Lubomir Ftacnik - Grandmaster Repertoire 6 - The Sicilian Defence (Quality Chess 2010)

The Sicilian Defence By

Lubomir Ftacnik

Quality Chess www.qualitychess.co. uk

First edition 20 1 0 by Quality Chess UK Ltd Copyright© 20 1 0 Lubomir Ftacnik

Grandmaster Repertoire 6 The Sicilian Defence -

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior permission of the publisher. Paperback ISBN 978- 1 -9065 52-08-4 Hardcover ISBN 978- 1 -9065 52-07-7 All sales or enquiries should be directed to Quality Chess UK Ltd, 20 Balvie Road, Milngavie, Glasgow G62 7TA, United Kingdom Phone +44 1 4 1 227 677 1 e-mail: [email protected] website: www.qualitychess.co.uk Distributed in US and Canada by SCB Distributors, Gardena, California, US www.scbdistributors.com Distributed in Rest of the World by Quality Chess UK Ltd through Sunrise Handicrafts, Smyczkowa 4/98, 20-844 Lublin, Poland Typeset by Jacob Aagaard Proofreading and computer checking by Colin McNab Additional analysis by Jacob Aagaard and Christoph Tiemann Edited by Andrew Greet Cover design by Adamson Design Printed in Estonia by Tallinna Raamatutriikikoja LLC

Series Foreword Creating the Grandmaster Repertoire series seemed a natural idea. There is a glut of opening books at the

Starting Out level.

These books have certainly been refreshing, but they have

almost completely replaced high-level opening books.

As chess fans, we felt we were missing out, and because we can, we decided to do

something about it.

The books in the Grandmaster Repertoire series are written by grandmasters, edited by

grandmasters, and will certainly be read by grandmasters. This does not mean that players who are not grandmasters cannot read them. We have worked hard to make our books

clear in their presentation and to make it possible for the readers to decide the depth to which they want to study them. When we were young and trying to be up-and-coming, we understood that you do not have to remember everything in an opening book in order to use it. It is our hope that those readers who find this repertoire too extensive and detailed, will ignore many of the details. Even now that we are grandmasters, we see the bolded moves as what we want to memorize, and the notes as explanations and illustrations. It is our conviction that you will eventually be more successful by playing the main lines, simply because they are based on better moves. Instinctively most players know this, but they fear losing to a prepared line and thus turn to unambitious systems, or unhealthy surprises. The opponent will not be able to use his preparation but, sadly, will not need it. These sidelines generally end in uninspiring positions almost automatically. Possibly the main reason why high-level opening books have disappeared is the rise of databases. It has been assumed that there is no point in having traditional opening books anymore, as you can look it all up in the database. Some rather lazy authors have a system: collect a few hundred games from the database, give Fritz a few moments, then hit Print. Such books add nothing to chess literature. We have seen enough of them and have never wanted to add to that pile. In these days of multi-million game databases, we all have access to information, what is lacking is understanding. In the Grandmaster Repertoire series, very strong players will share their understanding and suggest strong new moves that are in no one else's database. We are excited about this series and hope that the reader will share some of that excitement.

John Shaw & Jacob Aagaard Quality Chess

Contents Key to symbols used & Bibliography

From Russia Sicily with Love- Introduction

6 7

Minor Systems 9

1

Pandora's (Chess) Box- Miscellaneous 2nd moves

2

Some Like It Hot- The Morra Gambit

29

3

Forrest Gump- The c3-Variation

37

Closed Systems 4

Up Close(d) and Personal- Without g3

67

5

A Bridge Too Far- 3.g3

85

Anti-Open Systems 6

Fight Club- Various

101

7

Blade Runner- 3.i.b5t

1 19

8

The Last Samurai- 4.'\Wxd4

133

Minor Open Lines The Misfits- 6th Move Sidelines

149

10

Sideways- 6.g3

161

11

The Karate Kid- 6.h3

175

9

12

Pulp Fiction- 6.f4

183

13

The Rock - 6.i.e2

207

14

Midnight Express- 6.i.c4

25 1

English Attack 15

The English Patient- 6.i.e3 e5

285

16

Predator- Perenyi Attack: 6.i.e3 e6 7.g4

323

17

Four Weddings and a Funeral- 6.i.e3 e6 7.f3

333

Classic Main Line 21

License to Kill- 6.i.g5 e6

379

22

Blood Diamond- 6.i.g5 ctJbd7

405

Variation index

420

;!; i ±

Key to symbols used White is slightly better Black is slightly better White is better

+

Black is better

+-

White has a decisive advantage

-+

Black has a decisive advantage

+±

;;;

(x)

..,

equality with compensation with counterplay unclear xth match game a weak move

??

a blunder

!!

an excellent move

!?

?! #

a good move a move worth considering a move of doubtful value mate

Bibliography

Aagaard and Shaw (Editors): Experts vs. the Sicilian (2nd Edition), Quality Chess 2006 Arizmendi and Moreno: Mastering the Najdoif, Gambit 2004 Emms: Play the Najdoif Scheveningen Style, Everyman 2003 Emms and Palliser: Dangerous Weapons: The Sicilian, Everyman 2006 Emms, Palliser and Wells: Dangerous Weapons: Anti-Sicilians, Everyman 2009 Georgiev and Kolev: The Sharpest Sicilian, Chess Stars 2007 Greet: Starting Out: The Accelerated Dragon, Everyman 2008 Lund: Rook vs. Two Minor Pieces, Quality Chess 2005 Palliser: Fighting the Anti-Sicilians, Everyman 2007 Rizzitano: Play the NajdorfSicilian, Gambit 2010 Rogozenko: Anti-Sicilians: A Guide for Black, Gambit 2003 Sammalvuo: The English Attack, Gambit 2004

Periodicals

Chess Informant Chesspublishing. com New In Chess Magazine New In Chess Yearbooks TWIC Megabase Corr. Database

Introduction From Russia Sicily with Love First I would like to express my gratitude to the reader for opening this book on the Sicilian Defence. Credit must go to the Quality Chess team and their excellent authors whose efforts resulted in the creation of a real buzz about the Grandmaster Repertoire series. To follow in the footsteps of the previous titles made for a daunting challenge and I hope that the present book, the sixth volume in the series, will live up to the readers' high expectations. The unparalleled popularity of the Sicilian has led to the creation of an entire chess galaxy that is too vast for even the best and brightest minds to comprehend fully. Each player chooses his Kan, Sveshnikov, Dragon or other pet variation, around which he creates his own Sicilian world. My own modest expertise lies in the domains of the Najdorf and Scheveningen systems, which I have been playing and studying over the past two decades. The Scheveningen system represents a kind of foundational core, from which virtually all knowledge about thematic Sicilian structures and plans can be traced. Although the official subject of this book is the Najdorf variation, the two systems share many common themes and can often transpose to one another. In certain places, such as Chapters 1 2 and 1 3 (which deal with the variations 6.f4 and 6 ..ie2 respectively) , the decision to recommend the response 6 . . . e6, instead of equally valid alternatives such as 6 . . . e5, was influenced by my fondness for the Scheveningen set-up. I make no apologies for this, as I believe that an author can make the most useful contribution when writing about his own areas of expertise. At the end of the day this repertoire book is about cherry-picking the best and brightest ideas from the enormous jungle of variations available. In some sense the repertoire is notable not only for the recommendations that were included, but also for the attractive ones that (sometimes after agonizing deliberations) did not make the final cut. The whole Sicilian Defence creates something of a 'win-win' situation, in the sense that the unbalanced positions often result in bloodshed for one side or the other. In some variations Black may have to defend for a while, but it rarely kills his chances for a subsequent counterattack and ultimate success. I have tried to address all the most important ideas in every chapter, but practice will inevitably bring some new challenges, so please be prepared for some surprises. Nobody can foresee the future - it is often difficult enough to 'predict' the past (just ask any decent historian). I have often hankered for a bit of colour in our seemingly dry, black and white world of technical annotations, symbols and diagrams. As a young man I came across a game that is played in social situations, involving association with the names of films. Movies can often be symbolic, full of cultural references and associative bridges - evoking colours and emotions unlike any other form

8

Introduction

of media. I hope for some readers the chapter tides will evoke some positive feelings and help to place the struggle to master chess into a broader perspective. This entire project has at times threatened to pull me down and drag me under the deep waters of endless lines and multiplying ideas. I am greatly indebted for the help and encouragement of John Shaw, Jacob Aagaard and Andrew Greet of Quality Chess. The love, care and understanding of my wife Katarina went so far that she is happy to be woven between the lines. I appreciate the attention of any reader who glances beyond this preface. The main rule of the survival guide in Black's Sicilian galaxy is to Die Another Day be prepared to go under at any moment, but try to resist and strike back. The final (or should that be Fatal?} attraction of the Sicilian is the fact that it is truly dangerous - for both sides! -

Lubomir Ftacnik Bratislava, June 20 1 0

Minor Systems

b

a

d

c

f

e

g

Pandora's (Chess) Box - Miscellaneous 2nd moves

Variation Index l.e4 l...c5 A) 2.�a3!? B) 2.b3 �c6 3..ih2 e5 B1) 4..ic4 B2) 4..ib5 C) 2.b4 cxb4 C1) 3.d4 C2) 3..ib2 C3) 3.a3 D) 2.d3 d5!? D1) 3.�d2 D2) 3.exd5 E) 2.�e2 �f6 3.tbbc3 d5 4.exd5 �xd5 5.�xd5 �xd5 E1) 6.�c3 E2) 6.d4 F) 2.g3 A) note to 3.c3

F) note to 9.g4!?

C2) after 9.c4 8

8

7

7

5

5

6

6

4

4

10 12 12 13 15 15 16 17 19 19 21 22 23 23 25

7

3

3

2

2 1

a

b

c

d

e

f

1 0 ... CiJxe4!?

g

h

a

b

c

d

e

f

9 ...CiJdb4!N

g

h

a

b

c

d

e

f

14...b6!N

g

h

h

10

Minor Systems

l.e4 c5

Black can play just about anything, but the text move is logical as it avoids creating any kind of weakness that the a3-knight may exploit.

3.c3 Once again White can play just about anything, so we will limit ourselves to a couple of instructive examples to show how the game might develop.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

They say that a happy ending makes earlier troubles fade away, but what should we do about a scary beginning? The present chapter, featuring chess horrors of all imaginable forms was impossible to avoid; it is a true Pandora's box of manifold troubles Caissa is storing for her devoted followers. Fortunately, most of these sidelines are not so dangerous and in comparison with the sharpest and most complicated Sicilian variations they lack some sparkle. Nevertheless we should still take some time to find out how best to greet these exotic visitors.

3.g3 ig7 4.ig2 t0c6 5.d3 d6 6.f4 ttJf6 7.t0f3 0-0 8.0-0 !'lb8 9.t0c4 b5 10.t0e3 t0g4 ll.t0d5 ( 1 1 .!'\b l b4 1 2.t0c4 '®c7+) ll...e6 1 2.t0c3 b4 1 3 .t0e2 a5+ White's knight has used an extraordinary amount of time to reach a normal square, Zvjaginsev - Kobalia, Novokuznetsk 2008. 3.f4 ig7 4.t0f3 t0c6 5 .ib5 ttJf6 6.ixc6 bxc6 This is the more ambitious recapture, although the alternative can also lead to interesting play: 6 ... dxc6 7.d3 0-0 8.0-0 b5 9.'®el ia6 1 0.id2N ( 1 0.e5 ttJd5+ Popelyshev Viliavin, Moscow 2007)

In this Chapter we will consider the following moves: A) Vll:Ja3!?, B) 2.b3, C) 2.b4, D) 2.d3, E) 2.'�Je2 and F) 2.g3.

A) 2.lDa3!? This kinky idea came into the limelight at the end of 2005 after Zvjaginsev used it three times in the Russian Championship, defeating Khalifman and drawing with Dreev and Motylev. Many games later, one has to admit that it is much more sensible than an initial glance might suggest.

2...g6

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 0 . . . t0xe4!? (lO ... ttJd7=) l l .ia5! '®e8 1 2.'®xe4 ixb2 1 3.f5 '®d7 1 4.!'\ael ixa3 1 5.t0e5 '®d4t 1 6.'®xd4 cxd4 1 7.t0xc6 !'lfe8 1 8.t0xd4 The explosive sequence has only resulted in equality. 7.d3 0-0

Chapter 1 - Miscellaneous 2nd moves Also promising is 7 . . . d5 8.e5 lt:Jg4 9.h3 lt:Jh6 1 0.g4 f6 1 1 .exf6 exf6 1 2.'1We2t �f7 1 3.0-0 l"le8+ Black has the more harmonious position, and the slight compromising of his pawn structure is of little consequence. 8.0-0 Elb8 9 .'1We1 d6 1 o.'\Wh4 lt:Jd7 1 1 .f5 e6 1 2.'1Wxd8 Elxd8 13.fxe6 fxe6 14.lt:Jc4 d5 1 5 .lt:Ja5 Elb6+ Black's position is already slightly more pleasant, Popelyshev - Arakelov, Kostroma 2008.

Black has a solid position with enough scope for counterplay.

4... �c6 Black should wait for the most suitable moment before developing the other knight. After 4 . . . lt:Jf6 5 .e5 lt:Jd5 6.d4 cxd4 7.'1Wxd4! lt:Jb6 8.'\Wh4 White had slightly easier play in Shabalov - lzoria, Philadelphia 2006.

5.d4 This seems like the most natural move. 5.�b5 lt:J f6 6.e5!?N This energetic move has not yet been tested. 6 .d3 0-0 7.0-0 d5 is at least equal for Black. 6 . . . lt:Jd5 7.d4 cxd4 8.'1Wb3 Or 8.cxd4 0-0 with equality. 8. . . lt:Jc7 9.cxd4 lt:Jxb5 1 0.lt:Jxb5 a6 1 1 .lt:Jc3 d6 The position is equal although White must play carefully, lest the light-squared bishop eventually achieve his " 1 5 minutes of fame".

3...i.g7

5 ...cx:d4 6.cx:d4 �f6 7.d5 �b4 a

11

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

4)lj£3 Alternatives are possible, but there is no particularly convincing way to make use of the position of the knight on a3. 4.f4 lt:Jc6 5.d3 d5 6.lt:Jf3 e6 7.�e2 lLlge7 8.0-0 0-0 with equal chances. 4.d4 cxd4 5.cxd4 d6 (Also interesting is 5 . . . d5!? 6.exd5 lt:Jf6 7.�b5t lt:Jbd7 8.d6 0-0! 9.dxe7 'Wxe7t 1 0.lt:Je2 Eld8 1 1 .0-0 lLlc5 when Black can claim sufficient compensation for the missing pawn.) 6.h3 lt:Jf6 7.�d3 0-0 8.lt:Jf3 lt:Jc6 9.0-0 e5 1 0.d5 This position was reached in Papa - Wirthensohn, Switzerland 2007, and here I suggest 1 0 . . . lt:Jb4N 1 1 .�b 1 lLla6 1 2.�e3 b6 with roughly equal chances.

8 .. 0-0 9.0-0 �xd3N .

12

Minor Systems

Eliminating the opponent's bishops is usually a good policy for Sicilian players, and the present case is no exception. Nevertheless Black was also okay after 9 ... d6 1 0.i.c4 i.g4 l l .h3 i.xf3 1 2.'1Mfxf3 l:'!:c8, Zvjaginsev Bocharov, Tomsk 2006.

10.'?Nxd3 d6 l l..ie3 .id7 Black has already equalized comfortably.

B) 2.b3 Black may sleep soundly in the knowledge that the system with fianchetto of the bishop to b2 is not going to refute the Sicilian. At the same time the idea is certainly not completely stupid, and has been used with success by some strong players including Short.

2 lt!c6 3 .ib2 eS •.•

•

mention every possible White continuation, just offer a few illustrative lines. 4 . . . exf4 5.ttJf3 lt:lf6 6.e5 ltlh5 6 ... ltld5 is also okay, but I prefer not to obstruct the d-pawn. The knight is far from dim on h5. 7.i.e2 d5 8 .0-0 g6 9.e6 I tried to improve White's play with 9.tLlc3N, but after 9 ... d4 1 0.lt:le4 i.e? l l .tLlel i.f5 1 2 .hh5 i.xe4 1 3.i.f3 hf3 1 4.Wfxf3 g5+ White remains a pawn down, and the bishop on b2 is still a miserable piece. 9 ... i.g7 I O.i.xg7 tLlxg7 l l .exf7t cj;lxf7 1 2.ttJel lt:le6 1 3.ttJd3 cj;lg?+ Black remained a pawn up in Romanov Kurnosov, Minsk 2006. In the event of: 1 4.lt:lxf4 lt:lxf4 1 5 .E!:xf4 Wfd6 Black keeps a clear advantage, thanks to his better mobilization.

Bl) 4 .ic4 •

This is a sensible plan. White plays to control the light squares that were weakened by Black's last move. The b2-bishop is still bad, but White hopes to prepare f2-f4 after completing development and castling. If Black reacts too passively then he might end up in a difficult position, but if he plays accurately then he should be fine. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

4 lt!f6 S.d3 d6 6.tLlc3 •••

h

The advance of the pawn to e5 is a provoca­ tive, yet entirely sound strategy, as the proud bishop is now biting into granite. We will con­ sider rwo main moves for White: Bl) 4 .ic4 and B2) 4 .ib5. •

•

4.f4?! This pawn sacrifice has been White's most popular choice, but I do not believe it to be a really serious option. Black should simply accept the gift and develop naturally. I will not

13

Chapter 1 - Miscellaneous 2nd moves

6...i.e7

I I .liJxf4

Another decent approach is 6 . . . a6 7.a4 g6 8 .lt:Jge2 i.g7 9.0-0 0-0 IO.h3 Ei:b8 1 l .f4 exf4 1 2.ctJxf4 ctJd7 1 3.\Wc l ( 1 3.Ei:b l ! ? tt:Jde5 14.tt:Jce2 i.d7 looks about equal) 13 . . . tt:Jde5 14.i.d5 i.d7 1 5 .1Wd2 '1Wg5+ Black's position was somewhat more pleasant in Kosten V Rajlich, Internet 2006.

White does not gain much from l l .ctJd5 g5!? ( l l . . .i.g5 is also fine) 1 2.h4 ( 1 2 .g3?! i.xd5! 1 3.exd5 tt:Jd4 14.tt:Jxd4 i.f6 1 5 .gxf4 cxd4 1 6.fXg5 i.e5 is dangerous for White) 1 2 . . .i.xd5 1 3.exd5 ctJce5 1 4.hxg5 i.xg5 1 5 .ctJxf4 1Wf6 with equal chances.

7.ltlge2 0-0 8.0-0 i.e6! Black wastes no time in fighting for the central squares. Instead the following encounter illustrates the potential dangers: 8 . . . a6 9.a4 tt:Jd4 1 0.h3 i.e6 1 l .f4 ctJd7 1 2.f5 i.xc4 1 3.dxc4 i.g5 1 4.ctJd5 tt:Jf6 1 5 .ctJec3 with a stable advantage for White, Short - Prasad, Mumbai 2004.

1 1 ...hc4 12.bxc4 i.£6 13.lLlfe2 ttld4 14J3abl .ig5 15.lLlf4 �aS Black's active piece play was enough to balance his opponent's central majority, Blazeka - Idani, Kerner 2009.

B2) 4..ib5

9.f4 9.1Wd2 was played in Gelashvili - Gabrielian, Gyumri 2008, and now I suggest 9 . . . d5!N. This central break solves all Black's problems. 1 0.exd5 ctJxd5 l l .ctJxd5 i.xd5 1 2.f4 i.f6 Black is holding his own in the centre with full equality.

9 ... lLlg4!? This must be better than the cooperative 9 . . . exf4 1 0.ctJxf4 '1Wd7 l l .ctJcd5 with some initiative for White, Shengelia - D . Eggleston, Banyoles 2007.

IO.�d2 exf4

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

4... ltld4 There is nothing much wrong with allowing doubled c-pawns, but perhaps out of general principle I prefer to prevent White's idea and break a certain opening principle.

5.i.c4

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

At first glance the following alternative does not look like a serious option for White: 5 .i.xd4!? cxd4 However, Black will need to play with a certain amount of care as he is behind in development. 6.ctJf3 tt:Jf6 7.0-0 a6 8 .i.d3 1Wa5 9.c3 dxc3 l O.ctJxc3 i.b4!

h

Minor Systems

14

This looks better than 1 O . . .i.a3 1 l .i.c4 d6 1 2.lt:ld5 lt:lxd5 1 3.hd5 0-0 1 4.d4± The bishop on d5 shines brightly. l l .Wfc2 Or 1 l .i.c4 hc3 1 2.dxc3 Wfc5 1 3.Wfd3 ( 1 3.a4 b6 14.Wfd3 i.b7=) 1 3 . . . b5 1 4.id5 lt:lxd5 1 5 .exd5 f6= Black will soon catch up on development and then enjoy a healthy position. l l ...d6 1 2.a3 ixc3 1 3.dxc3 0-0 1 4.lt:ld2 ie6 1 5 .E'i:fcl E'i:ac8 1 6.c4 lt:ld7 Black has obtained comfortable equality, Wohl - Palac, Metz 200 1 .

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

5. .ttJf6 .

Should the reader feel more adventurous he might wish to consider the following daring queen foray, which is intended to derive some benefit from the pesky knight on d4. (Disclaimer: This would be done on the readers' own risk!) 5 . . . Wfg5!? 6.ixd4 This looks more critical than 6. �fl lt:lf6 7.lt:Jf3 'Mfh5 8.lt:Jc3 id6!? 9.h4 a600• 6 .. .'�xg2 7.'Mfh5 7.'Mff3 W'xf3 8.lt:lxf3 exd4 9.0-0 ie7 leaves White with insufficient compensation. So far we have been following the game Gelashvili - Thoma, Panormo 200 1 , which did not continue in a pleasant way for Black. So I found an interesting new idea:

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

7 . . . lt:lf6!?N The game continued 7 ... lt:lh6 8.W'xe5t cj;Jds 9.ie3 'Mfxh 1 1 0.f3 Wfg2 1 1 .lt:lc3 d6 1 2.'Mfd5� with a dangerous initiative for White. 8.i.xf7t 8.W'xe5t?! cj;Jds 9.ie3 Wfxh 1 turns out badly for White. Compared with the aforementioned game, the black knight is much better on f6 than h6. 8 ... cj;Jds 9.'Mff3 Wfxf3 1 0.lt:lxf3 cxd4 1 1 .lt:lxe5 id6 1 2.lt:Jf3 lt:Jxe4 1 3.E'i:g1oo We have reached a somewhat irregular queenless posltlon, with approximately balanced chances.

6)tk3 i.e? The position is essentially the same as line B 1 , except for the inclusion of the 'free' move . . . lt:lc6-d4.

7.l2Jge2 0-0 8.d3 E'i:b8 Playing for . . . b5 is the most natural way to utilize the knight's presence on d4.

9.0-0 White can also try 9.a4 a6 1 0.a5, although in this case the a-pawn might become a target. Play continues 1 0 ... d6 1 l .W'd2 lt:lc6 1 2.lt:ld5 lt:lxd5 1 3 .hd5 i.e6 1 4.0-0 hd5 1 5.exd5 lt:ld4 1 6.f4 if6 with roughly even chances, although White may have to be slightly more careful due to his pawn weaknesses, Gelashvili - Najer, Panormo 200 1 .

Chapter 1 - Miscellaneous 2nd moves

15

9 d6 10.a4 a6 ..•

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 1.a5!? White pushes his a-pawn into a precarious position in order to prevent . . . b5 for good. Another possibility is l l .f4 �g4 1 2.h3 �d7 1 3.a5 Wc7 1 4.Wd2 h6 with mutual chances.

l l ... ltlc6 12.ltld5 ltlxd5 13.hd5 llJxaS 14.£4 i.f6 15.i.c3 1 5.fxe5 .be5 1 6 ..be5 dxe5 17.Wd2 b6 1 8. 4 cxb4 1 9.Wxb4 �e6 looks about equal. White has enough positional compensation for the sacrificed pawn, but not more.

�

1 5 b6 16.ha5 bxa5 17.£5 i.d7 18.ltlc3 g6 19.Wf3 @hs

a

b

d

f

g

e Sicilia� is often associated with pawn sacnfices. Thts one is earlier than most and is not considered theoretically pro ising altho�gh Black should play cautiously and _ respect. We will consider three treat It wtth options for White: C1) 3.d4, C2) 3.i.h2 and

�

c

e

h

�

C3) 3.a3. C1) 3.d4 ltlf6! 3 . . . d5 is not a bad move and should probably give Black some advantage, but I believe the text to be slightly more accurate.

4.i.d3 ltlc6 s.c!lJe2 White struggles to find a set-up that could justifY his sacrificed pawn. For instance:

.•.

We have been following the game Ivanisevic - Fercec, Ljubljana 2005 . The position is complex and difficult for both sides. White seems to have good positional compensation, although it should be remembered that only one of his pieces can occupy the d5-square. Black, on the other hand, can hope to activate his bishop pair in the long run. In the game the second player eventually prevailed after a tough fight.

C) 2.b4 cxb4

5 .e5 lDd5 6.�e4 e6 7.tLlf3 d6 8.0-0 �e7 9.a3 dxe5 I O.dxe5 was Schneider - Schenk Germany 2004, and now Black could hav; secured a clear advantage with the simple 1 0 . . . 0-0N. 5.lDf3 d5 6.e5 tLle4 7.0-0 �g4 8 .�b2 e6 9.We2 tLlg5 I O.l2Jbd2 �e7 was also clearly better for Black in Philippe - Lerner, Metz 1 996.

s ...d6 6.0-o g6! The �ishop will be well placed on g7, and the sohd fianchetto formation will bolster the kingside against any attacking ideas.

16

Minor Systems 1 0 .'1We2 i.e7 when he was already much better in Rogers - Hoeksema, Groningen 1 99 1 .

4. . ti:Jd5 .

s.tt:Je

b

c

d

e

f

g

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

The evaluation is not changed by: 5 .i.c4 tt'lb6 6.i.b3 tt'lc6 7.a3 Compared with the previous note, GM Rogers had a more favourable experience on the black side of this opening in the same tournament after 7.d4 d5 8.exd6 '1Wxd6 9.'1Wf3 i.e6 1 0.ctJe2 i.d5 1 1 .hd5 '1Wxd5 1 2.'1Wxd5 tt'lxd5 1 3.0-0 tt'la5 14.tt'ld2 2"1c8+ Houtman - Rogers, Groningen 1 99 1 . 7. . .e6 8.axb4 i.xb4 9.ctJa3 0-0 1 0.tt'lf3 d5 1 1 .exd6 hd6+ White remained a pawn down with not much to show for it, Cierny - Lane, Topolcianky 1 994.

C2) 3.i.h2 ttlf6

a

a

h

Just as in the previous line, I believe this to be slightly more accurate than the immediate central strike with 3 . . . d5.

4.e5 After 4.i.c4 Black should not hesitate to enter the complications with 4 . . . tt'lxe4 5 .i.xf7t x£7 6.'\Wh5t gs 7.'\Wd5t e6 8.'1Wxe4 tt'lc6 9.tt'lf3 d5

5...ti:Jc6 6.a3 e6 Also promising is 6 . . . d6!?N for instance: 7.i.c4 tt'lb6 8.i.b3 a5 9.0-0 a4 I O.i.a2 e6 1 1 .exd6 '1Wxd6 1 2.axb4 tt'lxb4+ White will struggle to get anything real for the missing pawn.

7.axb4 Ji.xh4 8.c3 i.e? 9.c4 This was Baumert - Kovalev, Berlin 1 993, and now I suggest:

Chapter 1 - Miscellaneous 2nd moves

17

The simple trap of 5.axb4?? We5t has embarrassed a few Wing Gambit practitioners over the years.

5 ...e5 The solid 5 . . . e6 is a reasonable alternative, but the text is more ambitious.

6.axb4

IO)t]c3 0-0 I I .lLibS a6 12.i.e2 gbg 13.lL!d6 f6:j: Black's position remains solid, and as long as he stays alert he will have good chances to make his extra pawn count in the long run.

C3) 3.a3 d5!

6.c4!? This has not been the most common move, but it requires accurate handling from Black. 6 . . . We6 I think this is the best square for the queen. 7.d4!? This is the critical continuation, seeking to blast open as many lines as possible. 7 . . .exd4t 8 .i.e2 d3! It is important to play this here in order to disrupt the harmony of White's position before he can castle. 9.Wxd3 'Llf6 1 0.0-0 'Llc6 1 l .�el i.e? 1 2.axb4 This position was reached in Shirazi Tregubov, Livry Gagran (rapid) 2009, and here I found an improvement for Black:

a

This has for a long time been known as an effective response to White's plan.

4.exd5 '1Mfxd5 s.lL!a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 2 . . . i.xb4!N The game continuation of 1 2 . . . 'Llxb4? 1 3.Wd2 0-0 1 4.i.fl Wd6 1 5 .�xe7! Wxe7 1 6.i.a3 gave Black serious problems. 1 3 .i.d2 0-0+

18

Minor Systems

White will have a hard time demonstrating compensation for the missing pawn.

6...hb4 7.c3 7.�a3 �xa3 followed by . . . tt:lc6 does not give White much.

7...i.d6!? The point of this slightly unusual move is to defend the c7-square. The obvious 7 . . .�e7 8 .ctJa3 tt:lc6 9.ctJb5 �d8 1 0.d4 exd4 1 l .�f4 �f8 1 2.ctJc7 �b8 1 3 .tt:lxd4 �d7 is playable for Black but not so pleasant in practice.

9.tt:lc4 �c7 1 0.ctJe3 �d8 l l .�c4 e4 1 2.tt:lgl ctJe5 1 3.�a3 tt:lxc4 1 4.tt:lxc4 tt:lf6 White was struggling for compensation in Balakanova Chernenko, Pavlodar 2008.

9 .. .'1We4t 10.i.e2 I also considered the untested: 1 0.�fl !?N �g4 Black can also try 1 0 . . . tt:lh6!? 1 l .d4 �g4 1 2.tt:lb5 with a very lively game. l l .ctJg5!? 8 7

8.lba3 lbc6 Also possible is 8 . . . tt:lf6 9.tt:lb5 tt:lc6 1 0.c4?! (Better was 1 0.�c4N, although after 1 0 . . . �e4t 1 l .�e2 �xe2t 1 2.�xe2 �b8 1 3.ctJg5 �g4t 1 4.f3 �h5 1 5 .d3 a6 Black has no worries at all.) 1 0 . . .�e6 1 l .ctJxd6t �xd6 1 2.�a3 �c7 13.�e2 e4 1 4.tt:lg5 h6 1 5 .ctJh3 �xh3 1 6.gxh3 0-0-0 And Black was already clearly better in Grcic - Malpas, Australia 1 997.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

9.i.c4 White needs something crisper than either of the following moves: 9.tt:lb5 �b8 1 0.�a4 tt:lge7 1 l .�c4 �e4t 1 2.d? 1 0.b3 e6 l l .tt:'le3 c;t>c? 1 2.i,b2 i,d? Having solved the problem of his temporarily misplaced king, Black is absolutely fine.

7...i.g4 8.£3!? This is the most ambitious move, hoping to keep more complexity in the position by avoiding exchanges. Other continuations such as 8.0-0 i,xe2 9.tt:'lxe2 tt:lc6, or 8 .d3 tt:'lc6 9.i,e3 i,xe2 1 0.�xe2 e6, lead to equal play.

8 .. i.f5 9.0-0 �c6 IO.i.b5 :Sc8 l l .d3 .

Black has no problems whatsoever.

E2) 6.d4 e5! This radical action may seem surprising, but the slower approach is not fully satisfactory. After 6 . . . tt:lc6 7.i,e3! cxd4 8.tt:lxd4 i,d? 9.tt:'lb5! I was unable to find a path to equality.

24

Minor Systems

7.dxe5 We should also consider the gambit: 7.ctJc3!?

�(�A.�·� �� .,, -·Y-,,% · ---� � ���� � � � � � � � %!'"' � %!' "' r�ifr� � �� � -� � ''"6'' :"/ ' % %� '{ � � ��-� � � 3 - -,?qj� �-0 � �b b -��'llXX!��!lbW!j ' rd'''

8

7

6 s

4 2

-� a

8 .ie7 ..•

8 . . . tt:Jc6 9.if4 Wf6 also looks fine, for instance: 1 0.Wa4 ie7 1 1 .0-0-0 0-0 1 2.ie3 if5 1 3.ctJg3 ig6 1 4.ie2 Ei:ad8 with easy equality.

� §' �'Et'di'=� § R'

1.\

b

1 7.Ei:d l t id4 1 8.tt:Jxd7 Ei:xd7 is equal) 1 5 . . . b6 1 6.Ei:d1 �b8 1 7.ie2 Ei:he8 with level chances, as Black manages to bring his pieces into play in time.

c

d

e

f

g

h

This is an interesting idea, although it will be testing Black's nerves more than his actual position, as the latter is absolutely fine. 7 . . .'1Mfxd4 8 .ie3 There is also 8 .ib5t id7 9.We2 ctJc6 1 0.0-0 0-0-0 1 1 .Ei:d1 Wg4 1 2.ixc6 Wxe2 1 3.ixb7t mxb7 14.tt:Jxe2 ie7 1 5 .ie3 if5+ The game Keres - Filip, Helsinki 1 952, was agreed drawn here, but Black's bishop pair gives him a definite advantage. 8 . . .Wxd l t 9.Ei:xd1 ie6 1 0.ctJe4 tt:Jd7 1 1 .ib5 1 1 .ctJg5 if5 1 2 .ib5 f6 1 3.ctJe4 ixe4 1 4.ixd7t m£7 was a bit better for Black in Kupreichik - Vaulin, St Petersburg 200 1 . After the text move, the game Grigoriants Vorobiov, Moscow 2007, was agreed drawn. The continuation might have been: 1 1 . . .a6 1 2.ixd7t ixd7 1 3.ixc5 if5 1 4.ixf8 mxf8 The position is equal, although if Black is feeling ambitious he might try to make something of his superior minor piece.

a

b

c

e

g

9 .if4 '?;Vf6 10 ..ie3 0-0 1 I.ltlf4 :gd8 12.ltld5 '?;Ve5 13.ltlxe7t '?;Vxe7 •

After a logical sequence White has acquired a two-bishop advantage, but lost some time.

14. '?;Vh5 b6! Exchanging one half of the bishop tandem is the best way to prevent any future problems.

15 ..ie2 .ia6 16.ha6 1 6.if3 ib7 1 7.0-0 ixf3 1 8.Wxf3 ctJd7 does not change the evaluation.

16 ltlxa6 17.0-0 ltlc7 18.:gfe1 ltle6= .•.

7 .'?;Vxe5 8.c3 .•

In also checked the following untested line: 8.f4!?N We7 9.mf2 tt:Jc6 1 0 .lt:Jc3 id7 1 1 .lt:Jd5 Wd6 1 2.ie3 0-0-0 1 3.c4 g6 1 4.Wd3 ig7 1 5 .Wa3 ( 1 5 .tt:Jb6t �c7 1 6.Wxd6t �xd6

These moves were played in Sepp - Fressinet, Gothenburg 2005. Black's knight has found an ideal home, and in the present situation it is no worse than the enemy bishop. Therefore the chances are equal.

Chapter 1

-

Miscellaneous 2nd moves

F) 2.g3 d5! Once again we are wasting no time in fighting for the centre. This is considered to be Black's most principled reaction to White's unusual second move.

3.exd5 3.d3 is not ridiculous, but is hardly threatening either. There is nothing much wrong with exchanging the queens off, although it is perhaps even more promising to play 3 . . . tLlc6 intending to develop in similar fashion to line D 1 above, while retaining the option of simplifYing with . . .dxe4 depending on how White plays.

3 '?Nxd5 4.tLlf3 .ig4 ••.

here Black should have played: 14 . . .'Wxd5N In the game Black took with the pawn, which I do not understand. The text move keeps his queen and rook happy on the d-file. 1 5.'Wc3 e5+ Black dominates the centre and his chances are to be preferred.

5 '?Ne6t! •..

This is an important move, taking the opportunity to disrupt White's development.

6.�fl 6.'We2?! is toothless. 6 . . .'Wxe2t 7.�xe2 tLlc6 8.c3 e5 9.h3 i,f5 1 0.g4 i,d7 l l .tLla3 1his was Petrov - Seeman, Tallinn 200 1 , and now it looks interesting for Black to try l l . . .h5!?N (The game continuation of l l .. .f6 1 2.d3 0-0-0 was equal, but Black can try for more.) 1 2.g5 i,e6 1 3.d3 0-0-0 1 4.i,e3 tLlge7 1 5 .tLlh4 ( 1 5 .�c5 tLld5 1 6.i,e3 i,f5+) 1 5 . . . tLld5 1 6.i,e4 g6 1 7.tLlf3 i,g7+ Black controls the centre, so it is White who must try to fight for equality.

5 .ig2 .

5 . i,e2?! This is seldom seen, and with good reason. 5 . . . tLlc6 6.h3 i,f5 7.tLlc3 'Wd7 8 .g4 i,g6 9.d3 e6 9 ... e5 is also not bad, but I prefer the text. 1 0.i,e3 tLlf6 1 1 .'Wd2 tLld5 1 2 .0-0-0 0-0-0 1 3 .�b l i,e7 1 4.tt:Jxd5 White is not helped by: 1 4.tLle4 'Wc7 1 5 .h4 'Wb6 1 6.tt:Jfg5 h6 1 7.h5 hxg5 1 8.hxg6 f5+ This position was reached in the game Yudasin - Milman, New York 2003, and

25

9.tLle5!?

26

Minor Systems

The quiet 9.d3 reaches the note to White's ninth move below. 9 ...�xdl lO.tLlxd7 hc2 1 1 .tLlxc5 0-0-0 1 2 .b4! White needs to generate some activity, otherwise he will stand worse on account of his isolated d-pawn. 1 2 . . . e6 1 3.tLlxb7 Wxb7 14.b5 tLlge7 1 5 .�a3 Wb6 1 6.bxc6 tLlxc6 1 7.�xf8 l"i:hxf8 1 8 .l"i:cl After 1 8.�xc6 Wxc6 1 9.l"'cl �d3t the first player will struggle to hold the endgame. 1 8 . . . tLld4 This was Mozes - Loginov, Budapest 1 990. Black maintains slightly better chances thanks to his superior structure. His king is slightly exposed, but on the other hand it could become extremely active in the event of a few more piece exchanges.

s JWd7 ..

The queen retreats to clear the path of the e-pawn. 8

7

6 5

4 3

2 1

9.g4!?

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

This is White's most ambitious approach. Eliminating an enemy bishop is an achievement, although the drawback is that it costs time and creates weaknesses. Of course we should also check a few other options as well. 9.tLlc3 e6 1 0.�f4 tLlf6 1 1 .g4 �g6 12.tLle5 tLlxe5 1 3 .�xe5 �d6 1 4.We2 0-0-0!?

1 7 . . . c4! This dynamic move presents White with difficult problems. 1 8.tLlb5 I also considered 1 8.�f3!? h5!. It would be too risky to open the c-file just now. 1 9.g5 (or 1 9.tLlb5 Wc5 20.g5 h4 2 1 .Wf4 tLlh5 22.Wxc4 Wxc4 23.dxc4 a6+) 1 9 . . . tLle8 20.dxc4 h4+ Neither king is ideally situated, but Black's forces have the edge in coordination. 1 8 . . .Wc5 1 9.dxc4 tLle4 20.�xe4 �xe4 2 1 .l"'h2 a6 22.tLla3 l"i:d2+ We have been following the game Short Chandler, Dortmund 1 983. Black has more than enough play for a pawn, and White was unable to hold the position. 9.tLla3 This is a sensible move, heading for c4 and possibly e5. 9 ... e6 l O .tLlc4 f6 Covering e5 is the natural choice. In Karjakin - Grischuk, Moscow 2009, Black was successful with 1 O . . .�d6, but I do not see any reason for Black to relinquish the bishop pair just now.

Chapter 1

-

Miscellaneous 2nd moves

1 1 .i,e3 :I"\d8 1 2.a4 Another game continued 1 2 .g4 i,f7 1 3 .a4 b6 14."�e2 tt:lge7 1 5.i,f4 tt:ld5 1 6.i,g3 i,e7 Black succeeded in organizing his pieces harmoniously and obtained the better prospects, Flower - Aseev, London 1 994. 12 . . . t2Jd4 1 3.hd4 cxd4 1 4.�e 1 This position was reached in Sepp -Yakovich, Leeuwarden 1 993. Here I found a natural improvement for Black.

27

Another game continued 1 1 .tt:la3 i,e7 1 2.tt:lxg6 hxg6 1 3.tt:lc4 tt:lf6 1 4.a4 ( 1 4.i,f4 tt:ld5 1 5 .i,g3 f5!+) 14 . . . tt:ld5 1 5 .i,d2 g5! Black follows a simple and efficient strategy: keep the centre closed and increase his control over the dark squares. 1 6.a5 :I"\d8 1 7.c3 ( 1 7.i,e4 0-0 1 8.c;t>g2 f5+) 17 ... g6 1 8.�e2 cj;lfg 1 9.i,e4 c;t>g7 Both sides have certain advantages, but overall Black's kingside control gave him the better prospects in King - Sveshnikov, Neu Isenburg 1 992.

ll ...hxg6 12.'�Jc3 �f6 13.i.e3 i.e7 White would like to generate some activity for his two bishops, but is hampered by the position of his king, which makes it hard to connect the rooks and coordinate his army.

14.lL!e4

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 4 . . . b6!N In the game Black played 1 4 . . . tt:le7?!, almost certainly overlooking the strong reply 1 5.�a5!, forcing 1 5 . . . i,xf3 1 6 .i,xf3 b6 1 7.�b5 cj;lf7 1 8.c;t>g2 tt:ld5 1 9.:I"\he l t Without the light-squared bishop Black was facing a tough defensive task. 1 5 . c;t>g 1 tt:lh6 1 6.c3!? Opening the position carries certain risks when playing against two bishops, but if White does not do something active Black's position will just get stronger and stronger. 1 6 . . . dxc3 17.bxc3 i,c5 1 8 .d4 i,e? Black can look to the future with optimism. The e6-pawn may be slightly weak, but it can easily be defended and the bishop pair provides excellent long-term prospects.

9 .. i.g6 IO.�h4 e6 I I.tlJxg6 .

White is not obliged to make this exchange immediately, but it is doubtful that he has anything to gain from postponing it.

This has been the most popular move, although we will consider a few other options as well. 14.c;t>g1 does not seem to have been tried. Play might continue 14 . . . t2Jd4 1 5 .a4 :I"\d8 1 6.h4 e5 1 7.g5 tt:lh5 with equal chances. 14.h4!? White hopes to find a role for the rook on the h-file, either by pushing the h-pawn further or swinging the rook via h3. 14 . . . t2Jd4 1 5 .a4 :I"\d8 1 6.:I"\h3 cj;lfg Black sensibly opts for a kind of artificial castling, leaving his rook on the vital h-file. 17. c;t>g1 b6 1 8.:I"\ci c;t>gs 1 9.b3 These moves were played in Hort - Ribli, Baden-Baden 1 992, and here I think Black could have played more energetically with:

28

Minor Systems

1 9 . . . e5!N It is hard for White to defend the g-pawn without creating further weaknesses, for instance: 20.g5 lLlh5 2 I .lLld5 Vfie6 22.c4 lLlf4 Black has the better chances thanks to his two superb knights.

14... ltJxe4! 1 4 . . . b6 has been more popular, but the straightforward knight exchange ensures Black of a comfortable game with minimal fuss.

15.dxe4 After 1 5.ixe4 Black stays on top with 1 5 . . .f5 1 6.if3 0-0-0 1 7.a4 g5. The present position was reached in Korolev - Nimtz, Corr. 1 990, as well as a few others. Black has a few decent continuations, but the following would be my first choice:

� 8 i�i�if··�� ��� i�� �uu%� '� ,,�� ,,J%����� ��� �'� !� !� ����7, �� 3 ��-�% � % �� ����-:f��� �:f[�)�� fd""�av•�� r

7 6

s"

4 2 1

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

15 ...i.d6!?N Black takes control over a few more dark squares while avoiding the exchange of queens, which would probably be of more use to White in view of his compromised king position. It should also be noted that 1 5 . . . 0-0-0, Antonov - Lew, corr. 1 99 1 , is also perfectly fine.

16.Vfie2 0-0-0i White is not doing so badly, but Black's position is easier to handle.

Conclusion In this chapter we have investigated several variations that could prove challenging over the board, especially when mixed with the element of surprise. Some of them are a bit odd, but all should be respected. Where applicable I have tried to suggest an active reaction involving an early . . . d7-d5, which I hope will provide a semblance of consistency and congruency to our choices. Out of all the options considered here, I would consider 2.lLla3 and the gambit 2.b4 to be the most dangerous for the unprepared player, so I would advise the reader to pay particularly close attention to these two moves. The good news is that after a correct reaction Black will have nothing to fear, and should be able to enter the middlegame with at least equal prospects.

Minor Systems

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

Some Like It Hot - The Morra Gambit

Variation Index l.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 3...dxc3 4.lLlxc3 lLlc6 s.lL!a d6 6..ic4 a6 7.0-0 lLl£6 A) 8.b4!? B) 8.h3 C) 8..ig5 D) 8.VNe2

31 32 33 34 B) after ll.!f4

A) after 16.tLle2

D) after 8.We2 8

7

6 5

4 3

2

a

b

c

d

e

f

16.. J"\d8N

g

h

a

b

c

d

e

f

ll ...tLle5!?

g

h

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

The refutation of the Morra

h

30

Minor Systems

One of the great mysteries of the Sicilian Defence is the evaluation and fate of the Morra Gambit. Upon first impressions, it looks - to put it bluntly - like a cheap opening. White sacrifices a pawn on the third move for the simple idea of enhancing the speed of his development. It sounds like something that might be fun for internet blitz games but not much else. Because the gambit comes so early in the game, Black has complete freedom to choose any set-up he wishes. It would seem as though Black merely has to develop sensibly and avoid any traps to reach a position from which he can consolidate and exploit his extra pawn, and yet somehow the gambit remains a tough, perhaps impossible one to refute. Many players resort to meeting 3.c3 with 3 .. .l2Jf6 4.e5 l2'ld5, transferring the fight to the 2.c3 variation. In chapter 3 you can see I have recommended two different lines against 2.c3, so this option will not serve as a viable response to the Morra for the purposes of our repertoire. In any case, I would not wish to offer such a craven approach when White is, after all, offering to donate a pawn. After considering several different defensive set-ups, I finally found an answer that satisfied me. The set-up I am recommending avoids most of White's early attacking ideas and leads to a solid position in which Black will have decent chances to retain his extra pawn. Despite all that I believe the Morra to be a "nearly correct" gambit that should not be underestimated.

l.e4 cS 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.tLlxc3 tLlc6 s.tLlf3 d6 The defining feature of the recommended system is the intended development of Black's light-squared bishop on g4, followed by its subsequent exchange for the knight on f3. This will take away some of White's tactical chances, for instance by reducing the support

for the e4-e5 break. Exchanging a minor piece will also help to relieve some of the congestion in Black's position. s

7

6

.i. B*���:I i.�:�� !JI� �.,,. , f "•- �JI� al-� " ' % " � � �

,

"

: J!IJ!I J!IJ!I J!IJ!I� �� � �%N/J!IJ!I � /mt:zJ3� � " " �W[!f "� �0 b -�

2

, iiJ' 'ala'tW: ;' ,% /

a

uuY-

b

hun'Y-

c

d

,

,

e

f

g

'

h

Before going any further I would like to emphasize the following point. It is essential that Black executes his plan using the correct move order shown below, otherwise he can easily expose himself to tactical difficulties as we will soon see.

.

6 .ic4 a6 Let us briefly note that 6 . . ..ig4?? allows the simple trick of 7 . .ixf7t. A slightly more subtle mistake is 6. . . l2'lf6?. The problem with this move is seen after 7.e5! dxe5 (7 . . . l2'lxe5?? loses the queen after 8.lt'lxe5 dxe5 9 ..ixf7t) 8 .'\WxdSt l2'lxd8 (or 8 . . . c;t>xd8 9.l2'lg5) 9.l2'lb5! With a strong initiative for White, despite the queen exchange. Thus Black must first cover the b5-square before developing the knight to f6, and only then place the bishop on g4.

7.0-0 t[}f6 Finally Black is ready for . . ..ig4. In this position we will examine four main ideas: A) 8.b4!?, B) 8.h3, C) S..igS and

D) 8.'1We2.

Chapter 2 - The Morra Gambit With the crucial b5-square now under Black's control, 8.e5?! does not give White enough compensation after 8 . . . dxe5 9.�xd8t 'Llxd8 1 0.'Llxe5 e6 ( I O . . .�e6 is also good) 1 1 .:!"1d1 'Lld7.

31

looks interesting) when White had reasonable compensation in A. Stuart - Hoynck van Papendrecht, corr. 1 995.

A) 8.b4!?

9.'?9b3 9.�e2, Mezera-Necesany, corr. 2005, should be met by the straightforward 9 . . .�e7N. The move is less exotic than one's first impression might suggest, and has been the choice of several Morra specialists. White is in a hurry to create havoc before the defender can put his house in order with speedy development.

8 ...e6!? Now that White is in a position to open up the queenside, there is something to be said for keeping the c8-bishop at home. Black should certainly steer clear of options like 8 . . . 'Llxb4? 9 .e5 ! 'Lld7 1 0.exd6± and 8 . . .b5 9 .�e2! �d7 1 O.a4 bxa4 1 1 .:!"\xa4±. The only serious alternative to the text move is 8 . . .�g4, but in that case it will be harder for Black to develop his kingside pieces conveniently. Play continues: 9.b5 �xf3 Black should take the opportunity to damage his opponent's structure. 1 0.gxf3 axb5 1 1 .'Llxb5! ( I I .hb5 g6 should be better for Black) 1 l . . .ctJe5 12.�b3 e6 1 3.�a3 ( 1 3 .�b2!?N also

9.a4 �e7 1 0.�a3 was seen in Doucet - De Jonghe, Teeside 1 973. White is preparing to push his b-pawn, so it looks sensible to pre­ empt that idea with 1 0 . . . ctJe5!?N when Black stands well. 9.b5 was White's choice in Regan - A. Lutz, Germany 1 999, and here Black should have played 9 . . . axb5N 10.hb5 ( I O.'Llxb5 fails to impress after 1 0 . . . ctJxe4 1 1 .l"1e 1 , and now the simplest route to an advantage would be 1 l . . .�e7 [According to the computer, Black is also doing very well in the complications resulting from 1 l . . .d5 1 2.�f4 �c5 1 3.'Llc7t c±>e7.] 1 2.:!"\xe4 d5 regaining the piece with advantage.) 1 0 ...�c7 preventing the troublesome e4-e5, with an edge for Black.

9 ....ie7 IOJ�!:dl '?Nb6 l l .a3 ttJg4 12J!:a2 0-0 13.h3?! White would have been better off with 13.:!"\c2 �d7 1 4.�f4, when his pieces coordinate quite well and he is only slightly worse.

32

Minor Systems

13 lt:Jge5 14.lt:Jxe5 dxe5 15.i.e3 li:Jd4 16.li:Je2

able to hold the balance, but overall the text move is a much safer practical choice.

This position was reached in Fanha Pinheiro, Lisbon 2000, and now Black should have played:

l l.i.£4

.•.

1

� , � m • w� •

2

�""({""/� � � �-

6

1

a

b

c

d

f

e

g

h

16.. J�d8N Keeping a dear advantage.

B) 8.h3 This prevents Black's intended bishop development, at the cost of an important tempo.

8...e6 Now we reach a normal-looking position. The same set-up has been used by Black in a great many games, but the difference is that White would not normally have wasted time on h2-h3 . It is hardly surprising that this loss of time reduces his attacking prospects.

9.YHe2 i.e? IOJ:!dl YHc7

.

It looks riskier to accelerate the development of the queenside with IO . .j,d? 1 l .j,f4 b5 1 2 .j,b3 Wb8 due to 1 3.e5! dxe5 1 4.lt:lxe5 lt:lxe5 1 5 .j,xe5 Wb7 1 6.j,xf6 j,xf6, Manhardt - Pelletier, Medellin 1 996, 1 7.lt:le4N with some initiative. I actually analysed this line a bit deeper and concluded that Black should be

.i � 'W.i."� .� �cem .��·%'�'�" "�

� � . � uu/ ·� i)-" , . � ' � : ���,������� 3 � ������ ! s

�o .1.�. �.uu/�,0�� a

b

c

d

e

f

� g

h

l l. ..li:Je5!? This is a pragmatic choice. Black prevents any e4-e5 trickery once and for all, while also forcing the exchange of a pair of minor pieces. True, he ends up with doubled pawns, but one of them is an extra pawn so his situation is still pretty healthy. Besides, the doubled e-pawns will help to control several important central squares. There is a playable alternative in 1 1 . ..0-0 1 2.Eiacl ttJd7 13.j,b3 Wb8. Black's position is a bit passive, but he has no real weaknesses and can gradually try to exploit his extra pawn. Still, the main line seems much more straightforward.

12.i.xe5 A few players have exchanged with the knight, but in that case White would be forced to lose a tempo moving the bishop again. In the majority of games White has preferred to relinquish the bishop pair in order to avoid this loss of time.

12 ... dxe5 13.:Bacl YNb8!

33

Chapter 2 - The Morra Gambit Vacating the c-file is a sensible precaution. For instance, after 1 3 ... 0-0 14.he6! .ixe6 1 5 .4Jd5 4Jxd5 1 6.exd5 '1Mfd6 1 7.dxe6 '1Mfxe6 1 8.'1Mfxe5 '1Wxe5 1 9.4Jxe5 Elfd8 20.b3 White regained his pawn to reach an equal endgame in Massie - Solomon, Elista 1 998. The text move may appear a bit passive, but it works well.

14.a4 White is not in much of a position to launch an attack, so it makes sense for him to restrict any queenside advance from his opponent. s

JJ��-i��rJI

: !�-�'�j �. ��%"

� : !a!.1f.U� �� � 8 �����--!� 3

2 1

L ", M . � ��� - ,. ��"j a

b

c

d

e

f

g

8...e6! Once again Black abandons the ....ig4 plan in order to reach a favourable version of a different set-up. In this case the point is that the bishop would not normally go to g5 in such a position.

9.'1We2 h6 The solid 9 . . ..ie7 is reasonable, but the immediate attack on the bishop is more forcing and has scored excellently in practice.

IO.i.£4 1 O ..ih4 g5 1 1 ..ig3 reaches the main line below.

IO...gS!? This is the most ambitious move. Black can also proceed in more solid fashion with 1 O . . . e5 1 1 ..ie3 .ie7, although in that case White's control over the d5-square would offer him some compensation.

h

14...0-0 Another game continued 1 4 . . . .id7 1 5 .'1Mfe3 0-0 1 6 .'1Wg5 Eld8 1 7.'1Wxe5 '1Wxe5 1 8.4Jxe5 .ie8 1 9 ..ib3 b5 20.axb5 axb5+ White regained his pawn but still suffered from the lack of a dark­ squared bishop, Roeder - Gawehns, Germany 1 98 1 .

15.'1We3 h6 16.g4 �e8 1 7..ifl b6+ White could only dream of obtaining any compensation for the missing pawn in I. Horvath - Golikov, Hungary 1 992.

C) 8..ig5 This ambitious move has yet to be tested extensively.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

u.i.g3 IfWhite insists on preserving his bishop with 1 l ..ie3, there might follow 1 1 . . .4Jg4 1 2 ..id2 b5 1 3 ..ib3 tLlge5 1 4.4Jxe5 4Jd4! 1 5 .'1Mfd3 dxe5 1 6.Elfd 1 .ib7 when Black kept an extra pawn and full control of the game in Kissick W. Gray, corr. 2000.

34

Minor Systems

l l ... tlJh5 12.E!adl tLlxg3 13.hxg3 In the event of 1 3.fxg3, Dreke - Hertel, corr. 1 994, 1 3 . . ..ig7N White is unlikely to achieve much on the f-file.

17.hi .id7 18JWe3 E!cS 19 ..ie2 E!gS 20.g4 tlJds Black's king is safe enough in the centre and the second player eventually capitalized on his advantage in Lendwai - Lutz, Graz 1 993.

13 .. .'\W£6 Black is spoiled for choice, with a good alternative being 1 3 . . ..ig7 (the cheeky 1 3 . . . h5!?N+ also looks dangerous for White) 1 4.e5 d5 1 5.g4 'lffic7 1 6 ..ixd5 exd5 1 7.lZ:lxd5 'lffib 8 1 8J'i:fe 1 0-0 1 9.lZ:lb6 .ixg4 when White did not have enough for the sacrificed piece in Zelie - Saric, Zagreb 2007.

D) 8.'lffie2 Finally we arrive at the most common continuation. White continues with his usual scheme of development but also allows Black to carry out his plan.

8....ig4 14.tlJh2 1 4.e5 dxe5 1 5 .lZ:le4 'lffig7 1 6.Vfid2 f5 1 7.lZ:lc3 .ic5 1 8.Elfe 1 e4 1 9.lZ:lxe4 fxe4 20.Elxe4 0-0 was another failure for White in Costa - Gallagher, Lisbon 2000. 14.'lffie 3!?N g4 1 5 .lZ:ld4 lZ:lxd4 1 6.Elxd4 h5 seems sensible for White, but still not good enough for equality.

14... .ie7 1 5.f4 gxf4 16.gxf4 'lffig7 The position is quite sharp, but there is no question that Black's chances are higher. He has a pawn in the bank and an open g-file, while his bishop pair is also an important factor.

It should also briefly be noted that 9 . . . tt'le5?? 1 0.tt'lxe5! would be embarrassing for Black.

IO .if4 •

Sometimes White plays 1 0.h3, when 1 0 . . ..ixf3 1 l .'lffixf3 .ie7 1 2 ..if4 Vfffb 8 reaches the main line. (Please note that Black would not really benefit from 1 1 . . . tt'le5 1 2.Vfie2 lZ:lxc4 1 3 .'lffixc4 when once again his development is a little slow.)

Chapter 2 - The Morra Gambit

10 '?9b8! .••

White was threatening e5 so the queen should vacate the d-file, and this is the best location for her.

l l .h3 1 l .Wfd3 gives Black a pleasant choice. 1 1 .. .hf3 (also promising is 1 l . . .ii.e7!?N 1 2.hd6 Wfxd6 1 3.Wfxd6 ii.xd6 1 4Jhd6 cj;le7+) 1 2.gxf3?! (White should prefer 1 2.Wfxf3 with the same position as the main line, except for the position of the pawn on h2 instead of h3.) 12 . . . tt:lh5! 1 3.ii.xd6 hd6 1 4.Wfxd6 Wfxd6 1 5 .!Jxd6 cj;le7 1 6.!Jad1 !Jhd8 17.!Jxd8 !Jxd8 1 8.!Jxd8 �xd8 with a serious advantage in the ending, Al Badani - Sanjay, Beirut 2009.

Again Black should not waste time on unnecessary exchanges. For instance, 1 2 . . . tt:le5?! 1 3 .ii.xe5 dxe5 1 4.Wfg3 made his task much more complicated in Tsereteli - Matnadze, Tbilisi 200 1 .

7

6

If White spends an additional tempo on 1 3 .Wfd3, then 13 . . . tt:le5! becomes a good answer. 1 3 .ii.fl 0-0 1 4.!Jd2 !Jd8 1 5 .!Jad1 Wfc7 1 6.g4!? tt:le5 1 7.Wfe2 This was Regan - Paehtz, Dresden 1 998, and here I suggest: 1 7 . . . !Jac8N 1 8.!Jc2 tt:lg6 1 9.ii.g3 Wfa5+ White's kingside activity does not succeed in producing enough counterplay.

13...0-0 14.'?9g3 Another plausible continuation would be 14.!Jac 1 N !Jc8 1 5 .Wfe3 b5 1 6.ii.g3 h6+. In most respects White has a healthy position, except he is missing a pawn.

14... tlJe5 15.!J.e3

ll ...h£3 12.'?9xf3 !J.e7

8

35

Also after 1 5 .!Jd4 !Jc8 1 6.!Jad1 b5 1 7.a3 !Ja7+ White has no real compensation.

1 5...b5

� � S� ��r;/ ·� ��n{�� i. ""--:; " ' �� • m m i w i � ·� ;-,,�.uuZ�'

l "ill ' ill ill : ill·illil'·'·ill

1li!li

�'

��';; �� � f:o ill�iffl�i't� 0�pill �M•• 3� a

� � i¥� 8

�"'";

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

13.!J.e2 Removing the bishop from potential attacks from . . . b5 or . . . tt:le5. Some other moves have also been tried, but in all cases White has trouble justifYing the missing pawn. Here are a few other examples:

16... tlJg6 17.f4? b4 18.f5 bxc3 19.fxg6 hxg6 20.!J.f4 cxb2 2U'l:abl tlJxe4 White was soon forced to resign in Watzdorf - Buhr, Germany 1 994.

36

Minor Systems

Conclusion All gambits are tainted with a chance of failure, since the violent way of breaking the balance can sometimes backfire on the active side. The Morra Gambit has all but disappeared from high-level chess, despite never having been completely refuted. Black must play with great precision in order to tame the opponent's early initiative, which results from the rapid development of the pieces. The proposed antidote is one of the most promising and safest lines the defender can choose. It avoids the most dangerous attacking possibilities, while providing realistic chances for Black to capitalize on his extra pawn.

Minor Systems

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

Forrest Gump - The c3-Variation

Variation Index l.e4 c5 2.c3 A) 2 ...d6 3.d4 t!Df6 Al) 4.f3 A2) 4.dxc5 t!Dc6! A21) 5.cxd6 A22) 5.i.c4 A23) 5.WI'c2 dxc5 A231) 6.i.f4 A232) 6.t!Df3 A24) 5.f3 A3) 4.i.d3 g6! A31) 5.dxc5 A32) 5.t!Df3 B) 2 ...d5 3.exd5 Wl'xd5 4.d4 g6!r Bl) 5.i.e3 cxd4 Bll) 6.cxd4 i.g7 B12) 6.WI'xd4 B2) 5.dxc5 B3) 5.t!Da3 B4) 5.t!Df3 i.g7 B41) 6.c4!r B42) 6.i.e2 B43) 6.dxc5 B44) 6.i.e3 B45) 6.t!Da3 cxd4 B451) 7.t!Db5 B452) 7.i.c4!

38 38 39 39 40 41 42 43 44 46 46 48 49 50 50 51 52 54 55 55 56 58 59 61 61 62

h

38

Minor Systems

A) 2 ... d6 3.d4 llJ£6

l.e4 c5 2.c3

Now White has three main ideas: AI) 4.f3,

A2) 4.dxc5 and A3) 4.i.d3. AI) 4.f3

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

The 2.c3 Sicilian is without a doubt the enfant terrible of the whole Sicilian complex. The system was not really taken seriously until the stubborn efforts ofSveshnikov transformed it into one of the most fashionable lines ever invented. Some 90,000 games later the theory of the system could fill several volumes. Black's two most popular choices are 2 . . . lt:lf6 3.e5 ctJd5, with a somewhat improved version ofAlekhine's Defence, and 2 ... d5 3.exd5 1Wxd5, aping the main feature of the Scandinavian Defence. The biggest problem for Black is not so much finding a route to an acceptable position, but rather to find a fully sound line that offers him enough chances to play for a win. For this reason I decided to cover two options for Black, so that the reader can choose one that suits his own attitude to risk as well as the specific tournament or match situation that might arise on a given day. The first option will be A) 2...d6, a somewhat underestimated line but in my opinion not a bad one at all. We will then turn our attention to B) 2 ...d5, in connection with a kingside fianchetto. This leads to sharper play and is often used by players who are looking to win with the black pieces.

This has been seen in quite a lot of games, but the problem for White is that now both his knights are deprived of their most natural squares. A witty solution for the second player is the immediate counterblow in the centre.

4 ... d5! 5.e5 lLlfd7 6.f4 cxd4 7.cxd4 lLlb6 Black has good chances to obtain a pleasant version of the French Defence, since the bishop on c8 is not blocked.

8.ctJc3 8 .ctJf3 ctJc6 9 ..tel .tf5 1 0. 0-0 e6 1 I ..te3 lt:lc4! 1 2 ..txc4 dxc4 1 3.ctJc3 lt:lb4 14.ctJe1 h5 1 5.1Wf3 lt:ld5 was more than comfortable for Black in Basanta - Hodgson, Winnipeg 1 994. 8 . .td3 lt:lc6 9.ctJe2 should be met by 9 . . . g6!N (9 . . . lt:lb4?! 1 0.f5! was troublesome in Alavkin - Malaniuk, Kstovo 1 997.) 9.lt:lbc3 .tf5 1 o ..txf5 gxf5 1 1 .0-0 ( l l .e6 fx:e6 is nothing for White; the knight on e2 is useless, while Black can always hide his king on d7 if needed, and later he can easily manoeuvre a knight to e4.) 1 l . . .e6 with roughly equal chances. Black will develop his dark-squared bishop on e7 and might aim for active play on either side of the board.

8... ctJc6 9.b3!? White wants to delay ctJf3 in order to prevent the convenient development of the enemy bishop on g4.

9 ...i.f5 IO.i.a3 llJd7 I l .Wfd2 Wfa5 I2.ctJb5

Chapter 3 - The c3 Variation

a

b

39

c

d

e

f

g

h

In this position White has a wide choice. We will consider the following options in detail: A21) 5.cxd6, A22) s.i.c4, A23) s.Wfc2 and

A24) 5.f3. 13.l2Jf3 i.g4 14J':!:dl a6 15.l2Jc3 Wfa5 16.i.b2 hf3 17.gxf3 g6 18.e6!? White decides to complicate the game before Black can stabilize the position with . . . e6, when the doubled f-pawns could become a long-term liability.

18...fxe6 19.i.h3 i.g7 20.Wfe3 W!'b4 21.he6 hd4 22.l':!:xd4 Wfxd4 White must think about safety, otherwise he can lose the battle as in Rogers - Sadler, London 1 992.

A2) 4.dxc5 This should not trouble Black too much, although he should certainly take care to avoid 4 ... l2Jxe4?? 5 .'Wa4t.

4... l2Jc6! It would not be so terrible to play 4 . . . dxc5 5 .'Wxd8t mxd8 6.f3 e6 7.�e3 l2Jc6, but Black would have to play carefully to equalize. The text move leads to more interesting play.

The modest 5 .l2Jd2 offers White very little, for instance: 5 . . . dxc5 6.l2Jgf3 g6 7.g3 �g7 8.�g2 'Wd3 9.�fl 'Wd7 1 0.�g2 b6 1 1 .0-0 0-0 1 2.e5 l2Jd5 1 3 .'We2 tLlc7 1 4J%e1 �b7 1 5 .'We4 This was Sveshnikov - Dorfman, Volgodonsk 1 98 1 , and now 1 5 . . .l2Je6N 1 6.'We2 E1ad8 would have given Black a slight plus. 5 .�d3 also makes a timid impression. 5 . . . d5!? Recapturing on c5 is also okay, but the text seems even easier. 6.l2Jd2 e6 (If Black is feeling ambitious he might consider 6 . . . e5!?, which has scored well.) 7.tLlgf3 1his was Goloshchapov ­ Nevednichy, Miskolc 2004, and now 7 . . .�xc5 8.exd5 'Wxd5 would have been fine for Black.

A21) 5.cxd6 This amounts to an exchanging of what was, just two moves ago, White's proud pair of central pawns. In other words, it is not a serious try for an advantage.

s l2Jxe4 6.l2Jd2 ..•

White had better avoid 6.dxe7? 'Wxd 1 t 7.mxd1 l2Jxf2t 8.me1 l2Jxh 1 9.exf8='Wt

40

Minor Systems

Ei:xf8+ White is in trouble here, as he will have a hard time capturing the trapped knight on h 1 . Meanwhile Black intends to arrange long castling followed by . . . Ei:fe8t with powerful play in the centre. If White does not take on e7 he has several different ways to develop his pieces, but in all cases Black will get a comfortable position after . . . tLlxd6, when he will have two well-placed knights and a central pawn majority. I do not see much point in analysing every possible plan at White's disposal, so we will just consider one example from Grandmaster praxis featuring accurate play from both sides.

6... �xd6 6 . . . tLlxd2 7.�xd2 e5 is equally playable and leads to similar positions.

7.�c4 e5 8.tlJf3 f6 9.�xd6t .ixd6 lO..ic4 Y!fe7 l l ..ie3 .ie6 12.Y!ib3 hc4 13.Ylfxc4 Y!ff7 14.�d2 0-0 1 5J3dl l:Ud8 16.g7 2 1 .'Llxf8 if5 and Black wins.

12 ...tZk2! The knight is not only safeguarding itself from a potential capture, but also playing an active role in the defence.

13.i.c4

81

Chapter 4 - Without g3 Other moves are no better, for instance: 1 3.tLlg5 tLle3! Not only attacking the rook, but also threatening . . .hh6 followed by ... tLleg4.

13 ...lLld4 14)tJg5 e6! Thanks to the lost tempo involved in White's hb5-c4 manoeuvre, Black had enough time to recentralize his knight, supporting the pawn on e6 and thereby preventing the bishop on c4 from playing an active role in the attack.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

lO.tLld5 White should avoid 1 0.tLle2?! d5! 1 l .exd5 tLlxd5 when the resulting pawn structure favours Black. Here is one example: 1 2.Wi'f2 tLle3 (Also interesting is 1 2 ... b5!?N 1 3 .hb5 Wi'b6 with promising compensation.) 1 3 .he3 dxe3 1 4.Wi'xe3 ixb2 1 5 .l"lab 1 .tg7 1 6.Wi'f3 l"lb8 17.tLlg3 e6 1 8.'it>h1 b6 With the bishop pair and a sounder structure, Black was in full control in Kolosowski - Nedilko, Warsaw 2006. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 5.fxg6 There is not much else that White can do.

15 ...fxg6 16.hg7 xg7 17J:hf6 h6!-+

The attack runs out of steam. As you can see, a certain amount of precision was required in order to defend correctly. At the same time, the ideas were quite easy to understand and follow: just take away the influence of the bishop on c4, and everything else more or less falls into place.

C322) 9.lLlxd4 cxd4 The direct exchange in the centre may be White's best option, although it is not much of a try for an advantage.

10.tLld1 is not so bad, although Black should be able to obtain a comfortable game after 1 0 . . . d5 1 l ..tb3 dxe4 1 2.dxe4, Armbrust Fruebing, Willingen 2006. In this position it looks promising to pre-empt the possible e5push with 12 . . . tLld7!?N 1 3.tLlf2 Wi'c7 1 4.tLld3 a5! 1 5 .a4 tLlc5 1 6.tLlxc5 Wi'xc5 when Black has good chances on the queenside.

lO ...llJxd5 l l bd5 White can also consider 1 l .exd5, J. Peters D Lee, Los Angeles 1 999. White wants to attack along the e-file, but the downside is that his bishop has a restricted view of the board. Black should develop calmly with 1 1 ....!d7N with the possible continuation 1 2.a4 a5 1 3 ..!d2 l"le8, with roughly even chances.

-

.

l l...e6 12.i.h3 a5 13.a4 hS!? This is a sensible precaution.

82

Closed Systems

14..id2 .id7 15.�g3 �c7 16.�h4 5! 17-l:Uel gae8= Black's defences were holding firm in Klimov - Trofimov, Satka 2005.

C323) 9 .ib3 .

This natural-looking move has been White's most popular choice, but it runs into an unpleasant counter.

9... a5! Suddenly the b3-bishop has become a serious target.

13 ... a4 14.a3 d5 1 5 .i.a2 dxe4 1 6.dxe4 'We?+ The weak pawn c2 is hurting White's position.) 1 l . ..a4 1 2.ic4 d5 1 3.exd5 ttJxd5 14.a3 ( 1 4.'Wf2 b5!? 1 5 .ixb5 'Wb6 1 6.ic4 [or 1 6.c4] ttJe3 looks excellent for Black, for instance: 1 7.ixe3 dxe3 1 8.'Wg3 a3+) 14 . . . l"\b8 1 5 .tLlg3 e6 with an obvious plus for Black thanks to his superior structure, Wei - Stojic, Tuggeranong 2007. 1 0.'Wh4 This was played in Hernandez - Anand, Merida 200 1 . 1 0 . . .id7!N In the game Black sacrificed a pawn with 1 0 ... a4 and obtained good compensation, but the text move, which was subsequently given as an improvement by Anand, should ensure an advantage without much risk and should therefore be preferred. 1 l .e5 White should try to create problems for his opponent. The passive 1 1 .a4 gives Black a simple route to an advantage with 1 1 ... tLlxb3 1 2.cxb3 ic6 1 3.f5 'Wb6+. 1 1 ... a4!

1 O.ie3? is definitely not the answer in view of 1 0 . . . ttJg4!+. 1 O.i.d2 id7 (1 O . . . e6!?N is also promising) 1 l .a4 ttJxb3 1 2.cxb3 i.e6 1 3.l"'a3 'Wb6 1 4.ttJb5 ttJe8 1 5 .f5 id7+ Black's bishop pair and healthier structure gave him the better chances in Bauer - Pelletier, Aubervilliers 2002. 1 O.ttJxd4 cxd4 is just an inferior version of line C322, from White's point of view. 1 l .tLle2 ( l l .ttJd5 ttJxd5 1 2.i.xd5 e6 1 3.i.c4 [ 1 3.ib3?? a4 1 4.ic4 d5 1 5 .exd5 exd5 1 6.ib5 l"'a5-+]

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 2.i.c4 The immediate capture on f6 does not solve White's problems, and the same can be said for the following alternatives: 1 2.ttJxd4 cxd4 1 3.tLld5 (or 1 3.ttJxa4 b5 14.ttJb6 'Wxb6 1 5 .exf6 ixf6+) 1 3 . . . axb3 1 4.exf6 exf6 1 5.cxb3 l"'a5+

Chapter 4 - Without g3 1 2.ctJg5 'Llf5 ! 1 3.hf7t Elxf7 1 4.'1Mfh3 'Lld4 1 5 .iMfh4 'Llxc2 1 6.'Llxf7 Wxf7 1 7 .exf6 exf6 1 8.Eib 1 �f5+ 1 2 . . . b5! Continuing to fight against the dangerous light-squared bishop. 1 2 ... 'Llxf3t would let White off the hook: 1 3.Eixf3 ( 1 3.gxf3? 'Llh5+) 1 3 . . .dxe5 14.fxe5 'Llg4 1 5.�g5 'Llxe5 1 6.2:'\ff1 Ele8 ( 1 6 . . . 'Llxc4 1 7 .�xe7 would be unclear) 17.'Lld5 'Llxc4 1 8.ctJxe7t Elxe7 1 9.�xe7 '1Mfc7 20.dxc4 �xb2 2 1 .Eiae1 �d4t 22.'it>h1 with roughly equal chances. 1 3.'Llxd4 1 3 .�xf7t Elxf7 1 4.'Llg5 'Llxc2 1 5.'Llxf7 Wxf7 1 6.exf6 exf6 1 7.2:'\b 1 �f5+ is similar to the 1 2.'Llg5 variation noted above. 1 3 ... cxd4 14.'Llxb5 d5! 1 5.exf6 hf6 1 6.'1Mff2 dxc4 1 7.'Llxd4 cxd3 1 8.cxd3 �g4 1 9.�e3 iMfd5 Black has emerged from the complications with a definite advantage.

IO...i.d7 1 0 . . .�g4 is not a bad alternative, but I prefer to focus on the text move.

l l.i.xd7 lLixd7 12.Wffl a4 13.lLixd4 cxd4 14.lL:Ie2 Wfb6 1 4 ... e5 is fine as well, but I would prefer not to obstruct the view of the g7-bishop.

1 5.£5 8

7 6

5 4 3

2

1

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

83

15 ...d5!? This is a really interesting and creative idea. Black is looking to take the sting out of the possible 'Llf4-d5 manoeuvre.

16.i.g5 Obviously we should also consider the consequences of accepting the bait. 1 6.exd5 e6!? This can lead to interesting complications, although the straightforward 1 6 ... 2:'\ac8!? might actually be a stronger move. Black has fine compensation thanks to his pressure on the c-file. 1 7.c4 1 7.c3 gives Black the extra option of 1 7 ... exf5!, for instance: 1 8.'Llxd4 �xd4 ( 1 8 . . . 'Llf6 1 9.ctJc2 iMfxf2t 20.Wxf2 'Llxd5) 1 9.'1Mfxd4 iMfxd4t 20.cxd4 'Llf6 with better chances for Black. 1 7. . . dxc3 1 7 . . . exf5!? is possible, albeit slightly less attractive with the pawn on c4 instead of c3. 1 8.'1Mfxb6 'Llxb6 1 9.f6 cxb2 20.hb2 �h6 2 1 .dxe6 �e3t 22.'it>h1 fxe6 Black is not worse in the ending.

16...dxe4 17.i.xe7 1 7.dxe4 Elac8 1 8.2:'\acl 'Llc5 is clearly better for Black.

84

Closed Systems

We have been following the game Mitkov - Vera Gonzalez, Merida 2005. At this point Black exchanged on d3, but there was no need to release the tension so soon. Instead he could have kept the upper hand with:

17 .. J�fe8N 18 .ia3 .

In the event of 1 8.f6, the reply 1 8 ... exd3 suddenly becomes very strong, as 1 8.cxd3 runs into 1 8 . . . lLlxf6l when the knight on e2 will be hanging.

18 .. .tl:�e5! With some initiative, as 1 9.dxe4?? is refuted by 1 9 . . . lLlg4 followed by d3t.

Conclusion The contents of the present chapter seem quite disparate, with numerous types of positions being analysed. Line C 1 even took us as far afield as a line ofthe Dragon variation involving the early f2-f4. In those positions it seems like the first player is aiming for too much from the very beginning and puts (at least some part of) the carriage ahead of the horse. Line C2 featured a closed set-up combined with an exchange of light-squared bishops. White's set­ up is sound enough, although the early bishop exchange creates additional breathing space for the black pieces, and the defender should have little trouble equalizing the game. Variation C3 with the bishop on c4 is rather more threatening, although there is also a potential downside for White as the same piece might become a target, as was vividly demonstrated in the final variation C323) 9 ..ib3 a5!. Overall, if Black comes to the board well-prepared, there will be little reason for him to fear any of the lines examined in this chapter.

Closed Systems A Bridge Too Far 3.g3 -

Variation Index l.e4 c5 2.lLlc3 d6 3.g3 3...lLlc6 4..ig2 g6 5.d3 .ig7 A) 6.lLlf3 lLlf6 7.o-o o-o 8.h3 :gh8 Al) 9..ie3 A2) 9.a4 B) 6.£4 e6 7.lLlf3 lLlge7 8.0-0 0-0 Bl) 9..id2 B2) 9..ie3 b6!? 10.d4 .ia6 B21) ll.:gf2 B22) ll.:gel C) 6..ie3 :gb8 7J�r�d2 h5 Cl) 8.£4 C2) 8.lLlf3 C3) 8.lLlge2

86 87 89 91 92 92 94 94 96 96 97 97

A2) note to 10 ... b5

A I ) after 20.Ci:lc3

a

b

c

d

e

f

1 2...ti:lxg4N

g

C3) after 1 8 .. J!fc8

h

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

The Closed Sicilian defused

86

Closed Systems

When choosing the Closed Sicilian with 2.t2Jc3 and 3.g3 White avoids any early opening of the position or even direct contact of the pieces, and instead seeks to accumulate energy to be unleashed later in the game. His dream scenario would involve a devastating kingside attack, while the opponent keeps himself occupied by winning an odd pawn or two on the opposite side of the board. The reader may laugh or cry about this idea, but it is actually more realistic than it sounds. Black has to rush his queenside counterplay without delay and at the same time be mindful of the consequences of any possible opening of the centre.

l.e4 c5 2.tlJc3 d6 3.g3 tlJc6 4.�g2 g6

6... tlJf6 In variations without the f2-f4 advance Black does not have to worry about a kingside pawn storm, so there is no real need to develop the knight on e7. Instead the text move saves time and positions the knight on a more active square.

7.0-0 0-0 8.h3 A database search reveals that just about every legal move has been tried here, but since the whole line is not hugely popular, I will just focus on the main line, the point of which is to prepare j,e3 without allowing harassment with . . . ttJg4.

8 .. J'�b8

The kingside fianchetto is Black's most respected system.

5.d3 �g7

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Here we will consider three moves in detail:

A) 6.tlJf3, B) 6.f4 and C) 6.�e3. A) 6.tlJf3 Most Sicilian repertoire books do not even mention this move, but it is worth considering as White is playing with an extra tempo over a set-up that is commonly used by Black against the English Opening.

I will mention just one other interesting line: 9.Eiel White tries to play in the centre using his pieces. 9 ... l2Jd7 1 0 .j,e3 b5 l l .d4 White's strategy is not without logic, as his f-pawn will be better on f2 than f4 in a position with an open centre.

Chapter 5 - 3 . g3 1 l . ..b4 1 2 .tt:le2 a5! Black does not want to cooperate, and avoids . . .cxd4 for the time being. 13.1Mfd2 .ta6 1 4.l"\ad1 1Mfc7 1 5 .d5 Unsure how else to make progress, White drives forward.

1 5 . . . tt:la7 It was worth considering 1 5 . . . tt:lce5!?N 1 6.tt:lxe5 tt:lxe5 1 7.b3 a4 1 8.f4 tt:ld7 1 9.e5 .tb7+. 1 6 . .th6?! This allows a strong sacrifice. 1 6.1Mfc l .txe2 1 7.l"'xe2 tt:lb5+ was also not great for White. However, the first player could have maintained the balance with 1 6.Eib 1 tt:lf6 1 7.tt:lh4 tt:lb5 1 8 . .tg5, when he has no serious weaknesses. 1 6 . . . hb2! 1 7..txf8 Elxf8 1 8.1Mlh6 .tg7 1 9.1Mfh4 he2 20.l"'xe2 tt:lb5+ Black had a fantastic position for a small material investment in Golovin - Khismatullin, Voronezh 2008.

Al) 9 .ie3 b5 10.1Mld2 .

1 0.e5?! White's pieces are not fully prepared for the opening of the centre. 1 0 . . . dxe5 1 1 ..txc5 b4 12.tt:le4 ( 1 2.tt:la4!?N 1Mfc7 1 3.tt:ld2 .te6+) 1 2 . . . tt:lxe4 1 3.dxe4 1Mfa5 1 4 ..te3 .ta6 1 5 .Eie 1 Eld8 1 5 .1Mfc l tt:ld4+ Reinhard - Fischer, Bay City 1 963.

87

10 b4 l l.ttldl ...

In the event of 1 1 .tt:ld5, Galego - Damaso, Portugal 1 994, it looks interesting to try 1 l . . ..te6!?N 12.tt:lf4 (After 1 2.tt:lxf6t .txf6 1 3.d4 cxd4 14.tt:lxd4 tt:lxd4 1 5 ..txd4 .txd4 1 6.1Mfxd4 1Mlb6+ The endgame will be rather painful for White.) 1 2 . . ..td7 1 3.tt:ld5 'tM!c8 14.�h2 e6 1 5.tt:lxf6t .txf6+ Black has the more pleasant position without any hint of troubles.

Anyone who feels that the last move is too committal might also consider 1 1 . . ..td7, when play may continue 1 2 ..th6 tt:ld4 1 3 ..txg7 �xg7 with no problems for Black.

12..th6 White does not achieve much with 1 2.c3 .te6 1 3.tt:lg5 .td7 1 4.cxb4 ( 1 4.f4? tt:lh5!+) 1 4 . . . cxb4+. Also unimpressive is 1 2.b3 tt:ld4 1 3.hd4 cxd4 14.tt:lb2 Vlic7 1 5 .tt:lc4 .te6+ White has managed to mask his weakness on the c-file, but Black's extra space and bishop pair are important trumps.

Closed Systems

88

12 ... CLJh5 Black already enjoys a space advantage on the queenside and in the centre, and now he prepares to fight for the kingside as well.

looks unpleasant for White due to his severe lack of space and unsafe king.

19... hs zo.CiJc3

13.i.xg7 xg7

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

14.a3 1 4.tt:lh4?! is an instructive mistake. 1 4 . . . tt:lf4 1 5 .tt:lf5t gxf5 1 6.gxf4 Ristoja - Maeder, Haifa 1 970. Now Black could have seized the initiative with the natural 1 6 . . . 2"\g8!N The opening of the g-file will favour the player who can occupy it first. 1 7.fxe5 �h8 1 8 .�h1 ( 1 8.exd6? '1Wxd6 1 9.tt:le3 f4 20.tt:lg4 hg4 2 l .hxg4 2"1xg4-+) 1 8 . . . dxe5 1 9 .f4 fxe4+ White has only succeeded in opening the position against his own king.

2I.hxg4 hg4 22.CiJb2 ggs 23.hi CiJd4 It is not even clear if ... tt:lc2 should be called a "threat", as the monstrous knight can claim to be stronger than either of the enemy rooks.

24.f3 Ah5 25.�f2 Preventing . . .'\Wh4.

25 ...gb7 14... b3! Black should keep the a-file closed, preventing any counterplay, as he is already in a position to seize the initiative on the opposite flank.

15.c3 f5 16.exf5 gxf5 17J�el f4 18.g4 ttJf6 19.c4

This was the end of the game Engelhard Schnabel, e-mail 2006. It seems bit early to resign, so it is possible that the game ended in some other way, such as White defaulting on his next move. In any case, it is obvious that Black's initiative more than compensates for the sacrificed piece. A plausible continuation is:

Making room for the knight to return to c3, although d4 now becomes an inviting target for its counterpart on c6.

26.CLJe4 gbg7 27..ih3

1 9.d4 e4 20.tt:lh2 f3 2 l..�fl cxd4 22.cxd4 d5

27.. ,gg3 28..ig4 i.xg4 29.fxg4 �aS!

27.2"1g1 is refuted by 27 . . . tt:lf5!.

89

Chapter 5 - 3.g3 Threatening ...Ei:g6-h6. Black can also restore approximate material parity with ... Ei:xd3 at any moment. His position is clearly better, and quite possibly winning.

A2) 9.a4 The opening of the a-file should be beneficial for White as he kept his rook on the a-file.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

We have already encountered this idea in line AI above. It may not be quite as strong with the white knight on c3 instead of d i , but i t should still suffice for equality. I l .lLlh2!? This is a logical idea. The knight wants to exchange itself for its counterpart on f6, thus enabling the other knight to occupy the ciS­ outpost at a suitable moment. I l .'IWd2 is not dangerous, for instance: I I .. .lLld4 I 2.lLlei bS I 3.axb5 axbS I4.il.g5 lLle6 I S .ii.h4 h6 I 6.hf6 hf6 I 7.lLld5 il.g7 I 8.'1Wa5 il.b7 I 9.'1Wxd8 Ei:fXd8 20.c3 Ei:a8= Wahls - De Firmian, Novi Sad I 990. I I ...lLld4 I 2.lLlg4

h

9 ... a6 This is the most natural move, although Black can also consider 9 ... b6!?, making use of the fact that the rook is no longer tactically vulnerable on the h I -a8 diagonal. I o.il.e3 il.b7 I l .'IWd2 dS This should be enough for a satisfactory game, for instance: I 2.ii.f4 (Perhaps White should have settled for the equal position resulting from 1 2.exd5 lLlxdS I 3.ii.h6.) I 2 ... dxe4 I 3.dxe4 '1Wxd2 I4.lLlxd2 Ei:bd8 I S J:lfdi lLlhS I 6.il.e3 Markowski ]. Polgar, Oviedo I 993, I 6 ... lLlb4!N I 7.g4 lLlf6 I 8.Ei:dcl hS+. -

IO..ie3 b5 I will keep this as the main line in order to maintain some consistency between this and the previous variation A I . However, I will also mention a fully viable alternative: I O ... eS!?

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

I 2 ... lLlxg4N A natural improvement over I 2 ... lLlh5?! I 3.lLld5 il.e6 I 4.lLlh6t mh8 I 5 .c3 lLlc6 I 6.lLlf5! when Black was under pressure in Kogan - Belov, Moscow 2002. I3.hxg4 il.e6 I 4.lLld5 ii.xd5 I 5 .exd5 f5 I 6.gxf5 I 6.c3 is met convincingly with I 6 ... f4!. I6 ... lLlxf5 I 7.ii.d2 ii.h6 Black is doing just fine, and might well claim to have the stronger minor piece after the likely exchange of bishops.

l l.axb5 axb5 12.'i'd2 By contrast with the analogous poslt!on from line AI in which the a-pawns were still

Closed Systems

90

on the board, here it is more reasonable for White to play: 1 2.e5!? The conflict in the centre makes more sense when White is already dominating the open a-file with his rook. Nevertheless Black still has nothing to fear. 1 2 ... dxe5 1 3.hc5 b4 1 4.tLle4 In the event of 1 4.tLla4, Sandner - Rogulj , Austria 2003, it looks quite prom1smg for Black to play 14 . . .�c7 intending . . . Ei:d8 . The present position was reached in Muench - Derlich, Bad Neustadt 1 990, and here there are a couple of promising ideas for Black: 8 7

6 5 4 3 2

1

��.i.� ��·� �- -V-� , ,%- ·V-� i �� ;� - "·-·Y-� �� -" ��r�-- �

�� ,� ��-r���� � �"'LL � ' , %� r!: �- -�� £j �W.'" �� � �;,;:;xg7 1 9.Eia1 Elfa8 20.Eixa5 Elxa5+ Thanks to his control over the only open file, Black can feel optimistic about the future.

B) 6.f4 e6

14 Wc7 15.i.h6

As White is hinting at a possible pawn storm, I have chosen to recommend a solid set-up with the knight on e7, thus enabling Black to fight for some kingside territory with . . . f5 if needed.

1 5 .2::\a2 iWb6 1 6.Eifa1 b3 1 7.cxb3 iWxb3 1 8. Ela3 iWb4+

7.lLlf3 ltlge7 8.0-0 0-0

•• J

15 hh6!?N •••

This is a promising new idea. Instead 1 5 . . . 2::\a8 1 6.�g7 c;t>xg7 1 7.\Wg5 Elxa1 1 8 .Eixa1 e6 was equal in Kritz - Alekseev, Biel 2005.

16.iWxh6

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

This is the basic starting position for the present variation. In general terms, we can say that Black can quickly finish his mobilization and is well prepared for most scenarios. White's main choice concerns the development of his dark-squared bishop, so we will divide the material between Bl) 9.i.d2 and B2) 9.i.e3.

17.c3 1 7.cxb3 leaves White with a shattered structure and Black should be better after something like 1 7 . . .iWb6 1 8.Eia3 Ela8 1 9.Eifa1 Elxa3 20.Eixa3 Ela8 2 1 .Eixa8t �xa8 22.ctJc l iWb4+.

17 J'ga8 18.¥Md2 :!3fc8i .•

White will struggle to equalize.

It is too early for an immediate pawn advance: 9.g4 f5! A useful rule of thumb for this whole variation is: if it looks like White may be threatening f5, then play .. .f5 yourselfl 1 O.gxf5 exf5 1 l .�e3 ctJd4 ( I I ...h8 1 2.h1 �e6 13.Wd2 iWd7 14.Eiae1 b6 1 5.ctJg5 �g8 1 6.ctJd5 h6 17.ctJxe7 ctJxe7 was comfortably equal for Black in Manor - Gelfand, Israel 1 999, but he can even play more ambitiously.) 1 2.iWd2 Medina Garcia - Gadia, Malaga 1 965. Here it looks good to play 12 ...Wb6!?N 1 3.Eiab1 �d7 14.2::\fe 1 Elae8+ Black has completed the mobilization of his pieces, with pleasing results.

92

Closed Systems

Bl) 9.i.d2 b6!? The standard 9 ... Eib8, intending . . . b5, has been much more common, but the more modest text move is also quite attractive.

1 8 .lt:Jxe4 i.d4t 1 9.ci>h1 Elxfl t 20.'Wxfl Elf8 2 l .'We2 tLlf5+ Black has a dream position, with all his forces active and working in perfect harmony.

1 1...%Vd7 IOJ'�bl This is a typical idea in the 9 .i.d2 variation. The usual intention will be to prepare a3 and b4, although a secondary purpose might be to defend the b-pawn in order to facilitate the transfer of the c3-knight to the kingside.

IO i.b7 l l .a3 •..

Another popular continuation has been: 1 l .CLJe2 'Wd7 1 2.g4 f5 1 3 .gxf5 exf5 1 4.c4

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

12.b4

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

14 . . . CLJd8 Black is spoiled for choice as he can meet White's challenge with different manoeuvres of his queen knight. There is also 1 4 . . . tLlb4!? 1 5 .i.xb4 cxb4 1 6.tLJfd4 ( 1 6.'Wd2 Elae8 1 7.CLJg3 a5+) 1 6 . . . tLlc6 1 7.'Wa4 fXe4 1 8.dxe4 Menetrier - Mittag, corr. 1 990, and now 1 8 ... Eiad8N 1 9.CLJxc6 i.xc6 20.'Wc2 Elde8 would have left Black with the more comfortable position. 1 5 .CLJc3 CLJe6 1 6.lt:Jg5 1 6.i.h3 Elae8 17 .E\e 1 'Wd8+ 1 6 ... CLJxg5 1 7 .fXg5 fXe4!N 17 ... Eif7 1 8.�f3 Elaf8 was more pleasant for Black in Spassky - Portisch, Mexico 1 980, but the text is even better.

This is the most consistent move. In some games White has tried pre-empting the following knight jump with 1 2.CLJe2, but Black can still play 1 2 . . . tt:J d4! 13.CLJexd4 ( 1 3.b4 transposes to the main line below) 13 . . . cxd4 1 4.'We2 Elac8 with the better prospects, as seen in Balashov - Adorjan, Munich 1 979. In the resulting structure the moves a2-a3 and Ela1 b 1 are almost completely redundant.

12 )tJd4 13.liJe2 •.

1 3.bxc5 bxc5 does not really alter the evaluation.

13 :B:ac8 •..

With a comfortable game for Black, Haenisch - Stillger, Bad Zwesten 1 997.

B2) 9.i.e3 b6!? For many years 9 . . . tLld4 was almost an automatic choice, as d3-d4 was considered a significant positional threat. But eventually

Chapter 5 - 3 . g3 players began to realize that this was not necessarily the case, and nowadays many experts believe the text move to be the most accurate at Black's disposal.

IO.d4 This is the most principled continuation, although it turns out that Black is well-placed to meet it. White can also aim for a more patient build­ up on the kingside: 1 o.�f2 �a6 1 1 .'1Wd2 '1Wd7 1 2.l"'ael This looks more natural than 1 2.l"'fe 1 l"\ac8 1 3.g4, Starostits - Kulaots, Tallinn 2006, 13 . . .lt:Jd4N 1 4.l"\ab1 'Llec6 1 5.'Lle2 lt:Jxf3t 1 6.hf3 'Lld4 1 7.�g2 l"\fe8+ 12 . . .l"\ae8 1 3.g4 f5! This is an important motif, which stems logically from Black's preparation for conflict in the centre and kingside. 1 4.gxf5 14.exf5 exfS 1 5.g5 dS 1 6.'Lle5 ctJxeS 1 7.fxe5 d4 1 8 .e6 ( 1 8.ctJe2 'Llc6+) 1 8 . . .'1Wd6+ Starostits - Almeida Quintana, Oviedo 2008. 1 4 . . . exf5 1 5.�h3 No better is 1 5 .e5 dxeS 1 6.fxe5 'Lld8!+ Black's pieces have great fluidity and can easily manoeuvre to the best squares, in this case e6.

93

1 5 . . . d5! 1 6.e5 'Lld8 1 7.lt:Je2 d4 1 8 .�g2 'Lle6 1 9.h4 �b7+ Black kept the more harmonious position in Spassky - Atalik, Tallinn 1 998. It is also worth mentioning: I O.h1 dS! This is a try for an advantage. There is also nothing wrong with 1 0 ...�b7 1 1 .d4 dS 1 2.exd5 'Llxd5 1 3.'Llxd5 cxd4 1 4.'Llxd4 'Llxd4 1 5 .hd4 hdS 1 6.hg7 hg2t 1 7.'it>xg2 'it>xg7 1 8.'1Wxd8 l"\fxd8 with complete equality, ]. Polgar - Kramnik, Paris 1 994. 1 1 .�g1 1 1 .exd5 exdS 1 2.d4? �g4+ 1 1 . . .dxe4 1 2.dxe4 �a6 1 3 .l"'f2 '1Wxd 1 1 4.l"\xd1 hc3 1 5 .bxc3 l"'ad8 1 6 .l"\fd2 �e2 1 7.l"\xd8 l"\xd8 1 8.l"\xd8t 'Llxd8 Black went on to exploit his opponent's shattered queenside in Augustin - Boensch, Leipzig 1 979.

IO. .i.a6 .

Tournament practice has also revealed 1 O . . . dS!? to be a reliable solution, but I have chosen to concentrate on the preliminary bishop development. In certain positions Black may be able to benefit from a delayed but more effective advance of the d-pawn, backed up by a fully developed army of pieces.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Closed Systems

94

We will consider both rook moves: B21)

l l.l3f2 and B22) l l .l3el. B21) l l .l3f2 Y!fc7 1 l . . .cxd4 1 2.'Llxd4 l:!c8 is also quite playable, but I think it is more interesting to maintain the tension.

13 tlJf5! •.•

Black does not have to recapture immediately, but can instead take the opportunity to activate his knight while driving the enemy bishop to a passive square.

14..id2 tLlcxd4 15.dxe6 1 5 . 'Lle5 l:!ad8 also maintains some initiative for Black.

12.a4 This has been White's usual choice, with the obvious intention of 'Llb5. At this point I found a strong novelty for Black - quite a surprise, considering that this position has been tested in a few dozen games.

12 d5!N .•.

This is the perfect timing for the thematic central advance, as White's pieces are in the wrong positions to deal with the early conflict. In all the games on my database Black played 1 2 ... 2:%ad8, when best play looks to be 1 3.'Llb5 1;Wb8 14.l:!d2 i.b7 with approximate equality, Dovramadjiev - Liangov, Sofia 1 996.

15 ... tlJxe6 16.tlJd5 Y!fd6 17 ..ic3 tlJed4:j: Black's pieces are much more harmonious, and White faces a difficult battle for equality.

s

7

� 'IS'�

B22) l l.l3el

%,!S'� ·� �

'illi1 .ea -� "�� - - % ��m� y - - - - ��f· � '

� -,�� y5 rwl••; "� � ��{"�f'����� �/- O/�_,_,%�P.'d!""%®,� 3 - � mtZJr� 8wdti" '""�� �-�� i{- �%"'" --- - 1-- --%� � � � �

6

4

%f.

2

1

� �if � a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

l l l3c8 .•.

The position is exceptionally rich, and Black can try several different ideas leading to a variety of possible structures. One option is 1 l . ..cxd4 1 2.'Llxd4 l:!c8, leading to a lively position in which the result is wide open. However, just as in line B2 1 above, I prefer to maintain the tension for a move or two longer.

12.a4 This has been the most common choice so I will take it as the main line, although many other moves have been tried. Here are a few alternatives:

Chapter 5 - 3 .g3

95

1 2.d5 exd5 1 3.exd5 l2Ja5! (In the event of 13 . . . l2Jb4, playing to win the d5-pawn, White can respond with the tricky 14.f5!?.) 14.l2Jd2 This position was reached in Melendez Fierro - Martin Catalan, Spain 2006, and now Black could have secured a slight advantage with 1 4 . . J'!e8N 1 5.�f2 \Wd7+ thanks to his more harmoniously placed pieces. 1 2.�f2 is another popular move, which makes a certain amount of sense as this piece can often become a target on e3. Play continues 1 2 . . .cxd4 13.l2Jxd4 and now 1 3 . . . l2Ja5! sets up the awkward prospect of . . . l2Jc4. Compared with the l l . . . cxd4 line noted above, you can see how useful it is that the black rook already sits on c8. The following recent game shows how quickly White may fall into trouble:

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

14.i.f2 After the inexplicable blunder 1 4.dxc5?? d4 White was losing a piece and resigned immediately in Britton - Ward, Swansea 2006. 1 4.�h3!? only seems to have been played once. 14 . . . 2'!b8 1 5 .l2Jb5 �c8 1 6.�xc8 !'!xeS 1 7.dxc5 l2Jf5 1 8 .cxb6?? (White had to play 1 8.�f2N when the position remains unclear after 1 8 . . . a6!?.) 1 8 . . . l2Jxe3 1 9.2'!xe3 1Wxb6 and White resigned in Torres - Niebergall, e-mail 2005.

14... ll:lf5 1 5.dxc5 d4 16.ll:le4 1 6.l2Jb5 bxc5 17.l2Jd2 l2Jb4 was pleasant for Black in Loevkvist - Sogin, e-mail 2007. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 4.\Wf3 l2Jc4 1 5.l2Jd l ?! e5! 1 6.fxe5 dxe5 1 7.l2Je2 lnonu - Matlakov, Antalya 2009, and now after 1 7 . . .\Wd2N White's position is close to collapsing.

12...d5! Black has no reason to delay the pawn advance.

13.exd5 exd5 Black enjoys active prospects in the centre and has achieved good practical results from this position.

16... ll:lb4! 17.'11*/d2 1 7.l2Je5 bxc5 1 8 .c3 was played in Rogulj ­ Jovanic, Zagreb 2008 . Now after 1 8 . . . l2Jd5!N Black is doing well, as White can hardly contemplate 1 9 .cxd4 cxd4 20.hd4? l2Jxf4!-+.

17...bxc5 18.ll:lxc5? Betterwas 1 8 .l2Je5N, although after 1 8 ... l2Jd5 1 9.�h3 l'!e8 Black's strongly centralized pieces give him slightly better chances.

18 ..Jhc5 19.�xb4 gxc2 20.ll:le5 d3 2 l.i.e4 Le5 22.fxe5 ges Black's advantage was close to decisive in Tischbierek - Avrukh, Biel 2004.

Closed Systems

96

C) 6.i.e3 One of the great modern concepts for White in the Closed Sicilian involves the clever idea of exchanging the mighty bishop on g7, not only reducing Black's dynamic potential but also eliminating a key defender of the kingside. Fortunately for Black, the whole line has lost a lot of its sparkle as practical testing revealed the effectiveness of an early b-pawn advance.

8 b4 9.l'Lld1 '1Wb6 •••

There are several good lines for Black, but this would be my choice.

1 o.l'Ll£3 l'Llh6!? It is not only White who can aspire to kingside activity. The text move prepares . . .f5, while incidentally preventing castling which would now cost White his valuable dark-squared bishop after ... l2Jg4.

6 J:�b8 7.'1Wd2 ••

White seldom chooses to insert the moves 7.a4 a6 here, as the open a-file would almost certainly fall into Black's hands in the not too distant future.

7... b5

The main alternative is 1 1 .h3 f5 1 2.0-0 0-0, leading to the same position but with the a-pawns still on the board. Play may continue 1 3.exf5 (or 1 3.�f2 e6 1 4.lLle3 ltJ£7 1 5 .exf5 gxf5 1 6.g4 l2Jd4 17.lLlxd4 cxd4 1 8.l2Jc4 '1Wc5 1 9.Ei:ae1 �d7 with approximate equality, Krapivin - Krylov, Vladimir 2008.) 13 ... l2Jxf5 1 4.�f2 l2Jfd4 1 5 .lLlxd4 lLlxd4 1 6.c3 bxc3 1 7.bxc3 '1Wa5 1 8. h2 lLlb5 Black was in control as his pieces became very active in Krapivin - Frolyanov, Zvenigorod 2008.

C1) 8.£4 White abandons the �h6 dream in order to press ahead on the kingside.

1 1...a5 12.axb4 axb4 13.h3 f5 14.0-0 0-0 15.i.f2 1 5 .e5 does not achieve anything after 1 5 . . . l2Jf7 1 6.d4 '1Wb5!.

Chapter 5 - 3.g3

1 5 ...e6 16.�e3 �f'7 17.�c4 V!fc7 18J��fe1 �d8 19.exf5 exf5 20.c3 bxc3 21.bxc3 d5 Both sides have manoeuvred logically, with White never coming dose to any sort of advantage, Short - Kramnik, Wijk aan Zee 2005 .

97

1 0. . .e6 1 1 .0-0 lLle7 1 2.c3 bxc3 1 3.bxc3 lLldc6 14.th6 hh6 1 5 .Wxh6 ta6 1 6.V!fg7 Elg8 1 7.V!fxh7 hd3 and Black was on top in Krapivin - Grachev, Moscow 2006.

1 1.0-0 V!fa4 12.c3 bxc3 13.bxc3 �c2 14.�cl �xe3 15.�xe3 c!iJf6 16.£4 0-0 17.h3 L6

C2) 8.�f3 If you feel this move is clumsy you are definitely not far off the mark. The knight will have to jump away in order to make way for the advance of the f-pawn.

8 ... b4 9.�d1 �d4 10.�h4 The most ambitious move, although objec­ tively it may already be time for White to admit he achieved no opening advantage and settle for a safe continuation like 1 0.0-0 tg4 1 1 .lLle l .

C3) 8.c!iJge2 Of the three main options, this one fits in best with White's previous moves and has been by far the most popular choice. a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

8 ... b4 9.�d1 �d4

10 ...V!fa5 Black's biggest problem is that he is spoiled for choice, with virtually any reasonable move leading to a comfortable game. Here are two such examples: 1 0 . . . e5 1 l .f4 exf4 1 2.hf4 lLle7 1 3.0-0 h6 1 4.te3 g5 1 5 .lLlf3 lLlxf3t 1 6.txf3 lLlc6 1 7.tg2 te6 1 8 .a3 a5 1 9.axb4 axb4 20.c3 bxc3 2 1 .bxc3 lLle5= Black's defence was a pleasant task in Smyslov - Portisch, Portoroz 1 97 1 .

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

98

Closed Systems

10.0-0 e6

16.�e3

Black can also consider the more creative 1 0 . . .�g4!? 1 l .f3 �d7 1 2.lt:lcl �a4!? 1 3.lt:lb3 when the two sides are experiencing a kind of stalemate on the queenside. One interesting game continued 1 3 ...1Mlc7 1 4.f4 lt:lh6 1 5 .h3 f5 1 6.�f2 0-0 1 7.lt:le3 e6 1 8.�h2 �c6 with a full-blooded fight in store, A. Ledger Neverov, Port Erin 2002.

1 6.f4 f5 1 7.lt:le3 �a6 1 8. lt:le2 1Mlb6 was fine for Black in Lorenzo de la Riva - Gelashvili, Balaguer 2007.

l l .�cl

16 ...¥Mb6 Once again Black must choose between a few tempting continuations: 1 6 . . .�a6 1 7.:gd1 1Mla5 1 8 .lt:lb3 'Mfa3 gave him nice play on the queenside in Brooks Benjamin, Las Vegas 1 992.

If White wishes to expel the enemy knight from d4, then he should almost always retreat the e2-knight first. Instead after 1 1 .c3?! bxc3 1 2.bxc3 Black avoids any loss of time with 1 2 . . . lt:lxe2t, and after 1 3.'1Mfxe2 lt:le7 White has made a dismal score from this position.

16 ... e5!? 1 7.lt:le2 �a6 1 8.f4 f6 1 9.:gacl 'Mfa5 20.:gc2 :gb7 2 1 .�h3 :gfbg Black combined control of the b-file with an ambitious central set up in Short - Hossain, Dhaka 1 999.

l l ... �e7

17.�b3 i.a6 1 8,:gfdl iUc8

Having forced his opponent to make a couple of quiet moves, Black no longer needs to fear the bishop exchange. The b-file will soon be opening, and so Black should hurry to finish mobilizing his forces in order to fight for the initiative on the queenside.

12.c3 bxc3 13.bxc3 �dc6 14.,ih6 0-0 15.hg7 �xg7 White has fulfilled his dream, but it did not bring him any hint of an advantage. 8

7

6

7

6 5

4 3

2 1

a

b

c

d

e

g

Black had every reason to feel satisfied with the outcome of the opening in Ljubojevic Sosonko, Tilburg 1 98 1 .

5

4 3

2

1

8

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Chapter 5 - 3.g3

Conclusion The dosed system examined in this chapter contains potential that should not be taken lightly. Anybody who thinks that nothing bad can happen to the second player should take a look at the games from the Candidates match Spassky - Geller from Sukhumi 1 968. Geller (one of the few players with a plus score against Fischer!) lost the second, fourth and sixth games in the 6.f4 ttJ f6 line, before switching to 6.f4 e6 7.ttJf3 ttJge7 in the eight game, which he managed to draw. In more recent times the danger for the defender has diminished, with deeper understanding and more clever play by Black. I have presented three distinct defensive set­ ups, each of which has been carefully chosen to counteract White's chosen method of development. Variation A, involving the somewhat clumsy knight move 6.lt:Jf3, was met with 6 ... ttJf6, enabling Black to develop rapidly and fight for the centre. Against the more popular variation B with 6.f4, I recommended the somewhat more robust and flexible 6 . . . e6 7.ttJf3 ttJge7, enabling Black to fight for space on the kingside with ... f5 when necessary. The third and final variation C involved the sophisticated plan of 6.�e3 and 7.'.Wd2. In that case we saw the g8-knight remaining at home for a while, while Black accelerated his queenside counterplay with a quick ... l"1b8 and ... b5. In all three cases, we have seen that sensible play combined with a few useful tricks should enable Black to look forward to a pleasant middlegame.

99

Anti-Open Systems

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

Fight Club -Various Variation Index l.e4 c5 2}t)f3 2...d6 102 105 105 107 109 112 112 112 114 115 117

A) 3.i.c4 B) 3.c3 ltlf6 B1) 4.i.d3 B2) 4.i.e2 B3) 4.h3 C) 3.lL'lc3 ltlf6 4.e5 dxe5 5.ltlxe5 ltlbd7 C1) 6.i.h5 C2) 6.d4 C3) 6.ltlc4 e6 C31) 7.i.e2 C32) 7.g3

a

b

c

d

e

f

12 ...tt:lc4!N

g

C32) after 13.Wb5

C2) note to l l .�e3

A) note to 9.tt:lbd2

h

a

b

c

d

e

f

1 3 ...hc5!N

g

a

h

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 3 . J''lc8 or the cheeky 1 3 .. .'�d7!? .

h

Anti-Open Systems

102

After the opening moves l.e4 c5 2.llJf3 d6, I imagine most readers would be shocked to see the following punctuation: 3.d4?!

5 ... e6 is also possible, but the set-up with a kingside fianchetto has brought Black better practical results. 6..ib3 White can vary his move order, for instance by castling first, but in most cases the same position will be reached. 6 ... .ig7 7.0-0 0-0

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Despite being unjust, it may serve as a reminder of the strategic dangers associated with the white side of the Open Sicilian. White forgoes the slow attempts to win the centre and in a flash of inspiration opens the game - only to find himself bound to the concept of attacking Black's ramparts or risking a loss of his initiative followed by suffering in the endgame! The present chapter should give comfort to all those who grew up on the games of Capablanca and Rubinstein and prefer a slower strategic fight to short-term gunfights that might win or lose the game before move 20. All three of the systems presented are primarily positional and solid, but fortunately for the Sicilian player, also a bit timid and not dangerous against a well-versed opponent. A) 3 .ic4 •

The development of the bishop to c4 used to be sneered at, as players tended to perceive the line as too simplistic. However, in modern praxis even the strongest players have occasionally been known to turn to this positional treatment. 3 llJf6 4.d3 llJc6 5.c3 g6 .•.

SJ�el The alternative s.Ct:Jbd2 b6 9.!"1el only leads to a transposition.

8.h3 White prevents the pin along dl-h5 diagonal, but we should feel quite happy to see this move as I am recommending a set­ up with the bishop on b7 or a6 anyway. 8 ... b6 9.!"1el The immediate central advance does not bring much for White: 9.d4 �a6 1 0.2"1el e6 (The careless 1 0 ...'11>lfd7?! allows White to obtain some initiative with l l .e5! dxe5 1 2.dxe5 Wxdl 1 3.!"1xdl tt:lh5 1 4.!"1el) l l .tLlbd2 ( l l .�g5 cxd4 1 2.cxd4 h6=) l l ...cxd4 1 2.cxd4 tt:lb4 1 3.�c4?! ( 1 3.2"1e3 looks like White's best chance for equality) Lowitz Sommer, Bavaria 2008, and now 1 3 ... tt:lxe4!N would have won a pawn for Black.

Chapter 6 - Various 9 . . . tt'le5!? 9 ... e6 I O.tt:'lbd2 i.a6 l l .ttJfl 2"1c8 also brings Black a decent position, but exchanging a pair of knights should make his position more comfortable by reducing any congestion in his ranks. 1 0.d4 Exchanging on e5 would only saddle White with a backward d-pawn. 1 0 ...tt:'lxf3t l l ."MMxf3 i.b7

8. b6 8 ...i.g4 has also been tried in several games, but in general I prefer not to play this move except in response to d3-d4, when White's centre could become vulnerable. ..

8

.i�.i.� ��-�% """:%i�?.f%'" " '��'�

76 '��,:f.��·:t�� �· ""% '""" � ""%��,J��l!� '�

. � � � "' � �� . � /) � � % ' � �� � � � 3 ���'��8-�� ff""�� %"��' � ��''0 2 [)J��p "J!l�Jfl � � ��if�� � 1

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 2.i.g5 1 2.i.f4 b5 1 3.tt:'ld2 ttJd7 1 4.dxc5 tt'lxc5 1 5 .i.d5 "MMc7 16.2"1acl (Perhaps White should have preferred 1 6.tt'lb3N tt:'la4 1 7.2"1abl 2"1ac8=) 1 6 ... e5! 1 7.i.xb7 "MMxb7 1 8.i.g5 f5+ White was already struggling in Mainka Edouard, Bad Wiessee 2008. 1 2 ... h6 Black can also do without this move: 12 ... b5 1 3 .ttJd2 "MMb 6 14."MMe3 e6 1 5.2"1adl cxd4 1 6.�xd4 "MMxd4 1 7.cxd4 2"1fc8 18.f3 tt'ld7 1 9.i.e3 tt:'lb6 20.2"1cl d5 2 l .e5 a5 and Black had excellent prospects on the queenside, Totsky - Zvjaginsev, Samara 2000. 1 3.i.h4 b5 1 4.tt:'ld2 cxd4 1 5.cxd4 "MMb6 1 6."MMe3 g5! Black seizes the opportunity to force a favourable trade of minor pieces. 1 7.i.g3 tt'lh5 1 8.tt'lf3 tt'lxg3 1 9.fxg3 2"1ac8+ Without the dark-squared bishop it is White who is struggling for equality, Cicak - Popov, Sweden 2006.

,�; & � ,�a

iA%..-.J�A%

5 4

a

1 03

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

9.lLlbd2 9.d4 This should also be considered as it forces Black to make an important decision. 9 ... cxd4 1 0.cxd4 i.g4!? This might seem inconsistent with ... b6, but it is still the best way to exert pressure against White's centre. I I .i.e3 ttJ a5 A couple of alternatives are also worth considering. l l ...e5!?N 1 2.d5 ( 12.dxe5 tt:'lxe5=) 12 ... tt'ld4!? This is risky, but very interesting. (It looks as if Black has a simple route to equality with 1 2 ...i.xf3 1 3 ."MMxf3 tt'ld4 1 4.i.xd4 exd4 1 5.ttJd2 tt:'ld7, but the position is also a bit sterile.) 1 3.i.xd4 exd4 1 4.tt:'lbd2 ( 1 4."MMxd4?? i.xf3 1 5.gxf3 tt'lh5 1 6."MMd2 i.e5-+) 1 4 ... tt'ld7! ( 1 4 ... tt'lh5 1 5.h3 i.c8 1 6.tt:'lc4 tt'lf4 1 7.e5!i) 1 5 .h3 i.xf3 1 6.tt'lxf3 tt'lc5 ( 1 6 . . . "MMf6 1 7.i.a4!±) 1 7.tt:'lxd4 "MMf6 1 8 .tt'lc6 "MMxb2 with unclear play and mutual chances. l l ...ttJd7!?N with the idea of . . .i.xf3 also deserves attention.

104

Anti-Open Systems

1 2.i.c2

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 2 ... lt.Jc4!N Blackplayed artificiallywith 1 2 ... e5 1 3.lt.Jbd2 lt.Jh5?! ( 1 3 .. .Ek8!?N 1 4.Ek1 exd4 1 5.i.xd4 Vfie7=) 1 4.h3± in Balinov - Salmensuu, Budapest 1 999. 1 3.i.cl After 1 3.i.b3 ctJxe3 1 4.E:xe3 b5 Black is at least equal. 1 3 ... l='i:c8 1 4.h3! 1 4.b3?! ctJa5! 1 5.i.d3 ctJc6+ In the event of 1 4.lt.Jc3 lt.Jh5! 1 5.i.b3 hf3 1 6.gxf3 e6 Black has promising play on the dark squares. 1 4 ...i.xf3 The cheeky 1 4... i.h5!? is amusing but probably not entirely correct. 1 5.Vfixf3 lt.Jh5 1 5 ... tt.Jxb2? 1 6.i.xb2 l='i:xc2 1 7.i.c3 is promising for White. 1 5 ... b5!? looks reasonable though.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 6.Wid1 Or 16.Wid3 e5 1 7.d5 lt.Jf4 1 8.Wifl b5, with decent counterplay for Black. 1 6 ... e5 1 7.d5 Black is well ahead in development, although he will need to play energetically in order to avoid suffering on the weakened light squares on the kingside. Here is a sample continuation: 1 7 ... lt.Jf4!? 1 8.b3 ctJa5 1 9.ctJa3 lt.Jb7!? 19 ... a6 leads to roughly equal chances. 20.lt.Jb5 a6 2 l .ctJa7 l='i:c3! This leads to fascinating complications, with one key motif being the potential sacrifice on h3. 9 i.a6 It also looks quite reasonable for Black to play 9 ...i.b7 1 0.lt.Jfll='i:c8 l l .i.c2 b5 The queenside counterplay is coming before White was able to take any action in the centre. 1 2.h3 lt.Jd7 1 3.i.d2 b4 14.Vficl This was Delgado Ramirez - Dziuba, Internet 2009, and now Black could have fought for the advantage with 1 4 ...i.a6! 1 5.ctJe3 lt.Jde5 1 6.ctJxe5 ctJxe5 1 7.Vfib l bxc3 1 8.hc3 l='i:b8+ White is under unpleasant pressure on the queenside. ...

a

10 .!De5! ...

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Chapter 6 - Various Again we see this thematic move. It is all the more effective in conjunction with the bishop on a6. l l.i.c2 White is practically forced into this defensive move thanks to the weakness of the d3square. l l. . .'�c7 It is also quite good for Black to play 1 1 ...Ek8, anticipating the subsequent opening of the c-file. The following example illustrates his chances quite well: 12.i.g5 h6 1 3.i.f4 t2Jh5 14.i.e3 e6 1 5.Ek1 Wf6 1 6 .h3 t2Jxf3t 1 7.Wxf3 Wxf3 1 8.gxf3 d5 White was fighting to maintain the balance, Benjamin - Baklan, Moscow (2) 200 1 . 12.h3 e6 13.liJ3h2 lL!c6 14.£4 e5 15.lL!g4 lL!xg4 16.'�'xg4 Here I found an interesting new idea:

105

conflict. 1 7.exf5 gxf5 1 8.Wf3 ( 1 8.Wg3 Ei:ae8 1 9.i.d2 tLle7=) 1 8 ... t2Je7 1 9.t2Jg3 i.b7 20.Wff2 �h8 This was Benjamin - Baklan, Moscow (4) 200 1 . The position is tense with approximately equal chances, and everything still to play for. 17.dxc4 exf4 lS. .ix£4 lL!e5 19.'�'e2 hc4 20.'�f2 i.e6 Black has reached a pleasant Sicilian position with very little stress. B) 3.c3 lL!f6

The attack on e4 holds up White's intended d2-d4, although please do remember that Black is not threatening to capture the e-pawn immediately due to the check on a4. In this position White normally chooses one of the following three moves: Bl) 4.i.d3, B2) 4.�e2 and B3) 4.h3. Bl} 4.�d3

8

7

6

.i�.i.�·�

6

5

5

4

4

3

2 1

�� � lfl" ""'%--,�--,Y".-�."."� ----%� /-- - -� � �� "- '� ! ��� 3 � � ��� -� ��-� ���-� ���rd22� r[j ---�� %r[j ;;['f[j-r� 8

7

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

16...c4!?N This looks promising, although it is not the only decent move:

1 6 ... exf4 leads to a relatively dry position after: 1 7.i.xf4 lt:le5 1 8.i.xe5 dxe5 1 9.ctJe3= 16 ... f5!? is a daring move that sharpens the

0

%%i

%�

%

1 -� ct:Jm"ii � � �� jdJ f g h b �� bishop back to White intends to drop the CZJ in the style c2, followed by d2-d4, somewhat -even dream of the Ruy Lopez. Perhaps he can ----

a

----

'

c

''''

-

e

----

----

of a superior version of that opening, since the bishop will reach its intended square in just two moves, instead of the more arduous route it often undergoes via i.b5-a4-c2.

106

Anti-Open Systems

4....ig4 This highlights the drawback ofWhite's set­ up. The pin will make it harder for White to carry out his intended d2-d4 advance. 5.h3 White can also delay this move, in order to recapture on f3 with the other knight: 5.�c2 lLlc6 6.d3 g6 Another reliable option is 6 . . . e6, intending ... d5 leading to a comfortable French-type position with the bishop outside the pawn chain. However, I decided to focus on the set-up with a kingside fianchetto in order to maintain some thematic consistency. 7.tLlbd2 �g7 8.h3 �d7! Taking on f3 would fall in with White's plans. 9.0-0 0-0 1 0JJ:e1

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 0 ... tLlh5 Another decent option is 1 O . . . b5 1 1 .d4 cxd4 1 2.cxd4 tLlh5 ( 1 2 ... 1"k8!?N was worth considering) 1 3.d5 tLlb4 1 4.�b1 a5 1 5 .a3 tLla6 1 6.tLlb3 a4 1 7.tLlbd4 This was Akopian - Sutovsky, Moscow Rapid (2) 2002, and now after 1 7 .. .2''\cS 1 8.�g5 tLlc5 Black's pieces are working fine and the chances are even. 1 1 .tLlfl e5 Now the position strongly resembles a Ruy Lopez. In principle the present version should not be unfavourable to Black, as he has benefitted from developing his bishop

directly to g7, as well as the c-pawn to c5, both of which would usually cost additional time in the main line of the Spanish. 12.�g5 '1Wb6 There is also nothing wrong with 1 2 ...�f6N, for instance 1 3 .�h6 �g7 1 4.hg7 mxg7 1 5.l2Je3 �c8 with equal chances. 1 3.�b3 tLla5 1 4.�d5 h6 1 5.b4 cxb4 1 6.�e3 '1Wd8 1 7.cxb4 tLlc6 1 8.'1Wd2 lLlf4! Black succeeds in justifYing his 1Oth move . 1 9.hf4 exf4 20.d4 '1Wb6 2 1 .�ad1 This position occurred in Akopian Sutovsky, Moscow Blitz (4) 2002. Now Black should have played:

s ... i.x£3 6.Wfxf3 c!l)c6

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Chapter 6 - Various 7.i.c2 White does not achieve much with 7.0-0 tLld7!? (7 ... g6 is also fine) 8.i.b5 This looks a bit artificial, although Black should be fine regardless. 8 ...g6 9.l:'ld1 i.g7 l O.tLla3 0-0 1 l .i.xc6 ( l l .'We3 a6 12.i.e2 e6= The second player has obtained a harmonious set-up and his pieces are working together. Can the same be said for White?) 1 l . ..ttJe5 12.'We3 tLlxc6 1 3.d4 cxd4 1 4.cxd4 'Wb6 1 5.tLlc4 'Wa6 1 6.b3 l:'lad8 1 7.tLla3 d5+ Black had the more harmonious set-up in Svidler - Vallejo Pons, Monte Carlo 2005. 7...g6 8.0-0 i.g7 As usual, the kingside fianchetto works well. Black's control over the central dark squares, combined with the removal of the f3-knight, will make it hard for White to achieve the desired d4 advance. 9.Wfe2 It is a similar story after 9.d3 0-0 1 0.'Wd1 l:'\b8 1 l .tLld2 b5 1 2.a3 ttJd7 1 3.tLlf3 ttJde5 14. tLlxe5 i.xe5 1 5 .i.e3 'Wb6 1 6. ci> h 1 i.g7 17 .f4 a5 1 8.'\Wcl b4 1 9.i.a4 l:'\fc8 Black's queenside counterplay gave him decent chances, Kasparov - Bosboom, Wijk aan Zee (blitz) 1 999.

12... b4 This immediate queenside strike seems natural, although there is also nothing much wrong with the slower 1 2...'Wb6 1 3.i.d2 l:'\ab8 1 4.l:'\fd 1 b4 1 5.i.b3 'Wb5 1 6.l:'lacl tLla5 1 7.i.c2 ( 17.cxb4 tLlxb3 1 8.axb3 i.xb2 1 9.l:'\c4 i.g7=) 1 7. . . l:'\fc8 1 8.i.g5 e6 1 9.i.f4 'Wa6 with a pleasant position for Black, Svidler - Popov, Tomsk 200 1 . 13.i.d2 �b8 14.i.a4 Wfc7 15.�fcl �fc8 16.d4 bxc3 17.bxc3 �b2 18.Wfa6 lLlcb8 19.Wfd3 ll.Jb6 We have been following the game Svidler Van Wely, Polanica Zdroj 2000. The outcome of the opening can be evaluated as fully satisfactory for Black, who has succeeded in taking the fight to the queenside, preventing his opponent from utilizing his bishop pair and pawn centre in a truly effective way. B2) 4.i.e2

Modesty is said to be a great virtue, so this fine move must have some merit...

9 ...0-0 IO.d3 b5 I I.ll.Jd2 ll.Jd7 12.ll.Jf3

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 07

5.d3

108

Anti-Open Systems

White does not benefit much from: 5.'1Wc2 Wi'c7! This ensures that White's dream pawn centre (e4-d4) remains a fantasy. 6.0-0 b6 7.c4!? This might appear strange, but the reason for it can be seen after 7.Ei:el .ib7 8.d3 c4! 9.lt:Jbd2 cxd3 1 0.hd3 e6 l l .lt:Jd4 .ie7 when White's hopes for an advantage were nothing more than a pipe dream in Vujacic - Predojevic, Tivat 200 1 . 7 ....ib7 8.lt:Jc3 e6 9.d4 cxd4 10.lt:Jxd4 a6 Black sets up the well-known Hedgehog formation. 1 1 ..ie3 .ie7 1 2.Ei:acl 0-0 1 3.f3 Ei:ac8 14.Ei:fd 1 Ei:fe8= The queen on c2 is less than ideally placed, and Black generally has a harmonious position with equal chances, Azmaiparashvili Kasparov, London 1 993.

00

5 ...g6 6. - i.g7 7.ltlbd2

0-0

8 ...Wfc7 9.gel b6 IO.i.fl e6 l l.a4 Another game continued l l .b3 .ib7 1 2 ..ib2 Ei:fd8 1 3. a4 a6 1 4.b4 Ei:ac8 1 5.Wi'b3, Pakleza ­ Wojtaszek, Krynica 2003: 8

7

6 5

4

3 1::0:%:f�;q;;�wc;i%:/"'

2

1

b

a

c

-.//'""'"'=

d

e

f

g

h

Here it looks interesting for Black to try 1 5 ....ih6!?N Black has a harmonious position, and tries to irritate his opponent with this unusual bishop development. Play might continue 1 6.bxc5 bxc5 17.Ei:abl Ei:b8 with equal chances.

8 7 6 5 4 3 2

1

1 l .Ei:el ( l l .Wi'b3 e6 1 2.g3 d5=) 1 l . . .d5! 1 2.exd5 lt:Jxd5 1 3.lt:Jxd5 .ixd5 1 4.d4 cxd4 1 5.lt:Jxd4 lt:Jc5+ Black has managed to open the centre at just the right moment with very encouraging consequences, Kengis - West, Sydney Cepacol 1 99 1 .

l l ...i.b7 12.a5 gac8 13.h3

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

8.d4 8.Ei:e1 b6 9.d4 Wi'c7 leads to the same position. In general, it is hard to believe that White has anything better than establishing his strong pawn centre.

The slower approach does not bring White much joy: 8.a4 b6 9.lt:Jc4 .ib7 1 0.lt:Je3 Wi'c7

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

109

Chapter 6 - Various The game Kengis - Gulko, Vienna 1 99 1 , was agreed drawn here. This does not tell us much about the position, but it seems to me that Black should be fine. A plausible continuation might be:

Here is the first small refinement: Black is developing his queenside before the kingside. 6.0-0 .ib7 7J�el V!!l' c7! 8 .ic2 •

13...cxd4N 14.Ct:.lxd4 Taking with the c-pawn does not look too attractive as Black is in full control of the open c-file. 14 J:Ud8 15.axb6 axb6 16.'t:.lb5 V!!l'b8= White made some modest achievements on the queenside, but the b6-pawn is not really weak and the knight on b5 is not hurting Black. Meanwhile the second player has a harmonious position and can look for a suitable moment to break in the centre. •.

B3) 4.h3

White is aiming for an improved version of line B 1 . He intends to put his bishop on d3 after first preventing ...ibg4.

�� ?§6i" �""'%-,, ,�-, , u,� 6 C� . . � �' � mi �.-' ,.,.�� s

7

.!-.i.Bcif� �

"

5

4

3 ��}/�' � �� �-�-� �-% ��-���� % �� 2 ��� "'�w� � 1

,��•v=� :a: a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

4... c!t:Jbd7 There are other good moves, but I would like to recommend a related set-up to that seen in the previous variation, but with something of a twist. s ..id3 b6

I also investigated 8 ... c4, as played in Arapovic - Stohl, Medulin 1 997, but eventually decided it was slightly risky after 9.b3!N (The game continuation of 9.d4 was completely harmless, and after 9 ...cxd3 1 0.ibxd3l:'i:c8 Black obtained a comfortable Sicilian position.) White is trying to undermine his opponent's advanced c-pawn. Black's position is playable, but not quite as comfortable as he would like. A possible continuation is 9 ... a6 1 o.V!!I'e2l:'i:c8 1 l .ctJa3 cxb3 1 2.axb3 g6 1 3.ibb2 ibg7 14.d4± The asymmetry of the pawn chain is in White's favour. 9.tl:Ja3 This must be the critical path, intending to play d2-d4 in one move.

In the event of the slower 9.d3, Black should play 9 ... g6 with comparable play to line B2 above.

110

Anti-Open Systems

9. . e6 On this occasion the kingside fianchetto would be less appropriate. The point is that after d2-d4, Black may wish to react with a timely ... d6-d5. .

IO.b3!? White continues with his queenside development before occupying the centre. Of course, we should also pay attention to the immediate: I O.d4 This principled move might lead to a small storm. 1 0 ... cxd4 l l .cxd4 l l .ttlb5 should be met by l l ...Wc5!N (This is clearly better than 1 1 ...\Wb8?! 1 2.cxd4 ile7, Andriasian - Garza Marco, Benasque 2009, at which point 1 3.d5!N± would have been unpleasant.) 1 2.ttlbxd4 a6, when Black has a pleasant version of a normal Open Sicilian. l l ...d5 1 2.exd5!? This looks like White's only chance to put his opponent under any pressure. 1 2.e5 achieves nothing after 1 2 ...ha3 1 3.exf6 1Mfxc2 14.fxg7 l':i:g8 1 5.bxa3 Wxdl 1 6.l':i:xdl l':i:xg7= Black has nothing to worry about in the middlegame without queens. 1 2 ... ttlxd5 1 3.ila4 ilxa3

a

14.bxa3?!

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White should have preferred 1 4.ttle5!N ttl 5f6 1 5.bxa3 0-0 1 6.Jlf4 ttlxe5 1 7.he5 We7 with mutual chances. White's bishop pair is balanced by Black's superior structure and firm control over the d5-square. 1 4 ... ttlc3 1 5.ilxd7t Wxd7 1 6.Wd3 ilxf3 1 7.Wxf3 ttld5 1 8 .Jlf4 0-0+ White faces a difficult defence, Ovetchkin Golubev, Internet 2006. IO ....ie7

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

l l .ib2 It is also important to consider the consequences of the immediate: l l .d4!?N Compared with the previous note, the inclusion of the move b2-b3 leads to some significant differences as we will see. l l ...cxd4 1 2.cxd4 d5 1 3 .e5 ttle4 It is important to recognize that 13 ...ilxa3? is no longer a good move due to: 1 4.exf6 ttlxf6 1 5.ilxa3 Wxc2 1 6.Wxc2 l':i:xc2 1 7.l':i:ec l ± 14.ilxe4 This is the most forcing continuation, although perhaps White would be better off settling for the quieter 14.ild3 Wc3 1 5.ttlc2 ( 1 5 .l':i:b l WaS! is awkward) 1 5 ... 0-0 when Black has sufficient counterplay thanks to the nuisance value of the queen. 1 4...dxe4 1 5.ttlb5 Wb8 1 6.ttlg5 .

Chapter 6 - Various

111

The first player must show some patience, as the immediate strike against the knight on e4 backfires: 1 6.Le4? dxe4 1 7.CtJd2 f5 1 8.exf6 lt:Jxf6+ Black's two bishops are a powerful force.

b

a

c

d

e

f

g

1 6.ctJbl was played in Golod - Gershon, Ramat Aviv Modiin 2000. At this point I think Black should have played 1 6 ....1b4! 1 7.ctJbd2 f5! 1 8.exf6 lt:Jdxf6+ Black's active pieces give him the better chances.

h

1 6 . . . a6! 1 6 .. .lZJxe5!? 1 7.dxe5 'Wxe5 is possible, and after a lengthy analysis I concluded that it leads to equality. The text is more straightforward, and probably just a better move overall. 1 7.lt:Jd6t Ld6 1 8.exd6 'Wxd6 1 9.ctJxe4 Le4 20.l'he4 0-0 With a bad bishop and isolated pawn, White faces a challenging defence. 1 1 ...0-o 12J':�c1 Wfbs By now White is fully prepared for d4, so Black anticipates the opening of the c-file. 13.d4 cxd4 14.cxd4 d5 15.e5 ltle4

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

16... h6!? This is a somewhat useful waiting move. From here I analysed a few possible lines, eventually concluding that the chances are about equal with accurate play from both sides. 17.ltlbl The cheap solution 1 7.lt:Jc4?! does not work well for White after 1 7 ... dxc4 1 8 ..1xe4 Le4 1 9.'Wxe4 b5+. 17.. J�c7 18.ltlfd2 White is not helped by 1 8.'Wd3?! 'Wc8 1 9.'Wdl f5+. 18... ltlxd2 19.ltlxd2 �Uc8 20.Wfd3 ltlf8=

h

16.Wfe2N I believe this untested move to be White's best.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Black has successfully limited the dangers, and the position remains approximately equal.

1 12

Anti-Open Systems

From here, the play frequently transposes to the main lines after 4.d4 cxd4, but White can also keep the position in independent territory with: 4.e5 dxeS S.ltlxeS White is aiming for active piece play, helped by his minimal development advantage.

9.0-0 9.a4 e6 I O.Wf3 �e7 1 l .d3 0-0 1 2.0-0 l2ld5 13.l2lxd5 Wxd5 1 4.Wxd5 exd5 1 5.�e3 Ei:ac8 led to dull equality in Landenbergue - King, Switzerland 200 1 .

9...e6 IO.b3 .ie7 1 l ..ib2 0-0 12.VNe2 Ei:fe8 13-l:�adl VNc6 14.E!fel E!ad8 15.d3 At this point the players agreed a draw in Teske - Bischoff, Germany 1 999. The position is clearly equal, and there is not much else to say. C2) 6.d4

Cl) 6..ib5

Trading the bishop means express develop­ ment, but White's chances for an opening ad­ vantage become negligible. 6... a6 7.ltlxd7 It is hardly any better for White to play 7 ..ixd7t l2lxd7 8.We2 (8.l2lxd7 .ixd7 looks like nothing to worry about) 8 ... e6 9.d3 l2lxe5 1 0.Wxe5 Wd4 1 l..fi.f4 Wxe5t 1 2 ..ixe5 f6 when Black has no problems at all, Hammer - Nordahl, Oslo 2005. 7....ixd7 8.hd7t YNxd7

This move demonstrates a bit more fighting spirit than the previous one. Black must take it seriously as all the White pieces suddenly enjoy great freedom and mobility.

Chapter 6 - Various 6...e6 After 6 ... ctJxeS 7.dxeS 'Wxd1 t s.xd1 lt:Jg4 9.�bSt �d7 1 0.e6 fxe6 1 l .�xd7t 'tt>xd7 Black should be able to hold the balance but can hardly hope for anything more, Balogh Mamedov, Budva 2003.

accomplished with 1 l .ctJxd7 hd7 1 2.dxcS �c6 1 3.'Wg3

7.�b5 a6 I also spent some time looking at 7 ... cxd4 8.'Wxd4 a6 9.hd7t ctJxd7 1 0.�f4, but eventually concluded that it was too risky for Black. There is no reason to assist with the opponent's development. 8.i.xd7t 8.ctJxd7 hd7 9.hd7t 'Wxd7 1 0.�e3 �c8 1 l .dxcS 'Wxd1 t 1 2.lt:Jxd1 hcS 1 3.�xcS �xeS 1 4.ctJe3 ctJdS led to an absolutely level endgame in Tseshkovsky - Polugaevsky, Tbilisi 1 978. 8 ... liJxd7 9.�h5 The threat of mate may appear alarming, but calm defence should enable Black to defuse his opponent's initiative. 9 ...g6 9 .. .l2Jxe5 1 0.dxeS �d7 1 l .�gS is solid enough for Black as long as he does not play ...�e7 before ...�c6, preparing to eliminate the white knight which might appear on e4. The positions are rather dull though, so I decided to focus on a slightly riskier, but still sound continuation, which leads to more combative play. IO.�f3 f5! This looks better than 10 ... 'Wf6 1 l .'Wxf6 ctJxf6 1 2.�gS lt:JdS 1 3.ctJxdS exdS 1 4.�f6 �g8 1 S.dxcS �xeS when Black faced a tenable but slightly unpleasant endgame in Kotsur Zhang Zhong, Jodhpur 2003. l l.�e3 It is often White's prerogative to take the life out of the position. Here this can be

113

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 3 . . . hcS!N ( 1 3 ... f7!? was the risky try in Sorensen - Aagaard, Denmark 2009. Now White should have played 14.�e3N �g7 1 S.O-O±, when Black has some problems proving compensation.) 1 4.'WeS Black has to rely on the bishops in the following roughly equal ending. 1 4 ...�d4! 1 S.'Wxe6t 'We7 1 6.'Wxe7t 'tt>xe7 with sufficient compensation. l l . ..�g7

1 14

Anti-Open Systems

when White faced a difficult endgame in N. Davies - Navara, Birmingham 2005. 12 ...0-0 1 2. . . cxd4?! leads to difficulties for Black after 1 3 .bd4 . Wfc7 1 4.tt:lf3 Wfxg3 1 5.hxg3 .ixd4 16.tt:lxd4 tt:lf6 1 7.0-0-0 .id7 1 8.�he1 �f7;!; Black should be able to hold the ending, but it will not be much fun.

1 7.d5 �c8 ( 1 7 ... exd5!?) 1 8.dxe6 .ixe6 1 9.Wib6 .ixc3 20.Wfxe6.bb2t 2 l .�xb2 Wfc3t 22.i>b 1 Wfxc2t with a draw. 15 ...hc3 16.bxc3

However, there was a viable alternative in 12 ... tt:lxe5!?N 1 3.dxe5 Wfc7

4 3

16...£4! Preventing White's intended attacking plan with Wfe5 and .id4.

2

f

g

h

14.f4 .id7 1 5.Wig5 .if8 1 6.0-0-0 .ie7 1 7.Wfh6 .ifs 1 8.Wih3 b5!? ( 1 8 ....ie7 1 9.g4 fxg4 20.Wfxg4 0-0-0 should be equal too.) 1 9.�b 1 b4 20.tt:le2 .ie7 2 l .g4 0-0-0 with chances for both sides. 13.0-0-0 �a5 14.ltlxd7 hd7 15.dxc5 Another critical line might also end with a perpetual: 1 5.Wid6 �f7 ( 1 5 ....ic6!? 1 6.Wfxe6t %'\f7oo) 1 6.Wfxc5 b5!

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

17.hf4 .tc6 18.b2 hg2 19.�xg2l:hf4 1 9 ... Wib5t!? was the last chance to prolong the game. 20.�xb7 l:'U18 21.�d7 gfbs 22.gg7t ci>£8 23.gf7t 1/2-lfl Ruefenacht - Moser, e-mail 2006. C3) 6.ltlc4 e6

This natural move is the main line, although 6 ... tt:lb6 also seems fully viable.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Chapter 6 - Various Now White's main decision concerns the development of his kingside, thus we will analyse: C31) 7..te2 and C32) 7.g3. 7.d4 This move is nowhere near as threatening here as it was on the previous turn. 7 ...cxd4 8.'W'xd4 i.c5 9.lLld6t?! The check looks tempting, but only succeeds in helping the opponent to bring his pieces into play. A safer approach for White would be to play for equality with 9.'W'd3N 0-0 1 0.i.e2 lLlb6 1 l .i.e3 i.xe3 1 2.lLlxe3 'W'xd3 1 3.hd3 i.d7 Black can complain about the weather, but certainly not about the position. 9 .. .';f;e? 1 O.tt::lxc8t Eixc8 Strangely enough, the database shows that White has made a perfect score of 3/3 from this position. It just shows that statistics are not always to be trusted, as in reality Black has the upper hand. 1 1 .'W'h4 tLle5 1 2.i.e2 'W'd4 1 3.'W'g3 tt::leg4

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

115

14.tt::ld 1 Eihd8 1 5.'W'f3 was played in Andreikin - Mladenov, Plovdiv 2008, and now Black could have maintained the pressure with 1 5 ... 'W'd5!?N, hoping for a favourable endgame, or 1 5 ... Eid7, intending to double rooks while keeping queens on the board. 14 . . .'W'xg4 1 5.'W'xg4 tLlxg4 1 6.tLle4 i.b6 1 7.f3 '2Jf6 1 8.'2Jxf6 f8 1 8 ... e4!? also looks promising. 1 9.exd7 �xd7 20.f4 e4! This pawn sacrifice brings Black excellent chances. 2 1 .'Wxe4 �f6 Despite the pawn minus, Black has the upper hand as his pieces are extremely active. 15 ... ttJf6 16.tLlc6 'l!!!c7 Both sides have their own pros and cons here, but overall it seems to me that White's weak kingside is the dominant feature of the position.

173

17...i.f5 It also looks tempting to try 1 7. . . e4!?N 1 8.'Wg3 Ei:xd5 1 9.CLlxe7 \t>xe7 20.i.g5 'Wc5! when White's compensation is in question. 18.�el 1 8.CLlxe5? does not work due to 1 8 ...�e4.

It was worth considering the immediate attempt to obtain counterplay with 1 8.a3!?. This does not equalize, although it does force Black to make a difficult decision.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

One option involves grabbing a pawn with 1 8 ...�xc2 1 9.axb4 (or 1 9.'Wg3 bxa3 20.Ei:xa3 �g6+) 1 9 ... e4 20.'Wg3 (20.'Wc3 �d3) 20 ... Ei:xd5 2 l . CLlxe7 \t>xe7 when Black remains on top according to the computer, although the position remains rather murky. Another promising continuation Is 1 8 ...�e4!? 1 9.'Wg3 �xg2 20.'Wxg2 b3! 2 l .cxb3 'Wd7 with somewhat better chances for Black, as pointed out by Stohl. 18...'1!!!d7 Black sticks to his main goal of destroying the enemy kingside, rather than being distracted by the c2-pawn. 19.a3 b3! 20.cxb3 hb3; We have been following the game Alekseev - Dominguez Perez, Biel 2008. The position remains complex, but White's position is more dangerous due to his unsafe king.

174

Open Systems

Conclusion

Black is not obliged to meet 6.g3 with 6 ... e5, but this system seems much more spirited than the solid but timid 6 ... e6. White has invested lot of energy into experimenting with 7. � b3, but at present Black seems to be doing fine there, even against the tricky lO.i.d2 plan. The strategically heavy retreat 7.lDde2 is connected with the plan of h3, g4 and � g3. In this case Black does well to hurry with ... b5-b4, gaining enough counterplay on the queenside. And in a final twist, we saw how Black could follow the early queenside advance with... an attack on the far side of the board with ... h7-h5! Such ideas are becoming more and more typical in modern chess, and here it leads to rich positions in which Black is more than holding his own.

Open Systems

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

The Karate Kid 6.h3 -

Variation Index l.e4 c5 2.�£3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.�xd4 �f6 s.�c3 a6 6.h3 e6 7 .g4 d5 A) 8.�g2 B) 8.exd5

176 179

A) after 17.li:Jb3

A) note to 9.0-0

B) 13.�f3

8

8

8

7

7

7

5

5

5

6

6

4

4

4

3

3

3

2

2 1

6

a

b

c

d

e

f

13...l!?e7!N

g

h

2 a

b

c

d

e

17... Ela7!

f

g

h

a

b

c

d

e

f

1 3 ....id6!N

g

h

h

176

Open Systems

l.e4 c5 2.tl:lf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tl:lxd4 tl:lf6 5.tl:lc3 a6 6.h3 The funny-looking move has become extremely fashionable in recent years. White intends to combine the development of the bishop on g2 with a potential kingside advance; you might think of it as a turbo-charged version of the 6.g3 line from the previous chapter. We already saw that after 6.g3 and i.g2, White often follows up by playing h3 and g4, so in a way it is quite logical for him to try and save a tempo by playing g2-g4 in one move. Just about every sensible response has been tested, but I have chosen to recommend: 6...e6 6 ... e5 is possible, but after 7.'Llde2 White would not be far away from reaching his ideal outcome with an extra tempo over the previous chapter. Therefore on this occasion I prefer to revert to a Scheveningen formation.

8.e5?! looks dubious: 8 . . . 'Llfd7 9.f4 (9.i.f4 is well met by 9 ... �c7! 1 0.'Llf3 [ 1 0.�e2 runs into 1 0 . . .i.a3! l l .ctJdl i.xb2 1 2.'Llxb2 �c3t 1 3.�d2 �xb2] This was Koukoufikis - Vlahakis, Athens 2006, and now the most logical continuation seems to be 1 0 . . . ctJc6N l l .�e2 i.b4 when White already faces difficult problems.) 9 ... �h4t 1 0.'tt>e2 'Llc6 l l .i.e3 i.c5 1 2.ctJf3 �e7 1 3.hc5 �xc5 1 4.a3 0-0 1 5.'Wd2 f6 Black seized the initiative in Matla - Majcher, Leba 2006. 8.'Llde2 is playable, but does not give White much hope for an advantage: 8 . . . 'Llxe4 9.'Llxe4 dxe4 1 0.�xd8t 'tt>xd8 1 l .ctJc3 i.d7 (The computer says 1 l .. .f5?! is okay, but Black's position looks rather risky after 1 2.gxf5 exf5 1 3.'Lld5t)

7.g4

7...d5 The sophisticated 7 ...i.e7 8.i.g2 'Llfd7!? also leads to interesting play, but it feels more principled to take immediate action in the centre. In this position White's two main choices are A) 8.i.g2 and B) 8.exd5, although a few other moves have been tested as well:

a b c d e f g h 12.'Llxe4 (In the event of 12.i.e3?!, Romero Holmes - Ubilava, Subijana de Alava 200 1 , Black can safely hang onto his extra pawn with 1 2... i.c6N 1 3.0-0-0t 'Lld7 14.i.g2 f5.) 1 2 ... i.c6 1 3.f3 'Lld7 1 4.i.d2 ctJc5 1 5 .i.g2 ctJxe4 1 6.fxe4 i.c5 1he endgame was absolutely level in De Waard - Mrazik, e-mail 2008. A) 8..ig2 i.b4

This seems like the most logical and principled move. A brief glance at the alternatives should be enough to convince us of the need to take White's set-up seriously.

Chapter 1 1 - 6.h3 8 ... ctJxe4 9.ctJxe4 dxe4 1 0.0-0 lLld7 l l .he4 fie7 1 2.c3 (or 1 2.1Wf3!? 0-0 1 3.l"id1 'Wb6 14.1Wb3 'Wc7t) 1 2 ... 0-0 1 3.1Wf3 'Wc7 1 4.!if4 fid6 1 5.i.xd6 'Wxd6 1 6.l"\adl 'Wc7 1 7.'Wg3! The queen exchange will force Black to defend his queenside without support of the strongest piece. 1 7 ...'Wxg3t 1 8.fXg3 l"ib8 1 9.ctJb3 b5 20.l"id6 ctJe5 2 1 .ctJa5t Carlsen - Gelfand, Moscow 2008. 8 ... dxe4 9.0-0 'Wc7 l O.ctJxe4 ctJxe4 l l .he4 lLld7 1 2.l"iel fie7 1 3.c3 0-0 14.1Wf3 ctJe5 1 5.'Wg2 lLlg6 16.!ie3 l"ib8 1 7.l"iadl !id7 1 8.'Wg3t Kamsky - Karjakin, Sochi 2008. Again White will be somewhat better - the queen exchange is an important motif. 8

7

177

8

7

6 5

L=,////" /,,/, ,"7;"7://"///,

4 3

2

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 3 . . . me7!N 1 4.lLlxe4 !ixd2t 1 5.l"ixd2 h5 1 6.g5 e5= 9.fid2 e5!?N (9 ... dxe4 1 0.ctJxe4 fie7 1 1 .ctJxf6t i.xf6 1 2.Jie3 0-0 1 3.1Wd2 e5 1 4.ctJe2 'Wxd2t 1 5.fixd2 ctJc6 1 6.ctJc3 fie6= Tseitlin Efimenko, Panormo 200 1 .) lO.tLlde2 d4 l l .ctJd5 i.xd2t 1 2.1Wxd2 0-0

6 5

4 3

2

1

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

9.0-0 Alternatives should not be too threatening for Black:

9.e5?! tt:Jfd7 1 0.f4 (10.0-0 ctJxe5 l l .f4 ctJec6 1 2.ctJf3 fic5t 13.�hl h5+ Miersch - Gruzmann, Willingen 200 1 ) 1 0 ... ctJc6 ( I O ... 'Wh4t!?) l l .!ie3 ctJa5! 1 2.lLlde2 lLlc4 was better for Black in Miedema - Verkerk, corr. 1 989. 9.ctJde2 ctJxe4 1 0.!ixe4 dxe4 l l .�xd8t mxd8 1 2.Jid2 ctJc6 1 3.0-0-0 Ciuksyte - Petrenko, Warsaw 200 1 .

e f g h 1 3.c3 ( 1 3.0-0 ctJc6 14.f4 fie6 1 5.c4 dxc3 1 6.ctJexc3 exf4 1 7.'Wxf4 tt:Jd7=) 1 3 ... dxc3 14.ctJexc3 ctJc6 1 5.lLlxf6t 'Wxf6 1 6.ctJd5 'Wd8= Black has a comfortable position and White will have to play carefully to avoid a nightmare 'bad bishop' situation. a

b

c

d

Finally, there is: 9.exd5 ctJxd5 I O.Jid2 The best move is probably lO.ctJde2, transposing to line B. 1 0.0-0? ctJxc3 l l .bxc3 fixc3 12.Jie3 fixal 1 3.'\Wxal 0-0 gave White no compensation in Arbakov - Efimenko, Alushta 2002.

178

Open Systems

1 0.�d3 �c7 1 l .tL'lde2 tL'lxc3 1 2.bxc3 i,d6= Schneider - Nakamura, New York 1 999. 10 ... tL'lxc3 1 l .bxc3 i,d6 7

the white bishop is far from ideally placed on g2. 1 l ...tL'lc6 12.tL'lce2 �c7 1 3 .c3 i,e7 1 4.g5 g6 led to a murky position with chances for both sides in Gofshtein - I. Gurevich, Hastings 1 99 1 . 1 0...i.xc3 l l.bxc3 'Llxd5 12.YHd3 1 2.c4?? would be unfortunate due to 1 2 ... tL'lc3 intending ... �xd4.

b

a

c

d

e

f

g

1 2.2"1e 1 is playable, but allows Black to equalize comfortably with: 1 2 ... tL'lxc3 1 3.�d3 tL'lb5! 1 4.i,b2 tL'lxd4 1 5.Ld4 tL'lc6 1 6.Lc6 bxc6 1 7.�c3 f6=

h

Black is already at least equal, for instance: 1 2.2"1b1 Or 1 2.0-0 0-0 1 3.i,e3 �c7 1 4.�d2 Kravtsiv - Vovk, Lvov 2007, 14 ... 2"1d8!N 1 5 .2"1fd 1 tL'lc6+ 1 2 ... �c7 1 3.0-0 0-0 1 4.f4 tL'ld7 1 5.f5 tL'lc5+ Damjanovic - Kavalek, Salgotarjan 1 967.

12 ...YHc7 13.c4 �f4

9...0-0 Black does best to refrain from any pawn­ grabbing and instead focus on development.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

10.exd5 1 O.e5 tL'lfd7 1 1 .f4 is not so bad, although generally speaking Black should not have too many problems in the French-type positions as

14 ... V9xf4 15.gabl 'Lld7 16.gfdl YHc7! 1 6 ... tL'lc5?! enables White to obtain some initiative with 1 7.�f3 �c7 18.�a3 !"1b8 1 9.tL'lc6. 17)tJb3 17.a4 2"1b8! ( 1 7 ... tL'lc5 1 8.�a3 i,d? was

179

Chapter 1 1 - 6.h3 recommended by Golubev, but White has a strong answer in 1 9.tt:lb3! tt:lxb3 20.cxb3 �ad8 2 1 .We7±) 1 8.Wc3 Now it is safer for Black to play 1 8 ... tt:lc5, for instance 1 9.a5 e5 20.tt:lb3 tt:le6 with equal play.

9.tt:lde2 This is considered critical, and has been by far the most popular choice, although several other moves have also been tried.

9.ig2?! is not impressive, as after 9 ... tbxc3 (Black can also play 9 ...ib4 transposing to line A above, but White's inaccurate move order constitutes a gift that Black should not decline.) 1 0. bxc3 White will struggle to justifY his pawn weaknesses. A logical continuation is 1 O ...id6 1 1 .0-0 We? 1 2.�b 1 0-0 1 3.Wd3 tt:ld7 14.�d1 tbc5 1 5.Wf3 Manik - Oral, Olomouc 1 998, and now after 1 5 ...tt:la4!N White will have a hard time protecting his weaknesses.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

17..J;a7! 18.'1We3 Mamedyarov mentioned the line 1 8.a4 b6 1 9.a5 bxa5 20.We3 a4! 2 1 .tt:la5 Wc5, with better chances for Black. 18... b6 Having solved his development problems on the queenside, Black could feel satisfied with the outcome of the opening in Mamedyarov Karjakin, Foros 2006. B) 8.exd5 tlJxd5

It is also hard to believe that White can achieve much with 9.tt:lxd5 Wxd5 1 0.�g1 e5 1 1 .tt:lb3 Wxd1 t 1 2.c;t>xd1 'Llc6 13.ie3 1his was Ninov - Maruejols, San Sebastian 2008, and now after 1 3 ...ie6N Black is at least equal. The only serious alternative is: 9.id2 b5! After 9 ... ic5 1 0.tt:lb3 ia7 1 l .ig2 0-0 1 2.We2 tbxc3 1 3.ixc3 tt:lc6 1 4.�dl We? 1 5.0-0 id7 1 6.�d2 �ad8 1 7.�fd 1 White kept some initiative in Smirin - Zhigalko, Panormo 200 1 . I O.ig2 ib7 The bishop arrives on the long diagonal in time to neutralize its opposite number. 1 1 .0-0 tt:lxc3 1 2.ixc3 ixg2 13.c;t>xg2 b4 8

7

6 5

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 80

Open Systems

14.i.el 1 4.1Mff3 Ela7 1 5.lt:lc6 lt:lxc6 1 6.1Mfxc6t 1Mfd7 1 7.1Mfxd7t Elxd7= Black has no problems, even though his rook from h8 needs some time to get into play. 1 4 ... Ela7 1 5.c3 h5 1 6.f4 hxg4 1 7.hxg4 This position was reached in Smirin - Mista, Plovdiv 2008. Now instead of the reckless 1 7 ... g5?, Black should have played: 1 7 ... Eld7!N 18.'1Mff3 bxc3 1 9.bxc3 1Mfc8 The position is double-edged, with neither king feeling completely safe. At least Black benefits from having the more compact pawn structure, which should serve him well in the event of a queen exchange. 9. ..i.b4 9 ... h5!? This creative solution has only been tried once at the time of writing, but it offers exceptionally interesting food for thought.

way short of equality, and he was unable to cope with his problems. However, if Black wishes to keep the game more complicated then he may wish to investigate 1 2 ...1Mfe7t!?N. 1 3.1Mfxd8t lt:lxd8 1 4.i.e3 i.f5 1 5.0-0-0 Elc8 1 6.i.d3 Harmless is 1 6.c3 lt:le6. 16 ...hd3 1 7.Elxd3 i.e7 Black has no problems; the position is equal.

8 �. -.!.�·y,_,� ""'%_,_,��, 6 :r.·• • • "g 1@� �� 54 .�.:.�. �� �%8 33 �% � �1�f/ �%"/ 1@�8 3 m �� m 2 8}fiti" �%''LJ-i{� - --� �M 1 � 1]1V�j,m 7

�

,_,_,

8

a

7

6 5

3

2

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

I O.lt:Jxd5 I O.i.g2 hxg4 l l .hxg4 Elxhl t 12.i.xhl lt:lc6 looks fine for Black. 1 O ... exd5 1 1 .lt:lf4 hxg4 1 2.1Mfxd5 This position was reached in Sutovsky Najer, Netanya 2009. At this point Black's safest continuation would have been: 1 2 ... lt:lc6N The game continuation of 1 2 ...i.d7 1 3.i.c4 1Mfe7t 1 4.i.e3 i.c6 1 5.1Mff5 left Black some

----

b

�� -0 c

d

e

f

g

h

10.i.g2 Very timid is IO.i.d2 lt:lxc3 1 1 .hc3 i.xc3t (If Black is looking for a no-nonsense route to equality he can always opt for 1 1 . ..'\Mrxd l t 1 2.Elxd1 i.xc3t 1 3.lt:lxc3 i.d7 1 4.i.g2 i.c6 as in Becerra Rivero - Dominguez, Santa Clara 1 999.) 1 2.lt:lxc3 1Mfb6 1 3.'1Mfd2 1Mfxb2 1 4.Elb 1 1Mfa3 1 5.i.g2 0-0 1 6.0-0 lt:ld7 This was Tseshkovsky - Sakaev, Moscow 2009. White had enough compensation to fight for equality, but certainly nothing more. 10.. . tlJc6! I spent some time analysing the more common 1 0 ... 0-0, but eventually decided not to recommend it on account of the rare, but quite promising 1 l .a3!? lt:lxc3 1 2.1Mfxd8 Elxd8 13.lt:lxc3 i.xc3t 14.bxc3 as played in Mikhaletz

Chapter 1 1 - 6.h3 - Hoffmann, Budapest 1 998. I am not fully confident that Black is equalizing here - and even if he is, the most he can realistically hope for is a draw. 1 1.0-0 The alternative is to play 1 1 .�d2 'Llxc3, giving White an interesting option:

a b c d e f g h 1 2.�xc6t!? ( 1 2.'Llxc3 0-0 1 3.a3 �e7 is comfortable for Black, and the second player has scored heavily from this position; 1 2.�xc3 is also harmless, and after 1 2 ... 'Wb6 13.'Wd2 the players agreed a draw in Pietrusiak - Pytel, Wroclaw 1 972. Obviously the game is far from dead, but it is clear that neither side can claim an advantage.) 1 2 ... bxc6 13.hc3 'Wb6 1 4.'Wd2 c5 1 5 .a3 hc3 1 6.'Wxc3 0-0 1 7.0-0-0 �b7 The position remained dynamically balanced in Fontaine - Kosten, Saint-Affrique 2000.

181

I l...ltJxc3 IZ.C!iJxc3 1 2.'Wxd8t 'Llxd8 1 3.'Llxc3 was played in J. Miladinovic - Eric, Zlatibor 2007, and here it looks sensible for Black to play 13 ...hc3!?N 1 4.bxc3 �d7 1 5.Eib l Elc8 with a full share of the chances. 12...'i;Vc7 13.'i;Vf3 The position occurred in Vallejo Pons - Dominguez Perez, Oropesa del Mar 2000. Here I suggest a small refinement for Black.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

13 ...id6!N After the game continuation of 1 3 ...0-0, White could have obtained a slight initiative with 1 4.�f4!N. Instead White missed his chance by playing 1 4.Eid l , and after 1 4 ...�d6! Black prevented the bishop from developing with gain of tempo. I simply want to do the same thing a move earlier. .

14.etJe4 Obviously 1 4.Eid1 0-0 transposes to the aforementioned game, in which Black was doing fine. 14 .ie7 15.c3 By luring the knight to e4 Black succeeded in taking the sting out of 1 5.�f4, as after 1 5 ... e5 there is no 'Lld5. •.•

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 82

Open Systems

Conclusion

The quirky 6.h3 might appear to be an ugly duckling, but it has truly come into vogue in recent years, with many of the world's top players incorporating it into their repertoires. The plan involving 6 ... e6 followed by 7 . d5 will be music to the ears of classical players Black responds to his opponent's early flank activity with a strong counter in the centre, just as prescribed in the manual. Unfortunately the story does not end there, and we have seen that the game will often develop into a tense battle in which both sides must solve tricky problems. According to my analysis Black should be holding his own, although you can bet that the cheeky h-pawn will remain a topical subject in the ongoing theoretical debate. ..

Open Systems

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

Pulp Fiction 6.f4 -

Variation Index l.e4 c5 2.�f3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.�xd4 �f6 5.�c3 a6 6.£4 e6 A) 7.i.d3 B) 7.i.e3 b5 B1) 8.e5 B2) 8.i.d3 B3) 8.�f3 C) 7.�f3 �b6 C1) 8.a3 �c6 Cll) 9.�b3 �c7 C111) 10.i.d3 C112) 10.g4 C12) 9.�xc6 C2) 8.�b3 �c7 9.g4 b5 C21) 10.g5 C22) 10.i.d3

B3) note to 1 3.0-0

B l) after 26J''1d7

a

b

c

d

e

f

26 ... 1"k8!N

g

186 187 187 189 190 195 196 196 196 197 199 200 202 204

h

a

b

c

d

e

f

16 . . .h6!?N

g

C22) note to 12 ..ie3

h

16 ...0-0!N

h

184

Open Systems

One of the older attacking systems for White features the immediate 6.f4. This became especially popular in the 1 990s after being advocated in John Nunn's landmark Beating the Sicilian books. The glory days of the system may have passed, but Black still has to be well informed about the most accurate methods of defence; the underlying principles of White's play are as sound as ever. l.e4 c5 2.tiJf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tiJxd4 tt::l £6 5)Llc3 a6 6.£4

6 e6 Several other moves are playable. To mention just a few of them, the most popular response has been 6 ... e5 although I also spent some time analysing the intriguing and somewhat provocative alternative 6 ... g6!?. In the end, however, I decided that the Scheveningen-style treatment provided the right balance between solidity and counterattacking potential. Here White's main choices are A) 7 .id3, B) 7.J.e3 and C) 7.WI'f3, although several other ideas have been tried. Here are the most significant of them: •••

•

7.�e2 will lead to Chapter 1 3 (6.�e2). 7.a4 �e7 is likely to lead to Chapter 1 3 after a subsequent �e2 and .te3, or perhaps line E of Chapter 9 (6.a4 e6) in the event that the white

bishop comes to d3. 7.e5 This might seem premature and is rarely seen, but is far from ridiculous. 7 ...dxe5 8.£Xe5 tt:ld5 I also checked 8 ... tt:lfd7 9.�f4, as occurred in Shook - Sadiq Chanthana, e-mail 2003. Here 9 ... W'a5!?N looks interesting, but White's play now begins to make sense after: 1 0.W'f3! tt:lxe5 1 l .W'g3 followed by 1 2.0-0-0 with compensation and good attacking chances.

9.tt:lxd5 9 ..td2?? W'h4t was embarrassing for White in Ivert - Osterberg, Sweden 1 992. 9.tt:lf3 .tb4 10 ..td2 tt:lxc3 1 l .bxc3 .tc5+ Ratner - Helmbold, Ueberlingen 2000. 9.W'g4tt:lxc3 1 0.bxc3, Rantanen-Paasikangas Tella, Tampere 1 998, 1 0 ... tt:ld7!N 1 l ..tf4 W'a5 1 2.W'g3 g5! 1 3.hg5 ( 1 3 ..td2 h6+) 1 3 . . .Ei:g8 14.tt:lb3 W'xe5t 1 5.W'xe5 tt:lxe5+ The capture on d5 was played in Jennings - Aldridge, e-mail 1 996. Here Black should have responded with: 9 ...W'xd5N 1 0.tt:lf3 W'xd1 t 1 I .c;t>xd1 .td7! The ending should be equal, but it seems that White has to take more care than Black. 7.g4 Another aggressive though slightly premature move that requires careful handling.

Chapter 1 2 - 6.f4 7 ... eS!? This is the only real attempt to refute White's concept. 8.lt:JfS!N This is the most challenging reaction. In the event of 8.fxeS, D. Jensen - R. Moore, Grand Rapids 1 989, Black could have seized the initiative with 8 ... lt:Jxg4!N 9.ctJf3 ctJc6 lO ..tgS (I O.exd6 .txd6+) 10 ... '1Mrb6 1 1 .'1Mrd2 h6 1 2 ..tf4 dxeS 1 3 .ctJdS '1Mrxb2! 14.lt:Jc7t c:Jle7 1 S .l'l:d1 ( I S.lLldSt d8!-+) 1 S ....te6! 1 6.lt:Jxa8 exf4 1 7.ctJc7 gS with somewhat better chances, in an admittedly rather complex and irrational position. 8 ...hS!

9.fxeS 9.gS?! This idea, borrowed from the Perenyi Attack (see line C of Chapter 1 6) does not work so well here. 9 ... lt:Jxe4 IO.lt:Jxg7t .txg7 1 1 .ctJxe4 dS 1 2.ctJc3 (12.ctJg3 exf4 1 3 ..txf4 ctJc6 14.'1Mre2t [ 1 4 ..tg2 '1Mre7t! 1 S.ctJe2 0-0+] 1 4 ... c:Jlf8 1 S.c3 [ 1 S.O-O-O .tg4+] 1 S ....tg4 1 6.'1Mfd2 d4!00) 1 2 ....te6 1 3.fxeS lt:Jc6 1 4 ..tg2 WaS 1 S ..txdS ( I S ..td2 'IMrcS+) 1 S ... O-O-O 1 6 ..txe6t fxe6 1 7.'1Mre2 lt:Jd4 1 8.'1Mrc4t c:Jlb8 1 9.0-0 .txeS+ 9 ... lt:Jxg4 1 0 ..tf4 .txf5 1 0 ... ctJxeS!? 1 1 .'1MrdS! (I I .\MI'e2ctJbc6 1 2.0-0-0 g6 1 3 .ctJe3 .tg7oo) 1 I ...lt:Jbc6 1 2.0-0-0 .te6 1 3.ctJxd6t .txd6 1 4.'Wxd6 'Wxd6 1 S.l'l:xd6 0-0= 1 1 .exfS dxeS

185

1 1 ...'1Mrb6? 12.'1Mre2! is awkward. 1 2.'1Mrxd8t c:Jlxd8 1 3 ..tgSt!N 1 3.l'l:d1 t lt:Jd7 1 4.h3 exf4 1 S.hxg4 .tb4+ was attributed to a 1 989 game from the bulletin during the World Cup in Sweden.

1 3 .. .f6!? Safer is: 13 ... .te7 14 ..txe7t xe7 1 S .lt:JdSt c:Jlf8 ( l s . . .d6 1 6.l'l:d1 l'l:a7 1 7.h3 lt:Jh6 1 8.l'l:g1�) 16.h3 lt:Jf6 1 7.lt:Jb6 (17.0-0-0 ctJc6 1 8.ctJxf6 gxf6 1 9.l'l:d7 l'l:b8 20 ..tc4 ctJe7 2 1 .l'l:hd1 l'l:g8 22.l'l:7d6 [22.l'l:d8t l'l:xd8 23.l'l:xd8t c:Jlg7 24.l'l:d7 bS 2S ..txbS axbS 26.l'l:xe7 l'l:d8 27.l'l:b7 l'l:dS+] 22 ... l'l:gS 23.l'l:xf6 l'l:xfS 24.l'l:dd6 c:Jlg7 2S.l'l:xfS ctJxfS 26.l'l:d7 lt:Jh6+) 1 7 ... l'l:a7 1 8 .ctJc8 l'l:a8 1 9.ctJb6 with equality. 14.h3 fxgS 1 S.O-O-Ot lt:Jd7 1 6.hxg4 h4+ A draw is the most likely result, but I like this passed pawn. 7.ctJf3 lt:Jbd7 8 ..td3 This introduces a crude but potentially dangerous attacking plan: White wants to castle and later launch an attack based on e4eS, unleashing the bishop on d3 and driving the f6-knight away from defensive duties. 8 ... '1Mrc7 Black can also provoke the e-pawn into advancing with 8 ... bS 9.eS!? b4! I O.exf6 ( IO.lt:Je4 ctJxe4 1 I ..txe4 dS 1 2 ..td3 '1Mrb6 1 3.'1Mre2 .tcS 1 4 ..td2 aS turned out well for Black in L. Schneider - Agrest, Sweden

1 86

Open Systems

2006.) 10 ...bxc3 1 l .fXg7 hg7 1 2.b3 lt'lc5 13.�e3 Wfc7 1 4.0-0 �b?oo 9.0-0 b5 10.Wfe1 �b7 1 1 . 'lt>h 1 b4 1 2.'2ld1 12.'2la4 was seen in Dvoirys - Agrest, Budapest 1 99 1 , and here the easiest solution for Black was 1 2 ... Wfc6!?N 1 3.Wixb4 '2lxe4 14.�e3 �e7 with equal chances.

avoids revealing his intentions and might also opt for a different plan with the knight.

a

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 2 ...�e7 There is also 1 2 ... '2lc5!? 1 3.'2lf2 ( 1 3.Wfxb4 he4 1 4.�xe4 '2lcxe4 1 5.Wfa4t Wfd7= A. Saunders - Lindsalu, e-mail 2003) 1 3 ... d5 1 4.e5 '2lfe4 1 5.�e3 �e7 1 6.�d4 0-0= Amason - Pliester, New York 1 989. 1 3.'2lf2 In the event of 13.�d2 a5 1 4.a3, Vasiliev ­ Dion, Dos Hermanas 2003, it looks good for Black to try: 1 4 ... d5!?N 1 5.e5 '2le4 1 6.axb4 lt'lxd2 1 7.Wfxd2 axb4= 13 ... a5!N This seems like the safest solution, although Black also obtained an acceptable position with 1 3 ... '2lc5!? 1 4.�d2 a5 1 5 .a3 b3 1 6.�b5t '2lfd7 1 7J"k1 bxc2 1 8.Elxc2 a4 in J. Polgar ­ Polugaevsky, Roquebrune 1 992. 14.a3 bxa3 1 5.Elxa3 0-0 Black has no cause for complaints. A) 7.i.d3

White sometimes plays this with the intention of following with '2lf3 and so on, as above. However, by developing the bishop first, White

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

7... llJbd7 Black can also consider the disruptive 7 ... Wfb6!? 8.a3!? (8.'2lb3 Wfc7 9.Wif3 transposes to the note to move 9 in variation C2; 8.'2lf3 is possible, but the queen on b6 has considerable nuisance value and White will have a hard time arranging castling.) 8 ... '2lc6 (8 ... '2lbd7 would be incorrect due to 9.�e3!, with the point 9 ...Wfxb2?? 10.'2la4+-) 9.�e3 �d7 1 0.�e2 (Or 1 0.'2lf5 Wfc7 1 1 .'2lg3, Todorovic ­ Bistric, Banja Vrucica 1 99 1 , 1 l ...d5!?N 1 2.e5 d4 1 3.exf6 dxe3 1 4.'2lh5 g6 1 5.'2lg7t 'lt> d8!?00) 10 ...Wfc7 1 1 .0-0 �e7 12. 'lt>h 1 0-0 We have reached something resembling the positions from Chapter 13, without transposing directly. 8.0-0 8.'2lf3 transposes to 7.'2lf3 above. 8... b5 I do not trust the risky pawn grab: 8 ...Wfb6?! 9.�e3 Wfxb2 1 0.'2lcb5! axb5 1 1 .'2lxb5 Trapping the queen. In return Black obtains enough material, but he still has a hard time coordinating his position. 1 1 ...Ela5 1 2.Elb 1 Elxb5 1 3.Elxb2 Elxb2 1 4.Wfa1 Elb6 1 5.�xb6 '2lxb6 1 6.Wfc3 Black was unable to solve his problems in Anand - Kasparov, Tilburg 1 99 1 .

Chapter 1 2 - 6.f4 9.a3 �b7 lO.@hl �e7 We have reached a typical Sicilian position, the likes of which can be found in other parts of this chapter as well as the book in general. I do not want to spend too much time on it in this part of the book, so will just mention a few possible continuations.

187 Bl) 8.e5

Quite often when White feels his opponent is investing too much time into pawn moves he itches to start an attack.

l l.'iNel l l .'We2 tt'lc5 1 2 ..td2 0-0= Jakubowski Cyborowski, Dzwirzyno 2004. 1 L..lt:k5 White's most typical attacking plan would be to prepare e5 at some point, so it is always useful to have the option of eliminating the d3-bishop. 12.b4 ll:\xd3 13.cxd3 0-0 14.�e3 �c8 With chances for both sides, Schmaltz Shipov, Internet 2002. B) 7.�e3

By developing his queen's bishop at an early stage, White hints at the possibility of long castling. 7... b5

s

7

6

s

'ii� .i.B*•Y, �.i "'� , ,/, ,, ., � �

_ _ ;� B ,B ,'S_ �;< � � � � � i - W[j � ;< �'

�

�m "/%%� � � �%'"/,!"'"'%' �� 3 � m � � �ot s -� , -�W!J, , ,r{, ,;� �:Z"c�.,

4 2

� a

Now we will consider three possibilities: Bl) 8.e5, B2) 8.�d3 and B3) 8.'iNf3.

b

� c

d

�.t � Il e

f

g

h

At this point the safest continuation would have been l l ...'Wxd4N 1 2.'Wxb8 '2lxc2t 1 3.e2 tt'lxal 1 4.'Wxc8t e7 when White is more or less forced to take a perpetual. Instead the game continuation of l l .. ..tc5!? 1 2.'2lb3 ( 1 2.'Wxb8 .txd4) 1 2 ... '2lxc2t 1 3.e2 tt'lxal 14.'2lxc5 'We? led to rather murky complications, with White eventually coming out on top. The computer likes Black although

1 88

Open Systems

it probably does not fully appreciate the misplacement of the knight on a 1 , so overall I would regard "unclear" as a fair assessment. IO...Wfxd5 I I .i.e2 This pawn sacrifice is the only really principled continuation.

The passive 1 1 .tLlf3?! �b7 can hardly trouble Black. In the event of the aggressive lunge 1 1 .'1Wh5, as played in Zontakh - Najer, Internet 2004, it looks good for Black to respond calmly with 1 1 ...�b7!N (Instead the game continued with the tempting but probably inaccurate 1 1 ...'\We4 12.Wf2, leading to complications in which White's chances should be slightly higher according to my analysis.) 12.�e2 g6 1 3.'1Wf3 �g7 14.0-0 0-0 1 5.'\Wxd5 �xd5 1 6.a4 b4 1 7.tLlf3 tLld7+ White is left with weaknesses and very little to show for them. l l ... Wfxe5 12.Wfd2 i.b7

It looks less logical to for White to castle short. One game continued 1 3J:'1d1 �e7 14.0-0 0-0 1 5.tLlf3 '1Wc7 1 6.�d3 (This combined with White's next move seems rather slow, but he would also struggle to achieve anything through more energetic means, for instance: 1 6.�f4N '1Wc8 1 7.c4 bxc4 1 8 .tLle5 Eld8 1 9.'1Wc3 tLld7+) 1 6 ... tLlc6 1 7.c3 tLle5 ( 1 7 .. J:'1ad8N also looks good) 1 8.lt:Jxe5 '1Wxe5 1 9.�f4 '\Wc5t 20.�e3 '\Wc6+ Perelshteyn - Ehlvest, Connecticut 2007. 13 Wfc5 14.0-0-0 i.e7 15.lt�b3 White must try to impede his opponent's castling if he is to have any real chance of demonstrating compensation. .•.

The following game quickly led to disaster for White after an unsound combination: 1 5.�xb8? Elxb8 1 6.tLlxe6? fxe6 1 7.'1Wd7t f8 1 8.'1Wxe6 �xg2 1 9.Elhe1 Elb6 20.'1Wd7 �e4 2 1 .Elfl t Elf6 22.Elxf6t gxf6 23.Eld2 Elg8 0-1 Oll - Smirin, Klaipeda 1 988. 1 5.Elhe1 is a more reasonable move but fails to display the necessary urgency, and after 1 5 ... 0-0 1 6.�d3 tZ:lc6 1 7.lt:Jxc6 �c6 18.Ele5 '\Wb4 1 9.c3 '1Wa4 Black was clearly better in Schwilk - Zeller, Schwaebisch Gmuend 2000. 15 Wfc8 16.i.d6 1 6.tLla5 �d5 does not help White. ..•

1 89

Chapter 1 2 - 6.f4 I6 Y;Vds! The queen has had a busy time so far! Now she returns to her original square, solving all Black's problems in the process.

Partially inspired by the treatment of the English Attack discussed in Chapter 1 7, I decided to investigate this rare but enthusiastic lunge with the b-pawn.

17.Y;Vb4 .ixd6 18.gxd6 Y;Vg5t 19.gd2 Y;Ve7 Ensuring that the king will escape to safety.

I should add that there is nothing at all wrong with 8 ...ib7, after which White's most common reaction has been 9.1Mff3 transposing to line B3 below.

•..

20.�c5 0-0 21.ghdl .ixg2 22.�xa6 White needs to allow a queen exchange, otherwise he would be have nothing to show for the two-pawn deficit. 22...Y;Vxb4 23.�xb4 �c6 24 .ixb5 �xb4 25.gxg2 gxa2 26.gd7 We have been following the game Gipslis Sigurjonsson, Amsterdam 1 97 6. Here I think Black should have played: •

9.�bl 9.tZ'la4 allows Black to call the knight's posltlon into question immediately with 9 ...id7 1 0.c4 'Wa5 1 l .b3 ixa4 1 2.bxa4 e5, with a good position.

In the event of 9.tZ'lce2, Fabregas Fontanet Perpinya Rofes, Barbera 1 997, it looks logical to continue 9 ... tZ'lbd7N 1 0.0-0 tZ'lc5 with a healthy position for Black. It is useful to have the option of eliminating the d3-bishop at a moment s nonce. ,

B2) s.i.d3

With this move White avoids a premature confrontation and instead prefers to continue developing. 8 b4!? ••.

.

9 ...i.b7 10.�d2 �bd7 1 O ... tZ'lc6 should be perfectly playable too, for instance 1 1 .0-0 ie7 12.1We2 0-0 with a normal Sicilian position. u .Y;Vf3 e5 12.�£5 The other main option is 1 2.fxe5 tZ'lxe5 1 3.1Wg3, reaching a typically double-edged

190

Open Systems

position for the Najdor£ Several moves are possible here, but I found the following line particularly intriguing: 1 3 ... h5!? 14.�g5 h4! 1 5.hh4 lt:lxd3t 1 6.cxd3 8

% "" '

�

.�. � �

':-�-� ,% ··"-'��' � � - , :; : ,,���-�-- ,;� � � �� ' ,% � �-�� -�r��:' / � if,� •� �-- · � , ,% '� � � �� �.�"�!r�bN 3 �� .,%�/Q/ � � lf{j ' ""if . ·-- -· � .Fl' / ---� � � � �

B3) s.'!Wf3

This has been the most popular choice by far. 8... i.b7 9.i.d3 ltlbd7

4 s

2

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 6 ... lt:lxe4! 1 7.ctJxe4 'Wxh4 1 8.'Wxh4 :1'1xh4 1 9.ctJf5 he4 20.lt:lxh4 �xd3� With a pawn for the exchange plus two wonderful bishops, Black has a fully acceptable position. Obviously this whole line was far from forced, but it shows the kind of resources that lie under the surface of such positions. I will leave it to the reader to investigate the above line more deeply if he wishes. 12...g6 13.ltlg3 There are no clever sacrifices here, so the knight is forced to retreat. 13 ... exf4 14.'1Wxf4 ltle5 15.ltlc4 ltlfg4! This move effectively puts an end to Black's opening problems by reinforcing the perfectly­ placed knight on e5. 16.ltlxe5 ltlxe5 17.0-0 i.g7 18.a3 White's only active plan; he can hardly hope to break though Black's rock-solid kingside. 18 ... bxa3 19J�xa3 0-0 We have been following the game Heinemann - Stohl, Germany 2006. White can only dream of an advantage, and this particular encounter ended in a draw just two moves later.

10.g4 This is the most principled continuation, and the most frequently played.

In the event of1 O.a3 Black should play 1 0 ... :1'1c8, when the usual answer of 1 1 .0-0 transposes to 1 0.0-0 below. White's most important alternative is: 1 0.0-0 :1'1c8 1 1 .a3 1 1 .:1'1ae1 �e7 12.'Wh3?! (better was 1 2.a3 0-0, transposing to the main line) 1 2 ... b4 13.ctJce2 ctJc5 1 4.lt:lg3 1his was Romanishin - Schmidt, Yerevan 1 976, and now after 1 4... lt:lfxe4N I do not believe in White's compensation. 1 1 .ctJd1 is playable, although it is hardly the type of move that will strike fear in the hearts of Sicilian players. The game Hort - Ribli, Wijk aan Zee 1 983, continued 1 1 ...g6 1 2.ctJf2 �g7 1 3.ctJb3 0-0 1 4.a4 b4 1 5 .a5 'Wc7 1 6.'We2 e5 1 7.fxe5 ctJxe5 when the powerful centralized knight ensured a full share of the chances for Black. 1 1 ...�e7

Chapter 1 2 - 6.f4 The exchange sacrifice on c3 is a typical motif in many Sicilian positions; not just the Dragon. Unfortunately in this position the tempting l l ...Eixc3?! 12.bxc3 'Llc5 comes at a moment when Black is not fully developed. White can effectively refute his opponent's concept with 1 3.c4! bxc4 1 4.ixc4 'Llfxe4, Radulov - Soos, Sofia 1 967, and now 1 5.f5!N 'Lld2 16.'Wh5 g6 1 7.fxg6 fxg6 18.'We2 'Llxfl 1 9.'Llxe6! 'Llxe6 20.id4 'We7 2 l .'Wxe6± After 1 1 ...ie7 we will consider two continu­ ations for White:

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

a) 1 2 .'Wg3 0-0!? The more common 12 ... g6 is perfectly okay, but I rather like the provocative text move, as Black's position is resilient enough to withstand any acts of aggression. 1 3.e5 1 3.f5 meets with the powerful retort 1 3 ... Eixc3! 1 4.bxc3 'Llxe4 1 5.he4 ixe4 For a tiny material investment Black has obtained excellent piece play and destroyed White's pawn structure. 1 3 ... dxe5 14.fxe5 'Llxe5! This clever tactical nuance provides the justification for Black's 1 2th move. 1 5.'Wxe5!?N This is clearly the critical continuation, and in any case it looks more challenging than 1 5.'Llxe6 fxe6 1 6.'Wxe5 'Wd6 1 7.'Wxd6 hd6 1 8 .h3 ie5 1 9.Eiael ixc3 20.bxc3 e5 A draw was agreed here in Glinz - Staratorzhsky,

191

e-mail 2008, although it seems to me that Black is just better. 1 5 ...id6 1 6.'Wg5 Elc5! Surprisingly the queen is embarrassed. 1 7.'Llf5 1 7.'Wh4? loses byforce after: 1 7 ... Eih5 1 8.'Wel hh2t 1 9.�f2 'Llg4t 20.�e2 Ele5-+ 1 7.if5 is trickier, but Black remains on top with: 1 7 ... :ge8!+ 17 ... exf5 1 8.hc5 ixc5t 1 9.�h1 'Llg4! 20.'Wxd8 Or 20.'Wf4 g6 with a strong initiative. 20 ... :gxd8 2 1 .'Lld1

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

2 1 ...E\d6 This forces a draw. If Black is feeling more ambitious then he may consider 2 l ...g6!? with ongoing compensation. 22.Eixf5 22.hf5?? Eld2 would be painful. 22 . . . E\h6 23.Eixc5 Elxh2t 24. �g1 Elxg2t 25.\:t>fl 'Llh2t 26.�e1 'Llf3t The game ends in perpetual check. b) 1 2.Eiae1 White brings his last piece into play before initiating a conflict. 1 2 ... 0-0 1 3.'Wh3 'Llc5 1 4.if2 1 4.e5? does not work, and led to an early disaster for White in the following game: 1 4 ... dxe5 1 5.fxe5 'Llxd3 1 6.exf6 Jixf6 1 7.'Llxe6 Jixg2! 1 8.'Wg4 fxe6 0-1 Diaz Zapata, Havana 1 986.

1 92

Open Systems

1 4 ... 'Llfd7! White was not threatening e5 just yet, but it was still a smart idea to sidestep the possibility while also preparing a kingside regrouping.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 5.Wh1 1 5.f5 e5 1 6.'Llf3 'Llf6!? was pleasant for Black in Myrvold - Bologan, Oslo 1 994. The second player soon obtained the better chances after exchanging on d3 followed by opening the centre with . . . d5. 15 ... �f6 1 6.2:l:d1 2:l:e8 1 7.�g1 g6 1 8.'Llde2 �g?+ Black's set up is proving to be eminently flexible and if White will not make some progress he may fall behind in Yudasin Kasparov, Moscow 1 988.

This is generally regarded as the main line, although the following alternative also looks quite tempting: 1 0 . . .h6!? 1 l .a3 White's position is not strong enough to justify an immediate assault: 1 l .g5? hxg5 1 2.fxg5 'Lle5 1 3.W'g3 'Llfg4 1 4.g6 'Llxe3 1 5.gxf7t 'Llxf7 1 6.W'xe3 W'h4t is likely to end in tears for White. More sensible is 1 1 .h4 b4 1 2.'Llce2 'Llc5 ( 1 2 ... e5!?N looks quite promising) 1 3.'Llg3 This was seen in Alekhina - Grinfeld, Sochi 1 98 1 , and here I suggest 13 . . . 'Llxd3tN 1 4.cxd3 e5 1 5 .'Lldf5 g6 1 6.fxe5 dxe5 17.'Llxh6 hh6 1 8.�xh6 2:l:xh6 1 9 .g5 2:l:h8 (This looks better than 1 9 ... 2:l:h7 20.W'xf6 W'xd3 2 l .W'xe5t Wf8 22.W'f4 2:l:d8 23.2:l:h2 W'd4 24.2:l:f2 �c8 25.2:l:cl �e6 26.b3± White keeps an extra pawn and somewhat better chances.) 20.W'xf6 W'xf6 2 l .gxf6 Wd7 22. Wd2 e6 The pawn f6 needs constant protection, so Black should have no real problems in this ending. Finally, there is 1 1 .0-0-0 2:l:c8 1 2.'Llce2 ( 12.g5 hxg5 1 3.fxg5 'Lle5 1 4.W'g2 'Llfg4 1 5.�f4 b4 1 6.'Llce2, Lane - Mokry, Trnava 1 984, 1 6 ... 'Llxd3t! 1 7.2:l:xd3 'Lle5+; 1 2.'Llb3 'We?! 1 3.W'g2 b4 14.'Llb1 d5+ The tactics can easily turn against White.) 1 2 ... 'Llc5 1 3.'Llg3 'Llxd3t 14.2:l:xd3 'Lld7!? 1 5.h4 'Llc5 1 6.2:l:dd1 'We? 1 7.2:l:h2 �e7= The bishop pair gives Black bright prospects. 1 1 ...2:l:c8 1 2.0-0 �e7 1 3.2:l:ae1 Once again 1 3.g5? is premature: 1 3 . . .hxg5 14.fxg5 'Lle5 1 5.W'g3 'Llfg4 1 6.g6 �h4 1 7.gxf7t Wd7 1 8.f8=ctJt W'xf8! 19.2:l:xf8 �xg3 20.2:l:xh8 2:l:xh8 2 1 .hxg3 'Llxe3+ The tactics backfire against White, as the rook on h8 becomes active in the process. 1 3 ... g5!? This thematic positional tool should be known by all Sicilian players - and Najdorf fans especially. 1 4.f5

Chapter 1 2 - 6.f4 1 4.fxg5?! hxg5 1 5 .h3 ( 1 5 .hg5 Wb6 16.�e3 tLle5 1 7.Wf4 tLlexg4+) 1 5 ... tLle5 1 6.Wg3 ttJfd7+ The exchange on g5 is strategically dubious for White. The attempted 'improvement' 14.Wh3 brought White nothing but misery: 1 4 ... gxf4 1 5.�xf4 l:'!g8 1 6.g5 hxg5 1 7.�e3 tLle5 White had nothing to show for his missing pawn, and the desperate sacrifice 1 8.tLlxe6? sealed his fate after 1 8 ... g4!-+ in J. Dominguez ­ Zapata, Decameron 2003. 1 4 ... tLle5

193

1 984. White would much prefer to recapture with the c-pawn. 1 3.g5 ttJfd7 1 4.h4 1 4.0-0 g6 transposes to the main line below, while 1 4 ...�e7 is also quite reasonable.

8

7

6

V/////� -�/

5

4 3

2

a v="/',n,'"�J''''"" 'm/�

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 5.Wh3?! Better was 1 5.Wg2N tLlxd3 1 6.cxd3 e5 1 7.tLlf3 Wid? with dynamic equality. 1 5 ... @d7 1 6.�e2 h5! 1 7.fxe6t fxe6 1 8.gxh5 g4 1 9.Wg2 l:'!xc3! The celebrated exchange sacrifice on c3 is often very effective. 20.bxc3 �xe4 2 I .Wf2 tLlxh5+ We have been following the game Milos J. Polgar, Sao Paulo 1 996. White has little chance of defending against the intended ... g3.

-

I I.ltlce2 ltlc5 12.ltlg3 Wl'c7! The key move in this complex position. Black needs to fight against the threat ofWhite's long castling. 13.0-0 1 3.0-0-0 tLlxd3t 14.l:'!xd3 l:'!c8 was pleasant for Black in Korzubov - A. Sokolov, Vilnius

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 4 ... g6! This may appear provocative, but the black defences prove to be resilient enough. 14 ... ttJxd3t 1 5.cxd3 tLlc5 1 6.�e2! is by no means bad for White. 1 5.0-0 1 5.0-0-0 tLlxd3t 1 6.l:'!xd3 tLlc5 1 7.l:'!d2 0-0-0 was fine for Black in Feher Timoshenko, Cappelle la Grande 1 992. 1 5.h5 is not too dangerous after 1 5 ... �g7 1 6.h6 (1 6.hxg6 hxg6 1 7.l:'!xh8t hh8 18.@e2 e5 was already more pleasant for Black in Kernazhitsky - Feldman, Kiev 1 986.) 16 ...�f8 White has gained some space and the h6-pawn might become an important asset in an endgame. On the other hand the blocking of the kingside limits his attacking chances. 1 7.0-0 �e7 1 8 .a3 a5 1 9.axb4 axb4 20.l:'!xa8t ha8 White achieved no advantage and a draw was agreed in Cramling - Ilic, Lugano 1 983. 1 5 ... �g7 1 6.h5 16.a3 e5 1 7.tLlb3 exf4 1 8 .Wxf4 0-0 19.tLlxc5 tLlxc5 20.axb4 tLlxd3 (20 ... ttJe6 2 I .Wif3 �xb2 22.l:'!ab l �e5 23.tLle2 l:'!ae8+ Black has used his chances in the centre for gaining

1 94

Open Systems

somewhat better play in Hubner - Portisch, Lucerne 1 982.) 2 l .cxd3 .L.b2 22.�ad1 i,e5+ Up to this point we have been following the game Pyka - Jedrzejowski, corr. 2000. Here I found an interesting new idea:

13...g6 Black is thinking about striking in the centre with ... e5, but first needs to take control over the f5-square.

1 3 ... i2Jfd7 is also quite playable, for instance: 1 4.a3 bxa3 1 5 .b4 t2lxd3 1 6.cxd3 i,e7 1 7.�fcl Wb8 1 8.�xa3 0-0 with equality, Chandler Olafsson, Reykjavik 1 984. 14.g5 Technically this seems to be a novelty, although after Black's response we immediately transpose to several previous games.

a b c d e f g h 1 6 ... h6!?N It turns out that Black can turn the tables and fight for the initiative on the kingside! 1 7.hxg6 fxg6 1 8.Wg4 0-0-0 19.a3! This is White's best chance. Now the war rages along all fronts. Less challenging is 1 9 .l2Jxe6 t2lxe6 20. Wxe6 hxg5 2 l .fxg5 i,e5 22.t2le2 d5+ 19 ... hxg5 20.axb4 gxf4 2 l .bxc5 2 l .�xf4 t2le5 22.We2 t2lexd3 23.cxd3 e5 24.bxc5 exd4+ 2 1 ...Wxc5 22.�a4 fxe3 23.�c4 i,xd4 24.t2le2 i,xb2+ Black has succeeded in navigating the complications and keeping an advantage.

14.a3 bxa3 1 5.b4 t2lxd3 1 6.cxd3 gives Black a chance to fight on the kingside with 1 6 ... h5! 17.�ac l ? (Better was 1 7.g5, although after 1 7 ... t2lg4 1 8.�xa3 t2lxe3 1 9.Wxe3 Wb6 20.t2lge2 i,e?+ White will sorely miss his bishops in the middlegame.) 17 ...Wd7 1 8.g5 t2lg4 19.i,d2 This was Kupreichik - Balashov USSR 1 976, and here I suggest 1 9 ...i,g7N when Black should be clearly better, although the position is still quite tense with the knight on g4 being in some jeopardy. White would love to break the enemy spine with a violent attack: 14.f5 exf5 1 5.t2ldxf5!? This looks dangerous, but with accurate defence Black should be able to neutralize his opponent's initiative and keep some advantage. 1 5 ...gxf5 1 6.i,d4 fxe4! 1 7.Wxf6 �g8

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Chapter 1 2 - 6.f4 1 8.�xc5 Feeble is 1 8.�c4 d5 1 9.�e2 2"i:g6+. 1 8.'1Wf5!? would have been a bit more challenging, but Black stays on top after: 1 8 .. .l2Je6! 1 9.t2Jxe4 l2Jxd4 20.2"i:ael �d8 2 1 .'1Wf6t �e7 22.'1Wxd4 2"i:xg4t 23.�h1 '1Wc5+ 1 8 ...'1Wxc5t It was even possible to play 1 8 ...�g7!? or 18 ... 2"i:g6!?, but the straightforward text move is fine. 1 9.2"i:f2 �e7! 20.'1Wxf7t �d7 2 I .l2Jf5 This position was reached in Short - Lukov, Yerevan 1 984. At this point Black could have kept a clear advantage with the simple: 2 1 ...2"i:xg4tN 22.�fl 2"i:e8+ 14... ttlfd7

195

( 1 6.t2Jb3!?N looks more solid.) 1 6 ...'1Wxb4 1 7.c3?! '1Wxb2 1 8.2"i:fb 1 '1Wxc3 1 9.�fl �g7 20.2"i:cl '1Wxd4! (20 ... '1Wb2 2 1 .2"i:ab 1 '1Wa2 22.2"i:al '1Wb2 would be a repetition, but Black can be more ambitious) 2 l .�xd4 hd4t 22.�g2 �xa1 23.2"i:xal h6 This was Gdanski ­ Ki. Georgiev, Stara Zagora 1 990. Only Black can be better in this position, with more than enough material for the queen and stable squares for all his pieces. 16.2"i:xa3 This position was reached in Crisan - Baciu, Sovata 1 997, and here I suggest: 16 ...i.g7N 17.b4 tlJxd3 18.cxd3 l3c8 Black has a solid position and his bishop pair might become a force one day.

This is generally regarded as the main line. The advantage of the early queen development is that ... b7-b5 is inhibited.

15.a3 This looks logical, as it is hard for White to make any inroads on the kingside. For instance, the rash 1 5.f5? gxf5 1 6.'1Wf2 allows Black to seize the initiative with 1 6 ... 0-0-0! (but not 16 ... t2Jxd3? 1 7.cxd3 l2Jc5 1 8.exf5 e5 1 9.'1We2±) 1 7.exf5 e5 1 8.t2Jb3 d5+ The mighty pawn centre looms like a dark cloud over the white position. 15 . . bxa3 Another game continued 1 5 ... '1Wb6 16.axb4 .

1 96

Open Systems

can respond with either Cl) 8.a3 or C2) 8.�b3. Cl) 8.a3

This witty move defends indirectly against 8 ... 1Mfxd4??, which would now cost Black his queen after 9.ie3+-. 8 ... �c6 Now White really must move the knight, and can choose between C11) 9.�b3 and C12) 9.�xc6. C1 1) 9.�b3 V!fc7

Now we face one further split; White can continue developing and aim for active piece play with C 1 1 1) 10 ..id3, or commence an immediate pawn storm with C1 12) 10.g4. C 1 1 1) 10..id3

This is not a bad move, although a glance at the database reveals that it has made a dismal score in the region of 20% for White. 10...g6! Black is not facing any immediate threats, so he has enough time to organize a kingside fianchetto. Not only does this secure an active future for his bishop, but it also provides an automatic barrier against the attacking power of the bishop on d3.

1 1.0-0 White continues his policy of straightforward development. He does not achieve much with more aggressive actions, for instance:

1 l .ie3 ig7 1 2.g4 0-0 1 3.0-0-0 was Lyly - Budlevskis, corr. 1 993. Now Black should have played the logical 1 3 ... b5N with good attacking chances, as the pawn on a3 will help to facilitate the opening of the b-file. 1 l .id2 ig7 1 2.g4 b5 1 3.g5 l2Jd7 14.1MI'f2 ( 1 4.f5 l2Jd4!? 1 5.l2Jxd4 ixd4 gives Black good play on the central dark squares, as pointed out by Van Wely.) 1 4 .. .lL\b6 1 5 .1MI'e2? Probably concerned about ... lt:lc4, White commits an error, although Black's position was already the more appealing. 1 5 ... l2Ja4! White already faced serious problems in Lutz - Van Wely, Debrecen 1 992. l l ....ig7 12..id2 White has also tried: 1 2.ie3 0-0 1 3.Elae1 1 3.Elad1 can safely be met by 13 ... b5, without fearing 14.ixb5?! axb5 1 5.l2Jxb5 1MI'b8 1 6.l2Jxd6 e5! 1 7.f5 Eld8 1 8.l2Jxc8 Elxc8 1 9 .ig5 Elf8+ Black's extra piece should prove stronger than White's three pawns. 1 3 ... b5

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

14.c;t>h1 White should not rush into a premature

1 97

Chapter 1 2 - 6.f4 confrontation. 1 4.e5?! only led to problems for him after 14 ... dxe5 1 5 ..ic5 .ib7! 1 6 . .ixf8 :!'!xf8 with full compensation for the exchange as in De Firmian - Polugaevsky, Biel 1 990. Perhaps shaken by this turn of events, White immediately erred with 1 7.1Mfe3?, allowing his opponent to secure a big advantage with 1 7 ....ih6!. 1 4 ....ib7 1 5.iWh3 This position was reached in Leskur Sulava, Sibenik 2005. At this point it looks logical for Black to advance his queenside counterplay: 1 5 ... b4N 1 6.axb4 lLlxb4 With a comfortable position.

focus on the combative 14 ... d5!? which also looks reasonable for Black and may appeal to players who thrive on complications.) 1 5 .a4 tt:Jb4 1 6.hb4 axb4 1 7.ltJe3 .id7 1 8 .a5 .ic6= White is unlikely to achieve much without his dark-squared bishop.

12 ...0-0 13.lLldl!? White embarks on a somewhat unusual regrouping. Other moves would be met by the usual plan of .. . b5 and ....ib7, with a comfortable and harmonious set-up for Black.

17.:!'!ael lLld7! We have been following the game Short Kasparov, Debrecen 1 992. Black's last move more or less forces a queen exchange, leading to a position in which Black's chances are clearly better thanks to the great activity of his minor pieces.

13...e5!? This is a principled attempt to question White's last move, although it should be mentioned that there was nothing wrong with 1 3 ... b5.

14 ... exf4 15.Wxf4 i.e6 16.Wh4 Wds! This more or less kills White's dreams of carrying out a successful attack.

The cheeky 1 6 ... lLle5?! is a bit too clever for its own good, and after 1 7.:!'!xf6 iWd8 1 8.:!'!afl lLlxd3 1 9.cxd3 .ixb3 20 . .ic3 White is out of trouble.

C1 12) 10.g4

1 98

Open Systems

10 ... d5!?N, which seems logical but has, as far I am aware, never been tested. Eventually I was forced to conclude that White keeps an edge, with my main lines continuing as follows: 1 l .exd5( l l .e5 tLld7 1 2.�e3 g5!? looks like fun) 1 l . ..CLlxd5 1 2.tLlxd5 exd5 1 3.�e3 �d6 (13 ... 'We7!? 14.0-0-0 �xg4 1 5.'Wxg4 �xe3t 16.�b1 �e6 17.'Wg3 �e7 1 8.�h3 �g6 1 9.Eixd5 'Wxg3 20.hxg3 Ei:d8±) 14.0-0-0 0-0 1 5.�b1 Ei:e8 16.h3 �d7 1 7.�g2 CLle7 18.'Wf2± Still, this could be interesting food for thought for players who like to forge their own paths. as

l l .g5 This would seem like an automatic choice, although I found one noteworthy game in which White chose to postpone it: 1 1 .�d3 �e7 1 2.�e3 tLld7 1 3.0-0 CLlc5 1 4.tt:lxc5 dxc5 1 5 .e5 �b7 1 6.�e4 This was Onischuk - Cvitan, Yerevan 1 996. At this point Black should have played:

1 7.�e2 �b7 with a pleasant position for Black in Onischuk - Van Wely, Wijk aan Zee 1 997. 12...i.b7 13.i.d3 ClJc5!? This looks to me like the most straightforward equalizer. 1 3 ... g6 has been more common and is certainly playable, although it does give White an automatic point of attack and in practice the first player has scored well after 14.h4. 14.0-0 i.e? 15.'?Mf2 Black has no problems after 1 5 . CLlxc5 dxc5 1 6.�f2 tt:ld4 1 7.f5 0-0-0!. The option to castle long often plays a significant role in this line.

The present position was reached in the game Mestel - Polugaevsky, Reykjavik 1 990. At this point the following idea looks quite promising for Black:

� C'Z � � 8 I ��"� -"� �� ��rJI

j_� � · �-� · � 65 imil-- -Zm i�m-� Z · - � � � 4 �'z -� /,-o � �!ft "�, � � Z � � ��v� 3 ��tZJ %-- -Zo;�s;� -----�� �� � , 'd ''�� �� fm /�""% ,

7

�-;;

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

16 . . . 0-0-0!N 17.Eiad1 tt:ld4 1 8.�xb7t �xb7 1 9.�f2 A queen exchange would leave Black with no problems whatsoever. 1 9 ... h5 20.g5 'Wc6 2 l .�xd4 Elxd4 22.Ei:xd4 cxd4 23.CLle2 Ei:d8 Black keeps a full share ofthe chances. The only critical try for White seems to be 24.b4, but then 24 . . . a5! gives promising counterplay. l l ... ClJd7 12.i.e3 Another game continued 1 2.�d3 g6 13.�e3 �g7 1 4.h4 b4 1 5.tLla4 bxa3 1 6.Ei:xa3 tt:lb4

2

a

/""'Y-

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

15 ... ClJxd3N In the game Black exchanged on b3, but it seems to me that exchanging the d3-bishop is more important than compromising White's pawn structure. Besides, the knight on b3 is contributing very little to White's position at present. 16.cxd3 0-0 17.£5!?

Chapter 1 2 - 6.f4 Quieter methods also do not achieve much for White, for instance 1 7.l"lacl Wd7 when Black can look to open the game for his bishops with .. .f5 in the nearest future. 17...ex5 18.'1Wx5 1 8.tLld5 Wd7 1 9.tLlb6 We6 works out well for Black. 18 ... ll:Je5

199

Black should take the opportunity to strengthen his centre and open the b-file. IO.g4!? White can also play in a more reserved fashion with: 1 0.b3 il.b7 l l .il.b2 d5 12.il.d3 1 2.0-0-0 Wa5 1 3.e5 ( 1 3.b4 Wc7+) 1 3 ... tLld7 14.tt:Ja4 Wc7 was about equal in Z. Almasi ­ Kasparov, Lyon 1 994.

� .� � -� �� 7 �j_��� · � · ·�·� �·- � � ""

8

6

'' ""

5 � � · �,,, � � � {j � � , /-

"

4

iV� 3 � {j m.,t � � % %·� � � � 8�

2 1

��--� � ?%-� � � � L J �. --

a

C12) 9.ltlxc6 bxc6!

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 2 ...il.e7!?N There is something to be said for keeping the game less forced than current theory suggests. Having said that, the reason why this whole line is so rarely encountered in tournament play is that it was once played against Kasparov... 1 2 ... c5 1 3.exd5 exd5 14.0-0-0 (14.We2t We6=) 14 ... 0-0-0 1 5.tLla4 Wc7 1 6.il.f5t ( 16.il.e5 il.d6 1 7.l"lhe1 l"lhe800) 16 ... b8 17.il.e5 il.d6= 1 8.Wc3?! d4!+ J. Polgar Kasparov, Dos Hermanas 1 996. 1 3.0-0-0 0-0 1 3 ... Wa5 1 4.tLla4 0-0 1 5.e5 tLld7 1 6.f5!± is a bit unpleasant for Black once you go deeper into the variations. 1 4.g4 tLld7 1 5.tLla4 Wc700 The white bishops look impressive, but Black is solid and can consider several potential central breaks. IO ... g6 l l .g5 ltld7 12.b3

200

Open Systems the position.) 1 7.fXg5 axb4 1 8.i.e2 lt::le 5 1 9.he5 dxe5 20.0-0 '1Wa7t 2 1 .'it>h1 bxa3 The position is messy and double-edged, and any result is possible. After the move played it looks as though Black is losing a rook, but it turns out that the cheeky pawn, which made the audacious capture on move 1 3, is set to play a starring role:

13.i.b2 1 3 .lt::l a4 '1Wa5t 14.i.d2 '1Wc7 1 5 .i.c3 2"1h7oo

13 ...hxg5!N This clever move is an important improve­ ment over 1 3 ... 2"1h7, 011 - Stohl, Manila (ol) 1 992, at which point 1 4.h4N would have brought White some advantage.

14.lLla4 14. lt::ld 5? cxd5 1 5 .hl8 dxe4+ is certainly not what White wants. 1 4.fXg5 is possible, although this would constitute something of a moral victory for Black. Play may continue 1 4 . . . lt::le 5 (or 1 4 . . .i.e7 1 5 .h4 lt::le 5 1 6.'1Wg2 i.b7=) 1 5.'1Wg3 i.g7 1 6.i.e2 c5 with a promising position and impressive central control for Black.

16 ...�h5 17.i.xh8 �xhSii; With a pawn for the exchange, two powerful bishops and a healthy mass of central pawns, Black has every reason to feel satisfied.

C2) s.lLlb3 �c7

14...�a5t 15.i.c3 The alternative is 1 5 .b4 '1Wxa4 1 6.hl8 a5 !? (If Black is happy with a draw he can settle for 1 6 . . . gxf4 1 7.'1Wxf4 '1Wxc2 1 8J'k1 '1Wb3 1 9.i.g2 i.b7 20.2"1c3 '1Wb 1 t 2 1 .!"1cl '1Wd3 White has nothing better than 22.2"1c3 '1Wb 1 t repeating

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Chapter 1 2 - 6.f4 Black is happy to "waste" a tempo with the queen, now that the enemy knight has retreated from its active position in the centre.

9.g4 This is the most important move, although White can also try to develop an initiative based on piece play. The most direct way of doing so would be: 9.i,d3 b5 1 0.0-0 i,b7 1 l .i,d2 ttJbd7 1 2.Ei:ae1 i,e7 1 2 ... g6 is a perfectly satisfactory alternative. The fianchetto set-up will bolster the kingside, reducing the likelihood of a successful attack from White.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

20 1

1 5 ... dxc5 1 6.e5 ttJg4 1 7.i,e4 0-0-0 Black had a nice position in Romanov Kurnosov, Chelyabinsk 2007. White can also opt for a similar set-up after first restraining his opponent's queenside expansion: 9.a4 b6 Black settles for a more modest queenside fianchetto. Apart from that, his set-up will be more or less the same as in the previous note. 1 0.i,d3 i,b7 1 1 .0-0 l2Jbd7 12.Wg3 1 2.ttJd4?! does not make much of an impression, and after 1 2 . . .g6 1 3.Wh3 ttJc5 14.i,d2 i,g7 1 5.Ei:ae1 0-0 Black's position was already more comfortable in Cladouras - Shabalov, Gausdal 1 99 1 . Another possibility is 1 2.i,d2 g6 13.Wh3 i,g7 14.Ei:ae1 0-0 1 5.f5 Ei:ae8 1 6.i,g5, Nunn - Stohl, Novi Sad 1 990.

h

1 3.Wh3 Another game continued 1 3 .Wg3 g6 14.a3 0-0 1 5.f5 ttJe5 16.fxe6 fxe6 1 7.ttJd4 i,c8 1 8.tLlf3 (Perhaps White should have preferred 1 8 .i,h6N, after which 1 8 . . . Ei:f7 is about equal.) 18 ... ttJh5! 1 9.Wh3 ttJf4 20.i,xf4 Ei:xf4+ Goloshchapov - Kobalia, Ekaterinburg 1 999. Having exchanged the important bishop for a knight, White is destined to suffer on the dark squares. 1 3 ... h5!? Here we see an interesting plan by which Black decides to forgo short castling altogether. 14.c;t>h1 ttJc5 1 5 .ttJxc5 1 5 .f5N could be met by 1 5 . . . b4 1 6.ttJd 1 e5, with equal chances.

a

b

c

d

e

At this point Black should have played 1 6 . . . exf5N 1 7.exf5 and now either 1 7 . . . Ei:e5!? or 1 7. . . Ei:xe 1 1 8.Ei:xe l ttJe5 would have kept a fair share of the chances for Black. 12 ... g6 1 3.i,e3!? White tried 1 3 .i,d2 i,g7 14.Ei:ae 1 0-0 1 5.Wh4, in Adams - Cu. Hansen, Groningen 1 995. Now my preference would be 1 5 ... Ei:ae8N, anticipating the f5-advance with a solid, healthy position. 1 3 ...i,e7

202

Open Systems

This is the only move I found on the database, although I do not see anything wrong with 1 3 . . .ig7 either. 14.Ei:ad1 Black should consider his options carefully here.

a

b

c

d

e

Continuing development, while renewing the threat to the e-pawn. The position is balanced, with chances for both sides.

9 b5 ...

f

14 . . . lt:lc5! In view of White's decision to develop his bishop and rook on e3 and d 1 respectively, it looks logical for Black to threaten the now slightly vulnerable e-pawn. I checked a few alternatives, but was not completely happy with any of them: 14 . . . 0-0N is well met by 1 5 .f5! lt:le5 1 6 .ih6 Ei:fe8 17.fXe6 fXe6 1 8.'Wh3 Wfd?:t Black is somewhat uncomfortable due to the weakness of e6. 14 . . . h5!?N is interesting and somewhat thematic for the Najdorf. Play might continue 1 5 .id4 e5 1 6.ie3 h4 1 7.'Wf3 exf4 Black intends to follow with . . . lt:le5, when the well-placed knight will be an important asset. Nevertheless I do not fully trust the black position due to the continuing uncertainty regarding the safety of his king. 1 5.id4 This position was reached in Vehi Bach - Korneev, Ortiguera 2003. Black opted for long castling, which I do not find fully convincing. Instead I suggest the straightforward: 1 5 . . . 0-0N

C21) IO.g5 h4!? This daring counterattack is what gives the present variation a truly distinct character compared with the main line. It should be mentioned that there is nothing much wrong with the calmer alternative: 1 0 . . . lt:lfd7 1 l .ie3 1 l .id3 ib7 transposes to line C22 below, but White sometimes tries to do without the bishop on d3. The main alternative is 1 l .a3, when 1 1 . ..lt:lc6 reached line C 1 1 2 above, via the move order 8.a3 lt:lc6 9.lt:lb3 We? 1 0.g4 b5 1 l .g5 lt:ld7. 1 l . .. b4 1 2.lt:le2 ib7 1 3 .0-0-0 lt:lc6 1 4.lt:led4 lt:lxd4 Another possibility is 1 4 . . .ie7!?N 1 5 .lt:lxc6 ixc6 1 6.id3 0-0, followed by a standard race of attacks on opposite flanks.

Chapter 1 2 - 6.f4 1 5 .i.xd4 e5 1 6 .�e3 exf4 1 7 .i.xf4 tLle5 1 8 .�xe5 dxe5 1 9 .�h3 �d6 Thanks to his bishop pair only Black could dream about an advantage in Almasi - Sax, Budapest 1 99 5 .

White must certainly avoid 1 1 .tLl d 1 ? ( 1 1 .tLle2? would meet with a similar fate) l l . . .tLlxe4! which occurred in Grubbs - Woods, Dallas 2000. The main alternative is 1 l .gxf6 bxc3 1 2.bxc3 ( 1 2.Wxc3 is also playable: 1 2 ... Wxc3t 1 3.bxc3 gxf6 1 4.l"i:gl was seen in Bogie - Millar corr. 2000, and here I suggest 14 . . . tLlc6N 1 5 .�e3 l"i:b8 with chances for both sides.) 1 2 . . .gxf6 1 3 .l"i:g1 �b7 1 4.c4 t2Jd7 1 5 .�b2 This position was reached in J. Polgar Ljubojevic, Monte Carlo (blind) 1 995. At this point it looks logical for Black to continue 1 5 . . . l"i:b8N 1 6.0-0-0 a5 with chances for both sides.

l l . axb5 12.gxf6 gxf6 .

.

Black has a risky, but perhaps playable alternative at his disposal: 1 2 . . .�d7!?

203

This has only been tried once to my knowledge. Black lost the game in question but the opening left numerous questions unanswered.

13.fxg7?! It looks wrong to facilitate Black's development for the sake of a mere pawn. 1 3 .l"i:g1 N is a sensible alternative, although I doubt that Black has much to fear after 1 3 . . . gxf6, for instance 1 4.�d3 tLlc6 1 5 .�e3 Wb7 1 6 .Wh5 tLla5 with approximate equality. More dangerous is 1 3.f5!N which was recommended by Sutovsky after the game. His analysis continued 1 3 . . . gxf6 1 4.fxe6 fxe6 1 5 .l"i:g1 �e7 1 6.l"i:g7 with dangerous compensation for White. 1 3 . . .hg7 1 4.l"i:g1 �f6 1 5 .e5 �c6 1 6 .Wh5 1 6.�xb5 is also less than ideal after 1 6 . . . dxe5 1 7.c4 bxc3 1 8.Wxc3 Wb6 1 9.hc6t tLlxc6 20.�e3 Wb4+ White will have to defend. 16 ... dxe5 1 7.f5 exf5 1 8.�g5 1 8.Wxf5 �h4t 1 9.cj;Jd1 tLld7 20.�e3 t2Jf6+ 1 8 . . . We7 1 9.0-0-0 This was Sutovsky - Ilincic, Neum 2004, and now Black should have played: 1 9 . . . l2Jd7!N Sutovsky mentioned this in his annotations. The position is highly complex, but overall it seems to me that Black is doing well thanks to his well coordinated cluster of pieces in the centre. Overall 1 2 . . .�d7!? looks to be worth

Open Systems

204

considering although I hasten to remind the reader that the most critical challenge may well lie in the notes to move 1 3 above.

After the more natural 1 6.i.d3 Black keeps a fair share of the chances with 1 6 . . . t2le5 1 7.i.e3 l2lxd3t 1 8.cxd3 'Wa600•

13. i.x h5t This natural move has been the most popular, although in Timman - Tal, Hilversum 1 988, White deviated with 1 3 .t2ld4, after which I think Black's best answer would have been 1 3 . . l::l . g8N, taking the open file immediately. A logical continuation would be 1 4.i.e3 i.d7 1 5J'%g1 l::lx g1 1 6.hg1 'Wb7 with equal play.

16. . .bxc3 17.a4 This was White's idea - he stabilizes the bishop on b5 and hopes to open lines for his attack.

13. . . ll:Jd7 14. £5

8 ,� m.t•u •- �� r"': � �" " 7 ���!�A�£ 6 m ;t� , ;t� �

" "ti� � l�" ��"�� �� ��� %?'"]':'����� 3 -����-�®"' 2 %�J����;/[00 JlJ% 1 �� � � �fi M 5 �

4

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

14. . . Wfb6 In a later game the same player tried to "improve" with 1 4 . . . �e7?, but after 1 5 .i.xd7 hd7 1 6.fXe6 fXe6 1 7.l::\fl Black's position was already beyond saving in ] . Polgar - Van Wely, Amsterdam 1 99 5 . 15. 'We2 1 5 .fXe6 is not dangerous after 15 ... 'Wxb5 1 6.exd7t hd7 17.l::lg 1 'We5, when Black's control over the dark squares makes up for his dubious pawn structure. 15. . Jl:b8 16.c4!? Looks like a surprising choice, but does not change the overall evaluation of the position.

I7. . . L6! Black should not be overly concerned with material, and sensibly decides to exchange a pair of pieces while activating his queen. Obviously giving up a bishop for a knight carries certain risks, but overall this should not harm Black's position too much. 18. ha6 Wfx h3 19. i.h5 rlle7 20.fxe6 fxe6.., We have been following the game Gipslis Van Wely, Gausdal 1 992. The position remains roughly equal but also complex and difficult for both sides, with neither king feeling completely safe. Overall Black seems to be holding his own in the complications arising after 1 O.g5 b4!?. Depending on the reader's personal tastes, he can of course settle for the straightforward 1 0 . . . l2lfd7, with a solid position and a possible transposition to one of the other lines considered elsewhere in this chapter.

C22) IO. i.d3 This also leads to double-edged posltlons, although they will usually be of a more stable nature than those encountered in the previous section.

IO. . . i.h7 11.g5ll:Jfd7 Here there is nothing much to be gained from 1 1 . ..b4, as White can j ust play 1 2 .t2le2 if he wishes.

Chapter 1 2 - 6.f4

8 .�- a • m �� ,� 7 �-I-��--- ,�.6 • m - · - - -­ s4 a• a R ·w- �a alD - %�

�-CZJ��avm � d�m ·m ·w� �- � �-;; �--- -% _

3 2 1

_

a ----�

b

_

g h ��� d � f �M, c

e

12. i.e3 This natural move has been the most common, although White has some other ways to develop his attack. The bishop can also take a shorter step with: 1 2.J.d2 t2lc5 13.t2le2 1 3.0-0-0 f2lxd3t 1 4.'1Wxd3 f2ld7 1 5 .l'l:he1 0-0-0 was fine for Black in Yudasin J. Polgar, Groningen 1 993. The more direct 1 3.f5 is well met by 13 . . . b4 14.t2ld1 exf5 1 5 .'1Wxf5 t2lbd7 1 6.J.xb4 White may as well take the pawn, otherwise the arrival ofthe knight on e5 will ensure Black of a nice position with no material investment. 1 6 ... g6 Here I tried to improve White's play with 1 7.'1Wf2!?N (After 1 7.'1Wf4 t2le5 1 8.'1We3 h6! Black began to take over the initiative in Wahls - Hracek, Germany 1 997.) 17 . . . t2lxe4 1 8 .J.xe4 he4 1 9.Ei:fl f2le5 20.t2lc3 t2lf3t 2 I .i>d1 d5 22.'1We3 J.xb4 23.f2lxe4 0-0-0 24.t2lf6 f2lxh2oo The situation is somewhat unclear, although the position of the white king on d1 should prevent the first player from achieving much. 1 3 ... t2lc6 14.t2lxc5 dxc5 1 5 .c3 This looks better than 1 5.c4 'Wb6 1 6.a4?! bxc4 1 7.hc4 'Wxb2 1 8.J.c3 'Wb6 when White had no real compensation in Popovych - Maksimenko, Lvov 1 999. 1 5 ... 0-0-0

205

1 5 .. .'®a5 !?N would prevent long castling. 16.0-0-0 h6 1 7.J.c2 hxg5 1 8 .fxg5 t2le5 1 9.'1Wf2 This position was reached in Sryblo Urbanek, corr. 1 998. Now I think Black should have played: 1 9 . . .J.d6N 20.J.f4 f6 Reinforcing the powerful knight on e5, with at least equal chances. Another option is to prepare f5 without completing development, although this might prove risky for the first player as well: 12.'1Wh3 g6 1 3.EI:fl 1 3 .J.e3 b4 14.t2le2 J.g7 1 5 .0-0-0 was Bernhard - Woischke, e-mail 2000, and now I like 1 5 ... h6!N 1 6.gxh6 EI:xh6 1 7. '\Wg2 f2lf6 Without the g5 pawn, White's position is losing its bite. The text move leads to immense complications, but should not be more dangerous than many other lines. 13 . . .J.g7 1 3 ... b4 1 4.t2le2 f2lc6 1 5 .f5 gxf5 1 6.exf5 e5 1 7.f6 was a bit uncomfortable for Black in Ulibin - Khurtsidze, Oakham 1 992. 14.f5 exf5 1 5 .exf5 hc3t!? It is a bit counter-intuitive to give up the 'Dragon' bishop, but it is better than for it to be shut out. 1 5 . . . 0-0 Happened in two games of a very young Wesley So as White in 2006. Here 1 6.f6!N± would have been a natural improvement. The idea of EI:f4-h4 is quite annoying. 1 6.bxc3

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Open Systems

206

1 6 . . . 0-0!N 1 6 . . . ttJe5 17.fxg6 fxg6 occurred in Heinemann - P.H. Nielsen, Germany 2007. Here White could have improved with 1 8.i.e2!N ttJbc6 1 9.i.a3± and it is not so easy for Black to solve his problems. For example: 1 9 . . . l"i:d8 20.0-0-0 i.c8 2 1 .'1Wg3 i.f5 22.l"i:xf5! gxf5 23.i.h5t fs 24.lt:Jd4� 17.f6 1 7.'1Wh6 '1Wxc3t 1 8 .i.d2 l"i:e8t 1 9.d1 '1Wg7+ does not look dangerous for Black at all. 1 7 . . . h5! This might look risky, but it is not so easy for White to break through; shortly Black's pieces will become very active. 1 8.gxh6! 1 8.i.e3 '1Wxc3t 1 9.i.d2 '�WeSt 20.f2 ttJc5+ 1 8 . . . ttJxf6 1 9.i.b2 1 9.i.e3 '1Wxc3t 20.f2 i.c8 2 1 .'1Wf3 ttJg4t 22. g1 ctJxe3 23. '1Wxe3 lt:Jd?+ 1 9 . . . l"i:e8t 20.d1 ttJbd700 Black is looking for counterplay in the centre, with . . . l"i:e5-h5 being one important resource.

12...c!tlc6 13.0-0-0

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

13 ...b4! Several other moves have been played, but now that White has committed himself to long castling, I see no reason for Black to delay his assault.

14.c!tle2 i.e7 IS.bl aS Black continues his aggressive policy.

16.c!tlbd4 I also checked 1 6.tt:Jed4 a4 1 7.ttJb5, and found: 1 7 . . . '\WbS 1 8.lt:Jd2 0-0 1 9.'1Wh3 (or 1 9.ttJc4 b3+) 1 9 . . . ttJc5 20.i.xc5 dxc5+ The present position was reached in Dashko - Weetik, Belorechensk 2007. At this point I suggest a slight improvement for Black:

16...c!tlc5!N By reinforcing the e6-pawn, Black takes the sting out of any f5 ideas. Naturally the text move is also played with some active intentions as well as defensive ones. A possible continuation might be:

17.c!tlb5 ¥9b8 18.hc5!? dxc5 19.h4 a4 20.h5 0-0 With unclear roughly balanced play.

Conclusion In the current chapter White plays with a grand plan, which demands an equally well­ considered response from the defender. The first major variation of7 .i.d3 ttJbd7 should not hold too many dangers for the second player, although he should keep an eye on possible transpositions to other lines. We also saw that Black is holding his own in variation B with 7.i.e3 b5, despite the fact that he is making a lot of pawn moves in the early part of the game. Over time, the resilience of Black's set up contributed to the relative loss of White's interest in that system. Matters are somewhat more complicated in variation C with 7.'1Wf3 '1Wb6, when the second player often has to demonstrate some ingenuity to maintain the balance. The scope for creative players is considerable, and both sides can use their imagination and attacking skill to showcase the Sicilian Defence at its dynamic best.

Open Systems The Rock 6.le2

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

-

Variation Index l.e4 c5 2.ltlf3d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.ltlxd4ltlf6 s.ltl c3a6 6.i.e2e6 7. 0-0i.e7 8.f4 0-0 N����o AI) 10.i.e3 b5 All) ll.a3 A12) ll.i.f3 A13) ll.e5dxe5 12.fxe5ltlfd7 A131) 13.i.d3 A132) 13.i.f4 Al33) 13.i.f3 A2) lO.� el b5 1I.i.f3 i.b7 12.e5ltle8 A21) 13.h b7 A22) 13.�g3 A23) 13.£5 B) 9.a4ltlc6 10.i.e3 �c7 ll.�hl:Be8! Bl) 12.a5!?ltlxa5 13.e5!dxe5 14.fxe5�xeS lS.i.£4�c5 16.ltl a4�a7 Bll) 17.i. c7 B12) 17.i.e3 B2) 12.i.gli.d7 B21) 13.ltl b3 B22) 13.�d3 B3) 12.i.d3 B4) 12.� elltlxd4 13.i.xd4 e5 B41) 14.fxe5 B42) 14.i.e3 BS) 12.�d2i.d7 B51) 13.:Badl B52) 13.ltl b3 ����

B7) 12.i.f3ltla5!? B71) 13.� el B72) 13.i.gl B73) 13.g4i.£8 B731) 14.i.g2 B732) 14.g5

�

209 209 210 211 211 212 213 215 216 217 217 219 220 220 221 223 224 225 226 228 228 229 232 233 234 m

240 242 244 245 246 247

h

208

Open Systems

The Najdorf and Scheveningen set-ups have always been closely linked. Two of White's most popular and dangerous attacking systems against the Najdorf, 6 ..ic4 and 6 ..ig5, are almost universally met by the response 6 . . . e6, while the alternatives 6 ..ie2 and 6 ..ie3 can be met equally well by either move of the e-pawn. Is one of these moves really "better" than the other? Both options have their merits, and we could spend a long time debating the question without reaching any kind of ultimate truth. In this chapter I have chosen to focus on the seemingly more modest 6 . . . e6, for two reasons. First, I am aware that 6 . . . e5 is widely seen as the more traditional response for the Najdorf system, so I find it more interesting to focus on the option that has hitherto received less attention in the literature. And more importantly, it is the option with which I have the most personal experience and deeper understanding. Our basic starting position arises after the following moves:

l.e4 c5 V�jf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lt:Jxd4 ftJf6 5.lt:Jc3 a6 6..te2 e6 7.0-0 .te7 8.f4 0-0

no value in analysing variation after variation, transposition after transposition and so on. A careful study of the main lines presented here should arm the reader with all the knowhow and understanding he needs to deal with most ofWhite's more exotic possibilities. At this point we will divide the material into two major branches, based on whether or not White chooses to allow . . . b5. Thus we will consider A) 9. hl and B) 9.a4.

A) 9.hl White normally includes this prophylactic measure in his plans over the next few moves. I should add that there are numerous possible move orders and transpositions, and it would be counterproductive to try and analyse every last one of them. Instead, by studying the most important lines in detail, the reader should learn enough about the position to be able to deal with most deviations. I will briefly mention a few possible lines in which White tries to save time by postponing or omitting the move hi. 9 ..ie3 Wffc7 lO ..if3 ctJc6 l l .Wffe l (An altogether different direction is l l .ctJxc6 bxc6 12.ctJa4 .ib7 1 3.c4 c5 14.Wic2 lt:Jd7 1 5 .b3 !"lacS 1 6.:8adl ctJb8 1 7.Wif2 :8fd8 1 8.g3 ic6 1 9.ctJc3 .if6 20.C2Je2 .ib7 2 l .g4 g6 22.g5 .ig7 23.:8d2 ctJc6 24.h4 a5 25.h5 a4 Black had enough counterplay in Adams - Van Wely, London 2009.) l l . . .ctJxd4 1 2 .ixd4 e5

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

209

Chapter 1 3 - 6.ie2 1 3 .i.e3 ( 1 3.fxe5 dxe5 1 4.'1Wg3 ic5! exploits the position of White's king.) 1 3 . . . exf4 ( 1 3 . . . b5 is also quite alright) 1 4.ixf4 ie6 1 5 .�hl ctJd7 with a solid position, as seen in several games. The situation bears a close resemblance to line B42 below.

Black has achieved a harmonious set-up and is ready to strike at the enemy centre with a timely . . . ClJc5.

9...fic7 Here the principal choices are AI) lO.ie3 and A2) IO.fiei, remembering of course that 1 0.a4 will be considered under line B later in the chapter.

AI) IO.ie3 b5 Black can be grateful for the chance to play this useful move. The light-squared bishop will soon appear on the long diagonal facing the white king, and the b-pawn is already threatening to drive the enemy knight away from c3.

a

I3.fiei

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Another possible continuation is 1 3. '1Wf3 ctJc5 14.�ael �ac8 1 5 .id2 ( 1 5 .CLlb3 �fd8 is also comfortable for Black) 1 5 . . . d5! The central advance of the d-pawn should always by considered carefully in Sicilian positions. Here it is justified as White will be virtually forced to exchange the knight on e4, relinquishing the bishop pair and improving the scope of Black's pieces. 1 6.e5 ctJfe4 1 7.ixe4 ctJxe4 1 8.CLlxe4 dxe4 1 9. '\Wg3 Grosar - Mikhalchishin, Maribor 2000. 1 9 . . .'\Wd8!N 20.'1We3 �c4 2 l .i.c3 ic5 22.�d 1 '1Wc7+ The Black pieces are extremely active.

13 J'Ue8 .•

b

a

c

d

e

f

g

h

White can now choose between preventing . . . b4 directly with All) l l .a3, anticipating it with Al2) l l.if3, or commencing his own attack with the aggressive Al3) l l.e5.

Al l) l l .a3 ib7 12.id3 1 2.if3 reaches line Al2 below.

12 .liJbd7 •.

Also promising is 1 3 . . . ClJc5 14.ig1 g6 1 5 .b4 ctJxd3 1 6 .cxd3 �fe8 1 7 .ctJ b3 �ac8 1 8 .�cl '\Wd7+ Black has managed to exchange his knight for the enemy bishop without paying any price, Zherebukh - Shomoev, Plovdiv 2008.

14.fig3 tlJc5 I5.e5 tiJfe4 I6.tlJxe4 tlJxe4 17.fif3 tlJc5 This position was reached in Aagaard Shipov, Gistrup 1 997. Here I think White should have tried:

210

Open Systems

8 %:i -�/-� /-�·!�-� 7 � .t� � m1.r�1. I.

� ""/.-�,��� - �--/.�� � s���f•'D �� ,,� , D � 3 � � IDVD 2 'D!&3B�D 1 �� '- --�% - - �� �\� � %�� �6

4

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

18.'�g3N In the game he tried a spirited, but unsound sacrifice: 1 8.i.xh7t? �xh7 1 9.�h5t �g8 20.f5 dxe5 (20 . . .i.f8!N would have been even stronger) 2 1 .fXe6 i.f6 22.lhf6 fXe6 and White did not have enough compensation.

e5 16 .th6 ltle8 17.ltlb3 •

17.ctJde2 @h8 1 8 .i.g5 i.xg5 1 9.�xg5 ctJf6 20.ctJg3 �b6 2 1 .!"1ad1 2"1fd8 was comfortable for Black in Ayyar - Tarjan, Saratoga Springs 1 980. I also checked the principled, but insufficient attacking attempt: 1 7.f6?!N i.xf6 1 8 .ctJf5 �h8 1 9 .i.d2 �d8+ Black will defend carefully and tame White's attack.

17 tLla4! ..•

It is quite common in this variation for Black to accept doubled a-pawns in order to advance his queenside initiative, and in the present position the idea works perfectly.

18 ... ltlxd3 19.cxd3 E!ec8 20J�acl Wl'ds; The diagonal a8-h1 will become a source of headache for White.

Al2) I I ..tf3 .th7

18 ...bxa4 19.ltld2 �h8 20..ig5 hg5 2I.Wfxg5 Wfb6+ 12.a3 1 2.e5 dxe5 1 3.fXe5 '2Jfd7 reaches line A133 below.

12 ltlbd7 13.Wfel E!ac8 I4.Wfg3 ltlc5 15.f5 •..

White is under heavy pressure on the queenside. Finally we come to White's most aggressive option on move 1 1 .

21 1

Chapter 1 3 - 6.i.e2

Al3) l l .e5 dxe5 12.fxe5 llJfd7 In the event of 1 2 . . .'1Wxe5? 1 3.�f4 �c5 1 4.�f3 tt'ld5 1 5.tt'lxe6! he6 1 6.tt'lxd5 �xd5 1 7.�xd5± White would be overjoyed after his small witty combination.

Now we face a further division between

Al31) 13.i.d3, A132) 13.i.f4 and Al33) 13.i.f3. 1 3.tt'lf5?! The knight sacrifice is very tempting, but Black can parry it with a clever concept of his own. 1 3 . . . exf5 14.tt'ld5 14.�f3 tt'lc6 1 5 .ctJd5 �b8 1 6.tt'lxe7t tt'lxe7+ 14 . . .�xe5! 1 5 .�f4 �e6

1 6.�f3 1 6.l2Jxe7t �xe7 1 7.�f3 :§:a? 1 8.�d4 ctJc5 19 .�xb8 :§:d?+ 1 6 . . .�d8 1 7.:§:e 1 �g6 1 8.�h5 In the event of 1 8 .�c7, Klundt - Budde, Germany 1 982, Black should play 1 8 . . .ltJc6N with a winning position. 1 8 . . . �c6 1 9.�f3 :§:a? 20.:§:e3 20.ctJe7t he? 2 l .�xc6 tt'lxc6+ Black's three pieces clearly outclass the white queen. 20 . . . g5 !? 20 ... a5!?N also looks good, but Black decides to force the issue immediately. 2 l .ctJe7t �xe7 22.�xc6 tt'lxc6 23.:§:g3 f6 24.�d5t i>h8 25.:§:xg5? White had to play 25 .�xc6, although 25 . . . gxf4 should win for Black eventually as his minor pieces will coordinate beautifully. 25 . . . fxg5 26.�xc6 gxf4 0-1 Bentancurt - Lozano Kafure, Argentina 2000.

Al31) 13.i.d3 This aggressive move forces Black to proceed with caution, as there are numerous sacrifices in the air.

Open Systems

212

13 ... tt:lxe5N does not appear to have been tried, probably with good reason as White develops a dangerous initiative after 1 4.iJ4 tt:lbd7 1 5 .Wh5 g6 1 6.Wh3 i.f6 1 7.tt:le4 i.g7 1 8.ttJg5, intending to meet both 1 8 ... h6 and 1 8 . . . h5 with 1 9 .hg6.

14.hh7t!? In the following game White did not achieve much with a more patient build-up. 1 4.Wf3 i.b7 1 5 .Wg3 tt:lbd7 1 6.i.f4 b4 17.tt:lce2 �h8 1 8.ttJf3 tt:lxd3 1 9.cxd3 Aveskulov - Levin, Sochi 2008. Now it looks promising to play 1 9 . . .i.xf3!?N (If Black prefers to hang on to the bishop pair, then 1 9 . . . i.d5N also looks good for him.) 20.Wxf3 (20J''\xf3 Wc2!) 20 . . . tt:lxe5 2 1 . Wg3 f6+ Black keeps an extra pawn for the time being, as 22.d4? runs into 22 . . .Wc4.

21..ix£8 Wfxf8 22.'11Nxb5 tlJd7i Black's bishop is worth more than three pawns.

A132) 13.i.f4 White takes a moment to defend the e-pawn, and hopes to make tactical use ofthe opposition of bishop and queen.

14 ... �xh7 15.'11Nh5t �g8 16JU'3 This position was reached in Petraitis Chacon, e-mail 2003. Now it is important for Black to defend in the right way:

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

13...i.b7 14.i.d3 1 4 .i.f3 reaches line A 1 33 below.

14 tlJc5 1 5.'11Ng4 .•.

White is making no secrets about his ambitions to attack the enemy king, which does not appear to be so well defended.

1 5.. tt:lc6 .

a

16 f5!N

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

.••

Several other moves have been tried here. For instance I consider 1 5 . . . tt:lbd7 to be quite playable, but my overall preference is for the text move.

16.t1Jf3

17.exf6 i.x£6 18.t1Jdxb5! axb5 19.hc5 Wff7! 20J'\xf6! '!Wx£6!

After 1 6.ttJd5 ? exd5 the game Koch Hoffmann, e-mail 2007, was agreed drawn. However, it seems to me that White will have a hard time justifYing his material investment after 1 7.e6 Wd8 1 8.ttJf5 tt:lxe6.

Less convincing is 20 . . .Wxh5?! 2 1 .:1'1xf8t �h7 22.Ei:xc8.

Another game

Seizing some space. Now the critical continuation looks to be:

continued

1 6. tt:le4

tt:lxd3

213

Chapter 1 3 - 6.ibe2 1 7.'Llxc6 'Llxf4 1 8.'Llxe7t Vfixe7 1 9.Ei:xf4 �xe4 20.Ei:xe4 Rodriguez Guerrero - Castellanos Rodriguez, Mislata 2007. Black has equalized easily, and now after 20 . . . Ei:ad8N it is White who would have to be slightly careful. Finally, I also analysed the following untested continuation: 1 6.'Llxc6 hc6 1 7.Ei:ae1 ci>h8 1 8.Ei:e3 'Llxd3 The bishop was too dangerous as can be seen in the line: 1 8 . . . b4? 1 9 .hh7t! ci>xh7 20.Vfih5t! ci>g8 2 1 .�h6! f5 (2 l . . .g6 22.Ei:g3+-) 22.�xg7 �g5 23.Vfih8t �f7 24.�xf8 and White wins. 1 9.Ei:g3!? 1 9.cxd3 f5 20.exf6 Ei:xf6 2 l .Ei:xe6 Vfic8 22.Ei:xf6 Wxg4 23.Ei:xc6 Vfid7 24.Ei:c7 Vfixd3+ Black's advantage is defined by his powerful queen. Also 1 9.Ei:xd3 b4 20.Ei:g3 g6 is pleasant for Black.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

and a compact pawn structure, his chances should be evaluated as somewhat higher.

16 tlJxd3 17.cxd3 h8 29.c3 'ilb3 30.ii.e3 �f8 3 l .ii.f3 d5+ Kaplan - Konguvel, Andorra 2006.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

20 . . . 'ilc5 20 ... �bc8 2 l .�d3 'ilb4 22.�h3 ii.g7 was played in the famous and decisive 24th game in the 1 98 5 Karpov - Kasparov World Championship match. In the event of 23.f5! Karpov might have set himself on the path to retain his title, but history took another turn. 2 l .'ilxc5 bxc5 22.�d3 22.f5 might be more challenging, but Black is still holding his own after 22 . . . 'ild4 (22 . . . 'ile5N also looks absolutely fine) 23.f6 Vfia5 24.�d3 e500 Rehder - Dietrich, e-mail 2003. 22 . . . 'ild4 23.�h3 23.ii.e3 ii.g7 24.1lfid2 d5+ Gislason Chmelik, corr. 1 990. 23 . . .1lfie7 24.'ild 1 24.ii.e3 ii.g7 25.'ild1 f5 !+ Stern-Glaser, corr. 1 987. 24 . . . f5 25.gxf6 1lfixf6 26.'ile3 ii.g7 27.'ilg4 Vffe7

18.lLlxa5 The spectre of a knight on c4 could be troubling for the first player, although he can also prepare for it with: 1 8.Vfif2!? 'ilc4 1 9.ii.cl ii.f8 Now there might follow an amusing dance between the opposing knights: 20.'ild4 'ila5 2 l .f5 'ile5 22.'ilce2 'ilac6 and Black kept a solid position in Jansa - Ftacnik, Prague 1 989.

18...bxa5 The doubled a-pawns are not really weak in anything other than a theoretical sense, but the open b-file is of real concern to White.

19.b3 .ib7 Black switches his focus to the c-pawn. Because both files are open, White will always have at least one weakness on the queenside.

20.lLle2 gbc8 21.c4 lLlc5 22.hc5 If White gives up his dark-squared bishop then Black must have done something right.

238

Open Systems

22.'1Wc2 g6 23.l2lc3 �b8 also looks comfortable for the second player. It is doubtful that White can tolerate the knight on c5 indefinitely.

his queenside pressure and the latent potential of his bishop pair.

22...Wfxc5

As usual, Black prevents the cramping a4-a5. White can choose between a wide variety of ideas, but none is particularly scary for the second player.

B6) 12.lLlb3 b6

23.lLlg3 Another game continued 23.�adl �b8 24.l2lg3 i.c6 25.�f3 �b6 26.f5 �eb8 (26 . . . g6!?N 27.f6 i.f8 intending . . . �eb8) 27.f6 i.f8 28.fxg7 i.xg7 29.1Wf4 i.e8 30.l2Jh5 '1We5 Black maintains equal chances, having survived the kingside assault and kept enough counterplay on the opposite flank, Timofeev Shomoev, Warsaw 2005.

23 i.ffi 24J::!:ael �b8 25.�e3 i.c6 26.lLlh5 •••

We have been following the game Radjabov - Svidler, Monte Carlo (rapid) 2007. At this point I suggest a modest improvement:

26 �b7N •..

With the simple idea to double on the b-file. White has no immediate threats on the kingside, so a possible continuation might be:

27.�d3 �eb8 28.Wfa2 i.e?:j: Black should be able to weather any storm on the kingside, especially with the white queen in such an awkward position. Overall I rate Black's chances as slightly higher due to

a

13 .tf3

c

d

e

f

g

h

.

Once again, we will look at some of the more interesting of the many alternatives. 1 3 .i.d3 �b8 1 4.1Wf3 l2lb4 1 5 .�acl i.b7 1 6.1Wh3 e5 1 7.fxe5 dxe5 1 8.'1Wg3 Lopez Martinez Korneev, Elgoibar 2005. 1 8 . . . �bd8!N 1 9.i.d4 l2lh5 20.'1Wxe5 '1Wxe5 2 l .i.xe5 l2lxd3 22.cxd3 �xd3+ Black's two bishops give him the better chances. 1 3.�f3!? is a slightly unorthodox move which nevertheless deserves attention. 1 3 . . .i.b7 1 4.�h3 l2Jb4 1 5.i.f3 g6 1 6.�cl l2ld7 1 7.'1Wd2 �ac8 Both players are manoeuvring in sensible fashion, without disturbing the equilibrium. 1 8 .l2ld4 l2lc6 1 9.�dl l2la5 20.'1Wf2 lt:lc4 2 l .i.cl e5 22.ctJde2 exf4 23.ctJxf4 lt:lce5 Meijers - Rytshagov, Istanbul 2003. This whole sequence was not forced, but it both sides played logically and consistently. In the

239

Chapter 1 3 - 6.�e2 final position the chances are equal, as the vulnerability of the c2-pawn is preventing White from occupying the desired d5-square with the knight.

b4 20.lt:Jcb5 1Wc5 2 l .b3 CtJa5 22.CtJxd6 .kixd6 23.e5 .lie? 24.exf6 .kixf6 25 ..kie3 1Wc7= Without the d6-pawn Black's position was fairly easy to defend in Barua - Teplitsky, Yerevan 1 996.

Finally there is 1 3.1We1 �b7 (also quite acceptable is 1 3 . ..lt:lb4 14.lt:Jd4 �b7 1 5 .�f3 Elac8 1 6.1Wg3 .kif8 1 7.Eif2 Klovans - Zoler, Schwarzach 2000, 1 7 . . . Eied8N 1 8 .Eie1 �h8 with approximate equality.) 14.1Wf2 lt:Jd7 1 5 .Eiad1 CtJb4 16 ..kig4 lt:Jc5 1 7.f5

a

14.'1We2

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

This position was reached in Klovans Lesiege, Cappelle la Grande 2002, and now after 1 7 ... e5N 1 8 ..kif3 Elad8, the position remains balanced and playable for both sides.

13 .ih7 ...

Black can also try the now familiar: 1 3 . . . Eib8!? 1 4.1We2 CtJa5! 1 5.Eiad1 1 5 .CtJxa5 bxa5 gives Black typical queenside pressure. 1 5.lt:Jd2 is well met by 1 5 ... d5! 1 6.exd5 (After 1 6.e5 lt:Jd7 the bishop on f3 and knight on d2 are less than ideally placed in this French-type structure.) 1 6 ...exd5 1 7.1Wf2 .kic5 1 8.hc5 1Wxc5 Already it was White who had to worry about equalizing in Smyslov - Kalegin, Elista 1 995. 1 5 ....kif8 The immediate 1 5 . . . lt:Jc4 1 6 ..kicl b5 should also be fine. 1 6.1Wf2 lt:Jc4 1 7 . .kicl b5 1 8.axb5 axb5 1 9.lt:Jd4

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White should not try to be too sophisticated in his manoeuvring, for instance: 1 4.Eif2 Elad8 1 5 .Eid2 lt:Jd7 1 6.CtJe2?! (Better was 1 6.1We2N, although Black still has no problems after 1 6. . . lt:Ja5 1 7.CtJxa5 bxa5 1 8.1Wf2.kic6=) 1 6. . . CtJc5 1 7.CtJbcl 1his was Nanu - Damljanovic, Sozina 2004, and now Black could have punished his opponent's strange handling of his pieces with: 1 7. . . lt:Ja5!N 1 8 ..kixc5 bxc5+

14 tL'ld7 ...

Black pre-empts any e4-e5 ideas and prepares to deploy the knight actively on the queenside.

15J�adl 1 5.g4 CtJc5 1 6.g5 .kif8 1 7 ..kig2 g6 1 8.1Wf2 Elad8 1 9.Eiad1 was seen in Thorhallsson - Stefansson, Selfoss 2003, and now after 1 9 . . ..kig7N Black pieces are ready to deal with any of his opponent's ideas.

15 ... tL'lc5 Black could also consider 1 5 . . . lt:Ja5!? - it is rarely a bad move in these positions.

240

Open Systems

16.�f2 i.f8

Here is a quick round-up of the alternatives:

The position remained roughly full of tension in Smyslov - Radulov, Leningrad 1 977, but Black certainly kept his fair share of the chances.

B7) 12.i.f3 The bishop's relocation to the a8-h1 diagonal has grown to be recognized as the main line in this critical Scheveningen position. The combination of support for the e4-pawn, pressure along the h 1 -a8 diagonal and preparation for the kingside attacking plan with g4 goes some way towards explaining its popularity.

1 3 ..if2 This is played with similar intentions to line B72 below, except that this time White hopes to find a role for the bishop on the e 1 -h4 diagonal. 1 3 .. .':t:ld7 1 4.�e 1 b6 1 5 .e5 .ib7 1 6.hb7 This position occurred in Adams Kempinski, Kerner 2007, and here I would suggest: 1 6 . . . WI'xb7N 8

7

6

5

4

3

2

��� :i ·�:g1 1Mfe 1 t)

242

Open Systems

25 . . . '\We1 26.CLlxg4 '\Wh4t 27.'1Wh3 (27.�g 1 ? '1Wxg4) 2 7. . .'\Wxe7 reaching a double-edged position in which any result is possible. 20.CLle4 �xe7 2 l .CLlg5 g6 Black should be able to withstand any kingside assault, and with a rook and three pawns for a knight, his chances are somewhat higher. 1 3 .'1Wd3 This has been tried by a few strong players, but the queen on d3 looks a bit clumsy, and she can easily fall under some piece attack. 1 3 . . . e5 Another reasonable continuation is 1 3 . . . CLlc4 1 4.ic1 e5 1 5 .CLlde2 exf4 1 6.CLlxf4 CLle5 1 7.'\Wd4 !e6 1 8.!e2 �ac8 when Black was holding his own in Karpov - Martinovic, Amsterdam 1 98 5 . 14.CLlde2 14.CLlf5 ixf5 1 5 .exf5 CLlc4 1 6.ic1 exf4 1 7.id5 ( 1 7.'\Wd4 �ac8 1 8.'1Wxf4 '1Wd7 1 9.�d1 id8!+ The bishop will improve its location, and Black has a splendid position.) 1 7 . . . CLle3 1 8.!xe3 fxe3 1 9.'1Wxe3 �ab8 20.'1Wd3 if8 2 l .�ael �e5 22.�xe5 dxe5= Due to the opposite-coloured bishops the chances were perfectly equal in Panchenko - Wojtkiewicz, Katowice 1 993. 1 4 . . .ie6 1 5 .b3

I want to show that Black is not obliged to release the central tension immediately. The only practical encounter continued 1 5 . . . exf4 1 6.CLlxf4 CLlc6 1 7.CLlcd5 Despite the knight jumping to d5 the position remains balanced and a draw was agreed in Amason - Wojtkiewicz, Reykjavik 1 994. 1 6.f5 id7 1 7.�fcl CLlc6 1 8 .CLld5 CLlxd5 1 9.'1Wxd5 g6= The defence is doing fine with well­ coordinated pieces. Having explored the assortment of minor lines, we will now move on to the three main ones.

B71) 13.V9el This is a thematic move for these positions.

15.lL'lde2

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 5 . . . �ac8!?N This is not necessarily an improvement, but

1 5 .fxe5 CLlxe5 ( 1 5 . . . dxe5 1 6.'1Wg3 �h8 is also quite playable, but it is always nice to have a piece outpost on e5, as well as keeping the rook on e8 happy. 1 6.'1Wg3 CLlxf3 17.'1Wxf3 1his was Kovacevic - Kempinski, Bled 2002, and now the most accurate sequence looks to be

Chapter 1 3 - 6.ie2 1 7 . . .ig4N 1 8.1M1'g3 1Mfc5! 1 9 .i.e3 We5 with a comfortable position for Black.

15 �c5! ...

The queen turns out to be surprisingly well-placed here. It should be mentioned that 1 5 . . . d5!? is a decent alternative, but I believe the text move to be strongest.

16.�g3 The alternatives are no better: 1 6 .tt'lg3 exf4 1 7.Ji.xf4 tt'lxb2 1 8.ie3 1Mfe5 1 9.i.e2 i.e6 (or 1 9 . . . d5!?N 20.i.f4 1Mfd4+) 20.tt'lf5 ii.xf5 2 1 .1'ixf5 1Mfe6 22.1=i:f4 i=i:ac8 23.i.d4 tt'lc4 24.1Mfg3 tt'le5+ Black keeps an extra pawn as well as the better structure, Fedorowicz - Amason, St Martin 1 992. 1 6.f5, Malinovsky - Grandelius, Olomouc 2009, is best met by 1 6 . . . d5!N 1 7.exd5 ( 1 7.tt'lg3 d4 1 8.tt'ld5 tt'lxd5 1 9.exd5 i.h4 20.i.e4 tt'ld6+) 1 7 ...ii.xf5 1 8 .'\Mfdl i=i:ad8+ It becomes obvious that White faces an uphill struggle for survival.

243

1 8.1=i:fl 1 8.exd5?! is not really playable due to 1 8 . . . e4 1 9.ii.xe4 i.c5 20.i.d3 ii.xf2 2 I .i.xc4 i.g4+. 1 8.fxe5 was tried in one game: 1 8 . . . tt'lxe5 1 9 .tt'lg3 tt'lxf3 20.1'ixf3 i.g4 2 1 .1=i:fl (2 1 .e5 tt'le4+) 2 1 . . .d4 22.tt'ldl This was Markin - Grandelius, Pardubice 2009. Black has several strong continuations here, but perhaps the simplest would have been 22 . . .i.xd l !?N 23.1'ixdl i.c5 24.1'ie l i.d6 when Black wins a pawn and, in all likelihood, the game. The main move was played in L.B. Hansen - Cu. Hansen, Gladsaxe 1 994. Black's most convincing reply would have been: 1 8 ...dxe4N 1 9 .tt'lxe4 tt'lg4! This energetic move maintains Black's initiative. 20.fxe5 tt'lgxe5+ It is obvious that the opening of the centre came for at a bad moment for White.

I6 id7 ...

1 6.fxe5 tt'lxe5 ( 1 6 . . . dxe5 is playable, but the text is more ambitious.) 1 7.tt'lf4 i.d7 1 8.b3 i=i:ac8+ Black's pressure along the c-file gave him the edge in Babaev - Kempinski, Batumi 2002. 1 6.1Mff2 1Mfxf2 1 7.1'ixf2 d5! After this powerful move White is already in trouble.

1 7.1'ib l is unimpressive, and after 1 7 . . . 1=i:ac8 1 8.1'idl b5 1 9 .axb5 axb5 20.fxe5 tt'lxe5+ White position was just a shadow of its usual self in Prasad - Kempinski, Biel 200 1 . a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

244

Open Systems

17.b3 lt:le3 1 8.ixe3 �xe3 19.fxe5 ( 1 9.f5 l'l:ac8 20.�el d5 2 1 .lt:lxd5 lt:lxd5 22.exd5 hf5 23.c3 id6+ Black's bishop pair was virtually a decisive asset in Jaracz - Kempinski, Polanica Zdroj 200 1 .) 1 9 . . . dxe5 20.l'l:ad1 Dalvi - Popov, e-mail 200 1 , 20 . . . id8!N 2 1 .lt:ld5 lt:lxd5 22.l'l:xd5 ie6 23.l'l:d3 �g5+ With two healthy bishops, the second player will be the only one smiling in this position.

17... ttJxe5 18.ttJf4 ttJxf3 It was also possible to maintain the tension with 1 8 . . . l'l:ac8N, but eliminating an enemy bishop is always a useful insurance policy in case the position opens up later.

Black had enough queenside play to main­ tain the balance and prevent his opponent from mounting a genuinely dangerous attack in Glek - Sutovsky, Haifa 1 996.

B72) 13.-igl With this move White pre-empts the possible knight j ump to c4. The bishop is not so badly placed on g1 , where it keeps its monarch company and avoids obstructing any other pieces.

19.�xf3 White could also have considered 1 9 .gxf3!?N, for instance 19 . . .ie6 20.l'l:g1 g6 with chances for both sides.

19 ....ic6 Also interesting was 1 9 ...ig4!?N 20.�d3 l'l:ac8 2 l .ie3 �c4.

20.ttJfd5 .ixd5 21.exd5

14.�el

22.i.e3 'IWI>4 23.axb5 axb5 24Jha8 �xa8

White can also pre-empt the central advance with 14.lt:lde2 lt:ld7 (The following game showed another decent approach for Black: 14 . . . l'l:b8 1 5 .�e1 lt:lc6 1 6.lt:ld4 ttJxd4 1 7.ixd4 e5 1 8.fxe5 dxe5 1 9.�g3 lt>h8 20.ie2 �d6 2 l .ie3 ie6 22.ig5 ie7 23.l'l:ad1 �c5 24.ixf6 hf6 25.ig4+ Short - Amason, Vestmannaeyjum 1 98 5 .) 1 5 .�e 1 b6 1 6.l'l:d1 ib7 1 7.�f2 l'l:ac8 1 8 .b3 ttJc6 1 9.l'l:d2 lt:lb4 20.l'l:fd 1 d5! 2 l .exd5 At this point the players agreed to a draw in Tiviakov - Sax, Chalkidiki 2002. The likely continuation would have been 2 l . ..exd5 22.lt:lxd5 lt:lxd5 23 .ixd5

Chapter 1 3 - 6.i.e2 .txd5 24J�xd5 lt:Jf6 25 .:!''1 5 d3 'Wxc2 when the elimination of the centre brings a peaceful situation.

245

1 8... ltJc4!? Black embarks on a risky-looking, but nevertheless j ustified plan involving a daring foray from the knight.

14...e5!? It feels like a good time to play this move, as the white queen might start to feel uncomfortable opposite the enemy rook, even if there is no immediate way to exploit it. Black can also play more patiently with 1 4 . . J'l:b8, although in the following top-level game he did not quite manage to equalize: 1 5 .h3 lt:Jd7 1 6 ..th2 lt:Jc6 1 7.l"ld1 lt:Jxd4 1 8.l"lxd4 b5 1 9.axb5 axb5 20.e5± The bishop on h2 was helping to feed White's initiative in the centre in Kasparov - Topalov, Dos Hermanas 1 996.

15.ltJde2 White should certainly avoid 1 5 .fxe5? dxe5 1 6.lt:Jf5 .txf5 1 7 .exf5 .tb4 Black is already better, as the bishop on g1 is now misplaced. 1 8 ..te2 l"lac8 1 9.lt:Jb5!? A witty move, but it is not enough to solve White's problems. 1 9 . . . 'We7 20.c3 lt:Jb3 2 1 .l"ld1 axb5 22.cxb4 bxa4 23 ..tb5 l"led8 24.l"lxd8t l"lxd8 25 ..txa4 lt:Jd4+ The knights proved more valuable than the bishops in Oll - Smirin, Kissimmee 1 997.

Instead the more sedate 1 8 . . . l"lac8 would have been equal.

19.b3 lLla3! 20.l"lcl 20.l"ld2 would also have been met by 20 . . . b5. Presumably the idea behind the text move was that any subsequent . . . lt:Jxc2 would place the knight in an immediate pin.

20...b5! White does not quite have the time to punish the cheeky knight.

2I.i.e3 bxa4 22.fxe5 dxe5 23.i.h6 g6 24.bxa4 l"lad8 We have been following the game Soereghy ­ Goze, e-mail 2006. Black's enterprising play has paid off. He has succeeded in compromising his opponent's queenside structure and eventually converted his advantage to a full point.

B73) 13.g4

15 ...b6 16-l:�dl i.b7 17.'\Wh4 i.e? 18.'11Mg3

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Probably White's most promising idea.

13...i.f8

246

Open Systems

Now we will consider the subtle B731) 14..ig2 followed by the main line of B732) 14.g5. B731) 14..ig2 By refusing to drive the knight away from f6, White prevents the usually desirable ... b7-b6, which would now lose to e4-e5.

8 ., .i. .i�·tt � 7 "e � ,wr .t. . '�!�/' 6�------%/- --- -� 54 _____;_ �- ,,, �://,'» ��

1 7 ... tt'lc4 1 8.icl g6 1 9.Eld3 ig7 was not a bad alternative, but I prefer the text.

18.tlJde2! This looks like White's most challenging approach, aiming to limit the opponent's counterplay. Instead 1 8 .Elf3 tt'lxd4 1 9.ixd4 e5 20.Elh3 h6 leads to a complex position in which Black's chances are not worse.

18 ... l£Jb4 19.gd2

��� �% ?�:;,?�� ;:-8-1 �� � m -%%�/�

%-

�

�%i-dL- ;� '""� � �,�� ��� 3 �

a

14... tlJd7

"/

b

c

""';

d

"""

e

f

g

h

Black can also consider 14 .. J''\b 8!?, when it is doubtful that White has anything better than 1 5 .g5 tt'ld7 transposing to the note to Black's 1 5th move in line B732 below.

1 5.'?Nel Obviously 1 5 .g5 would lead back into B732, so we will only focus on White's attempts to do without this move.

1 5 ...b6 It seems logical to keep the knight j ump in reserve. Nevertheless it is also not bad to play 1 5 . . . tt'lc4 1 6.icl b6N ( 1 6 ... g6 1 7.b3 tt'la5 1 8.i.b2 ig7 1 9.Eld l tt'lc6 20.tt'lde2t Polzin - Kempinski, Germany 2005) 1 7.b3 tLla5 1 8.i.b2 ib700 In this typical Scheveningen position Black should have enough time to create counterplay.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

19... d5! This is a significant improvement over a high­ level game. I found the idea myself, although I later discovered that it had been played in an obscure e-mail game so I could not claim it as a novelty. 1 9 . . . '\MfdS?! is unsatisfactory after 20.g5 f6 (or 20 . . . g6 2 1 .Elf3 Elc8 22.Elh3 h5 23. gxh6 1Mfxh4 24.Elxh4 'it>h7 25.e5±) 2 l .tt'ld4!± Black had plenty of weaknesses and little compensation for them in Anand - Topalov, Dortmund 1 996.

20.e5 This leads to a posmon resembling the French Defence, in which neither side's pieces are deployed exactly as they would normally be in that opening. Overall I would say that the

Chapter 1 3 - 6.i.e2 differences favour Black slightly, as he can still pursue a queenside attack, helped in part by the pawn on a4 which provides a ready-made target. Before moving on, let us note that White is not helped by 20.i.d4 i.c5 2 1 .exd5 ctJxd5+.

20...i.c5 In his annotations to the aforementioned game, Anand only mentioned 20 .. .f6?! which creates too many weaknesses. However, 20 . . . i.e7!?N might be a worthy alternative, for instance 2 1 .Wf2 ctJc6 when I prefer Black's position slightly.

2I.ltld4 lt!c6! The knight has been Black's hardest working piece. Now, finally, it prepares to exchange itself for the important blockader on d4.

22J�f3 i.xd4 23.i.xd4 lt!xd4 24J�xd4 b5 25J�h3 lt!f8

247

B732) 14.g5 lll d7 15.i.g2 This is the normal move in such positions. The bishop makes way for the heavy pieces to get to the kingside.

15 ...b6 This is the standard move, although it might also be interesting for Black to consider 1 5 .. J''lb 8!?, hoping to play . . . b7-b5 in one move. Here are a couple of nice examples: 1 6 .We l (There is also 1 6.Wh5 ctJc4 17.i.cl g6 1 8.Wh3 i.g7 1 9 .ctJde2 b5 20.axb5 axb5 2 1 .b4 '1Wb6 2 2.l"i:a2 J.b7+ The strong knight from c4 was limiting White's attacking prospects in Hermansson - Kempinski, Stockholm 1 999.) 16 ... ct:Jc4 1 7.i.cl g6 1 8 .b3 i.g7 1 9.ctJde2 ctJa5 20.J.d2 ctJc6 2 1 .Wh4 b5 Black could not complain, as his queenside counterplay was becoming quite real in Nataf - Relange, France 2003.

s J:R .t�m�:-• m 7 R �&m • - • � '""�m i -� " "�- r�

: . ,�,,� � 43 "8/ B �;� ! D "B � ��""' ""% � �n�mf� 2 �wti! '�ri" "j�S;--� �-� �\ 1

'"

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

16J�f3 White's plan will generally involve shifting his queen and rook to the h-file in one way or another. Black will generally place his bishop on g7, after which the knight can always drop back to f8 to defend h7. One of Black's key resources will be the counterattacking thrust . . . f5 . If the second player can time this move correctly, it should enable him to secure some

248

Open Systems

valuable breathing space on the kingside and in some cases even fight for the initiative in the centre. Here are some illustrative examples: 1 6 .'Wh5 g6 1 7.'Wh4 CLlc4 1 8.�cl �b7 19.l"i:f3 �g7 20.CLlde2

can also postpone it as in the following game: 20 . . .'Wc5 2 l .l"i:d3 b5 22.l"i:h3 CLlf8 23.CLldl CLlb6 24.c3 lLlbd7 25.CLle3 f5! 26.gxf6 CLlxf6 Having outmanoeuvred his opponent for the past five moves, Black has taken over the initiative and went on to win in Polzin - Kempinski, Germany 2005. 2 l .b3 CLla5 22.l"i:f3 l"i:ad8 23.l"i:h3 CLlf8 Black's pieces coordinate well, his king is safe and he has every reason to feel confident about the future.

16 i.b7 ...

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

20 . . . d5!? (This plunges the game into unclear complications. A safer alternative would have been 20 . . . f5N 2 1 .l"i:h3 ctJf8 with a good position for Black.) 2 1 .l"i:h3 d4!? 22.'Wxh7t fs 23.CLldl This was Matejovic - Szegi, Slovakia 2006, and here Black could have created unpleasant queenside threats with 23 . . . CLla5!N. 1 6.'Wel �b7 1 7.l"i:dl g6 1 8.CLlde2 �g7 1 9.'Wh4 CLlc4 20.�cl

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

I think Black should continue to refrain from the knight hop to c4 for the time being. After 1 6 . . . CLlc4 1 7.i.cl i.b7, the following game provides an excellent demonstration of why it is not always desirable to drive the white bishop back to c l : 1 8.l"i:h3 g6 1 9.b3 CLla5 20.i.a3! White finds an excellent way to combine his kingside attack with pressure against the d6-pawn. 20 . . . l"i:ad8 (Deserving attention was 20 . . . e5!?N 2 l .CLlde2 exf4 22.CLlxf4 'Wd8 23.ctJfd5 'Wxg5 24.CLlc7 'We5 25 .CLlxa8 haS 26.l"i:b It The exchange sacrifice promises rich play, but Black's position is still worse.) 2 l .'Wel i.g7 22.l"i:dl ctJf8 23.CLlde2 i.c8 24.l"i:hd3 CLlb7 25.'Wd2± Black was unable to hold the d6-pawn and had to fight for survival in Kuczynski - Ftacnik, Germany 2002.

h

20 . . . f5!?N This looks like a good time for Black to execute his space-gaining break, although he

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Chapter 1 3 - 6.1e2

Conclusion

17Jl:h3 g6 18.'?Mg4 1g7 Now that White has committed his heavy pieces to the kingside, it starts to become more tempting for Black to consider 1 8 . . . 'Llc4!? 1 9.i.cl i.g7 20.'Llde2 This position was reached in Hanley - Michielsen, Groningen 2006, and here Black could have obtained at least equal chances with the thematic 20 . . . f5!N 2 l .�h4 'Llf8 .

19.i.gl f5! 20.exf5 After 20.gxf6 'Llxf6 2 1 .�h4 'Llh5 the knight on h5 is strong.

20 . .gxf5 21 .'?Me2 .

The evaluation would be similar after 2 1 .�h5 'Llf8 22.l'l:dl l=l:ac8.

2I...ttlffi 22J�fl �ac8 23.�d3 hg2t 24.'?Mxg2 ctJg6

a

b

c

d

249

e

f

g

h

Black kept a nice position with well-placed pieces in Fedorchuk - Kempinski, Germany 2008.

The Scheveningen set-up is a valuable tool in the repertoire of players who are willing to exercise patience with a view to counter­ striking at a suitable moment. White has tested umpteen different ways to try and penetrate the opponent's armour, but aggressive operations very often resemble a training exercise with live ammunition - one mistake can see the attacking efforts backfire, with harsh consequences. To play the black side of the Scheveningen system successfully requires many things: a certain level of concrete opening knowledge (as with all openings) , knowledge of typical plans and piece manoeuvres, as well as a more subtle feeling for when to manoeuvre, when to defend, when to counterattack and so on. The last of these can take some time and practice to develop, but once you have it, you will truly be the master of an unbreakable defensive system that can last a lifetime.

Open Systems Midnight Express 6.ic4 -

Variation Index l .e4 c5 2.�f3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.�xd4 �f6 5.�c3 a6 6..ic4 e6 A) 7.a4 B) 7.a3 C) 7..ib3 b5 C1) 8.0-0 .ie7 C 1 1) 9.a4 C12) 9 ..ie3 C13) 9.f4 C14) 9JWf3 �b6 C141) 10 ..ig5!? C142) 10 ..ie3 C2) 8 ..ig5 .ie7 9.�f3 �c7 C21) 10.0-0-0 �bd7 C21 1) l l .h£6 C212) 1 1 .�g3 C213) 1 1.e5 .ib7 12.�g3 C2131) 12 ... �xe5 C2132) 12 ... dxe5 C22) 10.e5 .ib7 l l.exd6 hd6 12.�e3 C221) 12 ....ic5 13.0-0-0 �c6 C22 1 1) 14.�xe6t!? C2212) 14.hf6 gxf6 C22 121) 15.�e4 C22122) 15.�d5 C222) 12 ... �c6!?

252 253 255 258 258 259 260 264 264 265 268 269 270 271 272 273 275 276 276 276 279 279 281 282

252

Open Systems

6 ..tc4 is one of the most direct attacking systems at White's disposal. The light-squared bishop focuses its aim against the pawn on e6, the cornerstone of Black's entire set-up. The first player will typically look to develop his remaining pieces as quickly as possible before attempting to draw on the power of the light-squared bishop to unleash a deadly attack, often with the help of a sacrifice on the sensitive e6-square. Fortunately Black is not without chances of his own. If White's intended attack fails to materialize, then his active bishop might become a target for Black's advancing queenside pawns. In other cases, the second player may goad his opponent into an unsound sacrificial attack, drawing on the legendary defensive resources of the Najdorf system. It all adds up to a recipe for breathtaking complications, combinations and sacrifices, so without further ado, let's see some action!

l.e4 cS 2.tLlf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tLlxd4 c!LJ£6 s.tLlc3 a6 6..ic4 e6

White has tried several different moves here, but only three deserve serious attention: A) 7.a4, B) 7.a3 and C) 7..ib3. 7.0-0 has no independent value against our repertoire, as after 7 . . . b5 8 ..tb3 we reach variation Cl below.

A) 7.a4 With this move White aims to restrict his opponent's counterplay. It looks slightly odd to combine this restraining approach with the active and aggressive development on c4, and yet the idea has been used successfully by a number of strong players, most notably Emms and Kuzmin.

7....ie7 8.0-0 tLlc6 It makes sense to develop the knight here rather than on d7, as the b4-square has been weakened.

9 ..ie3 1he more aggressive 9.mhl 0-0 10.f4 allowed Black to retaliate with 1 O . . . d5! l l .c!tJxc6 bxc6 1 2 ..td3 c5 1 3 .e5 tDd7 with a pleasant position in Gasparian - Anastasian, Yerevan 2006.

9 ...0-0

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

A set-up involving . . . e5 would be positionally dubious, as White's light-squared bishop would be ideally placed to assist in the fight for the weakened d5-square. Instead Black plays to fortifY the a2-g8 diagonal and follow up by harassing the dangerous bishop with . . . b5.

Chapter 1 4 - 6.�c4

lO.�hl White intends to play f4 at a suitable moment. Other ideas are not dangerous, for instance: 1 0.We2 d5 1 U 'lfd 1 �d6 1 2.exd5 exd5 1 3 .tLlxd5 tLlxd5 1 4.hd5 hh2t 1 5 .\tJxh2 Wxd5 1 6.c4 We4 was equal in Ivanovic Kasparov, Bugojno 1 982. 1 0.�a2 tt:Jb4 1 l .�b3 d5 1 2.exd5 ( 1 2.e5?! tLld7 1 3.f4 tLlc5+ Savon - Jakobsen, Esbjerg 1 980) 1 2 . . . tt:Jbxd5 White had no trace of an advantage in Nepeina Leconte - Bojkovic, Belfort 2002.

253

Also harmless is 1 6.fxe5 dxe5 1 7.i.g5 hal 1 8.l:'lxa2 Wc4 1 9.Wf3 l:'lc6 20.a5, J. Geller ­ Zagrebelny, Krasnodar 2003, 20 . . .i.b4!N 2 l .l:'la4 Wc5 with advantage to Black.

16 ...ha2 17J:ha2 '!Wc4 18.'\WO exf4 19J:�a4 '!We6 20.hf4 gc4 21.gxc4 Wfxc4 Black should have no problems from this position. I found two examples on the database.

22.e5 A previous game had finished with a quick draw: 22.g4 Wc6 23.h3 l:'lc8 24.i.g5 h6 25 .i.d2 Yz-Yz Kuzmin - Shneider, Enakievo 1 997.

10.. .'1Wc7 ll.Wfe2 .id7 12.f4

22...dxe5 23.he5 W/b4

This is the only really threatening plan at White's disposal, but Black is well placed to meet it.

The position remained absolutely equal in Emms - Grischuk, Esbjerg 2000.

B) 7.a3

12 .. J�ac8 13 ..ia2 lLlxd4 14.hd4 e5 15 ..ie3 �e6!

8

'lS' �- A. IDll/; ,k/ ff� ��} � a � � :.JL.s��� %: ,, -�g

/�·u� �-�""/;;� % "/J""%�-, ��'' • - �w�• 6� � �� "' " /� / " ";� � �� fm!� �� :3 � ��·· · ·� �� � "0%" � �0 �0" 2 _9P���f/� �v�P� mM

7

'j;

a a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

16.a5 1 6.i.xe6 fxe6 1 7.fxe5 dxe5 is of no concern to Black (compare the note to White's 1 7th move in line B4 1 of Chapter 1 3, page 228). The doubled pawns control several important squares, and Black's pieces are all working together harmoniously.

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

With this move White plans to meet 7 ... b5 with 8 .i.a2, tucking the bishop out of harm's way. The drawback is that, having spent an extra tempo on the queenside, White's attacking prospects are reduced. Of course, it also goes without saying that the most aggressive plans involving long castling will be out of the question due to the ease with which Black can open a file with . . . b5-b4.

254

Open Systems

7 /J.e7 8.0-0 0-0 9./J.a2 .•.

9.f4 d5! 1 0.exd5 exd5 1 l .�e2 tt::l c6 12.�e3 Ele8 gave Black an easy game in K. Mueller Hracek, Lippstadt 2000. The f4-pawn would prefer to be on its original square in such a position.

have been my recommendation had it not been for the even more promising main line.

12./J.dl As I mentioned before, the surprising reality is that it is not at all easy for White to find a convenient move. Here are a few examples:

9...b5 lO.f4 /J.b7 1 1.'1We2 It looks premature for White to try 1 l .f5?! e5 1 2 .ttJde2 tt::l bd7 1 3 .ttJg3 Elc8 1 4.�g5 Elxc3! 1 5 .bxc3 tt::l xe4 1 6 .tt::l xe4 �xe4 1 7.�xe7 Wffxe7 1 8.c4 This position was reached in Ermenkov - Portisch, Skara 1 980, and here Black could have maintained somewhat better chances with 1 8 . . . tt::l f6!?N 1 9.Wie2 Wid7+.

1 2.f5 e5 1 3 .tDf3 was played in Gerasimovitch - Stiri, Mureck 1 998, and now after 1 3 . . . h6!N Black is at least equal. White is not ready to play 1 2.e5? dxe5 1 3.fxe5 tt::l fd7+ as 14.�f4? �c5 wins material. 1 2.h1 lt:lbd7 1 3.�xe6 does not work either. After 1 3 . . . fxe6 14.lt:lxe6 Wffc6 1 5.tt::lxf8 Elxf8 the minor pieces are stronger than the rook, and White is vulnerable on the light squares.

12 ... lLlbd7 13-l::i:ael lLlcS 14.'\Wf3 14.e5 tt::l fe4 was better for Black in Van der Weide - Tatai, Amsterdam 1 967. The present position was reached in Sanchez Lloyd, St Rosa 1 983. At this point I found an important improvement for Black: a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

11. ..'\Wc7! I like this standard (but rare in this specific position) move for its sheer flexibility, and because I cannot see what White is going to play next. A playable, though somewhat uninspmng alternative is: 1 l . . .ctJbd7 1 2.e5 dxe5 1 3.fxe5 �c5 1 4.�e3 ttJxe5 1 5 .ttJxe6 �xe3t 1 6.Wffxe3 fxe6 1 7.'�xe5 Wib6t 1 8.h1 Elae8 Black's position seems okay, even if Arizmendi and Moreno feel that Black has no prospects.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

14... a5!N Those authors recommend 1 l . ..ttJc6, which looks like another good move, and may well

This is a particularly forceful way to exploit the weakness of the e4-pawn and the a7-g1

255

Chapter 1 4 - 6 ..1c4 diagonal. It is also worth mentioning the possibility of 1 4 . . .'�'b6!?N This highly ambitious move brings danger for both players. 1 5 ..1e3 '2Jfxe4 1 6.ctJxe4 .1xe4 1 7.'1Wg3 b4! The complications seem to favour Black. Nevertheless the text move seems like the better practical choice as it also leads to an advantage, but in a less volatile position.

15.f5! This looks like the best practical chance. After 1 5 .ctJcxb5 '1Wb6 1 6.'1We2 ct:Jfxe4 the exchange of a wing pawn for a central pawn has clearly been to Black's advantage.

15 b4! •.•

1 5 . . . mhS!? 1 6.fxe6 fxe6 gives Black decent prospects in an unclear position, but the text is a try for an advantage.

I6)bcb5 �d7 17.fxe6 fxe6 18.�h3 �fxe4�

19.gxffit .tx£8 20.�xe6 d5! 21.�xf8 �xh3 22.gxh3 �xd2 23.�e6 b3! 24.�xc5 bxa2 25.gal gf8 26.ci>g2 .1c8 27.gxa2 ga;

This is by far the most important option at White's disposal. The bishop will have to retreat at some point anyway, so it drops back to a safe spot on b3 without spending time on unnecessary pawn moves on the queenside.

7 b5 •••

The other main line is 7 . . . '2Jbd7 intending . . . ctJc5, both reinforcing the sensitive e6-pawn and preparing to eliminate the dangerous bishop at a moment's notice. The choice between the two is largely a matter of taste, although I believe that the text move is a more convenient one around which to build a repertoire. The point is that after the move order with 7.0-0, it would not make much sense for Black to play 7 . . . '2Jbd7 as the bishop is not yet committed to b3. Therefore Black would have not only have to study 7 ..1b3 '2Jbd7, but also 7.0-0 b5 8 . .1b3. Instead I find it more consistent to play an early . . . b5 against both ofWhite's move orders. At this point White must make a fundamental choice, his main options being Cl) 8.0-0 and C2) 8 ..1g5. However, we should also pay attention to some less common, but still potentially tricky alternatives. 8.f3 ct:Jbd7 9 .1e3 .1b7 transposes to 8 ..1e3 below. .

C) 7..1b3

256

Open Systems

8 ..te3 .tb7 9.f3 White is combining two of the most dangerous attacking systems, but unfortunately he fails to obtain the best of both worlds. 9 . . . ltJbd7 1 0.Wd2 b4 1 1 .tLlce2 d5 1 2.exd5 lLlxd5 1 3.0-0-0

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

1 3 . . . lLlxf6 1 4.ltJh5 �xc3! The exchange sacrifice on c3 is a well-known motif of the Sicilian, and in this position Black is well-placed to deal with the resulting complications. 1 5.lLlxf6t Feeble is 1 5 .bxc3? lLlxe4 1 6.lLlxg7t i>f8 1 7.lLlh5, Hildebrandt - Stewen, corr. 1 994, 1 7...Wb6!N (This is better than 17 . . ..th4t, although even brought Black a quick victory in the game.) 1 8.We2 Wc5 1 9.�d1 .th4t 20.g3 lLlxc3 with a winning position. 1 5 . . ..txf6 1 6.bxc3

h

This was Ardura Fernandez - Dominguez Perez, San Miguel 1 999, and here Black should have taken the opportunity to eliminate one of the enemy's strong bishops with 1 3 . . . lLlxe3!N 14.Wxe3 Wb6! Preventing any sacrifices on e6. ( 1 4 . . ..tc5 1 5 .lLlf4 We? 1 6.We1 is not so dear) 1 5 .ltJf4 0-0-0 1 6.ltJd3 g6 with better chances for Black, whose dark-squared bishop has the potential to become a monster. 8.f4 When faced with this early show of aggression, Black should remain calm and continue with his normal development. 8 . . ..tb7 9.f5 e5 1 0 .ltJde2 Another game continued 1 o.lLlf3 .te7 1 1 .Wd3 lLlbd7 1 2 ..te3 �c8 1 3.lLld2, Milagrosa - Bitoon, Manila 2007, and now after 1 3 . . . lLlc5!?N 1 4.hc5 dxc5 1 5 ..td5 c4 1 6.Wf3 lLlxd5 1 7.lLlxd5 0-0 Black's chances are higher. 1 0 . . . ltJbd7 1 l ..tg5 .te7 1 2.tLlg3 �c8 1 3 ..txf6 1 3.0-0 h5!+ This attractive idea is a common theme in positions with this pawn structure. See for instance the note to White's 1 Oth move in variation C 1 3 (page 26 1 ) . 1 4.h4 b4 1 5 .hf6 .txf6 1 6.lLld5 hh4 1 7.lLlxh5 Wg5+ R. Byrne - Fischer, Sousse 1 967.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 6 . . .he4! More accurate than 1 6 . . ..th4t 1 7.g3 he4 1 8 .�fl .tf6 1 9 ..td5 when White escapes to reach a roughly level position. 1 7.0-0 d5 1 8.a4 0-0 Black's position was dearly better in Ledic Szabo, Vinkovci 1 970. 8.We2 The queen does not really belong here in this system - it has better prospects on f3. 8 . . ..tb7 9 ..tg5 9 .f3 looks slightly odd, although the position after 9 . . . ltJbd7 10 ..te3 lLlc5 1 1 .0-0-0 We? 1 2.g4 .te7 1 3 .g5 lLlfd7 was interesting and gave chances for both sides in Lind Wojtkiewicz, New York 1 992. 9 . . .b4 1 0.tLla4 .te7 1 1 .0-0-0 1 1 .f3 looks rather slow by comparison, and

257

Chapter 1 4 - 6 . .ic4 after 1 1 . . .0-0 1 2.c3 bxc3 1 3 .lt:Jxc3 lt:Jxe4! 14.lt:Jxe6! fxe6 1 5 ..Le7 Vfixe7 1 6.lt:Jxe4 d5 1 7.lt:Jc3 lt:Jc6 Black had the better chances in Feygin - Shirov, Germany 2009. l l . . .'l'Na5 1 2.f4 li:Jbd7

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 3.l:'i:he l 1 3 ..ixf6?! li:Jxf6 1 4.e5 dxe5 1 5 .fxe5 lt:Je4+ Smet - Rooms, e-mail 2003. 13 . . . h6 14 ..ixf6 li:Jxf6 1 5 .e5 dxe5 1 6.fxe5 lt:Jd5 1 7.Vfig4!?N This looks better than 1 7.lt:Jxe6 fxe6 1 8.Vfih5t �d7 1 9.Vfig4 h5+ Almagro Llanas - Gomez Garrido, Galapagar 2009. 1 7 . . . 0-0

8 7 6 5 4 3

2

8 .V!if3 This is probably the most significant of White's unusual eighth moves. 8 . . ..ib7 Now we will consider rwo possibilities for White. a) 9 ..ig5 li:Jbd7 1 0.0-0-0 lt:Jc5 l l .l:'i:hel i.e? 1 2.Vlig3 b4 1 3 ..ixf6 1 3.e5!?N is interesting, but not fully satisfactory for White after 1 3 . . . lt:Jh5! 14 . .ixe7 Vfixe7 1 5 .exd6 lt:Jxg3 1 6.dxe7 bxc3 1 7.hxg3 cxb2t 1 8.�xb2 �xe7+. 1 3 ....Lf6 1 4.lt:Ja4N This is a clear improvement over 1 4.e5? .ih4! 1 5.Vfie3 ( 1 5.Vfixg7 Vfig5+-+) 1 5 . . . bxc3-+ Ketzetzis - Kanakaris, Kallithea 2009. 14 ... lt:Jxb3t 1 5.lt:Jxb3 e5 1 6.lt:Jac5 .ic8 1 7.li:Jd3 a5 1 8.lt:Jxe5! .Le5 1 9.f4 a4 20.li:Jd2 .Lb2t!? 20 ... a3 2 1 .fxe5 axb2t 22.�xb2 Vfia5 23.Ei:al 0-0� 2 1 .�xb2 0-0+ Both sides have their chances, but White's vulnerable king is the most salient feature of the position. b) 9.0-0 lt:Jbd7 l O.l:'i:el i.e?

r/=,p///,'/,,///

vmm,_,,c,-,;,

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Black has an excellent position, and the following idea does not fully solve White's problems: 1 8.lt:Jxe6 fxe6 1 9.Vfixe6t �h8 20.Ei:xd5 .Ld5 2 1 .Vfixd5 Vfixd5 22 ..ixd5 Ei:ad8 23 ..if3 .ih4! 24.Ei:fl Ei:f5+

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

l l ..Le6!? This is a principled choice. In the event of other moves, Black can benefit from not yet having had to move his queen. l l .Vfig3 is of course possible, but there is no reason to fear it. Black has several playable

258

Open Systems

responses, with one of the more interesting examples being: 1 1 . . . l2lc5!? (but not 1 1 ...b4? 1 2.f2ld5! exd5 1 3.exd5±) 1 2.'1Wxg7 )"lgS 1 3.'1Wh6 )"lg6 1 4.'1We3 b4 1 5 .f2lce2 f2lfXe4oo 1 l . . .fXe6 1 2.f2lxe6 l2le5 1 3.'1Wg3 Another interesting line is: 1 3.'1Wh3 Wd7 1 4.l2lxg7t f7 1 5 .f2lf5 )"lagS

1 9 .iWh5t )"lg6 20.f2lg3 '1Wg4 0-1 Sharma ­ Adly, Dubai 200S. 1 6 . . . )"lg6 1 7.f3 Worse is: 1 7.a3 )"lhgS 1 S.g3 )"lg4! 1 9.f2lh6t c±>eS 20.l2lxg4 )"lxg4 2 1 .'1We3 )"lxe4 22.f2lxe4 he4-+ 1 7 . . . )"lhgS 1 S.g3 b 1 .tc6 Black had promising compensation for the sacrificed pawn in Adla - Rotstein, Port Barcares 2005. After the main move White can choose between C21) 10.0-0-0 and C22) 10.e5.

C21) 10.0-0-0 tt'lbd7 1 3.g4 The other principled continuation is 1 3.'1Wg3N g6 1 4.e5 tt'lh5! ( 1 4 . . .dxe5 1 5 .'\Wxe5 0-0 1 6.h4 '1Wc8±) 1 5.'\Wg4 dxe5 1 6.tt'lf3 tt'lf6 1 7.'1Wh3 tt'lc6 1 8 ..tb6 '1Wb8 1 9.hc7 '1Wxc7� The compensation for the exchange is healthier than White would have hoped. 1 3 . . . tt'lc6 14.g5 This is consistent, but it turns out badly for White. Still, it is not clear if he could do any better with 1 4.'1Wg2 tt'lxd4 1 5.tt'lxd4 a5 1 6.g5 a4! 1 7.gxf6 .txf6 1 8 .'1Wg3 axb3 1 9.tt'lxb3 '1Wc8+ Black's strong bishops give him excellent chances. 14 . . . tt'le5 1 5 .'1Wg2 1 5 .gxf6 does not work due to 1 5 . . . tt'lxf3 1 6.fXe7 WaS! 1 7.tt'lxf3 a5+ with difficult problems for White. 1 5 . . . tt'lfg4 1 6 ..tf4 a5!? Also quite playable was 16 ... hg5N 1 7.h3 .txf4t 1 8 .tt'lxf4 tt'lf6 1 9.'1Wxg7 l:'l:g8 20.'\Wh6 '1We7 with equality. 1 7.h3 a4 1 8.hxg4 axb3 1 9.tt'lxb3

Black needs to bring the pieces out very quickly, but he must also be careful about his potentially vulnerable e6-pawn.

The immediate 1 1 ..txe6? does not work: 1 l . . .tt'le5 1 2 .'1Wh3 fXe6 1 3.tt'lxe6 .txe6 14.'\Wxe6 '1Wd7 1 5.'1Wb3 tt'lc4 and White had no compensation in Munteanu - Calotescu, Sovata 200 1 . The only other move worth mentioning is: 1 1 .l:'l:hel 0-0 1 2.'1Wg3 There is also 1 2.'1Wh3 tt'lc5 1 3.f4 b4 (or 1 3 . . ..tb7 1 4.e5 dxe5 1 5 .fXe5 tt'ld5 1 6 ..txe7 tt'lxe7 1 7 ..txe6 b4! 1 8 .tt'lce2 fXe6 1 9.tt'lxe6 'Wa5 20.tt'lxf8 l:'l:xf8 2 l .'it>b1 .td5 22.tt'lcl

270

Open Systems

'1Wc7+ Finnie - Berclaz, corr. 2002) 1 4.e5 dxe5 1 5.fxe5 bxc3 1 6.exf6 tLlxb3t 1 7.tLlxb3 Jb:f6 1 8.Jb:f6 \Wf4t 1 9.:E\e3 Wxf6 20.:E\xc3 .ib7+ The complications have subsided to leave a simplified position with a definite plus for Black, Timmerman - Soltau, corr. 1 986. 1 2 ... tLlc5 1 3 ..id5!? White finds an interesting way to complicate the game. He is not really helped by 1 3 ..ih6 tLle8 1 4.h4 f8 1 5 .\We3 '1Wc5 1 6.'1Wxc5 tLlxc5 1 7.f4 .ie7+ Black should have slightly better chances.) 1 2 . . .fxe6 1 3 .tLlxe6 \Wc6 14.tLld5 d7 2 l .axb5 axb5 22.l"&d1 t c8 23.l"&xd8t l"&xd8 24.tt:'lxb5 tt:'led5=

8 7 6 5 4 3 2

1

20.h£6 gxf6 21.�e4 he4 22JHxe4

8 � ��-� �� 7 ll llll "�ll l 6 fa ll•i• 0a �� -;-� � �

·. : ��..r. ��

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

In this sharp position White has tried two moves: C22121) 15.�e4 and C22122)

1 5.�d5. C22121) 15.�e4

%

3

2

1

�

'

,,_,_

�

%

�

�

�

� -�-��-�

8 �� ���8 � �� ��_ /;

��

%

� � � b d f g h ,_,_,

a

-

c

,_,_,

-

____

e

This active move forces Black to accept the sacrifice of the exchange in return for the f6pawn.

1 5 .L:d4 ••.

1 5 . . .1Le7? might quickly end in tears for Black after 1 6.tt:'lf5! exf5 ? 1 7.tt:'lxf6t f8 1 8.1&h6#!

22 id6 •••

There is no point in trying to save the f-pawn, as after 22 . . .f5 White has 23.l"&4e5 JLd6 24.l"&xf5 , as pointed out by Morgado and Alvarez in New In Chess Yearbook 87. The same authors mention the possibility of the text move, without further analysis. Having investigated the position, I see no problems at all for Black.

1 5 ... tt:'lxd4N sets a nice trap, but is not a great move due to 1 6.tt:'lxc5 (Black was hoping for 1 6.tt:'lxf6t? e7 1 7.1&g5 l&f4t!-+) 1 6 ...1&xc5 ( 1 6 . . . tt:'lxb3t 1 7.axb3 hg2 1 8 .l"&hg l ±) 1 7.l"&xd4 l&e5 1 8.1&c3 l"&c8 1 9.l"&hdl 0-0 20.1&b4 'it>h8 2 l .f3 Black's position is more or less playable, but it remains quite dangerous due to his sensitive king.

23Jhf6 �f8 24.�xf8t xf8 25.g3 g7=

16.�xd4 �xd4 17.�:xf6t f8

The endgame with three pawns versus a piece is balanced, but with some potential for either side to fight for a win.

Very enterprising is an attempt to keep the king on e7 in order to connect the black rooks: 1 7 ... e7!? 1 8.1&xd4 l"&ad8 1 9.1&h4 d6!N ( 1 9 . . . f8? Taddei - Roeder, Le Touquet 2006, 20.1&h6tN 'it>e7 2 l .l"&e l ±) 20.l"&dl t 'it>c5 Amazingly the king manages to pull off

C2212) 14.h£6 gxf6

280

Open Systems

a chessboard version of a circus trick, dodging bullets while balancing on a tightrope: 2 1 .WI'g5t lilb6 22.WI'e3t \ilc6 23.WI'c3t lilb6 24.l2ld7t!? 2:xd7 25.2:xd7 Wl'xd7 26.WI'xh8 a5! 27.c3 Wl'd3= Black barely keeps equality.

18.�xd4 �ds 19.�h4 White must play energetically, otherwise Black will have little trouble organizing his position and winning with his extra exchange.

20 ..�e5 .

The computer wants to try the cheeky 20 . . .�xg2!?N 2 1 .2:g1 �h3!, which looks risky, but might appeal to players with strong nerves who trust in their defensive skills. Another valid possibility is 20 . . . 2:d6!?N 2 1 .�c2 Wl'c4 22.'2lh7t 2:xh7 23.WI'xc4 bxc4 24.�xh7 f5 25 .�g6 �xg2 with a roughly equal endgame.

2I.tiJh7t 1 9.'2ld7t? soon led to a hopeless situation for White after 1 9 ... lile7 20.�xe6 fxe6 2 1 .2:d1 �d5 in Grimberg - Bromberger, Bavaria 2007. Not much better was 1 9.WI'e3? h6 20.2:e 1 �xg2 2 1 .f4 (2 1 .'2lg4 �d5+) 2 1 . . .�h3 and Black soon won in Hardy - Oestergaard, e-mail 200 1 .

19 ...h6 1 9 . . . WI'e5 could transpose after 20.c3 h6, but White can also try 20.f4!? Wl'e3t 2 1 .lilb 1 2:d2 22.�d5!! which I analysed to a draw after 22 ... 2:xd5 23.'2lxd5 exd5 24.2:e1 Wl'b6 25 .WI'e7t lilg7 26.2:e3 2:g8 27.a3 lilh8 28.WI'xf7 Wl'xe3 29.WI'f6t l'l:g7 30.WI'd8t with perpetual check. The text move reduces White's options while offering a few extra ones for Black on the next move.

2 l .f4 Wl'e3t 22.\ilb1 2:d2 23.2:d1 �e4t 24.'2lxe4 Wl'xe4t 25.\i/cl 2:xd 1 t 26.�d1 Wl'e3t 27. lilc2 lilg7+ was not what White was hoping for in Lobron - Novikov, Bad Wiessee 1 999.

21... e7 (better than 1 7 . . . \t>fs 1 8.l"1hel l"1c8 1 9.'it>b1 h6 20.c3±) From this position I only found one game, which continued 1 8 .\Wg5 ( 1 8.\Wh4N might lead to a draw after 1 8 . . .Lg2 [adventurous players may gamble for a win with 1 8 ... h5!?] 1 9.l"1he1 .if3 20.ltJxh7t 'it>e8 2 1 .tiJf6t 'it>e7=; Another possibility is 1 8.l"1he 1 l"1c8 [ 1 8 ... h6!?] when the computer finds several possible drawing lines, but nothing more than that for White.)

24.£4 Vf!c7 25.ctJf6 �ffi 26.ttJh5t ci>hs 27J�el �d6 The chances are about even, but the battle rages on.

C22122) 15.ctJd5

a

15 ...V!id8 The exchange of queens may not solve all the problems despite the compact position of Black's pieces. 1 5 . . . \We5 1 6.I'Nxe5 tDxe5 17.ltJc7t 'it>e7 1 8.ttJxa8 l"1xa8 1 9 .l"1he 1 .ixg2 20.l"1e3± White can continue to create problems in the endgame.

16.Vfif4 This is better than 1 6.c3?l ttJxd4 1 7.cxd4 .ia7 1 8 .ltJf4 (or 1 8.ltJc3 I'Ne7) 1 8 . . .\Wd6 when the mighty bishop pair tilted the scales in Black's favour in Papa - Karjakin, Lausanne 2003 .

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 8 . . ..ib6 (There is also 1 8 ... l"1c8!?N 1 9.ltJe4t �e8 20.\WxdSt l"1xd8 2 1 .ltJxc5 .ixg2 22.l"1he1 �e7 23.ltJxa6 ttJf3 Black should be better in this endgame, as his soon-to-be passed h-pawn will be a powerful force.) 1 9.ltJd5t 'it>f8 20.\Wh6t 'it>e8 2 l .I'Ng7 This position was reached in Hegarty - Neuhauser, Dieppe 2009, and here Black could have obtained the upper hand with: 2 1 .. .ltJxb3tN 22.axb3 .ixd5! 23.\Wxhst 'it>e7 24.\Wxh7 \Whs+

17.ctJc7t Insufficient is 1 7.l"1he 1 ? .ie5 1 8.l"1xe5 fxe5 1 9.tiJf6t 'it>e7 20.\Wg5 ttJd4 2 1 .c3 (2 1 .ltJg4t 'it>f8 22.\Wxe5 tDe2t! 23.1Mfxe2 Wg5t) 2 1 .. .h6 22.Wh4 (22.Wxe5 Wd6) 22 . . . 'it>f8 Black was defending successfully and went on to convert his extra material in J. Houska - Palliser, Swansea 2006.

282

Open Systems

17 'it>e7 •.•

After 1 7 . . . mf8?! 1 8.E\hel Ei:g8 1 9.'Llxa8 !xa8 20.c3;1; Black's life will not be sweet after dropping the exchange.

18.ghel e5 Black can sacrifice an exchange in order to eliminate the queens, but the idea does not quite equalize: 1 8 . . .'W'd6 1 9.'W'xd6t mxd6 20.'Llxa8 !xa8 2 1 .c3 mc5 22.cxd4t 'Llxd4 23.Eie3 b4 24.g3 a5 25 .!c2 f5 26.b3± Pavasovic - Karjakin, Kallithea 2008.

should provide enough compensation for the missing material.

20 i.cs 21.VNf3 h5 22.lt:Jxf6 i.g4 23.VNd5t 'it>c7 24.VNxf7t 'it>b6 25.£3 grs 26.lLld5t cs 27.VNg7! •••

After the less accurate 27.'W'g6?! !f5 28.'W'xh5 Ela7 29.f4 E\d7 Black consolidated and eventually won with his extra piece in Marton Bardocz - A. Stephenson, Internet 2004.

27 ga7 28.VNh6 ghs •••

19.ctJd5t! The obvious eating of the rook is worse: 1 9.'Llxa8 !xb2t! 20.mxb2 'W'xdl 2 1 .Eixdl exf4 22.'Llc7 'Lle5+

In this position a draw was agreed in Marton Bardocz - Kuhne, e-mail 2006.

C222) 12 lLlc6!? •.•

The main line is hugely fascinating, but there is no denyingthatit requires atremendous amount of home preparation, not to mention strong nerves! The present variation is an interesting way for Black to surprise his opponent with a natural yet unusual development of the last minor piece.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

19 'it>d6! •..

19 . . . md7? 20.'W'f5t md6 2 1 .c3 !c8 22.'W'f3 !e6 23.mb i ±

20."\W£5 Another possibility is 20.'W'h4N a5!? (Or 20 . . .Ei:g8 2 1 .c3 f5 22.'W'xh7 'Lla5 23.'Lle3 'Llxb3t 24.axb3 'W'f6 25.'W'xf5 'W'xf5 26.'Llxf5t me? 27.cxd4 Ei:xg2 and the ending should be a draw.) 2 1 .ctJxf6 'it>c7 22.c3 Ei:a6 23.f4 e4 24.'Lld5t (24.cxd4? 'Llb4-+) 24 . . . mb8 25 .'W'h5 !b6 26.Eixe400 This somewhat irrational position is about equal. White's active pieces

1 3.'Llxc6 is feeble, and after 1 3 . . .!xc6 14.0-0-0 0-0-0 Black already has the easier game.

Chapter 1 4 - 6.�c4

283

No better is 13 ..hf6 gxf6 14.LLlxc6 .hc6 1 5 .�d5 0-0-0 1 6.�xc6 Wfxc6 1 7.0-0 f5+ Black has an active position and the superior minor piece.

13 ...0-0-0 14.tLlxd6t Obviously we should also pay attention to: 14.tLlxg7 Mter this move White wins material, but pays the price by handing the initiative to his opponent. 14 . . .�e5!N In Darvall - Jovanovic, Canberra 200 1 , Black preferred 14 . . .�e7. The two moves can lead to the same positions in certain variations, but the main line reduces White's options slightly. 1 5 .tDxe6!? Quieter continuations are not very attractive as the knight on g7 is virtually trapped. One plausible continuation is 1 5 .0-0 tLlg4 (The calm 1 5 ... mb8!? also deserves attention) 1 6.Wfh3 ( 1 6 ..hd8 LLlxd8 1 7.Wfg5 :8g8 1 8.Wfxg4 :8xg7+) 1 6 . . . h5! 1 7.�xe6t fxe6 1 8.tLlxe6 Wfb6 1 9.tDxd8 LLlxd8 20.:8ad1 tLle6 2 l .ie3 Wfc6+ Despite his material disadvantage, Black's tremendously active pieces are the dominant feature of the position. 1 5 . . .fxe6 1 6.�xf6 ixf6 1 7.Wfxe6t Wfd7!? Golubev mentioned the more natural­ looking 17 . . . mb8 in Chess Today, but the text move helps to set up certain attacking motifs on the light squares; see the note to White's 20th move below for a nice example. 1 8.Wfxf6 :8he8t 1 9 .mf1 tDd4 White has three extra pawns, but the question is whether he will survive for long enough to use them. It would be reasonable to finish analysing here, but I decided it would be interesting to explore the position a bit more deeply:

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

20.h4! White badly needs to get more pieces into play, and I believe this to be the best chance of doing so. 20.:8d 1 ? is a nice way to set up a mating pattern exercise: 20 . . .�xg2t! 2 l .mxg2 Wfg4t 22. mfl Wih3t 23. mg1 tDe2t 24.tDxe2 :8xd 1 # 20.Wfg5 i s somewhat more resilient, although Black should still prevail as follows: 20 . . . tDxb3 2 l .axb3 b4! 22.Wfc5t �c6 23.Wfc4 (23 .Wfxb4 is refuted by 23 . . .ixg2t! 24.mxg2 Wfc6t 25.f3 :8d2+-+; 23.f3 bxc3 24.bxc3 Wfe6-+ The first player has all the pawns but Black is dominating the board.) 23 . . . bxc3 24.1Wxa6t Wfb7 25 .Wfxb7t mxb7 26.bxc3 :8d2-+ White may temporarily have five pawns for a bishop, but his pieces are just pathetic. 20 ... b4! This poses a tricky question to the opponent. 2 1 .:8h3!? This looks like a better try than 2 1 . tDa4 W1g4 22.f3 tDxf3 23.gxf3 �xf3 24.Wfg5 Wfxg5 25.hxg5 .hh1 +. 2 1 . . .:8f8 22.Wfe5 :8f5 23.Wfh2 bxc3 24.:8xc3t �c6+ White has a slight material advantage, but he will have a hard time dealing with his opponent's continuing initiative.

14...YHxd6

284

Open Systems

17.i.xd8 ttl£5 1S.V;Yd3 �xd8 19.fxe4 V;Y£4 This secures a draw, although there is a valid alternative in 1 9 ...Wfe5!? 20.Wic3t Wfxc3t 2 1 .bxc3 he4 22.0-0 l"ld2 23.l"lf2 l"lxf2 24 . ..t>xf2 lLld6 Black should be fine in this ending, bearing in mind that the white bishop is quite severely restricted.

20.g3 �xd3 21.gxf4 �e3t 22.�d2 �xe4 23.�hfl �d4t 24.�e2 White must obviously avoid 24.t>c3?? b4#, while after 24. t>c 1 ? lLle3 25 .l"lg1 l"lxf4 White is simply worse.

15.f3!? White is trying to block the b7-bishop from taking an active role in the game. The first player gets nowhere with other moves: 1 5 .0-0 lLld4 16.l"lfd1 was seen in Berbatov ­ Torrado Quintela, Cambados 2008. Now the best reply would have been 16 ...Wfc5!N 1 7.�xf6 (1 7.l"ld3 lLlxb3 1 8.axb3 Wfxe3 gives Black a comfortable ending after either recapture.) 17 ... gxf6 1 8.lLle4 Wfe5 and Black is better. 1 5 .l"ld1 lLld4 1 5 ... Wfe5!?N 1 6.0-0 Wfxe3 1 7.�xe3 l"lxd1 1 8.l"lxd 1 lLla5 is a safe path to equality. 16.f3 After 1 6.0-0N, 1 6 ... Wfc5! reaches the above line with 1 5 .0-0. ( 1 6 ... h6!?N) There is also nothing wrong with 1 6 . . .Wfc5, after which a draw was agreed in Alzate Rohl Montes, Medellin 2003. 17.�f4 Wfc5 18 . ..t>f2 l"lhe8 19.�e5 lLlxb3 20.axb3 Wfxe3t 2 I .t>xe3 lLld5t 22.lLlxd5 l"lxd5 Neither player should have realistic winning chances from this position.

15 ... tlJd4 16.ttle4 tt1xe4!N After 1 6 ...�xe4 1 7.fxe4 Wfc5 1 8 .c3 lLlxb3 19.axb3 Wfxe3t 20.�xe3 ..t>b7 2 1 .�g5± Black was unable to solve his problems in Naiditsch ­ Feller, Germany 2008.

24... �e4t The move repetition results in equality. Future games will doubtlessly shed more light on 1 2 . . . lLlc6!?, but based on the combination of presently available games and my own analysis, it looks to be fully viable and has the bonus of requiring nowhere near as rigorous preparation as the main line with 1 2 . . .�c5.

Conclusion The 6.�c4 system has always been known as a sharp and aggressive choice, and even the relatively calm variation C 1 with short castling is anything but boring. Black does not have to panic, and his careful and patient development, possibly in conjunction with the manoeuvre ...Wfb6-b7, will tame White's initiative. A different cup of coffee is the wildly popular and ultra-aggressive 8 .�g5 �e7 9.Wff3 Wfc7 (C2), in which each move can make or break the result for either player. Certain lines have been analysed out to a final result, but others have barely been tested. Anybody who enjoys adrenalin-fuelled chess should find rich rewards, although I also made an effort to include less wild options such as the final variation C222) 1 2 ... lLlc6!?, which shows that these rich positions contain something for everyone.

English Attack The English Patient - 6.ie3 e5

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

Variation Index l .e4 c5 2.lDf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lDxd4 liJf6 5.lDc3 a6 6.i.e3 e5 A) 7.lDde2 i.e6 AI) 8.liJ g3 A2) 8.f4 liJbd7 9.f5 i.c4 A21) lO.lD g3 A22) lO.liJcl d5! A221) l l .i.xc4 A222) l l.exd5 B) 7.lDf3 �c7 Bl) 8.i.g5 B2) 8.a4 i.e7 B21) 9.i.e2 B22) 9.a5 C) 7.lDb3 i.e6 Cl) 8.£4 exf4 9.i.xf4 lDc6 C l l) IO.�d2 d5!? C l l l) 1 1.0-0-0 C1 12) l l.exd5 C12) IO.�e2 C2) 8.�d2 C3) 8.f3 h5!? C31) 9.lDd5 C32) 9.i.e2 C33) 9.�d2 liJbd7 10.0-0-0 gc8 l l.®bl i.e7 C331) 12.lDd5 C332) 12.i.d3

286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 293 295 295 297 299 300 300 301 302 303 305 309 310 312 316 318 319

h

286

English Attack

England became a chess force to be reckoned with in the 1 980s thanks to an explosion of good players and many novel opening ideas, including what became known as the English Attack - an aggressive system based on the moves i.e3, f3 and g4, which became a feared weapon against the Scheveningen and Najdorf as well as some other Sicilian variations. In simple terms, White intends to castle long and hurl his g- and h-pawns up the board to threaten the enemy king. It seems a bit crude, but over the years the supporters of White's cause have come up with increasingly sophisticated ways of combining the kingside attacking plan with active operations in the centre and sometimes even on the queenside, depending on his opponent's reaction. As early as the sixth move, Black faces a fundamental decision regarding whether to advance his e-pawn one or two squares, the choice being largely a matter of personal taste. Given the status of 6.i.e3 as one of the pre­ eminent anti-Najdorf lines at White's disposal, I have decided to offer coverage of both 6 . . . e5 and 6 . . . e6, so that the reader can choose the option that best suits his own style. We will begin by investigating the former in the present chapter.

The pawn formation with ... d6 and ... e5 is arguably the more thematic choice for fans of the Najdor£ Compared with the more reserved 6 . . . e6, Black loses some flexibility in the centre but gains space, while winning a tempo and driving the enemy knight away from its ideal location on d4. At this point White must make a decision with far-reaching consequences. We will start by considering the slightly quirky A) 7.ctJde2, followed by the more orthodox B) 7.ctJf3 and finally the main line of C) 7.ctJb3.

A) 7.ctJde2 This looks like an odd choice, but White hopes to reposition the knight, usually on g3. The idea has been used with success by several strong players, most notably Nisipeanu, and should certainly be respected.

l.e4 c5 z.cllj f3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.ctJxd4 c!tJf6 5.ctJc3 a6 6..ie3 e5 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

7 .ie6 ..•

This standard developing move has been Black's normal choice, although several other moves are playable. Here is an exotic one: 7 . . . 'Llg4!? It seems a bit cheeky to move the only developed piece for a second time, but the precious bishop cannot move away from e3 due to the nasty possibility of . . .�b6. 8.�d2

287

Chapter 1 5 - 6.!e3 e5 8.ttJd5 ttJxe3 9.fxe3 ttJc6 1 0.ttJec3 .ie6 l l ..ic4 .ie7= 8 . . . ttJxe3 9.Wxe3 .ie6 1 0.f4 Or 1 0.0-0-0 .ie7 1 l .'it>b 1 ttJd7 12.f4, Ringel - Hummeling, e-mail 1 998, 12 . . . g6N with similar ideas to the main line below.

A1) S.liJg3 liJc6 It is worth mentioning the instructive mistake 8 . . . b5?! as played in Asrian - Thorfinnsson, Kerner 2007. Here White could have punished his opponent's overly eager opening play with 9.a4!N b4 l O.ttJd5 .ixd5 1 l .exd5 1Wc7 1 2 . .ie2± The combination of White's bishop pair and Black's weakened queenside adds up to an unhappy future for the second player.

9.!e2 g6!?

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 0 . . . g6!?N This looks like a slight improvement over 1 0 . . ..ie7 l l .f5 .ic4 1 2.ttJg3 hfl 1 3 .ttJxfl ttJd7 1 4.1Wf3 .ig5 1 5 .ttJe3 he3 1 6.1Wxe3 1Wb6 1 7.1Wxb6 ttJxb6 1 8.0-0-0± Timman ­ Vazquez Igarza, Amsterdam 2006. 1 1 .0-0-0 ttJc6 12.fxe5 ttJxe5 1 3.ttJd4 .ie7= White will find it difficult to achieve much without the dark-squared bishop.

At this point White can choose between improving his knight with A1) S.liJg3 and commencing active operations with A2) 8.f4.

9 . . . d5 1 0.exd5 ttJxd5 1 l .ttJxd5 1Wxd5 1 2 .1Wxd5 .ixd5 was about equal in Roy Chowdhury - Ramesh, Chennai 2008. Instead the text move aims to keep some complexity in the position, while playing to restrict the knight on g3.

10.1Wd2 h5 l l.lLld5 hd5 12.exd5 lbe7 13.!g5 lLlh7 Black should definitely avoid the greedy 1 3 . . . ttJfxd5? 14.ttJe4 f5 1 5 ..ic4 when he has real problems.

14...6 15.0-0-0 llJxg5 16.hxg5 �b6=

288

English Attack

Black has every reason to feel happy with the outcome of the opening.

A2) 8.£4

�·� �� �:7§ �; w -, , , ' " "/� · · � �� ��-� �% "/_}- - -%� 6 · � r�.i.� • 5 � �� ____ ___ __ ,;� � � � � 4 � � ��-;}---- %� � �% '"//- �"to 3 � �- � . 2 :�� ;� �� f� � u ,� �l� fw -� 8

7

� ? �): .a �!ia

�§'m'

,/

.

�----� a

b

c

d

�'" "� e

f

g

h

8.. lLlbd7 This has been the most popular move, although in practice Black has scored most heavily with: 8 . . . g6!? By preventing f5, Black maintains more tension in the position. 9.h3 Here are a few other possibilities: 9.�d2 ctJc6 1 0.ctJg3 exf4 1 1 .ixf4 d5 Very often the advance of the black d-pawn equalizes, as the knight on g3 will not be terribly useful. 1 2.exd5 ( 1 2.ig5 d4 1 3.ctJd5 ig7 1 4.ic4 h6=) 12 ... ctJxd5 1 3.ctJxd5 �xd5 1 4.�xd5 ixd5 1 5 .0-0-0 0-0-0= White had no trace of an advantage and a draw was agreed in Jenni - Vitiugov, Biel 2007. 9.g3 ctJbd7 1 0.ig2 ie7 1 1 .h3 2"lc8 1 2.0-0 ( 1 2.g4 exf4 1 3.ctJxf4 0-0 1 4.ctJxe6 fXe6=) 1 2 . . . b5 (Black should avoid 1 2 . . . exf4 1 3.ctJxf4 0-0 1 4.ctJxe6 fXe6 1 5 .h4! ctJe5 1 6.ih3 �d7 1 7.ctJd5±) 1 3.a3 Parligras Kovacevic, Dresden 2008 , 1 3 . . .ic4N 1 4.f5 ctJb6 Black benefits from healthy control over the centre. 9 . . .h5

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 0.£Xe5 The untested 1 0 .�d3!?N ctJc6 1 1 .0-0-0 2"lc8 leads to an interesting position with mutual chances. The other move to have been tried is 1 0.g3 ctJbd7 1 1 .ig2 b5 1 2.b3 This position was reached in Nisipeanu - Dominguez Perez, Foros 2007, and here Black should have played 1 2 . . . b4N (The game continuation of 1 2 ... ctJc5?! was insufficient to equalize.) 1 3 .ctJd5 ctJxd5 1 4.exd5 if5 1 5 .0-0 2"lc8 1 6.2"lcl ih6 1 7.�d2 0-0 1 8.�xb4 2"le8� With sufficient compensation for Black. 1 0 . . . dxe5 1 1 .�xd8t �xd8 1 2.0-0-0t ctJbd7 In theory White has a slight development advantage, but his ambitions are hampered by the badly-placed knight on e2. 1 3 .ctJgl !? White decides it is worth investing two tempi to improve the knight. 1 3.g3N �c7 1 4.ig2 ih6 should be fine for Black. 1 3 . . . 2"lc8

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Chapter 1 5 - 6.ie3 e5 1 4 ..id3 In the event of 1 4.lt:lf3, I doubt that Topalov would have hesitated to execute the thematic Sicilian exchange sacrifice: 1 4 ... E1xc3! 1 5.bxc3 .ia3t 1 6.'it>b l lt:lxe4 1 n''1d3 'it>c?+ Another possibility is 14 ..ig5 .ih6 1 5 ..ixh6 E1xh6 1 6.lt:lf3 'it>e7 17.lt:lg5 h4, with no problems for Black. 14 . . ..ih6 1 5 .hh6 l=%xh6 1 6.lt:lf3 'it>e7 1 7.lt:lg5 h4 1 8 ..ie2 �c5 1 9.l=%hfl �h8 20.�d3 �hc8 Black was at least equal in Nisipeanu Topalov, Sofia 2007. His pieces are operating in near-perfect harmony, and he went on to win after seizing the initiative with a thematic advance of the queenside pawns.

9.f5 It is doubtful that White can gain much from delaying this advance. One ofthe rare games in which he attempted to do so continued 9.1Mfd2 l=%c8 1 O.f5 .ic4 1 1 .lt:lg3 and now 1 1 . . .h5!? led to an double-edged strategic fight in Borisek Hulak, Murska Sobota 2006. (More orthodox alternatives such as 1 l . . ..ie7 and l l .. .b5 were also quite satisfactory, and can be compared with the main line below.)

9 ic4 .••

289

1 0.b3?! is rather risky due to the destabilizing of the knight on c3: 1 0 . . ..ixe2 1 l ..ixe2 �c8 ( 1 1 ...1Mfa5!?N also looks promising, for instance 1 2.id2 E1c8 1 3.lt:ld5 1Mfc5 with promising play for Black.) 1 2.1Mfd2? This suffers from a tactical refutation. (The only chance was 1 2.1Mfd3!N, although Black is still at least equal.) 12 ... d5! 1 3.lt:lxd5 lt:lxe4 1 4.1Mfd1 1Mfh4t 1 5.'it>fl lt:lg3t 1 6.'it>g1 lt:lxh1 1 7.b l 0-0 16 ..ixf6?! (White should have preferred 1 6.lt:Jh5, although even here after 1 6 ... lt:Jc5 1 7.1Mfe2 lt:lcxe4 1 8.lt:lxf6t lt:lxf6 1 9.ixf6 .ixf6 20.lt:Jd5 1Mfd8+ White should fight for equality in the position with a missing pawn.) 1 6 ... lt:lxf6 1 7.lt:lfl White is so close to achieving his dream central clamp with lt:le3 and lt:lcd5, but he is j ust one tempo too slow. 8 7 6 5 4

/.�/�iii;� 3 �{///�jfo.� 2 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

English Attack

290

17 . . . b4! Of course! 1 8 .ltJd5 l2'lxd5 1 9.Wfxd5 i.g5! 20.h4 i.h6 2 l .Wid3 E1c8+ White's plan has failed, and he is left wondering how to solve the problem of his poorly coordinated pieces, Saric - Palac, Zagreb 2009.

13 ...i.e7 14.E1acl 0-0 White has the makings of a huge positional advantage, if only the knight on g3 could easily teleport itself to within easy reach of the d5square. But in the absence of such trickery, the reality is that Black's queenside pressure gives him the upper hand.

8 7 6 5 4 3 2

20.lLlfl lLlg4 21.h3 lbxe3 22.lbxe3 i.b6+ White will have a hard time defending his weaknesses while preventing Black's active pieces from infiltrating his position.

A22) lO.lLlcl This looks like a better try for White.

1

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

15.lLld5 1 5 .l2'lh5 b5 1 6.l2'lxf6t l2'lxf6 1 7.a3 E1c8+ Black has strong pressure on the c-file, and a sacrifice on c3 is a real possibility.

15 ... lbxd5 16.exd5 White has relinquished the piece outpost on d5, in the hope of utilizing the e4-square to activate or exchange what had previously been his misplaced knight. But even this plan turns out not to be perfect.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

lO dS! •..

16 ... tl:lf6 17.c3 :Ek8 18.�fdl This position was reached in Van der Weide - Naiditsch, Belgium 2003, and here Black could have cemented his advantage with:

This well-timed strike should solve all of Black's opening problems. I also checked the same idea after the preliminary bishop exchange:

Chapter 1 5 - 6.1e3 e5 l O . . .ixfl l l .Eixfl And now: l l . . .d5!? Here is one other example to illustrate the potential dangers for Black: l l . . .Eic8 1 2.lbb3 b5 1 3 .a3 1e7 1 4.\Wd3 '1Wc7 1 5 .0-0-0 \Wc4 1 6.1g5 h6 1 7.1h4 0-0 1 8.\Wxc4 Elxc4 1 9.ctJa5 Elc7 20.1xf6 ctJxf6 2 l .ctJd5 ctJxd5 22.Eixd5 Elfc8 23.c3 h5 24.Wc2 With a big advantage for White who went on to win the game Nisipeanu Areshchenko, Foros 2006. The text move was tried in one high­ level game, but White was able to reach a favourable endgame with minimal fuss: 1 2.ctJxd5 1 2.exd5 transposes to line A222. 1 2 . . .ctJxe4 1 3.ctJb3 t2Jdf6 14.tLlxf6t ctJxf6 1 5 .\Wxd8t Elxd8 1 6.1g5 1e7 1 7.1xf6 1xf6 1 8 .c3

291

A221) l l.hc4 dxc4 12.'?9f3 b5!? Black can equalize effortlessly with 12 . . .1c5 1 3.ctJ l e2 he3 14.'Wxe3 b5 (or 14 . . . 'Wb6N=) as in H. Pedersen - A. Del Vecchio, e-mail 2006. The text move keeps the position more complicated and challenging for both sides.

13.tLl le2 b4 14.tLld5 ltlxd5 1 5.exd5 ltlf6 16.0-0-0 .id6 Another possibility was 1 6 . . . e4!?N 1 7.'1Wh3 '1Wa5 1 8 .Wb l 0-0-0 1 9.1g5 Elxd5 20.ctJg3 with a messy position.

17.g4 1 7 .1g5 might also lead to tricky complications after 1 7 . . . e4! 1 8.'1We3 0-0 1 9.\Wd4 c3!? (or 1 9 . . . Eie8!? 20.\Wxc4 1e5, with fair compensation for the pawn) 20.1xf6 cxb2t 2 1 .'1Wxb2 gxf6 Both kings have been left exposed and the position remains unclear but roughly balanced.

17...b3!

After the recommended move, White has tested two natural responses: A221) l l.hc4 and A222) l l.exd5.

This is much more interesting than 17 . . . h6 1 8 .h4 '1Wa5 1 9.g5 b3 20.cxb3 cxb3 2 l .axb3 hxg5 22.hxg5 Elxh l 23 .\Wxhl tLlg4 24.\Wf3 ctJxe3 25.\Wxe3 \Wc5t± when Black will have to fight for a draw in the endgame.

18.cxb3

292

English Attack

After 1 8.axb3 cxb3 1 9.g5 ( 1 9.cxb3 would transpose to the main line below) 1 9 ... bxc2 20.�xc2 ltld7 2 1 .ltlg3 E(b8 the white king does not feel especially safe.

18 ...cxb3 19.ax:b3!N

14 . . . ltlbxd5 1 5.0-0-0 lLlxc3 1 6.ltlxc3 Wxd3 1 7.E(xd3 E(d8= The position is peaceful and quite safe for Black.

13.VMf3

This is the most challenging approach. Instead after the timid 1 9.�bl bxa2t 20.�al e4 2 1 .Wg2 i.e5 Black was at least equal in Nisipeanu - Topalov, Vitoria Gasteiz 2007.

1 3 .�g5 did not make much of an impression after 1 3 ... i.b4 1 4.ltl l e2 and draw was agreed in Sakelsek - Czakon, Aschach 2006. In the final position 1 4 . . . Wxd5N and 1 4 . . . ltlbxd5N both look comfortable for Black.

19...h6

13 ... li)bxd5 14.li) le2 li)xe3

It is worth taking a moment to slow White's kingside play. From this position a possible continuation might be:

2o.fs+ White had little to show for his missing pawn in Leko - Topalov, Monte Carlo (rapid) 2006.

15 Wfxc6 16.Wfxb6 •..

White has also tried 1 6.0-0-0 b5 1 7.ig5 ie7 1 8.id3 l"lc8 1 9.1t>bl ltld7 20.ie3 d5 2 l .c3 l"ld8 22.l"lhel 0-0 23.ic2 The pressure against the central pawns gave White good chances to hold the balance in Cvek - Areshchenko, Germany 2007.

•

1 8.if2 l"lxb2 1 9.ixa6 d5 20.0-0 id6 2 l .c4 d4 22.ib5t lt>d8 23.a4 lt>c7+ Black's strong centre gave him the upper hand in Erdogdu Zakharstov, Olomouc 2009.

18 ... l"lxb2 19..ha6 d5 The ending should be approximately equal, as White's bishop pair and passed a-pawn are balanced out by Black's powerful centre, fewer pawn islands and active rook.

20.i>d2 i>d7 21.l"lhbl L3 22.l"lxb2 .hb2 23.i.b5t i>e6 24.l"lbl !"laS! 25.l"lxb2 l"lxa5 The position remains in balance and the game Bologan - Atalik, Wijk aan Zee 2007, was eventually drawn. This whole line appears to put 1 2.ltla5 out of commission as a try for an advantage, so future attempts will probably focus on White's alternatives on move 12.

C32) 9 .ie2 •

Given that g2-g4 is no longer an option, it makes a certain amount of sense for White to abandon all thoughts of aggression and settle for simple development.

313

Chapter 1 5 - 6.ie3 e5 It is more reasonable for Black to preserve the bishop on this occasion, as the reply �d3 would entail the loss of a tempo for White. 1 2.'®d2 �e7 12 ... g6 is also quite reasonable: 1 3.ctJa5 '®c7 14.0-0 �g7 1 5 .c4 b6 16.ltJc6 ctJb8 1 7.ctJxb8 (17.l"i:ad1 ctJxc6 1 8.dxc6 cJle7 1 9.'®b4 '®xc6 20.�d3 a5= Black's extra pawn compensates for the undesirable position of his king.) 17 ... l"i:xb8 1 8.b4 0-0 1 9.l"i:acl l"i:fd8 20.a4 '®d7 2 l .a5 Despite White's progress on the queenside the position remained approximately even in Nijboer - Van Wely, Wijk aan Zee 1 998. 1 3.0-0 '®c7 1 4.c4 0-0! Black should continue mobilizing his pieces without being too worried about the weakness of the h5-pawn. 14 ... b6?! is a bit too slow. One game continued 1 5.f4 g6 1 6.fxe5 dxe5, Ponomariov - Cvitan, Neum 2000, and here White could have obtained some initiative with 1 7.l"i:acl !?N a5 1 8.c5! bxc5 19.�b5. 1 5.f4 1 5.l"i:acl a5! 1 6.a4 �g6 17.'tt>h l b6 was comfortable for Black in De Vreugt Karjakin, Wijk aan Zee 2003. 1 5 ... exf4 1 6.�f4 �g6 1 7.l"i:acl

Benidorm 2002, but the text move keeps more life in the game. 1 8.l"i:f2 �h4! Provoking a slight weakening. 1 9.g3 �f6 20.c5 ctJe5 Black has promising counterplay.

10...ie7 Black obviously cannot contemplate a kingside fianchetto when the d-file is still open. However, he could have considered 1 0 ... b5!? l l .'®d2 �e7 12.l"i:fd1 ltJb6 1 3.�fl '®c7 14.'®f2 ctJa4! This is an important motif in the battle for counterplay. 1 5 .ctJxa4 bxa4 1 6.�b6 '®b8 17.ctJa5 ctJd7 1 8.�e3 '®xb2 1 9.ctJc4 �xc4 20.�xc4 '®c3 2 l .'®e2 0-0 22.�d2 '®d4t 23.�e3 '®c3 White failed to get any advantage as his queenside was shattered in Ivanchuk - Dominguez Perez, Havana 2006. It should be mentioned that White can always shuffle his move order around with 1 O.a4 �e7 1 1 .0-0, so Black should not count on being able to play this way. s

i.� �� � B*� � �----"---��

7m•m�� · •m --*-- m � 5. . � •• : 4 � m m 8m � �

6

%/:

N/,0

%�f�

%

3 �0� � 8 � � 28�8m�m8� r--�----" �� ��-k{- �� � �v�Mm 1

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 7 ... l"i:fe8!?N Black can equalize comfortably with 1 7 ... '®b6t 1 8.�e3 �g5 1 9.�xb6 �xd2 20 .CtJxd2 CtJxb6 as in Ponomariov- Karjakin,

a

l l.a4 V!fc7

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

It is hard to choose between this and the equally playable alternative: 1 l ...l"i:c8 1 2.a5 h4 1 3.'®d2 g6 Black intends to castle artificially by walking his king to g7. 14.l"i:fd l

314

English Attack

There is also 14.tt:lc1 Wfc7 1 5J''\d 1 Wf8 1 6J''\a4 (or 1 6.i.fl Wg7 1 7 .i.f2 l"\h5 1 8 .Wfe1 l'l:e8 1 9.1"\d2 Grischuk - Popov, Elista 2000, 1 9 ...Wffc6N 20.ctJd3 d5 2 l .exd5 ctJxd5 22.ctJxd5 i.xd5=) 16 ... Wffc6 17.l"'a1 ( 17.ctJ 1a2 d5 1 8.exd5 ctJxd5 1 9.ctJxd5 Wfxa4 20.ctJac3 Wfxa5 2 l .ctJxe7 Wxe7 22.ctJd5t Wfxd5 23.Wib4t bl has been White's most popular choice. 1 1 ...'1Wc7 1 2.i.d3 h4 1 3.f4 b5 14.l"i:hel Fixing the centre is not so clever for White: 14.f5 i.c4 1 5.a3 0-0 1 6.'\Wel l"i:fc8+

20.lDcl 20.ltk3 ttJc5 is also unpleasant for White.

20 .JMfe6 .

Black will soon collect the d-pawn, after which White's bishop pair will provide only negligible compensation.

C33) 9.'1Mrd2 lDbd7 10.0-0-0 The plan with the long castling is normal for the English Attack, and probably the most serious test of the whole 8 ... h5 line. White could also switch plans with 9.ttJd5 or 9.i.e2, transposing to variations C3 1 or C32 respectively.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

14 ... l"i:b8!? The great master of the 8 . . .h5 system finds yet another creative idea. This time Topalov anticipates an exchange of one of his minor pieces on c4, and thus places his rook accordingly. 1 5 .i>bl 1 5.f5 i.c4 1 6.'1We2 b4 1 7.tLlbl i.xd3 1 8.'1Wxd3 0-0+ The e4-f5 structure fails to deliver much for White in this line. 1 5 ... tt:lb6 Continuing the plan. 1 6.'\Wf2 1 6.fxe5 dxe5 17.'1Wf2 b4 1 8.ttJd5 ttJbxd5 1 9.exd5 ttJxd5 20.i.c5 tt:lf4 transposes.

Chapter 1 5 - 6.�e3 e5 1 6 ... b4!? 16 ... ttJc4 also looks reasonable, and was subsequently tested in a couple of high-level encounters.

b

a

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 7.ttJd5!N This is more challenging than 1 7.tDe2 ttJc4 1 8.ttJd2 (1 8.i.cl aS 1 9.fS �d7 20.ttJd2 ttJxd2t 2 l .hd2 a4+) 1 8 ...ttJxe3 1 9.�xe3 aS 20.b3 a4+ With two bishops a very safe king Black had the upper hand in Svidler Topalov, Morelia/Linares 2007. 17 ... ttJbxdS 1 8.exdS ttJxdS 1 9.fxeS dxeS 20.�cS ttJf4!? 20 ... ttJc3t? does not work: 2 l .bxc3 �xb3 22.cxb3 �xeS 23.�fS± The opposite­ coloured bishops might turn out to be a great blessing for the attacking side. 2 l .�xe71t>xe7 22.ttJcS :!:'\bd8= Black is doing fine despite the location of his king.

317

1 1. 'i!?bl White usually includes this prophylactic king move at some point. Sometimes he begins with: 1 1 .h3 White intends to play f4, but does not want to worry about a knight appearing on g4. 1 1 ...i.e7 1 2.i.e2 12.f4 bS 1 3.�d3 i.c4 1 4.mb1 (14.g4 hxg4 1 S .hxg4 :!:'\xh1 1 6.:!:'\xh1 ttJxg4= The opening of the h file is not so dangerous for Black.) 14 ...�c7 1 S.:!:'\hfl h4 1 6.:!:'\f2 0-0 1 7.:!:'1g1 b4 1 8.ttJdS (After 1 8.ttJe2 dS 1 9.exdS ttJxdS+ the White pieces are ill-prepared for the coming storm.) 1 8 ...ttJxdS 1 9.exdS Thorhallsson - M. Ashley, Bermuda 1 999. 1 9 ... ttJf6N 20.:!:'\d1 ttJxdS 2 l .�xc4 ttJxe3 22.�xe3 �xc4+ Black is in the driving seat with his good pieces and bishop stronger than the knight. 1 2 ... h4 1 3.f4 1 3.mb 1 bS 14.:!:'\he1 ttJb6 1 S.�xb6 �xb6 16.f4 0-0 17.�f3 (After 1 7.ttJdS hdS 1 8.exdS e4 1 9.�g4 :!:'\c4 Black has a stable centre and the dS-pawn might become weak.) 1 7... :!:'\c4 1 8.�d3 :!:'\fc8 1 9.fxeS dxeS 20.ttJdS i.xdS 2 l .exdS i.d6+ Onischuk Dydyshko, Minsk 2006.

1 3 ... bS Black should almost always just ignore the pawn on f4 in the 8 ... hS-line. 14.�f3 b4 1 S .ttJe2 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

318

English Attack

1 5 .l2Ja4 Vfic7 16.f5 �c4 1 7.Vfixb4 d5+ 15 ... a5 1 6.�bl Vfic7 1 7.Ei:hel a4 1 8.ctJbcl Vfib7+ White is already in big trouble, and his position soon collapsed in Mutschnik - A. Shneider, Alushta 2000.

C331) 12.lLld5 The knight jump to d5 introduces a somewhat dangerous concept.

12 i.xd5 •••

1 2 ... C2Jxd5 has been about equally popular, but the text is my own preference. Obviously there are some similarities with variation C3 1 , except for the fact that in that line the white king invariably opted for short castling.

l l ....te7

13.exd5 liJb6

� ��-'"" ,%�,��'��� � _ 76 m%l�t/o'_�·--l11w� ;� � 'tr•' " "; , � L' : ��__";� � � � � !/ ��d � -' '��0'-' 3 �!'?! � ,,

8

&?� •;�r

�

At this point several moves have been tried, but I will focus on the two most important ideas, namely C331) 12)Lld5, immediately changing the situation in the centre, and C332) 12 .td3, continuing development and intending to follow up with f4. •

12.h3 has also been popular, but in most cases it will simply transpose to line C232 after 12 ... b5 1 3.�d3. One other idea is: 12.g3 b5 1 3.ctJd5 �xd5 14.exd5 ctJb6 1 5.�h3 This was the idea behind White's 1 2th move, but it should not be too dangerous. 1 5 ... '2Jc4 1 6.Vfie2 E':c7 17.f4 0-0 1 8.�f2N (After the strange-looking 1 8.Ei:hgl !?, Lutz - Gommers, Belgium 2004, Black could have obtained good play with both 1 8 ... E':e8N and 1 8 ...Vfia8!?N.) 18 ... Ei:e8 1 9 .ctJd2 exf4 20.gxf4 ctJxd2t 2 l .E':xd2 �f8= Black intends ... C2Je4 with a healthy position.

�� �-

;?' �

�

/,,

�·�it.ffi a

14.i.xb6!

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

This is more challenging than 14.Vfia5 ctJc4 1 5.hc4 ( 1 5.Vfixd8t �xd8= The middlegame without queens poses no great problems.) 1 5 ... El:xc4 1 6.Vfid2 Vfid7 1 7.Vfid3 E':c8 1 8.g3 0-0 1 9.h3 Vlia4 20.ctJd2 Vfib5 2 l .c4 Vfib4 22.a3 Vlia4 23.c5 Ei:fd8= Black is doing fine despite the smart advance of the white c-pawn, Hracek - Ftacnik, Czech Republic 2000.

14 Vfixb6 1S ..td3 •••

The alternative bishop development should not cause too many problems for Black, as long as he makes a correct decision: 1 5.g3 0-0 1 6.�h3 E':c7! ( 1 6 ... Ei:a8 has been more popular, but it has scored badly and I think the text move is better.) 17.Ei:hel E':e8 18.f4 e4 1 9.�g2

Chapter 1 5 - 6 . .ie3 e5 .if8= Black was comfortable enough in Liu Dede - Wu Shaobin, Singapore 1 998.

15 ...0-0 Though it may feel strange to castle with the pawn on h5, practice has shown that Black's defences are still resilient enough.

16J:!he1 16 ..if5 leads nowhere for White after 1 6 ... E.k4 1 7.g3 1"\e8 1 8.1"\he1 .id8 1 9.c3 aS 20.1&d3 1"1c7 2 l .ctJd2 g6 22 ..ih3 @g7= Balcerak - Ftacnik, Germany 200 1 .

With this move White continues development and prepares f4.

16 ....id8 has been more popular, but it looks logical to develop another piece and prepare to contest the e-file.

his

'llj�j��rJI

s ,

76 �£-!J�hlJ�� ,_ ��..t� m

� �� '""%wil""';� f 4 ll�ll·!t�llll 3 ��/� l:ZJ�Jt�l� ""';�"'"�� � �-� 5

2 1

16 .. J:Ue8!?

319

[j��[j��

�[j�� �

��Ria Ri a

c

b

d

12...b5 13.h3

e

f

g

h

The main purpose of this move is to prepare g4, thus enticing the black h-pawn to take another step forwards. In the event of 1 3.f4, Black should respond with 13 ...1&c7, with similar ideas to the main line.

13 ...h4 14.£4 '?Mc7

As usual for the 8 . . . h5 line, Black should simply ignore the f4-pawn.

1SJ:!he1 a

b

17.f4 .i£8!?

c

d

e

f

g

h

Black could have secured an equal game with 1 7... l2lxd5 1 8.fxe5 dxe5 1 9.1"\xeS l2lf6, but instead chooses to keep things more complex.

This has been almost an automatic choice. Immediate action should not lead anywhere for White: 1 5 .fxe5 l2lxe5 1 6.l2ld4 l2lc4 1 7 .1& e 1 l2lxe3 1 8.1&xe3 1&c5 1 9.ctJd5 was seen in Firman - Areshchenko, Sudak 2002, and here Black should have played:

18 ..ie4 l:!c4 19JMfd3 l:!xe4 20J:!xe4 lbxe4 21 .'?Mxe4 �f2 22.f5 .ie7 Black was at least equal in Hynes - Djoudi, e-mail 2003. His bishop is not great, but his queen has considerable nuisance value.

C332) 12..id3 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

320

English Attack

19 ... tLlxd5!N (The game continuation of 19 ...hd5 20.exd5 tLlxd5 could have been punished by 2 1 .'.Wf3!± when the opposite­ coloured bishops greatly enhance White's attack.) 20.exd5 �xd5 2 1 .l:'!:hel l:'!:c7 22.'.Wf4 l:'!:h5 Black should be at least equal here.

15 ...�c4! Tournament practice has demonstrated that this is Black's most promising method of handling the position. The idea is simple, but effective: Black intends to play ... b4 and meet tLld5 with ... tLlxd5, without having his bishop exposed to attack after the reply exd5. 15 ... 0-0!?N 1 6.a3 l:'!:b8! 17.f5 ( 1 7.�f2 tLlh5 1 8.fxe5 t2Jxe5 19.�e2 tLlg3 20.hg3 hxg3oo) 17 ... a5 1 8.�f2 �xd3 1 9.'.Wxd3 b4 20.axb4 l:'!:xb4 2 1 .tLla2 l:'!:b8 22.hh4 (22.'.Wc3 l:'!:b5+) 22 ...a4 23.tLld2 '.Wc7�

1 6.�f2!? might encourage Black to change his plans slightly with 1 6 ...hd3!?N ( 1 6 ... b4 1 7.tLld5 tLlxd5 1 8.exd5 hd3 1 9.'.Wxd3 0-0 20.t2Jd4! This reveals the point behind White's clever 1 6th move. [20.l:'!:e2 a5 2 1 .'.Wb5 �f6oo] 20 ...�f6 2 1 .tLlc6 exf4 22.tLle7t �xe7 23.l:'!:xe7 '.Wd8 24.�xh4 tLle5 25.l:'!:xe5 '.Wxh4 White could claim no more than a negligible advantage in Tiviakov - Quinn, Bratto 1 999.) 17.cxd3 (17.'.Wxd3 exf4) 17 ... b4 1 8.t2Je2 '.Wb7 1 9 .l:'!:cl 0-0 20 .fxe5 dxe5 2 1 .l:'!:xc8 l:'!:xc8 22.l:'!:cl l:'!:xcl t 23.tLlexcl tLlh5= Black is completely safe, despite having a few pawns on the dark squares.

8 7 6 5 4 3 2

1

a

16... l:'!:b8!

a

16.a3!?

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Given Black's intentions, this seems like a principled reply. We should not underestimate the influence that the knight exerts from the c3-square. An example of what White should avoid is:

16.'.Wf2 b4 1 7.t2Jd5 t2Jxd5 1 8.exd5 �xd3 1 9.l:'!:xd3 0-0 20.l:'!:cl a5+ Black's activity on the queenside was developing unhindered in Mastrovasilis - Efimenko, Istanbul 2003.

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

I believe this to be the most promising reaction to White's last move. I was not quite satisfied with the following alternatives: 16 ... t2Jb6?! 1 7.'.Wf2!N ( 17.�xb6 '.Wxb6 1 8 .t2Jd5 tLlxd5 19 .exd5 was seen in Lutz - Ki. Georgiev, Plovdiv 2003, and here after 1 9 ... 0-0N 20.�f5 l:'!:cd8= Black has nothing to fear as his counterplay against the d5-pawn balances the chances.) 17 ... t2Ja4 1 8.tLlxa4 bxa4 19.�b6 '.Wb8 20.�xc4 l:'!:xc4 2 1 .tLla5 l:'!:c8 22.fxe5 dxe5 23.c4± Black's activity has badly backfired. I spent some time analysing 1 6 ... 0-0!?N 1 7.�f2 �xd3 (17 ... hb3 1 8.cxb3 exf4 1 9.�xh4

32 1

Chapter 1 5 - 6.i.e3 e5 lLle5 20.2"1fl±) but did not find a clear route to equality after 1 8.cxd3!.

17.'?Nfl!N

ctJxe4 22.'1:Wxe7 ctJxc3t 23.bxc3 'I:Wxc4-+) 2 1 ...ctJc5 22.fxe5 dxe5 23.i.xc5 'I:Wxc5 24.'\Wg3±

This looks critical, and is certainly more challenging than the plan seen in the following game: 17.tLld5 ctJxd5 1 8.exd5 i.xd5! 1 9.fxe5 dxe5 20.�g5 i.xg5 2 l .'I:Wxg5 'it>f8!

a

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

22.�f5 (22.�e4 �xe4 23.2"1xe4 l"1c8 24.2"1e2 l"1e8 25.2"1e4 ctJf6 26.2"1xh4 !"1xh4 27.'\Wxh4 g8+) 22 ... ctJf6 23.'1:We3 i.xb3 24.cxb3 g6 25.id3 l"1d8 26.'\WxeS 'I:Wxe5 27.2"1xe5 l"1h5 28.2"1xh5 ctJxh5 With a clearly better endgame for Black, Claridge - Krueger, e-mail 2004.

c

b

19.¥Nf1

d

e

f

g

h

I also checked the following line: 1 9 .fxe5 dxe5 20.'1:Wg3 b4 2 1 .axb4 axb4 22.ctJd5 ctJxd5 23.exd5 (23.ih6 �f6 24.exd5 �xd3 25.�xd3 �fc8 26.�d2 l"1a8 27.�f2 fSoo) 23 ...�xd3 24.2"1xd3 l"1fc8

17...0-0!? This interesting pawn sacrifice should result in promising compensation for Black. 1 7 ... b4 is interesting, but I do not quite trust it. Play may continue: 1 8.axb4 l"1xb4 (Perhaps 1 8 ...�xb3!? could be considered, although exchanging this bishop for a knight brings its own problems.) 1 9.fxe5 ( 1 9.�xc4 2"1xc4 20.�d2 a5 gives Black enough counterplay) 1 9 ... dxe5 20.i.xc4 (20.2"1fl 0-0 2 1 .i.xc4 !"1xc4 is fine for Black, as 22.'\Wxh4? is refuted by 22 ... 2"1xc3 23.bxc3 ctJd5-+) 20 ... 2"1xc4 2 1 .!"1d3 o-O!? 22.'1:Wxh4 !"1bs 23.2"1fa

18.'?Nxh4 a5! 1 8 ... b4 is not quite sufficient to equalize: 1 9.axb4 i.xb3 20.cxb3 �xb4 2 1 .�c2 (2 1 .ic4

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Black maintains decent compensation and White must tread carefully, for instance: 25.2"1cl �a8 26.c4 bxc3 27.2"1dxc3 'I:Wd8 28.�xc8 �xeS 29.2"1xc8 'I:Wxc8+

19 ... b4 20.axb4 axb4 21.�e2 l3fc8 22.�g3 l3a8 23.�£5 i.£8 24.hc4 '?Nxc4 25.'?Ne2 '?Nc6;;

322

English Attack

Conclusion Variation A with 7. l2lde2 fails to produce many sparks under closer scrutiny, which is perhaps not surprising given its artificial appearance. Nevertheless the move is by no means bad, and should be studied carefully. The positional 7.CLlf3 is also not to be underestimated. The various branches of variation B revealed that Black succeeds in maintaining the balance, but needs to combine a sound positional understanding with resolute action in certain critical positions. Finally, the most aggressive and popular retreat is variation C with 7.ctJb3, which will undoubtedly continue to be tested in competitive situations ranging from club chess all the way up to super-GM level, for years to come. My overall conclusion is that the recommended solution of 7 ...�e6 8.f3 h5!? leads to rich and dynamic positions in which Black should be able to maintain a fair share of the chances, although once again it was necessary to find some creative new ideas in certain key variations. The whole line is characterized by deep strategic play combined with a simmering cauldron of potential tactical fireworks lying under the surface - a perfect battleground for fans of the uncompromising Najdorf variation.

English Attack

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

Predator - 6.ie3 e6 7.g4 Variation Index l .e4 c5 2.lLlf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lLlxd4 lLlf6 s.lLlc3 a6 6.i.e3 e6 7.g4 e5 8.lLlf5 h5

A) 9.i.g5 B) 9.gxh5 C) 9.g5 lLlxe4 lO.lLlxg7t bg7 l l.lLlxe4 d5 12.lLlg3 d4 13.i.d2 Wi'd5 Cl) 14J�gl C2) 14.c4!?

A) note to 10.1i:ld5

A) note to l l .h4!?

324 325 327 328 330

C l ) after 20.0-0-0

8

7 6 5

4 3

2 a

b

c

d

e

f

1 6 ...1Wf4!N

g

h

2 a

b

c

d

e

f

1 5 ...1i:la4!N

g

h

a

b

c

d

e

f

20 ... !"1ah8N

g

h

h

English Attack

324

l.e4 cS 2.�£3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.�xd4 �f6 s.�c3 a6 6..ie3 e6 7.g4 �/�; , �."� "'"/-� ,,Y-_,�..t§i � � �-� � %'"//,!""% � 6� •� .t.• �� w� '''"";� � '""%� � � : �� m "';�'0 � �� �%"/ � " ' 3 � � m2 8DZ�Jif-- �� �H 'a' �� A Wll •W� .a. �� .JL �m�U�

8

7

! !

1

��-u-%rlri=�•� a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

This extremely sharp line, known as the Perenyi Attack, is related to the Keres Attack (5 ... e6 6.g4), but White hopes that his .1cl-e3 will prove more useful than Black's ...a7-a6 in the ensuing battle. Matters are not so simple though, as Black can begin an immediate counterattack against the g4-pawn, while it is quite helpful to have prevented a possible check on b5.

A) 9..ig5 hxg4 IO.�dS It is too early for White to give up his dark­ squared bishop: 1 0 ..1xf6 '!Wxf6 1 1 .lLld5 1 1 .'1Wxg4 .1e6 gives Black an easy game, for instance: 1 2.'1Wf3?! ( 1 2.0-0-0 looks better, although Black is still doing nicely after 1 2 ...lLld7 1 3.'1Wf3, Mijovic - Krivokapic, Bar 2005, 1 3 ... 0-0-0N) 1 2 ... tt:ld7 1 3 ..1e2 g6 14.lLle3 '!Wxf3 1 5 ..1xf3 .1h6 1 6.lLlcd5 :B:c8 1 7.c3 he3 1 8.lLlxe3 :B:h4 1 9.0-0 rj;;e7 White was already positionally lost in Bellin - Hillarp Persson, Guernsey 2007. 1 1 ...'\WdS 12.lLlfe3 .1e6 13 ..1e2 lLld7 14 ..1xg4 lLlf6 1 5.lLlxf6t '1Wxf6 1 6.'1We2 This position was reached in Alcazar Jimenez - Martin Rueda, Mondariz 2003, and here Black could have created problems with:

7...e5 7 ... h6 has been more popular, but I believe the text move to be the most challenging response.

8.�f5 hS!? I believe this to be a better practical choice then the more popular 8 ... g6, when play continues 9.g5 gxf5 1 0.exf5! d5 1 1 .'1Wf3 d4 12.0-0-0 with a hugely complicated and irrational position. It is not clear if Black will get a chance to enjoy his (often huge) material advantage, as hardly any of his pieces are playing. Instead our recommended solution is much safer and is gradually winning followers. White has three main responses: A) 9.i.g5, B) 9.gxh5 and C) 9.g5.

a b c d e f g h 1 6 ... '1Wf4!N 1 7 ..1xe6 1 7.0-0-0 '!Wxe4 looks like a safe pawn, while after 1 7.f3 White would have to reckon with 1 7 ... .1e7, when the bishop could become rather active. 17 ... fxe6 1 8.'1Wg4 '!Wxg4 1 8 ... :B:h6!? could also be considered. 1 9.lLlxg4 :B:c8 20.c3 .1e7 White's kingside weaknesses will give him some problems in the ending.

IO..)Ljbd7 There is a second satisfactory continuation in 1 0 ....1xf5 1 1 ..1xf6 gxf6 1 2.exf5 lLld7 1 3 ..1g2

Chapter 1 6 - 6.ie3 e6 7.g4 l"lh4 14.�d3 tt:lb6. From here, best play seems to be 1 5.0-0-0N (This is stronger than the meek 1 5 .tt:lc3?! �c7 16.0-0-0 0-0-0 1 7.id5 ih6t 1 8.Wb 1 Swinkels - Palac, Dresden 2007, since now 18 ... l"lh3!N 1 9.�e4 if4 would be very pleasant for Black.) 1 5 ... tt:lxd5 1 6.ixd5 �d7 1 7.Wb1 l"lc8 With roughly even chances.

325

1 5 ... tt:la4!N (This is a simple improvement over 1 5 ...�c7 16.tt:lxg4 �c6? [Black could still have maintained the balance with 1 6 ...ixf5N 17.exf5 ie7] 1 7.f4 and Black was suffering in Barrientos Chavarriaga- Brkic, Turin 2006.) 1 6.�c4 b5 1 7.�d5 ie6 1 8.�xd8t l"lxd8 1 9.tt:lxg4 ie7 Black's sounder structure gives him the better chances.

l l...g6 Black should exchange or repel his opponent's active pieces. First there is the knight...

1V�Jfe3 i.h6 And now the bishop.

13.hh6 gxh6 14.tlJc4!? The routine 14.tt:lxg4 tt:lxg4 1 5.�xg4 tt:lb6 1 6.�d1 ie6 gives Black a pleasant and easy game.

I4... tlJxe4! Black could have equalized with the solid 1 4 ... tt:lc5, but instead he opts for the most principled and ambitious move.

The more natural 1 1 .�e2 is also not dangerous after 1 1 . ..tt:lb6 1 2.ixf6 (Perhaps White should prefer 12.tt:lde3, A. Heinz - Tiemann, Boeblingen 2009, although after 1 2 ...ixf5N [this is better than the game continuation of 1 2 ... g6?! 13.tt:lxg4] 13.exf5 ie7 14.ig2 �c7 Black is at least equal.) 12 ... gxf6 1 3.tt:lde3 d5 14.0-0-0 d4 1 5.�b1

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

15.ig2 tiJdf6 16.tiJxf6t tljxf6 17.'11Md2 gh5 18.tiJxd6t i>£8 19.0-0-0 '!We7 Black has weathered the storm and emerged with an excellent position in Naiditsch Cvitan, Kusadasi 2006.

B) 9.gxh5

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

326

English Attack

I cannot imagine many scenarios in the Sicilian Defence in which this meek reaction to . . . h7-h5 could aspire to be the best line.

Now that g4-g5 is no longer an option for White, this becomes quite awkward to meet.

1 l ...i.xf5 1 2.exf5 e4 1 3.0-0 tt:lc6 14.a3 ixc3 1 5.bxc3 This position was reached in lonov - Vachier Lagrave, Moscow 2008, and here Black should have played: 1 5 ... Elxh5N With a clear advantage.

IO.i.g5

IO...d4 l l.ctJe2

A couple of other moves have also been tried:

It is doubtful that White gains anything with the preliminary minor piece exchange: 1 l .i.xf6 gxf6 1 2.tt:le2 (or 1 2.tt:lb 1 , Frolochkin - Fedoseev, Peterhof2008, 1 2 ... tt:lc6N 1 3.tt:ld2 �b6 with a good game for Black) 1 2 ...i.xf5 1 3.exf5

9... d5!

10.'\Wf3 d4 1 1 .0-0-0 ixf5 12.�xf5 ( 12.exf5 tt:lbd7 also looks pleasant for Black) was seen in Pikula - Jakovljevic, Niska Banja 1 996. Here it looks promising to play 12 ... tt:lbd7N 13.i.g5 Elxh5, with an excellent game. 10.f4!? White tries to provoke huge complications. 10 ...i.b4!? Black might also have done well to consider 1 O ... d4N, when my main line runs as follows: 1 l .fxe5 tt:lxe4 1 2.tt:lxe4 ixf5 1 3.tt:lg3 �a5t 14.i.d2 �xe5t 1 5.�e2 �xe2t 1 6.i.xe2 i.xc2 1 7.Elc1 d3 1 8.i.d1 tt:lc6 1 9.i.xc2 dxc2 20.Elxc2 Eld8 Black has a safe position with slightly better chances.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

This position was reached in De Jong Goudriaan, Hoogeveen 2008, and here it looks logical for Black to play 1 3 ... tt:lc6N 14.i.g2, and now either 14 . . . Elxh5 or perhaps even the disruptive 14 ...�a5t!?.

u ...L£5 12.exf5 V;Yds 13J'!gl

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

l l .ig2?! White should have preferred 1 1 .tt:lxg7t!?N f8 1 2.exd5, leading to a wildly unclear position with umpteen possibilities.

This looks better than 1 3 .tt:lg3?! tt:lxh5 14.Elg1 tt:lxg3 1 5.hxg3 �e4t ( 1 5 ... Elh2!?N may have been even stronger) 1 6.�e2 �xf5 1 7.i.d2 tt:ld7 1 8.0-0-0 Elc8 when White did not have much to show for the missing pawn in Giri - Kozlov, St Petersburg 2007.

13 ... tlJbd7N This simple move is an improvement over 1 3 ... tt:le4?! 14.i.g2 WaSt 1 5.i.d2 tt:lxd2

Chapter 1 6 - 6.ie3 e6 7.g4 1 6.Wxd2 when White was fine in Cheng Ftacnik, Las Vegas 2006.

14.ig2 'i'b5! The attack on the b-pawn is a bit annoying for White. True, Black may not be threatening to capture the pawn immediately as the white rook would penetrate to b7, but the real point is that the natural plan of Wd2 and 0-0-0 is prevented. Overall I would rate Black's chances as at least equal.

327

12... d4 The expansion in the centre seems a bit daring, but the alternatives fare worse. For instance: 1 2 . . .ig4 1 3.ie2 d4 1 4.id2 ixe2 1 5.Wxe2 Wd5 1 6.0-0 h4 1 7.lt:Jh5 'it>f8 1 8.f4 lt:Jc6 Pelletier - Jaracz, Warsaw 2005, and now after 1 9.f5!N h3 20.:8f2 Black is in trouble.

13.id2 'i'd5

C) 9.g5 This has been by far the most popular choice, and leads to a rich position after the following brief tactical exchange.

9...tlJxe4 lO.tlJxg7t hg7 l l.tlJxe4 d5 We have quite an unusual situation for the early stages of the Sicilian Defence. Black has seized the centre and his pieces have plenty of space; his only concerns are connected with the slight looseness of his pawns.

8

� i,�j_�ll ll

��

"j�ll �s' i•. :s U�illa �- i � � �LJ �· � � � � � � 3 � llll� ll�:1i jill� �r� %%��,� �,� .

4

2 1

b �[!} b - �[!} �b

d- --��� i�t-� m,

__ , __

a

12.tLlg3

Y-

b

c

d

,�, ,;,;

e

f

g

h

Harmless is 1 2.lt:Jf6t il.xf6 1 3.gxf6 il.e6 14.:8g1 lt:Jc6 1 5.il.g2 d4 when a draw was agreed in Todorovic - Aleksic, Budva 2004. A likely continuation would have been 16.ig5 Wb6 when Black is more than happy.

14.il.e2 This does not look too threatening and has never been played at GM level, but that does not mean it is a bad move. 14 ... e4 1 5.c4 A few other moves have been tried: 1 5.il.f4 h4 1 6.lt:Jh5 :8h7 17.:8g1 lt:Jc6 1 8.lt:Jf6t il.xf6 1 9.gxf6 Elh8 20.:8g5 Wds 2 1 .Wd2 Wxf6 22.0-0-0 il.e6 Black was a pawn up with good prospects in Oortwijn ­ Kund, e-mail 2007. 1 5.f3 has been played a few times, but the tense position soon peters out to equality after 1 5 ... d3 1 6.cxd3 exd3 1 7.il.c3 il.xc3t 1 8.bxc3 Wxg5 1 9.Wxd3 lt:Jc6 20.:8b1 :8h6 2 1 . mf2 il.h3 when a draw was agreed in Perez - Blanco Gramajo, e-mail 2006.

328

English Attack

1 5 .. .1l�'c6 16.0-0 h4 1 7.tilh5 This position was reached in Yordanov Grigorov, Plovdiv 2008, and here I suggest: 8 6 5

4

3

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 7...ie5N In the game Black opted for the questionable exchange sacrifice 17 .. J''\x h5?!, and although he went on to win, I do not think the idea was fully justified. 1 S.f4!? id6 1 9.lilf6t mfs Black is not worse in this double-edged position. 14.id3 ig4 1 5.ie4 �d7 1 6.f3 This was White's improvement over a previous game which continued 1 6.if3 lilc6 1 7.�e2 0-0-0 1 8.ixg4 hxg4 1 9.0-0-0 �e6 20.mb1 if8 2 l .f4 exf4 22.ixf4 �xe2 23.lilxe2 id6 when Black was defending successfully in Korneev - Wojtaszek, Evora 2007.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 6 ...ie6!? Another game continued 16 ...ih3 17.!'lg 1 , and here Black should have played 1 7 ... tilc6N (Instead in Korneev - Mogranzini, Porto Mannu 2008, Black erred with 1 7...h4?!, inviting the strong manoeuvre 1 8.tilh l ! followed by lilf2 hitting the bishop, and later tild3 when the knight was ideally placed.) The knight on g3 is not so well­ placed, so there is no reason to drive it to a better square. Nevertheless, after 1 8.�e2 (Black should certainly not be afraid of 1 8.f4? ig4 1 9.if3 0-0-0 when White is in trouble.) 1 8 ... tile7 1 9.0-0-0 it seems to me that White's chances are slightly higher. 17.h4 This looks better than 1 7.!'lg1 lilc6 (Also interesting is 17 ... h4N 1 8.lilh1 �c7!? intending ... tild7-c5.) 1 8.�e2 0-0-0 when Black had a comfortable position in Lagarde - Stephan, Pau 2008. 17 ... lilc6 1 8.�e2 0-0-0 The position remains tense, with roughly equal chances. Korneev - Meneses Gonzales, Spain 20 10.

Cl) 14J�gl This older move appears logical, but Black soon obtains a promising position.

14 ....ig4 15 .ie2 .

Chapter 1 6 - 6.!e3 e6 7.g4

15 . .CtJd7 .

Black intends to position the knight on c5, where it will control some of the vital central squares. In the following high-level encounter Black succeeded with a different approach, although I would caution the reader not to read too much into this as it was only a blitz game: 1 5 ... tt:Jc6 1 6.h4 e4 1 7.hg4 hxg4 1 8.'1Wxg4 e3 1 9.fXe3 dxe3 20.i.xe3 lt:Je5 2 1 .'1We4 '.Wxe4 22.lt:Jxe4 tt:Jf3t 23. �e2 lt:Jxg1 t 24.Ei:xg1 Ei:xh4 and Black went on to win the ending in Ponomariov - Gelfand, Moscow (blitz) 2008.

16 .hg4 .

This is not much of a try for an advantage, but the alternative is risky: 1 6.f3 After this move Black is unable to claim the best pawn structure, but his pieces can become very active. 1 6 ...!e6 1 7.lt:Je4 lt:Jc5 1 8.lt:Jxc5 1 8 .ic4 iWc6 1 9 .!xe6 lt:Jxe4 ( 1 9 ... lt:Jxe6 20.g6=) 20.if5 (20.ixf7t �xf7 2 l .g6t �e6 22.fXe4 '.Wxe4t 23.'1We2 '.Wxe2t 24.�xe2 e4 centralized set up promises advantage to the second player) 20 ... tt:Jd6 2 l .id3 lt:Jc4 22.icl the outcome of the bishops dance is an equal position. 1 8 ...\Wxc5 1 9.!d3 f5 Black is doing fine also after 1 9 ... 0-0-0N 20.'1We2 �b8.

329

It looks tempting to open the g-file, but now Black's dark-squared bishop enters the action with powerful effect. 20.'1We2 was better, when 20 ... 0-0-0 2 1 .0-0-0 Ei:d6 is roughly equal. 20 ...ixf6 2 1 .'1We2 2 1 .2"1g6 ih4t 22.�fl ih3t 23.�g1 0-0-0 24.'1We2 2"1hg8 is also not great for White. 2 1 ...ih4t 22.�d1 22. �fl ? ih3t would have been even worse. 22 ... 0-0-0 White's poor king position proved to be her undoing in T. Kosintseva - Wojtaszek, Lausanne 2006.

16. hxg4 17.'iNxg4 :gxh2 ..

The outcome of the opening can be evaluated as positive for Black, who benefits from active pieces and healthy control over the centre. In fact it is already White who must work for equality.

a

18.'iNe4

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Alternatives are no better:

a

20.gxf6?

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 8.ib4?! l:'i:c8 (Black could also consider 1 8 ... \Wb5!?N 1 9.a3 if8 with the better position.) 1 9.lt:Jf5 was seen in Koch Andruet, Marseille 1 989, and now Black could have obtained clearly better chances with 1 9 ...if8!N.

English Attack

330

White's position is not yet strong enough to justify a direct attack, and after 1 8.lt:Jf5 .!f8 1 9.g6 fXg6 20.Wxg6t i>d8 Black once again had the better chances. The game continued with the slow 2 1 .lt:Jg3?!, and after 2 1 ...:!':k8 White had real problems in Zherebukh Brodsky, Cappelle la Grande 2008.

18 ...Wxe4t 1 8 ... lt:Jb6!?N also deserves consideration.

19.lDxe4 rlle7 20.0-0-0 We have been following the game Hracek - Solak, Mallorca 2004. At this point I think Black's most accurate continuation would have been:

14...Wc6 Opening the centre is not good enough for full equality: 14 ... dxc3 1 5 ..!xc3 .!e6 (Black should not help the enemy with his development: 1 5 ...Wxd1 t 1 6.:!':i:xd1 h4 1 7.lt:Je4 lt:Jc6, Balogh - Doric, Vogosca 2007, and now after 1 8 . .!c4!N .!g4 1 9 .lt:Jd6t me? 20.f3 Black has serious problems.) 1 6 ..!e2 lt:Jc6 17.Wxd5 hd5 1 8.0-0 h4 1 9.lt:Jh5 :!':i:g8 20.lt:Jxg7t :!':i:xg7 2 l .f4 White's bishop pair gave him a pleasant edge in Amonatov - Grachev, Moscow 2007.

15.�d3 �g4

8 7 6 5 4

�-� �� · � �� ��·�· · · · : �i�.��lf#u s m m � �· - -/��. / � tw 4 �� � -' "--;�-� - �%!-� ���-�--�-�- -/B � 3� � ��-� m 2 8 �[!fi � �[!fi �� 8 ��

3

2 1

or so years. It is a tricky move, which forces the defender to play with some precision.

a

b

20.. J:�ah8N

c

d

e

f

g

h

Followed by activating the king. A possible continuation is:

21.c3 It looks logical for White to exchange one of the dominant central pawns.

21. ..i>e6 22.cxd4 exd4 23.�gel rlld5 With an edge for Black.

C2) 14.c4!? This is a modern idea, with most of the available games having been played over the past three

1

� �-----%• �v=----%-� m, /- - - -

a

16.Wc2

y;

b

c

d

"'""%

e

f

g

h

Another game continued 1 6 ..!e4 .!xd1 17.hc6t lt:Jxc6 1 8.:!':i:xd1 Gaponenko Chulivska, Nikolaev 2008. Here I suggest the immediate 1 8 ... f6!N (In the game Black played 1 8 ... 0-0-0 followed by ... f6 on the following move, but it looks much more logical to use the king actively in the centre.) Possible continuations include 1 9.lt:Je4 me?, 1 9.:!':i:g1 mv, and 1 9.f4 exf4 20.gxf6 .!xf6 2 1 .hf4 md?, none of which look at all bad for Black.

16...i.f3 17.�gl!?

331

Chapter 1 6 - 6.i.e3 e6 7.g4 This critical move was introduced just a few months before publication. The alternatives also warrant close attention: 1 7.i.e4 This should not be too dangerous. 1 7 ....L:e4 1 8.�xe4 The knight capture is no better: 1 8.ttJxe4 tDd7 1 9.0-0-0 0-0-0 20.fi:he1 (Or 20.bl dS! Timing this move correctly is a delicate matter of the utmost importance. Strangely enough, the text move only seems to have been tried in e-mail and correspondence encounters, and never over the board. Before going any further I will show why I was not satisfied with the more frequently-played alternative. 14 ... a5 1 5 .�b5! a4 16.ctJcl '\1Mb7 17.�xc6t '\1Mxc6 1 8.ctJd3 d5 1 8 ... Ei:b8 1 9 .ctJxb4 '\1Mb5 20.a3 d5 was seen in Quezada Perez - Dominguez Perez, Santa Clara 2006, and now White should have played 2 1 .exd5N hb4 (21 . ..ctJxd5 22.'\1Mxd5! �xd5 23.l"i:xd5±) 22.'\1Mxb4 '\1Mxb4 23.axb4 ctJxd5 24.�c5 lt:lxb4 25.ctJe4± Black has not managed to equalize from the opening. This position was reached in Najer Grigoriants, Moscow 2006. Black went on to obtain a nice position and later won the game, but at this stage White could have obtained the advantage with a natural improvement: 1 9 .ctJxe5N This is much more promising than the game continuation of 1 9 .ctJxb4?. 19 ...'\1Mc7 20.exd5 ctJxd5 2 1 .�d4 �d6 22.ctJf5 0-0 23.ctJxd6 '\1Mxd6± Black has some chances for counterplay with a timely ... a4-a3, nevertheless White's chances must be evaluated as somewhat higher.

15.g5 1 5.exd5 ctJxd5 1 6.�d3 Ei:d8 17.'\1Me2 lt:Jxe3 ( 1 7...�e7, F. Silva - Knoll, e-mail 2007, is also quite reasonable.) 1 8.'\1Mxe3 �e7 1 9 .ctJf5 �xf5 20.gxf5 a500 Black could look confidently to the future in Janusonis - Johansson, e-mail 2006.

Chapter 1 7 - 6 ..!e3 e6 7 .f3

IS ...hxgS 16..ixg5

349

well-placed on h4. Still, the whole line feels a bit shaky for me, and I suspect White can improve. Finally, another option is 1 6 ...!1e7!?N with the possible continuation 1 7.ctJf5 (Harmless is: 17.!1xf6 flxf6 1 8.exd5 flxd5! The bishop is poisoned, and after 1 9.'We3 fle6 Black is fine.) 17 ...hf5 1 8.exf5 'Wb7 Once again the position remains complicated, with chances for both sides.

17.£4 Clearly this is the critical response. We have reached a critical position, rich in resources for both sides. Having analysed it in some detail, I have concluded that Black has a number of moves that more or less equalize, although in all cases the position remains rather unclear and tricky for both sides - not an uncommon scenario in the Najdor£

16...d4!?N This is one of the more promising options, although as I mentioned previously, it is hard to offer a cast-iron recommendation in such a double-edged position. I spent some time looking at 1 6 ... :8d8N, but eventually concluded that Black's position was not so appealing after 17.hf6! (1 7.'�e2 fle7 1 8.'Wxa6 0-0 1 9 ..!b5 tt'ld4 gives Black promising counterplay) 17 ... gxf6 1 8.ha6. 1 6 ... dxe4!? is playable, and one 'freestyle' (computer-assisted) encounter continued: 1 7.hf6 gxf6 1 8.fxe4 l"ld8 1 9.'We2 'Wb6 20.l"lxd8t �xd8 2 l .'Wxa6 'Wxa6 22.ha6 :8h4� Arturchix - Pandini, Internet 2006. Black has good compensation for the pawn because his bishops are strong and his rook is

17... llJh7! 17 ...!1d6 1 8.tt'lf5 is a bit unpleasant.

:i�L.,Bj�mJ'I :5 !�����-�-� ��-li%���;�r %-�%•zru-- -�43 ·tiS - - -%� '""%� ��)« �'" ';�� ', � '�ilu.fu.i s

�

i3! "

a

18..th4

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White can grab a pawn with 1 8.fxe5, but pays the price in allowing his valuable bishop to be exchanged: 1 8 ... tt'lxg5 1 9.'Wxg5 g6 20.'Wf6 'Wxe5 2 l .'Wxe5 ctJxe5 22.tt'lxd4 flg4 23.!1e2 he2 24.ct:Jdxe2 ctJg4 Black has no worries.

IS ... ex£4 I9.llJf5 gS! 2o..tn tlJf6 2 I.llJbxd4 llJes Once again the position is approximately equal, but at the same time double-edged and challenging for both sides.

350

English Attack

A2322) 13.h4 d5

17... llJxe3 I also considered 1 7 ...�e7, but eventually concluded that it made more sense to eliminate the bishop on e3 when given the opportunity.

18JWxe3

7

� ��•m �� � . . ". i"5 ""'%�

3 2

- ��ii�� [j ;�;

s

·� .t� � ·� �-�� 5� ��-;> � ��"""�� ��·····-� 4 wl�WM�;"�-"�����[j

6

1

lo8�/'""';� wd jj"" �-0� � -" %� �

m � :a, � a

b

18....ie7!N Another harmless continuation is 14.g5?! hxg5 1 5.hxg5 l"lxhl 1 6.lLlxh l , Warakomska ­ Przybylski, Mielno 2007, and here Black could have obtained the upper hand with the typical response: 1 6 ... d4!N+

14 ... ttJxd5 15.0-0-0 f!c7 16 ..id3 gds Black had better avoid: 1 6 ... a5 1 7.lLlc5 hc5 1 8.�xc5 0-0-0 1 9.lLlf5 g6 20.lLlg7!± The white knight achieved a great feat in Naiditsch - Palac, Warsaw 2005.

c

d

e

f

� :a,

g

h

1 8 ... ltJd4?! has been played in a couple of games, but this looks much too risky. Play continues: 1 9.lLlh5! g6 (or 1 9 ...i,xb3N 20.axb3 lLlxb3t 2 I .ci>bi lLld4 22.f4 with some initiative} 20.ltJf6t ci>e7 2 l .ltJe4 i,xb3 22.axb3 lbxb3t 23.ci>bl ltJd4 24.l"lhfl ltJe6 25.h5 Black had won a pawn but was nonetheless under pressure in Pieri - Bergmann, e-mail 2006.

19.tiJf5

However, the following alternative is more reasonable: 1 6 . . . lLla5!?N 17.ci>bl ( 17.lLlxa5 'Wxa5 1 8.�c4 l"ld8 1 9.�f2 �e7 20.'1We2 0-0 2 I .ltJf5 �f6oo) 17 ... ltJc4 1 8.�xc4 '1Wxc4 1 9.ltJe4 lLlxe3 20.'1Wxe3 l"lc800 2 1 .l"ld2 �e7 22.'1Wa7 �d5 23.l"lhdl �xe4 24.'1Wd7t c;t>fs 25.fxe4 �xh4 26.'\Wd6t ci>g8 27.'1Wxe5 ci>h7=

White gets nowhere with 1 9.lLlh5 ci>f8! This move looks odd, but once Black follows up by ... g6 and ... 'it>g7, it becomes clear that the king is neither in danger nor as stupidly placed as it may first appear. 20.lLlg3 (20. ci>b 1 a5 2 I .i,b5 l"lxdl t 22.l"lxdl lLla7 23.i,a4 lLlc8 also looks promising for Black) 20 ... a5 2 I .ci>bl a4 22.lLld2 lLld4 With promising attacking chances for Black.

17.fff2

19 ...h£5 20.h£5 0-0

1 7.'1We2 lLlxe3 reaches the same position.

351

Chapter 1 7 - 6.!e3 e6 7.f3

8 b4 ..•

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

The impending kingside attack may look scary, but Black's counterplay arrives just in the nick of time.

Once again Black wastes no time in driving the knight away. Compared with the previous section, obviously the inclusion of the move g2-g4 in place of 1Ml'dl -d2 will lead to some changes in the character of play, especially in the event that the knight decides that its future lies at the edge of the board. Just as before, we will consider Bl) 9.tLla4 and B2) 9.tLlce2. It is worth mentioning that in the present variation the latter move has been far more popular, compared to the analogous 8.1Ml'd2 variation in which the knight has preferred the a4-square in roughly five out of eight games.

Bl) 9.tLla4 i.d7!

25.1Ml'd3 g6 is nothing for White, so he may as well settle for a draw.

Here we see the first major difference, which probably accounts for the lack of popularity of the present variation from White's point of view. The point is that with the queen on d2, this move would have left the b-pawn hanging, whereas now the attack on the knight is rather awkward.

25 dxe3 26.!h7t 'ii>h8 27.i.g6t

10.c4

21.g5 �xdl t 22.�xdl hxg5 23.hxg5 tLld4! 24.tLlxd4 24.!d3 lt:Je6 is not dangerous for Black.

24 exd4 25.�hl!? ..•

•••

After a series of logical moves on both sides, the game ends in a perpetual check.

B) 8.g4

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

There is also a second option, which I believe to be underrated: 1 0.b3!? This has scored unimpressively for White, but it seems to me that the few existing games have not accurately reflected the reality of the position. Therefore I am immediately recommending a new idea: 1 0 ... lt:Jc6N Unsurprisingly, in most games Black has been unable to resist the temptation of wrecking the enemy queenside with l O ...!xa4. However, swapping the bishop for the knight is a kind of sacrifice in itself. l l .bxa4 1Ml'c7 1his position was reached in G. Garcia - Bruzon Bautista, Cali 2000, and several subsequent games. At this point White could have obtained chances for an advantage with

352

English Attack

1 2.Ekl !?N ltJbd7 1 3.g5 ttlh5 14.'\Wd2 ie7 1 5 .c3± White succeeds in exchanging one of his weak pawns while opening the queenside for his pieces. In the resulting position his bishop pair should count for more than the doubled a-pawns. With the text move Black continues developing while reserving the possibility of exchanging on a4 at a later stage of the game. There are many possible continuations, but I will just give a few lines that appeared critical to me. 1 l .g5 ttlh5 12.ie2 1 2.Eig1 ie7 1 3.f4 ltJxd4 1 4.Wxd4 ixa4 1 5.bxa4 ltJxf4 1 6.Wxg7 ttlg6 1 7.0-0-0 Wa500 Black has enough counterplay on the dark squares. 1 2 ... h6 1 3.gxh6 Elxh6!

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White will no longer have the attractive possibility of c2-c3. I also considered 1 1 ...ttlc6!?N 1 2.g5 ttlg8.

a

c

d

e

f

g

h

This would actually have led to a fine position for Black, were it not for the unpleasant rebuttal of 1 3.ttlb5! axb5 14.cxb5 (But not 1 4.ib6? bxa4 1 5.ha5 Elxa5, when White's queen is no match for Black's three pieces.) 1 4 ... Eib8 1 5.bxc6 hc6 1 6.Eicl id7 ( 1 6 ...ha4 17.bxa4 b3t 1 8 .�f2 also looks good for White) 1 7.Wd4! ha4 Otherwise ttlb6 could be annoying, with ideas ofttlxd7 or ltJc4. 1 8.bxa4 Wxa4 1 9.Eic7 with a very strong initiative. The primary threat is Wa7, followed by ixa7 and a check on b5.

12.bxa4

1 4.Wd2 Taking the exchange is risky: 1 4.ixh6 gxh6 1 5.ttlxc6 ixc6 1 6.Eig1 Wh4t 17.�d2 Wxh2+ Without the dark-squared bishop White will have a hard time defending his weaknesses. 14 ... ttlxd4 1 5.Wxd4 ltJg3 1 6.hh6 ltJxh1 17.0-0-0 gxh6 1 8.4Jb6 Elb8 1 9.CLlxd7 �xd7 20.:1'1xh1 Wb6= Black has no problems at all.

lO .. JWas l l.b3 ha4 This time Black does best to make the exchange. Compared with the previous note,

b

12...h6!

353

Chapter 1 7 - 6.ie3 e6 7.f3 This move seems to be the one that put White's set-up out of business, at least with regards to popularity.

13.ig2 A more challenging continuation is: 13 ..ie2!?N 'i/fjc7 14.'i/fjd2 ttJbd7 1 5.0-0 .ie7 But I think Black is okay here too. For example: 1 6J�fd l 1 6.a5 should b e met by 1 6 ... g5! intending ... h5 with decent counterplay. Another possibility is 1 6.�abl a5 17.ttJb5 'i/fjc6 1 8.�fd1 0-0 1 9.ttJxd6 �fd8 20.'i/fjd4 e5 2 l .ttJf5 .if8 22.'i/fjd2 'i/fjxa4 with equality. 1 6 ... ttJe5 17 .a5 Or 17.�acl �b8 with even chances. 1 7... �b8 1 8.�dbl ltJfd7 Black is holding his own here, and the attempt to grab a pawn backfires on White: 1 9.�xb4?! �xb4 20.'i/fjxb4 d5 2 I .'i/fjb3 dxe4 22.f4 ttJc6+

16.0 .hxg5 1 7.fxg5 ttJh5 There is also 17...'i/fje5!?N 1 8.ttJf3 ( 1 8 ..if4 'i/fjc5 1 9.gxf6? [White had better settle for a draw with 1 9 .ie3=] 1 9 ...ixf6 20.ie3 Wffe5 2 l .�f2 �xc4 22.ttJb3 'i/fjxh2t 23.fl hal 24.ttJxal ttJc5-+) 1 8 ...'i/fjxe4 1 9 ..id4 ttJg4 20.ttJe5 (20.h3 ttJe3 2 l .'i/fje2 .ixg5 22.�adl .if4 23.�fe l ttJe5 24.he3 'i/fjxe3t 25.'i/fjxe3 he3t 26.�xe3 ttJxc4 27.�e2 �h5=) 20 ...'i/fjxe5 2 1 .he5 ttJdxe5� 1 8.g6 ttJhf6 1 9.gxf7t 19.'i/fjg4!? ttJf8! 19 ... xf7 Despite the suspicious-looking king, Black is doing fine.

13 .. .tiJbd7 14.0-0 gcs 15.£4 a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

20.'i/fjg4 20.ttJxe6? xe6 2 I .'i/fjd5t 'i/fjxd5! wins for Black - Lutz. 20 ... ttJf8 2 l .'i/fjg3 'i/fje5 2 l ...�xc4 22.�acl t is dangerous for Black. 22.'i/fjxe5 Perhaps White should have preferred: 22.�acl !?N= The game Bacrot - Lutz, Biel 2003, was agreed drawn here, although Black could have considered playing on with: 22 ... dxe5+

I6.g5 The following is not an improvement for White: 1 6.h3 hxg4 17.hxg4 e5 1 8.ttJf5 �xc4 1 9.ttJxd6t (19.'i/fje2 �c3+) 1 9 ...hd6 20.'i/fjxd6

354

English Attack

liJxg4 2 1 .El,adl Vflc7 22.Vflxc7 El,xc7 23.El,cl El,xcl 24.El,xc1 El,h6 25.i.d2 a5+

16 ... l2Jg4 17 .if2 •

18.g6 This is clearly the critical move, but Black's defences hold firm.

18 ...l2Jxf2 19.gxfl gxc4 20.gxf7t @xf7 21.f5 e5 22.lLlb3 Yf1c7 23.Yf1d5t bl .ib7 The posltlon remains complex, but objectively I doubt that White has enough for the sacrificed piece.

14 ...fxe6 IS.llJxe6 �aS! This is the only good square for the queen.

16.exd5 �xa2 17.�d3! White has no other threatening moves. This position was reached in Morozevich - Vachier Lagrave, Biel 2009, and here Black should have played:

English Attack

364

17 e4!N ...

The game continued with what looked like an impending catastrophe for Black: 1 7 ... �f7? 1 8 .g5 tt::lx d5? 1 8 ... \M!al t 1 9.�d2 iMfxb2 was necessary, but Black no longer equalizes. I do not want to spend time analysing this and other alternatives in detail, since I am recommending a different path for Black. However, I do think it is worth a brief diversion to witness the beautiful winning line that was missed by White in the game. 1 9.�h3 lLlxe3 20.tLld8t! �e7 2 1 . tLlc6t �f7 It was here that Morozevich missed a delicious winning combination, which was first pointed out by Korotylev.

! � -*-·� � )S 7 � -�� -�� �� �� i �i ���� -���-J�•-� �-fj � -�� %C/'C;%�;: ;��-� � :3 � � :i � !, 1 1: � 2

It is worth mentioning another plausible, but ultimately flawed alternative: 17 ...�b7? 1 8.iMlg6t i>e7 Recommended by Vachier-Lagrave in New in Chess Yearbook 94 as a correct way for Black to play. However, his suggestion of 1 9.d6t does not deserve an exclamation mark. White can refute his opponent's idea with:

s

6

%�r�

�

�

��fj:A�� ��

1 � a

b

�:� �: c

d

e

f

g

h

22.�e6t!!N �xe6 22 ...\M!xe6 23.tLld8t �e7 24.tt::lxe6 tt::lx dl 25.Eixdl is a winning position. Black is slightly ahead on material, but White can combine threats to the king with plucking pawns or harassing the pieces. 23.iMfg6t tt::l f6 24.gxf6 gxf6 25.\M!e8t i>f5 Most computers would have trouble finding 22.�e6t without considerable time on their hands, as this position from afar can appear unattractive to them. But when seen up close, it turns out that White can win by force: 26.tLld4t! �f4 27.tLle2t �f5 28.Eid4!! Black is helpless against the mating threats, for example: 28 ... Eig8 29.Eif4t! exf4 30.\M!e4#

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 9.g5! �xd5 Also losing is: 1 9 ... tt::l xd5 20.�c5t! tt::lxc5 2 1 .tt::lxc5 �c8 22.tLlb3!! and with the queen out ofthe game, Black does not have a reliable defence against 23.�c4 and 24.\M!e4. 20.tLlc7 hxg5 2 1 .tLlxd5t! 2 l .Eixd5? looks tempting, but fails to 2 1 ...E\c8!! and White has no good move. 2 1 ...lLlxd5 22.�h3 tLl7f6! 23.�c5t! �d8 24.Eixd5t! iMfxd5 24 ... tt::l xd5 25.\M!c6 with mate. 25.�xf8 Elxf8 26.Eidl And White wins.

365

Chapter 1 7 - 6.i.e3 e6 7.f3

18.�d4 What else should White play? Certainly not 1 8.fXe4?? when 1 8 .. .':tJe5 wins for Black. 1 8.tt:lc7t �f7 1 9.'Wc4 This is not entirely bad, but still leads to a sharp endgame with slightly better chances for Black:

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 9... 'Wxc4 Black should not get too greedy with 1 9 ... 'Wal t? 20.d2 'Wxb2 2 l .d6t as the white attack is too dangerous. 20.hc4 tt:le5 2 I .i.b3 8:b8 22.g5 hxg5 22 ... i.d6!? is playable, but after 23.gxf6 xf6 24.f4 tt:lg4 25.i.d4t �f5 26.tt:le6 i.xe6 27.dxe6 the evaluation is not so clear. 23.hxg5 8:xhl 24.8:xhl

26 ... tt:lg4 27.8:h8 tt:lxe3 28.tt:lxe8 i.e6! 29.8:xf8 i.xb3 30.cxb3 8:d8 3 1 .8:g8 tt:lf5 Now White has nothing better than: 32.tt:lf6 8:xg8 33.tt:lxg8 'Llxd6 White has to attempt to draw the ending, which might very well prove difficult. This line is of course not forced, and both parties have alternatives on the way. Nevertheless my overall feeling is that Black's chances are higher.

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a

18 ...i.d6!

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Clearly the most ambitious move. 1 8 ... b3 is a playable alternative which should lead to a draw as follows: 1 9 .tt:lc7t f7 20.d6 (20.tt:lxa8? i.d6 hands Black the initiative) Now Black has to take the perpetual after 20 ...'Wal t 2 1 . d2 'Wa5t 22. cl 'Wal t etc. Instead if he tries for more with 22 . . . tt:le5? he might easily end up in trouble after 23.cxb3! 8:b8 24.g5. One spectacular line runs 24 ... 8:b4 25.'Wc3 hxg5 26.i.c5! tt:lc6 27.h5!! and White has a winning attack after 27 ... g8 28.h6!.

19.i.c4

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

24 ... tt:le8! 25.d6t g6 26.f4!? The more normal 26.tt:lxe8 i.d7 also favours Black.

19.f4 b3! is also dangerous for White. A possible line runs: 20.cxb3 (20.i.c4 transposes to the main line below) 20 ...i.b7 2 I .i.c4 8:c8! 22.tt:lxg7t f7 23.tt:lf5 i.b4 24. c2 i.xd5 25.8:al 8:xc4t 26.bxc4 'Wxc4t 27.'Wxc4 i.xc4 and White will have a tough job fighting for a draw in the ending.

366

English Attack

19 b3! .•.

This powerful move was first suggested by Korotylev. Black is taking over the initiative.

20.£4 20.hb3 is simply poor. Black has some nice tactics: 20 .. .'Wa l t 2 1 .d2 'Wa5t 22.e2 exf3t 23. xf3 ttJe5t 24. g2 .ixe6 25.dxe6 ttJexg4 and White is close to being busted. Not even winning things with check works: 26 ..ia4t fg 27.'1Wxd6t?! g8 Black keeps an extra piece and should win without too many problems.

20 .. J:'l:b8! This is not the only promising option, but I think it is the strongest. Vachier-Lagrave only considered the weaker 20 .. .'�al t? but it seems to me that the text move is much more consistent with the spirit of the Najdorf.

a

21.cxb3

b

c

d

e

f

g

remains sharp, I extra piece should long as he plays Here is a possible

22.lLlxg7t This is not objectively the best way to play for White, but it is the only way he can really try to hurt us, which is why we should consider it carefully. 22.g5 ttJg4! leads nowhere for White, as 23.'Wxg7? is refuted by 23 ... '\Wal t! 24.d2 ttJxc4t.

22 . �f7 23.g5 ltJg4 24.g6t g8! 25.lLle8 .

.

Black appears to be on the verge of defeat, but in fact the opposite is true thanks to the following beautiful combination:

h

2 l ..ixb3 is poor. Black is a piece up, and in a dynamic position it is not too important what sort of piece this is. Thus the second player can decide the game with 2 1 . .J''\xb3! 22.cxb3 .ib7 23.ttJxg7t £7 24.ttJf5 1"\c8t 25.�d2 .ic5 26.'1Wc3 .if8 27.1"\al 1"1xc3 28.1"\xa2 1"\d3t 29. e2 ttJxg4 and Black wins.

2I...ltJb6

Although the posltlon see no reason why Black's not decide the game as with reasonable accuracy. line:

To summarize, Morozevich's 1 3 .ttJf4 does not appear to be fully sound, but it certainly demands accurate handling so I would advise the reader to study this section carefully before entering this labyrinth of complications over the board.

Chapter 1 7 - 6 . .ie3 e6 7.f3

B2314) 13 ..ih3 This bishop development is another critical line for us to consider. White prepares g5 and takes aim at the sensitive e6-square. s 7 6

�.m1.m•m �"'�" � , c � " � '" ""� I. -- "" � I. -� � �

�

� ········� � � � "'N/ � �-� 4 � �r� w"� � rjL � '""� ��/"""� r;� ��-'0 � � �,,-,,f:'"�� � 2 w �£-"-% �f!y%:�_��ezJ----%� �� � 1 � mM " �M 5 �

3

a

13 ... tLlb6

b

c

d

•

e

f

g

h

Tempting, but ultimately inferior, is: 1 3 ... tLle5?! Unfortunately I was unable to find a satisfactory solution to the following idea: 14. .lif4!N 14.b3?! would not be as effective here due to 1 4 ... dxe4 1 5 .g5 hxg5 1 6.hxg5 exf3 with a better game for Black. If you want to try out this interesting move order, you need to be prepared for White's strongest response. 14 ...dxe4 1 5.g5 tLld5 1 6.fXe4 lLlxf4 1 7.lLlxf4 Black has a hard time catching up on development, and is destined for some nervous moments with his king in the centre. 1 7... tLlc4 1 8.'\W£2 Black may not be losing outright, but I find his position rather unpleasant. Here are a few sample lines: 1 8 ....lid6! This seems to be the most resilient defence. 1 8 ...hxg5 1 9.hxg5 .lid6 is well met by 20.lLld3! White has a solid grip on the centre, and ideas such as e5 and g6 are in the air.

367

1 9.lLld3! 1 9.tLlh5?! .lie5 20 ..lifl with the idea 20 . . . tLld6 2 1 .tLlf3! looks tricky, but Black has a brilliant solution in 20 .. .lLlxb2!! 2 l .cifxb2 ib7 22. mb 1 0-0-0 with powerful compensation for the piece. After the text move I prefer White's chances. I am not sure how to prevent White's ideas of g5-g6 or e4-e5. He should definitely avoid: 1 9 ... g6? 20.h5! When White crashes through on the kingside. However, I would encourage the reader to investigate this variation independently and form his own conclusions. Authors can be mistaken, so if you think you have found an improvement for Black then go for it!

14.b3! 1 4.g5?! I believe this to be ultimately weaker, although proving it with analysis is not easy. 14 ... tLlc4 1 5.1Wd3 tLld7! 15 . . . dxe4? 1 6.fX:e4 tLle5 1 7.'1Wb3 hxg5 1 8.hxg5 lLlxe4 1 9.i.f4 looks like a classical murder scenario.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 6.lLlxe6!N White has to try this to stay in the game. 1 6.tLlf4? tLlde5 17.'1We2 lLlxe3 1 8.'1Wxe3 lLlc4 was already winning for Black in Ashwin Banikas, Rethymno 2009. White had to try a futile knight sacrifice and was without a real chance.

368

English Attack

1 6... fxe6 1 6 . . .'�a5?! does not work in this position, as 1 7.�d4!! fxe6 ( 1 7 ...'1Wxa2 1 8.b3 defends against Black's threats) 1 8.exd5 gives White a huge attack. 17.exd5 tt'lde5! 17 ... exd5? 1 8.'1Wg6t cj{d8 1 9 .tt'lf4 gives White a strong attacking position. 1 8.'1We4 exd5 1 8 ... tt'lxe3 looks riskier in view of 1 9.'1Wxe3 tt'lc4 20.iWe4 tt'ld6 2 1 . iWe5 (21 . 'fifxb4 tt'lc4 22.iWc3 exd5 23Jhd5 �xh3 24Jhh3 hxg5 25.iWd3 Elc8 26.f4 Elxh4 27.'1Wg6t iWf7 28.'1We4t �e7 Black's defences hold together) 2 1 ...tt'lb5 22.iWe3 e5 23.�e6 �d6 24.'1We4 with ongoing compensation for White. 1 9.Eixd5 �b7 1 9 ... �xh3!? is another possibility, which leads to dynamic equality. My analysis continues as follows: 20.Eixh3 (20.�f4 is sharper, but not more dangerous. Black plays 20 ...�d6! 2 1 .Eixd6 [21 .Eixh3 0-0-0 22.b3 hxg5 23.�g5 Elde8 24.bxc4 tt'lxc4 25.'1Wd3 is roughly equal as well, but if anyone has the chances, it is Black.] 2 1 . ..0-0! 22.�xe5 tt'lxd6 23.'1Wxb4 '1Wc4 24.�xd6 'fifxe2 25.�xf8 Elxf8 26.gxh6 iWxf3 27.'1Wb3t as the ending is a draw.) 20 ... Eid8 2 l .tt'lf4 This looks very dangerous for Black, but there is a brilliant solution: 2 l ...b3!! 22.axb3 Elxd5 23.tt'lxd5 iW a5! and neither player can reasonably avoid 24.cj{bl 'lWei t 25.cj{a2 iWa5t with a draw.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

20.b3! Only with this move can White maintain significant attacking chances. 20 ...�xd5 2 1 .'1Wxd5 Eld8 22.'1We6t �e7! Rybka's first choice is not always the best. After 22 ...'1We7 23.bxc4 '1Wxe6 24.�xe6 hxg5 25.�g5 �e7 26.f4 the sharp fight finally results in a peaceful and roughly equal position. 23.bxc4 Eld6 24.'1Wf5 Elf8! 25.'1We4 tt'lxc4! 26.gxh6! White has to seek an inferior ending at all cost. The computer wants to play 26.�f4, but Black has a wonderful combination:

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

26 ... Eixf4!! 27.tt'lxf4 b3!! 28.axb3 iWa5 Black has a winning attack. My main line runs as follows: 29.'1Wa8t cj{f7 30.g6t cj{f6 3 I .cj{bl tt'la3t 32.cj{b2 iWe5t! 33.cj{a2 tt'lb5! With decisive threats. 26 ... tt'lxe3 27.hxg7! 27.'1Wxe3?! Elxh6 is poor. Here Black is at a crossroads.

h

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Chapter 1 7 - 6.i.e3 e6 7.f3 27 .. .E':\g8!? This is the most ambitious move, and probably objectively strongest. He can also play safer with 27.JiJxc2 28.gxf8=1Mft c;!{xf8, but accept that White can more or less equalize with 29.1Mff5t i.f6 30.1Mfc8t 1Mfxc8 3 l .i.xc8 CLJe3 32.i.h3 hh4 33.i.e6 i.f6 34.i.b3, when it is unlikely that Black will have genuine winning chances. 28.1Mfxe3 :§:xg7 I would rate Black's chances as slightly higher, although all three results are possible. Returning to the main line, we have arrived at a position that the Russian GM Alexei Fedorov has employed twice with the white pieces.

369

15.g5 ttlfd5 16.fxe4 16.g6? e5 17.gxf7t xg6!N

g

h

380

Classic Main Line

The attacking system introduced by the moves 6.�g5 e6 7.f4 is far from easy for Black to handle. The first player wastes no time in moulding his small band of wooden soldiers into a vicious army of bloodthirsty assassins, with a licence to kill and the collective firepower to do just that. The task of playing against such a system is rather like picking up a venomous snake from the floor - the handler must keep razor-sharp wits and use a sound strategy to avoid the opponent's fatal bite. Many defensive set-ups have been tried, the most famous being the Poisoned Pawn variation with 7 . . .l.Wb6 8.'1Wd2 '1Wxb2, and the traditional main line of 7 ...�e7 8.'1Wf3 l2lbd7 9.0-0-0 '1Wc7, when both 10.�d3 and 1 0.g4 lead to a tough battle to put it mildly. My own proposed solution will hopefully come as a refreshing change from these well­ knownandexhaustivelyanalysedbatdegrounds. The recommended plan involves striking at the enemy bishop with an early ... h6, which opens the door to some colourful counterattacking possibilities based on a subsequent ... g5 in certain positions. Black's system fell our of fashion for a while, but it has recently started attracting more followers, and at the moment I see no reason why it should not continue its resurgence into mainstream acceptance.

l.e4 c5 2.ttlf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lLlxd4 l2Jf6 5.l2Jc3 a6 6..ig5 e6

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

From this posmon we will consider the sidelines of A) 7.'1&d3, B) 7.�f3 and C) 7.�d2, followed by the big main line of D)

7.f4. A) 7.�d3 Just as with the other two sidelines, White intends to castle without delay and then start some kind of attack.

7...b5 8.0-0-0 Nothing else is likely to trouble Black. 8.f4 b4 9.l2lce2 �b7 1 0.tt:lg3 h6 l l .�xf6 '1Wxf6+ Palekha - Loskutov, Serpukhov 2003. 8.�e2 tt:lbd7 9.f4 l2lc5 highlights a drawback of White's seventh move: the queen is forced to waste time. 10.'1We3 b4 l l .�xf6 (White is not helped by: l l .f2ld5N exd5 1 2.e5 '1We7 1 3.l2lc6 '1We6 14.f5 [ 14.l2ld4 l2lg4+] 1 4 ...'\Wxf5 1 5.exf6t f2le6 1 6.�h4 '1Wxc2 17.Ekl '1We4+) 1 1 ...'1Wxf6 Black is at least equal, for instance: 1 2.�f3 bxc3 1 3.e5 cxb2 1 4J::\b l dxe5 1 5.fXe5 '1Wd8 1 6.�xa8 �d7 1 7.�f3 tt:la4+ L. Anderson - Karasalo, e-mail 2007.

8 b4! •..

This energetic approach is not easy for White to counter.

Chapter 1 8 - 6.!g5 e6

9.ix£6!?N This interesting move is directed against the transfer of the b8-knight to c5. For instance, 9.CL'lb1 lLlbd7 gave Black easy play in Soylu ­ Hauchard, Istanbul 2000. (White does not want to exchange on f6 at a time when Black can conveniently recapture with the other knight.)

381

Black should have good chances to complete development, and the onus is on White to prove something before his positional defects make themselves felt.

Another game continued 9.CLJce2 tt:lbd7 1 0.f4?l (White should have settled for the modest 1 O.f3, although such an approach can hardly threaten Black.) 1 0 ... lLlc5 1 l .'We3 Vukovic Pavlovic, Vrnjacka Banja 1 999, and now I see no reason not to gobble the loose pawn with 1 I ...tt:lcxe4N.

9... �xf6 I prefer this over 9 ... gxf6 1 0.CLJce2, with unclear play.

10.�c4 �g5t Another option is IO ... CLJd7 1 l .'Wxb4 'Wxf2, with a murky position.

l l.f4!? 1 I .Wb1 'Wc5 is comfortable enough for Black.

l l. ..�xf4t 12.�bl lll d7 13.�xb4 With two powerful bishops and a better pawn structure, Black's long-term chances are excellent. For the time being, however, he lags in development and will need to play carefully to reach an acceptable middlegame.

13... �e5! The queen would soon have been chased from the f-file in any case, and it turns out that her presence may be required on the queenside.

14.�a4 �c5! This accurate move takes the sting out of any troublesome 'Wc6 invasions. From here

s.!e3 There is no reason to fear 8.i.xf6 'Wxf6 9.'Wxf6 gxf6. Generally speaking, this structure with doubled f-pawns is more dangerous for Black in the middlegame, when his centralized king would be a liability. With the queens exchanged his king will be ideally placed, and he can aim to exploit the power of the bishop pair. One high-level game continued 10.f4 h5 1 l .f5 tt:lc6 1 2.Eld1 i.d7 and Black was quite happy in Short - Kasparov, Sarajevo 2000. The only other reasonable option is 8.i.h4, when Black can obtain a decent position with 8 ...i.d7!? 9.0-0-0 CLJc6 1 0.CLJxc6 i.xc6 1 I .i.d3 !e7= Wibe - Olafsson, Gluecksburg 1 977.

8.. !d7!? .

382

Classic Main Line

This is an effective way of preparing ... l2lc6, although there are other decent ways to handle the position, for instance: 8 ... e5 9.l2lb3 (9.l2lf5 g6 10.l2lh4 .!g7=) 9 ....!e7 1 0 ..!e2 0-0 1 1 .'1Wg3 Wh8 1 2.0-0 b5= Saenko - Van der Hoeven, e-mail 2005 .

9.0-0-0 tllc6 10.'1Wg3 1 0.ltJxc6 .!xc6 1 1 ..!d3 b500

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

f

g

h

The resulting position is one that every Najdorf player should be happy to reach.

C) 7.Y;Yd2

a

l l.gxd4 1 1 ..!xd4 eS 1 2 . .!e3 l"i:c8 1 3.f3 bS 14.a3 .!e6 is fine for Black.

l l .. J;cs Black has decent prospects for counterplay, as demonstrated by the following illustrative line:

12.c;f?b1 gxc3! 13.hxc3 e5 14.gb4 a5 15.gxh7 tllxe4 16.Y;Yf3 d5� And not 1 6 ....!c6?? 17.'1Wxf7#!

7...h6!

b

c

d

e

h

Once again this well-timed move causes problems for White.

s.i.x£6 The first point to appreciate is that 8 ..!h4? loses a pawn to the thematic riposte: 8 ... l2lxe4Ft 8 ..!e3 is also less than ideal due to 8 ... l2lg4!, for instance: 9 . .!e2 ctJxe3 1 0.'1Wxe3 l2lc6 1 1 .0-0-0 '1Wb6 1 2.g4 .!e7 1 3 .h4 l2lxd4 14.'1Wxd4 '1Wxd4 1 5.2"\xd4 .!d7+ Naimanye - Ki. Georgiev, Manila 1 992.

Chapter 1 8 - 6.ig5 e6

8...�xf6 9.0-0-0 White needs to play actively and aggressively, otherwise it will be hard to justifY the loss of the bishop pair. 9.a4 ctJc6 1 0.ctJb3 Wfd8 1 l ..ie2 .ie7 12.0-0 0-0 1 3.f4 b6 1 4 ..if3 .ib7 1 5.Ei:ad1 b5 1 6.'�h1 Wb6 was just a normal-looking Sicilian position in which Black was obviously benefitting from the bishop pair in Panakus - Loginov, Budapest 1 994. 9.f4 is harmless, and transposes to the note to White's eighth move in line D.

383

central control and open b-file. One practical encounter continued: 1 l .f4 Wd8 1 2.ctJa4 .ie7 13.1Mfe3 Ei:b8+ Bryzgalin - Makarov, Samara 2002.

IO...�d8 l l.f4 .i\e7 12.%Yfl This position was reached in Vesterinen Smyslov, Amsterdam 1 954, and now I like the following idea:

12 b5N ••.

This typical counterattacking move gives Black an excellent game, for instance:

13.g4 b4 14.ltla4 Ei:b8 15.h4 �c7 16.cj;>bl id7+

9... ltlc6 This is a good way to make use of the queen's presence on f6. Now White will have to worry about a possible queen exchange, which would kill his early initiative and leave Black with a very pleasant ending thanks to the bishop pair.

White's attack is a long way from achieving anything, and in the meantime the knight on a4 is beginning to feel distinctly uncomfortable.

D) 7.f4 Finally we reach the main line, which has been played in thousands of games and continues to produce no end of spectacular fighting games, not to mention headaches for players on both sides of the board.

a

IO.ltlb3

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 0.'�b1 ctJxd4 1 1 .1Mfxd4 1Mfxd4 1 2.Ei:xd4 .id7 gave Black a slight but stable advantage in Piorun - Kempinski, Warsaw 2007. 1 0.ctJxc6 is possible, although the pawn structure after 1 0 ... bxc6 is obviously more favourable for Black due to his increased

384

Classic Main Line

introductory paragraphs, I believe this move is underrated and possibly due for a resurgence in the near future.

s..ih4 White gains nothing by exchanging on f6: 8.i.xf6 '1Wxf6 9.'1Wd2 g5!? 9 .. .lt:Jc6 is perfectly okay, but the text is more ambitious. Black is determined to make his opponent suffer on the dark squares.

the most logical continuation would have been: 1 3 ... E\b8N Black's chances are higher, thanks to his dark-squared domination.

8 .ie7 9.V!lff3 llJbd7 10.0-0-0 V!lfc7 ••.

a

1 0.f5 The only good thing about White's position is his lead in development. For this reason Black would love to exchange queens, which would enable him to exploit his positional advantage in the endgame without fear of a sacrificial attack. Here are rwo examples to show what White should be striving to avoid at all costs: 1 0.g3 gxf4 1 l .gxf4 '1Wh4t 1 2.'1Wf2 Novkovic - Korbut, Dresden 2008 1 2 ...'1Wxf2tN 1 3.c;hf2 'Llc6 and White has nothing to compensate for the missing dark-squared bishop. 1 O.fxg5 hxg5 1 1 .0-0-0 'Llc6 1 2.i.e2 'Llxd4 1 3.'1Wxd4 '1Wxd4 1 4.Eixd4 i.d7 The bishop pair combined with the central pawn majority gave Black clearly better chances in Kummerow - Pavlovic, Biel 1 997. 1 o ... 'Llc6 1 l .'Llxc6 bxc6 12.0-0-0 '1We5 1 3.g3 Preventing ...'\Wf4. This position was reached in Vouldis - Milu, Mangalia 1 992, and here

b

c

d

e

g

From this position White has tried various ideas, three of which warrant close attention. First we will consider the comparatively rare but still quite challenging Dl) 1 l.V!llg3!?, followed by the rwo most popular options of D2) 1 l .id3 and D3) II..ie2. Before we analyse the three main lines, we will first check some of the less common alternatives. •

A bit artificial seems to be 1 1 .Eig1 ?! b5 1 2.i.d3 b4 1 3.'Llce2 (or 1 3 .i.xf6 tDxf6 14.e5 i.b7 1 5.'Lle4 dxe5 1 6.fxe5 'Lld5+) 13 ... i.b7 14.b1 'Llc5 1 5.i.xf6 i.xf6 1 6.g4 0-0-0 1 7.'1We3 b8 Black enjoyed rwo bishops and some advantage in Fontaine - Ni Hua, Cannes 2004. White was advancing too slowly with 1 l .i.f2 b5 12.a3 i.b7 1 3.i.d3 'Llc5 14.b1 Elc8 1 5.Eihe1 0-0 1 6.'1Wh3 (1 6.Eie3 E\fd8 1 7.'1Wh3 Eld7 is also very pleasant for the second player.) 1 6 ... d5 17 .e5 'Llfe4 and ended with worse chances in Shabalov - Dominguez Perez, Cali 200 1 .

385

Chapter 1 8 - 6.ig5 e6 1 1 .g4!? b5! 1 l ...g5 1 2.e5! dxe5 1 3.fxg5 hxg5 14.ig3 has proven to be quite dangerous for Black in practice, so I consider it prudent to avoid this. However, ifyou like to take chances and wish to investigate this in more detail, I will simply mention the critical line as a basis for further investigation: 14 ... f\b8 1 5 .h4 gxh4 1 6.g5 tt:ld5 1 7.g6 .!g5t 1 8.�b1 tt:lxc3t 1 9.bxc3 f\f8 20.hh4 .!xh4 2 1 .Eixh4---+ fxg6? 22.1Wg3 '1Wb6t 23.tt:lb3 1Wf2 24.1Wxg6t 1Wf7 25.1Wd3 1Wf3 26.1Wd6 1Wc6 27.1Wd2 1Wd5 28.id3 e4 29.Eixe4 e5 30.1We3 b6 3 l ..!e2 1-0 Claridge - Ingersol, e-mail 2000. 1 2.hf6 Nothing else makes much sense. 1 2 ... tt:lxf6 1 2 ...hf6 should be avoided on account of 1 3.hb5!±. On the other hand 12 ... gxf6!? is not entirely stupid, and leads to unclear play. 1 3.g5 White should not delay his attack. 1 3 ... hxg5 14.fxg5 tt:ld7 1 5 .g6 .!g5t 16.�b1 tt:le5

1 7 ... 1Wxf7 1 8.'1Wg2 This position was reached in Perruchoud - Schweizer, Biel 2000, and now the most accurate move would have been: 1 8 ....!f6N= Black has a solid position and can look to exploit his bishop pair later in the game. Perhaps the most important of the minor alternatives is: 1 1 ..!g3 White prepares e5 and hopes to make use of the X-ray attack on the black queen. 1 l ...b5 1 2.e5 .!b7 1 3.1We2 dxe5 1 3 ... tt:ld5 is also playable, but I prefer the text move slightly. 14.fxe5 tt:ld5

a

17.gxf7t Worse is 1 7.'1Wg2?! f6!+ 1 8.ixb5t?! axb5 1 9.tt:ldxb5 1Wc5 20.tt:lxd6t �e7+ 2 1 .h4 .!h6 22.tt:lf5t?! exf5 23.tt:ld5t Alves - Tsuboi, Garanhuns 1 986, and here 23 ... �f8!N would have left White with nowhere near enough to show for his two-piece deficit.

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 5.tt:le4 1 5 .tt:lxe6?! is not quite sufficient, although Black must take care. 1 5 ... fxe6 16. tt:lxd5 .!xd5 17.Eixd5 exd5 1 8.e6 '1Wc6 19.'&h5t (19.exd7t �xd7 20.1Wd1 Elae8 2 l ..!d3 ig5t 22.�b1 E\hf8 saw Black consolidating in Van den Berg - Bobotsov, Beverwijk 1964.) 1 9 ... �d8 20.exd7 1his position was reached in Karup ­ Rasic, Neum 2003, and now after 20 ... g6!N 21 .'1Wd1 �xd7 22.id3 �c8 Black will shelter his king on b7 and should eventually consolidate his material advantage. Another aggressive try is 1 5 . tt:lxd5 hd5 1 6.tt:lf5, when Black should react bravely with 1 6 ... ha2! 1 7.tt:lxe7 �xe7:

386

Classic Main Line 1 6.ctJd6 ctJc5 17.�bl l"i:ad8= 16 ... 0-0 17.ctJd6 hd6 1 8.exd6

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White does not have sufficient attacking resources, for instance: 1 8.'1Wf3 (Or 1 8.'Wg4 Ei:hc8 1 9.Ei:d2 �f8 20.'1Wb4t, L. Bronstein ­ Rubinetti, Zarate 1 973, 20 ... ctJc5!N 2 1 .i.f2 [21 .b3? i.xb3 22.cxb3 a5] 2 l ...i.d5 Black is a pawn up with a safer king; although on the last move he must be sure to avoid 2 l . . .�g8? 22.hc5 'Wxc5 23.Ei:d8t!+-.) 1 8 ... Ei:hc8 1 9.'1Wa3t (19.Ei:d2 i.d5 20.'1Wg4 �f8 2 1 .'1Wb4t iWc5 Ostos - Duran, San Felipe 2008; 1 9.Eixd7t '1Wxd7 20.'Wa3t �e8 21 .'1Wxa2 Ei:xc2t! 22.�xc2 Ei:c8t-+) 19 .. .'\Wc5 20.'1Wxc5t (20.'1Wd3 i.d5 2 l .Ei:d2 b4 22.i.f2 'Wa5 23.Eie2 'IWal t 24.�d2 '1Wxb2 Black soon won in Grishchenko - Morev, Lipetsk 2007.) 20 ... Ei:xc5 2 1 .i.el Ei:c6 22.i.b4t �e8 23.i.d6 i.d5 Black gradually converted his extra pawn in Bolado Saez - Alvarez Fernandez, Barcelona 2006. 1 5 ... '1Wa5!? 15 ...0-0 is okay if Black does not mind his opponent forcing a draw. One such example, featuring accurate play on both sides, continued as follows: 1 6.C2Jf6t �h8 17.'1Wd3 gxf6 1 8.'Wd2 f5 ( 1 8 ... �h7 1 9 .exf6 i.d6 20.i.d3t �g8 2 1 .Ei:dfl was rather dangerous for Black in Weinzettl - Karner, Austria 2004) 1 9.'Wxh6t �g8 20.i.d3 (20.ctJxe6 £Xe6 2 1.'Wg6t) 20 ... 'Wb6 2 l.i.f2 'Wd8 22.h4 ctJxe5 23.ctJxf5 exf5 24.i.xf5 ctJg6 25.i.d4 i.f6 26.i.xg6 fXg6 27.'1Wxg6t f6 (22 ... c,±les allows 23.tt::l b6!

Chapter 1 8 - 6.ig5 e6 with a strong attack, for instance: 23 ...iWxa2 24.iWd6 'Llxd1 25J'1xd1 iWa1 t 26.d2 WaSt 27.b4 and wins - analysis by Rajkovic) 23.'Llb6! 'Llxh1 24J'!fl t l:t>g6 25.'1We7, as played in Ristic - Pablo Marin, Tjentiste 1 975. I analysed this position in some detail looking for a defence, but was eventually forced to conclude that the second player was fighting an uphill battle to survive. 1 9.lLlxf7 'Llxc3 There is a second promising line available in the form of: 1 9 ... 'Llxb2!?N 20.'Llxh8 (20.xb2 xf7 2I .ic4 id7 22.ib3 e7+) 20 ...'1Wxc3 2I .ib5t axb5 22.iWxb5t id7 23.iWxb2 iWc4 24.b1 l"i:a4 (24 . . J'1a5 25 .\:t>a1 l"i:b5 26.'Wg7 e5 27.'1Wg6t d8 28.'Llf7t e7 29.iWg5t=) 25.a1 !c6 26.'Llg6 !xe4 27.'Llf4 e5 28.'Lld3 !xg2 29.l"i:e1 idS 30.a3 !e6+ 20.'\W£3

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

20 ... l"i:f8! 20 ... l"i:xh2 looks less accurate due to 2 1 .l"i:fl ! 'Llxa2t 22. b 1 lLlc3t (22 ... lLlb4 23.iWg3--+) 23.bxc3 lt>d7 when Black is only slightly for choice. 20 ... '\WhS? is definitely not a smart idea: 2 I .iWf6 l"i:f8 22.'Llxd6t lt>d7 23.'1Wg7t 1-0 was the abrupt end of the game Rapoports - Kalnins, corr. 1 978. 2 1 .l"i:f1N This is a logical attempt to improve White's play.

393

In the event of 2 1 .e5, Supancic - Tarjan, Maribor 1 978, Black wins with 2 1 ...dxe5!N (The game continuation of 2 1 . ..lLlxa2t? 22.1i>b1 lLlb4 might have led to a reversal of fortunes had White played: 23.'Llxd6t!N e7 24.iWg4 d8 25.iWg7 iWf2 26.l"i:d1 --+) 22.l"i:fl e4!-+ 2 l . ..'Llxa2t 22.b1 'Llb4 23.e5

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

23 ... 1i>d7! 23 ... 'Llxd3 24.iWxd3 (24.'Llxd6t iWxd6-+) 24 . . . l"i:xf7 25.iWg6 d7 26.iWxf7t c6 27.l"i:f3 b6 28.l"i:c3 gives White decent chances of making a draw. 24.exd6 24.g4 d5 25.g5 iWa5 26.c3 iWa2t 27.cl 'Llxd3t 28.iWxd3 c7-+ 24 ... lLlxd3 24 . . .iWxd6 should also be good enough, as long as Black follows up carefully: 25.ie4 c7 26.c3 (26.'Llxd6 l"i:xf3 27.'Lle8t d7 28.l"i:xf3 xe8 29.h4 e7 30.l"i:g3 id7+) 26 ... 'Lld5 27.'Llxd6 l"i:xf3 28.'Lle8t d8 29.l"i:xf3 l:t>xe8 30.c4 'Llb6 3 1 .b3 e5+ The text move seems like a much easier practical choice though. 25.cxd3 iWfS 26.iWe2 iWxf7 27.l"i:xf7t l"i:xf7 28.g4 \:t>xd6 29.d4 id7+ Black will be the strong favourite to win the ending. To summarize, 17.'Llf3 is objectively dubious, but could easily create problems for an

Classic Main Line

394

unprepared opponent, so I would urge the reader to treat it with respect.

17 ...b5!? This has only been played a few times, but it appears quite promising. The main move has been: 1 7 ....1d7 This also offers Black good compensation thanks to his superior piece coordination. 1 8J%d2 (Another game continued 1 8.'1Mfd2 Elc8 1 9.Eidel b5 20.4Jdl , Ivkov - Tatai, Imperia 1 967, and here it looks good for Black to play 20 ... 4Jxd3tN 2 1 .Wxd3 b4 with pleasant compensation for the pawn.) 1 8 ... b5 1 9 .�bl b4 20.4Jdl �e7 2 1 .4Jhf2 4Jxh2 22.4Je3 Elag8 The black pieces were working in remarkable harmony in Brandenburg - Zhigalko, Hengelo 2005.

19JMel 0-0-0 20.a4!? White does not want his opponent to have all the fun, and immediately tries to create a weakness. A quiet move like 20.a3 should be met by 20 ... �b8 with a pleasant position.

20...bxa4 Black could also have considered 20 ... b4!?N 2 1 .lDdl lDxd3 22.cxd3 tLle5 with ongoing compensation.

21.tLlxa4!? Avoiding the roughly equal posltlon that would have resulted from 2 1 ..1xa6 a3 22.Wb5 Wxb5 23 ..1xb5 axb2.

21 ...�a5 22.b3 The evaluation would have been similar after 22.4Jc3 �b8 23 . .1c4 Elc8.

22... �b8 23.tLlb2 We have been following the game Mamedov - Areshchenko, Moscow 2007. At this point my favoured continuation would be:

a

18.�bl

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Suggesting a sensible regrouping of the white forces is not an easy task. One encounter continued 1 8.Eidfl .1d7 1 9.4Jd l , Rohde Boss, Werfen Essen 2002, and here I suggest 1 9 . . . �e7!?N 20.Wd2 Elag8+ with some advantage thanks to the glamorous black pieces.

23 .. J:�dg8N�

18 ....ib7!?

The knight on h3 remains a serious burden for White.

The bishop would also have been happy on d7, but Black obviously wanted to make full use of his previous move.

a

b

c

d

e

f

D3) l l ..ie2

g

h

Chapter 1 8 - 6.�g5 e6 The modest bishop move is generally regarded as the most challenging line for Black to face. White is hoping that the bishop will prove useful in controlling the vital g4- and h5squares.

!� lt!m*•w.-J� - i �A)y�: i �� 6 � l8"31ff,j"j� %� '"- "'�� / " "';� 5 �� �%'"//- ��-� ��-� 4 -?/ � �� � "-- ;�� v� --m 3 ��-�-----;� �� ��2 � �� � - � �� "" � -� B %mi �.f 8

1

'?,

__

,�

395

had little to show for the piece in Tatai Costantini, Bratto 2005. 13 ... dxe5 14.lLlxe6 Mter 14.1Mfxg7, Skovgaard - Andersson, Grenaa 1 973, 14 ... l"lh7N White has to transpose to the main line with 1 5.lLlxe6. White also gets nowhere with 14.f5 0-0-0 15.fXe6 exd4 16.exd7t 1Mfxd7 17 ..L:f6 .ixf6 1 8 . .ig4 .ig5t 1 9.'it>b1 f5 20.l"lxd4 '1Mfxd4 2I ..ixf5t l"ld7 22.l"ld1 .id2 and Black easily converted his extra material in Perez Perez Matanovic, Utrecht 1 96 1 . 1 4 ... £Xe6

�

/:

1

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

l l ...bS Several other moves have been tried, including the precautionary 1 l . .. l"lb8, but I believe the text to be the most promising. At this point White's only dangerous plan involves the advance of the e-pawn. Thus he can choose between the immediate D31) 12.e5 and the preliminary D32) 12 ..tx£6.

D31) 12.e5 The common consensus used to be that Black had overstretched himself and could be punished with this immediate act of aggression.

12. ..�b7 13.exf6

This is White's most promising idea, giving up his queen for some combination of black pieces. The immediate attempts to blast through with blunt force are unjustified: 1 3.'1Mfg3?! No better is 1 3.'1Mfh3? dxe5 14.lLlxe6 fXe6 1 5.1Mfxe6 lLlc5 1 6.\WxeS l"lc8 17 . .ixf6 gxf6 1 8 .\WhSt f8 1 9 .'it>b 1 lLle4 when White

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 5.'1Mfxg7 1 5.'1Wg6t?! 'it>f8 1 6 ..ig4 exf4 1 7 ..ixf6 .ixf6 1 8 ..ixe6 lLle5 White had nothing to show for the piece in Olthof- Deak, Eger 1 987. 1 5 ... l"lh7 1 6.�h5t 16.'1Wg6t l"lf7 1 7.l"lxd7 lLlxd7 1 8 ..if2 (no better is 1 8 ..ih5 0-0-0 19.'1Mfxf7 .ixh4) 1 8 ... lLlf8-+ Aghabekian - Huang Qian, Ekaterinburg 2007. 1 6 ... 'it>d8 1 7.'1Wg6 'it>c8 1 8.l"lxd7 White's initiative is petering out so he needs to add some oil to the flames. 1 8 ..ixf6 lLlxf6 1 9 .l"lhe 1 e4+ is unappealing for him. 1 8 ... lLlxd7 1 9.'1Mfxh7 .ixh4 20.'1Wg8t 20.l"ld1 is convincingly met by 20 ... b4 2 1 ..ig4 .ic6 (The defender must be sure to avoid 2 l ...bxc3? 22.'1Wg8t .id8 23.l"lxd7! cxb2t 24.'it>b 1 with barely equal chances.) 22.l2Je4 'it>b8+.

396

Classic Main Line

14...d5

20 .. .'1MI'd8 2 1 .'ifixe6

b

a

c

d

e

f

g

h

2 1 ...lifie7!N The exact move is more logical than the eccentric idea 2 1 . ..Vfif6?! Sedlak - Ilincic, Budva 2002, when White can keep some chances alive with 22.'ifih3!N r:Jlc7 23.Eld1 'ifie7+. 22.'tifig8t 22.lifixh6 lif!f6 23.lifixf6 ctJxf6 is a similar story. 22 ... lifif8 23.lifixf8t lt:lxf8 24.fxeS r:Jlc7 Black should win the ending without too many problems.

13...i.x£3 14.i.x£3

This has not been the highest scoring move, but it may well be best. The alternative is: 14 ... .ihf6 1 S . .ihf6 Elc8?! This leads to fascinating complications, although in view of the improvement at move 17 I would not recommend this move for Black. The safe alternative is 1 S . . . lt:Jxf6. This was my choice in the aforementioned game, as I was struggling to remember all the nuances of the more complicated lines. The game continued: 1 6.�xa8 dS (If I had this position again I would prefer 1 6 ... 0-0! 17.�f3 b4 1 8.ctJe4 [or 1 8.lt:la4, Hanston - Williams, Bristol 1 968, 1 8 . . . eS!N 1 9.fxeS dxeS 20.lt:lb3 Elc8 2 l .ctJacS e4 22.�e2 aS 23.�a6 a4 24.�xc8 axb3 2S.lt:lxb3 lif!xc8+] 1 8 ... lt:lxe4 1 9.he4 dS 20.�d3 lifixf4t 2 l .r:Jlbl aS The position remained dynamically balanced in Ozerov - Liebeskind, e-mail 200S.) 17.�c6t r:Jle7 1 8.g3 Eld8 (Slightly more accurate would have been 1 8 ... b4 1 9.ctJce2, Perunovic Antic, Dimitrovgrad 2003, 1 9 ... Elc8N .) 1 9.Elhel

I actually reached this position in one of my own games a short while before the book was due to be published, but forgot my analysis!

a

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White kept an edge in Van Kampen Ftacnik, Amsterdam 20 1 0, although it is not so easy for him to make real progress, and I eventually managed to win after my opponent misplayed his position. 1 6.hg7

397

Chapter 1 8 - 6.ig5 e6 1 6.ih4 is less threatening: 1 6 ... b4 1 7.CtJce2 'Wc4 ( 1 7 ...d5?! looks riskier, as after 1 8 J:X:he1 ctJc5 19.f5! White's pieces are becoming dangerously active.) 1 8.b3 'Wc5 1 9.l"'d2 0-0= 1 6... l"'h7 Here I found a strong new idea for White, which casts a dark shadow over Black's 1 5th move.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

1 8.fxe6 ctJe5 The defender must exercise extreme caution. For instance, 1 8 ... tt:lb6? is swiftly punished after: 1 9.l"'hfl 'Wc5 20.exf7t l"'xf7 2 l .ctJe4 'We5 22.ctJxd6t! 'Wxd6 23.�h5+1 9.�e4 'Wc5 20.tt:ld5! This is stronger than 20.ctJf5 fxe6 2 l .ctJxg7t �f7 22.ctJxe6 �xe6 23.l"'hfl 'We3t 24.�b1 l"'xc3 25.�d5t �d7 26.bxc3 'Wxc3 when Black escapes to equality. 20 ... fxe6 2 l .ctJxe6 'Wa7 22.ctJxg7t 'Wxg7 23.l"'hfl Black is surviving for the moment, but he is certainly under pressure.

h

1 7.f5!!N Previous games had seen 1 7.�h5 'Wc5! Black must be careful, as the white pieces are very mobile and dangerous. ( 1 7 ... l"'xg7? 1 8.ctJxe6 'Wc4 19.l"'he1 l"'xg2 20.l"\d4!N [White has got too excited with 20.l"'xd6? �e7 2 1 .l"'d4 'Wxe6 and was duly punished in Klavins Tal, Riga 1 959.] 20 ... l"'xh2 2 l .ctJc5t �d8 22.l"'xc4 ctJxc5 23.l"'xc5 l"\xc5 24.�xf7±) 1 8.f5! l"'xg7 1 9.ctJxe6 'We3t 20.�b1 This position was reached in Euwe - Tal, corr. 1 9 6 1 , and here Black should have played 20 ... l"'g8N 2 l .l"'he1 l"'xc3 22.bxc3 (22.ctJf4?! �f8 23.l"'xe3 l"'xe3 24.l"\xd6 l"'e1 t 25.�d1 �e7 26.l"\d4 tt:lf6+ The black rooks will become very active.) 22 ... 'Wxc3 23.ctJc7t �d8 24.tt:ld5 'Wc5 25.�xf7 l"'f8 26.�e6 White narrowly manages to maintain the balance thanks to his well-coordinated pieces in the centre. 1 7 ... l"'xg7 Black is not helped by 1 7 ... e5 1 8.f6 exd4 1 9.l"'xd4 tt:lf8 20.l"'e1 t tt:le6 2 l .l"'d2!±

a

15.ClJxe6!?

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White is keeping the flames of his initiative alive with this spectacular move. Weak is 1 5 .�d5? 'Wxf4t ( 1 5 ... l"'c8!?N and 1 5 ... b4!?N also look good) 1 6.�b1 'Wxh4 1 7.fxg7 0-0-0 1 8.gxh8='W l"\xh8 19.ctJxe6, Hartla - Koczo, Budapest 2009, and now after 1 9 ... fxe6N 20.�e6 l"'d8+ Black should win with careful play. White does have a more serious alternative: 1 5 .fxg7 l"'g8 1 6.�xe7 16.�xd5 b4 will transpose to the note to White's 1 7th move below after a subsequent exchange on e7.

Classic Main Line

398

1 6 ... �xe7!N This is more accurate than the immediate 1 6... '1Wxf4t, as played in Semer - Kover, corr. 1 979. 8

7

L=C////N/',_, ""///////,

6 5

20.ctJxe6 20.i.xa8 Elxa8 21 .ctJxe6 fXe6 22.Eixd7 Elg8 23.Eid6 �xg7 24.!"\exe6 Elf8 is also balanced. 20 ... £Xe6 2 1 .Eixe6t �xg7 22.ha8 ctJc5 23.Eie7t �f6 24.tLld5t �g5 Chances are about equal, although any result is possible.

15 ...fxe6 16.�h5t

4 3

2

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 7.!"\he l ! White must try to exploit the excellent coordination between his pieces. 1 7 .i.xd5? is refuted by 17 ... b4! (this is much stronger than 17 ... '1Wxf4t 1 8.�b 1 Elac8+) 1 8 .lLlc6t �f6 1 9 .lLlxb4 '1Wxf4t 20.�b1 '1Wxb4 2 I .i.xa8 Elb8 22.b3 lLle5-+ White ends up overstretched and losing. 17 ... '1Wxf4t It looks a bit too risky to try 17 ... �f6 1 8.f5! b4 1 9.fXe6 bxc3 20.hd5 iWf4t 2 l .�b1 iWb8 22.b3 lLle5 23.exf7 lLlxf7 24.!"\fl t �xg7 25 .Eixf7t �h8 26.i.xa8 '1Wxa8 27.!"\f6;!; The black king is more exposed than his counterpart. 1 8.�b1 �f6 1 8 ... �d6 puts the king in a more exposed position, and White obtains an edge after 1 9.i.xd5! exd5 20.lLlxd5 iWxh2 2 l .ctJf5t �c6 22.ctJde7t �c7 23.ctJxg8 Elxg8 24.!"\e7 Eld8 25.a3±. 1 9.hd5 Despite the seemingly chaotic situation, position remains dynamically balanced. 1 9 ... iWxh2 Also reasonable is 1 9 ... �xg7, for instance 20.g3 iWf6 2 l .ctJxe6t £Xe6 22.!"\xe6 '1Wf8 23.i.xa8 ctJc5 24.!"\e5 '1Wxa8 25.Eixc5 Eld8 with approximate equality.

a

16.. .g6!

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

Black would be playing with fire if he ventured 1 6 ... �d8? 17.fXe7t �c8, Kostov ­ Minev, Sofia 1 960, at which point 1 8.Eid4!N �b7 1 9.!"\el '1Wc5 20.i.f2± looks highly unpleasant. The white pieces are concentrated and prepared to strike.

17.hg6t ci>fS 18.fxe7t g7 19.�g3 Senseless is 1 9.e8=lLlt? !"\axeS 20.i.xe8 '1Wxf4t 2 l .�b1 Elxe8-+ Silva - Kover, corr. 1 994.

19... b4! In such a wild-looking position, it somehow only seems right to provoke further complications. The following two moves have also been tried: 1 9 ... lt:Jf6?! 20.f5 '1Wd7N (This looks like the best try. Instead after 20 ...'1Wxe7 2 1 .Eihe1 Elhd8

399

Chapter 1 8 - 6.�g5 e6 22.l"i:xe6 '®xe6 23.fXe6 xg6 24.�h4± White was clearly on top in Rothuis - Hachijan, Bussum 2008.) 2 1 .fXe6 (2 l .e8='® l"i:hxe8 22.he8 l"i:xe8 23.�e5±) 2 l ...'®xe7 22.�f7 b4 23.tLlxd5 tLlxd5 24.Ei:xd5 l"i:hd8 25.2"1f5± The black king will not be able to relax for a while.

an exposed king Black will have little chance to play for a win, so he decided to take a perpetual with 24 . . . '®a1 t 25.d2 '®a4 26.�xh8 '®f4t (26 ...'®xd7 27.�c3 '®xe7 28.�cl=) 27.�c3 '®c4t 28.d2 '®f4t 29.c3 '®c4t 30.d2 '®f4t Yz-Yz Bryson - Pereira, corr. 1 987.

1 9 ... '®c5 should be met by 20.f5!N (Instead after 20.e8='® l"i:hxe8 2 l .�xe8 l"i:xe8+ Black had somewhat better prospects in Tukmakov - Klimenok, Riga 1 962.) 20 ... b4 2 1 .tLle2 (2 l .fXe6? tLlf6+) 2 1 ...e5 22.l"i:he1 Ei:he8 23.tLld4 l"i:xe7 (23 ... exd4? 24.�f2 '®d6 25.�xd4t g8 26.l"i:e6±) 24.tLle6t l"i:xe6 25.fXe6 xg6 26.exd7 e4 27.�h4 '®c7 28.Ei:d2 '®xd7 29.l"i:xe4 Black's chances for win are minimal.

23..ie5

20.£5

After 23.l"i:hel '®b5 24.e8='®t l"i:hxe8 25.dxe8='®t l"i:xe8 26.bxc3 l"i:e4+ White will have to work hard to stay afloat.

23 ...cxb2t Compared with the Bryson - Pereira game, the main difference is that Black manages to destroy the pawn on b2 rather than the one on a2, thus ensuring that the white king will remain exposed.

The feeble 20.tLle2? runs into 20 ... '®c4.

24.hb2 20...¥Nc4! 20 . . . '®c5 transposes to 1 9 . . . '®c5 above. The text is more challenging, and should give Black chances to fight for the advantage.

21.fxe6 bxc3 22.exd7

24.b1 does not solve White's problems after 24 ... Ei:hd8! 25.exd8='® l"i:xd8+.

24...¥Nf4t 25.2"1d2 2S.b 1 '®d6 26.�xh8 '®xe7 leads to a similar situation.

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

25 ... l"i:hd8! 26.exd8=YN l"i:xd8

Black will collect the second of the terrible twins on the seventh rank, while keeping some winning chances in the ending.

Classic Main Line

400

D32) 12.hf6 lt:Jxf6 The bishop has to keep protecting the d6square. 12 ...ii.xf6? can be more or less refuted by 1 3.e5! intending tt'ldxb5.

1 5 ... tt'ld7?! 16.tt'lxe6! fXe6 17.ii.h5t b 1 'WaS is great for Black. 1 3 ...i.xe2 14.'Wxe2 e6 1 5.0-0-0 �c8 1 5 ... tt:lc4 1 6.�hfl tt:lh5 does not work here, because of 1 7.�xf7!! with a huge attack. 8

7

6 5

3

This turns out to be rather risky, and is unlikely to attract many followers.

12 e6 ..•

This more or less forces White to give up his valuable dark-squared bishop, after which Black will practically be guaranteed healthy and long-lasting positional compensation.

13..txf6 Inadequate is 1 3.i.e3? 'Wb4 1 4.0-0-0 exf5 1 5.'Wxf5 �h5 1 6.'1Wf3 i.e7 when White does not have enough for the piece, and after the further 1 7.i.e2 tt:le5 1 8.'1Wf4 i.g4 1 9.hg4 tt:lc4! Black was already winning in Kanovsky - Navara, Ostrava 201 0.

h=n///,//

4 2

413

r"'""·mD4"''

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

16.@bl 1 6.�hfl tt:lh5! also looks good for Black. 1 6 ... tt:lc4 Black has a promising attack (Tiemann) .

l l . JWc5! This is an important resource, as the double attack on d4 and g5 will force some kind of concession. White has three plausible responses: B221) IVll:J f5 ?!, B222) 12.Wfe3 and finally the critical B223) 12.i.e3!. .

B221) 12.tlJf5?!

1 3.tt:lxd6t i.xd6 14.i.xf6 tt:lxf6 1 5.'1Wxf6 i.g3t transposes to the following note.

13 ... tl:Jxf6 14.tl:Je3 Risky is 14.tt:lxd6t i.xd6 1 5.'1Wxf6 i.g3t 1 6.@e2N (An attempt to improve over 1 6.hxg3? '1We3t 1 7.tt:le2 �xh l + Namyslo - Bogner, Bad Liebenzell 20 1 0.) 1 6 ...i.e5 1 7.'1Wg5 b5 with excellent compensation for Black.

I4 tl:Jd7 15.tl:Jg4 ..•

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

a

15... b5!N

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

414

Classic Main Line

This suggestion of Tiemann looks like the most promising course of action, although in a way Black is spoiled for choice as the following alternative is also perfectly adequate: 1 5 . . .i.g7 There is even a third playable option in 1 5 ... lt:'le5 1 6.lt:'lxe5 �xe5 17.g3 i.g7 1 8.i.e2 i.d7 1 9.0-0-0 Garnelis - Kleijn, Permo 2009, 1 9 ... 0-0-0N with even chances. 16.0-0-0 lt:'le5 17.lt:'lxe5 �xe5 1 7 ...he5!?N was also not at all bad. 1 8.i.e2 i.d7 Black has promising compensation, although it would be too much to claim an objective advantage. However, in the one game that reached this position, White went astray. 8

7

6 5

Lw/_,['�"-c: -/////J" "·

4 3

2 b

c

d

1

a

c

d

16.e5

e

f

h

g

This principled move fails to solve White's problems, although it is doubtful that the quieter alternatives can improve his fate. 16.0-0-0 i.b7 1 7.lt:'lf6t (17.a3 i.g7) 1 7 ... lt:lxf6 1 8.�xf6 Elg8 1 9.�d4 2"1c8 20.�xc5 Elxc5 2 1 .2"\d4 e7 22.a4 i.g7 23.2"1b4 Elxc3! 24.bxc3 hc3 25.2"1b3 b4+

>m,.J"'" "•m//

a

8 7 6 5 4 3 2

e

f

g

h

19.�g3? Best play looks to be: 1 9.2"\hflN 0-0-0! 20.h3 (20.�xf7? �g5t 2 l .b1 Eldf8 22.h4 Elxh4 23.�xf8t i.xf8 24.2"\xf8t c?+) 20 ... 2"\hf8� 1 9 ...�xg3 20.hxg3 r:lie7 2 l .i.f3 This position was reached in Narmontas Bogner, Kerner 2009, and here Black should have played: 2 1 ...i.e5!N When White faces a difficult defence in the endgame.

1 6.i.d3 i.b7 1 7.�f4 (or 1 7.tt:Jf6t tt:Jxf6 1 8.�xf6 l"\h6 1 9.�f3 i.g7 with some initiative for Black) 1 7... i.g7 1 8.0-0-0 i.xc3 1 9.bxc3 �xc3 20.2"\hfl 0-0-0 2 l .�xf7 lDc5+ 16.tt:Jf6t e7! 1 7.tDxd7 (17.tt:Jg4 b4 1 8.tt:Ja4 �xc2) 17 ...hd7 18.0-0-0 i.g7 1 9.b1 b4 20.tLle2 i.a4! 2 1 .2"1d2 l"\hc8 22.b3 i.c6+

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

White must worry not only about ...�e5

415

Chapter 1 9 - 6.!g5 lLlbd7 with decisive threats, but also simply ... a5-a4 with a strong attack.

distracted by trifles such as the h2-pawn: 1 3 ... tLlxh2?! 14.tt:ld5 looks risky for him.

16.. J�b8 17.0-0-0

14.CLJb3N

17.exd6 is strongly met by 1 7 .. .f5! 1 8.tt:lf2 !b7 1 9.1We2 \Wxd6 20.Eidl \We7 2 1 .tt:ld3 b4 22.tLlb1 eS, when Black's two bishops and mobile central pawns give him fantastic compensation for a mere pawn.

This is the natural way to improve over 1 4.tt:lf5? ixc3 1 5.\Wxc3? ( 1 5.bxc3 tt:ldf6+) 1 5 ... \Wf2t 1 6.\t>d1 Elxh2 1 7.ih4

17... 'Lixe5 18.'Llf6t After 1 8 .tt:lxe5 \WxeS+ The bishops will become monsters.

18 ...r:lde7 19.YNf4i.b7 20.CLJfe4i.h6 21.YNxh6 l3xh6 22.CLJxc5 dxc5+ White faces a miserable defensive task in this ending. Thanks once again to Christoph Tiemann for sharing his analysis of the new idea of 1 5 ... b5.

B222) 12.VNe3

b

a

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 7 ... Eixh4! 1 8.tt:lxh4 ( 1 8.E\xh4 1Wxf1 t 1 9.1We1 tt:lf2t 20.\t>d2 \Wxg2 2 1 .tLle3 tt:lxe4t 22.Wcl \Wg6-+) 18 ...tt:le3t 1 9.Wcl tt:lxfl 20.tt:lf5 This position was reached in the game R. Griffiths D. Eggleston, Torquay 2009, and here 20 ... tt:lf8N would have virtually assured Black's victory. -

a

14...i.xc3 13.VNd2 i.g7 Black should not allow himself to be

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

It looks sensible to take the opportunity to shatter White's pawns, although Black can also consider a more creative approach with:

416

Classic Main Line

14. . . Wa7!? 1 5.tLld5 This looks critical, although we could also have fun analysing 1 5.id3 b500 and 1 5.h3 b500• 1 5 ....ixb2 1 6.Ei:b l ie5

20 ... Ei:h5 Another possibility is 20 ... tLlf2t 2 1 .i>c1 lt::Jx hl 22.ih6t es 23.tLlc7t d7 24.ie3 b6 25.tLld5 tLlxd5 26.exd5 ie5 with unclear play. 2 1 .hf6 lt::Jxf6!? 2 1 . ..if4 22.Eixh5 Wgl t leads to a draw after 23.e2 when neither side can avoid the perpetual. 22.tLlc7 if4 23.Wxf4 Ei:xhl t 24.i>d2 Elxbl 25.Wh6t gs 26.Wg5t hs 8

7

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

17.tLlc7t 1 7.he7 is well met by 17 .. .f6!, for instance: 1 8.lLla5 tLlc5 1 9.We2 Ei:h7+ 17 ... f8 1 8.tLlxa8 tLldf6! Incredibly, Black does not even have to recapture on a8, and can instead use his pieces to launch an attack without suffering from the absence of the rook. 1 9.id3 ixh2!? 19 ... Eixh2 20.Ei:xh2 ig3t would lead to a perpetual, but where's the fun in that? 20. dl After 20.f1 lt::J h5 2 1 .e1 ig3t 22.e2 ie5 the white king feels distinctly uncomfortable.

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

6

h

5

4

dl lLlxh6 23.�xh6 .tg4t 24.'it>cl �el t 25.'it>b2 �b4t=) 1 8 ...i.d7 1 9.lLlf5±

16.h3 i.d7 17.lLlb3 Vffc7 18.i.d4 :gc8:ii Black has more or less completed his development, and his pieces are a picture of harmony. Further practical testing is needed, but I am pretty sure Black is at least not worse. From this position I found one practical encounter, which we will follow for a few more moves.

22 ...Vffc7 With ideas of ... lZ:lc4 and ...i.h4t in the air, White had better settle for half a point.

Conclusion

a

b

19.:ggl i.e6

c

d

e

f

g

h

1 9 ... b5!?N also deserves attention.

20.g4 20 ..tg2 b5 2 l .a3 lZ:lfd?oo

20 .ig5 21.lLld2 VffaS!N ..•

After 2 1 ...b5 22.a3 lLlfd7 23.0-0-0 lZ:lb6 24.'it>bl White was consolidating and stood slightly better in Radulski - Raykhman, Cappelle la Grande 2010.

The modern chess world is characterized by the ever-increasing depth of computer­ assisted opening preparation, with some commentators even speculating about the death of our beloved game within the next however many years. In such times, it is all the more refreshing to witness the emergence of a brand new counterattacking concept in what is possibly the most heavily analysed opening system of all: the Najdorf. The paucity of practical examples in certain critical lines prevents us from drawing any firm conclusions about the 6 ... lZ:lbd7 system, but the results of the available games, combined with some of the original analysi contained within these pages, lead me to evaluate Black's system quite optimistically. If the readers feel the same way, perhaps they will make their own contribution in moulding the development of this new and exciting system.

Variation Index Chapter 1 l.e4 c5 A) 2.lt:Ja3!? 1 0 B) 2.b3 lt:Jc6 3.i.b2 e 5 1 2 B l ) 4.i.c4 1 2 B2) 4.i.b5 1 3 C) 2.b4 cxb4 1 5 C I ) 3.d4 1 5 C2) 3.i.b2 1 6 C3) 3.a3 1 7 D ) 2.d3 d5!? 1 9 D l ) 3.lt:Jd2 1 9 D2) 3.exd5 2 1 E) 2.lLle2 lLlf6 3.lt:Jbc3 d5 4.exd5 lLlxd5 5.lt:Jxd5 �xd5 22 E l ) 6.lt:Jc3 23 E2) 6.d4 23 F) 2.g3 25 Chapter 2 l.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4..!lJxc3 .!lJc6 s. .!lJf3 d6 6.i.c4 a6 7.0-0 .!lJf6 A) 8.b4!? 3 1 B) 8.h3 32 C) 8.i.g5 33 D) 8.�e2 34 Chapter 3 l .e4 c5 2.c3 A) 2 ... d6 3.d4 lt:Jf6 38 AI) 4.f3 38 A2) 4.dxc5 lt:Jc6! 39 A2 1) 5.cxd6 39 A22) 5 .i.c4 40 A23) 5 .�c2 dxc5 4 1 A23 1 ) 6.i.f4 42 A232) 6.lt:Jf3 43 A24) 5.f3 44 A3) 4.i.d3 g6! 46 A3 1 ) 5 .dxc5 46 A32) 5 .lt:Jf3 48 B) 2 ... d5 3.exd5 �xd5 4.d4 g6!? 49 B l ) 5.ie3 cxd4 50 B 1 1 ) 6.cxd4 i.g7 50 B 1 2) 6.�xd4 5 1

Variation Index B2) 5.dxc5 52 B3) 5.'Lla3 54 B4) 5.'Llf3 �g7 55 B4 1 ) 6.c4!? 55 B42) 6.�e2 56 B43) 6.dxc5 58 B44) 6.�e3 59 B45) 6.'Lla3 cxd4 6 1 B45 1 ) 7.'Llb5 6 1 B452) 7.�c4! 62

Chapter 4 l.e4 c5 2.ctJc3 d6 A) 3.'Llge2 68 B) 3.d4 70 C) 3.f4 g6 4.'Llf3 �g7 7 1 C l ) 5 .d4 cxd4 6.'Llxd4 'Llc6 7.�e3 'Llf6 8.�e2 0-0 72 C l l ) 9.0-0?! 72 C l 2) 9.'Llb3 74 C2) 5 .�b5t �d7 6.�xd7t '1Wxd7 7.0-0 'Llc6 8.d3 'Llf6 75 C2 1 ) 9.h3 75 C22) 9.�d2 77 C3) 5 .�c4 'Llc6 6.0-0 'Llf6 77 C3 1 ) 7.\Wel 78 C32) 7.d3 0-0 8.\Wel 'Lld4 79 C32 1 ) 9.f5?! 79 C322) 9.'Llxd4 8 1 C323) 9.�b3 82

Chapter 5 l.e4 c5 2.ctJc3 d6 3.g3 ctJc6 4.i.g2 g6 5.d3 i.g7 A) 6.'Llf3 'Llf6 7.0-0 0-0 8.h3 Elb8 86 A 1 ) 9.�e3 87 A2) 9.a4 89 B) 6.f4 e6 7.'Llf3 'Llge7 8.0-0 0-0 9 1 B l ) 9.�d2 92 B2) 9.�e3 b6!? 10.d4 �a6 92 B2 1 ) l l .Elf2 94 B22) l l .Elel 94 C) 6.�e3 ElbS 7.'1Wd2 b5 96 C 1 ) 8.f4 96 C2) s.'Llf3 97 C3) 8.'Llge2 97

421

422

Grandmaster Repertoire 6 The Sicilian Defence -

Chapter 6 l.e4 c5 v\fjf3 d6 A) 3 ..ic4 1 02 B) 3.c3 l2Jf6 1 05 B 1 ) 4 ..id3 1 0 5 B2) 4 ..ie2 1 07 B3) 4.h3 1 09 C) 3.tDc3 lDf6 4.e5 dxe5 5.lDxe5 t2Jbd7 1 1 2 C 1 ) 6 ..ib5 1 1 2 C2) 6.d4 1 1 2 C3) 6.lDc4 e6 1 14 C3 1 ) 7 ..ie2 1 1 5 C32) 7.g3 1 1 7 Chapter ? l.e4 c5 2.'Llf3 d6 3 ..ih5t .id7 4.hd7t V;Vxd7 A) 5.0-0 tDc6 6.c3 lDf6 1 20 A 1 ) 7J�e1 1 2 1 A2 ) 7.V!ffe2 1 23 A3) 7.d4!? 1 2 5 B ) 5 .c4 l2Jc6 6.tDc3 g6 7.d4 cxd4 8.l2Jxd4 .ig7 1 27 B 1) 9 ..ie3 1 28 B2) 9.tDde2 129 Chapter S l.e4 c5 2.'Llf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.V;Vxd4 'Llc6 S..ihS .id7 6.hc6 hc6 A) 7.c4 1 34 B) 7.tDc3 lDf6 8 ..ig5 e6 9.0-0-0 .ie7 136 B1) 10.V!ffd3 1 37 B2) 1 0.8:he l 0-0 139 B21) 1 1 .e5 1 40 B22) 1 1 .V!ffd2 1 4 1 B23) 1 1 . b 1 1 43 Chapter 9 l .e4 c5 2.tLlf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tLlxd4 tLlf6 s.tLlc3 a6 A) 6.f3 1 50 B) 6.V!fff3!? 1 5 1

C) 6.E\gl!? 1 54 D) 6.id3 1 56 E) 6.a4 1 5 8

Variation Index Chapter 10 l .e4 c5 2.�£3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.�xd4 �f6 s.�c3 a6 6.g3 e5 A) 7.tLlb3 i.e7 8.i.g2 b5 1 62 A l ) 9.a4 1 63 A2) 9.0-0 iLlbd7 1 64 A2 1 ) l O.i.d2!? 1 65 A22) 1 0.a4 1 67 B) 7.�de2 b5 168 B l ) 8.i.g5 169 B2) 8.i.g2 1 69 Chapter 1 1 l .e4 c5 2.�£3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.�xd4 � f6 s.�c3 a6 6.h3 e6 7.g4 d5 A) 8.i.g2 1 76 B) 8.exd5 1 79 Chapter 12 l.e4 c5 2.�£3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.�xd4 �f6 s.�c3 a6 6.f4 e6 A) 7.i.d3 1 86 B) 7.i.e3 b5 1 87 B l) 8.e5 1 87 B2) 8.i.d3 1 89 B3) 8.1Wf3 1 90 C) 7.1Wf3 1Wb6 1 95 Cl) 8.a3 tLlc6 1 96 C l l ) 9.iLlb3 1Wc7 1 96 C l l l) 1 0 .i.d3 1 96 C l l 2) 1 0 .g4 1 97 C l 2) 9.tLlxc6 1 99 C2) 8.tLlb3 '1Wc7 9.g4 b5 200 C2 1 ) 1 0.g5 202 C22) 1 0.i.d3 204 Chapter 13 l .e4 c5 2.�£3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.�xd4 �f6 s.�c3 a6 6.i.e2 e6 7.0-0 i.e7 8.f4 0-0 A) 9.@h l '!Wc7 208 A l ) l O.i.e3 b5 209 Al l ) l l .a3 209 A l 2) l l .i.f3 2 1 0 A l 3) l l .e5 dxe5 12.fxe5 tLlfd7 2 1 1 A l 3 1 ) 1 3.i.d3 2 1 1 Al 32) 1 3.i.f4 2 1 2

423

424

Grandmaster Repertoire 6

-

The Sicilian Defence

A 1 33) 1 3.�f3 2 1 3 A2) 10.'\We l b 5 1 l .�f3 �b7 1 2.e5 li:le8 2 1 5 A2 1 ) 1 3.�xb7 2 1 6 A22) 1 3 .1Wg3 2 1 7 A23) 1 3.f5 2 1 7 B ) 9.a4 li:lc6 1 0.�e3 1Wc7 1 1 .'it>h 1 j"\e8! 2 1 9 B 1 ) 1 2.a5!? li:lxa5 1 3.e5! dxe5 14.fxe5 1Wxe5 1 5.�f4 1Wc5 1 6.li:la4 1Wa7 220 B 1 1) 1 7.�c7 220 B 1 2) 1 7.�e3 22 1 B2) 1 2.�g1 �d7 223 B2 1 ) 1 3.liJb3 224 B22) 1 3.1Wd3 225 B3) 12.�d3 226 B4) 1 2 .1We 1 li:lxd4 1 3.�xd4 e5 228 B4 1 ) 14.fxe5 228 B42) 14.�e3 229 B5) 12.1Wd2 �d7 232 B 5 1 ) 1 3.j"\ad1 233 B52) 1 3.liJb3 234 B6) 1 2.liJb3 238 B7) 1 2.�f3 li:la5!? 240 B7 1 ) 1 3.1We1 242 B72) 1 3 .�g1 244 B73) 1 3.g4 �f8 245 B73 1 ) 1 4.�g2 246 B732) 14.g5 247 Chapter 14 l .e4 c5 2.ltJf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.ltJxd4 ltJf6 s.ltJc3 a6 6..ic4 e6 A) 7.a4 252 B) 7.a3 253 C) 7.�b3 b5 255 C l ) 8.0-0 �e7 258 C 1 1 ) 9.a4 258 C 1 2) 9.�e3 259 C 1 3) 9.f4 260 C 14) 9.1Wf3 1Wb6 264 C 1 4 1 ) 1 0 .�g5!? 264 C 1 42) 1 0.�e3 265 C2) 8.�g5 �e7 9.1Wf3 1Wc7 268 C2 1 ) 1 0.0-0-0 liJbd7 269 C2 1 1) 1 1 .hf6 270 C21 2) 1 1 .1Wg3 271 C2 1 3) 1 l .e5 �b7 1 2.1Wg3 272 C2 1 3 1 ) 1 2 ... li:lxe5 273

Variation Index C2 1 32) 1 2 ... dxe5 275 C22) 1 0.e5 i.b7 l l .exd6 Ld6 1 2.�e3 276 C22 1 ) 1 2 ...i.c5 1 3.0-0-0 ct:lc6 276 C22 1 1 ) 1 4.�xe6t!? 276 C22 1 2) 1 4.Lf6 gxf6 279 C22 1 2 1) 1 5 .ct:le4 279 C22 1 22) 1 5 .lt:ld5 2 8 1 C222) 1 2 ... ct:lc6!? 282 Chapter 15 l .e4 c5 2.