Chess Explained the Queen’s Indian (Wells)

Chess Explained: The Queen's Indian Peter Wells

[HAI~~IBIITI

First published in the UK by Gambit Publications Ltd 2006 Copyright © Peter Wells 2006 The right of Peter Wells to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. This book is sold subject to the condition that it shall not, by way of trade or otherwise, be lent, re-sold, hired out or otherwise circulated in any form of binding or cover other than that in which it is published and without a similar condition including this condition being imposed on the subsequent purchaser. A copy of the British Library Cataloguing in Publication data is available from the British Library. ISBN 1 904600 49 2 DISTRIBUTION:

Worldwide (except USA): Central Books Ltd, 99 Wallis Rd, London E9 5LN. Tel +44 (0)20 8986 4854 Fax +44 (0)20 8533 5821. E-mail: [email protected] USA: Continental Enterprises Group, Inc., 302 West North 2nd Street, Seneca, SC 29678, USA. For all other enquiries (including a full list of all Gambit chess titles) please contact the publishers, Gambit Publications Ltd, 6 Bradmore Park Rd, Hammersmith, London W6 ODS, England. E-mail: [email protected] Or visit the GAMBIT web site at http://www.gambitbooks.com Edited by Graham Burgess Typeset by John Nunn Cover image by Wolff Morrow Printed in Great Britain by The Cromwell Press, Trowbridge, Wilts.

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

Gambit Publications Ltd Managing Director: GM Murray Chandler Chess Director: GM John Nunn Editorial Director: FM Graham Burgess Gennan Editor: WFM Petra Nunn

Contents

Symbols Introduction 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

4 g3 ~b7 4 g3 i..a6: Introduction and Alternatives to 5 b3 4 g3: The Modem Main Line 4 ... ~a6 5 b3 4 a3: Introduction and 4 ... iLb7 5 tDc3 4 a3: Alternatives to 4 ... i..b7 4 tDc3: Introduction and 4 ... i.b4 - the Queen's IndianlNirnzo Hybrid 4 e3 and Minor 4th-Move Alternatives

List of Games Index of Variations

4 5 8 26 38 65 87 100 114 124 125

Symbols

+ ++

check double check # checkmate brilliant move !! good move interesting move !? ?! dubious move ? bad move blunder ?? championship Ch team championship Cht Wch world championship Wcht world team championship European championship Ech Echt European team championship ECC European Clubs Cup OL olympiad rpd rapidplay game simul game from simultaneous display adv advanced chess (man + machine) 1-0 the game ends in a win for White Ih-1f2 the game ends in a draw 0-1 the game ends in a win for Black nth match game (n) (D) see next diagram

Introduction

1 d4lt)f6 2 c4 e6 3lt)f3 b6 (D)

w

1. The Logic of the Queen's Indian There are a couple of crucial facts about the Queen's Indian which will reappear throughout the book and which are probably also the best place to begin to acquire a feeling for what this opening is all about. The first is that it was initially developed by players, perhaps Nimzowitsch above all, who have often been characterized as 'hypermodern' or more grandly as part of a 'hypermodern revolution' which saw its heyday in the 1920s. They brought to chess a number of new and fascinating strategic ideas. Most significant in the context of the Queen's Indian was a rather fresh conception of how to struggle for the critical centre squares using the pieces. This contrasted with the classical emphasis on direct occupation of the central squares with pawns, and had the very healthy effect of hugely extending the range of openings which came to be regarded as playable. In addition, the Queen's Indian, in common with its close cousin the Nirnzo-Indian, has benefited enormously from their much deeper understanding of how to base a strategy around control of squares of one particular colour. If these ideas seem familiar now, it is because, as is the case with many successful revolutions, hypermodern ideas have been absorbed and are now viewed as comfortably mainstream. This brings us nicely to the second key point about this opening - it is a light-square based opening. The key contest isfor the squares d5 and e4, as well as c4 which interestingly often becomes a focus for Black's counter-chances. In case this sounds a little esoteric, just consider for a moment that in the dark-square based openings beginning with 1 d4, such as the King's Indian or the Griinfeld, it is quite common for White to be allowed to set up a broad pawn-centre - one reason they were initially greeted with such horror by respectable opinion! Black in those cases is targeting the d4-square, and preventing e4 simply does not feature in the plan. The Queen's Indian, though radical at the time, was never frowned upon to this extent precisely because Black does seek to control e4 and prevent his opponent from setting up a broad pawn-centre as a matter ofpriority. Failure to do this tends to imply a failure of opening strategy.

6

CHESS EXPLAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

My reference to the relationship with the Nimzo-Indian - 3ltJc3 .tb4! - also merits some clarification. Without treading on the toes of any companion volume, I think it is fair to say that a really logical approach to the position after 2 ... e6 would require White to form an opinion on 3ltJc3 first. The move not only threatens 4 e4 but keeps open the option of f3 (a move which if ventured prematurely is usually well met by the 'classical' ... d5) to support such future intentions. It is probably only a slight exaggeration to say that the popularity of3ltJf3 and with it the Queen's Indian is itself a great tribute to the Nimzo-Indian and the pin on the c3-knight that characterizes it. In tum, 3... b6 is very much a response to the more modest knight move - the fianchetto carries far fewer risks when White's f-pawn is blocked. It is only exceptionally here that White will be able to unblock this pawn early in the opening phase - and hence only in Game 22 that competition for the e4square through use of the move f3 plays a central role.

2. The Contemporary Queen's Indian An awareness of widespread respect for the ... .tb4 pin is also useful for understanding how White's principal options for development have evolved. The most popular approach, 4 g3 (Chapters 1-3), aims to develop the kingside first and generally only to touch the bI-knight once the f8-bishop is already committed. This leads to an intense, but somewhat delayed, battle for e4 and d5. The other most popular move, 4 a3 (Chapters 4-5), enjoys a relationship with our discussion here which scarcely requires elaboration - conceding a tempo to prevent the pin almost defines the respect felt for it! The only eyebrow-raiser is probably the 4 ltJc3!? of Chapter 6. Suffice it to say that what looks like a 'change of heart' regarding the pin is the dominant focus of the chapter introduction there. I hope and believe that there is much less need to finish this section with a defence of the Queen's Indian as a varied, strategically rich and appealing opening than perhaps might have been the case 20 years ago. There undoubtedly was a time in the early 1980s when the opening became linked in the mind of the chess public, rightly or wrongly, with an excess of draws in elite events. It appeared to have lost its radical edge. Even then I do not think that the fault lay intrinsically with the opening. Still, in the intervening period there has been quite a transformation in the riches to which it can give rise. The prevalence of 4 a3 for White from the mid-I980s onwards, Black's espousal of the generally more ambitious 4 ... Sl.a6 and a re-visiting of the 'hybrid' lines of Chapter 6 - all of these have tended to make the opening more varied and exciting without jeopardizing its fundamentally solid and reliable reputation. Now the Queen's Indian player may be equally at home with an active bishop on a6 while contesting the centre with pawns. Just as the hypermodern ideas that inspired it became absorbed into conventional theory, so the lines between varieties of methods of contesting the centre have become somewhat blurred and this has generally just served to make things more interesting. It is not for its drawish qualities that we shall find the majority of the world's elite - Kasparov, Topalov, Anand, Adams, Krarnnik, Leko, Karpov, Gelfand to name but a few - on one side or other on the corning pages.

3. Selection of Material In keeping with the goals of the series, my overriding aim has been to bring the highest level of chess to the reader in the most accessible possible form. In general the selection of games has also been determined by considerations of strategic clarity and, I hope, entertainment. What was largely ignored was the result. Accidents happen even at a high level, and the reader is advised to use his own judgement in conjunction with the commentary rather than the less rigorous method of checking the result!

INTRODUCTION

7

I hope the material will appear reasonably balanced. Where a section has been granted more space - such as Chapter 3 covering 4 g3 i..a6 5 b3 - this is due to both its intrinsic importance and the mass of top-quality material that its fashionable status generates. While I have certainly sought to cover the most important variations, the priority has been to give a fairly comprehensive coverage of the wealth of different structures to which the opening can give rise. Each chapter has quite a substantial introduction, which I hope will succeed in setting the strategic scene, as well as a brief conclusion. In general, despite the occasional pocket of rather denser theory, the Queen's Indian seems to me an opening in which an understanding of the major strategic themes can carry the practical player a long way. I will have been reasonably successful if the reader finishes the book sharing my confidence on this. I would like to thank Gambit Publications and especially Graham Burgess for his patience, and for wisely curbing my enthusiasm for excursions into excessive theoretical detail. Finally I would like to thank Melanie for supporting me throughout as only she can. Peter Wells Swindon, England April 2006

1 4 g3

~b7

1 d4 ttJf6 2 c4 e6 3 ttJf3 b6 4 g3 i.b7 (D)

w

Whichever way the winds of fashion may be blowing, there is something of fundamental importance about the diagram position. Both sides are developing such that their light-squared bishops will face each other in a direct contest for the key central squares - dS and e4 - whose basic importance has already been heralded in the main introduction. For sure, we shall hear again in coming chapters of the rich strategic variety which two decades of popularity at the highest levels have injected into 4 ... i.a6, resulting in the subject-matter of Chapters 2 and 3 becoming the established 'main line' these days. However, for all that, it would feel like a blow to the prestige of the Queen's Indian if the unpretentious text-move were to be found wanting and fortunately it is fair to say that this, so far as I know, has never been seriously suggested. In other words, the eclipse of 4 ... i.b7 has been a testimony to the vitality of the Queen's Indian as a whole, not to its vulnerability. The subject-matter of this chapter remains important and the black cause retains notable advocates. Still, I am jumping ahead. What of 4 g3 itself? Why has this fianchetto retained its spot at the forefront of responses to the Queen's Indian almost since its inception?

The role of g3 and i.g2 in competing for the light squares in the centre has already been alluded to. However, this is only the bare bones of the story. Firstly, and perhaps a little negatively, there are the drawbacks, however minor, which attach to the alternatives and which were touched upon in the main introduction. Secondly it is worth stressing that the oftdiscussed unprotected status of the black bishop on b7 is by no means of academic interest only. It does playa significant role in the struggle for the diagonal- just look at the 7 d5!? of Game 3 for which it provides the tactical justification, various traps surrounding an ill-timed ... ttJe4 by Black in Games 1-2, and the problems of S... cS in Game 1. The list could easily be expanded. Thirdly, and perhaps crucially, when we tum to Black's development (and ignoring for the moment 4 ... i.a6, which I shall discuss in general terms at the start of Chapter 2) we see that the basic position arising from 4 g3 i.b7 S i.g2 i.e7 60-00-0 (D) - the principal subject-matter of this chapter - presents him with something of a conundrum.

w

In the majority of games White proceeds as in Games 1 and 2 with 7 ttJc3, certainly the most natural move and a good one. However,

4 g3 .i.b7

7 ... liJe4! is fairly unambiguously the best response, one which in some sense simplifies Black's choice of how to continue battling for the e4- and d5-squares. Both 8 'it'c2 (Game 1) and 8 i.d2 (Game 2) prevent doubled pawns on c3 and continue with the battle for e4, but by now Black has choices. After both moves, 'Dutch-style' strategies directly competing for e4 with ... f5 or putting the question to White's d-pawn with ... c5 perhaps in conjunction with ... i.f6 become viable. In other words, the exchange of knights undoubtedly extends the range of possibilities by which Black can satisfactorily mobilize his remaining forces. The really interesting question is quite how Black, having already exhausted his straightforward developing moves, should proceed if it were his move in the diagram above! Of special interest is the fate of the queen's knight. It looks natural to play ...d6 and ... liJbd7, but this is rather passive and probably adds force to White's d5 break which - as we shall see in Game 3 in the form of an intriguing gambit - is a substantial component of his armoury in any case. Putting the knight on a6 is viable in some

9

lines, but is no cure-all, while blocking the bishop with ... liJc6 barely comes into consideration at all. Moreover, White's irritating d5 advance is usually the response to any ... c5 move. So perhaps Black might decide that all this adds up to reconciliation with the need to challenge in the centre with pawns after all. If so, he will find that White's bishop on g2 is ideally situated for meeting ... d5 too, and for putting pressure on the d5-pawn, especially if Black seeks to contest space with a further thematic ... c5. This is much more than just a hypothetical discussion. In fact Game 4 explores just such a structure, the product of White's efforts to present his opponent with precisely this dilemma. It is all good propaganda for 4 g3, but there is a saving grace for the defence. White does not seem to have an especially purposeful 7thmove alternative to 7liJc3. Not so long ago the craze was for 7 nel!? but while it gestures in the direction of the e4-square, its contribution to the further play is patchy. So we can move on to look at the theory with respect for the iron logic of 4 g3, but a healthy regard for Black's resources too.

Game 1

Alexander Beliavsky - Hannes Stefansson Olympiad, Istanbul 2000 1 d4liJf6 2 c4 e6 3liJf3 b6 4 g3 i.b7 5 .i.g2 (D)

B

5•••i.e7 The most natural development, but Black has a couple of more or less playable alternatives:

a) 5 ... i.b4+ can be played either to exchange bishops or to attempt to misplace White's. However, after 6 i.d2, 6 ...a5 does not especially persuade me here since it reaches virtually the position that will be dealt with at some length in Game 8. The only difference - that White's pawn is still on b2 rather than b3 seems to me only to restrict the defender's options and enhance strategies based upon 7 0-0 followed by 8 i.f4 or 8 i.g5 leaving the b4piece a bit stranded. 6 ... i.e7 makes little sense. The development dilemmas which were highlighted in the introduction are hardly eased by the presence of a bishop on d2 - indeed if Black proceeded as in the main line he would find himself a full tempo to the bad! 6 ... .i.xd2+ is of course possible, but positions such as that

10

CHESS EXPLAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

reached by 7 'ii'xd2 0-0 8 tbc3 tbe4 9 'iYd3!? f5 lO 0-0 tbxc3 11 'ii'xc3 look more comfortable for White. Whether pushing for the c5 or the d5 advance, it is nice not to have to take Black's dark-squared bishop into account. b) 5 ... c5, as is often the case, would be a decent move were it not for the vulnerability on the long diagonal which 6 d5! exd5 7 tbh4 highlights. The effect here is not so disastrous since the king's bishop can still be fianchettoed as in the Benoni - see Chapter 6 for more on this. However, there is an additional problem here that after 7 ... g6 8 tbc3 iJ..g7 9 0-0 0-0, for example, White can seek a still more favourable structure by recapturing d5 with a piece. In Ki.Georgiev-Granda, Bled OL 2002, White chose lO iJ..g5!? J:.e8 (but not lO... h6 11 iJ..xf6 iJ..xf6 12 tbxg6! followed by a terrible fork on d5) 11 ~d2 a6 12 tbxd5 iJ..xd5 13 iJ..xd5 tbc614 ':ad 1 .l:!.c8 15 b3 b5 16 e3 'ii'b6 17 iJ..xf6 iJ..xf6 18 tbg2 tbb4 19 tbf4 with a pleasant hold on the d5-square. The only way to guarantee that White recaptures on d5 with the pawn instead is to play 7 ... b5!? However, although this is the thematic expansion of Black's queenside and a principal source of counterplay in Benoni-type positions, once White has castled there should be mileage in challenging these pawns with a timely a4, carving out a square for the knight on c4, supporting in turn White's basic plan of advancing his centre with e4-e5. 60-00-07 tbc3 (D)

B

7 •••tbe4! The most popular move and almost certainly the best, as discussed at some length in the chapter introduction. As I also intimated, it is

difficult to recommend 7 ... d5 here. Suffice it to say that the resulting structure is likely to be similar to that which will be treated in some depth in Game 4, only with 7 tbc3 making a significantly greater contribution to White's cause than 7 I1e 1. A couple of pertinent differences are especially worth noting though. In Black's defence, it is true that if White rushes to clarify the centre with 8 cxd5, it may be possible to try 8 ... tbxd5!? 9 tbxd5 iJ..xd5 lO \i'c2 f5 !?, when the e6-pawn is a bit weak, but Black at least keeps his share of the central light squares. After the more popular 8 ... exd5 9 tbe5!? it is also worth knowing that 9 ... tbbd7?! is very strongly met by lO 'iYa4!, when Black has severe problems with his c6-square. How 8 tbe5!? compares is open to question, since if then 8 ... tbbd7, it seems that Black can just about meet 9 cxd5 with 9 ... tbxd5! (but not 9 ...tbxe5 lO d6! - another long-diagonal trick!). However, 9 ~a4!? is again worth considering. All in all, 7 ... d5 neither equalizes nor is in the spirit of the opening. 8 iJ..d2 At first sight this may look a bit strange, but it is a useful reminder of the critical role played by the struggle for the e4-square. We shall see from time to time later in the book White resorting to the manoeuvre iJ..g5 and iJ..xf6 in order to exchange off a piece that is important in the struggle for key central squares. In this context, offering such an exchange on d2 makes perfectly good sense. Furthennore, the promise of a healthy future for the bishop on c3 also helps to ensure that 8...tbxc3 enjoys little following - a mild argument perhaps for 8 iJ..d2 over the 8 'iVc2 of Game 2. Also compare this with the less enticing set of circumstances which surrounds the immediate exchange with 8 tbxe4. In this case, White still has to develop the c I-bishop, whereas Black's light-squared bishop's occupation of e4 will be a quite legitimate means of controlling that square since it is relatively invulnerable to attack. In fact though, this line is by no means extinct, and despite the lack of serious problems which Black should encounter, it does illustrate a quite different question mark which hangs over his strategy in the 4 ... iJ..b7 Queen's

4 g3 .i.b7

Indian. How can Black create imbalance against an unambitious player of the white pieces? After 8 ....ixe4 (D), White can only contest the e4-square immediately by initiating further exchanges, but for those motivated by safety first (at best!) this is scarcely a drawback!

11

B

w

In fact, after 9lbh4?! f5! there is every reason to hope that a degree of imbalance might be injected, but 9lbel! is safer. With the knight's position secure, 9... f5?! is probably just weakening. Therefore 9 ....ixg2 10 lbxg2 is indicated, and now since e4 would give White a genuine predominance in the centre, 10... d5 is best. After 11 ~a4, Black gets to choose the structure. With 11..:iid7 for example, he will reach an 'Exchange Queen's Gambit' structure. He has no light-squared bishop blocked in, but he still has to beware of mild pressure down the c-file if he avoids ... c5, and against the d5-pawn if he plays it. l1...dxc4 12 'iVxc4 c5 looks the safest. 13 .ie3 cxd4 14 .ixd4 'iic8 should leave very little in it. However, 8 lbxe4 is rather safe for White, and there might even be a case for lovers of a microscopic advantage to be drawn to it from time to time. We now return to 8 .id2 (D): 8...f5 Black keeps the tension, contests the e4square by supporting the knight and reveals one of the drawbacks of 8 .id2 as against 8 'iic2namely that ... lbxc3 will still attack the white queen. Thus, for the moment, moves with the f3-knight designed to create embarrassment on the long light diagonal are not especially scary. However, as we shall see, the text-move does allow White to play 9 d5!?, and not least for this

reason Black may wish to consider alternatives. Chief among these is 8 ....if6 after which, interestingly, it is far from unusual for White to 'force the issue' with 9 Vi'c2, accepting a loss of tempo in order to reach positions similar to 'b' below. This is testimony indeed to White's confidence in proffering this exchange, but it is hard to be quite comfortable with such a disregard for tempi. 9l:[c1!? is a very valid alternative. Note that throughout this section I am deeply sceptical of solutions involving the move ... d5 since the exchange of dark-squared bishop for Black's f6-knight is very appropriate for White in these 'Queen's Gambit Tartakower' structures (see the notes to Game 14 for more than this). With that in mind, Black has a couple of interesting tries: a) 9 ... c5!? seeks to entice White into a structure in which his dark-squared bishop will really be missed prior to making the exchange on d2. After 10 d5 exd5 11 cxd5 lbxd2 12 lbxd2 d6 the idea looks quite valid. However, in the fascinating minor-piece battle which ensues, the white knights are also full of life, and White should avoid advancing in the centre with e4, which would risk a real field day on his dark squares, in favour of 13 lbde4! and an expansion on the kingside with f4 and often g4 too. Retreating the bishop from f6 looks too passive, but keeping it on the long diagonal with 13 ... .ie5!? seems to hold White up a bit better. 14 Vi'd2 .ia6 15 Whl file7 16 f4 .id4 17 :fel g6 18 e3 .ig7 19 g4 led to strategically rich play in Pinter-Tompa, Hungarian Cht 1993/4, in which White's prospects on the kingside are quite decent, but the bishop-pair undoubtedly spells some compensation for this. I suppose

12

CHESS EXPLAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

that it is this double-edged outcome which persuades some to settle for 9 ~c2. b) 9 ... llJxd2 10 'iVxd2 d6 and now it is possible simply to occupy the centre with 11 e4. White has a good deal of space for sure, and even the choice to probe on either flank: - h4 and b4 both fit nicely with his structure. However, the tricky part is always how to make progress without opening the position for the black bishop-pair - especially the dark-squared bishop which is in a sense 'uncontested' since 9 ... llJxd2. Similar arguments apply to 11 dS !?, which seeks to encourage Black straight away to clarify the centre with 11...eS. Here too the bishop-pair may look fairly harmless given the relatively closed nature of the play, and White can certainly improve his position with 12 e4 followed by h4, ii.h3, etc. However, again the acid test will come when he seeks a breakthrough. As so often occurs in the King's Indian Defence, the dark-squared bishop is for the moment blocked in, but its potential should be regarded with respect. We now return to 8 ... fS (D):

l:!.adlllJxc3 11 ii.xc3 ii.e4 12'iVc1! d6 13 .l:tfel llJd7 14 ii.f1 (preparing to play dS, cutting off the bishop's retreat, and then llJd2 embarrassing it) 14... ii.b7 IS dS llJcs 16 dxe6 llJxe6 17 ii.g2 ii.xc3 18 ~xc3 might be fractionally more comfortable for White since he can hope to manoeuvre his knight to dS in due course. Of course it is none too terrifying for Black all the same. 9 .•. ii.f610 ':'c1tLJa6 11 ii.e1 (D) One of the drawbacks of 8 ii.d2 is that the queen loses direct touch with squares on the dfile - d4 in particular. This retreat seeks to remedy that, looking to llJd4 to add pressure to both e4 and e6. 11 a3!?, preventing ... llJb4 and preparing b4, is also interesting. Note that even here, White is generally happy to allow ...llJxd2, secure in the belief that his space advantage, the possibility of playing llJd4 and perhaps e4 or even f4 will compensate for the absence of a dark-squared bishop.

B

w

11•.•cS!?

9dS!? An attempt to smother Black's fianchettoed bishop, which is a recurring goal for White in the Queen's Indian. The effectiveness of such a strategy is affected by several variables though, and at least one - Black's ability to position his other bishop effectively on the long dark diagonal- is encouraging to the defence here. White can also opt to play more quietly - first developing and keeping the dS advance in reserve. Van Wely-Tiviakov, Beijing 1997 is typical, and the formation reached after 9 'iVc2 ii.f6 10

This makes good sense if White declines to capture en passant. The planned llJd4 would be radically prevented and White also needs to bear in mind the possibility that Black will try to play ... exdS at a moment when White must recapture with the pawn, leaving it rather vulnerable to attack. Nonetheless, my hunch is that ll...llJacS !? is quite playable, intending 12llJd4 'iVe7 when 13 llJdbS is a double-edged venture since after 13 ... a6!? the capture on c7leaves the knight rather stranded. 12 b4!? llJxc3 13 ii.xc3 llJe4 14 ii.xf6 'iWxf6 IS 1Wd4!? makes sense to me, reaching a position similar to a 'theoretical' line in which White already has a3 on the board.

4 g3 iLb7

This might encourage Black to try 15 ...aS!? In any case, it certainly looks playable. 12 dxc6 dxc6 13 'iib3!? ttJac5 14 'ii'c2 "ile7

13

(D)

challenges for the e4-square, but even provides his c4-pawn with very handy support. 24••.11xd3 25 exd3 lZ'ld6 26 lZ'le5! iLxg2 27 ~xg2lZ'lf7 281Dc6 'iVd6 29 iVaI h6 (D)

w

w

15b4! White correctly judges that the elimination of a fair amount of material which this brings about does not necessarily imply an easing of his opponent's defensive task. 15••• lZ'lxc3 16 iLxc3 iLxc3 17 'iVxc3lZ'le418 "i!i'b2 c5 19 b5! a6?! Interestingly, Beliavsky does not question this in his notes, but while Black does liquidate a potentially shaky pawn on a7, ten or so moves later it becomes clear that it is very clearly White who has benefited from the opening of the a-file. 20 a4 axb5 21 axb5 IUd8 Black is first to the open file, but this cannot disguise the fact that he is a fair way from full equality. The main problem is very simple: although the black knight sits comfortably enough on the e4-square for the time being, it can always ultimately be exchanged, or driven away, either as in the game, or even with f3. By contrast, the outpost on e5, over which White exerts a healthy control, will be very difficult for the defender to contest, in addition to which it is a square that in tum promises useful access to c6 or d7. 22 llfdll:txdl+ 23 Itxdl :d8 24 :d3! A typical and important motif in the contest for an open file. Black has an unenviable choice between aq:epting the pressure which White's doubling rooks will put on the valuable open file, or making the following exchange. As a consequence though, White not only painlessly

30 'iia7?! This does not yet decisively spoil White's efforts, but it is a step in the wrong direction. As Beliavsky himself points out, by additionally attacking the knight with 30 'if'a8+! ~h7 31 ~7! he would have afforded Black no respite. 30•••f4! 31 \t>gl?! The realization that an inaccuracy has granted the opponent an unnecessary active resource can be a very disorientating experience and even for a player of Beliavsky's enormous class can be a moment when the danger of further error is heightened. It is true that 31 'ii'xb6?! f3+! would be no improvement since 32 ~xf3 'iY'xd3+ should draw without undue complications, whereas 32 'ifr>h3?! 'iNxd3 would create fresh danger only for White. However, exchanging queens with 31 'iNbS+! would have been the best way to neutralize Black's counterplay. The weakness of b6 trumps other considerations after 31... 'fixbS 32lZ'lxbS lZ'le5 33 gxf4lZ'lxd3 34 lZ'ld7! with excellent winning chances. 31 ••• g5! Black securely defends f4 and therefore alters the assessment of pure knight endgames - e5 is suddenly a stable outpost for Black's knight. There is no longer any place where White can break through, and the play peters out. 32 'iNa3 \t>g7 33 'if'c3+ e5 34 'ii'a3 'iVd7 35 \t>g2 h5 36 h3 \t>f6 37 gxf4 gxf4 38 'iVa7 'iVxa7 39 lZ'lxa7 lZ'ld6 40 ~f3 'ifr>e6 41 lZ'lc6 f6 42 lZ'lb8 111._ 111.

14

CHESS EXPLAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

Game 2

Daniel Fridman - Suat Atalik Lake George 2005 1 ttJf3 ttJf6 2 c4 e6 3 g3 b6 4 .i.g2 ~b7 5 0-0 ~e7 6 ttJc3 0-0 7 d4 ttJe4 8 it'c2 (D)

B

White challenges for the critical e4-square and crucially, by vacating the dl-square, he all but forces an immediate exchange on c3 since a later ...ttJxc3 will not attack his queen and thus alternatives are likely to fail to a strengthening of pressure on the all-important long diagonal8... f5? 9 ttJe5!, for example. The price for restricting Black's options in this way is that the queen on c3 does not contest e4 and may become vulnerable to a later ... .i.f6. 8...ttJxc3 9 'i'ixc3 Given the importance we have already attached to the e4-square, at least a passing query as to the viability of 9 bxc3 would be a healthy instinct. In fact, it seems there is no pressing need for Black to keep contesting it in that case. Relinquishing e4 but seeking immediate counterplay against his opponent's very weak c4pawn by means of9 ... ttJc6!? and ... ttJa5looks a sound source of counterplay. The same passing curiosity might also be aroused by 9 ttJg5?? although here the failure is tactical and much more drastic. The double attack on h7 and b7 would be potent but for Black having available the fiendish 9 ... ttJxe2+!, deflecting White's queen and simply netting a whole piece. 9•••d6!?

Unusual and, I suspect, deliberately provocative! Suat Atalik is clearly a grandmaster who plays the solid 4 ... .i.b7 with his eye very much on a contest for the full point. The drawback to 9 ... d6 might be revealed if White, by threatening again to play e4, can show that Black cannot do without the move ... f5 in any case, and that the two do not always mix comfortably. Black's claim will probably be that White can only achieve this by moves such as it'c2 or it'd3, which themselves introduce new possibilities for the defence. Still, the 'Dutch-style' 9 ...f5!? (D), which seeks to control e4 and prepares to slip the bishop neatly behind to f6, is regarded as more respectable, and White's markedly divergent approaches to it result in varied and instructive play.

w

The following seem to me the most important tries: a) 10 b3!? ~f6 ll.i.b2 d6 12 ltadl is a typical case in which White chooses quiet and unpretentious development. Here ... d6, although not compulsory, was probably wise since the alternative development of the knight to c6 might run into d5 at a later date too. As usual the issue is the slight weakness of the e6-pawn. It is easily protected in this case, but a white knight manoeuvre to f4 still makes sense in conjunction with the possibility of d5 once the

4 g3 .i.b7

light-squared bishops are exchanged. Hence after 12 ... 'ii'e7, 13lbel!? i.xg2 14lbxg2lbc6 15 ~f3 ~d7 16lbf4 is logical, and I tend slightly to prefer White in such positions in which he succeeds in exchanging his d-pawn for Black's e-pawn and retains some grip on the d5-square. Since 16...Itae8 can be met by 17 d5!?, this assessment is of some relevance. Still, I am far more inclined to claim a quite playable position than a theoretical advantage for White. 12 ... lbd7!? 13lbel i.xg2 14lbxg2 i.g5!? is a possibility to impede the knight's path, but White can still play for e4, as indeed he can in the event of 14... e5 15 't!i'f3!? g6 16 e4 and if Black is obliged to capture on e4 then his opponent can look forward to some active play in the centre. b) 10 d5 is as usual a critical option. However, it does in turn cede some influence over the c5-square, and when, as here, Black is also first to the long dark diagonal it is bound to be rather double-edged. White's scheme seems quite coherent after 1O... exd5 11 lbel!. Black should be reluctant in general to accept the spatial disadvantage which a pawn recapture on d5 would imply. The structure arising after 11...d4 12 ~xd4 i.xg2 13lbxg2 is more interesting to assess, as I felt it was a legitimate goal for White in line 'a'. Here if Black avoids ... d6, his d7 -pawn will always require defending by his major pieces. If he plays it, then e6 can prove weak. Meanwhile, White has chances to use the d5-square, and although Black's minor pieces sit pretty enough, he lacks targets for counterplay. Again, I do not want to exaggerate the problems - we are very much in the realm of only a slight nagging plus - but I feel Black does better with the active 1O... i.f6! 11 't!i'c2 lba6 12 l:dl lbc5 13 i.e3 d6. Now 14 i.xc5 bxc5 15 dxe6 is not to be feared since this e-pawn will be rounded up and the f6-bishop is likely to be the star of the show. In general, the b7-bishop is not great, but neither is White's on g2 so long as the pawn remains on d5. Black's other minor pieces look active enough to hold the balance. c) 10 lbe5!? (D) is an attempt to make an immediate issue of the long diagonal at the moment where his queen enjoys the possibility of swinging to f3 with some effect.

15

B

Atalik's own commentary on 9 ... f5 hinted at a certain reluctance to take this on, giving 1O.. .'iVc8 11 M!? as the critical line. This subtle move combines the standard idea of steering White's knight towards f4 (this time via d3) with the intriguing possibility of exchanging dark-squared bishops with a timely i.g5. These ideas were well illustrated in NikolicHjartarson, Belgrade 1987 after ll...d6 12lbd3 i.xg2 13 'iitxg2 i.f6 14 i.g5! 'it'b7+ 15 f3 lbd7 16 b4. Now if Black tries to pre-empt White's queenside activities with 16... c5?! he will be positionally punished by 17 bxc5 bxc5 18 i.xf6l:lxf6 19 dxc5lbxc5 20 lbxc5 dxc5 21 ~e5! (Nikolic) and the e5-square plays a dominant role not dissimilar to that seen in Game 1. However, so long as Black stays true to the 'Dutch' spirit of his 9th move and plays on the dark squares with 16 ... a5 17 b5l:tae8 18 .l:tael e5!, he should emerge with a fair share of the chances. After all this emphasis on the positional factors, I would like, by way of addendum, to mention the simple 10... i.xg2!? 11 ~xg2 d6 intending to answer 12 'iY'f3 with 12... dxe5 13 'ii'xa8 'ii'xd4. With c4 dropping, Black's control of the centre is quite appealing. There is no guarantee of fun here either though. Probably White should prefer 12 lbd3!?, as usual heading for f4 although after 12... i.f6 this does not look worse than 1O...'t!i'c8 to me. Perhaps 9 ...c5 is the most solid choice of all. This rules out the immediate 10 d5? - 10 ...exd5 will then win a pawn as ... d4 hits the queen, refuting any standard strengthening of pressure on the diagonal. After the main moves 10 ltdl d6 (D) though, White can in fact reach a Benonitype structure.

16

CHESS EXPlAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

w

However, after 11 dS exdS 12 cxdS ii.f6 13 "ilkc2 l:!.e8 14 e4 tOa6! Black should not in any case feel especially threatened. Again it helps that the bishop has arrived on the 'Benoni diagonal' with tempo, and since White may well be obliged to take a further tempo out to prevent ... tOb4, the feeling that Black is developing with a healthy 'flow' is reinforced. Neither should the structure arising from 11 dxcS bxcS unduly worry Black. We shall revisit such a configuration from time to time. In general, the b-file and hopes for a well-timed ... eS enable him to claim his share of the play. The latter works well when, for example, a knight invasion on d4 is supported and promotes the right exchanges. A word of warning though - if White can also exchange light-squared bishops then Black should be cautious about the weakening of his dS-square which ... eS entails. For example, after 12 ii.f4 Wkc7 13 ~d3 the very direet 13 ... eS?! leaves Black susceptible to 14 tOgS!, when dS will be very weak if he acquiesces to 14... g6 and the d6-pawn chronic if he exchanges on gS. However, there is not much wrong with the simple 13 .. J~d8, and a subsequent ... h6 can be worth throwing in too. In general, once he has put some pressure on d6, White lacks pawn-breaks - since e4 is usually well met by ... eS - and hence any obvious plan. In general, Black too should be warned off a premature clarification of the centre with ... cxd4 as this can expose his d-pawn to unpleasant fire, especially given that his bishop would prefer active duties on f6. In some cases though, such an exchange can be legitimate - if White heads for an early e4, for example by 11 b3 ii.f6 12 ii.b2 tOd7 13 ~c2!? "fic7 14 e4, it does seem

right to head for 14... cxd4! IS tOxd4 a6! and a typical hedgehog structure. White tends to enjoy more space, but with that comes responsibility. He should constantly be on the lookout for breaks with either ... bS or even ... dS. It is probably fair to say that such positions are less likely to be given a pure '=' sign in the literature than those in which ... cxd4 is met by tOxd4 and an ensuing exchange of bishops on g2, but they also promise much more potential fun and counterchances for the defence. Once we have established that there is some case for both sides to maintain the central tension, a further scenario becomes important one where White exerts pressure on the d-file and all but forces a full opening of that file. Despite the symmetry, positions such as that arising after 11 b3 'iic7 12 ii.b2 ii.f6 13 'i'd2!? l:td8 14 dxcS dxcS do not look entirely harmless, especially as White can exploit his opponent's back rank to increase the pressure with IS "ilkf4!. It is known, especially from the Catalan, that after an exchange on f4, White's hold on eS is likely to count for more than the rather academic doubling of White's pawns. Similarly after the superior IS ... tOa6! 16 ~xc7 tOxc7 I find it easy to believe that a similar argument would count against an immediate exchange on f6. However, it is to me more surprising and very instructive that after the plausible 17 tOeS ii.xg2 18 Wxg2 Black should immediately clarify the minor-piece situation with the excellent 18 ... ii.xeS! 19 .i.xeS tOe8! 20 f4 f6 21 ii.c3 ~f7, when White's bishop lacks scope, he has few points of entry into Black's position and will struggle to increase the pressure, TimmanKarpov, Amsterdam 1980. This is typical of Anatoly Karpov's advanced positional understanding - he comfortably drew the game. We now return to 9 ... d6!? (D);

lO'itd3 Not just renewing the positional threat of e4, but also the serious tactical horrors of tOgS! However, since Black's reply not only stops both, but also raises the possibility of a subsequent ...ii.e4, it is not clear that this is the best square. White has a specific idea in mind, but the positional gains feel 'typical for the variation' and secured only at the cost of some time.

4 g3 .i.b7

17

10 ~c2!? looks a more natural version, with the option of answering 1O.. .fS with 11 d5!? Here too though, Il...eS! does not seem that bad. Again the poor bishop on b7 is compensated for by some prospects of counterplay on the kingside and by its not so tremendous opposite number on g2 too. Indeed, after 12 e4 Black has 12 ... .tcS! returning this piece to the fray very much in keeping with the 'Dutch'. I am not surprised to see that the great free spirit Bent Larsen has defended this position. It is also worth mentioning that the continuation 12 ttJxeS?! dxeS 13 d6 would be a rather inappropriate tactic. 13 ....txg2 14 dxe7 'fiixe7 IS Wxg2 leads to one of a number of positions in which White will slowly realize that the black knight coming to c6 is a more promising minor piece than his dark-squared bishop. Therefore, once again, it appears that 11 ttJe1 !?, as in the game, might be the best plan. In this case 11 ... .txg2 12 ttJxg2 eS?! can be well answered by 13 dxeS dxeS 14 e4!? - further evidence perhaps that c2 is the more stable square for White's queen. 10.•.f5 (D)

ll1We3 In the context of the game plan, this looks questionable at first glance since Black's queen is quite acceptably placed on cS. However, there are a number of opportunities to put pressure on e6, and preventing ... eS is sometimes worthwhile too. The immediate 11 ttJe1!? is interesting. Perhaps White was keen to prevent 11....txg2 12 ttJxg2 eS, although after simple development such as 13 .te3, he can perhaps still claim an edge since Black's minor pieces are not ideal for supporting any kingside aspirations. 11 ..:t!i'c812ttJel Probably best. If his 11th move had been motivated by any notion of exploiting the pin with 12 d5 here, Fridman was probably prudent to think better of it. 12 ....tf6! (but not 12... eS 13 ttJd4! heading for e6) is a good response, activating this piece safe in the knowledge that after either capture on e6 the pawn will be easily rounded up. Atalik mentions 13 ttJgS!? but advocates 13 ... .i.xgS! 14 ~xgS ttJd7! with the knight headed for f6, once again with every hope of more than matching White's dark-squared bishop. 12....txg2 13 ttJxg2 ttJc6!? 14 d5 Very tempting, but there are various tough positional judgements to be made at this juncture. Will a black bishop on f6 be a strong piece, or is it inevitable that he will have to settle for ... eS at some stage when the ongoing fluidity of the centre becomes unsustainable? Again, I do not find the 'bishop vs knight' scenario which could arise from the alternative 14 ttJf4 eS! IS ttJd5 .tf6 especially enticing for White. 14...ttJd815 'ii'd3 .tf616l:tbl a517 b3 (D)

w

B

w

18

CHESS EXPLAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

17•••e5 An answer to the question posed above. Black's previous move placed an important obstacle in the way of White's hopes of building some initiative on the queenside with b4. Now it is time to clarify the centre - to see why, just try to envisage a sequence of useful moves which does not involve this! Although the visual impact on the f6-bishop is not enticing, its white counterpart is short of truly appealing squares too, as is his knight, which would much prefer to be on c3 or thereabouts. Moreover, as we shall see, Black's hopes of generating counterplay on the kingside are quite realistic. 18 e4 fxe4 19 'ii'xe4 ~h3! 20 lL'le1 lL'lf7 21 lL'ln h6 22 ~d2lL'lg5! 23 .i.xg5 ~xg5 (D)

w

24l:.bel?! This is not so much a dubious move, as the inauguration of an ongoing misconception. Having exchanged his somewhat limited bishop for Black's knight, Fridman now appears to feel that he should be left with the superior minor piece. However, such a bishop is easily underestimated. Its current scope may be limited, but its potential s~ope may be much greater. In particular, its presence is almost guaranteed to render any attempted escape from White's passivity by f4 fraught with danger. 24lL'lxg5! admittedly renounces most hopes of this pawn-break, but White can secure the f-file with f3 and doubling behind on the f-file. This looks passive, but might prove quite impregnable. As so often in chess, one of the hardest skills is to realize when fighting for the advantage is no longer an option and equalizing should become the priority. 24••.l:lf7 25 l:!e2 26 lDel? (D)

:ars

Consistent with the belief I outlined a few moves ago, but still courting danger. 26 lL'lxg5! was in Atalik's opinion still equal.

B

26•••a4! There is always a pleasing element of paradox when the forces line up with obvious intent on one side of the board and then a significant blow is landed on the other. As so often in such cases, the really fine point is the interplay between the two wings, and between strategy and tactics. Here is a case in point. If White were able to respond safely with 27 b4?!, this opening of a second front would be mildly absurd. However, Black then has the marvellous shot 27 ... l:!.f4!! and if 28 gxf4 ':'xf4 29 ~hl ~g4+! 30 lL'lg2 ~xe2! neither 31 h4 .l:;Ig4! 32 hxg5 lhg5 with ... e4 to come, nor 31 lL'lxf4 .i.xf4 is remotely palatable for White. In both cases Black has a very strong initiative for his material; the latter is also a fine illustration of why his bishop's potential should never be written off. Hence the text-move, after which Black opens his second front and his progress is hard to beat off on both wings. 27 f3 axb3 28 axb3l:!a8! 29lL'lc2 h5! An immediate and appropriate response to White's dubious decision to remove his knight from the defence of his king. 30 J:tg2 h4 31 f4 liars! 32 lL'le3?! exf4 33 'iie6 fxg3! A brutal response to the rather desperate resource which a mixture of positional and timepressure persuaded White to try. 34 ~xh3 fails to 34... .i.xe3+ 35 J:tgf2 gxf2+, when Black will cause immense damage by manoeuvring a rook to the g-file, so White has little choice.

4 g3 j"b7

34 .l:txf7 Si.xe3+! 35 'ii'xe3 .l:1xf7 36 hxg3 hxg3 37 '6'el ? The last chance lay in 37 'iVxg3 'ii'xg3 38 lhg3 but with little time on the clock it is hard to reconcile oneself to such an unpleasant fate.

19

37•••:f3 38 :a2 ri;f7 39 l:te2 l:te3! 0-1 A pleasing final touch to a game which revealed that Black's kingside chances in these 'Dutch' formation games should not be underestimated.

Game 3

Jeroen Piket - John van der Wiel Dutch Ch, Rotterdam 1997 1 d4 tDf6 2 c4 e6 3 tiJf3 b6 4 g3 Si.b7 5 Si.g2 Si.e7 6 0-0 Although this is very much the main move, one can certainly question whether early castling is a genuine priority or merely the product of playing on auto-pilot. Hitherto, White has avoided the move tiJc3 because he is reluctant to permit the ... Si.b4 pin, but now that Black's Sth move has committed this bishop to the more modest e7, the immediate 6 tiJc3!? (D) merits examination.

B

g7 hanging, Black has to rethink. However, 9 ... tiJxd2 10 tiJxd2 still leaves him cramped, and 9 ...0-010 tDxe4 fxe411 'ii'xe4100ks a little dubious whether he chooses to recoup the pawn on b2 or dS (after ll...cxdS 12 exdS ne8). Plans involving the retreat ...tiJd6 might be best, but look a bit passive and all in all there is a degree of encouragement to check out 6 ... 0-0!? This time White has two reasonable tries to show that there is purpose to his delayed castling: a) 7 'ifc2!? It may seem curious to see this played voluntarily, given that in those later sections of the book dominated by 4 ... Si.a6 we shall so often see Black keen to provoke it. However, as usual, the specifics are the key, and here with tiJc3 already on the board, in addition to aiming for a quick e4, White is also ready to meet 7 ... cS with 8 dS exd5 9 tiJgS! (D) (as 9 tiJh4 bS!? gives counterchances).

B

Of course, there will be transpositional issues if Black chooses an immediate 6 ... tiJe4, but there are some intriguing ways for White to try to avoid heading straight back into Games 1-2. There is also the interesting question of whether Black should castle and invite White to show whether his early challenge for the e4and dS-squares really amounts to much. The main challenge to 6 ... tiJe4 arises from the fact that 7 Si.d2!? fS is met by 8 dS! Si.f6 9 'fVc2!, a move which was not available in the analogous case from Game 1 since simply capturing on c3 and dS would suffice. Here though with

Sti1l9 ... h6!? looks interesting since 10 tDh3 bS! 11 tiJf4 tiJc6 12 cxdS tDd4 13 'iVdl b4 14 tiJa4 Si.d6 IS 0-0 l:r.e8 16 e3 tiJbS appears attractive for Black since his pieces remain very active, Korchnoi-Stefansson, Reykjavik 2000.

20

CHESS EXPlAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

This also serves to remind us of the two drawbacks to White's strategy - on c2 the queen can be vulnerable to attack from Black's queen's knight and by delaying castling, White is just as likely to be the victim as the beneficiary of long-diagonal tricks - he sorely missed d6 ideas in the middle of all that! In fact, White can do much better with 10 liJxd5 ~xdS 11 ~xdSliJc6 12 ~xc6 followed by the calm 13 liJf3. However, I am not convinced that White's slight structural plus amounts to much - Black can play ... 'ii'd7-h3 and at least 'threaten to threaten' some counterplay. Of course, Black can try other 7th moves too. 7 ... dS is a bit better than usual with 7 'fj'c2 instead of7 0-0 on the board, but still not to many players' taste and similar to Game 4 in any case. 7 ... liJa6!? is more interesting, since Black aims to meet 8 0-0 with 8 ... dS 9 cxdSliJb4!, capturing on d5 with a piece while maintaining a grip on the e4-square. 8 e4!? d5! is also complicated and 9 e5liJe4! with ... c5 and maybe ... liJxc3 to follow has some appeal. Black can look forward to some play along the c-file. b) 7 d5 is also thematic but it is significant that after 7 ... ~b4! 8 ~d2 Black need not enter the murky world of 8 ... ~xc3?! 9 ~xc3 exdS 10 liJh4liJe4 11 cxd5, which looks quite harmonious for White, but can calmly utilize the weakened c5-square by 8 ... liJa6! 9 0-0 liJc5 and follow up with ... as to bolster this fine piece. The b7-bishop is not so healthy after, say, 10 liJe 1 !?, but his other minor pieces work well. The fact that such positions are probably playable for Black is a useful addition to his weaponry in the ... ~b7 lines. 6•••0-07 d5!? (D)

B

Already at this early stage of our survey of the Queen's Indian it will be apparent that such advances of the d-pawn have a very important place in White's repertoire of ideas. This case is special though for being one of the sharpest and most controversial. Quite simply, it is a genuine pawn sacrifice, the theoretical merit of which is still debated, but which undeniably offers dangerous attacking chances and also assists in illustrating some of the positive potential in White's position. 7 ...exd5 The principled reaction of course. However, Sergei Tiviakov, who has a penchant for ... liJa6 in many lines of the Queen's Indian, has made a decent shot at showing that with 7 ... liJa6!? it is possible to decline the offer - in a sense to play quite effectively around dS. Since we have already seen that 6liJc3 and 7 d5 was not too terrifying to the defence, this should have some plausibility. SliJh4 This move looks so natural now that it is curious to reflect that before its top-flight debut in the hands of Lev Polugaevsky in 1980, there were so many high-level games with 8 liJd4. The clinching argument is practical - the textmove gives d5 no respite and thus all but forces 8 ... c6, whereas the older move offers 8 ... liJc6 or even 8 ... ~c6 as respectable alternatives. S...c6 As usual, Black should be very reluctant just to allow White the kind of spatial plus which would ensue if he can simply recapture with the c-pawn on dS. Neither does 8 ... liJe4 9 cxd5 ~xh4 10 ~xe4! ~f6 11 'fj'c2 make too much sense. The b7-bishop lacks scope and White has the effective long-term threat of advancing in the centre with e4 and f4. 9 cxd5 liJxd5 Again this looks best. 9 ... cxd5 is motivated by holding up the advance of White's e-pawn, but such a structural concession ensures that if White can regain the pawn he will always enjoy a pleasant positional edge. White should probably avoid 10 liJf5?! liJe4!, but with 10 liJc3! liJa6 IlliJf5! liJc7 12 ~f4 he exerts a good deal of pressure, and always has a timely return of the knight to e3 to pick up the dS-pawn again. It

4 g3 iLb7

seems a bad deal to soak up so much initiative for the sake of a pawn that is in any case so compromised. 10 lLlfS (D)

B

10...lLlc7! This voluntary knight retreat is now rightly regarded as Black's best choice. He prepares to contest the centre with ... dS as quickly as possible, after which moves such as ... i.f6, and on occasion challenging White's imposing knight with ... i.c8, come into the frame. In addition the knight is not vulnerable to either e4-eS or i.gS, as it would be on f6. Alternatives merely serve to show what a dangerous practical weapon this gambit can be: a) 10... i.cs aims at a purposeful retreat of the knight to e7, where it will in tum challenge the strong knight on fS. However, after 11 e4 lLle7 White has the useful shot 12lLlxg7! t;xg7, prising open the black king, followed by 13 b4! recovering the piece. 13 ... i.xb4 14 ifd4+ should give ample play for the pawn. Perhaps 13 ... i.a6!?, with the idea 14 nel i.xf2+, is tougher, not so much because the loss of the f2-pawn constitutes any equivalent inconvenience to the white king, but rather because it assists, in conjunction with the all but compulsory ... f6, in carving out eS as a reasonably stable square for a black knight. Still, my instinct is to prefer White, even without investigating further whether, as seems quite likely, 14 bxc5!? i.xfl IS i.xfl might constitute very dangerous play for the exchange. b) 10 ... lLlf6 11 e4 dS offers White a choice between kicking Black's pieces back with 12 eS, and keeping the tension and inviting the sort

21

of opening of the position which is highly likely to enhance his lead in development. My feeling is that the latter should be preferable. 12 eSlLle8 13 'ii'g4100ks threatening, but 13 ... 'it>hS prepares 14 ...i.cS!, a useful resource made possible by White's very abandoning of the threat to open the centre. After 12 lLlc3!? dxe4, 13 i.f4?! lLld5 14 'itg4 g6 might just hold for Black, but 13 i.g5! leaves Black short of a good move. If 13 ... h6 then 14 i.f4! is a different ball game since 14... lLldS IS 'ii'g4! must be avoided at just about any cost. It may be that Black has to give up the exchange but although his two pawns could be good material value, White's initiative will be only partially neutralized. 11 e4 dS (D)

w

12 ne1!? Both this move and 12l2Jc3 make good sense, and there are several similarities. My view is very much the same in both cases. Black does best to keep the centre closed so far as possible, and for the same reasons White should probably avoid e5 unless it is linked with very concrete attacking threats. For this reason, I suspect that after 12l2Jc3, 12 ... i.f6! is a logical reply. Then 13 exd5 cxd5! 14 i.f4 lLlba6 15 :tel lLlcS!? looks quite playable for Black, while 13 i.f4 and 13 lIel are best met with 13 ... i.cS!, when White tends to have to play the very committal 14 g4 in order to release his e-pawn, whether to attack dS or to advance. Exchanging on fS is then by no means out of the question. White has to show a lot of initiative to compensate for both the pawn and his positional indiscretions! 12.••dxe4?!

22

CHESS EXPlAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

As I hinted in the note above, my preference is for avoiding this open centre when White enjoys such active piece-play. Even here, when White has e5 prepared, 12 ... i.f6!? still feels right. After 13 e5, 13 ... i.e7 14 'ifg4 g6 looks risky for the defence, but once he parries direct threats to his king, the closed centre makes it hard for White to apply further pressure. However, there is a case to be made for 13 ... i.c8!? too. 14 exf6 i.xf5 15 fxg7 ne8! 16 nxe8+ 'fixe8 may not be intuitively appealing for Black, but he is super-solid in the centre, boasts a passed dpawn with potential, and the g7-pawn tends to block White's attack more than enhance it. 13 ttJc3 13 'j!Vg4! was the older move, when 13 ... i.f6 14 ttJc3 i.c8 15 i.xe4 also results in a strong initiative although 15 ... i.xf5 and ... g6 offers chances to defend. However, with the centre open there are several ways to achieve promising piece-play. 13•••i.cS! 14 ttJxe7+ 'iIIxe7 15 i.xe4 (D)

B

Although it would be problematic to prove a clear plus for White here, ifhe could force positions of this type it would do little for the popularity of 4 ... i.b7. Such an open position should offer realistic chances against the black king

and opportunities to 'bailout' with enduring compensation if the flrst wave is rebuffed. 15.••i.e6 16 i.f4 :dS 17 'iIIh5 h6 IS .:te3 White has forced a weakening of Black's kingside and as Van der Wiel shows, the sacriflce 18 i.xh6 is already sufficient for a draw. However, at this stage the decision to play for more seems a very fair one. IS.•.ttJeS 19 i.f5?! Neglecting one of the basic rules for handling such an initiative - any move which assists the opponent's task of catching up in development should be made with great caution. Putting pressure on e6 is understandable, but it can wait. 19l:lael! is much stronger- then i.f5 becomes a real threat. It is possible that Piket did not like 19 ... ttJf6, but 20 'iIIh4 keeps the pressure as 20 ... g5? 21 'fixh6 gxf4 22 gxf4 is suicidal with White's rook ready to swing to g3. 19••• ttJd7 Accepting the invitation! 20 l:tae1 ttJf8! 21 'fif3 nacS 22 h4 'iff6 There is nothing visually spectacular in such a process of disentangling, but the swing in fortunes is very dramatic. White's assault on e6 lacked a second dimension, and indeed there is a singular absence of further targets in Black's position now that his knights stabilize the defence of his third rank so well. What happens next is, I suppose, the product of desperation caused by this sudden reversal. 23 i.c2 ttJg6 24l!xe6?! With nothing for his pawn, White lashes out but achieves little except a shortening of his agony. 24•••fxe6 25 .l:!.xe6 'iIIxe6 26 i.b3 ttJxf4! The simplest since after 27 i.xe6+ ttJxe6 Black has an awful lot of wood for the queen. 27 gxf4 .l:td5 2S ttJxd5 'iVg6+ 29 'it'h2 cxd5 30 'iIIxd5+ 'it'fS 0-1

Game 4

Stanislav Savchenko - Luis Causa European Clubs Cup, Kallithea 2002 1 d4 ttJf6 2 ttJf3 e6 3 c4 b6 4 g3 i.b7 5 i.g2 i.e7 6 0-0 0-0 7 .l:1el!? (D)

The thinking behind seeking a useful 'semiwaiting move' here was detailed at some length

4 g3 .i.b7

in the chapter introduction. In the last decade the text-move has been clearly established as the most serious of these, with Vladimir Kramnik once a regular aficionado. In a sense developing the queen's bishop looks more natural, but 7 b3 lacks punch, while 7 .llf4 might be based on a belief that Black's desire to avoid playing 7 ... d6 runs deeper than is in fact the case. Here 8 d5 seems to fail to 8 ... exd5 9lZJh4 lZJh5! while 8lZJc3lZJe4 is pretty much business as usual.

B

7 l:tel though thrives on a further tactical level. 7 ... d6?! is here not so apposite since in addition to the very direct 8 d5!? - probably a more promising pawn sacrifice in general with ... d6 on the board - White has 8 lZJc3 lZJe4 9 'fi'c2! with the intention to meet 9 ... lZJxc3? with 10 lZJg5!, when the rook on el is ideally placed for preventing ... lZJxe2+, which was so effective at an analogous moment in Game 2. 7.••dS This move is out offavour against 7lZJc3, but the argument is that 7 l:.el is tangential enough to the main battle that this acceptance of a static centre in the style of the Tartakower QGD is much more enticing now. One reason that I am dealing with this in relative detail is that the same position with a3 instead of :tel will arise in Chapter 4. Like it or not, this structure is of great importance. Here too though, Black is not forced down this path. Again 7 ... lZJa6 is playable, and the inexhaustible creativity of Viktor Korchnoi may have struck again with 7 ... aS!? (D). The first point to note is that the immediate tactical priority which 7 ... d6?! above so clearly

23

w

ignored is here addressed - the flight-square for the rook on a7 ensures that 8 lZJc3 lZJe4 9 ~c2 can be safely answered with 9 ... lZJxc3. More than safely in fact, since another of7 ... a5's key virtues, its control of the b4-square, would force 10 bxc3. However, there are other points. The move contests b4, and might discourage White from the d5 advance since ... as also highlights Black's claim to the c5-square. Its debut saw 8 lZJc3 lZJe4 9 lZJxe4 .llxe4 10 d5 lZJa6 II lZJd4 .txg2 12 'iitxg2, when Black reminded us that even White's innocuous 7th move may have drawbacks through 12....tb4! 13 .td2 e5! 14 .txb4 (Dautov-Korchnoi, Swiss Cht 2005) and now either recapture on b4 offers Black a very reasonable position. Certainly food for thought! 8 cxdS exdS 9 lZJc3 lZJbd7 The alternative development is 9 ... lZJa6, but strangely this often transposes in the event that Black continues with ... c5 and after dxc5 recaptures on c5 with his knight. It has independent value if he prefers to accept the hanging pawns by 10 .tf4 c5 11 dxc5 bxc5 - compared with the next note Black benefits at once from having an extra defender (the queen on d8) covering d5. However, White has options on how to increase the pressure, and the manoeuvre 12lZJe5lZJc7 13 lZJc4!? (exploiting the long diagonal yet again) 13 ... lZJe6 14 .te5!, with lZJe3 on the agenda, is one visually pleasing and promising idea. 10 .llf4lZJe4 This is less common than the immediate 10 ... c5 11 dxc5 (D). Now: a) l1...bxc5?! is dubious in view of 12lZJh4! lZJb6 13lZJf5 .l:te8 14lZJb5 ~d7 15lZJbd6 .txd6 16 lZJxd6 with a clear advantage for White in

24

CHESS EXPLAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

B

Kramnik-Ribli, Groningen PCA 1993. The bishop-pair can have a field day against these hanging pawns. b) 1l...ltJxc5! 12 l:kl ltJce4 and now 13 ie5! icS 14 id4! looks like the right way to control the key d4-square. White's plus was not dissimilar to that achieved in the main game after 14.....e7 15 e311fd8 16 a3 'ife8 17 b4 i.f8 18 ~d3 l:Iac8 19 llc2 'iVd7 20 l:tec 1 in Chuchelov-Werle, Bundesliga 2004/S. The text-move, generating the option to flick in ... tDxc3 at the right moment, is appealing. The theoretical assessment has to rest on the note to Black's 12th. 11 'iVc2 c5 12 dxc5 (D)

can try 16 b4! with complicated play, meeting 16... i.d4 with 17.i:td1. 13c6! A zwischenzug that scores in terms of both time and structure over the simple recapture on c3. Black simply has less piece activity than is usually regarded as adequate compensation for an isolated d-pawn. 13••.i.xc6 14 'ii'xc3 l:1c8 15 ':ac1 tDc5 16 i.e5! Both a good square in itself and a sensible route to the blockading square d4. This move features quite heavily in the variation, and the underlying assumption, that Black is reluctant to weaken his e6-square by playing .. .f6, seems to be quite sound. 16•••ltJe4 17 ~d3 i.c5 18 i.d4 i.b7 19 l1edl11e8 20 e3 'i!i'd7 (D)

w

B

12••• tDxc3?! This inaccuracy leads to a safe plus for White with depressingly little in the way of counterchances. 12 ... ixcS! is the right way. Following 13 tDxe4 dxe4 14 tDgSl:tc8!? IS 'ifbl tDf6, 16 tDxe4 allowed Black to exploit the weakness of f2 to gain good play by 16 ... ixe4! 17 i.xe4 Wid4! 18 if3 ~xf2+ 19 ~hl in M.GurevichVan Wely, Bundesliga 2000/1. However, White

21 i.xc5 :xc5 The choice between accepting the isolated pawn on dS or the hanging pawns on dS and cS is typical for the variation as a whole - and is often a genuinely tricky one. In either case Black has reason to regret the reduction of material - his counterplay is diminished and his weakness is more easily defined as the endgame approaches. Hence Black's lack of enthusiasm for 2l...bxc5 22 tDd2! tDxd2 23 ':xd2, when in the absence of dark-squared bishops, a3 will be an excellent square from which White's queen can intensify the pressure. 22 tDd4 'i!i'a4 It seems odd to hasten the exchange of queens in this way, but the more natural 22 ... l:tec8 is well met by 23 .l:[xc5, when again White will generate excellent pressure on the pawns after

4 g3 i.b7

23 ... bxcS by re-routing his knight with 24liJe2! liJf6 2S liJf4 (Ftacnik). 23 'ii'b3 'iVxb3 24 liJxb3 .l:txc1 25 liJxc1 This looks unnatural, but Savchenko wants to play with one rook still on the board. He can afford to cede the c-file temporarily since if 2S ....l:.c8 26liJb3, Black's weak back rank prevents an invasion on c2. 25•••'it>f8 26liJe2liJf6 27liJe3 lId8 28 f3! Excellent and undogmatic play by White. There is no direct way to bring more pressure to bear on dS so White prepares both to gain space on the kingside and to bring his king to the centre. 28•••lIe8 29 g4 h6 30 'it>f2 .u.e5 31 i.n liJd7 32 h4 liJe5 33 l:!.d4 a6 34 i.e2 b5 35 a4! Suggesting that Black's pseudo-activity with ... bS has really only served to create a further target. However, defending such positions with little hope of any active play is the speciality of only a tiny few. 35••• bxa4 36 lIxa4 a5 37 :d4 (D)

B

25

Necessary to defend the c4-pawn, but the passivity of this bishop will contrast unfortunately with the barely limited scope of White's knight. Meanwhile White's patient build-up on the kingside will soon bear fruit. 43 f4! g6 44 g5 hxg5 45 hxg5 'ii?e6 (D) This lets the king in further, but 4S ... 'ii?c6 could be met by 46 liJdS followed by liJe3, which is also very bleak for the defence.

w

46 'ii?e5! f6 47 gxf6 ~xf6 48 liJd5+ 'ii?f7 49 'it>b6 i.e8 50 'ii?xa5 i.g4 51 'ii?b4 i.e2 52 'it>e5 1-0 Black has no play whatever, while White can methodically round up c4.

Conclusion

37 .••liJe4?! Perhaps another understandable error, but this time a very serious one. This liquidation will clarify just how poor the b7-bishop becomes once e4 blunts its impact on the long diagonal. Moreover, c4 will be very weak and Black's dark-square vulnerability will also come into sharper focus - indeed there is no stopping White's king heading straight for d4. 38 i.xe4! l:!.xe4 39 .u.xe4 dxe4 40 e4! ~e7 41 'ii?e3 'ii?d6 42 'ii?d4 i.a6

4 ... i.b7 looks basically as solid as ever, whether pitted against the 'traditional' 7liJc3 or White's more radical though quite contrasting tries featured in Games 3 and 4. It is probably encouraging to know that 7 :el does not oblige Black to head for 'static' ... dS structures - he has a fair choice of viable 7th moves. On the other hand, I suspect that 7 d5 may scare some players off regardless of its unclear theoretical merits. To my mind the relative absence of strategic variety in Games 1 and 2, and the danger of reaching positions there that tend to be a bit 'drawish' but are still microscopically better for White, are stronger arguments, though by no means necessarily decisive ones, for the greater popularity of 4 ... i.a6.

2 4 g3 i..a6: Introduction and Alternatives to 5 b3

1 d4lZ'lf6 2lZ'lf3 e6 3 c4 b6 4 g3 .ta6 (D)

w

Introduced by the great Aron Nimzowitsch, and initially regarded as just another of his mildly subversive eccentricities, 4 ....ta6 has now been established for more than two decades as the main line after 4 g3. This in tum renders the diagram position above arguably the most important in the entire Queen's Indian. There is in a sense an inherent aggression to 4 ....ta6 - it attacks a key pawn. It is quite a celebrated anecdote that Nimzowitsch's first opponent got around the dilemma of how to defend c4 by failing to notice that his opponent had deviated from the previously 'compulsory' 4 ... .tb7 and thereby proceeding calmly with 5 .tg2? Since after 5 ... ~xc4 either 6lZ'le5 or 6 lZ'lfd2 is well met by 6 ... ~dS, nobody has ever really claimed that this gambit might have validity. However, it is a nice testament to the subversive character of 4 ... ~a6 back in the 1930s. So what is the more durable point of 4 ... i.a6? In the first place the move is based upon a very simple premise, namely that White has no way of defending the pawn on c4 that does not involve some slight but unwelcome concession. The subject of the next chapter, 5 b3, probably

involves the least concession and provides the most secure support for the pawn, but Black also hopes to show that it makes a rather minimal contribution to White's own development - Chapter 3 will consider how well he fares. This chapter will concentrate on piece moves that cover c4. Game 5 will examine 5 lZ'lbd2, while Game 6 will explore the various queen moves. Taking a broader comparative view of queen's pawn openings in general, it may seem quite strange to think of these various queen moves or the innocent developing 5 lZ'lbd2 as some kind of a 'concession'. Surely these moves are frequently made voluntarily and effectively? To get to the truth of why they are not ideal here, it is worth recalling one general principle and one specific variation. The general point once again is to see the central battle in the Queen's Indian as not just for the e4-square, but also for d5. The specific line arose in the last chapter after 4 ... ~b7 5 i.g2 c5?! when Black's attempts to reach some kind of Hedgehog structure proved problematic after 6 d5! exd5 7 lZ'lh4 - one in a plethora of small tactics which remind us that the undefended status of the b7 -bishop is more than just an academic point. Mter any of the defences of the c-pawn under discussion though (with the exception of 5 'iVb3, which keeps the piece in touch with the dS-square, but which has other problems based upon the queen's potential vulnerability), the plan with ... c5 becomes one of Black's valid options. 5 lZ'lbd2, 5 'iVa4, and 5'ilYc2 all have in common that they reduce influence on the d5-square quite directly, and due to this Black gains an extra option. However, the impact of these moves is by no means entirely negative - they all develop, and may introduce fresh ideas of their own. 5 lZ'lbd2

4 g3 i..a6: INTRODUCTION AND ALTERNATTVES TO 5 b3

may lose touch with dS, but it does cover the e4-square and in turn raises the issue of 6 e4!? as a response to S... cS. The result is yet another interesting structure to consider. This brings us, I believe, to the real secret of the popularity of 4 ... .ia6 - the fascinating range of structures and consequent richness of strategy which it can generate. The four games of Chapter I with 4 ... .ib7 were, it is true, far from uniform. However, much of the interest was generated at White's behest by more radical ideas such as 7 nel and 7 dS. The basic pattern of Black's play - fianchetto, emphasizing control of dS and e4 followed by occupation of the latter when necessity demands - was admirably solid but afforded limited scope for variety, let alone for stamping individual taste on proceedings. 4 ....ia6 by contrast can be the

27

prelude to a number of quite diverse structures and ideas. In addition to lines with ... cS, Black may also switch to more 'classical' chess, challenging for the central squares with pawns usually ... dS in this case - trying to show that a6 is a decent square for the traditionally 'problem bishop' of the Queen's Gambit Declined. Alternatively, there are lines where Black simply returns the bishop to b7, nursing the 'concession' that he has forced on his opponent. Of course, such choices do come at the price of a little greater complexity, but the increased demands are very much upon White too, and the player with the better understanding of a few key positions should do very well. For this reason I shall give full coverage to each of the important structures in the games of Chapters 2 and 3.

Game 5

Jan Timman - Zhang Zhong Wijk aan lee 2004 1 d4 .!Dr6 2 .!Df3 e6 3 c4 b6 4 g3 .ia6 5 .!Dbd2 (D)

B

Developing, defending c4 and preparing the move e4. At the same time though, we may well concede the dual claim that d2 is slightly more passive than c3, and that this piece is not competing for the critical dS-square. Still, the onus is on Black to show that these considerations are not merely theoretical. This move has never achieved the popularity of S b3, but has tended nonetheless to enjoy a steady following, and

continues to be respected. As will become a pattern across the two chapters on 4 ... .ia6, Black has serious choices, and picking the right strategy to highlight the weaknesses of White's respective Sth moves requires careful consideration. 5 •••.ib4!? In a sense, this move looks like a return to the spirit of the Nimzo-Indian. Black is ready to exchange his dark-squared bishop for a white knight that contests e4 in order to increase his influence on the central light squares. I believe the passage of time has probably rendered 'classic hypermodernism' a permissible oxymoron for such play - gradually the radical has become mainstream, and the efficacy of this strategy is now all but universally accepted. However, this move might appear to mix a little curiously with 4 ... .ia6, which was certainly not sold to us as heralding a strategy of controlling the light squares with pieces. In fact, it is of great importance that the move renews the threat to c4 and again White lacks a cure-all response. Before we begin the hunt for the best option

28

CHESS EXPLAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

though, let's look at Black's other main choices from the diagram above. Given my comments in the introduction, the reader might feel a little let down if 5 ... c5!? were not to be a reasonable choice here. Indeed, this does work quite well if White proceeds routinely with 6 i..g2, to which Black replies with 6 ... ttJc6!: a) White seems to get no real advantage through 7 lDe5 lDxd4! 8 i..xa8 'ilkxa8, which is regarded as pleasant for Black. There are in a sense few 'special factors' here so we can conclude that a secure centre pawn is likely to be good compensation for the exchange where it is White's light-squared fianchettoed bishop that is the unfortunate minor piece. b) 7 dxc5 presents Black with the choice between recaptures on c5 which will crop up throughout the section. Here, I suspect that after 7 ... i..xc5 White can justify the position of the knight on d2 by developing the rest of his queenside with a3, b4 (with tempo) and i..b2an 'extended fianchetto' which all looks rather harmonious. Therefore I prefer the other recapture 7 ... bxc5!? (D).

w

This results in a pleasant version of a structure with which we shall become quite familiar. Black has compact centre pawns which control a lot of important squares, a half-open b-file, and if White fianchettoes with b3 and i..b2, the advance of the a-pawn to a4 combines well with this to create counterplay. However, my main feeling about the knight on d2 here is that it doesn't point White in the direction of a very clear plan. Note that if White subsequently tries to advance e4, it is by no

means out of the question for Black to advance his own pawn to e5. Then both players can boast a serious domination of their respective squares (d5 for White, d4 for Black) but it is Black who has a knight ready to hop there! One word of warning for the defender. Beware in this structure of rushing in with ... d5. It is true that the hanging pawns on d5 and c5 which then arise from cxd5 exd5 have their place - they are by no means regarded as a weakness in all positions and can with the right piece configuration spearhead genuine dynamic counterplay. However, here they could easily justify the position of the knight on d2 since with a half-open c-file and a diagonal open from b2 to f6, it is relatively easy to give the c5-pawn a hard time. However, the other point of 5lDbd2, preparing an advance ofthe e-pawn, should not be forgotten. Mter 5 ... c5 White has a more testing possibility in 6 e4!? as after 6 ...cxd4 7 e5! Black's knight will be kicked about quite a bit and this tends to yield White a fair bit of space. However, the position after the typical 7 ... lDg4 8 h3 lDh6 9 .i.g2lDc6 10 0-0 lDf5 is still not so easy to assess. White usually continues his pawn 'expansion', perhaps even on both wings, but these pawn advances do leave some weaknesses in their wake and in the final analysis in variations such as 11 a3 i..e7 12 b4 .i.b7 13 g4!? lDh4 14 tiJxh4 i..xh4 15 tiJe4 i..e7 16 i..g5! 0-0 (16 ... i..xg5? 17 tiJd6+!) 17 i..xe7 tiJxe7! 18 'iWxd4 tiJg6 19 f4 "VJJic7 (A.Evdokimov-Alekseev, Russian Ch (Krasnoiarsk) 2003) White has various 'soft spots' like f4 and c4 which he must keep covered, and these tend to balance the fact that the pawn on d7 could undoubtedly become a target. Black should even look for enduring chances to undermine his opponent with a well-timed ... f6. This may suggest that White's 13th move is open to question, but the knight on f5 is a big beast and recapturing on d4 without first driving it away is likely to lead to a lot of exchanges. These usually do no favours to the player nurturing a space advantage so I suspect Black is quite safe there too. Interestingly, there is another route by which Black can attempt to reach a structure related to the hedgehog family, namely by first flicking in

4 g3 iLa6: INTRODUCTION AND ALTERNATNES TO 5 b3

5 ... i.b7 6 i.g2 and only then 6 ... c5. However, whatever these bishop moves achieve from Black's standpoint, it is not to prevent 7 e4! (D).

B

The tactical point is that 7 ... liJxe4? is very powerfully countered by 8 liJe5! d5 (Black's position is too loose to sustain counter-tactics: if 8 ... liJc3?, then 9 fi'h5! g6 10 ~h3 nets significant material gains) 9 1li'a4+ liJd7 10 cxdS exdS 11 liJxe4 dxe4 12 i.h3! and Black is disastrously tied up. Therefore 7 ... cxd4 is more prudent, when White has an interesting choice: a) 8 e5 is again tempting, but reveals one significant defensive idea which the bishop on b7 does yield Black, namely that here there is no need for the f6-knight to be booted around as 8... liJe4!? is now available. Moreover, practice suggests that the e5-pawn can become a target after 90-0 liJxd2 10 i.xd2 ~c7!? (rather than the immediate 1O ... i.xf3, a paradoxical exchange which is well motivated by a desire to tie White to the defence of his e-pawn, but which suffers against the imaginative 11 'iVxf3 liJc6 12 'ii'xc6! dxc6 13 i.xc6+ 'ii'd7 14 i.xd7+ 'iftxd7, when it is in fact Black's d4-pawn which feels vulnerable, Salov-Karpov, Wijk aan Zee 1993) 11 i.f4 i.xf3 12 i.xf3liJc6 and White is forced to confront the reality that picking the d4-pawn back up will come at a price. The simplest is 13 i.xc6 dxc6 14 'iVxd4 nd8, when Black has no weaknesses and is fully equal, Piket-Karpov, Dos Hermanas 1995. b) 8 liJxd4 i.c5! 9 liJ4b3 i.e7 reaches a hedgehog with both White's knights looking a bit uncomfortable.

29

c) 8 O-O!? therefore has something to offer. 8... liJxe4 9 liJe5! is still very unpleasant, so Black tends to head for a more typical hedgehog with 8 ... d6 9 liJxd4. His problem is that while c3100ks a more natural square for White's queen's knight than d2 in such positions, they are still not to everyone's taste for Black, and in particular, recent games have unearthed for White a plan of advancing his a-pawn which can claim to make a virtue of the position of the d2-knight. One example was Roiz-Nyysti, Rethyrnnon ECC 2003: 9 ... liJbd7 10 .:tel 'ii'c7 11 a4! a6 12 as i.e7 13 liJ2b3 ':'c8 14 axb6 liJxb6 15liJaS and the piece under question has found a very positive path. We shall revisit hedgehog positions of various types and I shall have a good deal more to say about them in the course of the book. Suffice it to say here that the difficulty with them is frequently the construction of a clear plan. Even if White's manoeuvre here should more properly be seen as only a partial plan, to have such a clear-cut, uncomplicated improvement of the position available is something of a rare treat! So, after quite an extensive tour of Black's options, back to 5 ... i.h4 (D), a continuation for which I still have to admit a sneaking preference.

w

6 'ii'c2 A logical defence of c4, but open at least to the objection that it allows Black a fairly easy implementation of the rather harmonious plan we shall see in the game. For that reason, squares which would not be hit by the manoeuvre ... i.b7-e4, and which in tum attack the b4-bishop, certainly come into consideration.

30

CHESS EXPLAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

In fact, they (amongst others) do not seem to represent an improvement: a) 6 e3 was recently tried by Tregubov, but the objection to this for weakening the f3square and representing 'developmental inefficiency' in terms of the fl-bishop's future are only one grade lower than for 5 e3?! on the previous move. Such moves should be dealt with using general principles, and 6 ... 0-0 7 a3 iLxd2+ S 'ii'xd2 d5! should be one reliable answer. b) 6 'iWa4 c5! 7 a3 i.xd2+ S iLxd2 cxd4 (S ... iLb7!? changes nothing unless White believes there is something to exploit, when 9 dxc5 liJe4! seizes the initiative as Khalifman points out) 9 iLg2 iLb7 10 0-0 iLc6!? 11 'ii'dl .txf3 12 i.xf3 lbc6 (this strange manoeuvre again, by which Black threatens to hold on to the d4-pawn, and pretty soon White feels obliged to 'return the favour') 13 iLf4 0-0 14 .td6 .l:!.e8 15 iLxc6 dxc6 16 ~xd4 c5 and bishop vs knight seems pretty meaningless with this solid symmetrical structure, Dizdar-Sax, Croatian Cht 1996. c) 6'ii'b3 c5! - again this handy pawn thrust both protects the bishop and exerts pressure on d4. Following, for example, 7 iLg2lbc6 S 0-0 0-0 9 'iWa4, Black seems to be doing fine in terms of development after either 9 ... iLb7 or even 9 ... 'ii'cS. He should just be careful to answer any dxc5 with ... iLxc5 to avoid leaving his bishop stranded on h4. 6 •••i.b7! (D)

w

Job done! Having encouraged the queen to c2, Black clarifies his intentions of returning to the strategy of controlling e4 with this piece

and seizes the chance to do so with gain of tempo. 7 iLg2 i.e4! 8 'ii'b3 iLxd2+ It would now be questionable to delay this exchange with S... c5. In the first place, securing the bishop on e4 by exchanging in this way is desirable in itself so there is no reason to delay it artificially. Even more importantly though, after 9 dxc5 bxc5 10 0-0 iLxd2 11 i.xd2, Black has committed himself to a plan prematurely, and taken on a quite unnecessary weakness on d6. 9 iLxd2 0-0100-0 d6 (D)

w

As I hinted in a previous note, the hallmark of Black's strategy is above all flexibility. According to circumstances, the appropriate path to counterplay could involve any plausible pawnbreak: ... c5, ... d5, ... e5 or even ... b5. However, the first priority is to develop the remaining pieces while ensuring that the bishop remains well cemented on e4. Development of the b8knight to d7 is tidy, and helps to ensure that White will find no simple automatic plan. Since exchanging light-squared bishops is not on White's agenda - his main trump is the bishoppair after all - challenging the excellent bishop on e4 often involves some rather contorted manoeuvres, as we shall see. First, the shadowboxing! 11 llfdllbbd7 12 .l:.ac1 a5 13 'iWe3 .l:!.e8 14 iLc3 file7 15 i.h3 (D) At first sight this looks a little bizarre, but it is virtually the only way to try to evict the e4bishop without allowing the exchange of lightsquared bishops, which White rightly rejects. However, any such decentralization does give

4 g3 iLa6: INTRODUCTION AND ALTERNATIVES TO 5 b3

31

Black a clue that the time to make his claim to some play in the centre is nigh.

w B

15•...i.b7!? I recently reached this position in a game of my own. I had been aware that the tricky thing here was the lack of an automatic plan for either side, but the extent of this truth was only really brought home by experience. I decided that I wanted to keep my bishop on e4 until it was actually obliged to move, and opted for the slightly odd 15 ... h6!? However, after another waiting move from my opponent, 16 :tel, I realized that against 16 .. :i¥f8?! in particular White has the very annoying resource 17 lDe5!. Hence there seems to be no keeping the fine square any longer. Mter 16 ... .i.b7 17 .i.g2 ~e4 18 .i.h3, which I took to be a declaration of peaceful intentions, I opted for a strange and radical plan: 18 ... .i.h7!? 19lDd2 c6 20 .i.g2 dS. I doubt this is 100% correct, but the idea of finding a post for the bishop before challenging in this classical manner in the centre is very much in the spirit of 4 ... .i.a6 at least. Moreover, after 21 'ii'f4 b5 Black does appear to have found an alternative route to decent counterplay, although sadly I later overestimated this and lost control in Clemens-Wells, Hoogeveen 2005. 16lDh4 "firs! 17 f3 c5! (D) A well-timed break, coming at precisely the moment when White's minor pieces seem struck by a particular lack of coordination. However, since the move is in fact a pawn sacrifice, Zhang Zhong's judgement is particularly praiseworthy as the fierce initiative that ensues is by no means self-evident from the diagram. It seems a fair bet that in a few moves White was to regret

his acceptance and that here 18 'iWd2 would have been more prudent, although Black's presence in the centre is certainly quite healthy after 18...dS. 18 dxc5?! bxc5 19 'iWd2 d5 20 .i.xa5?! Also questionable. Given that the f3-pawn does for the moment a decent job of ensuring that the long light diagonal will not be a serious headache, 20 cxd5 exd5 21 i.xd7 lDxd7 22 .i.xa5 would have been the lesser evil. Given White's congestion, there is simply a case for clearing some wood. Nonetheless after 22 ... lDe5!, there is still a sharp disparity in the scope of the remaining minor pieces. 20•••d4! 21 b4 h6 22 a3 g5! Not only emphasizing that White's pieces are treading on each other's toes, but also intending to switch to direct attack using this pawn to soften up the long diagonal. 23lDg2 "fig7 24lDel g4! 25 ~g2 e5 (D)

w

The success of Black's concept hardly needs detailed analysis. A quick survey of the board reveals near total control of the centre, an initiative on the kingside, and a continued lack of

32

CHESS EXPLAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

hannony among White's pieces which ensures that making any use of his queenside pawn preponderance will remain a problematic matter. 26fxg4 This might look suspect with regard to the safety of White's king, but there is some sense in forcing the issue and attempting to bring his knight back into the game rather than simply waiting to be rolled over by ... e4. 26••• i.xg2 27 ttJxg2 ttJxg4 28 1:.0 e4 29 ~f4 e3 30 'ii'f5 ttJdf6 31 ttJf4? Zhang Zhong's annotations instead criticized White's previous move, preferring the activation of the white knight via h4. However, I feel that the primary culprit is the fact that the textmove allows White's queen to be driven back away from the kingside with gain of time. Strangely there seems to be a case for the greedy 31 'ii'xc5!? since after 31...tiJe4 32 ~f5 ttJgf2 33 c5!? the white queen is still in contact with the besieged kingside, while he will always have some aspirations on the other wing. 31 ....l:te5 32 'ii'c2 ttJe4 33 i.c7l:tee8 34 ttJd5 ttJgf2 35 b5 h5! White's defence of g3 looks less than watertight and this additional weapon will land rather quickly. Indeed, Black needs to make haste since his opponent's passed b-pawn offers chances to make a race of it. 36 a4 h4 37 'itfg2 (D) 37.. Ae6?! It's a shame that after such a great build-up, Black misses the key to crashing through on g3 - 37 ... hxg3 38 hxg3 1:.e5!! when 39 i.xe5

B

'ii'xe5 40 :gl 'ii'xg3+ 41 'itff1 ttJd2+! 42 ~xd2 'iWxgl + 43 xgl exd2 results in decisive material gains. 381:.g1?! An understandable reaction, but by taking away g 1 as a retreat for the king, this provokes a new and overpowering breakthrough. 38 b6! would have been much more testing, since Black seems to have no better way than to switch to the idea from the previous note, but 38 ... hxg3 39 hxg3 ':'e5!! 40 i.xe5 ~xe5 41 l:.g I! is more problematic since the analogous endgame is not winning with White's pawns a tempo further up the board. Fortunately, he has the calm 41..5~j>f8!, evading the pin and again threatening ... ~xg3+. There is nowhere for the white king to hide as 42 'itff1 'iWh5! and 42 ttJf4 'ii'g5 43 'itfh2 c;,t>e7! with ... l:.h8+ to come are equally devastating. 38...d3! 39 exd3 h3+! 40 'itf0 ttJd2+ 0-1 With a crushing combination of ... 'iWg4+ and ... ttJf3+ to round off a crisp attacking display.

Game 6

Lubomir Ftacnik - Gyula Sax European Clubs Cup, Saint Vincent 2005 1 d4 ttJf6 2 ttJf3 e6 3 c4 b6 4 g3 i.a6 5 'ii'a4 The quest for a painless defence of c4 continues! The text-move develops and makes a useful contribution in that the d-pawn is pinned and dl is freed for a rook to come quickly to the centre. However, there is also a downside in that the move does not directly contribute to the struggle for either the e4- or d5-squares, and as

we shall see, the queen may become vulnerable to attack. Other queen moves to some extent fit a similar pattern, but at least it seems possible to draw up some kind of hierarchy. 5 'ir'c2 is not that unusual, but it fails to convince. The problem is that after the thematic 5 ... c5! drawbacks to the move become evident firstly in that the idea

4 g3 .i.a6: INTRODUCTION AND ALTERNATNES TO 5 b3

familiar from the previous game, 6 e4 cxd4 7 eS (7 4:)xd4 i.cs also fails to inspire), is inappropriate now because of7 ... i.b7! with good play. Hence White should prefer 6 i.g2, but after 6 ...4:)c6! 7 dxcS Black can choose between 7 ... bxcS, with a pawn-structure which is becoming quite familiar in a perfectly pleasant version, and 7 ... i.xcs 8 a3l:!.c8! with fast, purposeful development and against 9 b4 i.e7 10 b5? the convincing resource 1O...i.xbS 11 cxb5 4:)b4L 5 ~b3!? (D), however, looks a good deal more to the point and has recently enjoyed a spell of considerable popularity. Once dismissed as a square too vulnerable to attack by ...4:)c6as, the story is now recognized to be a lot more complex.

B

One factor in the move's favour is that the queen continues to keep an eye on dS, and the development probably shows more positive features than any of the alternatives in the event that Black contests the centre in 'classical' style with 5 ... dS 6 cxd5 and now recaptures with 6 ... exdS 7 i.gS!? i.e7 8 4:)c3. Then 8 ...c6 is well met by 9 i.xf6! i.xf6 10 .i.g2 planning 0-0 %:tel and e4, which activates White's three remaining minor pieces very effectively. Black's 5th move makes more sense in conjunction with 6 ...'i!VxdS!? since the exchange of queens offers White limited prospects after 7 'ii'xd5 4:)xdS! followed by ... c5. It is much more interesting to accept the loss of tempo that 7 'iVc2! entails and aim at proving Black's queen vulnerable in tum. This seems quite plausible in the event of7 ... cS 8 4:)c3 'iVc6 9 dxc5 i.xc5 10 .i.g2 i.b7 11 0-0. White will quickly bring

33

rooks to the c- and d-files with chances to show that both Black's queen and his cS-bishop are slightly uncomfortable. White always has the option to trade light-squared bishops by playing 4:)h4 too. However, 7 ... 4:)c6!? is interesting since the attack on d4 can offer some potential for counterplay - 8 i.g2 ttJxd4! 9 'ii'a4+ 'i!VbS! works for Black due to the mate threat on e2. Hence White should prefer 8 4:)c3 4:)b4 9 "a4+!? Vi'd7 10 'ii'b3. I prefer White here since he tends to have the more coordinated forces once the early momentum of the play abates. Black pinpoints no drawbacks to White's queen move by playing 5 ...i.b7 6 .i.g2 cS, which is well met by 7 d5! exdS 84:)h4! since 8... dxc4?? 9 'iVe3+ makes serious material gains but also as the check on e3 will be a useful resource even after the more prudent 8 ... g6. The immediate S...c5!? may be rather better and after 6 dS can lead to familiar enough Benonitype positions. However, here too, with White's queen's knight not yet committed to c3, there may be a role for a check on e3. It may be helpful to compare the analogous position with a3 instead of g3, considered in the notes to Game 18, but this case looks a fair proportion of a tempo better for White! For all these reasons, 5 ... 4:)c6!? still seems to merit its main-line status. White needs to respond to the threat of ... ttJaS and although 6 i.d2 was trendy for a time, this not only looks clumsy but 6 ... i.b7! (threatening 7 ... 4:)xd4) 7 dS ttJe7! should be an effective response since 8 dxe6 fxe6 strengthens Black's centre at no apparent cost. Hence the main move is 6 4:)bd2, with a further interesting choice for Black: a) 6 ... dS!? looks awkward with both minor pieces on a6 and c6 giving a rather loose impression. However, Anand's patronage of the black cause should give pause for thought and in fact, direct attempts at exploitation of these pieces seem to rebound. 7 'iWa4 i.b7 84:)eS can be coolly met with 8 ... ..id6 after which ... 'ii'd7 tends to be a sound reply almost regardless of how White times the move 4:)xc6. However, Ponomariov's subtle 7 .i.g2 'iVd7 8 0-0 .i.d6 9 'ii'c3! sets more enduring problems since 9 ...0-0 10 ttJeS! should be avoided and even the more cautious 9 ... ..ib4 10 'ii'c2 .i.xd2 should slightly

34

CHESS EXPlAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

favour White so long as he interpolates the 'zwischenzug' 11 cxdS!. b) After 6 ... lZJa5, 7 ii'a4 is playable, but 7 "ir'c3!? (D) has largely taken over as the main topic of debate.

B

bishops with 9 e3 is rather too modest, but after discovering that 9 iLg2 0-0 10 b4 allows Black the paradoxical retreat 1O... lZJc6! 11 cxb6 i.bS! 12 b7 l:tb8 13 a3 lZJe4 14 'iVe3 lZJd6!, securing good squares and rather embarrassing White's queen, in Wells-P.Carlsson, Gibraltar 2006, I suspect 9 b4!? might be the subject of future investigation. We now return to S 'iVa4 (D):

B

The majority of games here have continued with 7 ... cS 8 dxcS bxcS 9 e4 iLb7 10 eSlZJe4 11 lZJxe4 iLxe4, leading to a position with clearly defined weaknesses and with them identifiable plans based on 'desirable exchanges' for both sides. White wants to target Black's d6-square, but must beware that his own d4 does not become a nice outpost for a black knight. To this end, White is interested in exchanging darksquared bishops, while Black is often interested in exchanging his light-squared bishop for the knight on f3, but only if his own knight is no longer stuck on the side but already en route for d4. Riazantsev-Adams, Bastia rpd 200S illustrates these points: 12 Jt.g2 iLe7 130-00-0 14 :tel! i.g6 (of course at this stage 14... it.xf3 would leave the as-knight hopelessly stranded) IS it.gS! (neatly exploiting the 'exposed' knight on a5; Black is understandably loathe to reduce to a battle between the raking bishop on g2 and a bishop on g6 whose target is less clear) lS ... lZJc6 16 iLxe7 fiixe7 17 h3! (now though, there existed the idea ... iLhS and ...iLxf3 targeting d4, so White nips it in the bud) 17 .. J:tad8 18 :tad 1 d6 19 ~e3 dxeS 20 lZJxeS lZJxeS 21 fiixe5 and although Black has liquidated his d6 weakness, White retains an edge. Recently though Black has also unveiled the unlikely-looking move 7 ... dS!? when 8 cS must be right but White has a difficult choice after 8... .te7!. Simply exchanging light-squared

5..•it.b7

There are alternatives here. Although the unlikely gambit S... c6 6lZJc3! bS?! 7 cxbS cxbS 8 lZJxbS fiib6 9lZJc3 has not stood the test of time as 9 ... iLb4 10 i.g2 0-0 11 ~dl! looks a rather straightforward recipe, Black can, even against S ~a4, use ...c6 as a preparation for ... dS. One notable idea which has inspired various imitators was seen in Salov-Karpov, Brussels WCup 1988 where after S... iLe7 6lZJc3 0-07 .tg2 c6 8 0-0 dS 9lZJeS Black played the nice freeing manoeuvre 9 ...bS! 10 cxbS cxbS l1lZJxbS 'iWe8! 12 lDc3 ~xa4 13lDxa4 iLxe2 14 ne1 i.bS!, leading to a queenless middlegame in which Black has good light-square play but needs to prevent White from gaining a grip on the cS point. Chances are about equal. 6 iLg2 c5 (D) As discussed in the introduction to this chapter, the viability of this move is a direct consequence of White's S 'iWa4. The queen has lost touch with the dS-square, and hence the response 7 dS? would simply lose a pawn. However, the assessment of a4 as a posting for the queen in the ensuing play remains to my mind far from clear to this day. 7 dxc5

4 g3 iLa6: INTRODUCTION AND ALTERNATIVES TO 5 b3

35

w

w

White wants to retain the light-squared bishops for some time, and correctly surmises that since c5 is not an ideal permanent home for his opponent's bishop, he can afford to assist his development in this way. The alternative is 7 0-0 cxd4 S ttJxd4 i.xg2 9 'it>xg2. White can argue he has gained the tempo 'iVa4 over a type of Hedgehog position known to theory and this will assist him to create pressure on the d-file. However, the queen's position is as controversial here as throughout the section. I like the position after 9 .. :ii'cS 10 ltd 1 a6 11 ttJc3 'iVb7+ 12 f3 i.e7 since 13 i.g5 ttJc6! makes sense with the black king still in the centre, while after 13 i.f4, White must reckon with 13 ... 0-0 14 l:td2 l:tcs!, developing the rook in preparation for ...d6, which will threaten ...e5 followed by the knight retreat ... ttJeS to hold d6 and then switch attention to White's potentially vulnerable c4pawn. 7•••i.xc5 It looks natural to accept the invitation to develop a piece! However, 7... bxc5!? as usual promises a decent version of a reasonable structure in which Black can hope for some chances on the b-file so long as he is careful to neutralize White's d-file pressure. It has also given rise to an extraordinary trap after the plausible S 0-0 i.e7 9 ttJc3 0-0 10 l:!dl 'tlVb6 11 i.f4 d6 12 .l:.d2 ttJc6!? which enjoys the rare distinction of having snared a whole series of players over 26OO! The latest case was Istratescu-N.Pedersen, Kavala 2002: 13 ..txd6? i.xd6 14 l:!xd6 'ifi'xb2 15 .!:[bl 'iixc3 16l.1xb7 ttJd4 (D). The continuation 17 ttJxd4?? (it is not too late for 17 'tlVdl, though after 17 ...1:.adS! IS ':xdS :txdS 19 ttJxd4 cxd4 20 .l:i.xa7 ~xc4

Black is beautifully centralized) 17 ... 'iHel+ IS ..tn ttJe4! 0-1 will be familiar to connoisseurs of this kind of thing. Needless to say, White can do better! 12 .l:i.abl is one idea, but the intended b4 break is covered with little inconvenience by 12...ttJa6. White can also try to exchange queens with 12 'i!ib3 since Black should avoid opening the a-file for his opponent's use. However, after 12 ... .l:td8 13 'iVxb6 axb6 14 ttJb5llieS 15 a3 h6 16 l:tac 1 ttJc6 17 ttJe 1 ttJaS IS i.d2 ..txg2 19 ~xg2 ttJc6 20 e4llia7, as in Vallejo Pons-Anand, Linares 2005, Black has no automatic means to free his game since neither the ... d5 nor the ... b5 break is easily achieved. However, it is also very difficult for White to increase his pressure. 8 ttJc3 0-0 9 0-0 i.e7! 10 .l:i.dl ttJa6 (D)

w

White's speedy access to dl discourages the customary hedgehog development with ...d6 and ... ttJbd7, but the knight will arrive on c5 with gain of tempo all the same. 11 i.f4 ttJc5 12 'iVc2 ~c8! (D) The right piece for this square! There is a specific argument against 12 ... .l:tcS?! as the reply

36

CHESS EXPLAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

13lbb5! puts pressure on both the a7-pawn and the d6-square with unpleasant consequences.

w

However, removing the queen from the opponent's half-open file makes sense in general terms, is a good preparation for a later ... d5 and also defends b7, which is an important prelude to the simplifying ... lbce4. It also prepares to meet 13 lbb5 with 13 ... lbce4! when White probably has nothing better than a draw by repetition with 14lbc7 ~b8 15lbb5, etc. 131:ac1!? White can also try to stop Black's next by 13 :d4. The drawback though is that without a white rook on the c-file, 13 ... d5! can be achieved rather painlessly. After 14 cxd5, 14 ... lbxd5 IS lbxd5.i.xd5 16l:!c1 'i!i'b7! gives White nothing much, while even 14...exd5!? comes into consideration since the c5-knight can be usefully headed for either e6 or e4. 13•••lbce414lbd4! lbxc315 'ii'xc3 (D)

B

15•••.i.xg2?! As played, this seems to jettison a tempo in comparison with the usual and more logical

15 ... a6! and while it may not be the type of position where tempi are absolutely critical, it feels like a step in the wrong direction. The point is that White appears to have no better idea than 16 1ib3 with the intention of anyway provoking 16 ... .i.xg2 17 'it>xg2 'i!i'b7+ 18 'iff3. Black can enter the ending with an extra move, but with lbb5 prevented, while he can also consider 18 ... lbe4!? 19lbb3 f5, after which Van Wely-Chuchelov, Bundesliga 2003/4 ended abruptly as Black's aggressive 20 lbd2 g5! all but forced White to give perpetual check with 21 lbxe4 fxe4 22 'ifg4! h5! 23 ~xh5 gxf4 24 'iWg6+ ~h8 25 'iWh6+ and so on. If this holds up, it could be a handy method of evading a slightly dreary ending. 16 ~xg2 a6 17 'tif3! White is first to the long diagonal after the exchange of bishops. There is not much more to be had than a small spatial plus, but it is instructive to see how White successfully nurtures this. 17...1:a718 a4 'tib719 'ifxb7 .l:hb7 (D)

W

20 f3 '::'c8 21 e4 d6 22 lbe2 lbe8 This looks a bit passive too. In the version of the ending with an extra tempo, Black has tended to arrange ... .!Ic6 and ... lbd7 which at least keeps the possibility of ... lbcs alive. Now if 22 ...l:c6, maybe even 23 b4!? needs to be reckoned with. Against either knight move, White does well to maintain his kingside grip by preventing ... gS. 23 h4! ~f8 24 b3l:tc6 25l:tdJ i.f6 26l:!cdl i.e7 27 h5! Moments where one side is able to improve his position while the opponent is virtually

4 g3 i.a6: INTRODUCTION AND ALTERNATIVES TO 5 b3

reduced to repeating moves with no goal in mind are a sure sign that the space advantage is counting for something. 27 .• J~c5 28 h6 g5 29 .ie3 ~c8 30 Wh3 ~c6 31 ttJc3! Insuring against ... b5, and also defending the e-pawn to rule out such resources as 31 f4 ttJf6!? 32 ttJc3 g4+. 31..J:[c8 32 f4 gxf4 33 gxf4! ..tf6 34 tDa2!

37

B

(D)

B

It is worth preventing ... ..txc3 and ... b5. In general though, in the absence of a pin on the c-file, ... b5 is not a problem. 34 ... b5, for example, can be strongly met with 35 cxb5 axb5 36 a5! and the powerful a-pawn will be a major new worry for Black. 34.....te7 35 ..td4 ..tf6 36 ..tf2 Again a slight but sure improvement of the position. 36•••e5 37 fxe5?! ..txe5 38 ttJh4 ttJf6 3911e1 b5 40 cxb5 axb5 41 as .ic3 Superficially it looks as if Black has broken out of his chains rather well. In fact, the tactics all work for White and the pin on the c-file will prove decisive in spite of the loss of his e-pawn. This naturally raises the question whether 41...ktbc7 would have been better, although 42 .ig3 seems to neutralize any real counterplay, after which the passed a-pawn is a tremendous trump card. 4211c1 ttJxe4 43 ..td4! :bc7 44 ttJd5 (D) 44•••.ixa5

Or 44 ... .ixd4 45 ~xc7l'l.xc7 46 l:.xd4! ':c5 47 a6!, when Black is strangely helpless to impede the a-pawn at all. 45 ..tg7+ ~e8 46 ttJxc7+ :xc7 47 nxc7 .ixc7 48 l:td5! b4 49 .l:!.d4 ttJc5 50 :xb4 Once this pawn falls, and White is once again the proud possessor of a passed pawn, the technical task is not especially difficult. 50•••Wd7 51 :f4 We7 52 b4 d5 53 IUS ttJe6 54 'it>g4! d4 55 .if6+ e8 56 l:td5 ..tb6 57 ~f5 ..ta7 58 ~e4 ..tb6 59 J:td6 .ie7 60 .l:!.a6 1-0

Conclusion My feeling remains that none of 5 ttJbd2, 5 ~3 or 5 'iY'a4 are quite equal partners with 5 b3, but they all have some merits and Black would do well to be prepared for them. My objection to the critical position at move 10 in Game 5 is, from White's standpoint, the difficulty of finding a good plan while Black has a plethora of plausible pawn-breaks. Still, it is none too easy to handle for either side - certainly not the desperate experience which the game was later to become for White. Similarly Game 6 became a torture for the defender, but 15 ... a6! should be a clear improvement and even 7 ... bxc5 a tempting option. In fact, my sympathies perhaps remain with 5 ~3. Not for nothing has the line 5 ... ttJc6 6 ttJbd2! ttJa5 7 'iVc3 become so topical. I think there could be plenty more to discover here for both sides.

3 4 g3: The Modern Main Line 4 ... ~a6 5 b3

B

In the introduction to Chapter 2, I have already discussed at length the idea that by playing 4 ... i.a6 Black is hoping to show that White has no 'concession-free' defence of c4. However, I suggested at the same time that S b3, the subject of this chapter, might come the closest. As well as providing c4 with rock-solid support, the move can only in the most academic sense be accused of creating any real weakness. It is true that in Game 8 we shall actually see Black use the b3-pawn as a target for the advance ... a5-a4, but this is very much the exception. In general, the objection to S b3 should be no stronger than that as a developing move it is not the most incisive. It is perhaps as a result also by far the most popular, especially at the highest levels where it has featured pretty regularly from the late 1970s to the present day. It has an enviable reputation for being fairly solid and relatively risk-free while still retaining a bit of sting. So what are the key elements to Black's strategy here? Before answering that, it is worth pointing out a move which, in contrast with Chapter 2, will barely feature at all- the break ... cS. In fact, the usual argument against this -

that White can simply advance the d-pawn - is not the point here since 6 dS?, for example, is met with 6 ....!i:JxdS! and 7 .. JIi'f6. Rather it is a positional argument. If Black seeks a hedgehog set-up, White will be able to capture on d4 with the knight or if the bishop has already retreated to b7 then with the queen. In either case, b3 will look like an unambiguous gain compared with mainstream theory. Instead there are two key elements to Black's strategy. First and foremost is the crucial check on b4. This appears in some form in all the games of this chapter, and is the crux of the appraisal of S b3 as an imperfect developing move. After all, if White could simply castle and follow up with i.b2 it would be very difficult to make the claim that S b3 was somehow a move White would rather be without. Quite simply, Black disturbs any hopes White may have of a straightforward fianchetto on the queenside by dragging his bishop to d2 - usually not with the idea of exchanging it, but merely to misplace it. The second key element is a return to the 'Classical' means of contesting the centre. It is only Game 8 in which, by returning the bishop to the long light diagonal, Black makes the radical, even impertinent, claim that S b3 is completely worthless. In the rest of the chapter Black tries to make a virtue of the a6-square in conjunction with the good old traditional move ... dS as his means of contesting the e4-square. Hence we shall see play which resembles the Queen's Gambit, generally in its Closed Catalan incarnation. Admittedly the main line of Game 7 gives this a radical and tactical twist not to mention the quite separate and rather interesting strategy which the note about S... bS injects into the play there. However, there is a

4 g3: THE MODERN MAIN LINE 4... i.a6 5 b3

fundamental strategic consistency across the substantial meat of Games 9-12. In this regard the importance of the move ...c6 as a preparation for ... dS can scarcely be overstated. In contrast with much of the rest of the book (including Game 7) it is generally not a promising option for White to exchange pawns as a response to Black's ... d5. The reply ... cxd5! robs his position of an extraordinary element of its dynamism, a point emphasized, I hope graphically, early in Game 10. I think there is a tendency in the literature to understate this key concept and the extent to which it is implicit in so much of the chapter. The 7 tDc3 of Game 9 (following 5 ... .i.h4+ 6 iLd2 .i.e7) is itself in no small part about being ready with e4 to pre-empt Black's ideal ... c6 and ... d5 set-up. Games 10-12 have in common the theme of Black putting pressure on c4, while his opponent responds by defending it with tDbd2, whether straight away on move 9 or by fIrst exchanging a pair of knights.

39

The rest of the chapter is dominated by one other critical question: how can Black continue to fInd a role for his bishop on a6 given that White resists the exchange on d5 and sets about organizing his own play in the centre with e4? In the notes to Game 10, it is arguable that simply exchanging on e4 and redeploying his bishop back on b7 is quite viable and that only the dryness of such a strategy speaks against it. However, the extra interest of Games 11 and 12 is that this simple recipe of meeting e4 with ... dxe4 tends to fall short - hence Black has to explore other strategies, which tend to range from radically preventing it, to freeing his game with ... c5, to trying to intensify the pressure on c4 by timing the move ... b5 as a response to e4. All this leads to rich and varied play which, despite some variations in which over-analysis has been an undeniable consequence, continues to attract the interest of the world's best. '

Game 7

Garry Kasparov - Boris Gelfand Novgorod 1997 1 d4 tDf6 2 c4 e6 3 tDf3 b6 4 g3 iLa6 5 b3 d5!? This has never really attracted a great following, but considering how sharp the main lines are, and how close to the edge much of it looks for Black, it is perhaps more surprising that the line has not suffered a knockout blow either. Black's idea here will become clearer as we go on. Suffice it to say that compared with other QGD Exchange-type structures he is hoping to benefit from not yet having committed his king's bishop. Moreover, by playing ...d5 immediately, he forces White to take a possible ... dxc4 seriously. In the early 1980s, a still more radical attempt to force White to pay fresh attention to his c4-pawn burst onto the scene, and this is also well worth a look. One of the virtues of 5 ... b5!? is that there is not much mileage in the attempt to ignore it. After 6 iLg2?! bxc4 7 tDe5 Black has the useful shot 7 ... iLb4+!, when after 8 iLd2 (8 'ifilfl d5 9 bxc4 0-0 has occurred

several times, but can only be very comfortable for Black since castling by hand is both inconvenient and time-consuming here) 8 ... cxb3 the threat of ... b2 nets Black a pawn. It is true that with 9 axb3 iLxd2+ 10 'iVxd2 d5 11 tDc3 White has some compensation based upon fast development, the c-file and the c5-square in particular. However, somehow this seems to fall into the category of sub-optimal gambits where a pawn is given up for little more than a decent shot at winning it back! Therefore White should acquiesce in Black's desire to modify the pawn-structure and seek piece-play to compensate for Black's central majority after 6 cxb5 .i.xb5 (D). It is easy to see the appeal of this line, especially if Black is keen to compete for the full point and thus wants to create imbalance. The exchange of White's c-pawn for the b5-pawn raises the possibility that the hugely important d5-square will prove a fairly safe haven for

40

CHESS EXPLAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

w

'strategic purity' of Black's idea, back towards a pawn contest in the centre. The most testing line is possibly 8 0-0 ttJbd7 9 ttJc3 SLa6 10 ttJe5!? (D).

B

Black's minor pieces. It also opens the way for Black to add pressure to the centre with the break ... c5, after which he may emerge with a majority of pawns in the centre. Nonetheless, there remains a suspicion that the immediate dynamics of the piece-play may be less in the defender's favour. Although 7 ttJc3?! is well met with 7 ... SLb4 and yet again a minor-piece exchange that enhances Black's central control, his path is less clear against the more consistent and patient 7 SLg2; e.g.: a) 7 ... c5 makes broad strategic sense, but the specifics are not ideal after 8 0-0 SLc6 9 SLa3!. This forces Black's development in a less harmonious direction since he would like to avoid the exchange on f8, which follows a premature release of the tension. A typical continuation therefore is 9 ... ttJa6 10 ttJbd2 SLe7 11 dxc5! ttJxc5 12':c1 ttJa6 13 SLxe7 "ilxe7 when White can play 14 e4! with a pleasant position (as in Barkhagen-Agrest, Swedish Ch (Linkoping) 2001), since neither 14 ... ttJxe4? 15 ':xc6! nor 14 ... SLxe4?! 15 ttJxe4 ttJxe4 16 ttJd2 is remotely acceptable for the defence. b) 7 ... SLc6 is also in keeping with Black's strategic ambitions, and may be combined with a plan of advancing the a-pawn to soften up White's queenside pawns. However, after 8 0-0 a5, while 9 ttJc3 is still quite well met with 9 ...i.b4! and yet again prospects of an exchange which will fit in with Black's light-square plans, White can probably do better with 9 i.g5!? SLe7 and only then 10 ttJc3 with the plan of playing e4, to which end an exchange of minor pieces on f6 may very well be justified. c) 7 ... d5 may therefore be the most reliable, but it certainly marks a turning away from the

Since 1O ... ttJxe5? is very powerfully met by the brutal 11 dxe5 ttJd7 12 ttJxdS! exdS 13 "iVxdS ttJb6 14 "iVc6+! "ild7 15 lid I, Black should prefer one of the following: cl) 1O... SLd6 11 ttJc6 "iVc8 12 a3! (a great knight on c6, but its future also needs securing) 12... 0-0 (Beliavsky-Topalov, Madrid 1997). Here I think White is better after 13 SLf4 "iVe8 14 ttJb4! SLb7 15 ttJd3!. It might seem strange to take four moves manoeuvring the knight to a square, one of the virtues of which is its influence over the spot from which it started! However, the additional control of c5 is vital too, and it is impressive that White's manoeuvre was almost entirely accomplished with gain of tempo. c2) 10... c5 11 SLf4 J::tc8 12 ttJa4 SLbS 13 ttJxc5 ttJxc5 14 dxcS SLxcS 15 b4! SLd6 (not IS ... SLxb4? 16 "ilb3) 16 a4 SLxe5 17 SLxeS SLc4 18 "ild4 and White's strategic gains looked the more relevant in Onishchuk-Mateo, Calvia OL 2004. The conceptual breakthrough here, I think, is to realize that the ... cS break is not always the end of Black's problems. Here White utilized his more purposeful development to prove his queenside majority much more mobile than his opponent's. Still, it must be admitted that it is the excellent expansion 15 b4 that brings his position to life, and without the specific tactics upon which it depends, it might be a different story. Back to the main game position after the sharp S... dS (D).

4 g3: THE MODERN MAIN LINE 4... i.a6 5 b3

w

41

w

6~g2

Theoretically at least, I think there is no need for White to avoid the main line (i.e. the textmove), but it may be a sensible practical choice against an opponent who relishes the tactical complexity of the main line. Moreover, we shall be fairly enthusiastic in general for the QGD Exchange-type structures that arise when White exchanges on dS and his opponent is obliged to recapture with the e-pawn. 6 cxdS!? shifts the game into more positional channels and leaves Black a choice: a) 6 ... lDxdS cedes the centre for relatively limited compensation. I like White after 7 e4!? ~xf1 8 ~xf1 lDf6 9 'iVe2 cS 10 ~b2 cxd4 11 ~xd4lDbd7 12 ~g2 ~c7 13 lDc3 'ii'b7 14 eS lDdS IS 'ii'e4 since Black had little in exchange for the isolation of his d-pawn in VeingoldVolke, Calvia open 2004. The move 13 ... ~b7 may appear to be the culprit, but with the cand d-files open, White's lead in development spells some problems for Black's queen in any case. b) 6 ...exdS looks more solid. A large part of Black's case seems to be that after 7 ~g2 he has at his disposal the manoeuvre 7 ... ~b4+ 8 ~d2

serious option since 12lDbS ~f8 followed by ... c6 represents no concrete progress for White. White should also take seriously the option of playing ~f4. An exchange on f4 can mean a real hold on the eS-square, but .. :fie7 will tend to be an option in reply. In other words, these positions are rich in options for both sides and are ultimately a matter of taste. 6...dxc4!? The sharp play that ensues from this has generally been the attraction for players venturing S... dS. Other moves will tend to lead to play similar to that found elsewhere in the chapter. However, it is important and instructive to note that the activity which Black can generate with the immediate 6... cS?! is not sufficient for equality. The hanging pawns which follow from 7 cxdS exdS 8 0-0 lDc6 9 lDc3!? look distinctly vulnerable. White is flexible enough to target the dS-pawn directly, and after, for example, 9... ~e7 10 dxcS bxcS II .i.gS :c8 12 :c1! Black already experiences some discomfort since if 12... d4?! 13 iLxf6 iLxf6?! 14lDe4 the cS-pawn will drop. 7lDe5 (D)

~d6!? (D).

The square d6 is a little more active than e7 and may help to prevent lDeS. Typical lines such as 9 0-0 0-0 10 lDc3 :e8 11 :el leave a good deal of flexibility for both players. White can perhaps meet 11...c6?! with the plan of 12 ~gS combined with e4, but there is better common sense behind 11...lDbd7!? when 12 ~gS loses its force due to 12 ... h6!, when the knight is ready to recapture and keep a hold on the key e4-square. Moreover, 11.. ..i.b7!? is also a

B

42

CHESS EXPLAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

At first sight Black's opening of the uncontested long light diagonal looks distinctly reckless. However, not for the first time, the check on b4 proves a useful counter-blow, spearheading a whole series of tactical resources.

7 ....Jtb4+ 8 cJm.! I have contrasted this variation with the analogous but inferior S... bS 6 i.g2?! covered above on the straightforward grounds that here the long diagonal is much harder to block and can thus cause Black significant embarrassment. However, the lines do have in common that S i.d2 is met with S... cxb3! when neither 9 i.xaS nor 9 ttJc6 measures up after 9 ... b2! and even 9 axb3 i.xd2+ 10 'it'xd2 ttJdS looks like only minimal play for a pawn. 8...i.d6! (D) Having displaced the white king, this withdrawal with tempo provides a useful instance of counterattack as the most effective form of defence. S... c6 is no longer seen as quite respectable. For once greed is probably the order of the day since Black's compensation after 9 ttJxc6 ttJxc6 10 i.xc6+ ~e7 11 iLxaS 'ii'xa8 12 f3 Itd8 13 iLa3! does not seem quite sufficient. However, for anyone of a nervous disposition 9 ttJxc4 is also quite playable.

w

eS and still maintaining the threat to a8, is also critical. Black should play 9 ... i.xeS 10 dxeS ttJg4, but instead of the huge complications to which 11 h3 leads after either ll...ttJxf2!? or 11...ttJxeS 12 iLxaS c3, White can try the eminently reasonable 11 i.b2! ttJd7 12 ttJxc4 iLxc4 13 bxc4 ttJgxeS 14 'ii'd4! (Ftacnik) with no need to cash in on the exchange but rather enjoy the excellent compensation for a pawn.

9•.•ttJdS 10 e4 White seizes the chance to establish his pawn-centre before Black can consider preventing it by means of ... fS. Given much of what has been said about the struggle for e4 being at the centre of the Queen's Indian, it might be supposed that the opening has been a fairly clear-cut failure for Black. In fact, White's advantage is far from overwhelming, not least because the position of his king is genuinely inconvenient, even after he has solved the immediate problem of the a6-fl pin. Also, having failed to hinder White's central ambitions on the light squares, Black can try to initiate a second round of combat and set up some kind of blockade, in which connection a later .. .iLxc4 may be a useful exchange. Interestingly, 10 ttJxd6+ is probably weaker since 1O... 'ilVxd6!? followed by ... ttJc6 and .. J:tdS offers Black active piece-play and specific threats against the d4-pawn. 10...ttJe7 (D)

w

9 ttJxc4 White in turn shows wisdom in his sense of restraint. It is not too difficult to appreciate that 9 .txaS?! iLxeS will yield Black very good value, since the threat to d4 (and through it to al) affords no time to retreat the bishop from as, and it will therefore be vulnerable to entrapment when ... c6 appears on the board. However, the ambitious 9 ttJd2, indirectly defending

lli.b2 Two separate pins conspire to ensure that 11 eS? fails again to 1l...i.xeS! 12 iLxaS ~xd4 and although White can claim an extra exchange with 13 'iVxd4 i.xd4 14 ttJc3 i.xc3 IS

4 g3: THE MODERN MAIN LINE 4 ... i.a6 5 b3

43

l:tbl the errant bishop will as usual be embarrassed by 15 ... c6!. 1l••• liJbc612liJd2 (D)

think White might also have considered the immediate IS dS!? 16 h5 (D)

B

B

12•••0-0 The fact that some months after this game the greatest openings expert in the history of the game chose to switch sides and defend the black cause can hardly be ignored. Interestingly he deviated here with 12... e5!? a switch to a pure dark-square strategy, more in the spirit of his beloved King's Indian! After 13 d5 liJd4!? 14liJf3 c5 15 'if;gl ~xc4!? 16 bxc4 0-017 h4 liJc8 18 ~h3 l1e8 19 'i.ti>g2 ~f8 20 l:.c 1?! liJd6! Black could claim quite a success in Khuzman-Kasparov, Tel Aviv simul 1998 since the power radiated by his blockading knight is pure, classic Nimzowitsch. However, White should have taken a leaf out of his opponent's strategy manual and seized the opportunity on move 20 to exchange a bishop tangential to the main struggle for a knight at the centre of it: after 20 ~xc8!, there is much less to offer against White's spatial plus. 13 ~gl b5 14liJxd6 cxd6 Of course, 14 ... 'iVxd6 15 eS is now quite unsatisfactory as the cS-square would become a real headache for the defence. 15 h4!? 'ii'b6 Perhaps this was Black's best chance to switch the play to an entirely fresh structure with IS ... d5!, when 16 eS ~b6 17 liJf3 f6! looks like a reasonably healthy French. Black will miss the dark-squared bishop, but with the f-file opening, White must be especially careful that he organizes his king's position in time to give f2 secure cover. For precisely this reason I

16••• h6?! Kasparov's own marking and in a pure chess sense no doubt correct. However, it is not hard to sympathize with Boris Gelfand's reluctance to grab the d-pawn at precisely the moment when Garry Kasparov's trademark h-pawn hits home! 17 d5! liJe5 ISliJf1! A very elegant and instructive piece reorganization. Not only will the knight be well placed on e3, the bishop is headed for d4 where, in addition to its own good health, it adds security to White's most questionable piece - his king. The advance f4 also enters the equation. IS•••b4 19 ..td4 'ii'aS 20 liJe3 J::tac8 21l:th4 l:1c7 (D)

w

22~d2!

A striking and instructive moment of restraint. Just as it appears White is well prepared to drive away Black's best minor piece with 22

44

CHESS EXPLAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

f4, he opts instead for the apparently modest text-move. Specifically, Kasparov mentions that 22 f4 lDd3 23 .in e5! 24 .ixd3 exd4 is only slightly better for White since 25 .ixa6 would be met with the annoying 25 ... dxe3!. However, there is a general point too. 22 'i¥d2! is far from modest - it introduces a threat of a3 as well as adding spice to the idea of evicting the knight by the alternative means lDg4. Black's response smacks of desperation and he never looks likely to make much of either his c-pawn or White's very temporary disorganization.

22•.J:tc3 23 .ixc3 bxc3 24 ~d4 exdS 2S exdS 'ikc7 26 'ifdl l:lc8 27 .ie4 'ii'b6 28 l:lf4 .ib7 29 %:tel 'iWaS 30 ':c2 'it>h8 31 .ig2 i.a6 32 lh4 ~b6 33 lDc4! This spells the end of the c-pawn, and with it the game.

33....ixc4 34 bxc41DfS 3SlIxc3lDd4? 36 cS Since if 36 ... dxc5, then 37 ~xd4. It would not be surprising if Boris Gelfand was in severe time-trouble by this stage.

36...l::txc5 37 ~xd4 1-0

Game 8

Loek van Wely - Viorel lordachescu European Chi Ohrid 2001 1 d4 lDf6 2 c4 e6 3 lDf3 b6 4 g3 .ia6 S b3 .ib7!? (D)

w

A striking move because it makes so explicit the claim that 5 b3 does so little for White's cause that Black is even happy to grant that move for free!

6 .ig2 .ib4+ As discussed in the chapter introduction, this check is a key resource to displace White's bishop and thus prove that b3 was no unambiguously positive developing move. In later games it will be associated with a retreat of the piece on the next move. Here though, as we shall see, while Black may not be in a rush to exchange bishops, he is ready to consider it provided it is on his own terms.

7 i.d2 as!?

Black sets out the terms on which he is willing to agree to an exchange of bishops: the half-open a-file and a pawn on b4 are likely to prove handy assets. Experience suggests this pawn is seldom vulnerable but rather quite an irritant to White, controlling c3 and in particular taking access to it away from the bI-knight. In addition, there is the possibility that once the immediate tension between the bishops is resolved by some other means, a sub-plot of7 ...a5 may be revealed. The further advance of the apawn might spell counterplay, with b3 as the target. As we shall see, this idea is of much more than mere academic interest, and will constitute a key resource for the defence in the main game. Black does have a second related idea which also seeks to exact a price for any exchange on b4 while at the same time putting pressure on the centre, namely 7 ... c5. However, this time, after 8 0-0 0-0 there seems to be a much stronger case for obliging with the exchange 9 .ixb4!? cxb4 (D). Although Black can still point to a slight weakness on c3, there is none of the useful pressure down the a-file, and White can therefore always challenge the impertinent b-pawn with a later a3 if he finds it difficult to work around the pawn. In fact, with the concrete plan of playing 10 'ii'd3! prior to developing his

4 g3: THE MODERN MAIN LINE 4 ... i..a6 5 b3

w

queen's knight, White should be able to create play in the centre and is unlikely to need this queL'PIside lever. After 1O ... d6 11liJbd2 'ikc7 12 e4 e5 White often commences an interesting manoeuvre with 13 liJe1 !?, seeking to arrange the secure defence of d4 with this knight while at the same time offering e4 the cover of the g2-bishop. This frees the knight on d2 for more active service. After 13 ... liJc6 14 liJc2 a5 15 :fel l:!.fe8 16 liJf1 liJxd4 17 liJxd4 exd4 18 'i¥xd4 'iVc5 19 l:tadl a4 20 f3! White had only a slight edge in Dautov-Hjartarson, Bundesliga 2003/4. The problem is that the time-consuming nature of White's knight manoeuvres is brought home by the exchange of this piece on d4 after all. Nonetheless, at the end of the variation, Black's counterplay on the a-file notwithstanding, his weaknesses look the more problematic. Mixing a 'Bogo-Indian style' central blockade on the dark squares with the queenside fianchetto always looks slightly strange to me, although this does look like Black's best option at move 10. Interestingly, Black's third option after 7 .i.d2, 7 ... .i.e7!? seems relatively neglected in the literature, despite the fact that the second 'tempo loss' with a bishop in the opening seven moves is a very rare event and would appear to be a moment in need of some explanation. The large number of times this has been played is surprising in itself - many also arising from 5 ... .i.b4+ 6 .i.d2 .i.e7 7 .i.g2 (or 7liJc3) 7 ... .i.b7!? - and there is a definite logic to provoking both b3 and .i.d2 in turn. Black is intending again to head for a QGD-type structure familiar from Game 3, but my feeling is that each of the moves which White has 'gained' have a certain

45

downside. After the natural 8 0-0 0-0 9liJc3 d5 10 cxd5 exd5 11 liJe5 for example, the b-pawn blocks 'i¥a4 and Black can thus simply reply 11.. .liJbd7! in contrast to the similar case back in Game 1. It can also influence the ensuing play. In Epishin-Shengelia, Neckar 2003, for example, White forced e4 - as usual, a valid goal in this structure. However, after 12 l:I.c1 l:!.e8 13 .i.f4! c6 14 e4, Black refused to relinquish the centre, preferring the solid 14... liJf8! 15 exd5 cxd5 16 .i.h3 .i.a3 (this useful dislodging move again) 17 Ik2 a6 18 liJe2 liJe6 19 .i.e3 liJe4 and with this symmetrical structure, any claim White can make to superior pieceplay is very slight indeed. 80-00-0 (D)

w

9 'ikc2 Assessing this move will require a pause for reflection. As is so often the case, the diagram position is best understood in the context of the struggle for the e4-square. Here though, there is the added ingredient of the tension between the bishops on d2 and b4 which the previous couple of moves have constructed. This is actually quite complex. Black is happy to have his opponent exchange on b4 as explained above, and is also very willing, as so often, to trade his bishop for a white knight coming to c3, with the customary tightening of his hold on e4. However, he is less enthusiastic to initiate the exchange of bishops on d2 himself. So, for the moment, the status quo suits both parties. However, this presents Black with a further dilemma. The most natural continuation of his development would be to play ... d6 and ... liJbd7, keeping the long diagonal open and with it influence on e4.

46

CHESS EXPlAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

The danger is that once its retreat to e7 is blocked, the bishop will be left stranded on b4, or in the worst case, actually trapped. However, as we shall see, the ... a4 resource frequently enables some seemingly surprising liberties to be taken. This is particularly true if White immediately tries to sidestep the tension with 9 ~g5. This is logical too in terms of the contest for e4, and quite effective if Black responds passively with 9 ... ~e7. However, the nice resource 9 ... a4! is much more to the point. This secures the bishop at least for the moment by preparing to meet 10 a3 with 1O... axb3! 11 'iWxb3 ~e7, when the weakness of the a-pawn is likely to matter. It is always worth bearing in mind, especially in a book which is seeking as far as possible to verbalize the thinking and ideas which underlie the strategies of the players, that just every now and again it is upon such tactical niceties that the fate of an entire system can hinge! White can also try 10 bxa4 but Black has 1O ... h6! 11 a3 ~a5!' Preparing to recapture on f6 with the queen while also using his own dark-squared bishop to hinder White's development is by far the most effective way to compete for the central light squares here. This was Polugaevsky's fine contribution nearly two decades ago. 9 a3 is another way out of the tension. There is not too much wrong with exchanging, but I would prefer 9 ... ~e7!? here. The argument is simply that the a3-pawn might not prove to be happy in the QGD-type positions that arise after 10 ttJc3 d5. At the very least, White does not have his full range of options available with his rook temporarily tied down to the defence of the a3-pawn. The other main move, 9 ttJc3, is now thought to be best met by the thematic 9 ... d6 10 'iWc2 ~xc3, which will be dealt with on the 10th move below. 9...d6 10 ~g5!? This is the important attempt to give 9 'ii'c2 a really distinctive flavour. Having protected the c3-square, White decides he is no longer afraid of the move ... a4. As usual, the pin from g5 is an appropriate means of struggling for the e4- and d5-squares, and with ... d6 already played, there

is into the bargain an immediate threat to trap the bishop on b4. However, 10 ttJc3 is still the main line, and leads to many theoretical and strategic riches. Black usually responds with IO ... ttJbd7 (D).

w

The reader would do well to compare Game 5 from Chapter 2 since Black's strategy of controlling the central light squares while keeping his centre and queenside pawns as flexible as possible is already known to us from there. The best way to illustrate the plethora of theory seems to be to discuss one strategic success for each side in tum: a) 11 lIfel ~xc3 12 ~xc3 ~e4 13 'iWb2 a4 14 ~f1 c5! (important in carving out squares for the knight-pair; this would have taken more preparation if White had chosen dl for his rook instead) 15ttJd2~b716b4a317'iVb3cxd418 ~xd4 e5 19 ~e3 'Wic7 20 .l:tac 1 'iVc6 21 f3 'iVa4 22 'ii'bl d5 and Black has successfully f8 and a draw was agreed here. Speelman's choice is a little curious, not least because 11.. .h5 has a 'hard-line' positional consistency which is often the hallmark of Jon's style. Still, I write with the benefit of hindsight, and it was not easy to judge quite how easily and effectively White would force through the f4 advance, and with it a whole new set of problems for Black's kingside. 12 SLe2 dxc4 13 h5 g5 14 SLxc4 c6 15 'ito>bl .l:i.c816 'i!i'd2! White makes no efforts to disguise his intention to blow open his opponent's kingside with f4, but then again there is precious little to be done against it! 16.••liJed5 17 liJxd5 liJxd5 18 f4! gxf4 19 SLxf4liJxf4 20 'it'xf4 (D)

B

B

Positionally there is a good deal to be said for Black's set-up. The problem is the safety of his king and with this thematic move White's plan to afford it no safe haven takes shape. The

20••• b5 21 SLb3 'it'f6 22 'fi'e4! Of course! White still has attacking aspirations on the light squares and an f-pawn to push in support of these. Black can aim for equivalent fun on the long dark diagonal, but this is quite easily brushed aside. 22••• c5 23 f4 c4?!

4 a3: INTRODUCTION AND 4 ... iLh7 5 4Jc3

It looks more consistent to play 23 ... cxd4 24 f5 d3 25 l%.d2 even though White's attack is still the more focused. 24 i.c2 'fiIe7 25 f5 b4 26 fxe6'iVxe6 27 'fiIb7 0-0 Since the king has been Black's bugbear for most of the game, it is difficult to ignore the irony that this 'solution' is brought about only

69

at the cost of decisive material loss ! Black's remaining threats are very easily parried. 28 i.f5 'iWd6 29 i.xc8 bxa3 30 l:th3! The simplest way in such cases is usually to mobilize the extra material with due haste. The rest requires no comment. 30•••axb2 31 l1c3 'iWh2 32 lhc4 'iVe2 33 'fiIb3 a5 34 i.f5 1-0

Game 14

Etienne Bacrot - Boris Gelfand European Team Ch, Leon 2001 1 d4 tDf6 2 c4 e6 3 tDf3 b6 4 33 i.b7 5 tDc3 d5 6 i.g5 (D)

B

6•••i.e7 The logical response, keeping open the option of ...tDxd5 in the event of an early exchange on d5. However, there is another route by which Black can hope to guarantee fluid pieceplay in the centre, namely by 6 ...dxc4!? (D).

w

In the later games of the chapter it would be fair to say that any resemblance to the Queen's Gambit Declined (QGD) is limited since Black tends to respond to any cxd5 with ... tDxd5, ensuring a fluid structure in the centre. The textmove, by pinning the knight, and raising the possibility of exchanging it off prior to a clarification of the pawn position in the centre, is both visually and thematically a much closer relative of the Tartakower QGD. Just two things I would like to say at this stage. Black can claim a partial success in that the move a3 is not generally regarded as the most critical response to the Tartakower. However, there are many lines in which cxd5 is met with ... exd5, and often White will seek either to constrain or even to attack Black's queenside pawn-majority. The move b4 is the key in such a plan, and clearly a3 is not a bad preparation for this.

The evidence suggests that White should respond by playing either very aggressively or very solidly: a) 7 e4 i.e7 8 i.xf6! i.xf6 9 e5 i.e7 10 i.xc4 is an uncompromising attempt to seize space at the expense of the bishop-pair. This demands accuracy from the defence. After 10... 0-0 11 0-0 c5 12 d5, I suspect that I2 ... exd5 13 tDxd5 does not equalize since White can in due course bring a rook to dl and there will be ideas of e6 in the air. However, the counterblow I2 ... bS!? 13 tDxb5 i.xdS 14 i.xdS exdS IS tDd6 tDc6! sufficed in Van Wely-Nisipeanu, Romania 2000 since 16 ~xdS tDxeS! is a neat equalizing tactic.

70

CHESS EXPlAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

b) 7 e3 ~e7 8 ~xc4 0-0 9 0-0 ltJbd7 10 ~c1 c5 is also quite instructive since it is heading for the kind of symmetrical position which looks at first as if Black should equalize without much difficulty. This may be, but examples such as V1adimirov-Anastasian, Abu Dhabi 2004 show that White is first to the c- and d-files and this leaves Black's queen short of a square which is both secure and desirable. After 11 dxc5 ltJxc5 12 ~e2 a6 13 ~fdl 'We8 14 ltJe5! ltJfd7 15 ltJxd7 ltJxd7 16 ~f4 White retains a nagging edge, not least because 16 ... b5? fails to 17 ltJxb5!. This type of position is important, not least because the option for Black to flick in ... dxc4 also exists in variations to be considered later such as 6 ... !1J..e7 7 e3. Now we return to 6 ...~e7 (D):

w

7 'iVa4+ White does not want to allow his opponent a Tartakower Queen's Gambit in which he is committed to the uncritical a3. Moreover, he believes that in comparison with the QGD, Black has played ...b6 and ... ~b7 a little prematurely and that this check will prove disruptive to Black's development. There is another subtle point involved too. Experience from the Tartakower has shown that set-ups in which White fianchettoes his king's bishop can be especially promising. Not least, Black may have to think twice before accepting hanging pawns if a bishop on g2 will automatically exert pressure on the d5-pawn. In a sense it is the fact that White has played a3 rather than e3 which enables him still to think in these terms. Sometimes a partial loss of tempo can increase options!

Despite all this, Boris Gelfand's eloquent exposition of Black's case after 7 .. :ikd7 has contributed to the search for alternatives: a) 7 ~xf6 ~xf6 8 cxd5 exd5 9 g3 (D) bears comparison with note 'c' to Black's 7th move.

B

However, the important difference is that here White's queen remains on dl, which enables Black to head for a hanging pawns structure with an early ... c5, whereas in the other line, if Black proceeds with ... c6-c5, White will have gained the move 'tWa4 effectively for free and can immediately bring pressure to bear on the pawns by putting a rook on the d-file. Nonetheless, this move-order does have the virtue of forcing such structures, and as 7 ... 'i!Vd7! in the main game shows its mettle, some white players are prioritizing choice of structure above niceties of tempo. For the record, 9 ... 0-0 10 ~g2 c5 II 0-0 ltJa6 12 e3 ~e7 13 'iVb3 .l:i.fd8 14 .l::tadl l::!.ab8 15 nfel tDc7 16 h4 g6!? (Bocharov-Sakaev, Moscow 2003) looks like a very sensible handling by Black. The d5-pawn is well defended, and in general White should be very careful about exchanging on c5 as it risks bringing Black's bishop-pair to life. b) After 7 e3 0-0 Black still intends to answer the immediate 8 cxd5 with 8... tDxdS 9 ~xe7 'WIxe7 10 ':cll'k8!, when he should get to make the ... c5 break under very fair conditions. Therefore, White would do better to wait. However, there is not too much wrong with the hanging pawns position for Black here either. For example, 8 l:.c1 tDbd7 9 cxd5 exd5 10 .i.d3 c5 11 0-0 tDe4 12 ~xe7 'WIxe7 13 dxc5 bxc5 14 'WIe2 ltab8! gave Black decent prospects on the b-file in Atalik-Grishchuk, Bled OL 2002.

4 a3: INTRODUCTION AND 4... iLh7 5 tiJc3

71

We now return to 7 'i¥a4+ (D): B B

7 ••.'i¥d7! As a once enthusiastic practitioner on the white side, I am in no doubt that this is the move which has been putting people off 7 'ii'a4+ of late. The others in brief: a) 7 ... tiJbd7 looks natural, but White can cause definite inconvenience with 8 i.xf6 i.xf6 9 cxdS exdS 10 g3 0-0 11 i.h3! since 11...c6 is met with the nice tactical shot 12 tiJxdS!. b) 7...i.c6 8 ~b3 dxc4 9 'ifxc4 0-0 also makes some sense, and Black got a very decent position after 10 e3 i.b7 11 i.e2 tiJbd7 12 :tdl h6 13 i.h4 'ifc8! 140-0 cS IS 'ili'a2 a6 16l:tcl ~e8 17 lIfdll:[c8 18 dxcslbxcs in the game Korotylev-Kasparov, Russian Ch (Moscow) 2004. Compared with the similar position we considered under the note about 6 ... dxc4 above, White is not challenging on the c-file, and his queen is curiously placed on a2. My feeling is that White has to make a virtue of his early queen development, rather than looking apologetic about it! 10 i.xf6!? i.xf6 11 e4 is more to the point, with very sharp play. c) 7 ... c6 is a major alternative which affords us the chance to see White's strategy in its purest form. My feeling is that after 8 i.xf6 i.xf6 9 cxdS exdS 10 g3 0-0 11 i.g2 (D) Black still might do best to playa quick ...cS anyway. Admittedly he is still a tempo down in comparison with the note on 7 i.xf6 above, but with careful handling he can still reach the type of position at the end of that line in which tempi were not, to be honest, of critical importance. Instead, it is dangerous to stay passive. In Wells-Sax, Szeged 1997, Black lacked space

after 11...:e8 12 0-0 ttJa6 13 .l::[fdl lbc7 14 :acl 'fJJe7 IS e3l:1ed8 16 b4 tiJe6 17 'iib3 :ab8 18 ttJel. This is just the sort of thing White is seeking here for he can manoeuvre to his heart's content. Moreover, breaking out now with 18 ... cS?! was no solution: 19lbxdS i.xdS 20 i.xdS cxd4 21 e4! left White's minor pieces perfect - his knight is coming to d3, and the advance f4 could embarrass Black's minor pieces in tum. Moreover, the opposite-coloured bishops are likely merely to enhance his attacking prospects. 8~xd7+

As Black's capacity to soak up the pressure against c7, which this exchange presages, becomes increasingly convincing, alternatives are being re-examined. 8 'ifb3 dxc4! 9 'i¥xc4 0-0 with ... .l:i.c8 and ... cS to follow makes little sense for White, but 8 'ifc2!? is a good deal more interesting. White claims that Black's queen is sufficiently compromised on d7 to justify this tempo loss. For starters it blocks natural development with ... tiJbd7, and may also be vulnerable to a well-timed tiJeS. However, 8 ... dxc4! (D) still leaves White needing to prove compensation.

w

72

CHESS EXPLAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

9 e4 is rather loose since after 9 ...bS! Black will have time to consolidate with ... a6 and withdraw his queen to c8, a reasonable square which leaves White's compensation in the centre looking a bit speculative. Hence, 9 e3!; when the d4-pawn is solidly defended, White is ready to meet 9 ... bS?! with 10 ttJeS! while 9 ... 0-0 10 i..xc4 is also more comfortable for White. Therefore, the spotlight has fallen on 9 ... i.xf3! 10 gxf3 bS, when White again has to play very sharply to show compensation. He does best to head for opposite-coloured bishops and all-out play on the light squares by 11 a4 c6 12 i.xf6! i.xf6 13 axbS cxbS 14 li'e4. However, crucially for his defence, Black can react calmly with 14...0-0! since IS 'ii'xa8 ttJc6 16 li'xf8+ is not that bad materially, but leaves the white position feeling loose. IS f4 is better, but I like IS ...l:tc8!? as in Piket-Khalifman, Wijk aan Zee 2002, waiting for White to commit his bishop to g2 or h3 before calmly playing ... ttJc6 at a moment when any capture on bS will have implications down the b-file. I suspect Black is quite OK here. White's centre pawns cover a lot of space, but there is always some active counterplay. 8.••ttJbxd7 9 ttJb5 (D) This attack on c7 is White's only real justification for exchanging queens. Otherwise he has just expended time easing the defence for Black, who can play ... cS without difficulty.

can be protected, and critically a further threat to c7 does not contain any terrible sting. Hence there will be ample opportunity to seek compensation in the centre, where the knight is likely to be missed from its 'normal duties'. There are alternatives. 9 ...0-0!? is a very interesting and complex pawn sacrifice. After 10 cxdS ttJxdS 11 i.xe7 ttJxe7 12 ttJxc7 l'tac8 13 ttJbS l:Ic2 14 l:tb 1 i..e4 Black has decent compensation, but I suspect that it may in time only be able to compete with Boris Gelfand's excellent main line move among those who positively relish giving up a pawn for active play. There is also the reasonable 9 ... 'ittd8, but this does have the clear drawback that after 10 cxdS ttJxdS 11 e4 ttJSf6 12 i..f4! the threat to c7 cannot just be brushed aside in the way we shall see in the game. lOcxd5 Necessary. After 10 i..f4?! dxc4! 11 ttJxc7+ i.xc7 12 i.xc7 0-0 13 %:tel l:r.fc8 14 i.f4 bS IS ttJeS ttJb6! White is really vulnerable on the light squares. lO•••ttJxd5 (D)

w

B

lle4

9 •••i..d8! This is at first sight a passive-looking retreat, but it does at the same time draw attention to the fact that aside from hitting c7, 9 ttJbS sorely lacks further dimensions. In other words, c7

Without this White can scarcely even aspire to keeping the initiative. Nonetheless the e-pawn is very vulnerable and the following rather forcing sequence seems more than satisfactory for the defence. Gelfand also mentions 11 i.xd8 ~xd8 12 1:[el a6 13 ttJc3 ttJxc3 14 l:txc3 cS which he marks '='. To be honest though, I think: this is one of those cases where this symbol is just used as shorthand to establish that things are OK for Black. The reality is that Black leads in development, his king will sit

4 a3: INTRODUCTION AND 4 ... i.h7 5 liJc3

well on e7 and he can aspire to counterplay with a quick challenge to the c-file while White's kingside is still waking up. White would do well to avoid this. 1l...lbsf6 12 ltd Looking to the bishop-pair to compensate for the loss of a centre pawn and the subsequent weakness of its isolated colleague. Again there is little alternative - fixing the centre with 12 eS invariably cedes the dS-square and leaves White struggling to find a plan. 12•.•.txe4 (D)

w

13l"ilxc7+ Since I tend to believe that in the game Black's 16 ... i.xf3!?, giving the highest priority to structure, is well justified, it might be worth considering avoiding it with 13 l"ild2 i.dS 14 l"ilxc7+ i.xc7 IS :xc7 ~d8 16 .:tc3 h6 17 i.h4 i.b7 although Black's control of key squares still convinces as compensation for the bishoppair. 13.•.i.xc7 14 :xc7l"ildS ISl:tc1 h6 16 i.d2 i.xf3!? 17 gxf3 ~e7 18 i.a6l"il7f6 Time to take stock. White can boast the bishop-pair and control of the only open file which for the moment at least cannot be contested. Black can look not just to target his opponent's pawn weaknesses, but to the considerable stability which they offer his knight-pair. The joys of occupying the square in front of the isolated pawn are well documented, and here the dS- and f4-squares coordinate conveniently, also keeping an eye on c7, the crucial 'entry square' which could tum White's c-file aspirations into something more concrete. However, for both sides, the key issue is how to translate

73

these sources of pride and joy into a real plan. Attacking the pawns while retaining control demands a good deal of finesse. 19J:tc4?! Gelfand himself suggests the subtle 19 ~gl ! to provoke 19...gS at a moment when White can immediately assault this pawn with 20 h4! and Black cannot defend it. After 20 ... gxh4 21 nh I, White looks to force ... hS to give his bishop for which good squares are rather at a premium - a useful spot on gS. Hence 19 ... g6 might be safer, but all in all, White would have done very well to throw this in. 19...nad8 20 ~e2 lhhS 21 nhc1lhhf4+ 22 'iPn Wf6 23 :ta4 gS! The battle lines become clearer. Black advances his kingside pawns with blockade top of the agenda, but the possibility of advancing them to create threats and open files as a backup. Meanwhile, White looks to the queenside, but with Black's knights covering c7 and b6 too a breakthrough is difficult to foresee. Hence Black is better, although it requires delicate handling to make real progress. 24 i.bS as 2S :c6 :c8 26 l:lac4 l:txc6 27 :Xc6l:td8 28 i.e3lhg6 29 :c4?! lhh4 30 'iii'e2 hS 31 :!'c6lhf5 32 c;t>d2 (D)

B

32 .••g4?! Black aims to undermine the bishop on e3 a novel way of creating a passed pawn. Nonetheless, this is something of a wasted opportunity after all the fine build-up, since Gelfand offers 32 ... lhf4! 33 nxb6 lhxd4 34 i.xd4+ :xd4+ 3S WeI lhdS 36 :a6 nh4 37 .l:i.xaS .:txh2leading to a decisive advantage due to the strength of the h-pawn. Still, I am sympathetic

74

CHESS EXPLAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

with Black rejecting such a hugely committal variation. In general, with knight vs bishop such 'races' between groups of passed pawns on opposite wings should be entered into with extreme caution. 33 .te2 g3!? 34 hxg3lLldxe3 35 fxe3lLlxg3 (D)

w

36l:!.xb6?! The decision to collect pawns before sacrificing his bishop for the powerful h-pawn was understandable, but perhaps Bacrot underestimated how much damage Black can inflict before he has to cash in. According to Gelfand the passive-looking 36 .td3! h4 37 ~el l:th8 38

':c2 is enough to block the h-pawn and hold the position. 36.••h4 37 f4 h3 38 .tf3 h2 39l:tb5 :h8 40 l:!.xa5 :h3! 41 .tb7 lLln+ 42 ~e2 lLlxe3 43 .thllLlf5 44 g2 ':xb2+ 46 ~h3 lLlxd447 a4 ~a2 48 .l:r.a7lLle2?! Trading h2 for f4 looks plausible, but by attacking f7 White is later able to render further progress highly problematic. 48 ... lLlb5!?, forcing the rook off the 7th rank as a prelude to bringing the king to f5, looks a better prospect. 49 'it>xh2lLlxf4+ 50 Wg3lLld3 51 .tc6lLle5 52 .te8 :d2 53 a5 l:td8 54 .i.b5 l1b8 55 .ta4 l:tb4 56 .i.e8 l:!.b3+ 57 'ittg2 ':a3 58 a6 :a5 59 'ittg3 rJilg7 60 Wg2 ~f8 61 :a8 We7 62 a7 f3 71 ~el lLle4 72 'Wt>dl J:ta2 73 'it>c1 We3 741M8lLlc5 75 'ittbl ':h2 76 l:!.d5 lLld3 77 l::[d8 ':b2+ 78 'ittall'::tb7 79 ~a2 'ittd2 80 :c8lLle5 81l:[cSlLlf3 82 'itta3lLld4 83 I:tc8 lLlb5+ 84 'itta4 lLlc7 85 :h8 112_112

Game 15

Vlastimil Babula - Leif Johannessen Bundes/iga 2005/6 1 d4lLlf6 2 c4 e6 3lLlf3 b6 4 a3 .tb7 5lLlc3 d5 6 cxd5 lLlxd5 I already mentioned in the chapter introduction that this seems to fit the tastes and temperament of the Queen's Indian player. Nonetheless, 6 ... exd5 (D) has retained a decent following, including among some very strong players. I shall give limited coverage here since the structure is already fairly familiar from the early chapters. Indeed there is a specific similarity with Game 4 of Chapter 1 given the popularity of 7 g3!? when in fact a3 has just been directly substituted for :el. There are also comparisons to be made with Game 14 since an early 'iVa4+ can feature heavily in White's armoury.

w

Somehow very straightforward development with, for example, 7 .tg5 .te7 and now 8 e3 lLlbd7 9 .td3 c5 10 0-0 0-011 ':cllLle4! doesn't

4 a3: INTRODUCTION AND 4 ... ~b7 5 LDc3

75

appear especially threatening to Black whose 'hanging pawns' in lines such as 12 i.xe7 fIIxe7 13 dxcS bxcS 14 fIIa4 ltJef6 (MitonYudasin, New York 2(05) tend to spell open lines more than any weakness. White seems to do better either with 8 'ir'a4+ c6 9 e3 0-0 10 i.d3, when he is ready to put a rook on dl in reply to an early ... cS, or else some sort of g3based approach. Perhaps 7 g3 i.e7 8 "iWa4+ or even 7 'ir'a4+ c6 8 i.gS when 8... i.e7 9 i.xf6!? followed by g3 transposes into the notes to Black's 7th in Game 14, which Black has tended to avoid of late. So, back to the more fluid 6 ... ltJxdS. 7 e3 (D) The limitation of this move is simple to discern. White is advancing his e-pawn a modest one square when he is really itching to move it two! In fact, establishing a 'classic' pawncentre still remains a key part of White's strategy. His principal idea, even at the cost of a tempo, is to support the e4-square with his bishop. It is just worth mentioning that the immediate 7 e4?! does fall short. Of course this gambits a pawn, but after 7 ... ltJxc3 8 bxc3 i.xe4 9ltJeS, White has ideas to play 'iVhS or "ii'g4 in conjunction with i.bS+, and this provides reasonable play against routine defence. However, Black has the paradoxical 9 ... "iWh4! intending calmly to return to d8 in the event of 10 g3. The attack on hI will then encourage f3, at which point most of White's initiative is nullified. 7ltJxdS?! is another idea which we shall revisit elsewhere, but which has limited appeal here since there is no downside to the convenient reply 7 ...'ii'xd5!.

7 •••g6!? This active mode of development is understandably seen as a slight drawback to White's modest 7th move, a direct reaction to the blocking-in of White's queen's bishop. There are no such luxuries after 7 'iVc2, when 7... g6?! 8 i.gS! is quite awkward to meet. Black borrows from the Exchange Griinfeld the insight that the attack on White's centre with ... cS will be especially well supported by a kingside fianchetto. However, there are a number of distinctive features which counsel against overplaying any Grtinfeld comparison: Black has developed his queenside first and still needs to demonstrate a sound mobilization of his kingside. In addition he is already committed to ... e6, often a useful break on the ambitions of White's centre, but occasionally just premature and weakening. White meanwhile has to accept that 4 a3 now looks rather irrelevant - it sometimes does happen that provoking S... dS turns out to be the move's sole achievement! However, the flexibility which accrues from not yet being committed to playing e4 is useful. It may still be right to establish a broad pawn-centre, but it is by no means compulsory - the extra pressure on d4 implied by the fianchetto may be taken as a cue to consider alternative plans. Of course the more 'traditional' set-up with 7 ... i.e7 is still possible and it is important to understand why this does not simply offer Black an improved version of Game 16. The first problem is seen after 8 i.bS+! (it is worth throwing this in to force ...c6 even though Black is likely to opt for a later ...cS, since on occasion it can restrict his options) 8 ...c6 9 i.d3 (D).

B

B

76

CHESS EXPLAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

Now 9 ... 0-0 allows 10 'ii'c2!, annoyingly hitting h7. After 1O... h611 e4lL1xc3 12 bxc3 cS 13 0-0 we reach Game 16 with the extra tempo ... h6 for Black, a weakening move he could well do without. To avoid this, Black can attempt to delay castling. However, 9 ... cS affords White the extra option 10 lLIxdS 'ti'xd5 II dxcS i.xcs 12 i.bS+, resulting in the first of a series of symmetrical pawn-structures in this section which might spell a slight edge since only 12... ~e7 avoids structural concessions. Therefore 9 ... lLIxc3!? also has its supporters. However, this unprovoked exchange of the knight has the drawback that White may gain the possibility to activate his queen's bishop via i.b2 and c4 since he is not yet committed to playing e4. 8i.bS+ This has the same idea of provoking ... c6 which we saw in the note about 7 ... ~e7 above although here there is no clear consensus either about the best square for White's bishop. However, there is also a school of thought that believes now is the time for a radical change of tack. The point is that Black's fianchetto is ideal for pressure against a classical pawn-centre, but might be less appropriate to the static centre which arises after 81L1xd5 exdS. Black's claim in turn is that 7 e3 has restricted White's queen's bishop which would normally prefer to operate outside the pawn-chain. It seems most thematic to look to the queenside, and some kind of space-gaining minority attack with 9 b4 when routine development by Black might lead to something like 9 ... i.g7 10 i.e2 0-0 II 0-0 c6 12 a4 a6 13 .i.b21L1d7 14 'ilb3 bS IS a5 l:te8 16 .l:r.ac1 with some light pressure for White, as in Kramnik-Lutz, Bundesliga 1992/3. Somehow, the black bishop on g7 seems to have underperformed, compared with the high hopes for it after 7 ... g6. For this reason, Black can instead adjust to changed circumstances and put the bishop on d6. 8.•.c6 (D) 9~c4

As I said, there is no consensus on the best place for the bishop. The text-move looks appropriate for supporting the advance of White's

w

d-pawn, but the piece could perhaps prove vulnerable on this square. Let us take a look at the others: a) 9 .i.a4 i.g7 10 0-0 0-0 11 e4 lLIxc3 12 bxc3 cS appears to make good sense. White aims to control the d7 - and e8-squares, but in all these Exchange Griinfeld-type lines Black is looking for counterplay on the c-file and the c4-square in particular, and there is a suspicion that from a4 the bishop might rather neglect these. After 13 i.g5 'ilVd6! (generally the best square in this line, as we shall see) 14 l:tellL1c6 the pressure on d4 encouraged White to fix the centre in Radjabov-Karpov, Moscow (Russia vs RoW) 2002 with IS eS 'fIIc7 16 'iVd2. After 16 ...1LIa5 17 .l::[ac1.i.dS (or 17 ... .i.xf3!? 18 gxf3 bS! taking advantage of the weakness on b3) 18 'ti'f4 Ftacnik points out that continuing to place minor pieces on optimal squares with 18 ...lLIc4! gives good counterplay. If White could play 19 i.f6 and answer 19... ~xf6 by recapturing with the e-pawn, his attack might be quite dangerous. However, the e-pawn is pinned, and the general preference for Black in most endgames means that ...f6 can be a useful resource too. In general it seems fair to say that if Black can provoke eS then the onus on White's attack to deliver is very high - endgames will be quite depressing for him. b) 9 ~d3 is quite similar if White meets 9 ... i.g7 with 10 0-0 0-0 11 e4 lLIxc3 12 bxc3 cS, when again the best-looking set-up with ... lLIc6 and ... 'ti'd6 offers decent play. One major difference has arisen from White's 10 lLIa4!?, which is designed both to hold up ...cS and to show that the d5-knight has no very enticing flight-square. However, this does not seem too

4 a3: INTRODUCTION AND 4... .th7 5 ttJc3

terrifying, not just because of the recently discovered 1O.. :ii'c7!? preparing to meet 11 e4 with 11."tt:Jf4 rather than retreating, but also as the older 1O... ttJd7 11 e4 ttJe7 looks OK too. Black may have ... e5 as an alternative pawnbreak, and even with a later ... c5 he is likely to enjoy active pieces to balance out his pawn weakness. If Black is really afraid of all this he can flick in 9 ... ttJxc3, but as usual making this exchange without provocation comes at the price of increasing White's options and there seems to me no need to oblige in this way. 9•••i.g7 100-00-011 e4 ttJxc3 12 bxc3 c5 13 .tg5 (D)

B

13...~c7? With accurate play, this dubious decision might have left Black struggling to recover. As I discussed above, d6 is usually the best square for the queen in this variation, as it exerts pressure on d4, prepares to develop the queen's knight to c6 - the most promising square - and also keeps an eye on d5 in the event that White's d-pawn advances. As we shall see in the game, it is this last consideration that trumps all others here. 14 d5! exd515 exd5 i.a6 Babula's comments on 15 ... i.xc3?! are instructive. After 16 J:1c1 i.g7 he intended 17 l:el! ttJd7 18 i.e7, when Black can scarcely afford to move his rook from attack since f7 will be chronically weak. The nice point is to resist the tempting 17 d6?! iVc6 18 i.e7, when the b7-bishop has been liberated and d6 is potentially weak once White cashes in. In addition to the passed c-pawn, this might add up to quite decent compensation for the exchange.

77

16 d6! 'ii'd7 17 i.xa6 ttJxa6 18 :el! c4 19 ~d5 ttJc5?! (D)

w

20 l:e7? A serious mistake just as White was nearing his goal, which actually kicks off something of a string of howlers! With 20 i.e7! White could answer rook moves with the embarrassing 21 ttJg5 while 20 ... .txc3 fails to 21 i.xf8 rtxf8 22 l:e7!. 20...'ii'fS 21 'iixc4?! Tempting, but in fact another slip. 21 'ti'xf5 gxf5 22 l:c7! again prepares to push the dpawn and is still better for White according to Babula. 21...ttJe6 22 i.e3 l:lfd8! 23 ndl?! i.f8 24 I1xe6? (D)

B

A bad mistake, but it is not difficult to see how it arose. It is good policy not just to check all recaptures, but to check for zwischenzugs too. 24...'Wxe6? The worst of all possible worlds - although 24...fxe6 25 d7! would also be bad enough:

78

CHESS EXPLAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

Black exchanges a key defender for an attacker whose vulnerability would have been brought into sharp focus by 24 .. J~ac8!' Then if Babula is right that 25 'ii'xc8 llxc8 26 l:le5 'iVd7 27 l:ted5 is really White's best, then it is no longer him pushing for the full point.

25 'ii'xe6 fxe6 26 d7 iLe7 27 ttJe5! Back on track. The powerful d-pawn carries the day, as it might once have done without the frenetic intervening narrative! 27...i.f6 28 ttJc6 ~f7 29 c4 iLe7 30 iLf4?! l:tg8 31liJxe7! 1-0

Game 16

Michal Krasenkow - Ruslan Ponomariov Wijk aan lee 2003 1 d4liJf6 2liJf3 e6 3 c4 b6 4liJc3 iLb7 5 a3 d5 6cxd5 61fVc2 (D) is a related idea which very much grows out of the theory to be examined in this game. As usual, the attempt to restrict the opponent's options succeeds in avoiding some variations but at the cost of allowing other fresh defences.

1fVc7 is typical. The very fact that 15 iLb2?! is an inaccuracy due to IS ... liJe5 (Bologan-Macieja, Stepanakert 2005) - since exchanging on e5 would kill White's counterplay on the al-h8 diagonal - suggests to me that Black stands well. Moreover, even after Lautier's superior 15 h3! liJe5 16liJh41He8 I would be happy to put faith in the stability of Black's occupation of key squares in the centre. 6 .•.liJxd5 7 ~c2 (D)

B B

White is hoping to induce a routine move such as 6 ...iLe7 and only then to play 7 cxd5 liJxd5 which gives him the option of transposing to Game 17 with 8 iLd2. We shall see more of all these niceties later. However, Black can try to cross White's plans with 6... dxc4!? 7 e4 c5 8 d5 exd5 9 exd5 iLd6!?, leading to an interesting structure which has enjoyed some popularity. However, I have always had a suspicion it should be quite pleasant for Black, whose good health on the dark squares presents White with difficulties turning his passed but isolated d-pawn into a positive weapon. Mter 10 iLxc4 0-0 11 0-0, I like l1...h6! since iLg5 is worth preventing. Then 12 l:tel a6 13 a4liJbd7 14 b3

No great mystery behind this move. White wants to support the construction of a pawncentre in the only way possible which does not consume a tempo on first playing e3. The potential drawback is that the queen will be vulnerable either to a rook, or more often to its opposite number down the c-file. 7••.liJxc3!? This immediate capture has become Black's most popular response. The reason is simple he is keen to force recapture on c3 with either queen or knight and cut out the possibility that White will flick in iLd2, introducing the third

4 a3: INTRODUCTION AND 4... i.b7 5 CDc3

recapture which will be covered in Game 17. Indeed, after 7 ...iLe7, 8 e4 transposes to the main game here, but it permits 8 iLd2!? Rightly or wrongly, players regard permitting the less scary 7 ... ttJxc3 8 'iWxc3 as a small price to pay for avoiding this. In all fairness, it should be pointed out that the text-move can also herald other strategies in which ... iLe7 is delayed, further strengthening its claims to flexibility. 7 ... cS also circumvents any intention to play iLd2, but as usual when Black gets this break in so early, White has the option of trying to make something of a symmetrical structure. 8 dxcS!? is a bit out of fashion, but I would not be rushing to defend after 8....i.xc5 9 iLg5!, when 9 .. .f6 10 .i.d2! implies a weakening of the e6pawn which seems to be more than academic. White usually follows with the simple e3 and iLc4 and his opponent is short on compensation since ... e5 almost always weakens the light squares unacceptably. 9...1i'c8 is preferable, but 10 l::tcl, with b4 in the air, and ttJa4 ready as an annoying answer if Black tries to prevent this with ... as,looks to me like fairly risk-free pressure for White. Neither is 7 ... ttJd7 a panacea. It will be recalled that the capture on dS on move 7 failed to 7 ...'fIxdS!, but with this possibility blocked off Black has no ideal capture. After 8 ttJxdS!, 8 ... iLxd5 is well met by the natural 9 e4!, while 8 ... exd5 9 iLgS! is still annoying for Black. In short, this all looks well worth avoiding. We return to 7 ...ttJxc3 (D):

w

8bxc3 8 'iixc3 (D) signals a significant change of strategy away from playing for e4 towards

79

putting faith in simple development while accepting virtually no weaknesses. Some hopes are placed on the queen's bishop, of either putting pressure on c7, or in the absence of Black's king's knight, causing mild embarrassment by a well-timed sortie to g5. While indisputably a quieter, less ambitious alternative, it is nonetheless very popular.

B

Black's choice is determined in no small part by how seriously he dislikes meeting the move iLg5. a) 8 ... h6 might seem to represent the rather 'extreme' view, that it is worth a tempo to prevent it. Interestingly it has been the most popular choice and none of White's choices offer anything very concrete. There was once a fashion for 9 e3, meeting 9 ... iLe7 with 10 iLbS+ c6 11 iLa4 followed by 0-0, e4 and :dl. This is at least interesting and unbalanced, but the simple 9 ...ttJd7 10 i.b5 iLd6!? looks safer since II O-O? is met by ll...iLxf3! while after 11 iLc6 iLxc6 12 'ii'xc6 0-0 Black can organize ... '¥fIe7 and ... e5 with no special problems. 9 b4 is also possible, but perhaps the most interesting idea is 9 iLf4 iLd6 10 ttJe5! when White tries to organize f3 and e4 while his opponent must take steps to prepare ... c5, ensuring it does not leave the d6-bishop vulnerable to a ttJxf7 trick. b) 8... ttJd7 9 .i.g5 iLe7 10 i.xe7 ~xe7! is also worth mentioning, if only as it gives quite a jolt to some often deeply ingrained assumptions. This seemingly inconvenient recapture is forced for sure since otherwise c7 hangs. However, it also has some positive features. Quite early on it was discovered that if White develops with e3 and i.e2 then Black's bishop on b7

80

CHESS EXPLAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

is likely to be by far the most sweeping minor piece. Hence he tends to fianchetto, but Black plans a quick mobilization such as 11 g3 tiJf6 12 i..g2 lVd6 l3 0-0 when it is debatable whether l3 ... c5 14 dxc5 'ii'xc5 15 ~xc5+ bxc5 16 tiJe5! is absolutely equal, but certainly the black king's position is an asset rather than a liability. Moreover, l3 ... .l::!.hc8!? is also quite playableanother feather in 1O ...xeT s cap as it usefully connects rooks. We now return to 8 bxc3 (D):

B

i..a6 i..dS! is not so clear, l3 i..bS! with ttJeS in the air generates very unpleasant pressure. Until Babula-Wells, Warsaw Ech 2005, I had believed that nonetheless 12 ... i..e7 l3 .td3 tiJf6! was quite promising since if 14 ii.b5+ ~f8! White must play IS eS to save his e-pawn, but Black's knight after IS ... tiJdS will easily compensate for the inconvenience to his king. However, the critical 14 'ikb5+ ii.c6 15 'ii'bl 0-0 16 0-0 'ili'd7 17 lIel 1\¥b7 is not necessarily the smooth development it appears to be. After IS tiJe5! it became apparent that White has no weak points and thus Black lacks any clear plan. 9 e4 0-010 ii.d3 c511 0-0 (D)

B

8....te7 This is the best route to the key position at move 11 as note 'a' shows. The alternative is to mobilize the queenside as quickly as possible, the prelude to an alternative gain of time against White's queen, but the merits of note 'b' are unclear too: a) 8 ... cS 9 e4 i..e7?! 10 i..b5+! .tc6 11 ii.d3 tiJd7 120-0 cxd4 l3 cxd4l:tc8 14 'iWe2 i..b7 15 i..f4 feels like a very smooth development for White, Yermolinsky-Lein, USA Ch (Seattle) 2003. A disruptive check on bS joins the reasons why the earliest possible execution of ... c5 might not be the best. b) 8 ... tiJd7 is an interesting and ambitious idea, which comes into its own against a routine response. After 9 e4 c5, 10 i..d3 can be met by 1O...'iWc7, when the threat to exchange queens gains a tempo as usual, and after 11 'ifbl one point of delaying the development of his bishop is revealed as 11...g6!? offers interesting play. However, White can do better. 10 .tf4! takes the c7-square from Black and forces a change of tack, and after 1O... cxd4 11 cxd4 l:tc8 12 'iWb3! Black cannot play 12 ... ii.xe4 since although l3

11 •••'iWc7!? Opposing queens on the c-file is usually sufficient to gain a tempo, since White hopes to attack and is therefore reluctant to play an endgame in which his opponent's chances of making use of his queenside majority, aided by possible entry on the c-file, tend to be every bit as good as his hopes to make an asset of his dpawn. However, it is also plausible that to guarantee the security of his king, Black should consider trading light-squared bishops and to this end 11...'i¥c8!? has been the most popular. 12 ~e2 .ta6 l3l:tdl! led to a good illustration of White retaining attacking chances in N.PertParligras, Gothenburg Echt 2005, although Black could have defended better: l3 ... J:.dS?! (this looks suspect: it achieves little and if anything even restricts Black's options against this basic plan) 14 h4! cxd4 15 cxd4 i..xd3 16 :txd3 tiJd7 17 i..g5!. It is now that Black might have used .. .lUe8 if he had not already committed

4 a3: INTRODUCTION AND 4... i..h7 5 tbc3

this piece. After 17 ... .i.xg5?! 18 hxg5 'iVc4 19 'iVe3! l:I.ac8 20 ];tadl 'ifa4 White's attack is actually much more potent than it may seem at fIrst glance. By 21 'iVf4! 'iVc2 22 g6!, answering either capture on g6 with 23 ttJg5, he could have set very severe problems. There is also the very sharp alternative 12 e5!?, when Black has done OK with the calm 12 ... 'iti>h8!? preparing to meet 13 .ltxh7?? with 13 ... .i.xf3 14 gxf3 g6!. However, if White plays 13 'iVe2!, this can hardly compare unfavourably with Krasenkow's approach in the game. 12 'ii'e2 ttJd7 (D)

w

13 e5!? As usual this move concedes some important squares and clarifies the task of the defender to defend h7 and then use the d5-square for his bishop to support c-fIle-based counterplay. However, I am sympathetic to this decision otherwise the appropriate development for the c1-bishop is by no means clear and Black has his own ideas to modify the structure. Against 13 i.b2, for example, both ... c4 and ... e5 come into their own. 13•••l:.fd8 14 h4! White would like to push this pawn all the way to the 6th rank and weaken the dark squares around Black's king. As we shall see, he is remarkably successful in this project. Slower here means less effective. After 14 .i.e3 l'1ac8 15 a4?! Black already had the decent hit 15 ... .i.xf3! 16 gxf3 (since if 16 'iVxf3 there is 16 ... ttJxe5!) 16... c4 17 i.c2 f5! 18 exf6 ttJxf6 and he should have been very comfortable in Babula-Wells, Gothenburg Echt 2005. 14•••ttJrs

81

An important defensive manoeuvre, one which in fact 13 e5, by opening the possibility of a crude line-up of forces against h7, all but forces. Incidentally, part of the argument for 13 e5 was that although it clearly strengthens Black's hold on the d5-square, there is for the moment no reasonable way for the knight to head there. 15 h5 (D) This makes good sense to me and I think 15 i.e3 is very much the same plan in a slightly different order. However, I do want to mention Gelfand-Carlsen, Biel 2005, for precisely the reason that the young Norwegian star treats us to what looks like a model defence. After 15 ... 'ifc6 161'1fdl l:tac8 17 h5, the move 17 ... h6! is easy enough to comprehend. Black prevents a hostile piece from landing on the important g5square, and also holds up the further advance of the h-pawn. Indeed it is far harder to grasp why Ponomariov refrains from this. However, the third element to the idea is far less obvious the manoeuvre of his defensive knight to altogether greener pastures by 18 ttJe 1 ttJh 7 19 'iVg4 ttJg5! 20 'ifi>h2 ~h8 21 a4 ttJe4! 22 ':dc1 .i.g5 23 f4 f5! and by this stage Black has excellent minor pieces and has nullifIed his opponent's attack. It is hardly surprising that Gelfand seized the chance to force a draw. Remarkably mature defence - a real model for Black in this line.

B

15.•.l:tac816 i.e3 Support for d4, as moving the rook from a8 may have brought the idea of ...cxd4 and ....i.xf3 into the frame. 16•••'fIc6 17 a4!?

82

CHESS EXPLAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

It is slightly unusual to combine these rook's pawn advances on both flanks, but certainly this is an idea to be aware of with this structure. An assault on b6 seeks to turn Black's queenside majority, often his trump card come the endgame phase, into a further liability. Certainly, Black's next two moves show that he takes White's intention very seriously, although given that they weaken the position of his queen and king in turn, it is difficult to endorse them entirely. It is also worth noting that Krasenkow refrained from the further advance of his h-pawn, claiming that 17 h6 ltJg6! gives counterplay. 17.••cxd4 18 cxd4.i.b4 19 h6! g6 20 :tfc1 'iVd5 21 .i.g5 k1xc1+ 22 llxc1 :c8 23 :!.xc8 .i.xc8 (D)

w

24"'b2! A clue that the heavy liquidation has by no means solved all Black's problems. The queen is heading for f4 with gain of tempo all the way. 24...a5 25 'ii'cl! i.b7 26 i.b5! The threat is indeed stronger than its execution! 26 'tIi'f4 ltJd7 27 .i.b5 .i.c6! would keep Black afloat. Now, however, the menace of 27

'iVf4 is all too real and since the natural 26 .....e4 27 i.e8! would switch attention to the weakness on f7, Black has little choice. 26...'i!i'b3 27 1!Vf4? A real shame, given White's superb buildup. This was the moment to round things off cleanly with 27ltJh4!. Quite simply, there is no longer any effective answer to 'iff4-f6. 27••.1i'bl+ 28 'it.?h2 'iVf5 29 iVxf5?! exf530 .i.d8 So, White does indeed win a pawn but now ironically it is again Black's minor pieces which are active enough to claim compensation. 30••.ltJe6 31 .i.xb6.i.d5?! A good square for sure, but the priority was rather to tie the knight to d4 by means of 31.. ..i.c3! and ask quite how White intends to make further progress. However, even with White's knight free to manoeuvre again, Black's excellent square coverage should contain any danger. 32 ltJgl f6 33 ltJe2 e6 39 .i.e8 i.xf4 40 .i.xa5 i.xh6 41 .i.b6 .i.c4?! This allows the light-squared bishop to get at Black's kingside pawns and necessitates a further round of defence which the accurate 41...'it.?d6! 42 a5 .i.c4! would have averted. 42 .i.c6 .i.f4 43 as .i.a6 44 .i.g2 'it>d7 45 .i.d5 ~d6 46 .i.g8 h5 47 i.h7 h4 48 h7 37 'It>f2 'It>g6 38 g4 hxg4 39 hxg4l:!.d4! 40 'it>f3 lIf4+ 41 'it>g3 b4 42 axb4 112_112

Game 19

Alexei Dreev - Sergei Tiviakov European Chi Warsaw 2005 1 d4 .!Df6 2 c4 e6 3.!Df3 b6 4 a3 ~a6 (D) 5'iVc2 Defending c4 and threatening the immediate push of the e-pawn to e4 of course has a

certain logic, but once we learn that the logic of Black's play is the belief that the queen stands worse here than on dl, it must give us pause for thought! In addition, as I mentioned

92

CHESS EXPLAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

w

B

in the introduction, there are defences of c4 here which might appear to boast no special drawback: a) 5 e3 is palpably better here than after 4 g3. Nonetheless, 5 ... d5! all but forces 6lLlbd2 since White does not benefit from an exchange on fl. After 6 ... ie7 7 b4 0-0 8 .i.b2 it is probably best to break out at once by 8... c5!? with a fair share of the centre. b) 5 lLlbd2 ib7 6 'ii'c2 is most often met by 6 ... c5, although 7 e4 cxd4 8 e5 is interesting since by 8 ... lLlg4 9 h3lLlh6 10 lLle4! White benefits from not having to recapture on d4 immediately. One logic of forcing 5 lLlbd2 is still to play 6 ... d5!? since after 7 cxd5 exd5 there is a welcome absence of pressure against the d5pawn. It is even possible that this justifies a more ambitious development than usual of the king's bishop to d6. Black should be fine here. c) 5 'ifb3 is probably the least natural of the alternatives, but has sting if Black reacts too routinely. After 5 ... dS 6 cxdS, 6 ...exd5 is well met by the instructive 7 .i.g5! J..e7 8lLlc3 c6 9 .i.xf6! .i.xf6 10 e4! .i.xfl 11 l:hfl 0-0 12 0-0-0 (D) which favours White, illustrating how influence over the key central squares d5 and e5 is the top priority in positions with an isolated queen's pawn. In particular, practice shows that I2 ... lLld7 13 lLle5! gives White a healthy initiative. Hence 6 .. :iWxdS!? looks preferable, although the positions after 7 it'c2 c5 8 lLlc3 it'd7 9 .i.g5!? cxd4 10 l:[d 1 have some life left in them. Perhaps the best antidote is to apply some logical reasoning at move 5. In addition to the familiar 5 ... c5!? idea, either 5 ... .i.e7!? to await 6 lLlc3 before challenging in the centre with 6 ... dS

7 cxdS lLlxd5! or perhaps even 5 ... .i.b7!? askingjust what purpose White's queen has on b3 when e4 is not supported, might come into their own. 5•••.i.b7 In the reasonable belief that e4 is worth preventing for the moment. With the c I-bishop unblocked and c3 still available for the knight, ... dS-based ideas do not look promising. 5 ... c5 6 d5 transposes to Game 18, but White can also play 6 e4, when the best Black can do is probably to transpose back into the main game. 6lLlc3 c5 (D)

w

7 e4 Again, the clear favourite, heading for a structure akin to the Open Sicilian. Of the alternatives, 7 e3?! allows Black the interesting positional possibility of capturing on f3 and then d4, when White's positional weaknesses look too serious for the open lines to be full value. 7 dxc5 is safe enough, but the structure arising after 7... bxc5!?, familiar from the early chapters, does not look any more promising without g3 on the board. There is also a sharp option in 7

4 a3: ALTERNATIVES TO 4... iLh7

d5!? which used to be popular on the basis that 7 ... exd5 8 cxdS lDxd5 9 .ltg5 .lte7 lO lDe4 0-0 II lDd6 offers good piece-play for a pawn. However, once Black unleashed the stunning reply ll...lDe3! 12 fxe3 .ltxf3 with the key tactical idea 13 ~xe7 'fixe7 14lDf5 'iVe4! White rather lost interest, even though 13 exf3 is not crystal clear. 7 •.. cxd4 8 lDxd4 lDc6 As well as the 8... .ltc5 of Game 20, Black can also settle for a hedgehog formation with 8 ... d6. While passive-looking, in reality this contains deceptive dynamism. This is difficult to analyse concretely. It is sufficient to note that neither 'iVc2 nor a3 really looks like a concession here. The former is perhaps the most plausible square given that White would want to vacate dl for a rook later anyway, while the latter is a sensible preparation for a later b4, provided of course that White first develops in full and can ensure adequate cover for his c4pawn. 9 lDxc6 i.xc6 (D)

w

10.ltf4!? A critical move which cuts across Black's intention to contest the bS-h2 diagonal as singlemindedly as possible. Still, there are several instructive and more or less enticing alternatives for White: a) lO e5!? is tricky, gaining a good deal of space to compensate for bringing the c6-bishop back to life and indeed shifting the battle very much to the light squares in general. The natural move would appear to be 10... lDg4, but II 'tIVe2 'fih4 12 h3lDh6 13 g3! ~d8 14lDe4 does seem to leave Black a little short on counterplay. He

93

can look to direct his knight towards d4 for sure, but White's hold on the d6-square means that a breaking of the bind by no means flows automatically from that. Perhaps 1O...lDg8!? is worth a look. b) lO 'tWe2 has really caught on, slightly surprisingly perhaps given that at least one central idea, the advance of the e-pawn, might, as we have just seen, have reasonable validity without it! In tum it is interesting that Black has tended to believe his opponent and settle for lO ... d6 II g3 ~e7 12 .ltg2 0-0 with ... lDd7 to come and so forth. To claim something concrete for White would be a bit much, but my preference in general is very much for the more dynamic hedgehogs in which Black provokes no early exchanges and plays his queen's knight to d7 (S ... d6 above was a case in point). When as here he exchanges on c6, it doesn't look so easy to find a good source of counterplay. Given this, Atalik-Gelashvili, Greek Cht 2003 was interesting. Black tried 10... ~c7!? preparing to meet quiet moves with ....ltd6 while calmly permitting II e5lDg8. Quality hypermodernism or a flagrant disregard for basic principles of development? It is a bit early to judge, but the knight does look more purposeful heading for g6 than it did on f5 in 'a' above. Black was very active after 12 i.f4lDe7 13 0-0-0 a6! 14 h4 b5! when in fact d5 is being carved out as a still better square for the knight. c) lO i.e2!? looks like an unpretentious enough development, but in fact ever since 5mbat Lputian revealed that lO... 'fi'b8 can be met with the very dangerous II f4! (D) (but not 11 .lte3?! .ltc5! with a favourable exchange) it has become a very sharp battleground.

B

94

CHESS EXPLAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

His principal point was tactical. Black's ideal development 11.. ..Jtc5 appears not just to prevent castling, but also to 'pin' the e-pawn against the fate of the hI-rook. If White has to go passive with 12 li'd3, for example, then 12...e5 with ... .i.d4! to follow would give promising chances on the dark squares since any recourse to ltJd5 by White tends to meet with capture by the c6-bishop. In fact though, 12 e5! .Jtxg2 13 exf6.i.xhl 14 fxg7 :!g8 15li'xh7 ~e7 16.i.d2 .Jtc6 17 0-0-0 grants White a ferocious attack for only a small investment, as in LputianKrakops, Elista OL 1998. I also found the attempt to improve on this with 11...e5 very instructive. The problem is that the excellent 12 .l:!.n! affords Black no time for the ... .i.c5-d4 manoeuvre since 12 ... .i.c5 13 fxe5 li'xe5 14 .Jtf4 is strong. Settling for 12 ... .i.d6, Black quickly finds that he is faced with an archetypal Sicilian pawn-storm on the kingside while he has nothing to offer either on the other wing, or more crucially in the closed centre. 13 f5! ~b7 14 .i.f3 a5 15 g4! h6 16 .i.e3 .Jtc5 17 .Jtxc5 bxc5 18 0-0-0 ~e7 19 h4 d6 20 g5 hxg5 21 hxg5ltJe8 22 'iid2 (Nayer-Pogorelov, Moscow 2(02) is a model example of what Black should avoid in this line. He is quite helpless against this unremitting attack. Thus, current theory counsels in favour of 1O... 'iic7, preparing the much more efficient ... 0-0-0 instead of ...~e7 should White proceed a fa Lputian. Black had shied away from this apparently natural move since White sometimes has ltJd5 ideas based on the opposition of the queens on the c-file. Ironically, it is just such a tactic which keeps Black afloat after 11 f4 .Jtc5 12 b4!? .Jtd4 13 e5 ltJd5! 14 ltJe4 ltJxf4 15 ltJd6+ li'xd6! 16 exd6 ltJxg2+ 17 ~d2 .Jtxal with immense complications and apparently fair compensation for the queen, Goldin-Chuchelov, Cappelle la Grande 2001. 10••..Jtc5 (D) An active development, eyeing the d4-square and keeping e7 free for the black queen. However, accepting White's occupation of the h2-b8 diagonal is not to everyone's taste and it is not surprising that the more direct 1O... ltJh5 has also enjoyed a certain following. Unfortunately, this move's most famous hour was certainly not

its finest! After 11 .i.e3 Black's plan demands consistency in fighting for the f4-square, but Karpov's 11.. ..Jtd6?? led to a graphic lesson in the perils of 'loose pieces' as 12 'iVdl! produced a moment of unique embarrassment in his illustrious career. Of course he should prefer either 1l....Jtc5 or 11...'iib8, but White can cover f4 easily enough with 12 .i.xc5 bxc5 13 g3 f5 14 .Jtg2 in the first case and 120-0-0 .Jtd6 13 g3! is probably best in the latter. Black will be driven back with f4 and generating critical pressure against e4 in lines such as 13 ... .i.e5 14 .Jtd3 li'b7 15 .!:thel will only come at a price. White tends to enjoy a dangerous initiative on the dark squares as soon as Black commits to ... .Jtxc3.

w

11 .Jte2 0-0 12 :dl It might appear that White's previous move, by covering the g4- and h5-squares, would render 12 e5 a clear threat. In fact, even here Black has the neat tactic 12... ltJh5!, meeting 13 .\txh5 with 13 .. :~h4! forking bishops when again the main effect has been a severe weakening of the light squares. This trick of course explains White's reluctance to push his e-pawn on the next couple of moves too. Interestingly, White's much sharper alternative, 12 O-O-O!?, tends to provoke from Black a voluntary retreat ofthe knight, viz. 12... ltJe8!? The idea is that while the immediate 12 ... .Jtxf2?! is well met by 13 e5 ltJe8 14 .Jtd3!, the threat will now win a tempo. After, for example, 13 .Jtg3 he will further use the check on g5 to play 13 ... e5! with 14 ... .Jtd4 to come with every chance of generating the sort of mischief on the dark squares which will be his goal throughout

4 a3: ALTERNATNES TO 4 ... i..h7

the section. At any rate, this has sufficed to see the quieter text-move return to fashion. 12•••a5 Since White has defended d4, it is worth preventing the possibility of him gaining space with b4. 13 0-0 White can still try to make an authentic threat out of eS, but only by slightly misplacing his bishop with 13 .i.g3. The feeling after 13 ... 'iVe7 14 eS tbe8 IS 0-0 fS! is that White will probably have to capture en passant anyway, whereupon the knight returns comfortably to the fray. 13•. :~e7 14 .i.g5 h615.i.h4 e5 (D)

95

looks quite active, to the extent of perhaps raising questions concerning the efficacy of 16 .i.f3. 17 l:lfel d61S l:ld3 'iVe6?! This feels like questionable timing. The coming exchange on dS is always complex since it appears to enhance Black's dark-square hold, but it can also assist White in the task of forming a plan. To make it with tempo is useful so ... iVe6 tends to be a cue for tbdS. However, my real objection is that this is the last chance Black gets to play ... gS in the context of restricting his opponent's light-squared bishop, and in view of what is to come, I feel he should avail himself of it. 19 tbd5 .i.xd5 20 cxd5 'Wie7 21 'ii'd2! l:I.tbS 22 .i.g4! (D)

w B

Now of course, White's threat to push eS was all too real. The text-move plays a critical role in clarifying the terms of the positional battle to come. Black pins all his hopes on the dark squares - d4 especially. In exchange, dS is, at least in a theoretical sense, severely weakened too, but in reality it is very difficult to envisage how the crucial defensive bishop on c6 will be diverted from its duties. Much will hinge ultimately on whether Black can break the pin with a timely ... gS without undue cost to his king safety. It is this, as we shall see, that Tiviakov fails to do, with consequences that should have been disastrous. 16 .i.f3 a4?! My hunch is that this is a bit of an unnecessary luxury, since b4 is a very distant worry in any case. Now looks like a time to aim for counterplay with something like 16 .. Jlac8, when slow build-up moves like 17 l:.d2 or 17 .l:r.fel could be answered by 17 ... gS!? 18 .i.g3 .i.d4 with a ... bS break even on the agenda. This

An excellent mini-plan. First White stops ... gS by force. Then, utilizing the fact that 22 ... gS?? still fails to 23 .i.xgS hxgS 24 'ilfxgS+ 'It>f8 2S 'iVh6+! keeping the king firmly in the danger zone, he improves his worst piece with a manoeuvre which should really have been prevented. 22•••'it>f8 23 .i.f5 g5 24 .i.g3 tbh5 25 'It>hl tbg7 26 .i.h7! Unusual but effective. The bishop rests here just until it can be given firm support on fS. It is surely testimony to Black's coordination problems that such a square can be a safe haven, even for a fleeting visit! 26••• 'it>eS 27l:r.c1 'it>d7 2Sl;tf3! :thS 29 .i.f5+ 'It>eS 30 li'e2! h5 31 'ilfb5+ 'it>dS 32 .i.xe5?! 'Right moment, wrong breakthrough'! In fact this move still leaves White better, but misses the spectacular but ultimately logical 32

96

CHESS EXPLAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

b4!! axb3 33 .:!.xc5! bxc5 34 ~c6 when 34 .. .'ii'a7 35 'iVxd6+ is slaughter, while 34...l:tb8 35 J:i.xb3! runs Black out of space on his own back rank a very elegant exploitation of Black's inability to connect his rooks. It is, in the case of both breakthroughs, no coincidence that removal of the magnificently entrenched bishop on c5 is the key to White's idea. 32.•.dxe5 33 l:1xc5! bxe5 34 'iVb6+ 'ike7 35 ~f6+ ~e7 36 ~b6+ 'iVe7 37 1Wf6+ ~e7 3S

41... 'ikxd6 42 .:!.d3! wins significant amounts of material. 40•.•'ifi>e7 41 hxg5l:thS 42 d6+!? Clearly White is concerned to avoid a position in which he has pawns for the exchange, but no open lines for his rook. Sound general thinking, but there was also a case for 42 'iVxf6 here. 42...'ifi>xd6 43 ltd3+ Pbl d6!?

It seems in a sense a shame to allow the rather static structure which results from the doubling of the e-pawns. Nonetheless, Black can undoubtedly look forward to some enduring dark-square influence thereafter. Moreover, the question arises, if not the text-move, then how to proceed? Throwing in 16...lIcS!? is all very well, but 17 :hel d6 is a similar story if White exchanges on e5. However, there is always the chance that White might get too ambitious and miss the ease with which his opponent can switch to playing on the light squares after IS f4.txc3 19 'iWxc3 b5!, which was fun for Black in M.Gurevich-Vaganian, USSR Ch (Moscow) 1985. 17 .txe5 dxe5 (D)

w

18 'ife2 IS f3!? :dS would transpose to the game Dreev-Cu.Hansen, Esbjerg 2003, in which White showed a much more measured plan, geared to the kind of simplification by which he can hope to exploit Black's doubled pawns and potentially rather directionless bishop. After 19 ~e2! ~c6 20 .l:txdS+ 'iVxdS 21 lIdl fIIe7

98

CHESS EXPLAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

22 'it'd2 .l:tc8 there is nothing so terrible about Black's position, but he is a little passive, and White has chances to improve with b4 in conjunction with 'ii'd6, seeking further exchanges and keeping an edge. 18••.Itd819 'iYe3?! ktd4! (D)

w

Black's dominance of the d-file certainly makes sense, but the move-order rather carelessly affords Black the chance he has been seeking to open lines against the white king. 23 .i.c2! looks right, and only thereafter 24 tiJe2, when Black really could only secure a ...b5 break in the context of a more wholesale simplification. If Khenkin believed that the coming simplification rendered the danger on the queenside insignificant, he is soon forced to revise that view. 23....l:i.4d7 24 .i.e2 (D)

B

Although an outpost, this square is not fully secure with a white knight still on the board. Nevertheless, this is a good moment to use it, forcing White to guard the e-pawn before evicting the rook since 20 tiJb5? llxd3! would be deeply embarrassing. 20 f3 .i.a6! Not only preventing 21 tiJb5, but also holding out the hope of some time advancing the bpawn to b5 to open some lines against his opponent's king. In any case, it is obvious that this piece had no future on b7 given the rock-like stability of the e4-pawn. 21 b3 file7 22 c;t>b2l:tad8 (D)

w

23 tiJe2?! This is definitely open to question. Expelling the rook from d4 in the context of challenging

24... b5! 25 e5 b4! The real point. White cannot continue to keep the files closed, while at the same time Black's bishop - which looked very much like a problem piece when we assessed the position at move 17 - is tremendously enhanced. 26 axb4 .l::tb8! 27 .i.d3! There is no serious defence of the b-pawn because 27 'it>a3? would be deservedly punished by 27 ...1\Vb7! while 27 llxd7?! tiJxd7 only makes matters worse as the c-pawn will become vulnerable as the b4-pawn drops. This is the first of two level-headed simplifying decisions by White. The second, exchanging the last queenside pawns, restricts Black's plus to the fruits of his superior piece-play. 27....txd3 28 ':'xd3 I1xb4 29 l:tct 'ir'e6 30 :td6! llxd6 31 exd6 'ikxd6 32 li'xa7 tiJd7 33 WIIe7? Still the right idea, but presumably missing Black's vicious 34th move. It was necessary to preface this with 33 ttc8+! 'ith7 and only then 34 WIIc7, as Adams points out, to keep c5 genuinely covered. Then Black can keep some initiative with 34 ...Wlla6 35 WIIxd7 'iVxe2+ 36 llc2

4 a3: ALTERNATIVES TO 4 ... iLh7

"iWe3, but after 37 l:tc3! it is unclear how he intends to make further progress. 33•••"iWd3! 34 ~c2 (D)

99

W

B

34...lbc5! The decisive blow. Of course this knight is immune from capture and 35 lbc3 fails drastically not so much to an immediate 'cashing in' with 35 ... .l:!.xb3+?! as to the crushing 35 ... ~c4!. So the pressure on b3 forces White to exchange on d3, and since 36... lbxcl hits the knight on e2, to part with significant material. 35 'ii'xd3 li'lxd3+ 36 ~c3 lbxc1 37 lbxc1 l:.bS The rest, as the books like to say in a phrase that often seriously clouds a multitude of sins, is 'just a matter of technique'. The plan here is clear enough - to bring the king to help contain the b-pawn as quickly as possible while activating the rook by opening files on the kingside but the detail reveals the execution as far from trivial. 3Slbd311cS+! 39 d2?! f6 40 g4 g5 41 b4 we7?! Consistent with the plan mentioned above, but missing the nice shot 41...1k4! with the point that after 42 b5 ':'cS! and 43 ...l:.bS the essential pawn drops, while otherwise White's pieces are respectively cut off and tied down. This would have significantly hastened the end. 42lbc5 e7 43 ~c3 h5! 44 gxh5 l:[hS 45 b5 ~d6 46lbb7+ d7, but after 17 .if4 the king's position also tends to become an issue. 17 .. J:tc8 18 .ib5+ .tc6 19 'it>d2 a6?! 20 .id3 'it>dS 21 l'lel .id5 22 l'lb2 worked out well for White in Wojtaszek-Tiviakov, Gothenburg Echt 2005 since Black has been persuaded to weaken b6 without even putting the d4-pawn under any pressure. c) 7 ... 0-0!? (D) looks at the time of writing as if it might be the stiffest test of all.

w

White's problem is by now becoming familiar - it is not dissimilar from that after 7 ... .te7. In order to make sense of 6 tDd2 he must play for e4. However, by this flexible development Black again is poised to respond in the centre as appropriate. S f3? d5! is out of the question since with the knight on d2 the further break ...c5 will be awkward to meet. S e3 is playable, but again I like the look of a 'Tartakower-type' structure with S... d5! with a later ... i.e7 still available. Just what is the knight doing on d2 in

107

such a position? Thus again, to be consistent it seems that White must throw caution to the wind with the pawn sacrifice 8 e4!? In tum, it is only really acceptance which makes sense for Black, who may otherwise be smothered in the centre. His problem is that the weakening of his kingside which winning the e-pawn entails carries obvious dangers with the black king already castled. After 8... g5 9 i.g3 (D) he is faced with an interesting choice of captures.

B

9 ... tDxe4 looks the more natural since the liberation of the f7 -pawn might be expected to assist the defence. Nonetheless, lines like 10 tDcxe4!? i.xe4 11 a3 i.xd2+ 12 'ft'xd2 tDc6 13 h4 .ig6 14 hxg5 hxg5 15 f4! do seem to offer White a pretty decent initiative, especially on the dark squares around the black king. So the spotlight has turned on 9 ... .ixe4!?, exploiting the fact that since the capture of this bishop would give Black irritating counterplay against c3, the piece will survive and relocate to g6 to give the black king a little extra cover. It is none too clear how White should proceed here, although I will not join the queue to repeat my 10 h4 i.g6! 11 hxg5 hxg5 12 'iff3 tDc6 13 .ixc7! 'iVe7!. After Black's forced, but nonetheless cool response to White's tactical trick, it is the tum of his own development and counterplay against d4 to swing the initiative his way. With 14 .id3 tDxd4 15 'il¥h3 tDh7! (Wells-Elianov, Amsterdam 2005) it gradually became clear during a long think that White has no good way to bolster his visually impressive array of forces. The d4-pawn needs support and for this reason, although the expenditure of a further tempo in justification of a gambit looks strange,

108

CHESS EXPLAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

I find an early a3 interesting, perhaps on move 12, or even Wojtaszek's recent 10 a3!? and the mess which resulted from 1O... .txc3 11 bxc3 i.g6 12 'iWf3 lLlc6 13 MlbhS 14 hxgS lLlxg3 IS 'iWxg3 'ii'xgS 16 "ffixc7 raises far more questions than it answers. Currently this looks like Black's 7th move of choice. 8 d5! (D)

B

This pawn sacrifice has been very rapidly established as the main line here. If the 6lLld2 line is all about the battle for e4, then this is the whole thing writ large. In spite of the loss of tempo with his knight, White claims that his early achievement of the e4 advance will justify his investment and the evidence is hard to rebuff. 8 ••.exd5 Acceptance is the acid test of a gambit of course, but the risks here do seem very considerable. The main alternative is somehow to close the centre with ... d6 and ... eS but in that case there is not much compensation for White's enhanced space. 9 cxd5 '¥IIe7 One of a number of ways to win a pawn, all of them risky not least because they all tend to involve some recourse to the loosening move ... gS. Certainly committing to this right away by 9 ... gS 10 i.g3lLlxdS lllLlxdS .txd5 12 a3! .taS 13 e4 i.b7 (13 ... .txe4? 14 b4!) 14 i.c4 (Gelashvili-Berkes, Greece 2004) leaves Black with a difficult defence. As well as weak squares and a suspect king, Black also has a problem bishop on as to worry about. 10 'ji'c2 0-0 11 e4!? My suspicion is that this move is one for the anthology of 'strong but not strictly necessary

novelties', a sure sign that Black's defence needs major strengthening earlier on. It could even mean the demise of 7 ... cS. For the record, 11 0-0-0 also seems strong since after 11 ... i.xc3 12 bxc3! i.xdS 13 e4 i.c6 14 f4! d6 IS lIel Black must contend with the cruel irony that having won his pawn without resorting to ... g5, the threat of eS might force him to play it anyway. 11••• g5 12 .tg3 .txc3 13 bxc3 .txd5 14 O-O-O.txe4 It is reasonably clear that the other capture, 14... lLlxe4?, succumbs to a lethal pin on the efile: 15 llel! simply nets material. However, it is worth pointing out that throughout this section Black's position is riddled with holes such as d6 and targets such as his advanced g5-pawn which mean there is little respite in eschewing material gains. 14... .tc6 IS e5lLlhS 16lLlc4! is typically miserable for the defence. 15lbxe4 'ilixe416 .td3 'iWc6 (D)

W

17h4! The threat to open the h-file is fearsome indeed. However, avoiding this is not enough to avert disaster - the new target will be the h6pawn. There are simply too many open lines and diagonals to defend if White proceeds with energy. 17••• g418 'ji'd2! q;g7 19 i.f4lLlh5 Or 19...nhS 20 hS! renewing the threat of i.xh6+ now followed by "ffig5+. 20 .te4 "ffif6 21 i.xh6+! Of course it is always a shame to exchange queens when the opponent's king continues to look distinctly draughty. However, knowing when to transform the nature of an advantage

4 lDc3: INTRODUCTION AND 4... i.h4 - THE QUEEN's!NIMW HYBRID

is a vitally important skill in converting it, mastering the transformation from initiative to material in particular. 21.••"iVxh6 22 'i¥xh6+ 'itxh6 23 .txa8 lbf4 24 l:the1 c4 25 %:td6+ 'it>h5 26 Ite5+ f5 27 .te4!

109

There is no let-up. White makes his material gains tell all the more effectively by maintaining the initiative. 27.•.'it>xh4 28 .l:.xf5 ~xf5 29 .txf5 g3 30 fxg3+ 'it>xg3 31.txd7 1-0

Game 23

Loek van Wely - Viktor Bologan Wijk aan lee 2004 1 d4 lbf6 2 c4 e6 3 lbf3 b6 4 lbc3 .tb4 5 ~b3!? (D)

B

A fascinating system which demands, perhaps of White still more than of his opponent, a real stylistic versatility. We shall see here the full range from positional grind to wild tactical affray, and it is Black who gets plenty of choice as to which type of battle will ensue. Part of White's idea is to achieve a position akin to a favourable version of the 4 1i'c2 Nirnzo-Indian, notably if he can encourage Black to waste time defending the bishop with a move which does not otherwise contribute much. I should note that I have adopted a little 'authorial licence' with historical accuracy here. In the interests of the structure of the theoretical discussion, I have substituted this customary move-order for the 4 ....tb7 S .tgS .tb4 6 ifb3 which was actually played. 5•••c5 (D) Not the only way to defend b4, but creating some extra tension in the centre is a logical insurance policy against the danger of simply squandering tempi.

By contrast, S... .txc3+?! would most blatantly cede time in comparison with typical Nirnzo-Indian positions since the exchange has been made unprompted by a3. Somewhere between the two lie S..."fie7 and S...aS, examples of moves which have some useful impact, but might not otherwise be first choices. The latter also incorporates a trap, in that an over-hasty 6 a3?! is well met by the zwischenzug 6 ... a4!, exploiting the fact that 7 "iVxb4?! lbc6 8 'ifbS ItaS! traps the queen. However, the more patient 6 .tgS .tb7 7 e3 h6 8 .tM gS 9.tg3lbe4 10 .td3 looks pleasant for White, and after the casuallO ... d6?! he even got the chance to demonstrate a nice method of fighting for e4 by 11 .txe4! .txe4 12 O-O-O! .txc3 13 'ili'xc3lbd7 14 lbel! 'ilie7 IS f3 .tb7 16 e4 in I.SokolovBrynell, Bundesliga 200S/6. Note in the final position that S... aS plays no positive role, while the opposite-coloured bishops are likely to favour the attacker.

w

6.tg5 For reasons evident throughout the chapter, this pin packs a punch in a way which other

110

CHESS EXPLAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

squares such as f4 do not. However, there is a very interesting move-order choice here between the text-move and 6 a3 !? This will come to pretty much the same thing in the event of, for example, 6 ... i.aS 7 i.g5 i.b7 resulting in a popular position analysed in the notes below. However, as it has slowly dawned on me that the main game here might be Black's soundest defence of all, so the significance of this attempt to avoid it grows. There are two important alternatives: a) 6 ... i.xc3+ 7 'iVxc3 comes close to resembling the popular 'Classical' Nirnzo-Indian lines with 4 'iVc2. However, there remains a feeling in this context that 5 ... c5 may not fit in ideally. After 7 ... i.b7, White in fact often transposes to the main game with 8 i.g5, but I would be very inclined to flick in an exchange of pawns on c5 first to circumvent the problems which Van Wely encounters later. Also, while it looks as if the alternative 7 ... cxd4 might represent some denting of White's centre, it may well be that after 8 tDxd4 the possibility to play f3 as a preparation for e4 may merely have enhanced it. b) 6 ... i.aS 7 i.g5 h6 8 i.h4 g5!? (or 8...tDc6 9 O-O-O!) 9 i.g3 g4 10 tDd2 cxd4 (D) is a very forcing option that results in wonderfully crazy play but is essentially a graphic reminder that the insertion of a3 and ...i.aS does mean that this piece is now on a safer square than b4.

w

Black's c-pawn was no longer just pretending to have ... cxd4 in mind! However, while different from the ... tDc6-based 'wild lines' we shall witness below, my scepticism just about extends here despite the fact that a player of Michael Adams's class has himself adopted the

black side. Strangely, White has not tended to follow the recipe suggested by Kiselev as long ago as 1991 - he indicated that 11 tDb5 tDe4 12 tDc7+ ~f8 13 O-O-O! retains the initiative since mass exchanges on d2 following 13 .. .'ifg5 14 'iVd3 do not guarantee Black material satisfaction since not just the rook on a8 but critically the neighbouring knight too is in peril. Similarlyafter 13 ... i.xd2+ 14 l:.xd2 tDxd2 15 ~xd2 i.b7 16 tDxa8 i.xa8 17 i.d6+! with ~g3 to follow, neither king sits in any kind of elegant regal comfort, but Black's appears to be even less secure. This is not the kind of line to enter into with less than meticulous preparation! Now we return to 6 i.g5 (D):

B

6...i.b7 Logical, but there is a great deal going on in this position, and as a consequence Black has some very sharp options to try to show that White is in a sense already overstretched. Principal among these is 6... tDc6, a logical enough follow-up to 5 ... c5, but in my view not blending especially happily with the queenside fianchetto. Specifically, with Black's bishop still on b4, White has 7 d5! without needing to worry about an invasion on d4. Black's only strategy here is based on 7 ...tDaS attacking the queen and with it gaining the option to grab White's c-pawn. However, after 8 'iVc2 h6 9 i.h4 (D) none of the options strike me as especially enticing. Moves such as 9 ... d6 which allow 10 e4 free of charge are much too compliant to fight for equality. 9 ... tDxc4 is a bit more combative and has the point that 10 e4 tDxb2! is at least complicated now that White's bishop has been

4 liJc3: INTRODUCTION AND 4... i..b4 - THE QUEEN'S!NIMZO HYBRID

111

B

w

pushed to h4 and therefore has no simple retreat to d2. Black plans to meet 11 ~xb2 with 11...g5 and 12... lbxe4. Instead 10 O-O-O! looks a good deal more convincing. Then typically, 10 ...iLxc3 11 ~xc3 creates a new set of problems since any attempt to break the pin with ... g5 thereafter must reckon with the pseudosacrifice lbxg5, drawing attention to a new and gruesome pin along the al-h8 diagonal! Neither does 9 ... iLa6 look any better. White kept the initiative at no cost at all by 10 e4 g5 11 iLg3 exdS 12 O-O-O! iLxc3 13 exdS! in WellsKoneru, British Ch (Millfield) 2000, as the threat of i.d6 and catastrophe on the e-file gave Black no time to preserve her bishop. 7a3 Here too there are options. One important idea to be aware of is that Black has delayed ... h6 with intent - he wants to have the option of ...iLxc3 in the event that White moves a piece into the ambit of a black knight on c3; e.g., 7 lIdl iLxc3+!?, when 81i'xc3 is met by 8 ... lbe4! 9 iLxd8 lbxc3. However, this is not the end of the story, for such moves as 8 bxc3!? are quite playable since the pin on the f6-knight remains far from easy to resolve. More surprisingly, even after 7 0-0-0 there is a school of thought that thinks questions of relative king safety and development fully compensate for White's structure despite the simplification after 7 ... iLxc3 8 'iVxc3 lbe4 9 iLxd8lbxc3 10 bxc3 'itxd8 11 dS! with e4 to come and some issues for Black to address in bringing his queenside pieces into play. 7•••iLxc3+!? My opinion of this move has risen in direct proportion to the problems encountered by the alternative 7 ... iLaS 8 dxc5!? lba6 (D).

It has long been acknowledged here that winning a pawn by 9 cxb6? lbc5 10 'iVc2 iLe4 11 'iVd 1 iLxc3+ 12 bxc3 'iWxb6 offers Black excellent compensation both structural and dynamic. However, Ivan Sokolov has recently suggested that the fault might lie exclusively with the greedy 9 cxb6, and that 8 dxc5!? is in fact a perfectly consistent way to try to make something of the bishop-pair. The key move is 9 c6!, which ensures that recapturing the pawn will entail a slight misplacing of the lightsquared bishop rather than an unambiguous improvement of the knight. The example which most impressed me is I.Sokolov-Macieja, Stepanakert 2005 in which White gave a model demonstration of his chances after 9 .. .iLxc6 10 ~c2 iLxc3+ 11 'ili'xc3lbc5 12lbd2! 0-0 13 f3 h6 14 iLh4 d6 15 b4lbcd7 16 e3 as 17 iLd3 axb4 18 axb41:hal + 19 ~xal ~c7 20 0-0 l!a8 21 ~c3 i.b7 22 .l:tal .l:hal+ 23 'ili'xal. Now Black chose to try to break out of his passivity with 23 ...dS but this weakens him further on the dark squares and after 24 i.g3 'ii'c8 25 ~2 ~a8 26 cxdSlbxdS 27 e4! lbe7 28lbc4lbc8 29 b5! it is difficult to claim that his light-squared bishop is not very much worse off than before. A nice lesson in restricting the opponent's pieces. There is of course no compulsion for White to play 8 dxc5 - moves such as 8 l:tdl and 8 e3 have some sting due to the enduring power of the pin, but at present the onus seems to be on Black to avoid positions in which he just suffers at the hands of his opponent's bishop-pair. 8 'i!kxc3 (D)

8••. h6! If counterplay cannot be created then White's bishop-pair is likely to count for something.

112

CHESS EXPLAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

B

After some useful but neutral move such as 8 ...0-0 it looks best for White to re-establish control of e4 with 9 dxc5 bxc5 10 lbd2 followed by e3 and f3 to blunt the b7-bishop. This is nothing disastrous for Black - indeed it can directly transpose to the 4 'ii'c2 Nimzo-Indianbut an early ...c5 in these positions is not everyone's cup of tea. Hence our move-order has only been revived by the very concrete active plan we are about to see. 9 .th4 gS 10 .tg3lbe4! 11 ~d3lbxg3 12 hxg3 ~f6! (D)

Opening the position in general and the dfile in particular makes some sense, but White might pay dearly for taking the e5-square away from his knight. It is, however, not obvious what else to recommend here. 13 0-0-0 would be desirable were it not for the reply 13 ... i.xf3! 14 gxf3 "it'xd4 15 "it'xd4 cxd4 16 l:hd4 lbc6, when Black has nothing at all to fear in this ending, Y.Milov-Onishchuk, Polanica Zdroj 1999.13 e3!? has some logic, but whether after 13 ... i.xf3 14 gxf3lbc6! 150-0-0 'iVxf3 White can hope to prove full compensation seems a bit doubtful. 13... bxc5 14 0-0-0 g4! ISlbh2 A rather ugly retreat, but after 15lbd2, the f-pawn can be grabbed without too much inconvenience. IS...hS (D)

w

w

Only through this specific very active defence can Black's play be justified. He attacks d4 and also casts an eye in the direction of the f2-pawn (White must at least reckon with the further advance of Black's g-pawn hereafter) while also usefully defending h8. In other words, although the combination of ... c5 and ... g5 looks rather loose and should generally be treated with suspicion, it seems to work here as part of an admirably pre-emptive dark-square strategy. 13 dxcS

16 'ti'd6? A serious error in a rather bizarre position. The knight on h2 looks a truly dreadful piece, but to compensate for this, pressure on the dfile hinders Black's development, his queen is for the moment tied to duties defending the h8rook (preventing lbxg4) while if the rook moves then h5 can be weak. The text-move jettisons time whereas 16 f4! followed by e3 would have begun the process of disentangling, with reasonable chances. 16.....gS+ 17 l:td2?! l:lg8! 18 f4 ~e7 19 ~eSfS

Black has simply been granted time to consolidate his kingside edifice, which is now a tower of strength with no vulnerable points. White's next move is a losing blunder, but his task is already very difficult.

4 tlJc3: INTRODUCTION AND 4... ~b4 - THE QUEEN's!NIMZO HYBRID

20 lld6? ttJc6 21 'ii'xcS lDa5! 22 'il'b4liJxc4! (D)

w

Not only has Black developed, he has suddenly whipped up a winning attack. 23 'ii'xb7 'ifxd6! 24 'iixaS+ g8 20 'il'xcSleaves White with the more pleasant structure since c7 remains weak. However, both 12 ... cS and 1O... liJe4 look like improvements for Black. However, there are drawbacks to delaying the clarification of the centre with cxdS too. For one thing, a slow manoeuvre such as 10 'ii'c2 prevents ...ltJe4 and might even claim to prepare e4, but is nonetheless not really recommendable as after 1O... dxc4 11 bxc4 i..xf3! 12 gxf3 both 12...cS and even 12... eS appear to yield decent counterchances against White's weakened kingside. 10...liJe4!? 1l.lhc1 'ilie712 l:tfdl f5 (D) Not for the first time in the course of the book, Black has opted for a formation which has a close resemblance to the Dutch. In a sense the combination of ... b6 and ... dS seems a bit loose in such a context. However, the key to the viability of Black's formation is the excellent defence

4 e3 AND MINOR 4TH-MoVE ALTERNATIVES

w

afforded to his potential weak spots - the c7and e6-pawns as well as the crucial e5-square are all well covered. Moreover, White is hardly overwhelmed by a surfeit of tempting plans. Whereas normally he might be quite willing to exchange pawns on d5 and thus clarify the blocked status of the b7-bishop, here not only is he reluctant to strengthen further his opponent's hold on the e5-square, he also badly needs to retain the dynamic possibility of trying to organize the move c5 much as we saw Portisch accomplish in the note to move 10 above. 13 a4!? (D) Although this novelty ultimately draws blood, White's new plan of using his a-pawn to soften up the black queenside with a view to weakening b6 and enhancing ideas such as lDe5 looks laudable enough in principle, but rather slow given that Black has both realistic chances on the kingside and the option of opening the centre. Specifically, Black is able to implement an aggressive rook manoeuvre which the main alternative 13 lDa4!? would prevent.

B

13••• ID'6! 14 a5 l:th615 g3

117

A necessary precaution. It is too late to keep the long diagonal closed by 'flicking in' 15 cxd5 since 15 ... .i.xh2+! 16lDxh2 ii'h4 would give Black a powerful attack. 15•••lDdf6 Gershon, writing in ChessBase Magazine, mentions the fact that 15 ... dxc4!? is a logical response to the weakening of the long light diagonal, suggesting that 16 bxc4lDg5 offers decent counterplay. Probably true, but I would be reluctant to make it so easy for White to solve the problem of his vulnerable f3-knight and to invite him to play the useful f4. Crude it may be, but 16 ... 'itf7!? preparing to add the weightiest piece to the attack by ...'iVg6-g4 might set White still thornier problems. Instead Black decides that keeping the long diagonal closed is a price worth paying to strongpoint his knight on e4. 16 axb6 cxb617 cxd5 exd5?! (D) Again there was a strong case for giving priority to the scope of the 'Queen's Indian bishop' by 17 ... lDxc3 18 .i.xc3 .i.xd5, when Black's influence over the central light squares makes a good impression.

w

18lDe5! A fine temporary pawn sacrifice which at a stroke reduces Black's attacking arsenal and brings the white pieces to life. It is not hard to see that capturing twice on e5 is not an option since a black queen on e5 would be vulnerable to a catastrophic discovered attack. However, the sequence in the game required fine calculation as the pressure against h2 initially intensifies ... 18••..i.xe5 19 dxe5lDg4 20 .i.xe4!

118

CHESS EXPLAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

The point. By forcing recapture with the dpawn, White's major pieces suddenly have two open files with which to drum up effective counterplay. Furthermore by choosing this piece to capture with, White gains considerable time and momentum. 20•••dxe4 21 ~c4+ ~h8 22 tLld5 ..txd5 23 'ti'xd5 (D)

B

The contrast with the last diagram could hardly be clearer. True, Black still has real threats on the kingside, but now he must play carefully just to hold the balance. 23•.•:e8? Natural enough, but a serious mistake. The transformation in the centre has not only liberated White's major pieces, but it has also created a potentially fearsome beast in the b2-bishop too. For this reason, g7 can now be seen as the most vulnerable spot in Black's position and so 23 ...:tg8! is preferable. Perhaps surprisingly,

White's activity then is probably only sufficient for a sharing of the honours after 24 h4 :e6! 25 l:c6 ':'xc6 26 'ii'xc6 tLlxe5 since the weakened light squares around the white king all but force 27 ..txe5. It is also worth noting that in contrast with the game, the effects of deflecting the opponent's rook from the 6th rank by 24 h3? would be disastrous here since 24 ... .l:txh3 25 'ii'd7 can be sidestepped with 25 ... 'ifg5! and White's king is once again in peril. 24 h3! l:xh3 25 ~d7! 'ir'xd7 26l:txd7 tLlxf2 This is a valiant attempt to create counterchances through tactics, based on the fact that the b2-bishop, though very influential, is also unprotected. However, it is not just the softness of g7 that troubles Black but the very powerful passed e-pawn. This also trumps the alternative defence 26 ...%1h2 by 27 l:cdl! h6 28 l:d8 %1xd8 29 l:[xd8+ ~h7 30 e6 when Black can set up some irritating checks but not prevent the king from running to the queenside. 27 e6? White underestimates Black's counterplay. 27 ~g2! l:h5 28 e6 tLlg4 29 ..txg7+ 'iii'g8 30 ..td4 was the way to proceed. 27 ..•tLlg4 281hg7 .l:1xg3+ 29 Wfl l:f3+ 30 'it'e111xe3+ 31 Wdl tLlf2+? Now the checks against White's king peter out, and the crucial bishop remains immune from capture. Instead, 31.. Jld3+! draws; e.g., 32 'it'c2 tLle3+ 33 Wbl l:xb3 and 34... l:xb2+. 32 Wd21bb3 33 ..tal! %1a3 34 kte7+ 1-0

Game 25

Baadur Jobava - Vasily Ivanchuk Capab/anca mem, Havana 2005 1 d4 tLlf6 2 c4 e6 3 tLlf3 b6 4 ..tg5 It is well known that the great World Champion Emanuel Lasker counselled the development of 'knights before bishops' and while - in common with most chess maxims - exceptions abound, I have not as yet worked out why many players are currently preferring the text-move to tLlc3 with the idea of ..tg5 to follow. On the one hand, there seems to be little mileage in

delaying ttJc3 beyond move 5 anyway, while Ivanchuk's superbly creative solution indicates that Lasker might have a good point in this case! So much for move-order. As for the efficacy of the ..tg5 pin in general, it is worth pointing out that things are rather different here from Chapter 6. Black is not yet committed to ... ..tM and therefore can, and frequently does, choose

4 e3 AND MINOR 4TH-MoVE ALTERNATNES

modestly to break the pin with ...i.e7 or even to chase the bishop with ... h6 and ... gS reserving the option of tucking this piece into g7 thereafter. In the former case at least the play will be significantly less sharp than in the previous chapter. We shall deal with all this in later notes. For the moment one move which merits attention and for a time in the 1980s made an impact probably exceeding its objective merits is 4 i.f4!? (D).

B

This owed something to the very distinctive and unfamiliar structures it gave rise to and much more to the marvellously flamboyant advocacy of Tony Miles, who had tremendous fun with it. There are, however, two antidotes which appeal to me: a) 4 ... i.b7 S e3 (of course S tLJc3?! i.b4 leads to a pleasant Nimzo-Indian type position for Black in which the role for the bishop on f4 is unclear) S ... i.e7 looks unpretentious, but Black gains time through the positional 'threat' to gain the bishop-pair by ...lbhS and this is usually sufficient to provoke 6 h3, which contributes little to White's development. Then can follow 6 ... 0-0 7lbc3 dS!? (D). Miles had some very pleasant experiences facing the static formation in the centre after 8 cxdS exdS, but as we have seen at several points in the book, there is often a case for keeping the centre fluid in this opening and as 8 ... lbxdS 9 lbxdS ~xdS!? seems more in the spirit, it is a bit strange that this has not been more popular from the start. Acceptance of the pawn offer with 10 i.xc7 appears to give Black rich counterplay with 1O... i.b4+! 11 lbd2 lbc6 while

119

W

after 10 i.d3, the decentralizing 1O ... i.b4+?! should definitely be avoided since the white king is not so uncomfortable on e2 anyway, but simply 1O... cS! will claim a fair share of the centre. b) 4 ... i.b4+!? immediately has some nice points. If White settles for the 'natural'S lbbd2 then S... .tb7 6 a3 i.e7! with ...cS to follow looks quite comfortable for the defence. Hence he tends to reply S lbfd2!?, which has more punch than it looks since the plan is to drive back the bishop and then develop the queen's knight to c3 with the customary fight for e4 and d5 in prospect. However, rather than S... ..tb7 6 e3 0-0 7 a3 i.e7 8 lbc3 which transposes back into a relatively theoretical line, the immediate S... lbhS!? makes good sense as White has no reasonable way to retain the bishop-pair. 6..tg3 i.b7 7 a3 lbxg3 8 hxg3 i.f8! followed by ... g6 and ... i.g7 is quite harmonious and there is limited sense to the knight on d2 into the bargain. We now return to 4 i.gS (D):

B

4•.. h6!?

120

CHESS EXPLAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

An attractive move in the context of the very interesting and original dark-square strategy already envisaged here by Ivanchuk. Black need not fear his opponent setting up a broad pawncentre with S i.xf6 followed by e4 - even most Trompowsky players would acknowledge that. Such a surrender of the bishop-pair in exchange for control of the centre has its place when White can still keep a tight grip on the central dark squares, but feels suspicious when 2 c4 is already on the board, however imperceptible that weakening of d4 is in the first instance. The main line is nonetheless 4 ... i.b7 S tiJc3, when the solid S... i.e7 deserves consideration. White can choose between: a) 6 e3 h6 (not an essential element of Black's defence in this line, but in general there is no real drawback and the king does gain 'luft') 7 i.h4 (D).

B

7...ttJe4!? sltJxe4 i.xe4! (better than S...i.xh4 9 i.d3 when White will have high hopes in the battle for e4 and dS, and if Black contests the centre with ... dS he will have only engineered that now familiar exchange of minor pieces which often forms part of White's agenda in the Queen's Gambit!) 9 .i.g3! 0-0 10 .i.d3 i.xd3 11 'iixd3 d6! and although White looks fairly healthy in the zone of the immediate central squares, lines like 12 dS eS! make graphic a slight concern over the prospects for activating his g3-bishop which, in essence, is why Black should be quite comfortable here. Of course, 7 ... tiJe4 is by no means compulsory anyway. It is a fairly safe rule - if dS will not be a problem, then ... cS is probably a reasonable move! This holds here due to the ... tiJxdS

trick, and games such as AzmaiparashviliAronian, Saint Vincent ECC 200S, which continued 7... cS 8 i.d3 cxd4 9 exd4 0-0 10 .i.c2 dS 11 cxdS tiJxdS 12 'tli'd3 g6 13 tiJxdS i.xdS 14 .i.xe7 'tli'xe7, are a good advertisement since the exchange of minor pieces is encouraging to Black when fighting against his opponent's isolated pawn. Black's cute and effective activation of his rook after IS .i.b3 'iVb4+ 16 "ii'c3 'iWxc3+ 17 bxc3 i.xf3! 18 gxf3 ttJc6 19 'iitd2 lHd8 20 l:hdl l:tac8 21 l1ac1 tiJaS 22 'iitd3 lIcS! is worth staying with the game a few moves for. b) 6 'ii'c2!? is thus partly directed against ... ttJe4 ideas. Again 6 ... h6 7 i.h4 cS! makes sense. However, more testing than White's treatment in 'a' above is to play 8 dxcS bxcS 9 e3 0-0 10 i.e2 d6 11 lldl tiJbd7 12 0-0 'ii'b6 13 Itd2 l1fdS 14 l:fdl ttJf8 IS h3 l:d7 16 i.g3 l:ad8 17 tiJel!? as in Dreev-Akopian, Beersheba Wcht 200S when although all White's immediate threats are comfortably parried, I have the sense that this is from White's standpoint one of the more promising guises of this familiar structure and makes good sense of the bishop on g3. Even when Black clarified matters by heading for the hanging pawns, tiJd3 and i.f3 ensured some enduring pressure. S i.h4 (D)

B

5...i.e7 Another strategy, again with a choice of viable move-orders, is S....i.b7 6 tiJc3 gS!? 7 i.g3 tiJhS. White should avoid 8 i.eS f6 9 'ii'c2 for the surprising reason that Black can ignore the 'threat' to g6 and play 9... fxeS! 10 'ii'g6+ 'iite7 11 'ii'xhS exd4! 12 tiJxd4 .i.g7 with ... 'ii'f8 or

4 e3 AND MINOR 4TH-MoVE ALTERNATNES

...'ii'e8 to come according to need. However, the power of the two bishops with an open centre which outweighs the superficially vulnerable black king contrasts a little with their influence after the more solid 8 e3lLlxg3 9 hxg3 J.g7. For example, 10'ii'c2'ii'e711 0-0-OlLlc612a3!?a6 13 g4! 0-0-0 14 ~bl d6 15 J.d3, as in SakaevPalac, Warsaw Ech 2005. White has fixed the kingside and while finding a plan is not a trivial business for either side, he has at least muffled the bishop-pair and shifted some attention to the light squares. 6 ttJc3 c5!? (D)

w

121

9lLldb5!? This suggests that the two players, as well as the subsequent imitators, are agreed that White's arrangement of pieces does not look especially promising in the event of the quiet play which follows moves like 9 .itd3. Hence the sharp text-move, with dual ideas of embarrassing Black either by J.xf6 or by e5 in conjunction with 'iff3 according to his response. Critical certainly, but also rather risky. 9 •..a6! (D) Ivanchuk in turn offers White a choice, with an inspired sacrifice prepared for either eventuality. By contrast 9 ... 0-0?! 10 e5 dxe5 11 J.xf6! 'ii'xd 1+ (otherwise 'iWf3 will win a lot of material) 12 Itxdl J.xf6 13 tDc7 will leave Black short on compensation.

w

It is this early challenge in the centre which gives this game its distinctive twist. The claim on the one hand is that White's dark-squared bishop might not be especially well placed for a hedgehog set-up, while its position is also the reason that Black need not fear the customary advance of the d-pawn. 7e4 Apparently accepting a hedgehog formation although, as we shall see, White has no intention of competing on some slow manoeuvring battleground. For the moment Ivanchuk's view can be endorsed that 7 d5 is tactically problematic due to 7... lLlxd5! 8 lLlxdS J.xh4 9 lLlxh4 .itb7 when he gives 10 lLlf5 exf5 11 e3 0-0 12 .ite2 tDc6 13 0-0 .l::.e8 with insufficient compensation for a pawn. It is worth adding that the safer 10 lLlf3 exd5 11 cxd5 0-0 is also a rather uninspiring 'Benoni' for White since e4 would just create problems down the e-file. 7 •••cxd4 SlLlxd4 d6 It is not part of Black's agenda to allow his opponent's e-pawn to capture more space.

10.itxf6 There is no turning back as 9 lLldb5 would be a titanic waste of time if White could not make trouble with one of his sharp options. However, his abortive attempt to improve his fate in 10bava-M.Carlsen, Skanderborg 2005 with 10 e5 gave Black excellent compensation after 1O...dxe5! 11 .itxf6 .itxf6! 12 'ii'f3 axb5 13 'ii'xa8 b4!. I am not sure what proportion of players will intuitively sense the extent of Black's compensation here. As in the main game, his primary trump card is White's weakness on the dark squares - d4 in particular. The structure hides this fact better than after 10 .i.xf6, but the mass of pawns in the centre can themselves be a major source of strength as Carlsen was to show: 14 tiJe4 (perhaps as Notkin suggests, 14 'ii'xb8 is a better try, but after 14... bxc3 15 bxc3 e4! 16 l:.c1 0-0 Black is still very active indeed)

122

CHESS EXPLAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

14....i.d7 IS lLlxf6+ gxf6 16 cS bxcS 17 "ila7 lLlc6 18 'ili'xcs lLld4 19 0-0-0 with a tremendous initiative for Black, which the young Norwegian star showed the maturity to exploit in the absence of queens after 19 .. :tWe7! 20 'ii'xe7+ d7 30 a7 iVxe2! 0-1 Rubbing it in a bit! Queening a pawn will offer nothing against Black's mating attack. A

The white player not keen to engage in heavy theoretical battlegrounds may well find some ideas of interest in this chapter, and Black should take steps to make sure that he doesn't also find an opponent far less well prepared than he would be in the more fashionable avenues. 4 e3 remains by some margin the most important move here, and offers chances for a theoretical edge if Black avoids ... dS, and of a slow manoeuvring position which is largely a matter of taste if he does play it. Game 24 does also indicate that White too needs to handle the position carefully to avoid Black obtaining quite serious chances on the kingside. Black's play in Game 25 is probably sound as well as marvellously creative. However, the compensation which Carlsen got might not be quite so intuitively convincing as that in the main game. Of course, it would be wise also to be prepared for the 4 4Jc3 move-order and with it altogether less scintillating fare, although heading for Chapter 6 with 4 ....tM is one option that usually guarantees a good scrap!

List of Games

Zoltan Almasi - Csaba Balogh, Hungarian Ch, Budapest 2004 Viswanathan Anand - Michael Adams, Corus, Wijk aan Zee 2005 Vlastimil Babula - Leif Johannessen, Bundesliga 200516 Etienne Bacrot - Michael Adams, Sarajevo 2000 Etienne Bacrot - Boris Gelfand, European Team Ch, Leon 2001 Alexander Beliavsky - Hannes Stefansson, Olympiad, Istanbul 2000 Viktor Bologan - Vladimir Kramnik, Dortmund 2004 Alexei Dreev - Sergei Tiviakov, European Ch, Warsaw 2005 Daniel Fridman - Suat Atalik, Lake George 2005 Lubomir Ftacnik - Gyula Sax, European Clubs Cup, Saint Vincent 2005 Baadur Jobava - Vasily Ivanchuk, Capablanca mem, Havana 2005 Garry Kasparov - Boris Gelfand, Novgorod 1997 Robert Kempinski - Johann Hjartarson, Bundesliga 200314 Igor Khenkin - Michael Adams, Bundesliga 200213 Michal Krasenkow - Ruslan Ponomariov, Wijk aan Zee 2003 Yannick Pelletier - Boris Gelfand, Biel 2001 Jeroen Piket - John van der Wiel, Dutch Ch, Rotterdam 1997 Alexander Riazantsev - Magnus Carlsen, European Ch, Warsaw 2005 Stanislav Savchenko - Luis Couso, European Clubs Cup, Kallithea 2002 Andrei Shariyazdanov - Ognjen Cvitan, Salona GM, Solin/Split 2003 Roman Siobodjan - Jon Speelman, Lippstadt 2000 Jan Timman - Zhang Zhong, Wijk aan Zee 2004 Veselin Topalov - Ruslan Ponomariov, Mtel Masters, Sofia 2005 Loek van Wely - Viktor Bologan, Wijk aan Zee 2004 Loek van Wely - Viorel Iordachescu, European Ch, Ohrid 2001

105

56 74 101

69 9 60 91 14 32 118 39 115

96 78 88 19

82 22

52

66 27 48 109 44

Index of Variations

1

2

d4 c4

e6

3

lbf3

b6

lbf6

w

b338 5 Or: S 'iVa432 S ~c2 32 S 'i'b3!? 33 Slbbd2 27 and now: S... cS!? 28; S... J-b7 6 J-g2 cS 29; S... J-b4!? 27

B

1: 2: 3: 4:

4 g3 4a3 4lbc3

Other moves

1: 4 g3 4 g38 4 ... ~a626 4 ... ~b7 8 S ~g2 ~e7 (S ... J-b4+ 9; S... cS 10) 60-0 (6lbc3 19) 6 ... 0-0 7lbc3 10 (7 b3 23; 7 ~f4 23; 7 d5!? 20; 7 .:tel!? 22) 7 ... lbe4! (7 ... dS 10) and now: 8lbxe41O; 8 ~d21O; 8 ~c214

5... ~b4+48 S... bS!? 39 S... d5!? 39 S... ,iLb7!? 44 6 J-g2 J-b4+ 7 J-d2 and now: 7 ... cS 44; 7 ... J-e7!? 45; 7 ... a5!? 44 6 J-d2

B

w

6... 6 ... i.xd2+48 7 i.g252

,iLe7!

126

CHESS EXPLAINED: THE QUEEN'S INDIAN

7 ttJc3!? 49 7 7 ... iLb7!? 45

8

c6!52 B

iLc352

80-052

8

d5

w

9

ttJe556

9 ttJbd2 53

9

ttJfd7

9 ... 0-056 10

11 12

ttJxd7 ttJd2 0-060

ttJxd7 0-0

4 ••• iLb7 4 ... c5!? 88 5 d5 .i.a6 6 'iVc2 88 4 ... iLa6 915 'lic2 iLb7 (5 ...c5 6 d.5 88) 6 ttJc3 c5 7 e4 cxd4 8 ttJxd4 93 and now: 8 ... d6 93; 8 ... ttJc6 93; 8... .i.c5!? 96 5 ttJc365 d5 5 Or: 5 ...iLe7?! 66 5 ... ttJe4 66 5 ... g666 cxd574 6 6 iLg5 69 6 'iHc2 78 ttJxd574 6 6 ... exd574

B

W

Now: 12... ttJf657 12... b5!? 60 12 .. .l:lb8!? 60 12 ... f5!? 61 12...l:tc8!? 60

2: 4 a3 4

a387

7 'ikc278 7 e4?! 75 7 ttJxd5?! 75 7 e3 75 7 iLd2 82 7 ... .i.e7 8 'ii'c2 83 7 ttJxc3!? 78 7 ... g6?! 75 7 ...iLe779

127

INDEX OF VARIATIONS

7 ... c579 7 ...'bd779

8 Or 8 'ii'xc3 79

bxc379

6 6 ttJd2!? 105 6 7

e3 h6

i.h4101

3: 4 tDc3 4

ttJc3100

B

B

Now: 7 ... i.xc3+!? 101 8 bxc3 d6 9 ttJd2! 103 7 ... g5 8 i.g3 ttJe4 102

4 i.b4 4 ... it.b7 and now: 5 a3 65; 5 i.g5 120 5 i.g51OJ 5 "ii'b3!? 109 5 i.b7101 5 ... h6!? 6 .th4 g5 7 it.g3 ttJe4 101

4: Other moves 4 e3 115 4 i.f4119 4 i.g5 118 and now: 4 ... h6!? 119; 4 ... i.b7 120

Chess Explained: The Classical Sicilian Alex Yermolinsky Fonner US Champion Yennolinsky explains the key plans and ideas of an opening he has relied on for almost three decades. This dynamic variation has been a favourite of players such as Anand, Kramnik and Shirov. 112 pages, 248 x 172 mm; $19.95/ £1 2.99

Garry Kasparov's Greatest Chess Games Volume 2 Igor Stohl Grandmaster Stohl's superb annotations explain the reasoning behind Kasparov's decisions, and the principles and concepts embodied by his moves. 352 pages, 248 x 172 mm, hardback $35.00/£22.50

An Explosive Chess Opening Repertoire for Black Jouni YrjOlii & Jussi Tella A hugely popular repertoire book. Based around the move 1...d6, Black has a complete answer to any white first move. 272 pages, 210 x 145 mm; $23.95/ £15.99

How to Beat 1 d4 James Rizzitano This full defensive system for Black is based on the counterpunching Queen's Gambit Accepted. Includes additional material on lines where White sidesteps the gambit. 160 pages, 248 x 172 mm; $27.50/ £15.99

Play the Open Games as Black John Emms Covers all of White's ways to avoid the Ruy Lopez. Emms explains how to deal with the Scotch, King's Gambit, Four Knights, etc. 224 pages, 210 x 145 mm; $23.95/ £15.99

The System: A World Champion's Approach to Chess Hans Berliner One of the most successful correspondence chess players of all time explains his unique approach to chess opening analysis. 176 pages, 210 x 145 mm; $24.95/ £14.99

King's Indian and Grunfeld: Fianchetto Lines Lasha Janjgava By calmly fianchettoing his king's bishop, White draws the sting from these dynamic defences. Without a big pawn-centre to attack, Black has fewer targets for counterplay. 320 pages, 210 x 145 mm; $22.95/ £1 5.99

Understanding the Grunfeld Jonathan Rowson Rowson's coverage is both readable and inspiring. The Griinfeld Defence (1 d4 tiJf6 2 c4 g6 3 tiJc3 d5) was a natural favourite of both Fischer and Kasparov. 240 pages, 210 x 145 mm; $24.95/ £1 5.99

101 Winning Chess Strategies Angus Dunnington This is an ideal improvement book to dip into at leisure. Anyone of these clever and creative strategies could win you a full point in your next game. 128 pages, 210 x 145 mm; $17.95/ £12.99

Chess Tactics for Kids Murray Chandler A channing guide to the most common tactical motifs. The illustrative positions show the 50 Tricky Tactics that experienced players use to win their games. 128 pages, 230 x 178 mm, hardback $14.95/£9.99

About the Publisher: Gambit books on the chess openings are designed to be different. We recruit the finest authors, writing on their specialist systems. Our editorial team is obsessive about double-checking variations and spotting tricky transpositions. We believe trustworthy analysis is important, and that an openings book should remain an asset over many years.

mAI~IBIITI

www.gambitbooks.com

........ 01 bookI aD