It is curious that at fl the king

a second is inevitable.

White reckons that after

37 1id4 Ve7 38 tDe4 tDg8 39 g5 Black resigns

feels more safe than on the customary

hl square, since Black has in reserve . . . c6-c5 followed by . . . 'i'c6.

28 29 h3 30 fxg6 31 l:leJ

c5 g6 hxg6

Grune 298

J.Littlewood-Botvinnik Hastings 1 961162 Sicilian Defence

1 3 4 5 2

e4 ttlt3 d4 ttlxd4 tllcJ

c5 d6 cxd4 tllf6 g6

In the Dragon Variation Black carries out

a plan that

was

introduced by

Reshevsky, in which the position of the queen's knight is determined later.

155

6 .i.eJ 7 f3 8 .lc4

i.g7 a6 b5

begin play on the file that is then opened on the queenside. Therefore Black castles on the kingside.

i.b7 �bd7

In order to create counterplay, Black must push back both white knights, but it must be done only in this order, since after 1 5 . . . eS 16 llJc2 and the inevitable 1 7 ltJe3 White has a good game.

12 13 cxb3 14 i.h6 15 1lxb6

Sticking to the afore-mentioned plan. Black (when White has already dev­ eloped his bishop at c4) develops his bishop at b7, and then plays his knight from b8 via d7 to c5. .in order to exchange White's king's bishop on b3 .

9 .lb3 10 il'd2

lDxbJ 0-0 i;xb6 b4!

16 e5

In keeping with his style of play� Littlewood goes in for great complica­ tions and . . . loses. More cautious was 16 tlJce2 e5 1 7 ttJc2 a5 with a double­ edged game.

16 . . .

lhd7

If 16 . . . dxe5 1 7 tDf5, and White wins the queen.

17 h4

Now the immediate 1 1 .th6 is the most unpleasant for Black� and after 1 1 . . . �xh6 1 2 1i'xh6 t2Jc5 1 3 0-0-0 llJxb3+ 14 cxb3 'i'b6 1 5 'iti>bl 0-0-0 1 6 b 4 I encountered certain difficulties i n a game with Krutikhin (No. 3 15). The attempt by Reshevsky in a game with Bisguier ( 1 957) to avoid the exchange of the dark-square bishops by 10 . . . h5 did not prove successful. White simply replied by castling kingside.

11 0-0-0 12 b t

�cs

Preparing after the exchange on b3 to recapture with the c-pawn (Boles­ lavsky' s well-known manoeuvre) and to

After 1 7 exd6 e5 or 1 7 . . . bxc3 White would have lost substantial material without any compensation. But now, since the black knight is pushed back, the opening of the h-file is unavoidable, and it would seem that White is bound to conclude the game with mate. How­ ever, Black finds a way of returning his knight to f6 and of parrying the threats on the kingside.

17 . . . 18 h5

bxc3 dxe5

18 c2 + 19 g2 g3

26 li)bJ 27 'i'h2

28 .i.xf4

Possibly 28 t;Jxf4 gxf4 29 Xi.xf4 was stronger, when it would have been easier for White to advance his f-pawn.

28

0

0

0

\V

gxf4

Black begins what appears 'to be a logical manoeuvre. He defends his a7 pawn, in order to restore the mobility to his knight at a5. However, soon it trans­ pires that this plan has to be abandoned. Even so, the situation on _the board is such that the four wasted tempi do not change anything.

1 59

36 .i.e2 37 l:lbl

i£1b7

A clever counter-chance. Now the 'natural' 37 . . . g7 44 tLlc6 Black resigns. He loses

Now, in view of the inevitable .i.fl , Black is bound to lose material.

i.xb5 dxe5 1i'd3 ltxa6 1i'xa6

1ixb5 d4 'ihc5 %ha6 'I' xe5

another

pawn.

After the retreat of his rook, Black would have lost not only the a6 pawn, but also immediately the e6 pawn, and this would have been even more serious than the loss of the exchange.

33 34 35 36 37

1if6 ltl:f8 tLld6

tLldJ 1ic8+ lta8 'iid8

Game 301

Skold-Botvinnik Stockholm 1962 Sicilian Defence

1 e4 2 ti)fJ 3 d4

It would appear that Black can still resist, but with his next move White pushes back the enemy pieces, and the rest becomes clear.

c5 g6 Jl.g7

This move is perhaps more accurate than 3 . cxd4, when not only 4 ltlxd4, but also 4 1Wxd4 is possible. ·

162

..

4 tLlc3 5 lLlxd4

cx.ci4 d6

6 i..eJ 7 i..c4

In the given situation this natural developing move is an error, which Black immediately exploits. Rauzer's move 7 f3 or else 7 i.e2 is correct.

7

8

•

•

•

.i.b5+

lt)xe3 lt b8 tlfb6

12 13 'ifxe3 14 .i.b3

. l£lf6

l£lg4 ct>f8

After Black's knight manoeuvre he is forced to give up the right to castle, but this is not dangerous.

15

'i'f3 White avoids going into a slightly inferior ending, hoping to create some threats thanks to the weakness of Black's fl. It is hard to say which decision is the more rational.

15 16 17 18 19

9 ifd2

If the bishop moves from e3 there can follow 9 . . . 'ib6, while the active 9 i.g5, preventing 9 . . . 'ifb6 because of 10 i.xe7+, can be met, e.g., by 9 . . . h6 10 i.h4 g5 1 1 .i.g3 with a double-edged game (Ljubojevic-Sosonko, 1 978).

9 10 .i.c4

g4 h4 l:tgl 0-0-0

.i.f6 h6 1fc5 g5 h5!

With a temporary pawn sacrifice Black parries the opponent's threats and regains the initiative.

a6 liJc6

20 gxh5 21 'iidJ 22 f4

g4 a5

22 23 1ixc3

.i.xc3

1 0 . . . tDxe3 was more accmate. Now White could have avoided the exchange of his bishop.

This leads to a favourable endgame for Black, but White is already deprived of any active possibilities.

White should have played 12 .i.d4, and if 12 . . . .i.h6 13 'ii',d3 e5 14 .ic5, or 12 . . . tt:Je5 1 3 i.e2.

After 23 bxc3 a4 the position of the white king would have looked very dangerous.

11 liJxc6 12 hJ

bxc6

163

·

23 .24 bxc3

11xc3

f5

In this way Black securely defends his passed pawn.

25 e5 26 c4!

d5

26 .i.e6! cxd5 27 cxd5 28 i.xd5 � 29 J.xe6+ x;e6

For the moment Black is two pawns down. and yet there is no longer any doubt that he will win.

30 :d4 31 l:tc4

l:txh5 l:tb4

32 l:bb4

axb4

The exchange of one pair of rooks nips in the bud the opponent's attempts to create counterplay.

d5

34 35 lldt+ 36 l:td7 37 'it?e2

llxh4 c5 Iih3+

The enemy king cannot, of course, be allowed to go to e4.

A clever move, which does credit to my opponent. It is not easy for Black to find a reply.

The position is not a simple one, but Black finds the correct plan. He is prepared to give up material, to force a rook ending in which he will inevitably be able to create two connected passed pawns.

33 'it>d2 34 h6 49 :d7 with a draw. 45 . . .h6 46 %td3 :cs 47 h4 %:ta5 48 l:ld4 is also not dangerous for ·white. But what was White to do after 45 . . . :cs ? For a long time the future appeared gloomy, until Geller found for White a unique idea of counterplay. When deep into the night he left me, it only remained for me to work out the · details of this find.

45

•

• •

l:r.c5

This means it was not in vain that we spent so much time on this move.

46

l!ti

�a5

It can be seen that, if the immediate 43 :tc7 :a4 had been played, basi�ally the same position would have ari�en. But what is the secret of the analysis?

47 :xh7!!

' I overlooked this defence', Fischer later wrote. There is nothing surprising about this - after the game it transpired that during the night my opponent had slept soundly. In addition, the decision to allow · the opponent two connected

181

passed pawns looks extremely paradox­ ical. It is base(:! . on the fact that, when these pawns begin advancing, the b6 square is weakened. Then, using checks, the black king will be forced away from the g6 pawn and it will be won, when White too will have two passed pawns on the kingside.

47 48

•

•

51

52

A thematic variation, giving concrete form to the previous note, would have looked like this: 48 . h2 f5 ltb5 f6 :b6+ lta6

hJ+ a5 cl;c7 '3;d6 cl;e6 rM7

· Here Black should have offered a draw. After all, being a pa� down, QY the unwritten· laws of sporting ethics I

182

could not be the initiator of peace negotiations.

63 · 64 65 66 67 68

�g6 a4

ltc6 l:ta6 l:r.c6 l:la6 @gt

.&tg6 + 'iit> a5 60 ltg5+ 'it>a4 61 l1g4+ a3. Here 62 l:h4 b2 63 b7 blif 64 h8'1'

is inevitable. My evaluation of the position was as follows: 'Black cannot win, since his rook is restricted by his king. ' Fischer continued the analysis:

�

l:t d3 a3

64 'ii b3+ 65 e2 W'dl+ 66 �e3 ltbl . • •

Only here, with his face a white as a sheet, did Fischer shake my hand, and with tears in his eyes he left the hall. However, our battle did not end at this point. The main topic was the question of whether or not 51 �d4 would have won. •••

After 52 l:lxg6 Black begins advan­ cing his pawns: 52 b5 53 h5 b4 54 b6 • • .

b3.

54 . . . J::th l 55 e2 lhb4

43 44 45 46

�dJ 'l&>c2 bJ

a4 a3

The saving move.

ltlb8 'l&>c7 'l&>xb7 b6

Black tries i�ediately to penetrate with his king into the white pawns. The preparatory 46 . . . lDc6 would also not have won.

If 36 . . . 4itte6, then 3 7 b6 !

37 38 39 40

41 42 43

a5 e6 ltlc6

When I began my adjournment analysis. I immediately discovered that 40 lDb6 ! would have quickly led to a draw: 40 . . . 'it>e7 (40 . . . d6 4 1 b8'i'+ lDxb8 42 lDc4+) 4 1 @e2 d8 42 llld5 etc. However, this inaccuracy on the last move before the time control does not have serious consequences. The impression is that White is losing, since after the elimination of the a-pawn his king will be too far from the kingside. In fact, it is able to return just in time.

47 48 49 50 51

xa3 'l&>b3 c2 d2 el

�c5 'l&>d4 'l&>e4 @f3

White succeeds in defending every­ thing. As often happens in a chess game, one tempo is lacking either for a win, or for a draw.

51 52 53 54

g2 h4 fJ tl:\dJ ltld7 t'l Draw agreed

An interesting game.

Game 3 13

Botvinnik-Petrosian World Championship Match Moscow 1963, 1 4th game Queen's Gambit

1 2 3

40

d4 c4 lhcJ

d5 e6 , JJ..e7

This move was mentioned back in the notes to Game 59. The point of it is that Black tries to provoke tiJf3 before

�d6 1 98

d4 square ( 1 0 dxc5) and allow the opening of lines.

the development of tlJ.e bishop at g5. As this and other games from the match showed, this continuation is by no means better than the usual 3 . . . tt:Jf6.

4 s 6

cxd5 Ar4 e3

7

g4

10

•

• •

lDc6

exd5 c6 .i.f5

Essential. 6 . . . tt:Jf6 7 i.d3 leads to the Exchange Variation of the Queen's Gambit with the bishop at f4 instead of g5, which is to White' s advantage. This idea was first employed by me in that Game 59. Then, in almost the same position (instead of . . . i.e7, Black had played . . . tt:Jd7) I played it in 1952 against Bronstein (see training games) .

7

•

• •

1 1 @fl When the rook has to remain on the h-file, and queenside castling -is ruled out, the king has to determine its own fate.

.te6

The point is that after 7 . . . i.g6 8 h4 i.xh4 9 'i'b3 b6 10 tiJf3 1 8 i.e7 1 1 ctJe5 White has a clear advantage.

8

h3

In the preceding even-numbered game (the 12th), I played 8 i.d3 . and 8 h3 is a step forward. but probably the most energetic is 8 h4, which I chose in Leiden ( 1 970) against Spassky (No. 379). It is interesting that, 15 years after the tournament in Leiden, the plan with 8 h4 was used by Kasparov in the 2 1 st game of his second match with Karpov.

8 9

•

•

.

i£if6

..tdJ

The following counter by Black in the centre would have been less favour­ able for him after 9 ttJ:f3, which I em­ ployed in the 18th game of the match.

9 10

• • •

lDtJ

c5

The position of White's king is not so secure, that he can give up the central

11 12

.

.

.

@g2

0--0

cxd4

Now White is able to defend his out­ post in the centre, and in this connection Romanovsky with good reason recom­ mended 1 2 . . . :es, with the idea of transferring the knight from f6 to :f8. 1 2 ... l:.c8 has also been played.

13

tt1xd4

Since White' s king is now secure, he need not concern himself that Black will avoid the exchange of knights and try to exploit the absence of the white pawn from d4. And the exchange of knights is to White's advantage: he inunediately gains the possibility of gaining control of e4 by the advance of his f-pawn, when he will dominate in the centre.

13 1 99

l£lxd4

Four years later a game Geller­ Spassky continued 1 3 . .i.d6 14 i.. xd6 'ifxd6 1 5 tbce2 .:res 16 .&te l .i.d7 17 i..b 1 , to White' s advantage.

18

..

14

exd4

ltld7

15

ilc2

lDf6

If Black had made use of this opportunity to fight for the initiative 14 . . . ctJe4 15 ltJxe4 dxe4 16 .i.xe4 f5 , then after 17 gxf5 ..txf5 18 'i'd3 his compensation for the material deficit would have been insufficient. Typical of Petrosian. He is afraid of weakening his position by either . . . h7h6 or . . . g7-g6, and so he is not concerned about losing two tempi, if he considers the move to be the most sensible in the given situation.

16

f3

Now White has a clear positional advantage. It would have been rash to be tempted by 16 g5 tllli5 17 �xh7+ �h8, since there is no way of contin­ uing the attack, and the bishop at f4 and the pawn at g5 are threatened. to say nothing of the bishop at h7.

16 17

• • •

·

.*.e5

:cs .i.d6

l%ael

It would again have been a mistake to go chasing a pawn ( 1 8 Jtxf6 'i'xf6 1 9 i.xh7+ 'ii?h 8), since the initiative would have passed to Black. The character of the play, arising with the given pawn formation after the exchange of the dark-square bishops, was well known to me from the game Levenfish-Kotov ( 1 1th USSR Championship, 1939), which I annotated for the tournament bulletin. In the endgame White will have the advantage - his minor pieces are more active than the opponent' s.

18 19

. •

•

.i.xe5

l:txe5

It is only possible to take with the rook, since after 1 9 dxe5 d4 20 exf6 ilxf6 Black wins back the piece, gaining a positional advantage.

19 20 21 22

11f2 .

%te2 libel

g6 lDd7 �b6

The double-edged 22 h4 would not have been in the spirit of the position, since White' s attacking prospects would be unclear, whereas an endgame will always be favourable for him.

22 23

•

•

•

lLlc4

i.xc4

Now there is exactly the same material remaining on the board, as in the afore-mentioned Levenfish-Kotov game. In the event of 23 . . . dxc4 24 d5 i.d7 Black loses a pawn, so he has to take on c4 with his rook, but then the d5 pawn will restrict the e;ictivity of his bishop.

23 24 200

l:r.xc4 l1d2

lite8

25 26

1!e3 b3

a6

At ..any moment Black could have increased the pressure on the d4 pawn, so the rook must be driven away.

26 27 28 29

ltla4 itlb2 itld3

l:tc6 b6 a5

·

35

itld3

35 36 37

gxf6 1t'g5

This, of course, is to gain time on the clock.

After the knight manoeuvre has forced a slight weakening of the enemy pawns, White returns it to the centre.

29

which is not now possible on account of 34 . . . .i.f5 35 gxf6 l:xf6 36 'l'e5 J:d6 37 �e2, and in the end Black loses his d5 pawn. 34 i..f7 .

f6

Petrosian underestimates the dangers arising in the endgame from the fact that a white pawn will be at g5. It was completely bad to accept the pawn sacrifice: 37 . . . 'ii'xd4 38 ti.)eS . However, Black could have defended tenaciously with 3 7 . . . rl;g7 38 ttJf4 rJm, · although after 3 9 ri;g3 he has no useful moves.

38

30

.i.e6 'I' xf6 'l'xg5+

hxg5

h4

White prepares g4-g5. to weaken the dark squares in the opponent 's position.

30 31

J..f7

l:txe8+

White is always ready to exchange one pair of rooks. Black's counter­ chances are reduced, but Iris weaknesses remain.

Jl 32 33 34

'l'e3 g5 lbf4

.ixe8 Ji.f7 �e6

White prevents the opponent's intention of playing his bishop to f5 ,

20 1

38

a4

Black grows nervous, and makes things easier for White-. The exchange of a pair of pawns does not bring any relief, whereas removing control from the c5 square is irrational. Here it would have been more advisable to stick to waiting tactics.

39

bxa4

After 3 9 ltJe5 :c3 40 bxa4 l:r.a3 4 1 llb2 :xa4 4 2 l:txb6 l:txa2+ all the queenside pawns are exchanged, which eases Black's defence.

39 40 41 42 43 44

a5

li)c5

Clti>gJ f4 e5

:lc4 bxa5 .t.f5 a4 a3

. . •

llxd3 Axa3 xd5 c6

ltb2 � llg2 l:lxg5+ h5

52 53 54

d5 d6 d7

llg2 l:lc2+

After the forced exchanges, which have led to White winning a pawn, Black's only hopes, naturally, rest on the advance of his passed pawn.

White's plan, begun with 3 3 g5, has been logically completed. His king has penetrated into the black position.

44

48 49 50 51

:b4

Or 44 . . . :c2 45 .:txc2 .i.xc2 46 ttJa6 3'.b3 47 lDb4 .i.c4 48 �c2, and White remains a pawn up.

54

45

lhd3

45 46 47

d6 ci>c6

Of course, with such an active king White can go into the rook ending, and the enemy rook must not be allowed to go to b2.

If 47 . . . :as, then immediately decisive.

l:lb5

g3

l:.d2 f8

'it>e8 d3

The storm clouds are gathering over White's position, but in adjournment analysis I managed to find the only saving move.

It is hard to explain why I avoided the natural 39 :xd4 lilc8 40 @h2 11cc2 4 1 _:tgL when White is a pawn up with winning chances. Apparently in time trouble the advance of the passed pawn seemed to me to be a safe antidote against the threat of . . . r!c8-c2. In fact Black is handed an extra tempo for this manoeuvre. 39 . fies

If 47 :b l Black could now have replied 47 . . . llh2.

Now I should have reconciled myself to the inevitable dratV (40 e7 lkc2 4 1

Of course, not 47 .. ;d2 48 :b l . In the event of 47 . . . l:xb3 48 11exd3 J:xd3 49

40

'it>h2

45 . . l:.e3 . 46 'it>f4

:ab2

The whole point is that the threat of 4 7 l:.h I has been created.

46 47

205

47

•

•

•

l:t dl

:xg2

l:lbd2

Ilxd3 a outcome �6 5 1 f6 Draw agreed

A step forward compared with Game

298, where after 1 1 0-0--0 Black retained the option of castling kingside. Now this would be dangerous. White achieves nothing with 1 1 a4 bxa4 (Ostojic-Ivanovic, 1 972).

Game 3 15

Krutikhin-Botvinnik USSR Spartakiad, .Moscolt1 1963 Sicilian Defence

1 e4 2 lt)f3 3 d4 4 ltlxd4 5 ltlc3 6 .i.e3

f3 .i.c4 .i.b3

.i.g7 a6 b5 i.b7

.. 'l'xJt6

13

0-0-0

13 14

... cxb3

.i.xh6 ltlc5

.

That same year there were also other attempts to justify Black's set-up, but none were successful. For example, 1 2 . . . b4 1 3 ti)a4 'i'a5 14 'ifd2 0-0 1 5 a3 'i'e5 1 6 axb4 d5 1 7 0-0-0 (Mazzoni0 'Kelly).

c5 d6 cxd4 ltlf6 g6

It will be remembered that this move followed by 7 f3 is the plan introduced into tournament play by Rauzer back in 1 936.

6 7 8 9

11 12

Black, for his part, sticks fully to the development plan suggested by Reshevsky.

After 13 'i'g7 Black would have successfully defended with 1 3 . J:tf8. .

lDxb3+

Boleslavsky 's well-known idea. The white king is more securely defended by its pawns than after 14 axb3, when Black still has chancei;. of opening the a­ file. In addition, the c:-ftle, which in the Sicilian Defence is usually used by Black, may here · also come in useful to

206

·

White. And for the moment Black' s extra pawn in the centre i s of no significance·.

b4!

Preparing the manoeuvre of the knight to a5, where it will occupy an unpleasant position. Another, equally effective idea was demonstrated by Stein in a game with Veresov ( 1 963): 16 l:the 1 �b8 17 tiJd5 lDxd5 1 8 exdS.

16 17 18

lhbJ h4

b8 1lhg8

21 22

g5

23

lhd5!

l:lf8 lhd7

l:c8

lha5 1i'f4

lk7

%1.gc8

A loss of a tempo. 20 . . . �8 should have been played.

White energetically conducts the offensive: after the forced exchange on d5 Black will have considerable problems due to the weakness of his c6 square.

23 24 25 26

exd5 'ife4

gxf6

.lxd5 lhe5 f5

Otl1erwise there would have followed 26 . f4, when the position of the knight at e5 would be impregnable. . .

Preventing the active 18 . . . g5 fol­ lowed by .. J�g6 and . . . g5-g4. At the same time White himself begins a pawn offensive on the kingside.

18 19 20

g4

1i'b6

14

Or 14 . . . e5 1 5 ttJc2 'fl.e7 16 lDb4 (or 16 lDe3), and White's position is preferable. Black has no choice, other than to castle queenside. 0-0-0 15 'ifi>bl

16

21

Now, in view of the unequivocal threat of 22 g5, the rook is forced to return to the kingside to defend the f7 pawn.

26 27

11.hfl

laxf6

Up to here my opponent had played excellently, but now he makes an error. After 27 f4 tLlg4 28 l:the l � 29 'i'd4 Black would have had to contend with serious difficulties, since his knight would not longer have been defending

207

the key e5 square. Now, however, I am saved by a chance tactical opportunity. c;t>as 27 . · 2s ; - net

if White is agreeable to allowing the Pirc defence, he should not p)ay his bishop to c4� 4 ltic3 is better.

.-

4 5

•

•

•

'lfe2

lDf6"

Or 5 e5 dxe5 6 ttJxe5 · 0-0 and Black carries out the freeing advance . . . c7-c5.

5

• •

•

c6

In order after e4-e5 to have the reply . . . lDgJ l:tb7+ llh6+

lbf4 :d4 ¢Jc7 �b6 c5

What can be said about this position? White forces the enemy king to defend its queenside pawns. Then the d- and g­ pawns will inevitably be exchanged, which leads to an ending with two pawns against two on the same wing. Does that mean a draw? Yes, provided only that Black does not succeed in exploiting his sole trump - the remote­ ness of the enemy king from the main battlefield. But how can he do this?

56 57 58 59

�b6 �b5 �a6 b6

l:th7 llb6+ llh7 l:th6+

For the moment only White has achieved anything. He has driven the opponent' s king as far away as possible from the d-pawn. Now the logical continuation, complicating the play somewhat, would have been 60 d6. Then White would possibly have been able to exchange his d-pawn for one of Black ' s queenside pawns, or for the g­ pawn, but with the black king on the seventh rank, further away from the white pawns.

60

llh7

But this, for the reasons indicated, is wrong. As is apparent from the course of the game, the immediate exchange of the d- and g-pawns does not complicate Black's task, but makes it easier.

60 61 62

lbd5 :d2

'itxg4 b4

If Black immediately threatens the pawn, then after 62 . l::ta2? 63 b5+ h7 53 Si.xf6+ �h6 54 i..g7+ 'it>h7 (or 54 . . . 'iti>g5 55 %le5 mate) 55 .i.c3+ etc. 49 'it>h7 50 .*.xf8 But not 50 i.e5 because of 50 . . . .i.c5 . •

50 51 52

•

•

ll'xd4

ilxd4+ lhd4

i.fl It only remains for White to transfer his bishop to the gl -a7 diagonal.

52 53 54 55

i.. a3

cbf2

.i.b4

g5 lidl c/i;g7 h4

This ·diversion' is not able to change anyt11ing.

56 57 58 59

gxh4 Jil.el �g3 .i.f2

59 60 61

.tc4 f4

l:td4 �xh4 lid4

The main obj ective has been ful­ filled: now the rook will have to defend the b6 pawn.

An oversighh:-but in a position where there was nothing at all to do! e.g. 224

l:tdl l:td6

Clearing the long diagonal for the manoeuvre i.e2-f3-c6. 61 �g6 fxg5 62 fxg5

·

Black resigns

10 f3 A dubious plan,

Game 3 22

against which Smyslov finds a convincing reply. 10 d3 was simpler and better.

BotVirinik-Smyslov USSR Team Championship Moscow 1964 English OpeniQg

1 2 3

c4 ltlc3 g3

lDf6 e5 .i.b4

4 5

.i.g2 a3

0-0

Probably the simplest way of equal­ ising in this opening.

A waste of an important tempo. 5

ttJf3 (Game 3 3 3 ) or 5 e4 was preferable.

5 6

.. bxcJ

.

.i.xc3 e4!

An interesting idea. Smyslov carries over this well-known idea from the Sicilian Defence (for White) to the English Opening (for Black). Now White has to develop his king' s knight on an unsuitable square. 6 . l:.e8 7 e4 c6 followed by . . . d7-d5 is also possible (as recommended by Polugayevsky). ..

7 8 9

ltlbJ 0-0

ltlf4

l:te8 d6 b6

225

e3!

10 11

... d3

11 12 13

1ie1 g4

13 14 15

h4 'ifg3

h6 ltlf8 ltlg6

16 17 18

lhhJ h5 .i.bl

ltlh7 ltlb4 f5

By leaving the opponent with his pawn on e3, White risks getting into danger. After 1 1 dxe3 .ia6 Black would have advantageously regained his pawn, but even so this should evidently have been preferred.

..i.b7 ltlbd7

White needs to gain counterplay at any price. For this he transfers his queen to the kingside, and with its support he begins a pawn offensive there.

The black knights have not only set up a secure defensive screen, but they are also ready to launch a counterattack.

By skilfully manoeuvring with his knights,. .:•Black has pushed back the opponent �s pieces, and White's hopes of an attack have been sharply curtailed. Now Smyslov lands an energetic pawn blow - a significant link is his plan for developing his initiative.

19

-*.b2

1i'f6

The first point in the game when Black can be criticised. He could have retained the advantage with the active 1 9 . . . tbg5. Then in the event of 20 tL\f4 11b8 2 1 h2 'i'f6 the white pieces are extremely badly placed (only not 20 . . . 'i'f6 immediately because of 2 1 'i'xh4 lDxf3+ 22 .i.xf3 'ifxh4 23 .i.xb7, and White has three minor pieces for the queen). White promptly makes use of the respite afforded to him to seize the initiative.

20

f4!

.i.xhl

In the new situation Black should have considered sacrificing the ex­ change (20 . . . fxg4 2 1 .i.xb7 gxh3 22 ..txa8 l:txa8), since it would not have been easy for White to show that his material advantage is sufficient for a win.

21

g5

This important intermediate move was apparently overlooked by my opponent when he played 1 9 . . . 'i'f6.

21 22 23

25 26 27 28 29

• •

g6!

hxg6 1i'b6 l:xf5 l:[afl :r6

thf8 1ig7 tllxg6 l:tf8 ifxh6

Black has managed to parry the immediate threats to his king, but now he faces a battle in an endgame a pawn down.

30 31 32

11fe5

i.c6 ltf4

•

..

hxg5 fxg5 11xh4

White avoids the exchange of queens, since his chances of an attack have become very real.

23 24

24

White must not be allowed to bring his queen's rook into play - then Black's position would become hope­ less. Therefore, with a subtle pawn sac­ rifice, Smyslov mobilises all his forces for the defence. If Black is allowed time to play 25 . tDIB, it will no longer be possible to exchange pawns on g6. Therefore this must be done immediately.

gxh6 lZ.xf6 .t.ct

lbf6 �h7

The outcome is not so obvious after 32 l:tf7+ xh6 3 3. l:.xc7 tbes (34 d4 ltlxc4 20), since the position of the white king is not secur�. Therefore White gives preference to a' ,continuation by

226

which he finally eliminates the annoy­ ing pawn at �� and brings his inactive bishop into . play. .

32 33

lt\g5+

33 34 35

.lxe3 llti

ci>xh6 h5 �e8

l:t.b7+

'it>g4

• •

•

:g8

In this way White protects his king against any misadventures.

Hoping, apparently, to win a pawn (at e2).

36 37

f2

An important subtlety. In the event of 37 . . . l::txe3 3 8 xe3 f3 l::tc6

65 66

:xf7+ .ib5

�e5

l:.c3 Here I saw perfectly well that by playing 6 7 g5 ! hxg5 68 h6 e2 + (Black has nothing else) 69 �Ke� l:h3 70 h7 I could attain a dearly drawn position, but fate intervened: ·1 decided to play for

244

a win. This was ridiculous, of course, but for the · moment White still has a :.: draw.

67 68 69 70

l:.h7; l'th8 :eS+ l:te6

.tf8 .i.g7 d4

This is already dangerous. The simplest way to draw was 70 l:e4+ ! �c5 7 1 i.. e2 i..d4 72 :te6.

70

...

l:tb3

Black misses the strongest contin­ uation 70 . . . .i.eS ! with the threat of 7 1 . . . l:ic2. Now, however, with 7 1 .ta4 ! na3 72 Ji.di i.e5 (otherwise the e3 pawn is lost) 73 l:.xh6 White could have attained the position that occurred in the game, but with the significant difference that the black rook would be passively placed.

71

.i.e2

.i.e5!

simple reply 72 . . . :bs 73 f2 gJ

l:lf6+ D.g6+ g8

37 38 39 40 41

g3 �g4 'ifn's �g6 d6 g2

It was dangerous to play 1 1 i.xh5

t'.Dg5 with an ·attack for Black.

h4

11

A dubious undertaking. It is true that

Black gains the g5 square for his knight, but the h4 pawn will constantly need

defending, making it hard for him to castle.

12 13 14

lDg5 .i.d 7

g4 i.e3 'i'd2

A routine move. With 1 4 'i'g l followed by iff2 White could have hmnediately switched his queen to an active position, from where it would have simultaneously

controlled

... b4

lDe6

kingside, White takes measures to make

tDg5 because of 23 bxc5 dxc5 24 i.a4+ b5 25 �xb5 (25 . . . tLlxb5 28 26 .ixb5+ '3;e7 27 .i.xg5).

a5 22 a4 A highly risky step. In the forth­

it also impossible on the queenside. • •

b6

.

The acceptance pawn course,

sacrifice

of the

unfavourable

coming attack on the black king, the open b-file will be used by White.

temporary

( 1 5 . . . cxb4)

was,

because

Jl.c6

Black was unable to carry out the planned manoeuvre 2 1 . . . ..i.xdS 22 cxd5

Seeing as it is hard for Black to castle

15

@h2

21

three

important squares : d4. h4 and f7.

14 15

21

Preparing an attack with g4-g5 on the black king stranded in the centre.

of

of 16

t'.Dd5. when White gains control of the

Perhaps things would have been a little easier for Black after 22 . . . i.xd5 23 cxd5

central d4 square and easily wins back

tDg5.

23 24

his pawn.

16 17 18 An

:abl l:thfl @gt

unsuccessful

.i.c6 i.b7 ltX6 regrouping:

bxa5 lla7

bxa5 1ff2

Defending the weaknesses on the kingside.

25

the

0-0

g5

The only move. If 25 . . . fxg5, then 26

knight was better placed at e5 than at

i.xd4 cxd4 (26 . . . ltJxd4 27 ..th5+ !) 27

d4.

19 20

lDd5 i.dl

lDcd4 f6

'i'f5� and White' s attack is irresistible.

26

Black intends to exchange bishop for knight ( . .. .ixd5), and for this he secures a base at g5 for his knight from e6.

g6

.

f5

Overlooking a veiled tactical blow by the opponent. 26 . . . .ieS 27 'i'g2 f5 28 exf5 tbxf5 2 9 ife4 was more tenacious,

286

other than my opponent). However, on that move I made a decisive oversight. And so, from the sixth round of the Team Championship, here is my en­ counter with the challenger.

although even t11en Black's position was probably lost. .

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

e4 d4 tt)cJ tt)xe4 tt)gJ h4 ltlf.l

c6 d5 dxe4 .i.f5 .i.g6 h6

In Games 275, 277 and 329 one can follow the course of events when White develops his king's knight at e2 (or h3). Here 7 f4 is also played.

27 l:tb8! Black resigns. After 27 . . . 'i'xb8 28

7 8 9

'i'xh4, mate is inevitable.

h5 .i.dJ

lild7 .i.h7

9 .i.c4 e6 10 'ife2 tiJgf6 leads to an equal game.

Game 345

9 10

Spassky-Botvinnik USSR Team Championship .Moscow 1966 Caro-Kann Defence There are. of course, always two participants in a match for the World Championship: the champion, and the challenger. One has been victorious in a match, while the other has overcome all the grandmasters in the qualifying com­ petitions. It is the dream of every player to meet them at the chess board, and this is what happened with me in the USSR Team Championship. I ·will give one of these games. In the second, with World Champion Petrosian (on the 1 1 th day of uninterrupted battles�. I had even more grounds for winning {the way to win on the 34th move was pointed out by none

•

•

.

.i.xd3

Vxd3

This variation of the Caro-Kann Defence was a favourite· weapon of Spassky. Tastes differ, but does a con­ tinuation deserve such attentio� when over a period of roughly 50 years only two insignificant changes have occur­ red? These are that they began advancing the white pawn to h5 (instead of leaving it at h4) and after queenside castling they began placing the queen at e2 before playing �b l and c2-c4. I forgot about this latter innovation and carelessly played . . . �gf6 too early (instead of . . . 'i/c7). After this Black got into difficulties, since White was able to establish his knight on e5 . However, this entire variation was quite well known to me: back in 1 928 I

287

happened to be the commentator on a game Grigoriev-Panov, where this same opening occurred. li)gf6 in

tt:Jc3 f6 1 9 exf6 i.xf6 2 0 'i'c4 Wb6 2 1 b 4 tLla6 2 2 ttJe4 h e eacountered definite difficulties. This was :one . of the reasons why I chose a different continuation. In addition, it involves a cunning positional idea.

16

f4

c5

17

c4

tllb4

18

·i.. xb4

18 19 20 21

.U.xdl lDe4 illd6+

Forcing events. White cannot allow . . . c5-c4 (this manoeuvre in fact occur­ red in the afore-mentioned Grigoriev­ Panov game) .

11

i.. d 2

Here 1 1 .i.f4 has also been played, but then 1 1 . . . 'i' a5+ 1 2 .id2 'JJkc 7 was found, leading to the same position that is reached in the game. Later White tried to improve on this variation with 1 2 b4 'i'xb4+ 1 3 c3 'ib5 14 c4 ifa5+ 15 ii.d2 'i'a6 16 0-0 (Velirnirovic-Hort, 1 97 1 ), but it is not clear whether his positional advantage compensates for the sacrificed pawn.

11 12 13 14

0-0-0

1fle2! lDe5

'ffc7 0-0-0 e6 tDxe5

Events develop differently after 14 . . . ctJb6 ( 1 5 ..ta5 l:t.d5), as in a game Romanishin-Bagirov ( 1 978), with quite good play for Black.

15

dxe5

The simplest, . but perhaps not the strongest continuation. After the black pawn takes up position on b4, it will be hard for White to find a comfortable shelter for his king. For this reason, if the queens are on Black will always gain counterplay. 1 8 b 1 should have been preferred.

lDd5

1 5 . . . ttld7 would seem to be more natural, but not long before our game, Petrosian played · this against Spassky, and after 16 f4 i..e7 17 ltle4 ttlc5 1 8

l:txdl+ cxb4 i.e7 'ita>b8

At first sight White has an over­ whelming advantage, but this hardly accords with the truth. · The c4 pawn is 288

Spassky played so quickly at this poin� that two obvious conclusions suggest themselves: he judged the now inevitable exchanges to be in White's favour, and at the same time he was afraid of giving the impression that he had not seen Black's last move. These factors probably prevented him from considering the most sensible decision and returning his knight to d6. Now White has to play an endgame a pawn down.

weak, and the position of the knight at d6 is insufficiently secure.

22

�xf7

22 23 24 25

lbd6 g3 'ifg4

If 22 g3 Black could have replied 22 . . . f6, while now his pieces are activ­ ated as a result of the exchange of the ii pawn for the f4 pawn.

Although White has simultaneously attacked two pawns, both threats are easily parried.

25

..

'ifd7

26

'ii?b t

Ji.gs

27

ltlb5

•

26 fixg7 is not now possible (26 . . . i.g5+). In addition. Black is intending to play 26 . . . 'ii'a4 and 27 . .. i.g5+.

28 29 30

ifxdl xd1

llxdl 'ifxdl+ .i.e3!

31 32

'it>e2 b3

.i.cl .i.b2

33 34 35

lbd6 0e4 g4

.i.xe5 'ii?c 7

35 36 37

'ii?d3 cxb5+

White has to be ultra-attentive. For example, 3 1 b3 .if2 32 g4 JL.c5 33 e2 a6 34 tiJd6 .txd6 35 exd6 b6 36 'it>d3 b7 37 'ii?d4 c6 38 'ii?e5 'it>d7 would have led to a lost pawn ending.

Of course, not 26 . . . l:tf2 because of 27 ilxg7 1Wa4 28 .:l.cl ! This move does not yet spoil anything, but there was no need for it.

Now White loses his e5 pawn, but Spassky' s intuition did not betray him, and he has every reason to hope for a draw.

After 35 ttJc5 .ltxg3 36 tDxe6+ d6 37 tlJxg7 White loses his knight: 37 . . . e5 38 tDe8 29 e6.

21 28

•

•

•

c2

nn

The rook cannot be taken because of mate (28 �xfl 'i'd3+).

'ii?c6 b5

Sooner or later this capture would have been forced. Since White's king could not leave d3 because the exchange . . . b5xc4, b3xc4 would be unfavourable for him, he was only able to move his knight. But then Black, using zugzwang,

289

would reach the central e5 square with his king. 37 d5 If 37 . . . e 2 li)b4

gxh6 e5 e4+ �e5 d4

The other defensive plan involved 44 ti:)e4. After 44 . . . .i.:f8 45 lDt"2 JJ..e7 46 lDe4 e5 4 7 tt:)f2 lt>f5 48 c4 g5 49 ti:)d3 �xh5 50 liJxb4 g5 5 1 a4 g4 52 �d3 White would probably have gained a draw, but 44 . . . .i.c7 45 iLlf2 JJ..b6 46 �e4 eS 47 liJd2 �4 48 c4 e3 49 lDfl+ (or 49 �b l .i.a5) 49 . . . d5 .i.g5

already

.i.f6

has

been

62

ttlc4

62 63

xa2 68 'it>c4 'it>a3 .

already

65 66 ttlc6 67 ll\e5 68 lbd3 White resigns: the

inevitably queen.

.fi.d4 .i.c5 c.ird4 i.b6

b2 Ji.c5 'it>xa2 il..e7

b4 pawn will

Game 346

Botvinnik-Balashov Hastings 1966167 Nimzo-Indian Defence

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

c4 lDc3 d4 e3 i.d3 a3 i.xc4

lDf6 e6 .i.b4 0-0 d5 dxc4 .i.d6

This position occurred twice in the World Championship Return Match of 29 1

196 1 (Games 285 and 286)� There it was mentioned that 7 . . . ilxc3+ is bad for Black.

8

f4

After 8 ttJf3 lllc6 9 b4 e5 10 i..b 2 White's position is considered to be slightly preferable. although Game 286 showed that Black can successfully fight for equality. In the present game White tries to test another possibility, relying on the inexperience of his young opponent., but this proves to be a psychological miscalculation.

can hope for some advantage, since in the endgame his king will be better placed than the opponent's. But for the moment the initiative is with Black.

11 12

tLlfJ

lhd8 .i.d7!

The threat of 13 . . . :cs is highly unpleasant, and White must be attentive.

13

ii.d2

14

tLle5

%%.c8

The only way! After 1 4 i.d3 i.xe3 White would simply have lost a pawn.

14 c5!

8

Threatening 9 . . . cxd4� when Black will be better mobilised. Therefore White must not avoid the possible exchange of queens.

9 10

dxc5 b4

i.xc5

10 11

. 'l'xd8

i..b6

A tempting. but risky move. The b4 bishop. c3 laright and e3 pawn are insuf­ ficiently well defended� which is subtly exploited by Black. 10 �f3 was correct. •

.

This. strictly speaking� is the idea of the entire variation. Theoretically White

292

tllg4

This simplification eases White's de­ fence. However, even after the strongest continuation 14 . . . ..ie8 ! he would have maintained the balance (in the only possible way!): 1 5 'it>e2 ttJc6 16 ltJxc6 .i.xc6 17 :hg 1 i.xg2 1 8 .i.xe6 !

15 16 17 18

tllxg4 lDe5 ll\xd7 �e2

:ixc4 llc7 tllxd7

It has become clear that Black's initiative has petered out, and it would have been simpler for him to accept the inevitability of a draw.

18

• • •

tDt'6

: �ct

19 20 . 21

l!hdl Ael

lid8 !lcd7 t'.Dd5

22 23

t'.Dxd5 l:txd5

r!xd5 l:xd5

24

a4

.

Black would not have achieved any­ thing with 2 1 ... lLlg4 on account of 22 1.lxd7 l:Ixd7 23 t'.LJa.4 ! , but' the exchange of knights leads merely to a loss of time. 2 1 . . .l:txd l was the simplest.

23 . . . exd5 was more circwnspect, but Black, naturally, did not want to give himself an isolated pawn. It transpires that White' s opening idea has in the end proved successful - his king is more active than the opponent's.

27 28 29 30

e4 b5 i.d2 lia8

lld7 · i_e7 .i.d6 b6

Now Black is left with a weak pawn at a7, which, with the bishops on the board, makes the endgame hopeless for him. In the rook ending after 30 . . . .i.c5 3 1 .te3 .i.xe3 3 2 ct>xe3 b6 3 3 axb6 axb6 34 l1b8 White also should have been able to win, but more accurate play would have been required than in the bishop ending.

31 32 33 34

a6 .ic3 h3 llc8

i.c5 g3

lDf6 e5 c6 d6

Regarding 4 . . . e4, see Game 288.

5 6 7

e4

fxe5+ lib8

3 4 5 6

The active inclusion of the white king in the play makes the outcome obvious.

28 29 30

Cifi>d5 Jlxe5

�xd6 'it>xd6

�

lld6+

exd6 J!Ld8+

6 7

In this way at least the black rook breaks free . . .

33 34

'it>c7 'it>xb 7

g6 �g7 c6

White has not played this variation in the best way (to me it seems more rational to develop the light-square bishop at e2 rather than c4, as, for example, Ciric played against me in Beverwijk - Game 370). Now Black has the chance of shutting the bishop at b3 out of the game by . . . d6-d5.

@g8

After 30 . . .I:ixe5+ 3 1 �xe5 �e8 32 @e6 the game would have concluded even more quickly.

31 32

ltJfJ ilc4 .i.b3

1ie2

0-0

lid2 r!xg2

The capture on a2 would not have changed anything. The outcome is decided by the white c-pawn.

l:txh2 35 c5 ltc2 36 c6 37 b4 Black resigns. In view of the threat ·

of 3 8 :Lc5 he has to give up his rook ilmnediately.

Game 353

Medina--Bot,1nnik Palma de Mallorca 1967 Pirc-Ufimtsev Defence

1 2 3

e4 d4 tDcJ

d6 ltJf6

And this allows Black to exchange his queen' s bishop for the knight at f3 (in most variations of the Pirc-Ufimtsev Defence this exchange is necessary) with the gain of a tempo. If White had decided not to prevent the exchange by 7 h3 (whicl\ however, is not especially good for him). he should have castled immediately. Apparently my opponent

311

17

was already intending to castle queen­ side.

7 8 9

.i.g4 hJ "i'xf3

li.xf3

e6

It is not possible to play . . . d6-d5, but even the modest move of the e-pawn makes the position of White's king's bishop quite unpromising.

10 11

ii.gs .i.h4

17 18

18 19 20

tLlbd7

0--0-0 Very risky ! Black is the first to begin active play. Meanwhile, after . 1 2 0-0 White's position would not have given cause for alarm.

12 13 14

ife2 f4

1ia5 b5

This move weakens White' s which Black immediately exl>loits.

14 15 16

tDbl tDd2

b4 d5 c5

e4,

•

•

.

ihxf6

dxc5

After 18 e5 ctJh5 1 9 \in c4 20 g4 lDxf4 ! White would have been left with a broken position.

h6

Th.is move has the drawback that at h4 the bishop will obstruct White' s pawn offensive o n the kingside.

11 12

.i.xf6

The threat of 1 7 . . . c4 was highly unpleasant, and it would still have been on the agenda after 1 7 e5 ttlli5 . There­ fore White simplifies the position, but after this exchange Black's lxf8 White resigns

In my game with Matulovic, which I have already mentioned, in one of the variations exactly the same mating position occurred.

ifxf4 'iie5

Game 3 54

Botvinnik-Diez del Corral Palma de Mallorca 1967 King's Indian Defence

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

c4 lbcJ e4 d4 f3 il.e3 d5

t°Llf6 g6 d6 .ll..g7 0-0 e5 t'Lle8

The more usual continuations are 7 . . . lllli5 (Nos.294 and 324), if Black, as

3 13

in this game, is aiming for counterplay with . . . f7-f5, and 7. . . c6, when his plans also include active play on the queen­ side.

8 9

ild2

10 11

.i.d3 .i.c2

play with l l . . .fxe4 1 2 fxe4 lDf6 1 3 h3 lbhs 14 lDge2 'i'f6 15 bl a5, but White retained some advantage.

12 13

f5 �a6

0-0-0 In beginning t11e manoeuvre of his knight to c5, Black intends to intensify the pressure on the e4 pawn. Therefore White must immediately bring his king's bishop into play, deploying it on t11e b l -h7 diagonal.

ltlge2 exf5

.i.d7

This exchanging operation relies on the fact that it is unfavourable for Black to recapture with his bishop, since he loses control of the central e4 square, which will be occupied by the white pieces.

13 14

�c5

gxf5 h4?

Not only preventing 14 . . . 'i'h4, after which it is not easy to defend the c4 pawn, but also aiming to disrupt the opponent' s defences by the further advance of the rook's pawn.

14

.

.

•

a4

This attempt to create counterplay cannot be successful; it involves too small a force, but Black cannot just stand still !

15 16 11

h5 b3

a3 b5

a5

This and Black's nex1 move are based on the conviction that his position on the kingside is perfectly secure, and that, wit11out losing time, he can prepare active play against White' s queenside castled position. Meanwhile, as the game shows, there were insufficient grounds for such complacency� so that he should have preferred l l . . .f4 12 .i.t2 g5, aiming to curb W11ite's initiative. Nine years later, in a game with the new World Champion Anatoly Karpov ( 1 976), Con:al tried to improve Black' s

In this situation Black can of course make a temporary pawn sacrifice, but even so he will be too late with his

3 14

counterattack. But it is doubtful whether he had any other plan� his decision is forced.

17

h6!

Driving back the bishqp and, even more important, depriving tl;ie knight of the g7 square, from where it could have defended the f5 pawn.

17 18 . 19

cxb5 lih5

ilh8 l:.b8

White is threatening to play 20 ltg5+ �fl 2 1 i.xf5 . The attack on the f5 pawn will now be intensified, in the end leading to White gaining control of e4.

19 20

.. g4

•

i.xc5 lDe4

24 25

dxc5 lLlf6

lLlxc5 ltle6+

l:txb5

The advantage is most easily con­ verted in the endgame. 25 i. xe6 •

•

•

26

dxe6

9'xd2+

27 28 29 30

lixd2 lDxf4 :l.xe5 :rs+

.J:te7 lib8 ltlxg4 lDf6

The tempting 26 . . . !:tdS would have been met by 27 'i'b4+ :e7 28 :xe5.

Apart from Iris positional advantage, White is two pawns up. l:ee8 31 .id3

l:tf7 f4

20 . . . fxg4 would also give up control of e4, but additional breaches would appear in Black's defences.

21 22

having to play without his king's bishop. 23 %lg5+ 'i&>f8

c6

32

i.b5

33 34 35 36 37

i.xc6 l:tec8 llc2 h2 White gives mat�. first!

..i.xf6 lDd7

Alas, this is only an exchanging operation - the last lightning flash of the departing thunderstorm . . .

1'xd7 e5 !bes 1Wxh3

34

'ife6!

Forcing the exchange of queens. as after 35 'ii'xb7 .:es 36 c6 'iife4+ 37 @h2 l:e5 White would already have had to think about how not to lose.

35 36 37 335

'ilfxe6 lhb7 lba7

fxe6 l:tc8

By playing 37 l:tb5 White could have hoped to win if his king were able to reach: e5, which in the given case is ruled out.

37 38

•

•

•

White first moves his knight from c3 to . a central position. 8 · .0-0 When I played 7 . . . f5 I had thought to delay my kingside castling until White determined that his king would remain on its own wing, but now I decided not to fear queenside castling by the opponent, since waiting tactics had their drawbacks. It soon transpired that White had quite different intentions. •

llxc5

b3

. In order to answer 3 8 . . . hS with 39 h4, not allowing 39 . . . g5 . :rs 38

39 f4 :d5 e5 40 . a4 41 a5 Draw agreed

Game 362

Benko-Botvinnik

c4 gJ .i.g2

g6 i.g7 e5

It now turns out that White is playing the Closed Variation of the Sicilian Defence with an extra tempo.

4 5

ttJc3 e4

l'iJe7 d6

If now or on the ne,.,,_1 move Black had played . . . c7-c5, this would have led to an ahnost symmetric position with a minimal advantage to White.

6 7 8 If 8 i.e3

replied 8 . . .

lDge2 d3 ttJd5 .

9

.i.eJ

i.e6

10 11 12

'W'd2 0-0 l:lael

9d7 IUi

Another plan was chosen by Csom against Gulko ( 1 976): 12 l:tacl l:taf8 1 3 f3 h8 14 b 3 l2Jg8 1 5 exf5 gxf5 ( 1 5 . . . i.xfS 16 d4) 16 f4.

English Opening

1 2 3

•

Strictly speaking, Black already has a lead in development over his opponent, who has spent time on c2-c4 and liJd5. In the game D .Byrne-Benko ( 1 966/67) he did not exploit this factor, and after 9 . . . h6 1 0 'i'd2 g5 1 1 f:[jxe7+ l2Jxe7 1 2 f4 he conceded the initiative.

For example, 4 1 . . . exf4 42 gxf4, and the black king hurries to the queenside. Of course, there are also other ways to draw.

Monte Carlo 1968

•

ttJbc6 f5

Black would probably have �d4 . (9 lDxd4 exd4 ), so 3 36

12 13

l:taf8

f4

In this position I outlined the following plan, which is not without its positional novelty and psychological elements. First Black exchanges pawns on e4 (White is forced to recaprure with the pawn, so as not to let the enemy knight in at f5), and then the light-square bishops, in order to weaken the e4 pawn and the position of the white king, and finally he exchanges pawns on f4, opening the e-:file for a frontal attack on the e4 pawn (White will be forced to recapture on f4 with the pawn, so as to control the e5 square). When the rook attacks the e4 pawn from e8, White will probably play liJe2g3 , after which the black h-pawn · will advance, accentuating the weakness of the e4 pawn and the open position of the white king . . .

13

• •

•

fxe4

The correctness of Black's plan was indirectly confirmed in the game Schmidt-Ribli CDfs.

.i.xg3

cxd6

1l'd3+

· · •xb5

9'xe8

White resigns

1fg4 Game 363 Botvinnik-Portisch Monte Carlo 1968

English Opening

26

:f4

Of course, stronger was 26 .i.xe5 gxh2+ (26 . . . 1i'xe4+? 27 f3

tLlf6+ ��+

In our day it is almost impossible to win in the style of the old masters. For this you need your opponent to be in the wrong frame of mind and psychologic­ ally not ready for a battle. Usually with Lajos Portisch that is in fact what happens - once or twice over the course of a tournament. In particular, this told duritlg the following old-fashioned game.

1 2 3 4 5

c4 thcJ gJ cxd5 .i.g2

5 6

thfJ

e5 �6 d5 tt:lxd5

In this variation of the Englisll Opening White' s plan includes pressure on the h l -a8 diagonal and along the file . . . But which file - this depends on Black: either the c-fi.le (if· the knigh1 simply leaves d5), or the b-file (if the knight on d5 will be exchanged for the! knight at c3).

'lfxh2+ 'ifxd2 �g7 �xg6

7

8 338

0-0

dJ

J.e6 tt:lc6 tLlb6

opening the c-file and in some cases of occupying c5 with a minor piece. Black, possibly again aiming for a draw, exchanges lo:lights, ·1osing a tempo in development. Meanwhile, he had available the energetic reply 1 1 . . . ttJdS: This, for example, is what Mariotti later played against Gheorghiu ( 1976), and the variation 12 .i.c 5 b6 1 3 i.xe7 tlJdxe7. 14 b4 axb4 1 5 axb4 1!i'd6 enabled him almost to equalise.

If White is aiming for an immediate fight, he can play 8 a4 or 8 d4 exd4 9 .

4.lb5 .

..

8 9

�e7 a5

a3

11 12 13 14

In several games my opponents as Black carried out the plan of castling kingside and advancing . . . f7-f5, without preventing b2-b4 (Nos. 2 7 1 and 302). In Ulis case White gained a clear advan­ tage. 9 . as was once played against me (before this game) by Flohr, and our game quickly ended in a draw. Portisch, however, was wrong to imagine that I was in a peaceful mood. When I played Flohr, I was mainly concerned that my opponent did not lose interest in the .

.

tournament and would play as well as possible in his subsequent games. But on this occasion I was ready to try and exploit the defects of Black's last move, which weakens somewhat his queenside pawn formation.

10 11

.i..e3 ll:\a4

0-0

�

White carries ou a typical man­ oeuvre in such positions, with the aim of

11xa4 llfcl llc2

ltlxa4 .i..d 5 lte8

·

.tf8

Black again displays a certain com­ placency. It was also not possible to oppose White's aim of doubling rooks by the excessively active plan with a pawn sacrifice: 14 . b5 15 W'xb5 :bs 16 'i'a4 ( 1 6 .i.b3 1 7 'l'xc6), since it is not apparent how the white queen' s seem­ ingly dangerous position can be ex­ ploited. However, as was pointed out by Smyslov immediately after the game, Black could have successfuHy defended with 1 4 . . . .i.d6, and if 1 5 'i'bs f:De7. .

.

. . .

. 15

:act

lhb8

Black's desire to play 16 . . . c6, com­ pletely suppressing White's activity on the c-file, is understandable, but for the moment he sacrifices the c7 pawn and t11e consequences of this tactical oper­ ation were not calculated by him with sufficient accuracy. In the event of 1 5 . e4 (to which Black's preceding move seemed to have been directed) 16 dxe4 .i.xe4 17 l:Id2 1i'f6 18 .i.f4 :acs the immediate threats would have been parried, although White would have retained the initiative.

3 39

. .

16

lhc7

.t:.c6

be accepted: 1 8 xfi 19 11fc4+ g6 20 9g4+ W 2 1 liJg5+, and Black has to part with his queen, otherwise he is mated. h6 18 Defending the g5 square, but weak­ ening the light squares still further. tics 19 :b7 . h8 20 1Fc4+ Also after 20 . 1We6 2 1 tDxe5 Black would have been unable to resist for long. ...

•

•

•

..

Black continues his manoeuvre, ex­ pecting that White will have to give up rook for bishop ( 17 :7xc6 CD.xc6)� after which Black's slight material advantage will be compensated by White's positional tnunps. Alas, disillusionment awaits Portisch. . 17 lltxc6! Of course, Black also took this sacrifice into account, but he incorrectly thought that the rook at c7 would remain trapped and would also have to be given up. But the bishop at c6 is no longer there, and the b7 square remains undefended! However, even this is not the main thing. The rook sacrifice has eliminated the enemy bishop, which was covering the light squares in Black's position. 17 bxc6 Black retains his b7 pawn, but this is of no significance, since White is already aiming at the other flank. 18 1lxf7! Rarely almost in the opening is one able to give up both rooks, one after the other. True� the second sacrifice cannot •

.

.

21 tDb4! Once again White can ignore the threat to his rook - he is playing for mate. 21 11xb7 h7 22 lDg6+ 23 .i.e4 With the threat of 24 /1Je7+ and 25 1t'g8 mate. 23 j\d6 24 li)xe5+ g6 Or 24.. . �h8 25 ltJt7+ g8 26 liJxd6+. 25 .t�g6+ g7 26 .*.xb6+! Black . resigns

340

. • •

If 26 . . . d5

27 28 29 30

exd5 dxe4+ �d7

For Black it would be most advan­ tageous to exchange the knights, and for White - the bishops. As for the ex­ change of the white bishop for the black knight, it too can be considered to favour White, but even so this is what Black should have decided on (32 . . . tLle7+). Strangely enoug� Black ex­ changes bishops, after which the proba­ bility of zugzwang is greatly increased.

33

.tc5

ttle7+

Now this check is possible (bad is 34 !JLxe7 �xe7, when the f2 pawn is en prise), but this is no longer of signifi­ cance, since the exchange of the white bishop for one of the enemy pieces is assured.

34

h5

30

Up to this point Black has defended well, but here he plays imprudently. He should have acted wit11out delay by playing 30 .i.d8 ! , whea without ex­ changing knights (3 1 ltJe5+), White would be unable to maintain his king at d5 (or e5) in view of the inevitable 3 l . . .ltJe7+. But in the bishop ending the chance of putting the opponent in zug­ zwang is minimal, and White would probably have been unable to convert his positional advantage. . ..

31

34

il.g7!

il.f8

i.xc5

The reader already knows that it would have been better to agree to the exchange of the knight; 34 . . i.c7 should have been played.

Now the e7 square is no longer ac­ cessible to the black knight: if 3 1 . .. .i.d6 there would follow 32 i.f6, and the white king remains on its central square.

31 32

'it>c4

After 34 �e5 i.xc5 3 5 bxc5 the situation would be more complicated (due to the weakness of the c5 pawn), and so White chooses a different way.

.i.d8 .fi.. b6 343

.

35

'it>xc5

�c7

Defending the b6 square by 3 5 . . . tDc8 also had its drawbacks - the black knight would become too passive.

36

itlg5

36 37 38

itlh7 h4

Forcing the advance, and hence the weakening, of Black's kingside pawns.

f6 f5

Zugzwang is approaching. In the event of 3 8 . . . b6+ 3 9 ct>d4 d6 40 tDf8 etJc6+ 4 1 e3 tDe5 42 'it>f4 the g6 pawn cannot be defended. Kholmov seeks salvation in tactical complications.

38 39

. li_)f8

•

.

f4 b6+

The best practical chance was probably 39 . . . D 40 g3 tills 4 1 tDxg6 lDxg3. Although after 42 'it>d4 White also comes out a pawn up. the technical difficulties would be more significant. My opponent underestimated White's 42nd move.

40

d4

ttJf5+

41

e4

tLlxh4

40 . f3 41 g3 ctJf5+ is now too late, if only because of 42 �d3 ! ..

·

4 1 . f3 again does not help in view of 42 xf3 l'Dxh4+ 43 lt>g3 li:Jf5+ ( 43 . . . g5 44 ltJe6+) 44 �f4

It would appear that Black has nevertheless succeeded in creating some counterplay, since it seems impossible to prevent him from creating a passed pawn on the queenside. White, however, has prepared the necessary antidote.

46

.

lDe6+

c6

Black's last hope is to attack White's queenside pawns.

43

ttJ:d'4

g3 tLlxg6

•

•

•

ltlc4

'il?a4 bJ

48 49 50 51 52

ltlxb6 'it>xa3 lLld5 b3 f4 �c4 ltlc7 xb4 ltlxa6+ Black resigns

b5

When he played 39 . . . b6+ Black over­ looked that if 43 . . . g5 White replies 44 g3 ! gxf4 45 gxh4 with a won pawn ending. Therefore my opponent is forced to readjust.

44 45

46 47

The situation is not changed by 47 . . . b5 48 lDe5 �xa3 49 tDc6! or 47 . . . ct>bS 48 ttJb2.

. .

42

li)e5!

A manoeuvre, after which everything becomes clear.

tLlf5 itlh6

344

Game 3 65

Ostojic-Botvinnik Beverwijk 1969 French Defence

1 2

e4 d4

e6 d5

3

lhd2

4

e5

5

lDf6 lDfd7

f4

At present this variation is not as popular as 5 i.d3, but even so it also sets Black difficult problems.

5 6

7

cJ lDdfJ

c5 �c6

in a number of other games), 8 . . . h5 9 gxh5 :xh5 10 t'De2 tbb6 1 1 ltig3 lth8, did not appeal to me, since I thought that in certain circumstances Black should have the possibility of initiating immediate counterplay on the queenside by . . . b5-b4.

9 10

it)e2 .i.h3

lt:'lb6

First 10 fi)g3 should have been played, to prevent Black' s undennining advance . . . h7-h5. This is what hap­ pened later in the game Belyavsky­ Bagirov ( 1 974): 10 ltJg3 a5 1 1 Ag2 b4 12 0-0 a4 13 a3 bxc3 14 bxc3 lDa5 1 5 lta2 ctJb3 16 f5 h6 17 �hl.

10 11 12

gxh5 .i.g4

h5 !lxb5 llh8

Now there begins a battle for (and against) f4-f5 .

7

•

•

•

Petrosian's idea. which he employed against Cooper in the 16th Olympiad ( 1 964). The point is that White's king's bishop will now be unable to reach the b l -h7 diagonal at an early stage of the game. However, the blocking of the queenside allows White to gain a men­ acing initiative on the kingside. However, does Black have anything better? If 7 . . . 'i'a5 the simplest is 8 �f2.

8

�g3 1£1e7 ffc2 g6 h4 After 1 5 f2 lLlf5 White would have lost the opportunity of advancing his pawn to h4 without exchanging the knight at f5, but after the exchange (as occurred in the game) the pawn march h2-h4-h5 is no longer dangerous for Black.

.

•

.

b5

The continuati�n .that occurred in the afore-mentioned game of Petrosian (and

15 16

.i.xf5

16

...

1£1f5

1 6 'i'h2 was no better on account of 16 . . . ltJxh4 17 t:Dxh4 i..e 7.

g4!

The most energetic and logical reply. lf 8 b3 Black can reply 8 . . . b5, and the variation 9 a4 ttJas 1 O ltid2 b4 is quite safe for him.

8

13 14 15

c4

gxf5!

Now Black's position on the kingside is secure. He has sufficient space for manoeuvring, while the white h-pawn is not only blocking the . enemy forces, but is also subsequently a target. The

345

picture would have been quite different after 16 . . . exf5 17 h5, when White's advantage is obvious.

17

25

l:tagl

l:tgh8

Parrying the threat of 26 l2Je4.

26 27 28 29

l1h3 l:tghl l::t l h2 �g2

�c7 J:l8h7 'ilh8 ltlc8

tl'lg5

The knight 's position may look menacing, but all its 'shots' are blanks.

17 18 19 20

exf6 'ife2 h5

f6 1f xf6 .i.d6 llh6!

The knight .embarks on a lengthy journey; its ultimate destination is e4.

The h-pawn must be blockaded, since it is restricting three of its own pieces: queen, rook, and knight at g3 .

21

tl'lf3

White redirects his knight to another square: where. however, it will be just as harmlessly placed. Perhaps he should have tried to maintain the status quo.

21 22

... ll'le5

30 31 32

..i.e3 �

ltle7 .i.d7

White has returned his laright to its former position, where it at least prevents the opponent from tripling on the h-file.

.i.d7

0-0-0 Here the king feels very much at home. This is one of the subtle points of Petrosian' s generally unsuccessful idea. So, in this game too I castled late, but I cannot especially boast about this, as my opponent did not castle at all.

23 24

i.d2 ltlfJ tl'lg5

:lg8

il.e8 346

32 33 34 35

lDfl ht

7 exf5 .ltxf5 can hardly be dangerous for Black, and, as shown , by the game Tarve-Pohla (Parnu 1971), 7 . . .gxf5 is also possible: 8 'i'h.5+ f8 9 'i'dl ttJf6 10 liJf3 g5, then l!.dd3 underlin�s the danger of the black king' s 'thoughtless behaviour' .

358

27 . . :lh3

Winning a second pawn (d6 or h7).

:1c6

33 34 35 36

ltxd6 ltdJ :g4

.i.g8 h6 3 9 �h3 'i'e3+ 35 40 g3 'i'f3 4 1 'iib4+), in which White has to give perpetual check, was pointed out by grandmaster Benko.

37 38

•

•

•

'3;e7

38 39 40

1Wh8+ 1l'e5+

'itf6 g5 �b6

cxd5

4 5 6

ii.f4 el

Is it not possible to try and run away with the king? For example: 4 1 ®h3 .D.h l + 42 @g4 'i'h4+ 43 � �fl+ 44 @e3 'i'f2+ 45 �d3. But then 4 5 . . . 'ii'xg2 ! and White is again forced to give perpetual check.

41 42 43

1fb8+ 'it>g5 @h5 "l'd8+ 1fh8+ Draw agreed

lbcJ

d5 e6 iJ..e7

exd5 c6 .i.d6

Previously only 6 . . . .if5 was played here, and it would appear that 6 . . . i..d6 was first employed in the game Gligoric-Portisch ( 1 967). It leads to quieter play than that in the variation 6 . . . i.f5 7 g4 (cf. No. 3 1 3). A good plan for White against 6 . . . ..td6 has not yet been found. In the present game too he gained only a minimal advantage, and yet, apart from anything else, he has an extra tempo, which Black has spent on playin_g . . . i.f8-e7-d6.

7

,

d4 c4

White also has the possibility of 4 e4, leading to open piece play.

'ifxh7+

Or 38 'i'g7+ e8 !

1 2 3 4

.i.g3

The afore-mentioned game continued 7 .i.xd6 1i'xd6 8 1'.d3 l£Je7 9 ti)f3 ti)d7 10 0-0 tbf6 1 1 'ifc2 0-0 1 2 %tab 1 g6 1 3 b4, and White's position was perhaps only slightly more pleasant. 7 t;)e7 Instead of this Gligoric recommends playing 7 . . . .i.f5 immediately, although it seems to me that after 8 'S'b3 Black has some problems over the defence of his b7 pawn. 8 ttlf3 0-0 •

9

368

•

•

.i.dJ

.i.f5

This is the clever point of Black's plan. After 10 �xf5 lDxf5 the bishop at d6 is defend� and the attack on the b7 pawn ( 1 1 'i'b3) is easily parried.

13 14

h4

li)xd6

This advance of the rook' s pawn was what White was intending when he played 1 1 lDxd3. But the entire plan requires too much time, and by straight­ forwardly carrying it out, he ends up in a difficult position.

14 15 16

h5 h6

lhd7 g5!

Reckless and flippant - a further loss of time . . .

16 17 18 10

ll.\e5

10 11

lDxd3

11 12 13

ilf3 .i.xd6

g4

1ie7 Ve6

0-0-0

The start of White's misadventures, which continue for fully 10 moves! Of course, I did not want to waste a tempo on 10 Vic2 (in view of 10 . . . ..txd3 1 1 'ifxd3 ), but then Black would have been unable to solve his main problem - what to do with his bishop on d6? Exchang­ ing on g3 is dangerous, since this opens the h-file, and meanwhile White has a clear plan: queenside castling and the opening of the position by e3-e4.

18

.i.xd3

Of course, 1 1 ifxd3 was more cau­ tious, although after 1 1 . . . i.xe5 12 .itxe5 lDd7 13 Jlg3 White' s advantage is insignificant.

lt)f5 g6

Now, when the bishop at d6 is defended by the. lmight, White has no reason to defer this exchange.

Aae8

This is a mystery - what was Black hoping for? After White's queenside castling (and he had nothing better) 1 8 . . . lDe4 ! would have been especially strong, since the reply :c 1 is not pos­ sible. Black could also have carried out this manoeuvre on the next move, but he played it only when White was fully ready to parry it!

369

19 20

1lg2 d2 e2 l:td6

g4 'Iffl+ 9hl+ 111'h6+ 1tg6

Black's last hope is to open up the game with . . . g4-g3, but this leads to the loss of a pawn.

47 48 fxg3 49 'it>el 50 dl 51 cl

g3 -.its+ W'hl+ 1ig2+ W'g l+

Now White retreats his rook and defends his c5 pawn.

52 53 54 55

lldl at Black resigns

..

Grune 3 74

Matanovic-Botvinnik Belgrade 1969 Pirc-Ufimtsev Defence

1 2 3

e4 d4 tLlf3

g6 lL g7 d6

8 9

Now 4 c4 would have led to the King' s Indian Defence, while for the Pirc-Ufimtsev Defence the most typical move is 4 tDc3 . Black has fewer diffi ­ culties after 4 .i.e2 (as Petrosian played against Spassky in the 1 966 World Championship Match) or after the move chosen in the present game.

4 5 6

.i.c4 1fe2 0-0

lbbd2

a5

8 . . . d5 is premature in view of 9 c3 ltJbd7 10 e5 .

a4

lLlf6 0-0 c6

This reply pursues two aims: it prepares . . . d6-d5, which restricts the opponent' s light-square bishop, and it defends the d5 square, so that if the knight is attacked by e4-e5 it can move

My opponent, who was aiming to reach a position ftdm Game 3 16, repeats

372

tl1e error made there, whereas he had an excellent choice between the sound continuations 9 c3 and 9 a3 .

9 10

•

•

•

d5

e5

The Encyclopaedia considers that after 10 c3 White retains the advantage. It is impossible to agree with this, if only because of the reply 10 . . e6. .

10 11 12 13

h3 lllxfJ c4

lDfd7 .i.xfJ e6

Here is the prepared improvement (Gipslis played 1 3 i.g5, under­ estimating the strength of the reply 1 3 . llib6). It is true that White succeeds in preventing the attack on his centre by . . . c6-c5, but at a high price: the weak­ ness of the b4 square will inevitably tell. 1 3 c3 was more circumspect.

ii.gs .fia2

16 17 18 19

lJ..e7 .i.d6 �xa2 l:[fal

19 20 21 22

W'xc4 lLld2 .i.c5

23

gJ

l:tfe8 lLlxa2 W'bJ

After 1 9 l:ta3 'ii'xc4 2 0 ·,'ifxc4 dxc4 2 1 t'Dd2 Black could have • defended his pawn by 2 1 . . . b5, whereas now this will not be possible.

. .

13 14 15

The time had come to maintain the balance with the exchange 1 6 cxd5. The attempt to cramp Black's position (16 c5 'ifc7 1 7 Ji.e7) would. have encoun­ tered a tactical refutation ( 17 . . . tbxe5 18 .i.xf8 tt:Jxf3+ 1 9 'i'xf3 :xf8 with ex­ cellent compensation for the sacrificed exchange). As for the game contin­ uation, it leads to a slightly inferior ending for White.

llla6 ifb6

1f xc4 dxc4 ltlb6 kta6

Gipslis was unable to make this move, since the b2 pawn was not defended.

15

•

•

.

lLlb4

White did White not regain his pawn? Because in the variation 23 i.xb6 �xb6 24 ll'lxc4 l:tb4 25 tLld6 (25 tt:lxa5 lta8) 25 . . . .tld8 26 l:l.dl .i.ffl Black would again have obtained an

373

advantage. If instead 23 l:.c l , then 23 . . . .i.h6. Therefore White prepares if necessary to block the c l -h6 diagonal by l2-f4.

23 24

l:.cl

25

ltJe4

. •

•

�d8 .ilf8

24 . . . il.xe5 25 i.xb6 l:txb6 26 liJ,xc4 .ixd4 27 ttJxb6 ..txb6 would probably have led to a draw. This seems very active, but White over-rates his chances. By playing 25 ctJf3 followed by 26 i.xb6 lhb6 2 7 :xc4 he would have almost completely equalised.

25

.

.

•

dJ

g6 .id8 h4 h3

Black is aiming to activate his bishop or obtain another passed pawn, and in so doing to rid himself of his doubled pawns. But more significant is the fact that now on the sixth rank he will have another weak pawn at e6. fxe5 56 �

Otherwise 45 l:h3. Now, to defend his h-pawn, both Black's king, and his bishop, must stay on the kingside.

Larsen was probably afraid of White moving. his king to a4 and then playing b4-b5. In the event of this he wanted to gain some counterplay, and for this reason he sacrifices a paw� assuming that the doubled h-pawns will be of little value. Subsequent events, however, do not confirm Black's hopes.

49 50

gxh3 'ifi>e2

57

.i.h4

Now White avoids the manoeuvre of his king to the queenside, and tries to exploit his passed h-pawns. ·

50 51 52

'it>fJ

3!

lhd4 :he4 l:tf5

llc5 ltJd7

Black Wlderestimated this reply when he played 26 . c4. White is able to parry the action of the black rooks along the fifth rank and gain a clear advantage.

·

tl)xf5 g4

31

g6

f4

36

f5

36 37

...

�g7

�e6

A serious unpleasantness! For the moment the knight is immune (36. .. �xh6 37 .tlxg6 mate).

lbf5 l:tc5

3 1 ctJd6 tDf6 32 .:t.xc4 :xc4 33 l2Jxc4 ltlxh5 would have let · Black off too cheaply. Now the very strong 32 tl'ld6 ttlf6 3 3 :d4 is threatened.

34 35

li)b7 The point of Black's plan! If now White plays 36 g5, then 36 . . . liJxg5 37 fxg5 l:hg5 and the knight at h6 is lost, and Black has every chance of drawing.

. .

29 30 31

fxg6 li)f6

hxg6 liJxh6

Of course, not 3 3 ... 'iti>g7 . because of 34 l:e7+.

c4

A difficult decision to take, since now the white knight will occupy an ideal post at d4. But Black needs to free the fifth rank, so as to activate his rooks.

27 28 29

32 33

ltJf8

lie8

Now it is hard for Black to find a useful continuation (of course, 37 . ttlli.7 is not possible because of 3 8 :gs+ xll6 ? 39 :xg6 mate). In the time scramble he decides on a move that offers White a choice a good practical device. 37 l:a5 ..

-

The last tactical chance. White's knight has successfully escaped from the unfortWlate square as on the queen­ side, but perhaps it will be possible to exploit its poor position at h6? It is for this that Black sacrifices a pawn.

38

ci>d2

Unexpectedly, the 'device' works. This move would seem to throw away

399

the wi� since in the rook ending White is left with a weak pawn at fS . During the game I thought that White would win most easily by 3 8 'ittb2, and if 3 8 . . . l:tb5+ 3 9 @a3 lt.a5+ (otherwise Black ends up in zugzwang), then 40 'lt>b4 l:txa2 4 1 g5 with a material and a positional advantage. Also dangerous for Black was 3 8 f6+ �xf6 3 9 l:xf8+ @g7 40 l:c8 �6 41 l:xc4 l:xa2 42 l:te4 ! with a highly favourable rook ending. In Spassky's opinio� 3 8 fxg6 ltlxg6 39 li)f5+ �6 40 :e4 was also quite good for White.

38

•

•

•

xh6

Now, when the a2 pawn will be won, Black himself goes into the rook ending. � g7 39 1'xf8

40 41 42

l:tc8 gxf5 e3

gxf5 :xa2

After 42 l:txc4 l:ta5 43 ltf4 �f6 Black has every chance of drawing the game.

42 43 44 45

�e4 ltc6+ ltxc4

@16 ltxc2

52

..

53 54 55 56

57 58 59 60

a5

46 47 48

l:tc7+ l:lc6+ d 4

f6

49 50 51 52

e5 d5 llc7+ lta7

l:le2+ l:lf2 f6

@f7 :n The main thing for the weaker side is the activity of his rook.

c4 c5 c6 @cs

a4 a3 l:ld2+ :c2+

It is good to drive the king to c7, and only then advance the pawn to the second rank.

:e Encyclopaedia considers the lesser evil to be 8 ... e6, but it is hard to agree with this.

This is the whole point If 17 . . . 1ib3 there follows 18 i.xc6, and the b2 pawn is defended. Black prefers to give up the

405

exchange, hoping that the open position of the white king will give him some · counterplay.

17 18 19 20

exd4 lbc8 J:r.hct

li)xd4+ 1fxd4 40 1'xf4

The entire variation was forced for both sides. Unfortunately for Black, he is obliged to waste a tempo moving his bishop.

20

• • •

.ld8

This leads to an endgame, in which White wins easily. However, after 20 . . . .i.d6 2 1 l:txf8+ li.xf8 22 l:tc8 the threat of 23 1i'b8 would have quickly decided the outcome.

21 22 23 24

1fb8 'it'xf4 'ifi>f1 b4

White first invades with his rook into the enemy position, and then plays his bishop to c6; after a different move order the activity of his rook would have been restricted.

27 28 29 30 31

a4 llxf8+

rl;e7 ii.c7 lDxb4 d6

Forcing Black to block the c6 square, where his knight might have been advantageously placed.

31 32 33 34 35

lLlb5 t2Jxf4+ .i.b6

1ha7 :xn

l:txg7 'ifi>e2

xc6 b5 'ifi>xa5 lDd5

Since Black has been unable to make use of his passed pawn, it means that the endgame is hopeless for him.

White's main trump is his extra pawn on the queenside.

24 25 26

a5 Ji.c6 l:xc7+ lid7+

35 36 37 38 39 40

d4 lt)c4 '1t>d5 b4 h5 cJ.ie5 llh8 Black resigns

Botvinnik-Ragozin Bolshevo Sanatorium 1947 Queen's Gambit

1 2 3 4 5 6

27

l:tc8+

d4 ltlfJ c4 ti)c3 cxd5 e3 ·

d5 ltlf6 e6 c5 ltlxd5 cxd4

Before the Chigorin Memorial Tournament we decided to check once 406

again the position that occurred in the game Botvinnik-Alekhine (No.94) after White· s 1 0th move .. Although instead of this last mQ�e the World Champion played differently (6 . . . l'Dc6 ), this merely leads to a µansposition of moves.

7 8 9

exd4 i..c4 0-0

10

�et

and Black's bishop at c8), where White played i.b5, but Black gained sufficient counterplay.

ltlc6 �e7

0--0 In Grune 1 33 Black played 9 . . . a6.

10 �e3 (No. 1 32) is weaker. Against Szabo (Groningen 1946) I carried out the same plan as in the present game, but without 10 J:te 1 . Here Alekhine played 1 0 . . .b6 and after 1 1 ltJxd5 he ended up in a difficult position. All the commentators thought that Black was obliged to exchange first on c3 � it is this advice that Ragozin follows.

10 11 12

bxc3 Ad3

12 13

... 1!'c2

ltlxc3 b6

There is no longer anything for the bishop to do at c4.

15 16

i.b7

A manoeuvre that was employed back in the game Chekhover-Levenfish ( 1 934 ). If 1 3 . . . h6 White advantageously plays 1 4 1ie2, threatening 1We4.

13 14

.

•

.

J.h6

•

•

1i'd2

•

•

•

l:tc8

.hlabl !

A necessary link in White· s plan. Now a possible attack on g2 ( .. ."i'd5) can always be parried by l:b5 .

16

...

17

h4

.i.f6

This proves to be a loss of time; 16 . . . i.f8 was simpler.

g6

The pawn sacrifice 14 h4 .txh4 leads to unclear consequences (Larsen­ Unzicker, 1 968). 14 lle8 The same position was reached in the · afore-mentioned game with Szabo (only, there Whit�' s rook was still at fl , •

15

An important link in White 's plan. It is useful to move the queen off the c­ file, and also to take control of the g5 and h6 squares, preparing the advance of the h-pawn. For the moment Black leaves his queen at d8, hoping to prevent h2-h4.

It transpires that after l 7 . i.xh4 18 tLlxM irxh4 1 9 i.g5 'i'g4 (19 . . 'i'bs 20 .ie2) 20 lle4 'i'f5 21 l:te5 1i'g4 22 .ie2 Black has to give up his queen for rook and knight.

407

. .

.

·

17 18

1fd6

.*.f4

Preventing the opening· up of the position by 18 . e5, when there would follow 1 9 .i.g3, and it is hard for Black to escape from the pin. . .

18 1ia3 18 . 'i':f8 was more cautious; the ..

counterattack against c3 comes too late.

19 20

h5 .i.e5

lDa5 1ie7

The queen has to return, since after 20 . . . .i.xe5 2 1 tDxe5 'i'xc3 22 iff4 it would be hard for Black to defend.

21 22 23

�

.i.xf6

tLlg4

9xf6 l:ted8 'Wg7

24 25 26

hxg6 ..g5 l:b5

hxg6 f8 lDc6

There is nothing better. If 23 . . . ilh4 24 'iff4, threatening to win the queen.

29 30 31

ttlxg8 1fe7 llbe5

�xg8 i.c6 l1d7

32 33 34

1ih4 '8'f4 �gJ

ifh8 1lg7

34 35

%ieg5

White' s queen sortie would not appear to have achieved anything, since now it is forced to leave the enemy position. However, this is not so: Black has been forced temporarily to block the c-file.

The storm clouds are again gathering over the position of the black king. To be fair, I should mention that it was not so difficult for White to find the correct plan here: all he needed to do was copy Lasker's play in his game with Capa­ blanca (Moscow 1 935).

..td5

There is no defence against the threat of 36 ..i.xg6.

35

l:Xc3

A vain attempt to parry the bishop sacrifice.

36

.i.xg6

37

.i.xf7+!

l:lxg3

In a difficult position Ragozin de­ fends coolly; the knight manoeuvre to g8 saves Black from the immediate threats.

27 28

lDf6 :eJ

Intending 29 l:lh3 .

28

lDe7

lhg8 408

.;

The subtle point is that after 37 :xf7 3� 'i')fg3 (but not 38 .&txg7+ l:.gxg7) Biack does not have suffi cient compensation for the queen. . . .

37 38 39

[

�

li.xg7 l%.xg7 i.xe6+ Black resigns

Ragozin-Botvinnik

Nikolina gora 1951 efl_e_ nce���� ch_D Fr_ _ en_ � ��� __

1 2 3 4 5 6

e4 d4 tLlcJ e5 aJ 'i'g4

e6 d5 .i.b4 c5 ii.as

6 b4 is a popular continuation, as, for example, in the 9th game of the Smyslov-Botvinnik World Champion­ ship Match (1954). 6 i.d2 is also quite good for White.

6

.

•

•

lj_)e7

were especially necessary - after all, for three years I had not taken part in any competitions. Again I had to turn to the French Defence, since during that time new ideas had appeared in practice. In my game with Reshevsky from the World Championship Match-Tourna­ ment (No. 1 81) after 5 ... il.xc3+ 6 bxc3 'ilc7 7 1i'g4 f5 8 1i'g3 cxd4 9 cxd4 I ended up in a difficult position. There­ fore I decided to test a continuation from an earlier game with the same opponent (No . 1 66).

7

1fxg7

It is well known that 7 dxc5, as Reshevsky played against me, is stronger, arter which White retains an opening advantage without any compli­ cations. But on this occasion too Ragozin went his own way. 7 l:tg8

8 9

'iixb7 b4

cxd4 dxc3

Black could have considered 9 . . . i.c7 10 liJb5 a6! (but not 10 . i.xe5 1 1 ttJf3 :i.h8 12 'i'd3 .i.f6 1 3 i.f4 ttJg6 14 l'iJc7+ f8 1 5 i..g3 ttJc6 16 l'iJxa8 e5 17 'i'b5, which does not give him an equal game) 1 1 ltJxd4 �xe5 12 ti)gf3 1'c7, when for the sacrificed pawn he has some initiative. ..

10

bxa5

11

tl)fJ

/i)d7

10 . . .liJbc6 is worse on account of 1 1 tt:Jf3 (with the threat of 1 2 tiJg5) l l . . .Wfc7 12 .llb5.

In 195 1, befqft�.t We match for the World Champio�r,.jp, ;training games

Another plan is to make rapid use of the passed h-pawn: 1 1 f4 'i'xa5 12 tlJf3 liJf8 1 3 'i'd3 .i.d7 14 tl'lg5 :cs 15 I!b 1 b6 16 h4 (Gligoric-Dµckstein, 1 955).

409

11

• • .

·

.1fc7

The exchange of the light-square bishops is a · positional mistake - the black rooks gain freedom of movement.

In the 9th game of the World Championship Match against Smyslov ( 1 954) I played 1 1 . . . tt:illJ , which is far weaker, since instead of making a further attack on the central e5 pawn Black removes the only threat to it. I have to admit that three years later (during the game with Smyslov) I quite simply forgot what I had played against Ragozin - after all, I was in my 43rd year, and at such an age a chess player' s memory i s no longer faultless. The move played has the advantage of forcing White to take urgent measures to defend his e5 pawn; more­ over, 1 2 i.g5 is not possible on account of 1 2 . . . l:txg5 1 3 tLlxg5 'i'xe5+.

12

13 14 15

16 17

13

.

•

.i.b5+

g3

tt'lfg6

hJ

l:lc4 lt:\gxe5 tt'lxe5 0-0-0

.i.eJ ltJc6 It transpires that, as a result of the unjustified exchange of bishops, White is unable to defend his central pawn.

.i.f4

•

.i.d7 'tl'xd7 :g4!

15 . . . J::txg2 was dubious in view of 16 .i.g3 . Now, however, White is forced to weaken his position by g2-g3 ; 16 Jlg3 is met by the unpleasant 16 . . . l:e4+, while after 16 i..e 3 the reply 16 . . . :xg2 is now possible.

18 19 20 21 22

Subsequently Euwe recommended this way for White to retain the initiative: 12 i.b5 a6 (if 12 ... J%xg2, then 1 3 @fl and 14 :lgl) 1 3 .i.xd7+ i.xd7 14 0-0 d4 (14 . . . 'ii'c4 1 5 ttlg5) 15 ..i.g5 .i.c6 16 JJ..xe7 @xe7 17 'i'h.4+ e8 1 8 tLlg5 11fxe5 1 9 f4.

12

i.. xd7+ 1id3

0-0

lt:\xe5 1i'h7 .i.xa7

tt'lf8

White has regained his pawn, but at a high price: his bishop is shut out of the game for a long time, and the initiative completely passes to Black. White's main chance is to create a far-advanced passed pawn. 410

22 23 24 25

lDtJ+ �g2 llfel

lDd2

d4

f3 Black was threatening .2 5 . . . fid5+ or 25 . . . 'ifc6+. ·

25 26 27 28 29

1fxd7+ l:te5 l:tael l:tb5

f5 �xd7 c8).

29 30

.

.

d3

•

l:tcl

White would also not have been saved by 30 l::t xb7+ �6 3 1 cxd3 (or 3 1 J:!c l ttJc4, transposing into a position from the game) 3 1 . . .c2 32 .:I.c l l:txd3 33 :b2 ctJxf3 .

30 31 32 33

ltxb7+ cxd3 .?!bJ

ltJc4 �6 lixd3

If 3 3 .if2 there would have followed 33 . . . c2, while if 33 :Ixc3 :xc3 34 i.d4+ e5 . 3 5 i.xc3 l£le3+ and 36 . . J:hc3.

33 34

. J.f2

•

lld2+ c2

.

A mistake, which could have led to a draw. Black should have played 34 . . . ctJb2 with nwnerous threats (. . . ltJd l , . . . lDf3

�e7 ci>d6

g4

It would have been better to refrain from this move, which weakens the f4 pawn. Now the black king must immediately return to the kingside, in order to succeed in reaching g6 (in the event of the further advance of the white pawns).

45

411

llxc2 :b2 .i.eJ

•

.

•

"1e7

46 . 47 48 49

·

·

ltel :e2 Itel l:te2

g6 �h5

Preventing the further advance of the black king (54 . . .