The Scotch Game - Peter Wells

Batsford Chess Opening Guides

The Scotch Game Peter Wells

"

B.T.Batsford Ltd, London

First published 1998 Copyright 10 1998 Peter Wells ISBN 0 7134 8466 7 British Library Cataloguiog-in-Publication Data. A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, by any means, without prior permission of the publisher. . The Bauford Chess Opening Guides were designed and developed by First Rank Publishing Typeset and edited by First Rank Publishing, Brighton Printed in Great Britain by Biddles Ltd, Guildford & King's Lynn for the publishers, B. T. Bauford Ltd, 583 Fulham Road, London SW6 SBY

-

Chess set used in cover photograph courtesy of the London Chess Centre

A BATSFORD CHESS BOOK General Manager: David Cummings Ad'l1i.sors: Mark Dvoretsky, Raymond Keene OBE, Daniel King, Jon Speelman, Chris Ward

CONTENTS

I

1 e4 e5 2lDf3lDc6 3 d4 exd4 4 lLlxd4

Bibliography Preface

Introduction

6 7 8

Part One. Main Une 4 •.•~f6 1 Main Line with 5 ~c6 bxc6 6 e5 'ffe7 7 'tte2lOd5 S c4 JLa6 9 b3

2

3 4 5

14 Main Line with 5ll)xc6 bxc6 6 e5 'ffe7 7 'iie2ltX15 S c4 JLa6: White's ninth move alternatives 33 Main Line with 5 ~e6 bxe6 6 e5 'ili'e7 71!ie2 ~ S c4ltJb6 9ltJd2 44 Main Line with 5 ~c6 bxc6 6 e5 "i!le7 71!re2lOd5 8 c4ltJb6: White's ninth move alternatives 63 5 ~xe6 bxc6: Early deviations for both sides 70

Part Two. 4 •...tc5

6 7 8

9 10 11

5li.)xc6: Kasparov's 5...•£6 6 fidl dxe6 7liX3 .i.e6 SiDa4I? 5 ~e6: Early deviations for both sides 51Ob3 and 5lOE5?1 5 JLe31lYf6 6 c3liJge7 7 .*.co4: Systems with ...~ 5 .i.e3 Wf6 6 c3lL)ge7 7 .i.e4: Systems without ...ltJe5 5 .i.e3: Early deviations for both sides

Part Three. Black's Other Fourth Moves U~~

13

Black's Fo\,llth Move Alternatives

Index of Complete Games

81 91 102 109 123 132

m 150

159

I BIBLIOGRAPHY I Books

Encyclopaedia 0/Chess Openiny; volume C (Sahovski Informator 1997) Bats/ord Chess Opening,s 2, Garry Kasparov & Raymond Keene (Batsford 1989) W'mning 'With the Scotch, Gary Lane (Batsford 1992) Periodicals In/ormator

New in Chess Yearbooks New in Chess Magazine Chess Monthly British 'Chess Magazine ChessBase MegaBase CD-ROM

PREFACE

I

It seems increasingly inevitable that introductions to opening books will discuss the information explosion in chess, both in tenDS of the mind-boggliog growth in available material, and the much improved quality of analytical aides used by top players. One of the more positive consequences of these changes, especially in the 'Opeo Games' (1 e4 e5), has been a greater willinplcss among the leading players to experiment not just with new ideas, but with those old ideas which that fickle creature 'opeoing fashion' had ditched prematurely. English players, notably Nunn, Shon and Chandler have played a major role here, reviving the Four Knights Game and even the King's Gambit. From the mid 198Os, there was again more to 1 e4 e5 than just the Spanish. It was the World Champion Garry Kasparov's advocacy of the Scotch which led, via the 'trickle-down effect' of fashion, to its current great popularity at all levels. Indeed he has stated his belief that it is the only serious alternative to the Spanish after 1 e4 e5. There is much more to this new popularity than mere imitation too. Kasparov's pioneering work bas revealed many brand-new areas of research - look at his mammoth analysis in Game l for example, or the entire Chapter 5 dedicated to the unlikely but brilliant knight move 8 ~ - and this has attracted some very fine young talents, Sergei Rublevsky, and the young Ukrainian, Vladimir Baklan, to name but two whose fine effons feature heavily in what follows. The Scotch is strategically quite a complex opening. I have tried as far as possible to explain what is happening :with panicularreference to a few imponant recurring themes. I hope you will find the illustrative games I have chosen instructive and entertaining. A few words about the scope of this book. I have decided· to exclude the so-called Scotch Four Knights (those lines where White answers 4•••~ with 5 ltXJ) for two reaSODS. First., the lines with 5 lDxc6 are very complex and popular. and a superficial treatment of 5 ltX3 would have done more harm than good. Second, the lines with 5 llX:3 are neith~ as dangerow as 5lWtc6, nor very closely related strategically. I am confident that the popularity of the Scotch will continue, and certainly hope that it does. since it is fascinating for both sides. I hope that the right balance has been struck between general themes and new analysis to encourage this process at all levels. PeIi!r Wells. Bud4.pest, M4y 1998 7

INTRODUCTION

I

The Scotch - A case of 'rich strategic imbalance'

To try and undemand the wide appeal of the Scotch, we could do wone than to return to Kasparov's claim that, along with the Spanish (Ruy lopez), it is the only opening after 1 e4 e5 which can set Black lasting strategic problems. I think that this has to do with the fact that in vinually every important variation of the Scote4 a cenain degree of 'imbalance' is generated within a very few moves. Authors like to we such terms as 'sharp', 'double-edged' or 'unbalanced' to desaibe chess positions. What this basically boils down to is that the initial 'equilibrium' has been disturbed.. This may take many forms - one side may enjoy an advantage in development or activity of the pieces. Alternatively, there may be longer-tenn structural factors present such as pawn weaknesses. Then again a simple gain of material is an important source of 'imbalance'. What makes for fascinating chess is the interplay of these factors. If White simply has two extra pawns then the theoretical interest in the positiOD is limited. If on the other hand Black can claim a huge lead in development and anacking chances as 8

compensation then suddenly all is still to play for_ The great thing about the Sanch. is DOt only that we find very early conflias between competing types of advantages enjoyed by White and Black respectively. but that there is great variety in who enjoys which type of plus. The Pure Scotch Pawn Structure A certain element of 'imbalance' is in-

jected immediately by the exchange of pawns on d4. The significance of this is not to be undaatimatecl, and the relative scarcity of games featuring this 'pure' structure largely reflects Black's desire, and in most ~ his ability. to avoid it. The problem is that if Black takes no special action, his opponent is likely to enjoy a pleasant space advantage and CODtrol of the important ciS-square. while he himself struggles to find active squares (or his pieces and possibilities for counterplay. Take the following position from a game played between two strong masters. see fo/Iowing diagram There is nothing in the blllCk position which can be pointed to as a concrete weakness, nor does White have any immediate plan. Nevertheless, White's last

Introduction

move 12 :ell prevented Black's planned exch3nge of light-squared bishops, preparing to answer 12...Jlb3 with 13 .AbU, fol-. lowing the rule that the side with a space advantage should avoid exchanges. White can build at his leisure, and always has the clS-square available for occupation, while Black has no equivalent 'suongpoint' , since should his knight move to e5 it would be immediately evicted by fl-E4.

We shall see other instances of the 'pure Scotch structure' throughout the book. In general the difficulties which Black faces in these militate against this modest approach involving an early ...d7-d6. If we pause briefly to take a comparative view we might get an idea of why this space advantage.is particularly pernicious. Take for example the analogous central pawn position where White has a pawn on d4 (instead of e4) and Black on e6 (lDStead of d6). Here again we can talk of some spatial plus, but this type of position is very popular - just think of the Can>Kann or several variations of the French. The difference? .In essence it is that here Black can, often without great inconvenience, strike back at White's centre with the break ...c7{c6}-cS. In the Scotch, the equivalent strike ...0(£6)-5 does oa:ur, but it is a much more complex matter. For starters, the lUng's knight, unlike its bl-

counterpart, usually has to be developed before any such break can be contemplated, and in the majority of cases this means to f6, blocking the f-pawn. In many cases too, the advance of the f-pawn has implications for the lUng's position which render it less convenient. It is broadly for these reasons that 'Where possible in the Open Games BL:tck bases his defence around maintaining his e5· pawn tIS a strDngpoint in the centre. This is true of, for example, many lines of the Spanisb (Ruy Lopez) and Italian Game. The Scotch bas the significant advantage of denying Black that option. Modlficadons of the 'Pure Scotch Structure' The traditional criticism of the Scotch Game is that it releases the tension too early, and gives Black too many opportu· nities to strike back either at the e4-pawn (4 ...1Uf6 or 4...fih4) or the knight on d4 (4...~c5 or 4....(6). In one sense, this argument has some justification. If we focus on Black's two most significant moves for a moment, 4...1tlf6 (Chapters 1-5) and 4....i.CS (Chaptcn 6-11), it is true that both of them succeed in interfering with the rosy piaure painted of the 'pure strueture' above. Where I part company with this argument is that for me many of these changes simply enrich the position, and while they clearly provide Black with more play than in the 'pure' case described above, they also provide White with a wealth of ncw opportunities. To take 4..--*.0 first, we find that broadly White can react in three ways: a) 5 ~b3 (Chapter 8) tends to retain the pawn structure most resembling the 'pure Scotch', but the retreat of the knight takes much of the sting out of White's spatial advantage. Thus this line bas lost a good deal of popularity in recent years. . b) 5 i.eJ .£61? 6 d (see Cbapters 9-11) 9

The Scotch GBme

reveals another interesting modification of the ideal type. The important point here is that White has been forced into the concessiOD of advancing his c-pawa to d, which interferes quite substantially with his preferred developmenL 7be enticing pombiJity ofdeueloping the quam's /might to d, eyeing the d5-square, bIIS been lost.

just that. The fact that White has not yet committed his bishop to e3 affects the issue too, but there is a school of thought which expeas its importance to grow very rapidly. c) 5 llm6 entails the most radical change of structure. The most important lines arise from 5.....f61? 6 1id2 dxc6.

Of course this is purchased at a price. There is no doubt that the black queen can often find a role in these lines (see Game 61 for example). Equally though, she can form a target for White's operations (as in Games S6 and 59). Moreover, this line contains a larger than Dormal range of tactical tricks. Whenever the queen wanders off to the kinpide the c7point is weakened, and the possibility ~4-b5 is in the air. Also the undefended bishop OD c5 is a source of tactical riches. Black, hankering after his fuU share of the centre through the advance ...d7-dS, is often ~UctaDt to push the d-pawn just one square. Hence, the defence of this piece requires either •.ic5-b6, or ...b7-b6. These are respectable enough, but not to everyone's taste, so still expect to fmd a number of tactical motifs. An interesting postscript here is the attempt to reach a struaurally similar position without the controversial queen posting. 4••ib4+ 5 c3 i.c51? found in Chapter 13, is a very recent idea which attempts

This new structure merits careful consideration. It is well known from the Spanish Exchange variation that Black's problem is rather more than just doubled pawns. The point is that the c-pawns fall OD his majority wing and hence very simplified endings are bad news (especially pawn endinp which arc, other thinp being equal, simply lost). White has the simple plan of creating a passed pawn by the advance of his e- and f-pawns. Black has no such equiva1enL Hence Black's case revolves largely upon his ability to generate active piece play. On one level 5......f61? is about avoiding the endgame. However. Black is again hoping to inteifen: with White's JeuelqpmenL

70

Development: Quantity. but Quality tool

a) Hindering the opponent's development In the Preface, I mentioned that the Scotch is d.i.stinguisbed by 'extremely: early

Introduction

contact between the pieces'. This was not just an attempt to make it all sound interesting! Rather. in the Scotch. in fairly stark contrast with the image of the Open Games, the players tend not merely to concentrate on their own rapid development but to give priority to hindering that of the opponent. This is where the 5...'i'f61? of the previous example was typical. It would be too loosening for White to move the f·pawn in reply. Hence he is left with a choice of moves like 6 'iie2?1 or 6 Wdl {best} which create their own problems for the development of his remaining pieces. Thus Black, who can in addition hope to bring a rook rapidly to the d-ftle. creates the necessary activity to compensate for his weakened structure by forcing White's queen to impede her own forces. This is by no means an isolated example. Indeed. there are mong parallels in the basic position of the first four chapters which arises from the moves 1 e4 e5 2l£)f3 lik6 3 d4 exd4 4 .!Oxd4lbf6 5 ~ bxc6 6 eS, and now 6...•e7(Q by Black, which virtually forces 7 1i'e2 with the following diagram:

These two queen moves may be seen as a son of 'exchange of inconveniences'. Black takes the decision that it is to his CIUlSe JisruptiJm to the mobilisation of both sides' .frmet The strategic

iUluanlAgt to

implications are enormous. Questions such as whether to fianchetto the respective king's bishops or. if not, then how to find a secure and effective posting for the queen while 'normal development' is resumed, come to dominate the opening stages. There are at least three logical grounds for Black's decision: First, he can claim more options {or his queen when seeking to ere-release' his king's bishop for the simple reason that whereas he has the luxury of attacking the pawn on eS. White's queen is actually tied to its defence. Second, on similar grounds to those found in the last example, since Black is playing with a structural defect the doubled c-pawns - he should in general seek compensation in piece play. and this will hardly be facilitated by both sides being able to develop without hindrance. Thirdly. by forcing the white queen to e2. Black is able to add a new dimension to the play - the possibility after 7•••~ 8 c4 of keeping the knight in the centre by pinning White's c-pawn with 8....i.a61? exploiting the pin against e2. Another example of how development in the Scotch is rarely routine, and highly responsive to the circumstances of the opponent's developmenL The downside of 8....i.a6 will be touched upon at the end of this Introduaion. These first two examples of 'interference with development' are of great imponance since they influence the play in large chunks of the book, but there are many others. Look at the discussion of 10 a3 from Game 2 for example, and 16 i.d51 from Game 85. which transformed the assessment of a whole line by keeping one key black piece at home. One more case which I find rather interesting is worth a mention here. In the next diagram position, from HjartanonI.50kolov. Akureyri 1994. Black has a subtle possibility. 11

The Scotch Game

spell disaster for White's king. The note to move 11 in Game 30 is also instructive. Black not only plays with his king in the centre, but even opens it up. later flnding a haven for his king on b7.

Black's unusual .. .Aba move was an attempt to intedere with White's queenside development (see also the note to Black's tenth move in Game 19) and was to some extent successful, but now leaves that piece in search of a role. The move played, 12.•••g6I, is very instructive and reveals another potential problem of White's 7 discussed above, namely the fact that the defence of the c2-square has been deserted. Black's idea is simply that in order to prevent a queen invasion on c2 White will have to castle long. Consequently, the otherwise rather clumsy rook on ba comes into play and Black has various attacking chances against the white king.

.e2

c) Lateral rook development The possibility of mobilising the rooks 'around the side' is another important consequence of mutual development difficulties. Take the following position.

b) King position

This leads on nicely to a brief mention of the broad range of destinations available for both sides with regard to king placement. Castling long as well as short appears frequently for both sides throughout the book. It is perbaps more surprising that there are a number of interesting and seemingly paradoxical cases where the king remains in the centre, sometimes as a result of just such a development logjam as we have been considering. In this position below, from Game 3, Black invites White to capture 12 exf6? with check, safe in the knowledge that 12 ••• by clearing the e-6le, would

wdB.

12

The scenario of queens blocking bishops is nothing new. Neither does Black's

need to compensate for a damaged structure by active piece play present any surprises. Two factors here do, however, encourage White to think radically: The completely dear open fates give an urgency to the need to bring a rook to the e-file, as well as reducing the number of potential safe havens for White's queen to run to

Introduction

and 'make wllY' for the bishop's development. Also. Black dominates the Ions light-squared diagonal - the fianchetto is not an option. at least with a rook on htl All this adds up to IS 1th3! followed by 16 neJ!. oniy then followed by 17 sJ, as White's most efficient development path.

I could list several games where Black has serious problems with the bishop on a6 - Games 13 and 14 sprinS to mind but it would scarcely be an exaggeration to say that the role of this piece dominates the first two chapters. In the case of the knight on b6, I would just like the reader to look out for various

Problem Pieces

examples of its successful re-deployment.

This [mal important theme bas already been touched upon, when we considered the difficulties which Black could have with his queen on f6 in Chapters 10-12. Here I want to mention two more recurring cases - both arisinS chiefly from the line 4...ltjf6 5 lOxc6 bxc6 6 eS 'fIe7 7 fi'e2 IOd5 8 c4. Black has a choice of 'problems'. Aher 8....L6 the fate of this bishop will largely determine his fate, and aher 8...ltjb6. albeit to a lesser degree, Black does well" to ensure that this knight can re-enter the play before it is seriously restriced by White's pawns. After 8... .i.a6 9 b30) the outlines of the problem are already clear. The bishop may end up targetins a well-secured pawn. Its hopes usually rest OD the move ...d7-d5 and a lease of life after ...dSxc4. The following is the nightmare scenario from Magomedov-Hachian, Yerevan Olympiad 1996. where Black has desperate c-paWns that, aside from their own intrinsic difficulties. restrict the hapless bishop.

Here I offer one from Grosar-I.Sokolov. Portoroz 1993.

In the diagraoi position Black exploited the position of the white queen on e4 to win back a tempo with the surprising manoeuvre to...~1? followed by ...liXS-e6. aiming for the 'ideal' set-up of .. .,i,b7 and •••c64+. 20 h4 d51 21 '&83 a51 22 ..ba5 ~ 23 Wf2 mlf8+ 24 Wa2 24 M4 would also fail to 24..1lxe5 25

1Jd4lhf4+!

pawn in other ways. 10 .i.g2 .i.g7 11 0.0 JZde8 13 tJ'el _0 (13 ...llJb6 14 c5Q 14lDa31 was very good for White in Mukhametov-Likov, Omsk 1996. e) 9...d6?1 also failed to impress io Ru· blevsky-Aleksandrov, Polanica Zdroj 1997. The game continuation 10 J.g2 dxeS 11 0.0 cot 12 1fell lDb4 13 1i'a4 .i.b7 14 lDc3 £5 15 .i.f4 g5 16 .i.el i.g7 17 "as! lDc2 18 .i.c5 19 lIadl .i.f8 20 1&4 .i.e8 looked complicated, but the underlying theme is Black's problems with his minor pieces. which he was never able to solve.

Q.O.O 12 !leU

.e5

10861

"f3+

24.• .Ax851 26 exe5 26 ';tih2 .f2+ 0-1 After 27 ~h3, 27... .i.c8+ 28 g4 1lf3+ concludes an exceptionally vigorous· at-

10 exf6 lDx£6 11 ~ 'i'xe2+ 12 he2 .i.c5 13 0.0 0.0 followed by ...d7-d5 would leave Black with very free and active development, as well as the open f·me. The text, by dragging Black's d'pawn to the efile, renders the c-pawns disastrously weak (see the Introduction). 10 ... dxeS 11 i.g21 'Wd7 120-0 lObS 13 b3 0-0-0 14 lOc3 i.e6 15 lld1 .i.d4 18 i.83 85 17 841

tack.

Gamel3 Lalic-Izeta

Ubeda open 1988 1 e4 85 2 /Cif3 /Cice 3 d4 8xd4 4 1Cixd4 /Cif6 5 1Cixc6 bxe8 6 a5 118' 7 "82 1Cid5 8 c4 .b6 9 a3 tell As we shall see, this is an inaccuracy. 9...g6 s~ould be preferred - see Games 1416. Black's other alternatives are: a) 9.•.0-0-01? is Dot a b2d move. Sioce 10 .tgZ lleS looks good for Black, White should play 10 b31 leading to a position already considered in Chapter I, Game 1. b) 9...g5?! is here altogether less appropriate than after 10 b3. It is not difficult to work out why. White is not committed to weakening the long dark-squared diagonal and has the extra tempo to defend the e538

17...tlib871

Too slow, as Black fails to vacate a s:alir factory retreat for his knighL !zeta ~ suggested 17....f51? which, by freeing the d7-square, looks like an improvement. Still, I believe in White's positiom! trumps here. One interesting idea is the sequence 18 .i.e4 ft'e6 19 flO g6 21)

Main Line with B ... j,D6: White's 9th move alternatives

Ld4I? exd4 21 lLlb51 cxb5 22 3Xb5 f5 23 .LsI which results in a very powerful attack for White. 18 85 ~ 19 ~ 'fide 20 b4fD.e7

Given the unpalatable mixture of posi. tional problems (the weak C'pawns, poor minor pieces and White's grip OD the c5. square) there was perhaps a case for mix, ing it at any price with 20..ixall? 21 Ibd6 ltixd6, when 22 b5 (22 'ifdll? .i.d4 23 .hd4 laxc41 is Dot dear) 22 ...ab5 23 lik5 .i.c8 24 cxb5 .tc31 is better for White but not allover. 21 &5 .i.c8 22 hd4 exd4 23 a6 h6 24

Instead Nikolic chose 13 •. .f61? 14 'Wc21 when he should have tried 14...111b4 15 YJib3 £xeS 16 i.d2 1Ib8 17 lllb5 ~I 18 cxdS llxb5 19 1134 .i.b7 with equality. If Black's chances rest on such a tactic, this looks like fruitful territory for White to re-examine.

-"'2 h4 25lDb71 .bb7 26 axb7 hxg3 27 hxg3 d3 28 c51

Black no longer has any means fend either the al· or b7·points.

to

de-

28••••d4 29 Va3 g7 22 ..tc4 (Kasparov) Black is not sufficiendy active to compensate for losing the dS-pawn. In any case the rest of the game is still relevant if only in relation to 12.. L8. 18 .••c6 191.tc1 Jlae8 20..tf31 The standard spot for the bishop in these lines, preventing any rook invasion. 20 .••Wl8 21 lDa4 *e7 22 lUeS Wei8

42

This position seems to be satisfactory for Black. His perspectives are largely defensive, but it is difficult for White to develop play. 23 ~ 1158724 b4l1a81 Here it seems appropriate to foree the issue. Given time White was able to push Black into passivity after 24••.Ab8 25 Ilc3 !teeS 2611aJ Ab7 27 Aa5 na8 28 a41!e8 29 h4 h6 30 lla6 in Kislov-Stempin, Poland 1997. 26 a4 8626 b6 %-%

I am normally rather sceptical about long and elaborate justifications for draw agreements, but here the following, given by Mikhalevski, is both plausible and in· structive: 26..1[b8 27 llc5 lle4! (the point of Black's play is revealed - he has encouraged the b-pawn forward to force White's rook to a vulnerable square) 28 .i.xe41 dxe4 29 ~I Wxc51 30 iDxd7+ Wc41 31 M8 cxbs 32 axb5 341 (32...Wxb5 gives White's king the crucial tempo to ~ proach) 33 b6 a3 34 b7 a2 35 lDc6 al'" + 36 'i!t>g2 \Tff6 37iDa5+ wb5 38 bS" + 'iha5 39 fJ'a8+ 'i!t>b6 40 ti'xe4 and the position has bumt out to a draw.

Main Line with 8 ... JLe6: White's 9th move alternatives Summary 9 lDd2 fails to really impress. Game 11 shows the 'subtle' way to exploit the weakening

of the c2.square, when Black achieves a minor piece harmony rarely seen aher the stronger 9 b3 or 9 gJ. 9 111e4 is only of historical interest. Game 12 is a masterpiece, but the note on 9...ttlb41? is probably where its real death knell will lie. 9 gJl? is therefore the critical part of the chapter. The ending considered in Games 15 and 16 is thoroughly unclear, by no means dull and looks likely to maintain its topical· ity. Game 14 proves pretty conclusively that Black should not avoid it. As for players of the white pieces, if the ending does not appeal, take a look again at Van der Wid's idea of developing with 13 ttiaJl? in the note to move ten of Game 14. 1 e4 a5 21013 lOeS 3 d4 axd4 4 ~d4 iOf6 & IOxc6 bxc6 S .& ••7 7 V.2 /Od5 8 c4

he 9g3 91f)d2 (D)

9••.1LIb4 - Game 10 9... g6 - Game 11 9"ffe4 -

Game 12

9...g6 9.• .f6 - Game 13 10 b3 .i.g7 11 .i.b2 0-0 12 -'.g2 (D) lIae8 12..•.!Zfe8 - Game 14 130-O.be& 14 he& .xe5 1& 'fIxe<x.5 16 cxd6 JLxf117 ~1 cxd& 18 ~ c8 (D) 19 Ilc1

19 lId 1 - Game 15 19.. .llfa8 - Game 16 (by transposilion)

Slf)d2

12 "g2

18... c6

43

CHAPTER THREE

I

Main Line with 8 ...llJb6: 9llJd2

1 e4 a5 2 ~f3 ~c8 3 d4 axd4 4 ~d4 ~f8 6 ~c8 bxc8 8 a6 'fIa7 7 'fIa2 1tXi5 8 c4~ SltXi2

Here we consider the critical variations of the main line with 8...lDb6 9lDd2. The most important decision here for Black is whether to move the a-pawn -forward or not. In Games 17-19 we see the popular 9.....e6 10 b3 as, intending to immediately undermine the white pawn chain with ...as-a4. However, 9...•e6 em also be foUowed by the simple 10...i.e7 and 11 •••()'(), as in Games 20 and 21. The ... 31as-a4 advance can also be prefaced by 9.. ..i.b7 (Games 22 and 23) but here too Black has an alternative with queenside castling (Games 24 and 25). FinaUy, Black em instead choose 9..•aS (Games 26 and 27) or aim for central play with 9... d6 (Game 28).

Game 17 P-H .Nielsen-Dautov

BadLauterberg 1991 1 e4 a6 2 ~f3 &8 3 d4 axd4 4 ~d4 lOxc8 bxc8 6 as 'fIa7 7 "a2 l2ld6

~f6 6

8 c41ilb8 9lOd2 'fIa6 10 b3 a517

The old move 10.. ib4?1 is considered in Game 19, along with the unusual 44

10.• J1b8, while 10....i.e7 is the subject of Games 20 and 21. 11 .i.b2 a41

Very direct. 11 .. ib4 is seen (by transposition) in the notes to Black's 11th move in Game 19.

1203

This move is under something of a cloud due to the present game. The alter· native 12 eel is considered in Game 18. 12•• ib4I _ The attractive thing about this ...31-35a4 based vari.:uion compared with othen which we shall examine later in this ch~ ter, is that here Black is Dot rushing to open the a-file, but rather using the a:. pawn flexibly. So long as the tension is

Main Line with 8 .. .fi)b6: 9 0d2

maintained, White must always reckon with the possibility that his bishop will be hassled by Black pushing this pawn to 33, no idle threat as we shall see. 13 .i.g2 0-0

Black's best strategy is to break in the centre. Playing to win the e5-pawn in· volves too many positional concessions, viz: 13...nb8?! 14 0.0 a3 15 ~d4 c5 16 ~e3 ().()? (having said a highly commiual 'A', Black forgets what comes next; for better or worse 16......xe5 had to be tried) 17 ~! and White dominates the .board, QU· Sonntag, Eupen open 1995. 140-0 d5!

16.i.d4

Unfonunately after 16 ~cl ~c3 17 Ilbl dxc4! Black's position, while a little disjointed, holds together effectively enough, for ex:.unple 18 .*.xes 19 Acl 'firs!, 18 bxc4 lIxc4 19 Vc2 .beSl or 18 Ad! 'itg6! in all cases favouring Black.

"c2

16...c5 17 .i.e3

Again the alternative 17 cxd5 falls just shon after 17...•xdS {17•••0xdS?! 18 ll)g5Q 18 .!e3 .L6 19 fi'c2 ~xf1 20 lhfl :ad8! 21 It)gS 11'd3 22 "i'xd3 (22 Wet? .td2I) 22.. JhdJ 2J .ie4 with some positional compensation for the exchange, but clearly not enough to recommend this from a theoretical point of view. 17 ...h6 18 .c2 WeS 19 1I"x08 hxOB 20 llfc11 dxc4 21 1tld21

This, combined with White's last, form definitely the best chance for White to extract positional concessions in exchange for his impending pawn loss. In fact, Black wisely switches attention to the e-pawn straightaway, since ~g further gains on the queenside flI'St would be counterproductive, e.g. 21. ••cxb3? 22 ~b3 e42J ll)cS or 21...hd2? 22 .ixd2llad8 2J .i.e3 - Dautov. The second variation in particuBlack makes efficient use of his forces. lar reminds us that while itself lacking in Queen, knight and bishop all act together . scope, the dark-squared bishop is absoto pressure the c4-point, and the bishop lutely indispensable 3S a defender of may join in too. Moreover, we DOted be- Black's queenside pawns. fore that the a-pawn is not yet committed, 21 •. .lIae822lUxc471 and after White's natural reply this be22 f41 was a better try, since tbe objeccomes the crucial point. tions to Black taking funher 3Ction on the 151tlf37 queenside persist to some extent, while This is criticised by Dau(Ov, although 22 .•.£6 2J 1Oxc4 .hc4 24 bxc4 £xeS 2S his suggested. improvement 15 f4 also has lIc2!, though leaving Black with some its problems after 15•.•1Wg61 16 lQf3 'ifb5! advantage, clearly represents a weakening by which flOe manoeuvre Black keeps his of Black's kingside compared with the share of control over the light squares OD game. the kingsic:le and still has the option of 22•• .bc47 ..ia6 to increase the pressure. A very instructive moment, since the 15.• .&31 choice of how to achange bears with Stronp=r than IS .. ia6 16 lDd4 1tg6 17 great relevance OD our basie theme of . Ilacl when I prefer White. Black's 'problem' minor pieces. As we 46

The Scotch Game

shall see, the knight, though it eventually finds its way to the d3-square, does have a rather long and tonuous route. After 22. ••lOxc41 23 bxc4 JheS 24 M4 lle7 on the other hand, there would be no impediment to a most suitable redeployment of the bishop via c8 to E5, where incidentally it would play a key role in a rather serious restriction of White's rooks - again full marks to the bishop on b4 too for preventing. despite its paralYsed state, a challenge on the important open e-61e. 23 bxc4 :Xe5 2411c2ll1dB 25 ~f4 lile7 26 lIb1 ned7 27 Af3 /l)c8 28 Ag4 lIe7 29 h4 it)bs 30 Wg2 ~ 31 .Ilb3lUb2 32

.i.e2 lIed7 33 .i.e11 ~3 34 hd31

After the knight has finally worked itself into the hean of White's position, this exchange will secure the draw. Of course, a large part of the problem is that while we were able to note that the bishop on b4 performed certain specific important taSks well on a fairly full board, it is a disastrous piece with which to try and make progress in a simplified position. Black simply has no breakthrough. 34•• Jlxd3 3& Jilxd3 llxd3 36 Wl1 lId1+ 37 We2 n.,+ 38 Wl3 f6 39 .i.e3 ~ 40

.i.e1 lIg1 41 .i.e3 We6 42 lIe1 lbe1 %-%

Game 18 Fogarasi-Varavin Kobanya Dpen 1992 1 e4 e5 2 1Df3 ~ 3 d4 elUM 4 1Dxd4

0f8 5 lZDccS bxc6 6 e5 lIe7 7 1182 ~5 8 c4 .ttlbs 9 lOd2 "e6 1 0 b3 a5 11 .i.b2 a4 12 .e311 .i.b4I

In view of my above comments about keeping the a-pawn's role flexible. I do not really understand what moved Ivan Sokolov to clarify matters by 12••.axb3?1 13 axb3 lbal+ 14 .hal .i.b4 15 .i.d) d6 16 ().() (as we shall see in the main line - note 46

'a' to White's 14th move - this natural and

desirable devdopment is not really on the menu in the analogous position where Black has retained the queenside tension, and hence the possibility to push ...a4-a3) 16... dxe5 17 he5 f6 18 .tf4 Wxe3 19 Jlxe3 ().O 20 ~3 with a small but certain positional plus for White in SvidlerI.Sokolov, Groningen 1995. The immediate strike in the centre with 12...d5?1 is also illogical, since in the closed centre position tIut results the role BLadt intends for his advanced a-pawn is far from clear: 13 cSl ~ 14 b4 Itb8 15 Jid f6 16 f4 £xeS 17 £xeS g6 18 IClfJ .tg7 19 .ad) ().O 20 ().O was much better for White in Fogarasi-Fokin, Kobanya open 1992. 13.i.d3

As Black's plan in the game looks like a really serious nuisance, White might have to consider 13 .ie2I? seriously to keep the d-square defended and hence retain the possibility of ~cJ. It is unclear whether, in terms of activity and the prospects of any attack on the kingside, this represents some concession by White. We now have the test, but Baklan-Kuzmin, 'Alushu 1997, did not shed too much light since Black's tJ ......g6? 14 ~dJl '@'!;5 15 0.0 ~ 16 iDe4 was obviously none too critical Baklan also likes 13 .•.dS 14 ().O ~ (14 ••. .ixd21?) 15 00 Eor White but this

rust

needs tests.

Main Line with B..• ltlb6: 9 li:Jd2

1814 Not just striking at the centre, but also The plan of driving Black's queen to e7 initiating some sneaky ideas to advance the seems to do White's defensive efforts a-pawn to 33, when White's bishop might around his vulnerable king no favours at just be incautious enough to flOd itself all. White's last shot has to be piece rather trapped in mid·board. than pawn play. To this end 16 'i'g5!? (or Thus, the text seems preferable to 16 tfgJ, to answer 16....g4 with 17 e61?) 13...dS 14 Q.O hdl 15 11'xd2 dxc4 16 bxc4 16.....g41? (after 16...0-0 17 ~4 h6 18 L6 when ,17 1!rg5I? looks promising. ' cxdS J.xd2+ 19 !Exd2 adS 20 £4 White Black has had to make some committal also gets a share of the anack.ing chances) decisions in order to round up White's c· 17 ..",4 JUg4 18 D -*.e6 when Black is pawn. White has to look beyond the dis- comfortable, but the serious danger has service which his e-pawn does to the passed for White. bishop on b2, and concentrate on ways to 18...dxc41171511 exploit his potential advantage on the 17 ~4 must be a better try, although dark-squares: 17...Q.O (17... g6?1 18 ~a3 17...~1? looks promising for Black. .fui:4 19 .Led he4 20 llfdl .idS 21 17 •••ffe7 18 ~c4 ~c:4 19 bxc4 ~I b l gives White huge compensation 20 Id2 'iIb4 21 'ife4llb8 22 Wd1 along just the lines outlined above) 18 f41 Black's attack Iw assumed decisive (18 .i.f5?1 ~61) 18....Lec4 19 f5 'fib6 proportions. U 22 .La) 'iixa3+ 23 'i!Jldl (otherwise White will get a massive attack Black can remove the rook on hi with through the further advance to (6) 20 impunity. S'xh6 gxh6 21 lID I and White's kingside 22....txb2 23 e8 0-0 24 We2 Ixe6 26 chances outlast the exchange of queens bee 96 26 lIb1 13 ...d61

Wells. 140-0-0 This would not be White's preferred option, and this choice of destination for the king undeniably contains much dan· ger, but neither 14 Q.Q?I a3 15 .i.c1 .i.e) nor 14 exd6 fkxe3+ 15 fxe3 cxd6 16 .Leg? :g8 are recommendable. 14...axb3 16 axb3 d6

26...llf2+1 27 Wxf2 Wxd2+ 28 Wt3 Ilb3

0·1

Game 19 Morozevich-Arkhipov Tal Memorial, Moscow 1992 : 1 e4e52li:Jf3~3d4exd44~d4

li:Jfe 6 lOxc6 bxc6 6 e6 ee7 7 'ife2 ~6 47

The Scotch Game 8 c4l2lb8 91.ild2 'ifaO 10 b3 .Q.b417 10...Ab8 is another oovd SU'3lqy,

again bearing on our theme of aeating counterchances by disrupting White's devdopmenl: 11 g3 (11 ~bVI rather walks into Black's intended 11 .. .1&41 U i.d4 c5 13 .i.eJ ltX:31 14 1fdJ 15 1UO lIf6 16 oad2 lMSQ 11..~b4 12 i.b2 1r&61 (oeady forcing loog castling - see my comments in the Introduction) 13 ().O.O 0.0 14 a3 i.e] 15 'tiel dSl was seen in the game Hjanarsoo-I.50kolov, Akureyri 1994.

.xeS

pawo

undermine White's queens ide the light squares by 13...a4I? However, White then has 14 c5 ~ 15 b4 .ta6 16 J.xa6 Jba6 170-0 (Kasparov) when his space advantage counts for more than any cootroversial claim. which Black might put in that his knight is superior to White's bishop. Still, this would have beeo a better try than 13...dS?1 14 adS adS 15 Aell, as in Kasparov-Karpov, World Championship match, Lyon (16) 1990, when the bishop pair combined with the backward e-pawo added up to a large plus for White. • After the text move Black will concentrate on the centre, and the break ...d7-dS rather than the a-pawn push. The strategy has some similarity with Game 20, and the advantage of avoiding 12 g3 (Game 21). to

structure

00

120-0-01

12 a3?1 obviously costs time and 12...hd2+ 13 "xd2 f61, as in NijboerWinants, Wijk aao Zee 1992, is good for Black. 12.•.d6 13 axdO 1fxd6

Now White should have played 16 exd61 .i.f61 17 ~I (Black has certainly generated some dangerous ideas; 17 dxcn? hb2+ 18 xf2 (10 'ilxl2? ndl+)

lo...fld4+. 9 .• id4

The only logical follow-up to s...ndS. Black wants to keep his influence on the importaJ:lt gl-31 diagonal. and the game continuation provides the taaical justification of this. 10c3 10 ().() is the more theoretically important move - see Games 41-43. 10•. ..i.xf2+1 The only good move, but a very clean equaliser. Alter 10...b5? 11 c:xd4 u i.c2 bxa4 13 "xd4 lhd4 14 i.e) ltb4 15 all? lhb2 16 .ixa4, Rublevsky-

.xd4

84

16...lilxe41 17 a4 The only way. 17 lruce4? would leave White clearly in the role of defender. 17 .. .llxc51 18 bxc5 .i.c4! The point. Black's active minor pieces ensure that castling queenside is White's only way to connect his rooks. To capture either c-pawn would be to fundamentally mis-assess the nature of Black's compensation, which is about maximum activity of the forces rather than picking up odd scrapsl 19 .i.e3 0-0 20 Ad4 llb8 21 0-0-0 .i.e21 22llhe11

neS

Reducing the material further and forcing a situation where the oppositecoloured bishops will secure half a poinL This is not to say that against a lesser op-

4 ... i.c5 6 /i)xc6: Kaspsrov's 8 /i)a41?

ponent Black could not have tried to carry on just a litde. Note that 22 lL1em .t.dl! would have spelled immediate disaster for White.

14 1It'xa4 bxa4 15 i.c2 i.c4

22•• ..bd1 23 1lxe4 .b3 24 :04 96 %-%

Game 41 Kasparov-Short

PCA World Ch., London (11) 1993 1 e4 85 2 /i)f3 ~ 3 d4 .xd4 4 ~d4 i.c& 6 ~c6 "16 6 "d2 dxc6 7 /i)c3 .iee 8 tba4 :dS 9 .teD i.d4 10 0-0 ~771

16 :.171

Faced with 8 lLIa4 on its debut, Shon fails to fmd the best reply. 10... a6 is seen in the next game and lO.••b5 and Black's other moves in Game 43.

An interesting moment. White should in principle be happy to excltange Black's rook OD dB which both controls an open me, and is a potential defender of the vulnerable c7-pawn. Much less obvious is the fact that the bishop would have stood well on dl. In faa 16 ru1l is particularly strong since after 16..1lxdl+ 17 .ixdl .t.b5 18.i.E.. White has 19 .*.g41 in reply to 18...WdB.

11 c3 b517

This leads to a most untidy-looking suuaure, not dissimilar to that seen in note 'b' to Black'~ tenth move in Game 43, although here his pieces are much better placed to put up a struggle. When watching this game live, I had the feeling that Black was suffering terribly. In faa, although 10...ibe7 is not theoreticaUy satisfactory, it is notable how many obstacles the black minor piece formation - bishop on b5 and knight on c8 - can put in the · way of the realisation of White's advantage.

The text ,looks better than 11 •.•36 12

"xdJ

ad4 'l'xd4 13 'i'c2 'l'xd3 14 lhdl 15 ltkS Ild8 16 truth7, when the remaining black pawns are even easier to get at; while · 11...i.b6 12 ti'e2 hands White the 'minor

· exchange' without a fight. : 12 c:xd4 1It'xd4 13 "c2 "xa41

.' Again unaesthetic but more resistant ",than 13.....xdl 14 11xd3 llxd3 15 ~ ;;Zld8 16 i.f41 Black's pawns are manifestly weak, but with one extra as encourage· .ment, he makes a good job of organising a :grim defence.

16•• ..i.b5 17 .t83 Itlc8I 18 i.c5 li)b8 19 1lad1 Ilxd1 20 1lxd1 86 21 f4 tan 22

.ia3 This looks strong, but Nigel Short reacts to the continued prevention of castling with some equanimity. There was a case for striking with 22 .id4I? (6 23 eS before Black could proceed with the heroic marshalling of his forces. 22•. .h51 23 Wf2 J:lh6 24 85 c5 2& .i.f5

m,e 28Aci271 Black's ability to defend his many weak pawns has been most impressive. However, bringing the king up with 26 dl ~f2+ led to a draw by repetition in Lupu-Solozhenkin, Spain 1993. 160'()1

Presumably caught off balance by the tum of events, White loses without a real

fight. Of course, 16 £xg4~ lIbdB is equally horrendous, since both the £4- and e3squares beckon invitingly to Black's knight. Therefore White had to try 16 134

A very energetically executed miniature, and an important reminder that 'forced drawing' lines are not always what theyseeml

Game 7) Campara-Rodriguez Talavera DosHermanas 1992 , e4 e5 2 013 lOc6 3 d4 exd4 4 iWld4 .tc5 5 .te3 9f8 6 c3li:lge7 7 lOc2J7

This move fulfils the requirement of preventing Black's immediate ...d7~ break, and also prepares the manoeuvre of

4.;.~c6

6 iLe3: Early deviations for both sides

the knight via eJ towards the control of the d5-square, against which Blaclt's whole strategy of inducing c2-c3 was directed. Still, while sound, such a non-file. The (otherwise quite impressive) bishop on b6 might rather impede his own side·s operations on the queenside. 13 ohe4 lIee 14 i.f31 Somewhat paradoxically, it is 14 .i.d3?1 which BI~ can meet by 14.. ..i.a6! since 15 b6 16 0-0 lhe2 17 be2 1!re5 gives Black a lot of counterplay. 14.....xe2+ 16 he2.la6 16 c4! .bc4

8 ee2 ~f6 9 h31

17 .. J1ab8 18 ""1 .b6 19 b3 f8 20 gxf8

12...1Oxa471

"ciS

17~c3

Basically refuting Black's idea. Apart from two pawns, Black can claim little for his piece. White develops without undue difficulty, neutralises the few threats, and sets about exchanging pieces.

151

The Scotch Game

.i.d4 21 .i.b2 .i.xf8 22 ~ .llh4 23 ~c& lU8 24 .ID121 .bh3+

This wins a third pawn, but White's 26th move ensures total liquidation in return. 25 "'91 Abe8 26 ~d71 .bf2+ 27 1lxf2 hd7 28 .i.c4+ .i.ee 29 1W8+ Wxf8 30 llf1+ We7 31 .be6 1-0

Game 84 Sax-Miles

Szeged 1997

11 e5 looks more like the logical culmination of White's strategy, but even l1...h61? may be possible, since 12 i.xh6 gxh6 13 'irxh6li)fSI 141Whs Wh41 is not sufficient for White. Also 11 ... g6 12 \th6 dxeS 13 .i.f6lOfs 14 hdBltixh6 15 hel lIb7 is promising for Black. 11 .....e8 12 b4 J.b6 13 ~ ~g6 14

ube 16 .te3 If 15 0-0 "eSl Black threatens ...ltif4,

~6

and White's pieces are terribly overextended to no obvious end.

1 e4 ~I? 2 ~f3 e6 3 d4 exd4 4 &d4 ~c6 bxc6 7 J.d3

.i.b4+ 6 c3 .i.c6 6 ~717

16...f61

8~5

This looks like a prelude to some aggressive idea based on attacking h7 by advancing the e-pawn. It never comes to fruition, and hence a quieter approadl looks in order, e.g. S 0-0 lDg6 9 b4 .i.b6 10 liXI2 or 8...0-0 9 b4 i.b6 10 a4 as 11 ~ 8 ...d6 9 .i,g6 Abel 10 b3 It is VelY pleasant to be able to throw in

a useful move like 9.. ,m,SI, safe in the knowledge that 10 b4?! is refuted tactically by lO...nxb41 11 cxb4 i.d4 12 i.c4 0-0 13 _4 !lea 14 'iIhS dSl Hence the text, which represents an unhappy loss of tempo. and a potential weakening of the dark squares. 10•••0-011 .ttld2 152

This move, albeit here with an extra tactical dimension. forms a basic part of Black's repertoire in this line. The resultant position finds Black enjoying a clear initiative based on his active rooks. more compact pawn position. and chances to embarrass the white king. For White's part, he could reflect that something like this structure with the exchange of knight for bisbop on b6, could have been attained with his king in safety and a more solid development of bis queen. 16 exf6 lDf4 17 "xe8 ~d3+ 1B wd2 Ilxe8 19 obd3 .txf&+ 20 Wd2 e6 21 a3 ~8 22 JZhe1 W 23 We1 :lee 24 Wb2 JIae8 26 a4 .i.a4 26 g3 .tf3 27 a5 Black still has the chances, but in the fi-

nal position the potential strength of White's b-pawn renders the task of getting his connected pawns rolling difficult.

Black's Fourth Mo ve Alterna tives 27 ••. exb4 28 axb8 bxc3+ 29 'i'xc3 e5 30

lla7+ .%-%

~g8

31 m,1 llb8 32 lId7 i.c8

Game 85 Pavasovic-Kunte

11 'fIxc6+ .i.d7 12 'WdS lllic4 13 "'xc4 Ab81 for similar reasons to those outlined. in the note above. 11 ...0-0 12 .i.d3llb8 13 Qxl2 e6 14 ~ ~c4 15 .hc4 Jul6

WorldJunior Ch., Halle 1995 1 e4 e6 2 IOt3 lUe6 3 d4 exd4 4 ~d4

.i.b4+ 5 c3 .i.e7 8 i.c4(1) Of course Black's slightly passive choice can be countered in several ways, but I like the direct quality of the text. White will also not allow his opponent to develop unhindered. 6 .•.ll:lfB The alternative 6...d6?1 looks unjustifiably risky. After 7lOxc6 bxc6 8 'fib31 ~f6 9 U7+ 'itif8, the simplest antidote ~ pears to be 10 ~e6I? ltlxe4 11 i.xcB 'fIxcll 12 ().O dS 13 ~ lQc5 14 'itc2 g6 15 b4 lDe6 16 .i.b2, when Black's king position and the potential disaster of his loose pieces on the e-flle should add up to a great advantage for White, as in A.GrosarSennek, Portoroz 1993. 7 lWIc6 bxc6 8 e5 lCe4 8...lodSl? is also possible, offering a pawn which White does well to leave alone. After 9 '*.xdS?1 cxdS 10 .xdS '*.a61 not only is White's king caught in the centre, but the advance c2-c3 has caused weaknesses on the light squares, complicating the task of combating the powerful piece on a6. So, White should prefer 9 ().O lOb6 10 i.b3 ().O 11 ll)d2 dS 12 exd6 cxd6 (there is nothing in White's piece position here to justify capture with the bishop on d6) 13 1Of3!? dS 14 ~c2 .L.6 IS l:el i.f6 16ltXi4 cS 17 It)fS and ·although Black's pieces are satisfactorily developed, White will have the easier task rmding a plan, as in MilovShvidler, Israe11996. 9 .'31 d5 10 exd6 lWId6 11 0-01 Again White should avoid the greedy

16.id51

Bringing together two of our most persistent themes. Again Black is trying to seek compensation for a weakened pawn structure through active piece play. Here after 16 b3?1 .i,b7 17 1thS? (17 1i'fS was relatively better) 17...1I'f618 Ae3 :beal he was extremely successful in this endeavour in Vragoteris-Grivas, Iraklio 1994. White in turn, gives priority to preventing Black's intended mobilisation, and fmds his opponent, faced with this very strong novelty,lacking in any back-up plan. 18...0471

A rather desperate invitation to avarice which White again passes up, and exploits slowly and positionally. 17 b3 .i.a& 18 :e1 .ic5 19 b4 b6 20 e4 c5 21 b5 i.c8 22 .i.'4 i.e7 23 llaci1 i.d7 24 hc7 'be7 25 lIe7 ~ 28 .bc4 :beI8 27 .d5 .'4 28 i.f1 1-0

Game 86 Van der Wiel-Sosonko

Dutch Ch' Hilversum 1987 J

1 e4 e6 2 ~f3 lUc6 3 d4 exd4 4 ~d4 .f617

163

The Scotch Game

ing a simpler retreat for the knight on b5, also gave White a pleasant edge after 9...a6 10 IM4 I.ili:d4 11 hd4 'itg612 ().().() 0-0 13 'Bf4 d6 14 lld3 f6 15 AgJ itf7 16 ~ in Bruk-G.Flear, Tel Aviv 1989. It is not so clear to me why Black must be in such a rush to play 9... a6?! now that White has prepared a comfortable reply. I would prefer 9...0-0 10 ().().() d6. 9 ... a61

5~5

White's principal attempt to avoid tranSposition to wdl-known paths. Thus after 5 .i.eJ .i.c5 6 c3 we fmd ourselves in Chapters 9-11. After 5 lrucc6 Black can again return to main lines with 5... i.o (see Chapters 6 and 7) although 5... dxc6 is also playable here. 5 .• .Ac5 6 "82 .i.b617

Again the main move here, but in Chapter 12 a case was made for the position reached after 6.....d81? (see Game 79). The move order here also has the vinue of virtually forcing White's queen to e2 rather than to f3, although of course here Black has to reckon with the transposi. tional possibilities discussed at move five.

Now, by contrast, White's last move unpinned his c3-knight and Black would be wise to pay attention to White's pivotal positional threat. Thus the casual 9...0-0?1 was strongly met by 10 lL'ldSl ~dS 11 exdS lDe7 12 d6! cxd6 13 lhd6 'fIeS 14 .i.xal 'fIf4+ 15 'fi'eJ (15 i.eJl?) 15...'fIxe3+ 16.Le3 lOf5 17 lld3 lruce3 18 fxe3 d5 19 a3 and Black has insufficient compensation for the pawn, since the white knight still has a fme outpost available on d4. in Chiburdanidze-MiIes, Palma de Mallorca 1989. For those trying to locate this game, it is worth DOting tbat the opening moves were 1 d4 llk6, which just goes to show that the Scotch can crop up in the least expected placesl 10 ltldSlOxdS11 exd5 axbSI7

7101c3lZlg87 8 .a83 .aaS

90~

The apparently quieter 9 'iid2I?, prepar154

Black realises that the immediate discovered check does no serious damage, and that 11 ...lUe7 definitdy gives White more room to manoeuvre after, for example, 12 lOd4 (U lW3 b51?) 12...0-0 13 tLlb3

Black's Fourth Move Alternatives ~b4 14 ti'c4 ~d6 15 ~dJ, as in VaidyaShabtai, Budapest 1992.

12.i.d4+7J

Nimzowitsch's dictum, that 'the threat is stronger than the execution' has a surprisingly wide validity. Here White should capture immediatdy on c6, when 12.••dxc6?? is ruled out due to 13 Jlg5+1 '$'e6 14 AdS mate. It is rather less selfevident that 12•.. bxc6 13 Jld4+ 1'fe6 14 'fIxe6+ fxe6 15 .A.xg7 AgS 16 .i.h61 would represent an improvement for White over the game. The point is that although Black's structure is not so ugly as in the next diagram, neither in terms of piece activity nor pawn breaks can he expect as much counterplay as he enjoys in the game. 12.. JWe7 13 dxc6 dxc8 14 'fIxe7+ ~xe7 15 .i.xg7 IlgB 18 Ad4 b81 17 .bb6

this enables Black to sacrifice a pawn, liquidate his weakness and prove full equality. 18 e3 .Q.e8 19 g3 b41 2011dl

White did not like the look of 20 axb4, when Black's active pieces ensure enough counterplay, for example 20.• ':al+ 21 ~d2 Axdl+ 22 'itixd1 .i.d5 23 Jlg1 1las followed by .. Alt. The rest of the game is very comfonable for Black. 20._.bxa3 21 Ilxa3 llxa3 22 bxa3 .\U5 23

.i.c4 b5 24 lle1+ c.d5 15 .i.xd5 adS 16 .i.e3 .*.f5 with full equality. 7 ..ih4 Bo~ Spassky recently tried another pla~ible looking development, 7.•. g6?1 8 ~d2 ~g7, but he will need a good reply to the excellent 9 1t:Id5! found by the computer Kallisto. The point is that 9.. ..hb2? fails to 10 J.c3I, and however Black reacts he will be subjected to horrors on the long diagonal. Note that the unusual position of Black's king's knight helped to produce this rare tactical possibility. 8 .*.d2 0.:0 9 0-0-0 d6 10 1193 .tee 11 f4

rather convincing. Mer this reasonable looking move, White seems to gain a decisive plus by force. However, after 14.••fxe4 15 ~!? (15 Le4 is fme too, but the threat of ~g5 will provoke another weakness) 15...hd2+ 16 lWl2 h6 17 ~1? Black will in any case come under heavy pressure, as the g6-square is very weak.

f5

26 ...~6 27 1Ice .d8 28 11.3 1icS 29 1tlb8 .!tld8 30 .f5 31 lLld5 cB 32

11...f6I? had already been played with

15 exf51 .hI5 16 llxe8 lbe8 17 lOd51

Despite allowing exchanges, this move, pivotal to White's whole system, cawes Black great difficulties here too. The threat of lDf6 wins a valuable tempo, and with it a pawnJ

17 •• ..txd2+ 18 J:lxd2 IUS 19 .bf5 Hxf5 20 1ib31 11n 2111xb7 h6 22 93 whB 23 l1d3 Wh7 24 b3 85 25 11c3 lOd4 26 Wb21

White's excellent knight ensures that his opponent has no counter-chances whatsoever. Safety first is the philosophy by which he will maintain that grip. 26 1hc7 "£51 27 ltle31 was also possible but there is no need to allow Black any activity at all.

.84+

satisfactory results in Sax-Keitlinghaus, Feldbach open 1997, but after 12 ~ hd2+ 13 lbd2 liJe7 White should avoid exchanges with 14 lbe3, keeping a small spatial plus.

.!tlc3 1ixe4 33 lbe4 d5 34 11e8 11d7 35

12 a3 .i.a5 13 Ad3 .d7 14 mwe1 :aeS

35 ...*06 36 .!tlc6 Ad6 37 lle7 d4 36 :a7lld5 39llxa5 1-0

I find White's play in this whole game 156

~I

In addition to his extra pawn, White also has the more active pieces. This rapidly secures him a second, and the game.

Black's Fourth Move Alternatives

Game 88 Pavasovic-Z.Basagic Bled open 1996 1 e4 a6 2 ~f3 ~c6 3 d4 exd4 4 ~d4 06 5 lOc3 .*.07 6 .*.a3 d6 7 ti'd2 ~f6 B ~c611 bxc6 9 .!the

White's last two moves represent a very direct and· logical approach to the position. He believes that after the exchange of dark·squared bishops, Black's counterplay on the half-open b-file will not amount to very much. Indeed it seems on this evi· dence to be less potent than that generated when Black is able himseU to trade on d4 and then expand with ...c7-c5, ... a7·a6 and ...b7·b5. Moreover, while Black's next move could be open to the familiar charge of 'castling into it', it is clear that given the possibility of White advancing his e-pawn (with or without a supponing f2· (4) neither the centre nor the queenside are very attraclive options for Black's king.

9 ...0-0100-0-0 'ire7 11 h4\l1b8

If Black tries 11 ...~, he will fmd that after 12 lllxe4 'tixe4 13 i.xg7 Wxr,7 his knight is $Ordy missed, and that he is subjected not just to the usual h·me indigo nities, but to invasion down the e-file too. One illustrative line: 14 Dell? 'fId5 15

'fIc3+ f6 16 h4!? 'ftxg2 17 h5 .if5 18 hxg6 .i.xg6 19 .cUl fig5 20 Ite7+ 'i!1h8 21f4 . 0 22 i.d31 breaking through decisively on h7. 12 hg7 wxg7 13 h5 .i.e6 14 :e1 wg8 1&141

Since Bladt can always capnu-e on g6 with the f.pawn, the crude attempt to give mate using the home alone would be destined for disappointment. This move however, creates havoc. The advance of the pawn to £S adds crucial weight to the assault on Black's g6-pawo, and incidentally wins back the powerful a2-g8 diagonal for White's bishop. All this induces Black into the opening of the h·file without allowing a second rank defence. 15...~5 16 15 .i.d7 17 04\ ~g3 18 llh3lOxf1 19 -.61

Black has removed the potentially dangerous bishop, but at what cost? 19...f6 20 bg6.bo4 21l1h4 15 221lxf1 'irg7 23 gxh7+ ~8 24 1fxg7+ Wxg7 25 exfS 1-0

Black loses a piece, since 25...AxfS can be met by 26 h8'iI + I, deflecting the f8rook. A brisk miniature and a funher illustration of the potential of castling on opposite sides when Black h~ failed to make a successful challenge White's space advantage.

757

The Scotch Game

Summary

I expect that 4...~b4+ 5 c3 .*.c51 (Games 83 and 84) is here to stay. After 6lilicc6 bxc6 7 .*.d3, both 7..,riJe7 and the untried 7...d6Iook reasonable. 4...tif6 seems to have continued validity as a transpositional option, not least due to the interesting and unusual 5 lLlbS ..tc5 6 \lke21i'dBl? Perhaps its relative lack of popularity arises because it side-steps a line (4 ..icS SlLlb3) which is none too frightening in any case.

4...lLlge7 is less impressive, and seems rather overrated. White's approach in Game 87 looks promising. Other moves fall prey to the objection discussed in the Introduction. White' gets his space advantage without a fight, Game 88 is a rather graphic case in point. 1 e4 e6 2 lllf3 ~c6 3 d4 exd4 4lllxd4 4 •• ib4+(D)

4......f6 - Game 86 4.../Dge7 - Game 87 4...g6 - Game 88 6 c3 .i.c6 (D) S.. ie7 - Game 85 6lllxc6 bxc6 7 i.d3 (D)liJ.e7 7...'fIh4 - Game 83 8"6- Game 84

4 ... i.b4+

158

5 ... .*.c5

7 i.d3

IINOEl OF COMPLETE GAMES I Adams-Wells, Dublin ~ 1993 ............................................................................... 103 Anand-Shirov, Linares 1997.......................................................................................... 93 Azmaiparashvili-Hector, San Sebastian 1991 ........................................................... 147 Baklan-Smejkal, German BuruJes/iga 1997.................................._............................. 120 Beliavsky-Almasi, Yi'goslav l.e4gue 1997.................................. _ ................................ 22 Campora-Rodriguez Talavera, Dos Hermanas 1992............................................... 134 Chandler-AdamS, Hasting,s Pn!mier 1991 .................................................................... 55 Djurovi~::.Rajic, Novi Sad open .1988 ........................................................................... 105 Dochev-Kazhgaleyev, PariJub,ct 1996......................................................................... 51 EblvC$1;-Beliavsky, Reykja1Jik 199/ .............................................................................. 109 Fogarasi-Hebden, CappeJlela Grande open 1993........................................................ 58 fogarasi-Varavin, Kobanya upen 1992 ............................................_.._....................... 46 Handoko-Speelman, MoscO'Ul Olympiad 1994........................................................... 129 Hector-Kristensen.B, Vejle 1994 ..................................................................... ;.......... 104 Ivanchuk-Smyslov, TJblI'R 1994................................................................................ 140 Kasparov-Anand, PCA World 0,., New York (8) 1995...............-............................. 27 Kasparov-Ivanchuk, Amsterdam 1994 ................................................................ 25 Kasparov-Karnsky, TJburg /99/ ................................................................................. 125 Kasparov-Karpov. Tilburg 1991.................................................................................... 19 Kasparov-Leko, Tilburg 1997 ...................................................................................... 150 Kasparov-Nikolic, 1997.................................................................................... 30 Kasparov-Short, PCA World 0,., Lomkm {II} 1993 .................................................. 85 Kasparov-Sokolov.I, Ye7e'V4n Olympiad 1996............................................................ 39 Kasparov-Sorin, Buenos Aires (sim,Jeaneous) 1997.................................................... 113 Kasparov-Topalov, Las Pa/mas 1997............................................................................ 91 Klovan-Pioch, USSR 1974............................................................................................ 136 Komeev-Komljenovic, Zaragoza open /996.............................................................. 144 Kotsur-Frolov, Russian Cup, Tomik /997 ................................................................... 16 Kotsur-Shchekachev, Smolensk 1997......................................................................... 155 Lalic-heta, Ub:eda open 1988........................................................ _ ............................... 38 Landen~ue-Kori:hnoi. Ptuj Zona/1995 ............................................................... 107 Lautier-Bellavsky, BielI992 .......................................................................................... 73 Leko-Almasi, UIJeda 1997............................................................................................... 41 Ljubojevic-Spassky, Mont7'e4l1979............................................................................... 63 Lupu.Miles, Cappidle Lz GrtUUle open 1994 ................................................................ 133

tIS.,

unares

169

Index of Complete Games

Markovic-Mozetic, VmjackA Banja 1992..................................................................... 97 Miles-Hebden. London 1994.......................................................................................... 99 Morozevich-Arkhipov. Tal Memori4J, MoSCO'W 1992................................................. 47 Morozevich-Balasllov, St Petersburg Zonal 1993 ...................................................... 119 MiiUer.Mat-5chiffer. Genn4n Bunilesliga 1997........................................................ 147 MiiUer.Mat-WeIls. Gerr1IiIn BunJesliga 1998 .............................................................. 60 Nielsen.P-H-Dautov, Bad l.JJutl!7'beri. 1991 ................................................................. 44 OU-Gan:ia.G. New York open 1997 .............................................................................. 50 OU-Georgiev.Kir, Groningen 1993 .............................................................................. 78 OU-Peng Xiaomin, Beijing 1997................................................................................. 126 PaIac~rgadze.G. PUI4 open 1977............................................................................. 29 Pa1ac-Ma1aNuk, World Temn 0,., Lucerne 1997........................................................ 94 Pavasovic-Basagic.Z, Bled 0fJ!:'J 1996.......................................................................... 157 Pavasovic-Dos Santos, WoTIJ Junior 0,., Halle 1995................................................ 86 Pavasovic-Kunte, WoridJunioro,.,HaJ/e 1995 ....................................................... 153 Polgar.J-Piket. Tdburg 1996........................................................................................ 124 Polgar-Zsu-Xie JUD, Women~ World o,.•Jaen (l) 1996............................................ 81 Ramesb-Kazhgaleyev, YeTn1tUJ Olympiad 1996 ......................................................... 57 Rdange-5myslov. Genera/:i()ns rn4II:h, Cannes 1996. .................................................. 88 Rublevsky-Anancl,.PC:A MOSCOfII (rapidplay) 1996...................................................... 84 Rublevsky-Goldin. Tit1at 1995.................................................. _ ................................. 96 Rublevsky-Gretarsson.H, Yerm:m OlympiAd 1996 ........._ .................................... 112 Rublevsky-Mikhalevski, EuropeAn Cup, fIiInius 1995 .............................................. 14 Rublevsky-Peng Xiaomin, Yerevan OlympiAd 1996............................................... 114 Salov-!tarpov, Reggio EmiJia 1991.............................................................................. 137 Sax-Miles. Szeged 1997 .................................................................................................. 152 Sdunaltz-KarPatchev, CappeJJela Grande open 1993 .............................................. 146 Schmittdiel-dostisa, Mitropa Cup, Buk 199J .............................................................. 75 SchnUttdiel.TlSchbierek, German BundesJiga 1992 ................................................. 128 Sc:hoeJlrnann·Mikhalchishin.A., BIeJ open 1995 ........................................................ 72 Smagin-Gligoric. Yugoslavia 1991................................................................................ 98 Smagin.Murcy. V'unna open 1991................................................................................ 70 SJDagin-UnziCker, DortriUnuJopen 1992 ................................................................... 141 Smyslov-Ioseliani, VeID'ans w. Women. PrAgue /995 ........._ ................................ 123 Soc:ko-Grabarc:z.yk, Polish a,., Sopot 1997............................_ .................................... 66 Socko-Jakubowski, PolAnd 1997..................................................................................•40 Strange-McMahon, ShejJield 1996 ................................................................................ 59 SveshiUkov-Malaniuk, AiustA 1994.............................................................................. 53 Svidler-Adarns, 'Ii/burg 1997 ........................................................................................ 35 Svidler-Arkhipov, RussiAn 0,., EJistA 1994............................................................... 116 SUJDZO-Eismont, Harkanyopen 1993........................................................................ 132 ThorhaUssou.Pedenen.S, NOrdic Grand Prix, Tonha'llTJ 1997................................. 68 Thorhallsson-Pinter, Manila OlympiAd 1992 ........................................................... 121 Tunman-Karpov, London 1984......................................................_ ............................ 36 Tompa-LukaCs, Budapest 1976..............................__........ _................. _....................... 139 TseitIin.tdk-Mikhaievski, Beenheva 1997................................................................... 33 Van der Wiel-Grabarczyk, EmopeAn Temn 0,., PuI4 1997.... ___ ......................... 65 Van der Wiel-Gulko, Amsterriatn 1987 ......................... _ ......._ .._ ........................ 102 Van der Wiel-5050nko. Dutch a,., HiJfIeTS14m 1987....................___ ........" ........ 154 Van Wely-Piket, Monaco (2nJ m41£hgame) 1997............................... "...................... 118 Vukovic.Z-BIag~·eviC, Y"ROSlavia 1993 ...................................................................... 23 Webb.I.-LejUc, iJanTe 1994 .................................................................................. 77 WelIs-Cladouras, Worishofen open 1997....................................."." ..................... 49

as

160