Zoran_Ilic_-_The_Sicilian_with_Qb6.pdf

(Reprocessed with Scan Tailor by jparra, 2012-12-11)

The Sicilian with 1

e4 c5

2

...

1trb6

lbf3 lbc6

3

d4 cxd4 4 lbxd4 iVb6

& 1

e4 c5

2

lbf3 e6

3

d4 cxd4 4 l2Jxd4 �b6

Zoran S. Ilic

B.

T.

Batsford Ltd.,

London

First published 1998 © Zoran S. Ilic 1 998

ISBN 0 7 1 34 8238 9

British Library Cataloguing-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. Edited by Tim Harding and typeset by Chess Mail Ltd., Dublin Printed in Great Britain by Redwood Books, Trowbridge, Wilts for the publishers, B. T. Batsford Ltd. 583 Fulham Road, London SW6 5BY

Dedication This book is dedicated to the memory ofmy mother, Ruza !lie

A BATSFORD CHESS BOOK General Manager: David Cummings Advisors: Mark Dvoretsky, Raymond Keene OBE, Daniel King, Jon Speelman, Chris Ward

Contents Bibliography

4

Symbols

5

Introduction

6

Main System: 1 e4 c5 2 ttlf3 ttlc6 3 d4 cxd4 4ttlxd4 ftb6 Part One: White Reinforces the Centre by 7 Ad3 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

General Remarks and 9 a4 Classical Line with 9 Ae3 (without g4) Classical Line: White Attacks with g2-g4 White plays Ad2 White Plays .i.gs 7 ... Ab4 Variation

10 17 30

44

53 60

Part Two: White Reinforces The Centre By 7 Ae3 7. White Plays 8 f4 8. White Plays 8 a3 9. White Castles Queenside

65 71 75

Part Three: Early Deviations in the 2 10c6, 4 ... lrb6 Line •..

10. White's Alternatives at Move 7 11. Deviations on White's Sixth Move 12. Deviations on White's Fifth Move

90 l OO 103

4

Contents/Bibliography

Kveinys Variation Part Four: 1 e4 cS 2 lOO e6 3 d4 cxd4 4 l0xd4 1tb6 13. 14. 15. 16.

Kveinys Variation: Introduction and S l0c3 White Plays S l0b3 Enhanced Kveinys Variation Various Deviations on White's Fifth Move

108 117 124 1 30

Guide to Transpositions, ECO and NIC Codes

135

Suggested Repertoire For Black

139

Index of Variations

1 42

Bibliography The following were the sources most frequently consulted: • Informator 1-71 • New in Chess Yearbooks 1-46 • Encyclopedia of Chess Openings- ECO (l", 2"d and 3n1 editions) • Beating The Sicilian by John Nunn & Joe Gallagher (3nl ed.) - BTSJ • Various Chess Databases • Various Chess Magazines: e Inside Chess e New in Chess e Europe Echecs e Chess in the USSR e Shakhmatny Byulleten e Shakhmaty Riga e Jaque

Symbols + ++ #

!! ;t :j:

±

+ +-+ 00

? ?? !? ?! 1-0 0-1 Yz-Yz

Ch OL z

IZ Ct Wch Cht Echt Wcht Mem. s/f Jr

worn rpd corr. sim (n) (D)

Check Double Check Mate Good move Excellent move Slight advantage to White Slight advantage to Black Clear advantage to White Clear advantage to Black Winning advantage to White Winning advantage to Black Unclear position Bad move Blunder Interesting move Dubious move White wins Black wins Draw Championship Olympiad Zonal lnterzonal Candidates event World championship Team championship European team championship World team championship Memorial tournament Semifinal Junior event Women's event Rapid game Correspondence game Simultaneous display game nth match game Diagram follows

Introduction

A number of systems in the Sicil­ ian Defence involve the idea whereby Black lowers the tension in the cen­ tre by playing ...'it'b6. The main ob­ jective of the queen's early outing is to decentralise White's knight from d4 and in that way to reduce the pres­ sure on the e6 square. In practice this idea is most frequently found in the Sozin Variation after the moves I e4 c5 2 o!Df3 o!Dc6 3 d4 cxd4 4 o!Dxd4 .!Df6 5 o!Dc3 d6 6 �c4 "Wb6, and the Scheveningen after I e4 c5 2 o!Df3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 o!Dxd4 o!Df6 5 o!Dc3 a6 6 f4 e6 7 "Wn "Wb6. However, the most direct way to apply this idea is the line in which Black plays ...'it'b6 as early as the 4th move, after the introductory moves 1 e4 cS 2 lOO �c6 3 d4 cxd4 4 �xd4 Wb6 (D). In this way he immediately achieves his goal - the decentralisation of the d4-knight. Of course, this is not done with­ out a price. It costs a tempo because later in the opening Black will be obliged to retreat the exposed queen and make way for his b-pawn. This system forms the central part of the book that is in front of you, and is the fruit of several years of

w

both practical experience and theo­ retical research. Although this is an opening book and not a middlegame text, I have tried to make it accessi­ ble to players of all ranks. The book gives a lot of complete games in or­ der to break the inevitable monotony of pure theory, that is, the dry refer­ ence style more or less common in the analytical overview of this kind. As to the history of the system. I am not sure who is the inventor of the whole idea. In the Seventies GM Eduard Gufeld and many Yugoslav players played it rather often. The variation later drew the interest of a few Armenian grandmasters. Among the present-day adherents we should single out GM Vladimir Akopian. A lot of games from his practice pro-

Introduction 7

vide the best example of the vitality of Black's fourth move. The final part ofthe book deals with a variation that, basically, has that same idea - the decentralisation of the d4-knight, but carried out by Black in a less direct way: 1 e4 cS 2 �f3 e6 3 d4 cxd4 4 �xd4 'ffh6 (D).

w

this system are still in the initial phase of research. In the year 1988, I decided to play a big open tournament in Saint John (Canada). Being engaged with some other matters at that time, I didn't have enough time for serious theo­ retical preparation and I faced the problem of how to react to 1 e4. I had to solve the problem within the Sicilian Defence because my whole repertoire up to then had been based exclusively on the sharp Najdorfand Scheveningen variations. Since at that moment I was not too familiar with the state-of-the-art trends in those two popular systems of the Sicilian, I looked for something relatively unknown and less investi­ gated. So, I was attracted by the 4 . .'ii'b6 system. My first experience being positive, I continued to play this system regu­ larly. In many of my games, my op­ ponents were surprised by the early 4 . . .'tWb6, with the consequence that I always managed to achieve a time advantage in the opening. A few words about the organisa­ tion of the whole material are re­ quired. The author is not familiar with any existing opening monograph on this system. All encyclopaedic edi­ tions are, as far as this theme is con­ cerned, more or less useless, as the Guide To Transpositions demon­ strates. That Guide shows how vari­ ous introductory move orders, with their wide range of ECOIN!Ccodes, relate to the different schemes of de.

B lack makes no commitments with his queen's knight and leaves open the possibility of the develop­ ment ... ft:Jd7. This variation has been played for years by the Lithuanian GM Aloyzas Kveinys, so in the lit­ erature it can be found under the name of "The Kveinys Variation". Of course there are numerous transposi­ tional options between this and the 2 . . ft:Jc6 system if Black decides to play . . . ft:Jc6 sooner or later. But, in practice, in most cases he prefers the flexible method of playing with the development ... ft:Jd7. The idea 2... e6, 4 . . .'iVb6 did not attract the attention of leading players for many years, but lately it has not been infrequent even in the top circles. Many variations of .

8 Introduction

velopment that Black and White may adopt in the 4 ... 'i!t'b6 systems. The complete structure of these systems has been given for the first time in this book, and in the author's opinion, is the best way to present all the available material to the reader. It hasn't been an easy task to sys­ tematise the numerous possibilities of transposition characteristic of this type of Sicilian Defence. I consider this classification of the 4 . . 'ii'b6 sys­ tems one of the indisputable merits of the book. Wherever it was possible, I have given a comparative survey of simi­ lar positions arising either from the Sozin or Scheveningen!Paulsen. This particularly applies to the first part of the book. This means that the book offers a lot of interesting material that has wi der relevance than to the 4 . . .'i¥b6 system alone. Although this book is thematically highly specialised, and despite its relatively small size, it gives complete systems for Black in the Open Sicil­ ian both with 2 . lt:Jc6 and 2 . . e6. Having both these lines in your rep­ ertoire will certainly make direct preparations more difficult for your opponent. Here I should like to make a short general statement about my personal opinion of the main 4 .. . 'il'b6 system. Black's first objective - the decen­ tralisation of the d4-knight - has positive sides, although it does not mean anything special. Many things in chess theory are relative and a .

.

.

.

matter of taste. Let us remember that there are many systems in the Sicil­ ian Defence that have a solid reputa­ tion for White where he, even without being forced by ... 'il'b6, returns the knight to b3. For a player with a general knowl­ edge of the Sicilian (e.g. the Schev­ eningen, Paulsen, Rauzer or Sozin variations) it will be easier to grasp both the basic ideas and the neces­ sary finesses. The practically unlim­ ited possibilities of transposition offer an experienced adherent of this vari­ ation the chance to transpose from one system to another and thus di­ rect your opponent into terrain less familiar to him. This is a practical virtue of the 4 .. . 'ifb6 system, which by no means should be underesti­ mated in modem chess. The system 2 ...GtJc6, 4 ... '*Vb6 is divided into three parts. The first, most extensive, part consists of six chapters, five of which deal with the classical position arising after the following moves: 1 e4 c5 2 lt:Jf3 lt:Jc6 3 d4 cxd4 4GtJxd4 'iVb6 5 lt:Jb3 lt:Jf6 6 lt:Jc3 e6 7 ..td3 a6 8 0-0 ..te7 (D).

w

Introduction 9

The first Chapter examines the variation where White plays 9 a4, while the systematisation criterion for the next Chapters is the various pos­ sibilities of developing the white dark-squared bishop: 9 �e3, �d2 and 9 �g5 are given in Chapters Twoffhree, Four and Five, respec­ tively. (The division of material be­ tween Chapters Two and Three depends on White's avoidance or em­ ployment, respectively, of the thrust g2-g4 after kingside castling.) Chap­ ter Six deals with the less explored variation 7 . �b4. Part Two, entitled "White Rein­ forces the Centre by 7 �e3", is di­ vided into three chapters. Chapters Seven and Eight deal with various lines where White does not play the move �d3 or postpones it, while Chapter Nine is devoted to the im­ portant topic of the variations where White castles queenside. Not surprisingly, the most unpleas­ ant lines for Black are the sharpest variations: "White Attacks with g2g4" (in Part One) and "White Cas­ tles Queenside" (in Part Two ) . Finding adequate defensive resources and possibilities for counterplay in these variations is the key to the as­ sessment of the vitality of the entire system. In other variations Black rela­ tively easily achieves a solid game. Part Three is devoted to various early alternatives to the main line. ..

Separate sections deal with possible deviations from the main variation, which White can make at the 7'\ 6'\ and 5 tb moves in turn. As for the Kveinys Line, the mate­ rial on which is less extensive, the material is systematised in four chap­ ters. Chapters 1 3-15 deal with the clas­ sic continuations 5 '2Jc3 and 5 '2Jb3. Other less investigated options for White can be found in Chapter 16. There will inevitably be a number of controversial assessments in a book such as this (due to many un­ clear positions). The reader shouldn't take them a priori. He is advised to check and make his own judgments. I am sure the book has left many issues open, which is understandable having in mind the complexity of the systems examined and the changeable nature of chess theory. But, in any case, the author will be pleased if the book becomes a useful guide to the adherents of this line that will help them play this system more confi­ dently and successfully. I am especially thankful to two people who have helped me in my work on this book. To my wife Biljana for understanding and sup­ port, and to Grandmaster Marjanovic whose enormous Sicilan experience was very valuable in making assess­ ment of some critical positions. Zoran Ilic Nis, June 1998

1

Ge neral Remarks a nd 9 a4

c5 1 e4 �c6 2 �f3 cxd4 3 d4 1'fb6 4 �xd4 �f6 5 �b3 e6 6 �c3 a6 (D) 7 Ad3 This is the obligatory move in the line - Black must play .. . a6 sooner or later. Otherwise: a) Some players, such as the great advocate of this line, the grandmas­ ter Vladimir Akopian, prefer 7...Ae7, avoiding any weakening of the b6 square in the early stages of the game. Perhaps this is a more precise move order, but it is not inadvisable to avoid or postpone .. . a6 for a long time. In that case White can eventually uti­ lise the unprotected b5 square. One example which illustrates this is the game Wedberg-Cabrilo, Kladovo 1 980: 7 . . . d6 8 0-0 �e7 9 a4 0-0 1 0 �e3 f!ic7 1 1 f4 b6 1 2 g4 lUd7 1 3 g5 g6 14 f5 .l:e8 15 �b5 lUde5 1 6 lU d4 �d7 1 7 fxe6 fxe6 1 8 .i.xc6 .:Uxc6 19 lUdb5 and White had the edge. b) Another idea, to react immedi­ ately in the centre, is premature. Af­ ter 7. . . d5 8 exdS exd5 9 0-0 1i.e7 I 0 .i.g5 .i.e6 1 1 a4, White h a s a

w

positional advantage which, though not big, is long-lasting. c) However, the possibility of playing an early ... d5 after 8 f4 is valuable. If Black commits himself with 7 ... d6 (a move order frequently played in tournament practice) in­ stead of 7 . . . a6, then he is deprived of that option. The game G.Garcia­ Grivas, Manila OL 1 992, had the following course: 7 ... d6 8 f4 a6 9 'iff3 i.e7 1 0 a4 'if c7 1 1 0-0 0-0 12 a5 lUb4 1 3 �e3 �d7 14 �b6 'li'b8 1 5 �hi e5 1 6 .:Ud2 exf4 1 7 'ti'xf4 .i.e6 ;�;too. d) The continuation 7... Ab4 is seldom played; it is dealt with sepa­ rately in Chapter Six. 8 0-0 This is the correct move order.

General Remarks and 9 a4 11

w

w

In the case of 8 f4, Black can re­ act with 8 ... d5 ! (D). The efficacy of the timely reac­ tion 8 . . . d5 ! was convincingly con­ firmed in three games. After the unavoidable 9 e5 (9 exd5 is weak since White already played f2-f4) 9 . . . CtJd7, the games deviated: a) 10 ffg4 a5 ! I I a4? 'it'b4! I 2 0-0 CZJcxe5 1 3 'ii'e2 tLlxd3 I 4 'ii'x d3 CUc5 I5 'ii' g3 CUxb3 I 6 cxb3 .i.c5 + M.Wahls-J.Polgar, Munich I 99 1 . b) 1 0 ffn lLlc5 ! I I .i.d2 ( I 1 �e3 CUxd3+ I 2 cxd3 d4 I 3 �f2 'ii'b4-+) 1 l . . .CUxd3+ I2 cxd3 CUb4 1 3 'ifi>e2 CUxa2 1 4 CUxa2 'it'xb3 1 5 CUc3 .i.d7 1 6 f5 l:.c8 0- I Vehi Bach-Bellon, Platja d'Aro I 994. c) 10 a3 .i.e7 I I 'Wh5 g6 I2 'tlt'h6 .i.ffl I 3 'tWh3 �g7 I4 �e3 'tlt'c7 I 5 tt:le2 b6 I 6 0-0 .i.b7 I 7 �hi CUe7 18 CZJbd4 tLlc5 I9 _tg I h5 20 'ife3 h4 2I l:f3 CUe4 22 l:h3 g5 ! 23 fxg5 'iYxe5 + M.Jovcic-Z.Ilic, Tivat I 995. 8 Jle7 Another move order worthy of consideration is 8 ffc7!? (D). This is not a loss of tempo because sooner or later Black will have to relo•..

cate the queen. With it, he avoids the annoying a4-a5 manoeuvre. The game I .Gurevich-J. Polgar, Hastings 1 992 continued 9 a4 b6 (9 ... d6 see Larsen-Polgar, three para­ graphs below) 1 0 f4 d6 I I .i.e3 (1 1 'Wf3 .i.b7 1 2 'Wh3 .i.e7 I 3 .i.d2 CUb4 I4 l:ae1 0-0 transposes to the 9 a4 line below, while 14 a5? ! d5 I 5 axb6 1Wxb6+ I 6 .i.e3 1Wc7 I 7 e5 CUe4 I8 f5 exf5 19 'it'xf5 0-0 + was Velimirovic-Barlov, Vrsac I 987) I I ....i.b7 (Black's idea is to prevent the very unpleasant plan suggested by A.Mikhalchishin: 'ti'e2, CUd2-c4 cre­ ating strong positional pressure on the queenside) I 2 'it'e2 .i.e7 I 3 CUd2 d5 I 4 e5 tLld7 1 5 CUf3 g6 1 6 'iff2 CUc5 I7 l:fd1 o-o-o I 8 liJd4 lLlb4 with mutual chances. We can see that with the move order 8 .. .'tWc7 Black can avoid the line a4-a5 . White, on the other hand, doesn't now have to play .i.e3 or hurry with 'iti>h 1 in order to move his f-pawn. He has the active 9 JlgS con­ tinuation at his disposal, which will be discussed separately in Chapter Five. Here I would only mention that

12 General Remarks and 9 a4

with this move order, Black has the interesting 9 Jtd6 (instead of the usual 9 ... �e7), with which Black, nevertheless, did not achieve equal play in the game Kaminski-Kveinys, Rewal 1 992, which continued 1 0 f4 h6 1 1 �xf6 gxf6 1 2 \'fg4 �fl! 1 3 'tli'h4! �e7 1 4 'irh5. In comparison with 8 ... �e7 and 8 . . . 'tlfc7, it seems that the continua­ tion 8 d6 is less precise. In the game A.Mikhalchishin-Liicke, Dortmund 1 992, White achieved a clear advan­ tage after 9 a4 �c7 10 a5 b6 1 1 axb6 'lr'xb6 1 2 �e3 fie? 1 3 'l!fe2 'Llb8 (Or 1 3 ... 'Llb4 1 4 �b5+ 'Lld7 1 5 l:!a4 a5 1 6l:tfa1 with decisive advantage) 14 .td4 ( 1 4 'Llb5 !) 1 4.. . e5 1 5 ..i.e3 ii.e7 16 �b5+ ± . It is better to refrain from the logi­ cal reaction 1 0 . .. b6 and to continue 10 Ae7 1 1 �e3 0-0 which trans­ poses into Ziatdinov-Akopian below, or 10 ltid7 1 1 .tf4 .te7 12 \'fd2 0-0 1 3 l:.fd1 b5 14 axb6 'lr'xb6 1 5 �e2 and now instead o f 1 5 .. . 'Llc5 1 6 'Llxc5 dxc5 1 7 'Lla4 ± (Larsen-J. Polgar, Buenos Aires 1 992), Black could have played the superior 1 5 . . . 'Lice5. Now we return to the principal move 8 Ae7 (D). The diagram shows the basic po­ sition of the whole 2 ... 'Lic6, 4 .. . VWb6 system. At this moment White faces the choice of several fundamentally different plans that have been treated separately. The rest of this chapter deals with the variations where White plays 9 a4. The most often played ...

w

...

...

...

...

continuation, 9 �e3, leads to the so­ called Classical Variation after the moves 9 .. . 'fic7 1 0 f4 d6 11 fif3 0-0; this will be discussed in Chapters Two and Three. The continuations with which White ignores the posi­ tion of the black queen on the b6 and develops his dark-squared bishop on d2 and g5 are given respectively in Chapters Four and Five. 9 a4 As with the system where White quickly plays .te3, this is another direct attempt to utilise the exposed position of Black's queen. The idea behind White ' s a2-a4 is to limit Black's activity on the queenside. In this line Black has to be cautious in choosing the right move order. A su­ perficial treatment can easily bring troubles, as can be seen from several examples below. 9 11Vc7 (D) With this move order, Black tries to avoid the fixing of his queenside after a4-a5 and �e3, which would prevent his b-pawn advancing. This looks like an unpleasant possibility, although in a couple of games

General Remarks and 9 a4 13

Akopian obtained more or less suc­ cessful play by consciously allowing the cramping of his queenside.

w

For instance: 9. ..0-0 I 0 .i.e3 'iVc7: a) The immediate 11 aS allows Black the ambitious ll...dS!? - see the game Scholz-Chuchelov, given below in note 'c2' to White's 1 0U'move. Also possible is the more modest ll...d6 1 2 �b6 'iYb8 13 it:ld2 tt:lb4 14 'i!t'e2 d5 1 5 exd5 tt:lbxd5 1 6 it:lxd5 tt::lxd5 1 7 tt:lc4 ..td7 1 8 tt:le5 �e8 with a playable position for both sides, Ziatdinov-Akopian, Niksic 199 1 . b ) 1 1 f4 ( A more precise move order) 1 1 ... d6 1 2 a5 tt:lb4 and now: b 1 ) 13 \'We1 e5 14 l:!.a4 ( 1 4 f5 d5) 1 4 . . . tt::lxd3 15 cxd3 �e6 16 tt::ld2 exf4 with an equal game, Frolov-Akopian, Jurmala 1 989. b2) The manoeuvre tt:la4-b6 seems to be more promising. The example Khait-Nadanian, Czestochowa 1 992, supports this statement. There fol­ lowed 13 �a4 �d7 14 tt::lb6 l:!.ab8 15 �d4 �h8 16 e5 tt:le8 1 7 f5 tt::lxd3 18 �xd3 �b5 1 9 c4 dxe5 20 cxb5

exd4 2 1 .l:Z.ac 1 with a dangerous ini­ tiative for White. 1 0 f4 This is the most precise move or­ der if White wants to enter the main line. If he plays 10 Ae3 first, Black has the option 1 0 ...d5 !? (IO . . . b6 1 1 f4 d6 transposes into the main line) when 1 1 exd5 exd5 1 2 .i.e2 �e6 1 3 a5 0-0 1 4 �b6 "i¥d7 1 5 l:. e 1 is only slightly, if at all, better for White, Polugaevsky-Averkin, Moscow 1 970. If instead 10 aS!?, then: a) The direct and committing re­ action 10 ...b6 is inadvisable in this particular position. After 1 1 axb6 'i!Vxb6 1 2 .i.e3 "ilc7 1 3 f4 d6 14 "iWe2 tt::lb4 White obtained a strong pos­ itional pressure by playing 1 5 ..tb5+ in Bjarnason-Nkousen, Lyngby 1990. b) Also rather risky is the idea of utilising the fact that his dark-squared bishop is still not closed in and play­ ing 10 ... Ab4?! aiming to gain the aS­ pawn. That this cannot be done without considerable concessions is shown by the following line: 1 1 �d2 �xa5 (Even more dubious is 1 1 . . . tt::l xa5? ! 1 2 lt:lb5 ± ) 1 2 tt::l xa5 lt:lxa5 1 3 lt:ld5 ( 1 3 lt:lxb5 axb5 14 b4 b6 1 5 'ti' e 1 �b7 looks satisfactory for Black) 1 3 . . .tt::lx d5 ( 1 3 . . . exd5 1 4 �xa5 b6 1 5 e5! ± ) 1 4 �xa5 b6 1 5 exd5 bxa5 1 6 'ti'g4 ± with the idea 1 6 ... 0-0 1 7 d6! 'i¥xd6? 1 8 'ife4 and White wins. c) It is best for Black to treat the position after 10 a5 "a la Akopian"­ ... d6, ... 0-0, ... lt:lb4 ignoring White's idea .i.e3-b6 (see the examples above).

14 General Remarks and 9 a4

Another option is to try to make use of 'Wh3CUb4!? 1 4 .te3 eS ( 1 4... 0-0) 1S the fact that White has postponed the aS! bS (1S...bxaS 16 fxeS dxeS 17 move f2-f4 and attack in the centre with lUaS .tc8 18 'ifg3 0-0 19 CUc4±) 16 fxeS dxeS 1 7 .tb6 'ii'b8 ( 17... ...d5. This idea was carried out by Black 'ifd7? 18 'ifg3) 1 8 .tcS 'ifc7 and in two games: Black managed to maintain the bal­ c l ) 10 ...i0b4 1 1 .te3 d5 12 .tb6 ance, Novoselski-Barlov, Kragujevac 1Wb8 1 3CUcS 0-0 14 l%el .td6 1 S h3 198S. .tc7 16 l:a4;!; Rohde-Kuijf, Beer­ c) 11 fin 0-0 12 a5 (12 .te3 b6 Sheva 1987, and c2) 10 0-0 1 1 .te3 dS 12 .tb6 transposes into the main line) 12 ...bS 1Wf4 13 exdS exdS 14 l:ta4 CUb4 IS (Possible is 12...CUd7 13 .te3 bS 14 l:te1 .td6 16 g3 'Wg4 1 7 .te2 'Wg6 Wxb6CUxb6 Egger-Garias, Vina del 1 8 .tcS .txcS 19 lUxcS CUc6 20 Mar 1997) 13 axb6 'ifxb6+ 14 .te3 CUxdS lUxd5 2 1 'WxdS l:.e8 22 l:.d1 Wb7 (More logical is 14 .. .'ilt'c7 1S .:a4 .tfS with compensation, Scholz­ l:tb8 with the idea ...CUb4) 1S eS?! (Pre­ Chuchelov, Berlin 199S. mature. White didn't calculate properly d6 (D) the subsequent tactical complications) 10 1 S... dxeS 16 CUc5 "f#c7 17 CUbS axb5 18l:Xa8 exf4 19CUe4 (19 1Wxf4 �xf4 20 l:.xf4 CUd5 or 1 9 .tt2 lUeS also w loses) 19 ...fxe3 20 CUxf6 + .txf6 21 1We4 l:td8 22 Wxh7+ 'itffl 23 l:!.xf6 gxf6 24 'Wh6 + 'ite7 0-1 Cigan-Z.IIic, Brezovica 1988. ..•

11

b6

The most logical. Less advisable is 1 1 10b4 12 a5 e5 13 CUa4 .te6 14 CUb6 l:b8 and now, instead of playing 1S f5 , in the game Am. Rodriguez-Kouatly, Toluca 1 982, White attempted to increase his spa­ tial advantage by playing the incor­ rect 1S c4?. That led to catastrophe after 1S . . .CUg4 16 .tc1 exf4 17 .txf4 gS! 1 8 .te2 hS 19 .td2 dS 20 .txg4 hxg4 2 1 exd5 'i!Vxh2 + 22 �f2 l:!.h3 23 .txb4 .txb4 24 'i!Vd4 l:txb3 0-1. ...

11

.i.e3

There are several examples in which White deviated from this move: a) 11 aS bS 12 axb6 1Wxb6 + 1 3 'iPh llUb4 ( 13 ... 0-0 14 'iVe2lUb4 IS CUaS lUxd3 16 cxd3 ;I;; Topalov­ Kocovski, Star 199 1 ) 14 lUaS d5! ? IS eS CUd7 16 .:n CUxd3 17 exd3;!; Smirin-Marasin, USSR 1988. b) 11 Wh1 b6 12 Wn .tb7 1 3

12

en

The direct 12 g4 is discussed early in Chapter 3 (Kolker-Nadanian).

General Remarks and 9 a4 15

w

0-0 (D) 12 The alternative 1 2 �b7 has mainly a transpositional character. Two examples in which the main line was avoided are presented below: a) 13 l:tael CDb4 I 4 ctJd4 ( 1 4 'ifh3 transposes into the main line) I 4 . . . 0-0 I S �hi ctJd7! I 6 \Wg3 .i.f6 I 7 CDdi .l:.ae8 1 8 t2J f2 'ti'd8! and Black' s position is slightly prefer­ able, Vogt-Lukov, Cienfuegos 1 983. The manoeuvre ... tl:ld7, ... �f6 and . . . .l:.ae8 employed in this game is worthy remembering. This is a use­ ful plan in many positions from the 4 . . . 'i!Yb6 system. b) 13 tlg3 h5?! ( 1 3 .. . 0-0 is more reliable) 1 4 .l:.ae i ctJg4 1 5 .i.c1 "il'd8 1 6 l:te2 t2Ja5 1 7 h3 t2Jxb3 I 8 cxb3 ctJf6 1 9 e5 h4 20 1Vg7 .l:.g8 21 exf6 ± Morales-J.Armas, Sagua la Grande 1989. 13 l:tae1 The attempt to immediately exploit the absence of Black's bishop from the a8-h I diagonal is impatient and wrong, as these alternatives demonstrate: a) 13 e5? dxe5 1 4 fxe5 t2Jxe5 ! 1 5 'ifxa8 .i.b7 1 6 'ii' a7 t2Jeg4! 1 7 .i.f4 ...

'ifc6 is winning for Black. b) 13 aS?! bxa5 1 4 e5? ! dxe5 1 5 fxe5 t2Jd7 (Or 1 5 . . . t2Jxe5 1 6 \Wxa8 tl:leg4 1 7 l:.f4 t2Jxe3 1 8 'it'f3 ctJf5 w i th compensati o n , C ampora­ Wirthensohn, Biel 1 983) 16 'Wh3 g6 17 ..th6 t2Jcxe5 1 8 .i.xf8 ..txf8 19 t2Je4? f5 20 t2Ja5 l:tb8 2I ctJg5 lLlf6 22 b3 tl:lfg4 23 'irg3 (2 3 c;t> h 1 ) 2 3 . . . ..td6 2 4 h 3 t2Jxd3 2 5 'it'xd3 .i.c5+ 0- I Santa Roman-Benjamin, Cannes I 992. The possibility that White, in a practical game, might go astray with a premature e4-e5 is one of the rea­ sons why Black usually prefers the main line continuation I 2 . . . 0-0 to I 2 ... .i.b7. Compared with the idea of the central breakthrough, the sharp plan characterised by the advance of the g-pawn (g2-g4-g5) is more rea­ sonable: c) 13 g4 ctJd7 ( 1 3 ... tl:lb4 1 4 g5 tl:ld7 1 5 'it'h5 g6 I 6 'ilh6 f5? { 1 6.0 .!:[e8} 1 7 exf5 exf5 I 8 t2Jd4 ± Hohn­ Illner, Dortmund 1992) 1 4 g5 .l:.e8 ( 1 4 .. . ..tb7 15 'i¥h5 t2Jb4 16 l:.f3) 1 5 h4 .i.b7 1 6 h5 t2Jb4 1 7 g6 f5 !? (White would have had compensation after 1 7 . .. fxg6 1 8 hxg6 hxg6 1 9 tl:l d4 t2J f8 20 'ifh3 ..tf6 2 I l:tf2) 1 8 gxh7+ Wh8 19 h6! g6 20 'ilig3 .i.f6 with chances for both sides, Dervishi-V.Georgiev, Ankara 1 993. 13 .i.b7 /llb4 (D) 14 'ffh 3 This is the standard move in this variation, with which Black controls two important strategic elements: White' s light-squared bishop and the 0

16 General Remarks and 9 a4

d5-point. In the game Savereide­ Chiburdani dze, Thessaloniki OL 1 984, Black played superficially, and after 14 .. l1ad8?! 1 5 f5 exf5 1 6 'Lld5 ll:lxd5 1 7 exd5 lLle5 1 8 ._,xf5 g6 1 9 'it' t2 she faced problems.

w

l:tg8! 22 .:&.cl l:ad8 23 'lfi>h l ll:lxd3 24 l\Yxd3 ll:lc5 25 'i¥h3 Wi'd7 ! :;: Urday-Panno, Mar del Plata 1 988. c2) Or 16 Ae3 l:tad8 1 7 'Lld2 d5 ! 1 8 fxe5 and now in Mnatsakanian­ Akopian, USSR 1 987, Black could have obtained the advantage by 1 8 .. . ll:le4! 19 e6 f6 20 i&.xe4 dxe4 + . Black also stands better, if, instead of 1 8 fxe5, White continues either 1 8 exd5 ll:lxd3 1 9 cxd3 ll:lxd5 +, or 1 8 ll:lxd5 'Llfxd5 1 9 exd5 ll:lxd3 + Akopian. d) 15 'Lld4 l:t ad8 (Possible is 15 ... .l:lfe8 16 �h 1 i&.t& 1 7 ll:lO e5 1 8 fxe5 dxe5 1 9 'Llh4 i..c 8 20 ll:lf5 'iii>h 8 21 �h4 Moiseev-Schliiter, Vi­ enna 1 99 1 ) 16 Wh1 ( 1 6 ll:lf3 e5 1 7 ll:lg5? h 6 1 8 ll:lf3 exf4 1 9 �xf4 i.. c 8 20 g4 ll:lxg4-+ Casa-Z. IIic, Nica 1 988) and now: dl ) 16 ... d5 (I am not sure that Black has created all the conditions for carrying out this central break suc­ cessfully) 1 7 e5 ll:le4 1 8 .i.g 1 i.. c5 1 91:1f3 l:1 fe8 20 li'h4 ll:lxd3 21 cxd3 �e7 22 'iYg4 ll:lxc3 23 .l:l:.cl f5 24 'ifh5 i&.c5 with a complicated posi­ tion where White's chances are bet­ ter, Wang Zili-Gufeld, Beijing 1 996. d2) I prefer the waiting policy. For example in the game Grujic-Z.Ilic, Novi Becej 1 994, after 16...1:lfe8 1 7 �f2 'Lld7 1 8 'it'g4 ..tf6 Black had at least equal play. White's moves 1 7 i.. t2 and 1 8 'iVg4 are certainly not the best possible but even if White commits himself with f5, Black would, after ... e5 and a possible ... d5, achieve active play in the centre. -

This is the key position for the line in which White plays a2-a4. Both sides have completed their develop­ ment in the best manner and a com­ plex Sicilian battle is ahead. I n practice several continuations have been tried. a) The most direct, 15 e5?!, is again questionable: 1 5 . . .dxe5 1 6 fxe5 �xe5 1 7 il. b6 ( 1 7 1:1xf6 1:1xd3) 1 7 ... 'il'h5 18 'Wxh5 ll:lxh5 1 9 .i.c5 ll:lxd3 20 cxd3 !tfe8! 2 11i.xe71:1xe7 22 ll:lc5 a5 ! :;: Brodsky-Akopian, USSR 1 987. b) 15 'Lld2 :fe8 16 l:lf3 g6 1 7 .l:lg3 .:ladS 1 8 �f2 .i.t& 19 'iW114 �e7 20 'ifb3 .it& 21 '1Wh4 i..g7 22GtJc4 Yz-Yz Chandler-Benjarnin, Cannes 1 992. c) 15 Ad4 e5 when: c l ) 16 fxe5 dxe5 1 7 'iVg3 'Lld7 1 8 i.. e 3 � h 8 1 9 'Lld4 g 6 ! 20 ll:l f3 (20 . . . i&.h6 2 1 i..c 5-+) 20 ... f6 21 'Llh4

Classical Line with 9 Jle3 (without g4)

2

This i s the first of two chapters dealing with the important variation (l e4 c5 2 'Lln 'Llc6 3 d4 cxd4 4 !Oxd4 tlb6 5 lllb3 'Llf6 6 'Llc3 e6 7 Ad3) a6 7 Ae7 8 0-0 in which White reinforces the cen­ tre with both bishops, playing 9 �e3 Lines where the bishop is devel­ oped at d2 (usually in conjunction with �h 1 ) are covered in chapter 4 and when it goes to g5 instead, we have Chapter 5. The main divergence point for the �e3 line is seen in the diagram, which normally arises after the fur­ ther moves. 9 'flc7 10 f4 d6 (D) ffn 11 The most consistent and stand­ ard, but not unavoidable, move. 1 1 a4 transposes to the main line of Chapter 1 . 1 1 'Lla4 is an interesting option if White wants to avoid classical posi­ tions. Black can then choose between l l...b5 12 lbb6 .l:tb8 1 3 lbxc8 'iYxc8 and ll. . 'Lld7 1 2 c4 b6 1 3 lbd4 �f6 .

w

14 lbxc6 'ir'xc6 1 5 �cl �b7 16 b4 0-0 1 7 !tf2 with a spatial advantage for White, Pupo-Urday, Havana 1 992. 0-0 (D) 11 It used to be considered that in this type of position one should not hurry to castle because White achieves the initiative with the aggressive g2-g4 etc., but more recent games confirm that Black's position is very tough and full of defensive potential. In fact, in this particular position Black doesn't have much choice but to cas­ tle. Unlike the Sozin line (1 e4 c5 2 lbf3 lLlc6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lbxd4 lbf6 5 lbc3 d6 6 �c4 'iYb6 7 lLlb3 e6 8 0-0 a6 9 .te3 'ir'c7 10 f4 �e7 1 1 �d3 b5 12 'iVf3 0-0), here Black is a tempo down because the move ... b5 hasn't

18 Classical L;ne with 9 �eJ (withoutg4)

been played yet. This means that . .. Ab7, which would have been a very convenient option, can't be played. In our actual main line, it is im­ possible to start action on the queenside: a) In the case of l l ... b5? there would follow 1 2 e5! and, if 1 2 ... tZ:ld7, then after 1 3 exd6 J..xd6 White has 1 4 J..xb5, as was played in the game Kofidis-Anastasian, Athens 1 993. We see that l l .. .b5 doesn't work, but Black has two other options to avoid the main continuation 1 1 .. .0-0. b) The old alternative l l .ad7 was played in several games. In that case, probably the most unpleasant plan for Black is if White immedi­ ately plays 12 g4. The idea of using the b6 square with 12 l0a4 is tempt­ ing but not effective: after 1 2 .. . 0-0 1 3 tZ:lb6 l:ad8 14 c3 J..e 8 1 5 a4 d5 ! 16 exd5 exd5 1 7 aS d4! 1 8 tZ:lxd4 tZ:lxd4 1 9 J..xd4 i.cS Black achieved good play in Kostro-Gufeld, Tbilisi 1 970. c) Another quite reasonable idea, ll ...l0d7, was tested in two games: 12 l:lael b5 1 3 a3 (Or 1 3 tZ:ld4 J..b7 14 tZ:lxc6 J..x c6 1 5 i.d4 J.. f6 1 6 Axf6 tZ:lxf6 1 7 'ti'g3 0-0 with a roughly equal position, Mortensen­ Larsen, Espoo 1989) 1 3 0-0 1 4 'ifb3 ( 1 4 g4!?) 1 4 ... l:te8 1 5 eS tZ:lfB! with solid play for Black, Dedes-Grivas, Greece 1 987. d) It is imprecise to go ll...l0b4?! before .J:be 1 has been played. In that case White has 12 .l:ac l , with which ...

he gains a tempo after the unavoid­ able opening of the c-file. The game Minasian-Kurajica, Erevan OL 1 996, took the following course: 1 2 ... 0-0 1 3 a3 tZ:lxd3 1 4 cxd3 1Wd8 1 5 e5 (An energetic way to make use of his ad­ vantage in development: White de­ liberately compromises his pawn structure with the idea of obtaining a kingside attack) 1 5 . . . dxe5 1 6 fxeS tZ:ld7 1 7 d4 tZ:lb6 (Black has problems developing his queenside) 1 8 'ifhS tZ:lc4 1 9 i.f4 bS (If 1 9 ... tZ:lxb2? 20 l:lf3 White would quickly obtain an attack) 20 �f3 g6 21 :gJ l:!.a7 (Too slow; better 2 l . ..�b7) 22 tZ:le4 ..tb7 23 tZ:lf6+ ..txf6 24 exf6 'ti'xf6 25 :n 'flle7 26 ..th6 tZ:lxb2 27 'ti'eS f5 28 i.xf8 'ifxf8 29 d5 and White soon won the game. Now we return to the main line after 1 1 . . .0-0 (D).

w

...

As usual in such a position, White has many options. The continuation 1 2 a4 transposes into 9 a4 that was already discussed in Chapter I. For the sake of clarity, the varia­ tions 12 g4 and 1 2 Uael b5 13 g4,

Classical Line with 9 �eJ (without g4) 19

where sooner or later White makes thi s aggressive advanc e on the kingside, are given separately in Chapter 3. In the rest of this chapter, we ex­ amine variations where White re­ frains from the g2-g4 attack: A: 1 2 ltJd4 B: 1 2 'ito>h 1 C: 1 2 l:tae1 12 a3 is not dangerous to Black and rarely has an independent char­ acter after 12 ... b5 when: a) The central breakthrough 13 eS? is bad in this particular position, as can be seen from the game Aguera­ Danailov, Candas 1 992, where after 1 3 . . . dxe5 1 4 fxe5 ltJxe5 1 5 'ifxa8 ltJ eg4 1 6 l:£4 ltJxe3 Black was clearly better. b) 13 /l)d4 (The plan of recen­ tralising the knight doesn't promise a lot.) 13 . . . ltJxd4 14 �xd4 e5 1 5 �e3 �b7 1 6 l:tae1 l:tac8 with equal play, Krajina-Grivas, Vinkovci 1 989. c) 13 g4 (inadvisable): Chapter 3. d) 13 Wh1 see line B below. e) 13 ,J;laet see line C32 below. Lines with a2-a3 often arise in practice via Chapter 8 (7 -'.e3 'ikc7 8 a3). A:

12 /l)d4 The white knight usually comes back to the centre only after Black has played . . . ltJb4. When Black' s knight is still on c6 Black has the opportunity to simplify matters. 12 /l)xd4

It is best to play this well-known freeing manoeuvre. Less promising is 12 ... �d7 1 3 �h 1 b5 14 a3 l:tab8 1 5 ltJxc6! ..t.xc6 1 6 'i!Vh3 g6? ( 1 6 ... e5 ! 1 7 fxe5 dxe5 18 'it'g3 ltJh5 ! 1 9 'iff3 g 6 i s unclear according to Anand) 17 f5 ! b4 ( 1 7 ... exf5 1 8 exf5 b4 1 9 lLle2 ± ) 1 8 axb4 exf5 19 b5 ! cxb5 20 exf5 b4 2 1 lLle2 l'la8 22 l:txa8 �xa8 23 .i.d4 'tid8 24 ltJf4 .i.c6 25 'flh6 Was 2 6 �c4 1 -0 Anand-Epishin, Belgrade 1 988. eS 13 �xd4 14 fxeS dxeS 15 1'lg3 (D)

B

Now Black has two possibilities: a) 15 ...�e6 1 6 �hl ( 1 6 Axe5? is bad because of 1 6 . . . 'ft'c5+ 1 7 '1tih1 ltJh5 while also in case of 1 6 '4i'xe5 �d6 1 7 '4i'g5 �xh2+ 1 8 'ito>h 1 h6! Black has good play.) 16 ... ltJd7 1 7 �e3 'ito>h8 ( 1 7. . . l:t fe8 is better) 1 8 ltJd5 'i!Vd8 (After 1 8 ... .i.xd5 1 9 exd5 White threatens �3 and Black can­ not play 1 9 ... g6? because of20 ..th6) 1 9 l'ladl l'lc8 20 c4 and in Kosanovic -V. Damjanovic, Tivat 1 995, White

.20 Classical Line with 9 �eJ (without g4)

achieved a significant advantage in the centre. b) 15 ....1\c5 1 6 Axc5 'tWxc5+ 1 7 �h1 'ti'e7 (Passive is 1 7 .. . ll:le8?! 1 8 il:ld5 f6 1 9 b4 'tWd6 2 0 �c4 �h8 2 1 .l:ad1 ± I.Marinkovic-Colovic, Cacak 1 99 1 ) 1 8 �c4 b5 1 9 il:ld5 ll:lxd5 20 �xd5 l:tb8 21 l:tad1 l:.b6 and Black succeeded in holding the balance, Marinkovic-B.Knezevic, Subotica 1 992. B:

b5 12 Wh1 As already observed in a similar position, it is unwise to play the move 12 ... '0b4 before White has played l:ae l . However, Kreiman­ Yermolinsky, USA eh 1 994, con­ cluded 1 3 l:tacl �d7 1 4 a3 il:lxd3 1 5 cxd3 'ii'd 8 I 6il:ld4 �c6 1 7 'ii'g3 �h8 1 8 l:tc2 Y2-Y2. 13 a3 Of course, this move is not com­ pulsory, but it sets a hidden trap for Black. It is inadvisable to play 13 1Vh3 before Black has played ... �b7, as was shown by the game Britton-Con­ quest, Guernsey 1 99 1 , where after 1 3 ... b4 14ll:le2 e5 1 5 f5 d5 1 6il:ld2 l:td8 1 7ll:lg3il:ld4 1 8 �xd4 dxe4 1 9 .i.xe4 ll:lxe4 2 0 lUdxe4 .!:lxd4 Black stood better. b4 13 Introducing a risky adventure which Black can avoid by playing 13 ... l:tb8 or 1 3 .. . .tb7. For example: a) 13 ... I:Ib8!7 14 ifh3 l:td8 1 5 il:ld4? ll:lxd4 1 6 e5 (1 6 �xd4 e5-+)

1 6 . . . dxe5 1 7 fxe5 il:lf5 1 8 exf6 Axf6 + Kiriazis-Anastasian, Aegina 1 993, and b) 13 ... Ab7 14 'ii'h 3 l:tad8 1 5 l:ae1 l: fe8 1 6 l:tf3 b4 Farago-Illner, Budapest 1 995. 14 axb4 'Oxb4 15 e5 il.b7 Black stands worse after 1 5 ... 'Ofd5 1 6 il:lxd5 exd5. 16 1fh3 dxe5 17 fxe5 1Wxe5 18 l::ta 5! (D) The point of White's strategy. His rook enters the battle in the best pos­ sible manner and this manoeuvre is worth remembering. This motif can appear in various forms. For exam­ ple, the same position appeared after a different move order in the game Sharif-Z.Ilic, Cannes 1 989, with the important difference that the bishop was there placed on d2 instead of e3. This possibility is discussed in Chap­ ter Four.

B

This position has been the subject of many discussions and analyses. It

Classical Line with 9 �eJ (without g4) 21

is clear that 18 ...l0bd5? and 18 ... f!lc7? lose by force after 19 l:txf6 and 1 9 i.xh7+ l2Jxh7 20 l:th5, res­ pectively. Furthermore, 18 ... Ad5? is unsat­ isfactory, as is shown by the follow­ ing analysis: 1 9 lL\xd5 exd5 ( 1 9 . .. lL\bxd5 2 0 l:txf6 ! +-) 2 0 Ad4 'i¥h5 (20 ...'ii'e6 2 1 Af5 'ti'e2 22 l:Iaa1 with many threats) 2 1 �xf6 'ti'xh3 22 il.xe7 'ii'g4 23 h3! and Black loses the knight on b4. IfWhite's bishop is on d.2, then White has an even sim­ pler win: 1 8 ... �d5 19 lL\xd5 exd5 20 �xb4 ..txb4 2 1 .l:.xf6. Two continuations for which it is still difficult to give a definite assess­ ment are: B 1: 1 8 . . . lL\xd3 and B2: 1 8 . .. 'i'Vd6 While in the case of the former, the assessment that White has the ad­ vantage is justified, in the latter vari­ ation, matters are not clear. B1 : 18 l0xd3 ! ? l0xe5 19 l:txe5 20 Acs (DJ The same position appeared in the game Mortensen-Gufeld, Hastings 1992, with the difference that White had not played the move Wh 1 . There it arose from the Sozin move order: I e4 c5 2 tLlf3 tLlc6 3 d4 cxd4 4 tLlxd4 tLlf6 5 tLlc3 d6 6 .i..c4 'iVb6 7 't:lb3 e6 8 0-0 ll.e7 9 .i.e3 'f!lc7 10 il.d3 a6 1 1 f4 b5 1 2 a3 .i.. b7 1 3 'i'Vf3 0-0 14 'i!Vh3 b4 1 5 axb4 tLlxb4 1 6 e5 dxe5 17 fxe5 Wxe5 1 8 .l:.a5 lL\xd3 1 9

l:txe5 lLlxe5 2 0 .i.. c 5. The position of the king on the g 1 square has both its advantages and drawbacks. There followed 20 ... i.xc5+ 2 1 lLlxc5 .i..c6 22 'i!Vg3 lt:lg6 23 .l:. d 1 (23 b4 ! ?) 23 ... a5 ! 24 .l:.d6 l:tac8 25 'Lld3 ttJe4! 26 lt:lxe4 ..txe4 27 'iWe3 .i..d5 28 'ii'd2 a4 and Black had at least an equal game. This is a nice example from Black's point of view, but White failed to play the stronger 22 lt:lxe6 ! .

B

20 l0g6 Not 20 ... Axc5 2 1 lLlxc5 .i..c6 be­ cause of 22 lt:lxe6, winning a pawn. However, 20 ... 1:tfe8 is better than the text. 21 Axe7 l0xe7 22 tOes The alternative is 22 l0a5 l:rab8 23 lt:lxb7 l:xb7 24 b3 . 22 Ac6 23 l:txf6! With this exchange sacrifice, White revives the attack: 23 ... gxf6 24 ttJ 5e4 Axe4 2 5 lt:lxe4 l:t fd8 26 l2Jxf6+ Wg7 27 lLlh5+ Wf8 28 'ifg4 with a superior position for White,

22 Classical Line with 9 �eJ (without g4)

Timman-Kurajica, Reggio Emilia 1 984/85. An interesting alternative here was 24 Wg7 25 1lt'h4 l?Jg8 26 l?Jxf6 l?Jxf6 27 'i!Vg5+ �h8 28 -..xf6+ �g8 29 h4 when it seems that Black is defenceless against the fur­ ther advance of the white h-pawn. But Black c an put up a fight after 29 .. .l:tfd8 30 h5 Wf8 - Huhner. ..•

B2:

18

.d6! ? (D)

w

b) 19 .axh7+ l?Jxh7 20 l:lh5 e5 (20 ... �xg2+ 2 1 'Ot>xg2 e5 22 'Ot>h l 'ifg6 23 l:tgl 'ifxc2 24 l:tg2 'ifd3 25 l?Jcl ! �fl + 26 �gl +-) 2 1 �c5 (It is noteworthy is that, if White's bishop is placed on d2 instead of on e3, then he lacks this possibility; of course not 2 1 lhh7 �xg2+! 22 Wxg2 Wg6+. ) 2 l . . .'ifg6 22 �xe7 l?Jxc2 (22 ... �xg2+ 23 �xg2 'ifxh5 24 �b4 is ± according to Timman) 23 .i.xf8 l?Je3 24 l:tgl l?Jxg2! (24 ... llJg4? 25 .i.c5+-) 25 l:txg2 .l:xf8 26 l:lxe5 'ifc2 27 l?Je2! l:ld8. I think this is the critical position for the assessment of the continua­ tion 1 8 .. .... d6. C:

Unfortunately this move has not been tested in practice. The analyses given below show that White has no clear way to achieve the advantage (if there is any way at all). a) 19 J\cS ._,d8! ( 1 9... �c7? 20 �xb4 ..i.xb4 21 l:f.xf6+-) 20 �xe7 (Black wins after 20 .txb4 �xb4 2 1 .l:.xf6 g6) 20 . . . 'i!Vxe7 2 1 �xh7+ l?Jxh7 22l:f.h5 f5 23 l:f.xh7 'i!Vg5 and Black has good counterplay. For ex­ ample, 24 l:lgl tLld5 25 l?Jxd5 Axd5 26l?Jc5 l:f.fc8 ! 27 .l:h5 'i!Vd2 28 liJd3 l:f.xc2 and White have to struggle for a draw.

1 2 l:lael After this, the most frequently played continuation, Black is at the crossroads: C l : 1 2 . .. l:tb8 C2: 1 2 . ..l?Jb4 C3: 1 2 . .. b5 The main and most consistent con­ tinuation, played in many games, is 1 2 ...b5 (C3). Since some new games and analyses favour White after his most direct approach with 1 3 e5 ! , Black has to pay more attention to the alternatives Cl and C2 which pre­ vent it. Another possible way to avoid White's e4-e5 advance is the continu­ ation 1 2 /0d7. After 1 3 Wg3 (For 1 3 g4 see Chapter 3, line B) Black played superficially in the game Solo­ mon-Davidovi6, Sydney 1 990, where ...

Classical Line with 9 �eJ (without g4) 23

after 13 Af6? (This often-useful move doesn't work in this particular position.) 1 4 e5! dxe5 1 5 f5 ! exf5 ( 1 5 ... .:Ub6 1 6 .:Ue4!) 1 6 .i.xf5 'iVd8 1 7 l:d1 ! White was clearly better. Correct is 13 11b8, transposing into line C l . ...

.••

Cl:

12 Black avoids the threat e4-e5, by removing the rook from the a8-h 1 diagonal. Still, this is in a way a waste of time. The rook move has more sense if White has already played a3, which is not the case here. Now I think the most promising continua­ tion is 13 g4 (compare Chapter 3, page 39). In practice 1 3 �g3 was played in two games. 13 1tg3 �d7! (D)

w

Gurevich, Hastings 1 993/94 went on: 14 ... dxe5 1 5 fxe5 .:Uh5 ( 1 5 ... .:Uxe5? 16 .i.f4) 1 6 fin g6 1 7 .i.h6 .i.b7 (Black also loses material in case of 1 7 ... .:Ug7 1 8 .:Ue4 .:Uxe5 19 .:Uf6+ 'it>h8 20 'ii'g3 Ad6 2 1 'ii'h 3 with the idea 22 Axg7+ 'it>xg7 23 'iWh7+) 1 8 .i.xffl .:Uxe5 1 9 'ii' e 3 .:Uxd3 20 Axe7 .:Uxe1 2 1 'ii'c5 'ii'x c5 22 .:Uxc5 (Now it's clear that White has calculated better. In the case of 22... .:Uxg2 or 22 . .. .:Uxc2, then 23 .i.d6 is winning) 22 ... b4 23 .:U3a4 .:Uxg2 24 .i.d6 l:c8 25 .:Uxb7 .:Ue3 26 l:lc 1 and White realised her material advantage with­ out many problems. The correct 13 �d7 was played in the game Repkova-Svidler, Gron­ ingen 1 993 . White superficially mixed several plans and after 14 'tWh3 ( 1 4 f5 !?) 1 4 ... .:Ub4 1 5 a3 (A waste of time. 1 5 .:Ud4 is better) 1 5 ... .:Uxd3 1 6 cxd3 \'t'd8! 1 7 l:f3 'it>h8 1 8 g4l:!.e8 19 .:Ud4 Af6 20 l:tefl Wg8 21 .:Ude2 g6 22 e5 :Ji.g7 23 exd6 b5 24 .:Ue4 f5 ! Black soon obtained decisive counterplay. ...

C2:

Black should not underestimate the e4-e5 threat. For example 13 b5 is dubious because of 1 4 e5 ! . With the rook on b8, the pinning motif along the h2-b8 diagonal is a factor. After 1 4 e 5 ! the game Arakhamia-1. ..•

12 �b4 (D) This is a quite playable continua­ tion and a reasonable alternative if Black wants to avoid 1 2 ... b5 1 3 e5 ! . The drawback i s that i t allows the quick recentralisation of the b3knight. However, in practice White has not played convincing examples either after this or other alternatives, so after 12 �b4 it is difficult to determine the main line. ...

24 Classical Line with 9 �eJ (without g4)

w

The following practical examples demonstrate the vitality of Black's position: a) 13 lt:1d4 nes 14 g4 b5 1 5 g5 l2Jd7 16 ti'h3 �f8 1 7 ll:Jf3 ll:Jxd3 1 8 cxd3 b4 1 9 llle 2 'Wc2 ! :;: Gavric­ Kurajica, Banjaluka 1 983. b) 13 Whl b5 14 't!t'g3 �b7 15 e5 illh5 16 't!t'g4 ll:Jxd3 17 cxd3 g6 1 8 llld2 b4 1 9 lLlce4 dxe5 2 0 .l:lc1 �b8 2 1 �c5 �xc5 22 lll x c5 illx f4 + Wittmann-Gostisa, Aosta 1 988. c) 13 '8h3 ltJxd3 1 4 cxd3 b5 1 5 l:.c1 'i!Vd8 1 6lLld4 �b7 1 7 g4 l:c8 1 8 :tcd1 l:!e8 19 l:d2 ll:Jd7 20 g5 b4 2 1 ltJd1 lLlc5 oo Westerinen-Kosten, London I 988. d) 13 1t'g3 e5 1 4 f5 ..t>h8 1 51Yf3 b5 1 6 g4 d5 1 7 g5 d4 1 8 gxf6 �xf6 I 9 lLJxd4 exd4 20 .ll f4 'it'b6 2 1 lLJe2 �b7 with good play for Black, Schiifer-B.Knezevic, Sofia 1 994. e) 13 a3 (This continuation does not promise any advantage.) 1 3 . . . lLJxd3 1 4 cxd3 �d7 (Or 1 4...b5 I 5 l:tci 'fi'b8 1 6 lLJa5 .i.d7 1 7 lLla2 �d8 1 8 lLlc6 Axc6 19 lhc6 a5 20 f51Vb7 21 .l:cc l b4 and White had problems with his knight, Moldovan-Kiselev,

Bucharest 1 997) I 5 l:c1 't!t'd8 ( 1 5 ... 'ft'b8 1 6 lLJa5 �d8 1 7 b4 b6 18 lLJb3 �e7 I9 lLJb1 a5 20 lLJd4 axb4 2 1 axb4 'it'b7= Keres-Smyslov, Bled 1 959) 16 �h 1 .l:c8 17 lLJd4 lL!e8 1 8 f5 �f6 1 9 l:.c2 lLJc7 20 l:cf2 ti'e7 21 fxe6 fxe6 22 'ifd1 ..ixd4 23 .i.xd4 lLJb5= Lutz-Martinovic, Groningen 1 995. f) 13 g4 (Probably the best.) 1 3 ... lLJd7 14 g5 .l:e8 (14 ... b5) 15 'fih.5 ( 1 5 �d4 lllc6 1 6 .i.e3 ..tf8 Y2-Y2 Kuporosov-Vokac, Lazne Bohdanec 1 994) 1 5 . . . ..tf8 ( 1 5 ... g6 is more pre­ cise.) 16 .l:f3 g6 1 7 't!!Vh4 .i.g7 (This type of position will be examined in detail in the next chapter on the g2g4 attack) 1 8 f5 b5 19 .l:h3 h6 20 gxh6 ..tf6 oo Asrian-An astasi an, Yerevan 1 995. C3:

12

b5 (D)

w

Before we consider the position after 1 2 . .. b5 in detail, it is necessary to mention that it can arise with dif­ ferent move orders as well, charac-

Classical Line with 9 �eJ (without g4) 25

teristic of the Paulsen or Sozin. The typical move orders are: 1 e4 c5 2 ltJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lLlxd4 lLlf6 5 lLlc3 lLlc6 6 .itc4 �b6 7 lLlb3 e6 8 0-0 a6 9 �e3 Wlc7 1 0 f4 j.e7 1 1 �f3 0-0 1 2 �d3 b5, and 1 e4 c5 2 ltJf3 e6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lLlxd4 a6 5 lLlc3 V//Jc 7 6 �d3 lLlc6 7 �e3 lLlf6 8 0-0 b5 9 lLlb3 .i..e 7 10 f4 d6 1 1 'iWf3 0-0. It is clear that this move order is favourable for Black because he is a tempo up compared to the variation 4 .. . 'i¥b6. After 1 2 ... b5 White has several continuations at his disposal. One of the most significant, 13 g4, is sepa­ rately given in the next chapter. Other continuations are: C3 1 : 1 3 �h1 C32: 1 3 a3 C33: 13 Qg3 C34: 1 3 Qh3 C35: 1 3 e5! 13 An was seen in Matulovic­ Chiburdanidze, Vinkovci 1 982. The idea of re-routing the dark-squared bishop to the kingside to support the c4-e5 attack is interesting, but it costs two tempi. The best reply is 13 Ab7 1 4 'Wh3 f.tad8 with equal play. In­ stead the game continued 13 b4 (It's not necessary to hurry with this move) 14 l2Jd1 .itb7 ( 1 4 e5? 1 5 lLle3 exf4 1 6 l2Jd5 ! l2Jxd5 1 7 exd5 l2Je5 1 8 �xe5 ! dxe5 1 9 d6+-) 1 5 'fi'h3 e5 1 6 �h4 ( 1 6 lLle3) 1 6 ... l2Jd7 1 7 lLie3 .i.xh4 1 8 'Wxh4 'Wd8 1 9 'iWxd8 �axd8 20 lLlc4 with slightly better chances for White.

C3 1 : 13 Whl �b7 Instead 13 b4 14 lL\d1 �b7 1 5 ii. f2 a5 1 6 �h3 g6 1 7lLie3 l:tfe8 1 8 ..th4 with chances for both sides, was played in Jones-Suzuki, Novi Sad OL 1 990. It is more in the spirit of the line is to refrain from ...b5-b4. The better plan is to post the knight on the b4 square with the idea of con­ trolling White's very strong light­ squared bishop. �b4 14 1rh3 14 ... b4? 15 e5 ! dxe5 16 fxe5 l2Jxe5 1 7 �f4 lLixd3 1 8 .1i.xc7 lLlxe 1 19 .l:l:.xe1 bxc3 20 bxc3 ± Savanovic­ Djukic, Kladovo 1 994. 15 itld4 (D) ...

B

...

...

This position, which is important for the 4 . . . 'iWb6 system, has been tested in several games from tourna­ ment practice: a) 15 g6?! 1 6 f5 gxf5 1 7 exf5 e5 1 8 .i.h6 �h8 19 �xf8 l:txf8 20 liJf3 ± Pritchett-Large, British eh 1 980. b) 15 d5 (This typical central ...

...

.16 Classical Line with 9 .i.eJ (without g4)

break is premature here, but a possi­ ble alternative is 15 . /t)xdJ!? 1 6 cxd3 b4 1 7 lba4 l:.ac8 intending . . . WaS) 1 6 eS lt:Je4 1 7 �xe4 d.xe4 1 8 a3 'Llc6 1 9 lLlce2 'Llxd4 20 'Llxd4 aS 2 1 'f!Vg3 l:.a6 22 l:.d1 b4 23 fS exfS 24 'Llxf5 l:.g6 25 ..tb6! 1 -0 lvanovic-Kocovski, Dojran 1 992. c) 15 Dac8 1 6 a3 'Llxd3 1 7 cxd3 Wd8! 1 8 :n 'Lld7 1 9 l:.d1 .i.f6 20 l:.g3 l:.e8 2 1 f5 ctJffl22 'ii'g4 l:.c7 23 l:.fl �c8 and Black had enough de­ fensive resources, Belikov-Akopian, St. Petersburg 1 993. This is an in­ structive example of how Black should treat the diagram position. ..

..•

C32 : 13 a 3 Ab7 (D) 13 ...Db8, retaining the bishop on the c8-h3 diagonal, is. another possi­ ble plan. For example, 1 4 'f!Vg3 b4 1 5 axb4 l:.xb4 ( 1 S ... 'Llxb4!?) 1 6 �d2 l:td8 1 7 e5 d.xe5 1 8 fxeS l:.xd3 1 9 cxd3 l:.xb3 20 exf6 �cS+ 2 1 �hi 'i¥xg3 22 hxg3 with better chances for White, Fogarasi-Bech Hansen, Budapest 1 992.

w

14 fi'h3 Or 14 Wh1l:He8 ( 1 4... l:.ac8 1 S g4 b4 1 5 axb4 'Llxb4 1 6 gS ctJd7 1 7 ctJd4 ctJcS=) 1 5 'i!Vh3 l:.ad8 16 ctJd4 'Llxd4 1 7 �xd4 ctJd7 ( 1 7 ... eS !?) 1 8 eS and: a) After 1 8...g6!? White's attempt to attack at once with 1 9 f5? ! ( 1 9 exd6) 1 9 . . . exf5 20 l:.xf5 collapsed after 20 . . . 'LlxeS 2 1 l:.exe5? (21 �xeS dxe5 22 l:.fxe5 �c6) 2 l . . .d.xe5 22 �xeS l:. xd3 ! 23 cxd3 W c8 0- 1 , Christian-Liicke, Hamburg 1 990. b) 18.. �f81 9 fS d.xe5 (19 ... exfS !?) 20 �xeS 'flcs 21 f6 gxf6 22 �xf6 �xf6 23 l:.xf6 figS 24 l:.efl l:.d4 25 l:.xt7 l:.h4 26 l:.xf8+ l:xf8 27 'il!Vxe6+ r3;g7 28 Wd7+ �g8 29 'ife6+ Yz-Y2 Somlai-Liicke, Budapest 1 99 1 . 14 b4 14 ... Dad8 1 S g4 h6 1 6 g5 ctJh7 1 7 g6 was dubious for Black in Myrvold-Razuvaev, Gausdal 1 993, but 14...Dfe8 is interesting: 1 5 f5 ( 1 5 e 5 dxe5 1 6 fxe5 'Ll x e S 1 7 .i.f4 'ifb6+!) 1 5 . . .exf5 1 6 'i¥xf5 'Lle5 1 7 h 3 l:tac8 1 8 .i.d4 �d8 1 9CLld2 'i¥d7 20 'ii'f4 'ife6 with an unclear posi­ tion, Thipsay-Vasiukov, Delhi 1 987. In case White played 'Oth 1 instead of lhe 1 , then, in playing ...b4, Black has to take into account the possible central break e4-eS, which was dis­ cussed earlier. axb4 15 The game Kupreichik-Tal, Sochi 1 970, was also interesting. The same position arose with a different move order where White was a tempo up, that is, the move 'lt>h 1 was already played. There followed an unex.

Classical Line with 9 �eJ (without g4) 27

pected "semi-correct" sacrifice 1 6 tt:Jd5 ! ? exd5 1 7 exd5 tLlb8 1 8 J.d4 g6 1 9 l:tf3 ( 19 l:te3 ! ) 19 .. . Axd5 20 l:tfe3 �d8 2 1 '*'h4 lZJbd7 22 'ifh6 'irb7 23 l:tg3 and now, instead of the most consistent 2 3 . . . �b6 ! , Black played the incorrect 23 ... tt:Jc5? and lost in a few moves after 24 lZJxc5 dxc5 25 f5 ! cxd4 26 fxg6 fxg6 27 �xg6 'Oi;>h8 28 1Wxf8+ tLlg8 29 �f5 ! l:tb8 3 0 l:te8 W fl 3 1 l:th3 1 -0. �xb4 15 16 �d4! (D) 16 e5? is wrong: 1 6 .. . dxe5 1 7 fxe5 1Wxe5 1 8 .l:txf6 lZJxd3.

B

practice after 1 6 tLld4 (the diagram position), Black did not have the worse of it: a) 16 . .�xd3 1 7 cxd3 :res 1 8 tt:J f3 .l:lac8 1 9 g4 tt:Jd7 20 g5 �f8 2 1 g6 hxg6 22 tt:Jg5 tt:Jf6 2 3 �d4 tt:Jh5 24 f5 exf5 25 exf5 l:txe 1 26 lhe I iVa5 with a sharp position, Peters­ Fedorowicz, USA eh I 984. b) 16...�d7 I 7 'if;hi (I7 f5 !?) I 7... tLlc5 (Perhaps it is better to keep this knight closer to the kingside, so I 7... tt:Jxd3 and I 7 ... l:tac8 deserve attention) 1 8 l:td1 lZJcxd3 I 9 cxd3 Af6 20 l:tf3 .l:lae8 21 l:tg3 �h8 with an unclear position, Vuruna-Z.Ilic, Tivat 1 995. .

C33: 13 1lg3 The transfer of the queen to h3 is a much more usual option but the alter­ native '1Wg3 should also be seriously considered. In both cases, regardless of whether the queen is on g3 or h3, White's plan to organise the attack is based on the timely e4-e5. a) 13 Wh8 I4 �h i �b7 1 5 tLld4 ( 1 5 e5? dxe5 1 6 fxe5 'i!Wxe5 ! 1 7 �f4 'Wh5 1 8 Ae2 '1Wg6 :::;: ) 1 5 ... .l:lae8!? 1 6 tt:Jxc6 .i.xc6 1 7 e 5 tt:Jd7 1 8 'iih3 g6 19 Ad4! (19 exd6 1Wxd6=) 19 . . . dxe5 20 fxe5 �c5 2 1 �xc5 lZJxc5 22 'ifh6 and, according to Nadanian, White has a small edge (Muhametov­ Nadanian, Czestochowa 1991). b) 13 b4 1 4 tLldi a5 15 tt:Jt2 a4 16 tLld4 tt:Jxd4 1 7 .txd4 e5 1 8 fxe5 tt:Jh5 19 'iff3 dxe5 20 1Wxh5 exd4 2 1 e5 g 6 2 2 'ife2 Yz- Yz Y .Griinfeld­ Grivas, Novi Sad OL 1 990. ...

Here we have a position similar to variation C3 1 . The difference is that the a-pawn has been exchanged and White did not play 'if;hl , which, theo­ retically speaking, favours Black. It seems that the best plan for Black is . . . tt:Jd7, . . . �f6, and then perhaps ... l:tae8 or ... l:tac8. Here, too, it is dangerous to play the provocative 16 ...g6?! because White obtains an attack after 1 7 f5 e5 I 8 fxg6! exd4 I 9 l:txf6 fxg6 20 l:txfE+ l:txfE 2I �xd4 ± . In two examples from tournament

•••

28 Classical Line with 9 �eJ (without g4)

C34: 13 1th3 White plays this regardless of the fact that the black bishop is still on the c8-h3 diagonal. a) Among several ways to parry the e4-e5 threat, I consider the flex­ ible 13 ... �b4 is best. b) In the game Waitzkin-Olesen, New York 1 993, Black treated the variation poorly and it was convinc­ ingly shown that the plan of pushing the queenside pawns ( ... b4, ... a5) is slow in this particular position. White achieved a clear advantage after 13 ...1ld8 14 g4 b4?! 1 5 'Lle2 tLld7 1 6 g5 a5 1 7 'Llg3 a4 1 8 tLld2 g6 1 9 l:te2 Jl. f8 2 0 f5. c) For the forcing variation 13 ... e5 1 4 f5 'Llb4 1 5 g4 d5 1 6 g5 the criti­ cal move is 16 ... d4! ? since the alter­ native 16 ...�xe4 1 7 'Llxd5 tLlxd5 1 8 .i.xe4 is favourable for White. In the game Payen-Wauters, Cannes 1 989, followed 1 8 ... lLlxe3 19 l:txe3 .i.xg5 20 l:tg3 .i.f6 21 '4Wg2! 'iYa7+ 22 c;i;>h1 l:tb8 23 l'hg7+ c;i;>h8 24 .l:r.xh7+ �xh7 25 'ifh3+ 1 -0. C35: 13 e5! (D) The most challenging continua­ tion, which is the main line recom­ mended for White against the 2 ... lLlc6, 4 ... 'i!Vb6 system b y Nunn & Gallagher in BTSJ. Therefore your opponents are most likely to be aware of the possibility! This central breakthrough used to be regarded as a premature reaction,

B

but the latest example from practice puts this j udgment under severe doubts. As in many other Sicilian positions, the question is - whether to play .. . dxe5 or to prefer ... 'Lld7, avoiding the opening of the c 1 -h6 diagonal that activates White's dark­ squared bishop. Does the weak e5pawn balance White's activity? Black now has three continuations at his disposal. a) 13 ... dxe5 14 fxe5 when: a 1 ) 14 ... �d7 15 .i.f4! (Better then 1 5 'ifh3? ! g6 1 6 �h6 l1d8 ! with an unclear position) 1 5 ... �b7 1 6 'iYg3 and, according to Nadanian, White has the advantage. a2) For many years, theory con­ sidered that Black could sacrifice the aS-rook by 14 ...�xe5? 1 5 �xa8 lLleg4 when most continuations fa­ vour Black. For example, if 16 Af4? 'ikb6+ 1 7 �h1 .i.b7-+ while after 16 l:lf4 lLlxe3 17 'iff3 'Llc4! 18 l:tfl lLlxb2 1 9 a4 �b7 20 ifh3 tLlxd3 2 1 irxd3 l:tc8 (Delekta-Z.IIic, Capelle la Grande 1 992) Black had the supe­ rior position.

Classical Line with 9 �eJ (without g4) 29

However, the latest e xample clearly disproved this line: 16 g3! (The only move) 16 . . . �b7 ( 1 6 . . . lLlxe3 1 7 llxe3 �b6 1 8 'i!V f3 �b7 1 9 �f4 lLl g4 20 lle 1 lLl xe3 2 1 'it'xe3+-) 1 7 f!/a7 f!/c6 1 8 .i.e4! (The key move which seals Black's fate) l 8 . . . lLlxe4 19 lLla5 'ikc5 20 �xc5 �xc5+ 21 f!/xc5 lLlxc5 22 b4 1 -0 Uicke-Grivas, Dortmund 1 992. b) The practical experience with the continuation 13 ... �d7 is, I think, not encouraging from Black's point of view. The game Nadanian-Palevic, corr. 1993, had the following course: 1 4 exd6 (Weaker is 1 4 fi'h3 g6 1 5 cxd6 Axd6 1 6 f5 exf5 1 7 lL:\d5 'i¥d8 1 8 l:'txf5 f6 1 9 l:!.ffl lL:\de5 with a good play for Black, Kofidis-Grivas, l l ioupolis 1 995) 14 l'Wxd6 (not l4 . . . .txd6? 1 5 kxb5 !) (D) ...

IV

15 �aS lLlxa5 1 6 V!Wxa8 �b7 ( 1 6 ... b4? ! 1 7 lLle4 'Wic7 1 8 'i!Va7 .i.b7 1 9 i.t2! 'Wic6 20 'iVe3! lLlc5 2 1 'i!Wh3 tuxd3 22 cxd3 :1: ) 1 7 'Wia7 b4 ! 1 8

l:tdl ! (Both 1 8 lL:\b5? 'iVc6 1 9 l:!.t2 :ta8 20 lL:ld4 'ird5, and 18 lLle4? 'ifc6 19 l:te2 f5 20 lLlg5 J:a8 21 'ifd4 �c5 are losing for White) 1 8 .. .'iVc7! ( 1 8 . . . bx c3? 1 9 �xh7+ 'i17xh7 20 l:txd6 .txd6 2 1 'ii'd4! �c5 22 'ii'd3+ �g8 23 �xc5 lLlxc5 24 'ifc3+-) 1 9 ..ltxa6! l:ta8 ( l 9 ... bxc3 ! ? 20 _txb7 etJxb7 21 b3 ::!; ) 20 lL:\b5! 'ifxc2! 2 1 l:!. d 2 ( 2 1 .txb7 ! ? ) 2 1 . . . l:txa7 2 2 l hc2 l:!.x a6 2 3 l:!. d 1 etJf6 ( 2 3 . . . lL:\f8 ! ?) 24 llc7 .i.f8! \ll- Y2. Instead of these complicated vari­ ations involving grabbing the ex­ change, White can, in the diagram position, play the simpler 15 l0e4! 'Wic7 1 6 ..Wh5 g6 1 7 'iWh6 with the initiative. (All the above analyses are given by Nadanian.) Additionally, BTSJ says that 15 .ae4 .i.b7 16 f5 is a dangerous-looking continuation and it also indicates the possibilities 15 Wih3 and 15 l:ld1 as well as 1 5 lLle4. c) 13 ... l0e8!? is also possible. It is not easy to make a proper assess­ ment of whether thi s move or 1 3 .. . lL:\d7 is more reliable. In the game S ocko-Bielczuk, Hlohovec 1 993, after 14 etJd4 lLlxd4 ( 1 4 ... ..ltb7!?) 1 5 .txd4 (If 15 'Wixa8? then 1 5 . . . �b7 1 6 'f!ia7 dxe5 with the idea . . . i.c5) 1 5 . . . .tb7 1 6 �h3 g6 1 7 'i17 h 1 l:d8 1 8 lLle4 ..ltxe4 19 l:xe4 White had a certain advantage. However, it cannot be concluded from this example that 1 3 ... etJe8 is unplayable.

3

Cl assical Line : White Attacks with g 2-g4

In this chapter we shall examine the variations where White plays g2g4 in conjunction with kingside castling. It goes without saying that the plan involving g2-g4 is the most aggres­ sive one. Here we have a case where White quite reasonably applies the well-known strategic rule that the side with the opening advantage should attack. The sharp positions that arise are reminiscent of those from the Scheveningen Sicilian. The differ­ ence that his light-squared bishop has been developed at d3 and not at e2 suits White. Usually the advance g2-g4 is made after the following introductory moves: 1 e4 c5 2 l0f3 l0c6 3 d4 cxd4 4 l0xd4 1lb6 S l0b3 l0f6 6 l0c3 e6 7 _ad3 a6 8 0-0 ll.e7 9 £e3 .c7 10 r4 d6 u trn o-o (DJ. It is also interesting to play the line g2-g4 without the move 'it'f3. With this White can gain time if, later in the game, he plays directly 'iWh5 without the intermediate move 'iff3. For ex­ ample, 11 a4 b6 1 2 g4 .i.b7 1 3 g5 tZ:Id7 14 f5! tZ:Ide5 15 'ith5 gave a prefer­ able position for White, Kolker­ Nadanian, USSR 1 99 1 .

As usual, instead of 'i!Vf3, White can also develop his queen on the e2square: 1 1 .e2 0-0 (It's possible to postpone castling and first start counterplay on the queenside, 1 1 ... b5 1 2 g4 Ab7 { 1 2 ... h5?! 1 3 gS tZ:Ig4 14 .i.d2} 1 3 gS tZ:Id7 ;!; ) 12 g4 l:e8 (12 ...b5) 13 g5 tZ:Id7 1 4 l:tf3 g6 1 5 :afl ! b5 1 6 :h3 b4? (This move only helps White to move his knight to the kingside and exploit the weak f6 and h6 squares.) 1 7 tZ:Idl �f8 1 8 lLlt2 ii.g7 1 9 tZ:Ig4 dS 20 lLlh6+! with a clear advantage for White, A. Rodriguez-Carlier, Amsterdam 1 987.

w

Again we have the position after 1 1 . . .0-0 which was the main subject of Chapter 2, but here White's plan

Classical Line: White Attacks with g2-g4

is more aggressive. It is convenient to consider separately: A: 1 2 g4 and 8: 1 2 l:!.ae 1 b5 1 3 g4. The ideas are similar but there are also differences, which are better no­ ticed if the material is given separately. Before starting to examine these variations, let us mention the follow­ ing. If White intends to play the varia­ tion with g2-g4, it is unnecessary to play 1 2 a3 ftrst, which here can be consid­ ered a waste of time. The following two examples, where this move order was played, are interesting: a) l2 b5 1 3 g4 �b7 1 4 g5 lt:Jd7 I 5 'i!Yh3 l:!.fe8 1 6 f5 exf5 1 7 lt:JdS ft'd8 1 8 'iWxf5 lt:Jce5 1 9 h4 -tf8 20 i.. d4 g6 2 1 'iWf4 -txd5 22 exd5 Ag7 and Black managed to solve his prob­ lems, Schweber-Rubinetti, Mar del Plata 1 968. b) That Black cannot treat the variation passively is seen from the example Pyhala-Perlstein, Warsaw 1 989, where after 1 2 l:le8 1 3 g4 {jj d7 1 4 g5 g6 1 5 h4 b5 1 6 h5 l:!.b8 1 7 'it>g2 b4 1 8 l:th 1 ! bxc3 1 9 hxg6 fxg6 20 l:!.xh7! White obtained an ir­ resistible attack. For other lines with 1 2 a3 see Chapter 2. ...

...

31

details. In particular, their suggestion at White's 1 5'h move in l ine A23 awaits practical tests. Black has these possibilities: A 1 : 1 2 . . . lt:Jb4!? A2: 1 2 ... b5 He cannot be satisfted with: a) 12 d5?! 1 3 e5 lt:Jd7 14 l:!.ae1 b5 1 5 'Wh3 g6 1 6 :n f6 1 1 'Wh6 lt:JdxeS! (The only chance. 1 7 . . . l:tf7 loses after 18 .i.xg6 hxg6 19 l:th3 l:tg7 20 lt:Jxd5 ! ) 1 8 fxe5 lt:Jxe5 1 9 .l:h3 .i.d6 2 0 'ifh4 .i.b7? (20 . . . ..td7) 2 1 'Lld4 lhe8 22 lt:Jcxb5! axb5 23 lt:Jxb5 'ffd7 24 lt:Jxd6 lt:Jf3+ 25 l:txf3 �xd6 26 l:th3 l:!.e7 27 g5 f5 28 .i.d4 1 -0 Geller-Gufeld, Moscow 1 970. The central structure which appears after ... d6-d5, e4-e5, where Black doesn't have the possibility ... lt:Je4, but is forced to play ... lt:Jd7, favours White in the majority of cases. b) 12 1:le8!? 1 3 g5 lt:Jd7 (D) ...

...

w

A:

12 g4 Editor's Note: As this is one of the options GMs Nunn and Gallagher give for White in their popular book Beating The Sicilian J, players of the black side need to be attentive to the

Now: b 1 ) 14 lrh3 is imprecise. White loses a tempo, because he will later play 'YWh5 anyway. For example,

32 Classical Line: White Attacks with g2-g4

1 4... ltJf8 1 5 f5 lL\e5 1 6 ltJd4 b5 1 7 'it'h5 i..d7? ! (Better i s 1 7 ... i..b7) 1 8 f6 i..d8 1 9 ltJD ! ltJxd3 ! 20 cxd3 b4 2 1 fxg7 lL\g6 22 ltJe2 and now, in­ stead of22 ....i..b 5? (Gallagher-Z.Ilic, Bern 1 989), which was too slow, Black should have played 22... 'it'c2 with counterplay. b2) After 14 1rh5 it is best for Black to continue 14... g6 1 5 �h6 i.. f8 1 6 'ifh4 b5 1 7 .:n, transposing into variation A22, discussed below. Also possible is 14 ... �b4 1 5 .l:tf3 g6 1 6 'ifh6 Af8 1 7 'ti'h4 i..g7 1 8 .l:tafl ltJxd3 1 9 cxd3 f5 20 gxf6 (20 exf5 ! ?) 20 . . . i..xf6 oo Delgado-Larduet, Ha­ vana 1 997. The plan which avoids the move . . . g6, played in the game Hawelko-Sznapik, Slupsk 1 988, is less reliable: after 14... �f8 1 5 f5 lL\e5 1 6 f6 i.. d8 1 7 ltJd4 White's position was preferable. b3) There is another way of con­ ducting the kingside attack: 14 fS lL\de5 1 5 �g3 i..f8 1 6 l:[f4 seems promising for White, Bezgodov­ Kozlov, Perm 1 997. A1:

�b4!? 12 �d7 13 gS 14 lrhS g6 15 1Wh6 l:te8 (D) This is one of the typical positions for the 1 2 g4 variation. Instead of 1 5 ... .:e8, it's probably better to play lS...bS and after 1 6 .l:tf3 to transpose into the main line (A23 below) with the radical 1 6... f5. After 15 ... lle8 both the attack and

w

defence need to be extremely precise and enterprising. Even a slight im­ precision is sufficient for the oppo­ site side to gain a decisive initiative. a) 16 .a.ad 1 ! ? (A seldom played idea that deserves attention. White brings the queen's rook into the game, combining threats on the kingside with the pressure along the d-file.) 16 ... b5 1 7 a3 ltJxd3 18 l:.xd3 i.. f8 1 9 'ii'h4 i.. b7 ( 1 9 ... i..g 7?! 20 .l:tfd 1 ) 2 0 i..d4 e5 2 1 fxe5 ltJxe5 2 2 .l:th3 h 5 2 3 gxh6 �h7 2 4 'iVf4 .l:te7 2 5 ltJd2 ! with advantage to White, G.Mainka­ Martinovic, Dortmund 1 988. b) 16 llf3 Af8 1 7 'ilfh4 'ifds! 18 1'ff2 (White gives up the idea of a direct attack) 1 8 ...f6 1 9 h4 b5 20 .l:tg3 fxg5 2 1 hxg5 i.. g 7 22 i.. fl ltJc6 23 :d1 b4 24 ltJa4 'fiic7 with chances for both sides, Ciobanu-Lupu, Odor­ heiu 1 993 . Worthy of consideration is 18 l:lh3 h5 ( 1 8 ...h6!?) 1 9 ltJe2 with the idea lL\g3. A2:

12 bS (D) Preference should be given to this continuation.

Classical Line: White Attacks with g2-g4

w

13 g5 13 ffh3! ? is a cunning move with which the talented Bojan Knezevic scored two effective victories against renowned grandmasters. The fact that Knezevic has the variation 4 . .. 'i¥b6 in his repertoire as Black leads to the conclusion that the continuation 1 3 fVh3 i s the result of his home analy­ ses and should not be underestimated. White threatens to play g4-g5 after e4-e5 and thereby eliminate the de­ fence of the h7-square. Black has to be very cautious: a) 13 . b4? is a mistake because White obtains a winning attack by force after 1 4 e5 ! , e.g. 1 4.. . dxe5 1 5 g 5 lLlh5 1 6 ..txh7+ 'ifr>xh7 1 7 fVh5+ �g8 1 8 l:!.f3 ..txg5 19 fxg5 lLle7 20 'Lle4 f5 21 gxf6 4Jf5 22 l:!.h3 1 -0 B. Knezevic-Kurajica, Zaragoza 1 996. This is an instructive example which shows that the d3-bishop must always be kept under control. b) With the continuation 13...g6, which in a radical way eliminates the threats to the h7-square, Black was not successful either in the game B. Knezevic-Barlov, Yugoslavia eh, ..

33

Belgrade 1 998. There followed 14 g5 lLlh5 15 f5 b4 1 6 lLla4 exf5 17 exf5 'Llg7? (A mistake that enables White to sacrifice the exchange and gain an irresistible attack.) 1 8 lLl b6 .i.xf5 1 9 Axf5 lLlxf5 20 l:!.xf5 gxf5 2 1 lLld5 'ii' d7 22 lLld4 lLle5 23 lLlxf5 .i.d8 24 l:!.fl 'ii' e6 25 lLlf4 �d7 26 .i.d4 l:ta7 27 lLld5 l:!.b7 28 'ii' h6 f6 29 lLlde7+ �fl 30 'Wxf6+ We8 3 1 lLlg7+ 1 -0. The centralisation of the white knight should not have been allowed. Cor­ rect is 1 7 . .. .l::t b 8! when in the case of 1 8 'it'h4 l:Ie8 1 9 l:!.ae 1 lLle5 20 f6 ..ttE 2 1 ..te2 Black has 2 1 . . .'ii' c 6. These two examples clearly dem­ onstrate the hidden dangers lying be­ hind the continuation 1 3 Vit'h3. What is the best defence for Black? c) The usual 13 it)b4 is also un­ satisfactory because of 1 4 e5! dxe5 1 5 fxe5 'ffx e5 1 6 .i.f4! �c5+ 1 7 �g2! .i.b7+ 1 8 'it>g3 and Black loses the queen. d) Apart from Barlov's 1 3 . . . g6 where, despite Black's defeat, mat­ ters are not quite clear, Black has at his disposal 13 it)d7. In that case one of the possible variations is 1 4 e 5 g 6 1 5 exd6 �xd6 1 6 lLle4 J.. e7 1 7 f5 exf5 1 8 gxf5 lLlde5 19 �g3 l:lfe8 20 fxg6 (20 a4!?) 20 . . .hxg6 21 lLlf6+ ..txf6 22 l:Ixf6 fie?. Thanks to the centralised e5-knight, Black's position is defensible. 13 it)d7 The position with the inflexible 13 ..ltle8?! arose by a different move order in the game Fischer-Saidy, New York 1 966. Black quickly faced se...

...

.

34 Classical Line: White Attacks with g2-g4

rious problems after 1 4 'it'h5 g6 1 5 'it'h6 f5 1 6 exf5 gxf5 1 7 lt:Jd4 lt:Jd8 1 8 l:tae 1 lt:Jg7 1 9 l:tf3 lLlfl 20 'iVh4 lt:Jh8 2 1 l:lh3 h5 22 �e2 etc. 14 'lfh5 (D) The most enterprising plan. Before considering thi s in detail, let us men­ tion that the attacking plan involving the march of the h-pawn is possible but less dangerous. For example: 14 .x::la d1 l:le8 15 l:tf2 �f8 16 h4 l:tb8 1 7 h5 lt:Jb4 1 8 ...g3 i.b7 19 ...h3 lt:Jc5 20 g6 fxg6 21 hxg6 h6 22 ll:Jd4 ..tc8 23 'ifh5 lt:Jd7 24 An lLlf6 25 'ifh4? (This mistake allows Black to achieve a winning position by force) 25 . . .e5! 26 fxe5 lt:Jg4 27 l:.xfl ._,b6! 28 i.f2 dxe5 and Black had a deci­ sive advantage, Shamkovich-Z.I\ic, Saint John 1 988. Another less direct approach was seen in the game Sarnrnalvuo-Grivas, Moscow OL 1 994, in which after 14 a3 b4 15 axb4 lt:Jxb4 1 6 ll:Jd4 l:tb8 17 l:tf2 l:le8 18 f5 lt:Je5 1 9 'i!ie2 exf5 20 lt:Jxf5 .i.f8 there appeared a com­ plex position with mutual chances. White's direct attack with heavy pieces along the h-file seems danger­ ous and Black has to be extremely skilful and cool-blooded in his de­ fence. A single mistake is enough to lose the game. Nevertheless, although Black's situation seems dangerous, in practice players on several occasions have demonstrated the vitality of their positions. There are several modes of de­ fence. Different types of positions arise when Black plays:

B

A2 1 : 1 4 ... l:te8 (followed by ... ll:Jf8 without the move ... g6), A22: 14 . .. g6, and A23 : 1 4 liJb4. . . .

A21: 14 15

.x::lf3 (D)

.x::le8

B

Now: a) 15 �b4 1 6 .il.d4 (With the idea 1 6 ... g6? 1 7 'trxh7+ ! ) 1 6 ... e5 1 7 fxe5 lUxe5 1 8 AxeS g6 1 9 l:txfl 'it'a7+ 20 .i.d4 gxh5 \12-\12 Schiifer­ Liicke, Munster 1 992. b) 1 5 ... .ab7 16 l:th3 liJf8 1 7 l:tfl b4 1 8 liJd1 g6 1 9 'i:Vh4 ( 1 9 'ffh6) 19 ... a5 20 f5 exf5 2 1 exf5 lt:Je5 22 ...

Classical Line: White Attacks with g2-g4

4Jd4?! (I don't see how Black would defend himself in the case of 22 f6 ! 'iWc6 23 .l:.g3 �d8 24 'ii'h6 4Je6 25 4Jd4) 22 . . . �d8 23 f6 h5 24 �e2 'iWd7 25 .l:.g3 4Jh7 26 .i.xh5 gxh5 27 'i!Vxh5 �h8 28 :f4 4Jg6 and Black managed to parry White's threats and win the game, Stebbings-Plaskett, London 1 993. c) 15 �18 (It is better to play this move after White 's :h3) 1 6 e5 g6 (If 1 5 . . . dxe5?, then 1 6 .i.xh7+ 4Jxh7 17 .l:.h3 wins) 1 7 exd6 'ii'xd6 1 8 'ifh6 f5 1 9 gxf6 ..i.xf6 20 4Je4 'it'd8 21 4Jxf6+ 'it'xf6 2 2 .i.e4 .i.b7 23 .l:.d l (23 4Jc5) 2 3 . . . :ac8 2 4 ..i.c5 Yz-Yi Nekrasov-Fomichenko, Krasnodar 1 996. Although in the last two examples Black scored good results, the impres­ sion is that in both games he had a hard time. The most economical de­ fensive set-up for Black - where he plays . . . 4Jf8 without the prior ma­ noeuvre ...g6, ... ..i.f8, ... �g7 - is not entirely reliable. It's true that the f8knight is a powerful kingside de­ fender, but it's not a sufficient guarantee for a successful defence.

35

B

...

A22: g6 14 1 5 'ffh6 (D) In the case of the straightforward attack 15 'ffh4 .l:.e8 1 6 :n h5 1 7 4Je2 .i. f8 1 8 4Jg3 .i.g7 1 9 4Jxh5 gxh5 20 'it'xh5 4Jf8 2 1 c3 .l:.e7 22 l:g3 .i.b7 Black had sufficient de­ fensive resources in the game David­ B. Knezevic, France 1 997.

After the correct 1 5 'it'h6, Black has in practice played two continuations. 15 This is the stronger. The other is 15 f6 e.g. 1 6 4Jd4 4Jxd4 (Weak is 16 ... 'Llc5? 17 f5 'Lle5 18 fxe6 'Llxe6 1 9 tLld5 'i!Vd8 20 tLlxe6 J&.xe6 2 1 .i.b6 'i!Vd7 22 gxf6 .td8 2 3 tLle7+ and White won, B.Knezevic-Zivic, Kladovo 1 994) 1 7 ..i.xd4 d5 ! ( 1 7 ... :n?! 1 8 f5 .i. f8 1 9 'it'h3! ± Ulybin­ Akopian, USSR 1988) 1 8 exd5 .i.c5 1 9 .i.xc5 'ii'x c5+ 20 l:!f2 exd5 2 1 .i.xg6 hxg6 22 'iVxg6+ �h8 2 3 l:1 e 1 l:!a7 24 b4 'i!fxb4 25 'it'h6+ Yz-Yz Schiifer-Kohlweyer, Germany 1 992. Af8 16 l:ln 16 . . . b4? loses after 17 :h3 tLlfS 1 7 f5. 17 'ffh4 (D) This is an important position for the g2-g4 variation. In practice, it can also appear from the move order char­ acteristic of the Sozin line: 1 e4 c5 2 tLlf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 tLlxd4 tLlf6 5 tLlc3 tLlc6 6 .i.c4 'ii'b6 7 tLlb3 e6 8 .i.e3 'i!fc7 9 f4 .i.e7 10 0-0 0-0 1 1 .i.d3 a6 1 2 g4 b5 1 3 g5 tLld7 1 4 'ifh5 ...

36 Classical Line: White Attacks with g2-g4

g6 1 5 'it'h6 .l:.eB 1 6 .l:.f3 �fll 1 7 �h4 (We see that White compensated for the loss of tempo �c4-d3 by playing not �d1 -f3-h5 but directly �d1-h5).

B

The dynamic position above re­ quires a concrete approach and en­ terprising play by both sides. From the existing examples from practice it is not easy to conclude which of Black's defensive plans is superior. b4 17 It seems that this is a useful inter­ mediate move in this particular posi­ tion. The point is that White plans to attack with f4-f5 and in the event that the c3-knight has been chased away, Black may be able to answer f4-f5 with . . . exf5, not worrying about the d5 square. 17 ...Ab7?! is definitely weaker: 1 8 l:th3 h6 1 9 gxh6 �h7 20 :n Jle7 2 1 'it'f2 l:g8 22 'Lld2 'Llb4 23 'Llf3 ± Z.Markovic-Martinovic, Niksic 1 997. The alternative is 17...Jlg7 when: a) 18 J:lafl ! ? �b7 ( 1 8 . .. b4) 1 9 f5 (Probably 1 9 l:th3 lt:lfll 20 f5 is bet­ ter and after 20. . b4 2 1 f6 bxc3 22 .

fxg7 �xg7 it is less favourable for Black that his bishop is on the b7 square) 1 9 . . . b4 20 f6 �h8 2 1 'Lldl lt:lce5 22 l:h3 'Llfll 23 .li.d4 'Llxd3 24 cxd3 e5 25 �f2 �c8 26 l:lg3 lt:le6 27 i.e3 'ii' c 2 and Black obtained counterplay in A . Martin-Garcia Ilundain, Spain 1993. b) 18 l:lh3 lZ:lf8 19 f5 and now: b 1 ) 19 ... exf5 20 'Lld5 �d8 2 1 �b6 is in White 's favour, b2) while in case of 19 ...Axc3? there follows 20 f6 ! with the inde­ fensible attack as in the game Akopian-Prakash, Mamaia 1 99 1 . After 20 . .. �xf6 2 1 gxf6 h5 22 'i!Vf4 e5 23 1Wh6 'Lle6 24 ""h1 'i¥d8 25 1:.fl Black resigned since he is de­ fenceless against 26 l:rxh5 and 27 l:g l . b3) 1 9... b4! 20 f6 (Forced because after the knight move there would follow 20 . ..exf5 and White does not have the 'Lld.5 option.) 20 ... bxc3 2 1 fxg7 �xg7 22 bxc3 e5 23 .l:.f3 �e6 24 .l!tafl lt:la5 25 'Lld4 exd4 26 �xd4+ f6 27 'it'h6+ ""g8 28 llxf6 l:leb8 29 h4! (29 f!f7? 'it'xf7 30 l:txf7 �xf7 3 1 �g7+ 'ltr>e8) 29 ... lt:lc6 30 h5 lt:lxd4 3 1 cxd4 �xa2. This analy­ sis is by Ulybin and Lysenko (Jnf­ onnator 66). Further they recommend 32 d5 !? or 32 e5!? with the idea .te4, assessing the positions in both cases with the unclear sign ( oo ). 18 llh3 Weaker is 1 8 'Lldl �g7 19 'Llf2 ( 1 9 l:th3 !?) 1 9 . . . f5 (Or 1 9 . . . 'ftfd8 20 l:h3 h5 2 1 f5 exf5 22 exf5 lLlde5 23 �e4 gxf5 24 i.d5 f4 25 .txf4 �xh3

Classical Line: White Attacks with g2-g4

26 'ifxh3 l:tc8 27 'ifxh5 liJe7 28 Ae4 liJ7g6 29 Ae3 liJc4 + A .Martin­ Eiguezabal, Alicante 1 989) 20 gxf6 �xf6 2 1 'i¥g3 'Ot>h8 22 :n �b7 oo Gul l aksen-Mochalov, Debrecen 1992. h5 18 19 itle2 (D)

B

Now: a) 19 ...Ag7 when: a 1) 20 itlg3 a5 2 1 l:!.fl a4 22 liJd2 liJc5 when unclear complications arose after the direct attack 23 liJxh5 gxh5 24 'i!Vxh5 in Schurade-Borriss, East Germany 1 989. The game con­ tinued 24 . . . liJxd3 25 cxd3 l2Jd4 26 e 5 ! ? (26 'Ot>h 1 ) 26 . . . liJf5 27 liJe4 lUxe3 (Interesting is 27 ... �b7 28 lbf6+ 'Ot>f8 29 llc1 'i!Vd8) 28 CUf6+ 'Ot>ffl 29 'ifh8+ �xh8 30 l:!.xh8+ xg5 33 l:tg8+ �h6 White would have noth­ ing better than perpetual check) 32 l:txa8 'Ot>g6 33 f5+ and White won. a2) 20 Dn Axb2? 2 1 f5 exf5 22 liJf4 liJe7 23 exf5 liJf8 24 liJxh5

37

gxh5 25 'ir'xh5 liJxf5 26 liJd4 lll h6 27 gxh6 �xh3 28 'it'g5+ liJg6 29 'iVf6 1 -0, Ulybin-N.Kirov, Capelle la Grande 1 996. The capture on b2 was overoptimistic, but the line 20 . . itlf8 21 liJd2 .i.xb2? ! (2 1 . . . l:!.b8) 2 2 'Llc4 .tg7 2 3 lll b 6 l:!.b8 24 liJxc8 l:bxc8 25 f5 is also in White ' s favour according to Ulybin and Lysenko. b) 19... a5!? (In cold blood Black hurries with his counterplay on the queenside.) 20 itlg3?! .i.a6 21 �xa6 l:xa6 22 CUxh5 gxh5 23 'tlfxh5 �g7 24 1i'h7+ 'it;fl! 25 l:tfl a4 + Ulybin­ Ruban, Kursk 1 987. To assess the validity of the continuation 1 9 ... a5, it is necessary to test in practice the position arising after the superior 20 Ilfl instead of the committal move 20 'Llg3?! . .

A23: itlb4 14 This is the introductory move for a defensive system that essentially differs from the two previously ex­ amined ones. The standard move . .. lll b4, as in many other positions, is useful here too. The knight controls the d5 square and, if necessary, can eliminate White ' s light-squared bishop. The control of the d5-square will enable Black to take a radical action on the kingside with . . . f7-f5, with which he parries White's threats along the h-file. This theme gives the variation a completely independent character.

38 Classical Line: White Attacks with g2-g4

15 :o BTSJ says that 15 f5!?, to fore­ stall Black's planned reaction, de­ serves consideration. g6 15 15 lle8 transposes into the game Schiifer-Liicke, given above in A2 l . 1 6 .h6 f5! 17 exf5 (D) Less enterprising is 17 gxf6 l:txf6 1 8 l:g3 ( 1 8 tlJd4 g5 !) 1 8 ... t2Jf8 1 9 t2Jd4 ( 1 9 e5?! dxe5 2 0 fxe5 l: f7 2 1 .i.e4 .i.b7 � ) 1 9 . . tlJxd3 ( l 9.. . e5? 20 tLlf5 ± ) 20 cxd3 .i.d7! with a satis­ factory position for Black, Bellia­ Grivas, Vinkovci 1 989. .•.

.

t2Jxd3 19 �d5 (If 19 l:th3 l:tf7 20 tlJd5 'it'b7 21 tlJxe7+ l:xe7 22 cxd3 'ii' d 5 and B l ack i s doing fine) l 9.. .'iVd8 2 0 cxd3 (20 �d4? ! tlJ3e5!) 2 0.. �b7 2 1 �d4 l:lf7 and Black i s O.K., or here 20 �xe7+ 't!Vxe7 21 cxd3 .i.b7 and Black has promising play once more. 1s :n 19 .i.d4 19 .i.xf5 doesn't work because after 1 9 . . gxf5 20 g6 B lack has 20 . . l:tg7. �fB (D) 19 .

.

.

w B

exf5 17 18 l:th3 It should be noticed that in this l i n e B l a c k sti l l hasn ' t p l a y e d . . . .i.b7. Is the reduced control o f the d5-square significant, that is, can White utilise this square in a concrete way? A brief analysis shows that Black has a satisfactory defence in all lines. For instance: 1 8 �d4 tlJc5, or 18 a3

The only adequate defence; Black keeps his head above water. Compare this position with the one from the game Chandler-Gufeld, Dortmund 1 983 (Variation B 1 1 ). Things are more favourable for Black here since White doesn't have the move 20 .i.xf5 because of the sim­ ple 20 .. .i.xf5. In the above-men­ tioned game the moves l:tae 1 and ... .i.b7 were interpolated, so White had the decisive 2 1 .i.xf5. If White now continues 20 l:te1 , .

Classical Line: White Attacks with g2-g4

Black is not forced to play the in­ correct 20 ... Ab7? 2 1 Axf5 ! gxf5 22 g6 ! + - , but i n stead chooses 20.../Qxd3. Then in the case of 2 1 lt:ld5 'it'b7 22 lhe7 l:xe7! (22 . . . 'ifxd5? 23 'ifg7+) 23 lt:l f6+ �f7 Black' s king has escaped while his opponent (the white king) has be­ come the target. The positions from chapters A and B are very similar so it's necessary to compare them in order to have an adequate opinion about the line. B:

12 llael Everything in this section needs to be compared with line C in Chapter 2, where Black' s alternative 1 2'h moves and White's alternative 1 3'h moves are analysed. 12 b5 Nunn points out that 12 .../Qd7 may be best, when if 1 3 g4 (avoiding the transpositions discussed in Chap­ ter 2) 1 3 ... b5 1 4 g5 Ab7 we reach line B l l below. We shall see there some improvements for Black on the lines given in BTSJ. 13 g4 (D) This is aggressive but perhaps not as dangerous as 13 e5 (Chapter 2, line C35) which is Nunn's rec­ ommendation. We see that this variation differs from the previous one because the moves .:tae 1 and (usually) ... Ab7 have been interpolated. It's difficult to say for which side it is the more favourable.

39

B

At first glance, it seems that 1 2 .l:.ae 1 slows down the whole idea of the g2-g4 attack but it is unsafe to generalise because, in many posi­ tions, the e-file becomes a very im­ portant factor if the centre is opened. On the other hand, notice the fact that in the most common move order (line 8 1 below) Black lacks the de­ fensive potential of his bishop along the c8-h3 diagonal. Therefore, although the bishop can play an active role on the b7-square, one should seriously consider the variations where Black postpones the development of this piece. The alternatives are: B1 : 1 3 . .. Ab7 B2: 1 3 ... lt:ld7 a) 13 ... b4?! 1 4 lt:le2 d5?! (Black has no justification for such activity) 1 5 e5 lt:le4 16 lt:lg3 f5 1 7 exf6 lt:lxf6 1 8 g5 lt:le8 19 'ifh5 g6 20 J.xg6! +­ Videki-Varga, Harkany 1 993. Here 14 ... a5, with the idea ... J.a6, is a bet­ ter plan. b) 13 ... g6 14 g5 lt:lh5 1 5 lt:le2 f6 1 6 lt:lg3 lt:lxg3 1 7 'ifxg3 fxg5 1 8 fxg5 e5 oo Dervishi-Bellon, Bern 1 996.

40 Classical Line: White Attacks with g2-g4

B1:

Ab7 13 This is the main continuation. �d7 14 g5 15 Ylh5 (DJ 1 5 Ylh3 c auses Black fewer problems. After the correct 1 5 . . . CZJ b4 there are several examples from tournament practice where, as a rule, there arose very complex positions with m utual chances. Black achieved satisfactory results. a) 16 a3 is not in the spirit of the sharp g2-g4 system. White's attack loses its intensity. For example, 16 ... lbxd3 17 cxd3 ctJc5 18 CZJc 1 d5 1 9 exd5 l:ad8! (With the pawn sac­ rifice Black achieves excellent play along the diagonal a8-h 1 ) 20 d4 ctJa4 21 4Jxa4 bxa4 22 dxe6 'i!Vc6 23 ext7+ %1xt7 24 lbd3 i..xg5 ! 25 ctJe5 'it'h 1 + 26 xf7 23 'ifxh7+ and White wins. The same situation

was encountered in the game Bellia­ Grivas, Variation A23. The differ­ ence is that here l:ael has been played instead of l:tf3. Since the rook is still on fl , Black shouldn't hurry with ... f5. a2) 16 ... �xd3 or 16 ...De8 are better options while 16 ...Ab7?! 1 7 !l f3 f5 transposes into the game Chandler-Gufeld, which is bad for Black - see B l l above. b) Worth considering is the con­ tinuation of Dabetic-B.Knezevic, Igalo 1 994, where Black at once ap­ plied radical solutions. After 15 ... 1Llxd3 ! ? 16 cxd3 b4 17 li:Jdl f5 1 8 li:Jf2 g6 he achieved a satisfactory game. The position after 14 ... I:le8 ap­ peared in the game Yagupov-A. Kharitonov, Russia 1 996, via the move order characteristic for the Scheveningen: I e4 c5 2 li:Jf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 li:Jxd4 li:Jf6 5 lt:Jc3 e6 6 f4 a6 7 'iYD \i'b6 8 li:Jb3 lt:Jc6 9 �e3 'f!ic7 10 jLd3 ..te7 1 1 0-0 0-0 1 2 l:tae l b5 1 3 g4 li:Jd7 1 4 g 5 l:!.e8. There followed: g6 15 1rh5 16 1Vh6 According to Kharitonov, 1 6 'ii'h 4!? i s better. 16 Jlf8 17 flh4 Ag7 1s Do 1rd8!? A useful move. Apart from mov­ ing away from the potential attack li:Jd5, Black - at the appropriate moment - will be able to react with .. .f5 or ... f6.

Classical Line: White Attacks with g2-g4

19 llh3 20 f5 This is a committal move but it's di fficult to find any other way to strengthen the pressure against the black king. In the case of 20 /Odl, with the idea lLlf2-g4, Black would react with 20 . .. f5 !?. exf5 20 21 exf5 tOes (D) Black has managed to achieve the optimal defensive set-up. Yagupov-Kharitonov is a signifi­ cant game for the whole variation 1 2 l:be I , 1 3 g4. In the further course of the game Black unexpectedly quickly achieved counterplay and won the game. From the diagram, there followed 22 �e4 .txf5! 23 ..txf5 gxf5 24 lt:ld5 lt:lg6 25 ..,h5 l:te5 26 Wf3 lt:le6 27 l:th5 f4 28 ..tf2 lt:lxg5 29 ..,d3 Wd7 30 l:txe5 ..,g4+ 3 1 �fl dxe5 32 lLlc7

43

w

..,xh5 33 lt:lxa8 e4 34 Wd8+ ..tf8 35 h4 lt:le6 0- 1 . From the examples given above, we see that in the variation 12 l:.ae l b5 1 3 g4 ..tb7, as a rule, there ap­ pear extremely complex positions where Black faces not an easy task of p arry i n g W hi t e ' s ki n g s i d e threats. In the future Black might pay more attention to the continu­ ation 1 3 . . . lt:l d7, postponing the fianchetto of the c8-bishop.

4

W h ite Plays Jld 2

In the variation discussed in this chapter, White doesn't play .te3. It's not necessary to chase away the black queen from the active b6-square be­ cause Black will in any case be forced to move the queen in order to play with the b-pawn. In the present line, White typically plays the useful pro­ phylactic move ..t>h 1 , which enables the active f2-f4 advance, and devel­ ops his dark-squared bishop on d2. Compared to the previous exam­ ples, this introduces two new factors. Firstly, the bishop indirectly controls the b4-square. Secondly, after the l::.ae 1 move has been made, the threat e4-e5 becomes more real, so in the majority of cases Black is forced to react with . . . e6-e5 himself at the ap­ propriate moment. (1 e4 c5 2 �f3 �c6 3 d4 cxd4 4 �xd4 tWb6 5 tQb3 �f6 6 �c3 e6 7 Ad3 a6 8 0-0 Ae7) 9 Wh1 9 ffe2 d6 usually leads by trans­ position to the main line A below. An original way to treat the line was shown by Black in the game Tal­ Gufeld, Moscow 1 970. In that game

after 9 d5 I 0 exd5 exd5 ! I i..g 5 .tg4 12 'i!fd2 0-0-0 1 3 :re 1 'f!lc7 White had no easy task to refute Black's risky play ( Y2- Y2, 27 moves). 9 d6 10 f4 1rc7 11 Ad2 After 1 1 flf3 it is best to trans­ pose into the main line B with 1 1 0-0 in view of ll �b4? ! ( 1 1 . . . b5? is also premature because of 12 e5) 1 2 'i!fg3 ctJh5 1 3 'ilf3 ctJf6 14 �d2 d5 1 5 e5 ctJd7 1 6 �e2 ! ;!; Matulovic-Klaric, Vinkovci 19 82. 11 0-0 {D) ...

. . .

. . .

w

In the line where the bishop is de­ veloped on d2, White can develop the

White Plays �d2 45

queen on e2 or f3. Both continuations have their significance and are given separately: A: 12 'li!Ve2 and B: 1 2 'lWf3 . Of these, 1 2 'i!Vf3 is the more dan­ gerous for Black.

A:

b5 12 1te2 13 a3 The most often played continua­ tion. White secures the knight' s po­ sition on c3, but in a way this move will also help B l ack to obtain counterplay on the queenside more easily. The point is that the bishop's presence on d2 won't prevent Black · from playing .. . b5-b4 later. The al ternative where White doesn' t commit himself with the a­ pawn is perhaps better and should also be seriously considered. If the knight is chased away from the c3 square with the ... b4 move, it will play an active role either on the kingside or in the centre, moving via d1 to the f2 or e3 squares. The examples in which White immediately played 13 �ae1 are given below: a) 13 ... �d7 1 4 l:tf3 g6 ( 1 4 ... l:te8) 15 'YWf2 �b7 16 .l:.h3 l2Jb4 17 a3 l2Jd3 18 cd3 l2Jc5? ! ( 1 8 . . . .i.f6 ! ) 19 l2Jd4 j,f6 20 f5 'i!Ve7 21 .i.h6 l:tfe8 22 :tfl exf5 23 l2Jxf5 ± Vujakovic­ Djukic, Zlatibor 1 989. b) 13 ...�b7 14 e5 dxe5 1 5 fxe5 l2Jd7 16 �f4 l2Jb4 17 l2Je4 l2J xd3 1 8 cxd3 'li!Vb6 1 9 .Ae3 YWd 8 2 0 .i.d4

�h8 2 1 l:tf4 l:tc8= Dvoirys-Akopian, USSR 1 99 1 . c) 1 3...b4 1 4 'Lldl a5 1 5 c3 e5 1 6 'Lle3 exf4 1 7 .l:.xf4 li:le5 1 8 l2Jf5 .l:.e8 19 l2Jbd4 �f8 oo Saltaev-Todorov, Cappelle la Grande 1 995. 13 �b7 13 ...l:lb8 is an acceptable alterna­ tive. The rook supports the b-pawn, which is quite reasonable if White has played a2-a3. For example, 1 4 .l:.ael b4 1 5 axb4 li:lxb4 and now: a) 16 �b5 axb5 1 7 �xb4 e5 1 8 'Lld2 ( 1 8 .i.xb5 li:lxe4) 1 8 . . . �g4 1 9 'li!V f2 �e6 2 0 c 3 l2Jg4 2 1 'YWg3 exf4 22 'lWxf4 l2Je5 23 �c2 l2Jc6 24 �a3 b4 25 cxb4 l2Jxb4 and Black can't be dissatisfied with the position (Santo Roman-Kouatly, Lyon 1 988). b) 16 e5 dxe5 17 fxe5 l2Jd7, and not l2Jd7? 1 7 li:lb5 axb5 1 8 �xb4 li:lc5 1 9 exd6 ..txd6 20 �xc5 ..txc5 2 1 �xh7+ �xh7 22 'lWh5+ �g8 23 l2Jxc5 with a strategically winning position for White, Nikolenko­ Egiazarjan, Ashkhabad 1990. 14 �ae1 (D) The diagram below shows a very similar position with the difference

B

46 White Plays itd2

that a2-a4 and ... b7-b6 have been played instead of a3 and ...b5 . There are two examples in which this very position was tested: a) 14 g6 1 5 f5 'Lle5 1 6 .th6 l:.fe8 1 7 fxe6 fxe6 1 8 CLJd4 1i'd7 19 .tc4 lt:lxc4 20 'ii'xc4 d5 2 1 exd5 exd5 22 'ii' d 3 CLJg4 oo Salai-Bakalar, Brno 1 990. b) 14 ... ttlb4 1 5 CLJd4 lt:lxd3 1 6 cxd3 1i'd7 1 7 b4 l: fc8 1 8 l:. b l l:tc7 1 9 b5 a5 20 'it'f2 l:.ac8 2 1 lt:lde2 ili Edelman-Cabrilo, New York 1 990. b4 14 �xb4 (D) 15 axb4 ...

w

18 f5 .tf6 1 9 .te3 l:.ae8 20 'ifh5 g6 21 'ii'h 3 exf5 22 exf5 .tt e 7 23 fxg6 hxg6 24 lt:lf5 l:te5 oo Schumi-Lutz, Budapest 1 989. c) 16 ttlbS axb5 17 .txb4 e5 ! (A timely reaction that solves all Black's problems): c l ) White didn't achieve any ad­ vantage in the game Gallagher­ Avshalumov, Tbilisi 1988 where after 18 .d2 l:.ab8 1 9 fxe5 dxe5 20 .1L.xe7 'ii' x e7 2 1 'ii' e 3 l:.fc8 a draw was agreed. c2) In the event of 18 AxbS 'Llxe4 1 9 .td3, it ' s superficial to play 19...d5? as happened in the game P.Popovic-Z.Ilic, Saint John 1 988, where Black had problems after 20 .i.xe7 'ii'x e7 21 fxe5 l:tac8 (21 ... 'ifxe5 22 lt:lc5) 22 lZ:la5 .ta8 23 .txe4 dxe4 24 'Llc4 'ifc5 25 b3 ± . B ut the continuation 1 8 .txbS shouldn't worry Black because Black could have played 19 f5! 20 fxeS dxe5 21 .txe4 .i..xe4 22 lt:ld2 .tb7 and if 23 'Wxe5 then Black has 23 ... .txg2+ 24 �xg2 't!Vg5+ with a slight advantage. c3) 18 c3 l:tfb8 ( 1 8 . . . l:t fd8 1 9 lt:ld2 ± ) 1 9 'Lld2 .tc6 2 0 .i.c2 l:te8 21 'iff2 (21 f5 d5 '=i= ) 2 l . ..'i!Va7 with equal play, P. Popovic-Barlov, Yugo­ slavia 1 988. ...

White has tried three continuations in this position. The thrust 1 6 e5 is premature. The other two, 1 6 lt:ld4 and 1 6 CLJb5 lead to a complex play and practice has shown that Black's chances are not weaker: a) 16 eS?! tlJe8 1 7 CLJb5 axb5 1 8 .txb4 dxe5 1 9 .txe7 11fxe7 20 fxe5 l:ta2 21 CLJd4 l:txb2 22 ll:Jxb5 g6 =i= Santo Roman-S imic, Montpellier 1 988. b) 16 ttld4 lt:lxd3 1 7 cxd3 lt:ld7

8:

1 2 •o A more active continuation. Playing 'Wh3 or 1i'g3 later, White can create some real threats sooner than in the case of 12 'ife2.

White Plays ..l.d2 47

The a2-a4 move could be interpo­ lated, but it helps Black to develop his queenside more quickly: 1 2 a4 b6 1 3 'i't'f3 .i.b7 1 4 'f!Vh3 lLlb4 1 5 f5 e5 1 6 :Iae I l:lad8 1 7 lle3 lLlxd3 1 8 cxd3 d5 19 l:lg3 'iiih 8 20 exd5 .i.xd5 :;: Soltis-Z.Ilic, Belgrade 1 988. b 5 (D) 12 This is one of the key positions of the 4 . . . 'i!Vb6 system. In the 3rd edition of ECO, for ex­ ample, it is analysed in 833/4, aris­ ing from the sequence (1 e4 c5 2 CLJf3 tLlc6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lLlxd4 CLJf6 5 tLlc3 'tWb6 6 CLJb3 et 7 .i.d3 �e7 8 0-0 a6) 9 Wh 1 'i/c7 1 0 f4 d6 1 1 'f!Vt3 0-0 1 2 i.. d2 b5. Since line B2 is recom­ mended there, with a favourable ;l;; assessment for White, one can expect many opponents to follow that course in future.

w

As in many other variations, here too White can play the position with or without the a2-a3 move. Therefore we distinguish: B 1 : 1 3 a3 and B2: 1 3 l:lae l .

Although it is diffi cult to gener­ alise, matters are more favourable for Black when White has played a2-a3 . Then his chances to create active play on the queenside are greater, and this claim has been confirmed in practice. Let us mention that 13 e5? doesn't work because of 1 3 ... dxe5 14 fxe5 lLlxe5 1 5 i.. f4 ( 1 5 'i!Vxa8? .i.b7 16 'i/a7 �xg2+) 1 5 ... CLJxf3 1 6 .i.xc7 lLlh4 :o: Kofi dis-Grivas, Portaria 1 996. B1:

13 a3 .i.b7 Now we have a further divergence. White can play: B 1 1 : 1 4 l:.!.ae 1 or B 1 2: 14 'flfh3 but in both cases Black achieves good play. Bl l : 14 l::lael b4 There is no reason to postpone this move, although it is possible to play it a move later after 14 ... g6 1 5 'ilh3. In M.Cid-Panno, Femeda Cup 1 99 1 , Black obtained very good game after 1 5 ... b4 1 6 CLJd1 ( 1 6 axb4) 1 6 . . . bxa3 1 7 bxa3 a5 1 8 a4 ( 1 8 f5) 1 8 ... lLlb4 1 9 CLJc3 d5 20 exd5 lLlxd3 21 'f!Vxd3 lLlxd5. 15 axb4 lC!xb4 16 lClb5 Or 16 lCld4 lLlxd3 17 cxd3 %labS 1 8 'iWg3?! 'i/b6 19 lll ce2 't\Yxb2 20 .i.c3 'ii' b6 + Zvara-Vokac, Prague 1 994.

48 White Plays � d2

16 axb5 lla2 17 Axb4 More logical than 17 ...l:la4 18 c3 l:ta2 although Black was successful with this move order too in the game Arnason-Gostisa, Belgrade 1 988, af­ ter 1 9 l:te2 ( 1 9 Aa3 d5 !?) 1 9 ... e5 20 fxe5 dxe5 21 il.xe7 'ifxe7 22 �xb5 (22 �b 1 ) 22 . .. tt:Jxe4 23 Itxe4 l:hb2 24 .i.. c4 Wa3 25 lLJcl? (25 'f!Ve3=) 25 . . . l:t b 1 26 �d3 l:txcl 27 l:h4 l:xfl + 28 '@'xfl g6 and Black real­ ised his material advantage. e5 18 1Vh3 b4 19 il.c3 llxb2 20 Axb4 dxeS fxeS 21 flxe7 22 Axe7 with an equal game, Kl undt­ Cabrilo, Germany 1 992. Bl2: 14

flh3 (D)

B

White threatens the direct 1 5 e5 and Black has two ways to parry this threat:

B 1 2 1 : 1 4 . .. l:tad8 and B 1 22: 1 4 . .. b4. B121 : llad8 14 b4 15 llae1 Probably the only satisfactory re­ ply. That the superficial treatment of the position leads to a quick catas­ trophe is shown by the following two examples: a) 15 ...1lfe8 1 6 l2Je2 �f8 1 7 l2Jed4 l2Jxd4? 1 8 �a5+- Thipsay­ Grivas, Manila OL 1 992. b) 15 ...1ld7?! 1 6 l2Jd5! exd5 1 7 exd5 lLlb8 1 8 .!.c3 h 6 ( 1 8 . . . g 6 1 9 l:xe7 ! ) 1 9 l:txe7 ( 1 9 l2Jd4!?) 1 9 ... l2Jxd5 ( 1 9 . . J:f.xe7 20 �xf6 gxf6 21 �f5+-) 20 �xg7 ! with a winning attack, Geenen-Goossens, Belgium 1 992. The original version of the lL\d5 sacrifice was seen in the game Tal­ Zaichik, Tbilisi 1 988. A completely different move order gave a similar position: 1 e4 c5 2 lL\f3 d6 3 d4 cd4 4 l2Jd4 l2Jf6 5 l2Jc3 e6 6 f4 a6 7 1Vf3 1Vb6 8 a3 lLl c6 9 l2J b3 'WIc7 1 0 .i.. d3 �e7 1 1 �d2 0-0 1 2 0-0 b5 1 3 l:ae l . Now instead o f the logical move 13 ...Ab7, which, after 14 Wh 1 b4, would transpose into the game Arnason-Gostisa, Belgrade 1 9 88 mentioned above, Black played the over-ambitious 13 ... b4?! . Unexpect­ edly there followed 1 4 l2Jd5 ! (The straightforward 1 4 axb4 doesn't give an advantage after 14 ... l2Jxb4 1 5 'Llb5 { 1 5 e5?! l2Jxd3 1 6 exf6? l2Jxe1 + }

White Plays �d2 49

15 . . . axb5 1 6 Axb4 ..tb7 with equal chances) 1 4 ... exd5 1 5 exd5 ..tg4 (Black immediately returns the piece. However, it was better to retreat 1 5 . . . lLlb8 or 1 5 ... lLla7 although it's obvious that White has a permanent initiative for the sacrificed piece af­ ter 1 6 axb4 ..tb7 1 7 c4 with the idea �c3, g4 etc.) 1 6 'ilt'g3 GLld5 1 7 1i'g4 lLlf6 1 8 'i!Vh3 and White had the more promising play. 16 axb4 �xb4 (D)

w

17 �b5 17 e5 lLlxd3 1 8 exf6 lLlxe 1 1 9 fxe7 .i.xg2+ 20 'iVxg2 lLlxg2 2 1 exf8+ l:txf8 22 'itxg2 is better for Black. axbS 17 18 Jlxb4 e5 We have the same position as in Variation A with the difference that the moves 'it'h3 and . . . l:!.ad8 have been played. B122:

14 b4! (D) This is the most consistent move, ...

after which White players have tried various continuations.

w

axb4 15 The fol lowing continuations, which avoid the quick elimination of his strong light-squared bishop, are a better choice for White: a) 15 �e2 bxa3 16 bxa3 e5 1 7 lLlg3 ..tc8 1 8 f5 a 5 1 9 lLlh5 a4 20 lbc 1 GLld4 oo Cam i l l eri-Grivas, Zouberi Z 1 993. b) 15 �d1 bxa3 16 %ha3 ! aS (It is important to eliminate the light­ squared bishop. Weaker is 16 ... d5 1 7 e 5 lLle4 1 8 .l:ta4 ± ) 1 7 ..tc3 Aa6 1 8 lLle3 Axd3 1 9 cxd3 l:tfb8 20 lLlg4 lLlxg4 (20 ... 'iid 8!?) 21 1Vxg4 i.f8 22 f5 e5 23 GLld2 d5 24 exd5 Axa3 25 bxa3 GLld4 26 f6 with a dangerous ini­ tiative for the exchange sacrifice, ZeiCic-Nadanian, Cannes 1 997. 15 lLlxb4 eS 16 The most challenging continua­ tion. However, in this line, where White has played �h i and ..td2, the forcing complications that arise after

50 Mite Plays .it.d2

this central break favour Black. There is one example where White aban­ doned this continuation but there, too, Black was successful: 16 tt:la5 lLlxd3 1 7 cxd3 l:ac8 1 8 fS exfS 1 9 'f!YxfS .i.. a 8 20 ltJc4 ti'b7 2 1 .igS? Jlc5 0- 1 Belotti-Sanchez, Biel 1 992. dxe5 16 17 fxe5 1fxe5 18 l:ta5 Not 18 l:txf6? lLJxd3. 18 1rd6! (lJ) 18...-*.dS loses after 1 9 lLlxd5 exdS 20 .i.. x b4 .txb4 2 1 l:xf6+, while the sacrifice 18...it:lxd3 is an­ other weaker alternative. After 1 9 l:xeS lLlxeS 20 lLlaS Ac8? 2 1 'it'g3 lLlg6 22 lLlc6 White had a clear ad­ vantage in Sharif-Z.Ilic, Cannes 1 9 89. Compare this game with Timman-Kurajica where the white bishop was placed on e3 - Chapter Two, line B l . Black's position is very sensitive and doesn't allow any waste of time. Better is 20 ... l:lab8.

w

1 9 Axh7+ lLlxh7 20 .l:Ih5 e5 ! 21 .l:Ixh7 .i.xg2+ (In this variation, the white king's position on the h l square suits Black) and now: a) 22 ffxg2? �xh7 23 .l:I g 1 g6 24 ctJe4 'f!Yb6 25 il.. c 3 ctJc6 was qui c k l y wi n n ing for B l a c k i n Geenen-Kishnev, Belgium 1 997. b) 22 Wxg2 'Yi'g6+ 2 3 .i. g5 ! �xh7! (23 ... f6? ! 24 .l:Ih5 'it'xc2+ 25 ctJd2 ± ) 24 'i:Yxh7+ �xh7 25 il.. xe7 l2Jxc2 26 �g3 (26 .i.xf8? loses after 26 ... ctJe3+ 27 �g1 ctJxfl 28 .i.c5 l:lb8 ! ) 26 ... l:tfb8 with the better end­ game for Black, Schmalts-Kishnev, Altensteig 1 993. B2:

13 l:tael This continuation poses more problems for Black. Now Black can go on: 821 : 1 3 .. . .i..b7 or 822: 1 3 . . . b4. B21: 13 14

B

Two examples from the diagram show the failure of White's attack:

ffh3 (lJ)

Ab7

White Plays �d2 51

The most unpleasant continuation. The white queen is placed most ac­ tively on the h3 square focusing on the potential weaknesses in Black's camp - the h7 and e6 pawns. 14 a3 transposes into the variation 1 3 a3, which was examined earlier, while the continuation 14 ffg3, with the idea f4-f5 and .i.h6, is less prom­ ising for White. For instance: 14 .. . b4 ( 1 4 . . . g6 or the standard 1 4 ... 'Llb4 are also playable alternatives.) 1 5 'Lld1 a5 (The plan ... b4, . . .a5 is not the best for Black. More solid is 1 5 ... 'Lld7 !?) and now: a) 16 l0f2 e5 1 7 f5 l:.fd8 1 8 �h6 .i.f8 1 9 �g5 .i.e7 20 �xf6 �xf6 2 1 'Ll g 4 .;. f8 22 'Lld2 .;. e 7 oo l . Marinkovi c - Dj u k i c , Kladovo 1 994. b) 16 e5!? (This ambitious break in the centre i s more energetic) 16 . . . 'Llh5 ( 1 6 ... 'Lld7 !?) 17 'ife3 ! g6 1 8 'Llf2 dxe5 1 9 fxe5 'Llxe5?! (An incorrect piece sacrifice although in response to other moves White would play 20 'Llg4 with the advantage.) 20 'iVxe5 .1d6 21 't!Vd4 a4 and now in­ stead of 22 .1xb4? (Kojovic-Djukic, Nis 1 994), White should have calmly continued 22 'Llc I . The variation 22 . . . �xh2 23 'Lle2 'Llg3+ 24 'Llxg3 'iVxg3 25 'Lle4 �xe4 26 .1xe4 'ifh4 27 'it'f6 clearly favours White. 14 Uad8 (DJ The best move. Black indirectly controls White ' s strong attacking piece - the d3-bishop. Now 15 e5? doesn't work because after 1 5 . . . dxe5 16 fxe5 'Llxe5 1 7 .1f4 .1d6 1 8 .1xe5

.1xe5 1 9 l:.xf6 Black has at his disposal the well-known 1 9 ... l:.xd3 ! . The alternative i s 14 ...g6, after which 1 5 e5 - played in the game Klundt-Mainka, Germany 1 990 led to forced play where Black had enough resources to defend his posi­ tion. There followed 1 5 . . . dxe5 1 6 fxe5 'Lld7 1 7 .i.f4 'Llcxe5 1 8 'ifg3 .1d6 1 9 .1xb5 axb5 20 'Llxb5 'it'b6 2 1 'Llxd6 W'xd6 22 .1xe5 'Llxe5 23 'it'xe5 'iVxe5 24 .:txe5 .:txa2 with an equal game. 15 f5! ? is probably a more prom­ ising reply to 14 ... g6. w

b4 15 a4 According to Gufeld, the opening of the position with 15 ... bxa4 is a better alternative. 16 l0d1 d5 This is the consistent follow-up to the previous move. The knight is de­ centralised, so White' s control of the central squares is weakened. 17 e5 l0e4 18 l0e3! The idea behind this move is to

52 White Plays � d2

support f4-f5 . I t is stronger than ei­ ther 18 Axe4 dxe4 19 .l:!.xe4 lZJa5 when it's obvious that Black has com­ pensation, or 18 �f2 lZJa5 1 9 lZJxa5 'ifxa5 20 b3 (20 f5? exf5 21 'ifxf5 g6 + ) 20 .. . f5 (A typical radical coun­ terattack in such a position although in this particular situation it seems simpler to play 20 .. . lZJxf2+ 21 .l:!.xf2 g6, with equal play according to Sax) 21 exf6 .l:!.xf6 22 CDg4 l:tg6 23 f5 exf5 24 l:.xf5 ;t Lobron-Gufeld, Dortmund 1 983. �h8 18 18 ... �a5 1 9 'Llxa5 'i¥xa5 20 f5 ! exf5 2 1 'Llxf5 ± . f5 19 �g4 gxf6 20 exf6 21 f5! and White's chances in this ex­ tremely complicated position are bet­ ter, Sax-Wirthensohn, Graz 1 984. B22: b4 13 This is one of those few variations within the 4 .. . 'Wb6 system where I consider the plan with the straight­ forward pawn advance on the queen­ side to be superior to the manoeuvre . . . lt:lb4. 14 /Qd1 After 14 /Qe2 .i.b7 15 'ifh3 l:tfd8 1 6 c4 ( 1 6 f5) 16 ... e5 1 7 f5 a5 1 8 .1g5? lt:lxe4 1 9 .1xe4 Axg5 2 0 f6 g6 2 1 'ifg4 .th6 Black had sufficient defensive resources in Menvielle­ Urday, Mesa open 1 992. aS 14

B

15 c4 (D) Moving the c-pawn is the best plan for White. With it he either achieves a considerable spatial ad­ vantage or underlines the exposed position of Black 's pawns on the queenside. This way of playing is also seen in the fol lowing two ex­ amples: a) 1 5 e5 lt:ld5 16 c4! bxc3 1 7 lt:lxc3 ;t Matulovi c - Marti novi c, Smederevska Palanka 1982. This is the line recommended for White in ECO. b) 15 c3 a4 (Better is 1 5 . . . bxc3) 16 lt:ld4 lt:lxd4? (Black completely lost his sense of danger and very soon was exposed to an irresistible attack.) 17 cxd4 d5 1 8 e5 CUd7 19 f5 ..ta6 20 f6 gxf6 2 1 �xh7+! 1 -0 Saltaev­ Grivas, Komotini 1 993. 15 bxc3 a4 16 Axc3 /Qxd4 17 /Qd4 18 Axd4 Aa6 19 /Qc3 'ffb 7 Y2- Yz Z.Aimasi-Grivas, K6pavogur 1 994.

White Plays �g 5

5

(1 e4 c5 2 �f3 �c6 3 d4 cxd4 4 �xd4 1!fb6 5 �b3 �f6 6 �c3 e6 7 Ad3 a6 8 0-0 Ae7) 9 Ags In this variation, the threat e4-e5 is emphasised in a similar way to the variation where White develops the bishop on d2. The active position of the white bishop on the g5-square brings more aggression into the po­ sition and there are frequent instances of sharp tactical battles that started in the early phase of the game. One of the features that disting­ uishes this variation from others is the possibility for Black to play the provocative . . .h7-h6. Both sides have to take this possibility seriously into account. Although I am not in favour of generalisations, I think that Black, in principle, should avoid this move unless it brings him some concrete advantage. Certainly, each position requires a careful approach and pre­ cise calculation, because even a slight imprecision can be costly. d6 (D) 9 9 h6 I 0 ..te3 would favour White because Black has weakened his kingside too early. The move ... h6 is more reasonable when White has al­ ready played f2-f4. The diagram position, as ex...

w

plained on page 1 36 in the Guide To Transpositions, is a form of Rauzer variation. 10 Wh1 This is considered to be the main continuation but there are two rea­ sonable alternatives: a) With 10 ffe2 White refrains from Wh 1 and plays a useful move. Since Black sooner or later neverthe­ less has to play . .. 'Wic7, White's idea is to save a tempo, that is to make the f4 move without the prophylactic Wh l . This way of playing should not be underestimated. Black players have chosen various plans: a 1 ) 10 ffc7 (Black should play this move after White played ..t>h I ) 1 1 f4 ( I I a4 b6 1 2 f4 h6 1 3 j,h4 �b7 I4 f5 lLle5 I 5 fxe6 fxe6 1 6 �xf6 il.xf6 1 7 'fVh5+ 'ii£7 1 8 'ilfh3 0-0 19 il.e2 ;t Osadchenko-Razarian, ...

54 White Play5 �g5

Kazan 1 997) 1 1 . . .h6 1 2 .ih4 b5 ( 1 2 . . . tZ:l xe4? 1 3 tZ:l xe4 .ixh4 1 4 �g4 ± ) 1 3 a3 il.b7 1 4 .ig3 ( 1 4 f5 0-0 1 5 �h1 .l:.ae8 1 6 'iWt1 .i.. d8 1 7 'iVh3 'irc8 1 8 i0d2 tZ:le5 1 9 .l:.ae1 ;t Zadrima-Krylov, Moscow OL 1994) 1 4 . . . h5 1 5 .1h4 tZ:lg4 1 6 .ixe7 'ti'xe7?! ( 1 6 ... tZ:lxe7) 17 1Wd2! 'irh4 1 8 h3 tZ:lf6 1 9 l:tae 1 ± Matulovic­ Ennenkov, Vraca 1 975. a2) 1 0 Ad7 (The idea of com­ pleting the devel opment of the queenside before castling does not promise complete equality) 1 1 'if;>h 1 flic7 1 2 a4 l:tc8 1 3 a5 tZ:le5 1 4 tZ:ld4 .i.. c6 1 5 .ie3 0-0 1 6 f4 tZ:lxd3 1 7 cxd3 � Suetin-Gulko, Moscow 1 984. a3) I O h6 1 1 .i..e 3 li'c7 12 f4 0-0 ( 1 2 ... b5) 1 3 g4 (The difference com­ pared to the variations examined ear­ lier is that Black has already played ...h6, which favours White.) 1 3 .. . tZ:lh7 and now: a3 1 ) After 14 'frf2! Black cannot prevent the advance of White's h­ pawn; in the event of 14 ... 'ft'd8 there · would fol low 1 5 .ib6. Hracek­ Ehlvest, Pula 1 997, went 14...b5 1 5 h4 tZ:lf6 and in this position White accepted a premature draw. a32) A weaker plan was chosen by White in the game Arakhamia­ Hracek, Oakham 1 990, where after 14 l:lf3?! b5 1 5 %th3 b4 16 l2Ja4 l:tb8 1 7 c3 .id7 18 e5 dxe5 19 tZ:lac5 .ic8 20 fxe5 tZ:lxe5 Black had a clear ad­ vantage. a4) We see tllat in all the above examples, Black avoided 10 0-0 but castling is a logical response and per-

haps this is the best reply to 1 0 li'e2. b) 10 a4 (D) is a positional con­ tinuation.

•..

•••

•..

Instead of preparing the advance in the centre, White is satisfied with gaining space on the queenside. This gives him a slight but not serious ad­ vantage, e.g. 10 ... tZ:la5 ( 1 0 ... ft'c7 1 1 a5 0-0 1 2 li'e2 .id7 1 3 f4 tZ:le8 1 4 .1xe7 tZ:lxe7 1 5 e 5 f5 1 6 exd6 tZ:lxd6 1 7 'if;>h I tZ:lg6 1 8 l:.ad1 � Lukin­ Anikaev, USSR eh 1 975) and now: b 1 ) 1 1 lLhaS li'xa5 1 2 .i.. d 2 'ilt'h5?! ( 1 2 . . .'ifc7 � ) 13 'ife1 tZ:lg4 14 h3 tZ:le5 1 5 .ie2 'irh4 16 1Wd1 g5 1 7 f4± Ivanovic-Piachetka, Stara Pazova 1 988. b2) 1 1 Ae3 "f!ic7 12 tZ:lxa5 flixa5 1 3 h3 ( 1 3 'ft'e l .id7 1 4 h3 l:.c8 1 5 f4 .ic6 1 6 l:.b1 'ilc7 1 7 b4 0--0 1 8 b5 .ixb5 1 9 tZ:lxb5 axb5 20 l:!.xb5 d5 !: Dorfman-Gulko, Moscow 1978) 1 3 ... .id7 14 f4 l:tc8 15 1Wd2 .ic6 1 6 f5 � Y.Griinfeld-I.Ivanov, Toronto 1 984. After 10 'if;>h l there are two main lines:

White Plays ..l.g5 55

A: 1 0 ... 0-0 and B: 1 0 . . .''ii' c 7. Another plan, 10 Jld7, is weak­ er: 1 1 j.e3 ( 1 1 a4 ltJaS 1 2 j.e3 fl/c7 1 3 ltJxaS 1WxaS 14 f4 0-0 1 S fl/e1 'f!ic7 16 aS j.c6 17 fl/g3 ;t Kudrin­ Gulko, USA eh 1 987) 1 1 ...''ii'c7 1 2 ltJa4 ltJeS ( 1 2. . .bS ! ? 1 3 tiJb6 l:tb8 1 4 ltJxd7 ltJxd7 1 5 a4 ;t ) 1 3 ltJb6 l:tb8 14 f4 ltJg6 1 S ltJxd7 'irxd7 16 a4 0-0 1 7 aS J:fe8 1 8 'iff3 l:tbc8 19 'Lld2 'tWc6 20 c4 ltJd7 2 1 b4 ± Palac­ Avshalumov, Belgrade 1 988. ...

A:

0-0 (D) 10 It should be emphasised that in practice this position often arises via the move order from the Richter­ Rauzer Sicilian: 1 e4 cS 2 ltJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 ltJxd4 ltJf6 S ltJc3 ltJc6 6 �gS 't!Yb6 7 ltJb3 e6 8 j.d3 j.e7 9 0-0 0-0 1 0 Wh1 a6.

w

h6 f4 11 This leads to massive complica­ tions where both sides have to play very precisely.

Safer is 1 1 . . .1i'c7 with the transi­ tion into the main line B, 1 0 ... 1i'c7. 1 2 Jlxf6! 12 Jlh4?! ltJxe4 is weaker. In two games from Twardon ' s practice, Black was more successful after 1 3 liJxe4 .i.xh4 1 4 ltJxd6 (Bad is 1 4 'fllh 5? .i.e7 1 s : n fS 1 6 tiJgs j.d7 1 7 ifg6 .i.xgS 1 8 fxgS tiJeS 1 9 W'hS .i.e8 20 'fih4 ltJxf3 2 1 gxf3 We3 and Black won, Stypka-Twardon, Lubnie­ wice 1 994) 1 4... tiJb4 1 S ltJc4 'f!lc7 1 6 ltJeS ltJxd3 1 7 1Wxd3 b5 1 8 c3 �b7 19 'fih3 i1..e 7 20 J:ae 1 .i.d6 with better chances for Black, Socko­ Twardon, Lubniewice 1 994. Let us mention that in cases where the black queen is on c7, the tactical attack . . . ltJxe4 is not so efficient. This can be seen in the game P.Ostojic­ Polugaevsky, Skopje 1 97 1 , where the critical position arose after the move order characteristic of the Sozin, where Black is a tempo up: 1 e4 cS 2 ltJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 ltJxd4 ltJf6 S ltJc3 ltJc6 6 .i.c4 'irb6 7 ltJb3 e6 8 0-0 .i.e7 9 'it>h1 a6 1 0 �gS 'f#c7 1 1 .i.d3 0-0 1 2 f4. Here after 12 ... h6! in the event of 13 .ilh4!? ltJxe4 White would have 1 4 .i.xe7 ltJxc3 1 S ..i.xd6 (White doesn't have this option in above ex­ ample because Black's queen is not on c7) 1 S . .. tiJxd1 1 6 �xc7 ltJxb2 1 7 .i.e4 ltJa4 1 8 ..i.f3 with an unclear position according to Polugaevsky. But, regardless of that possibility, with this move order Black is a tempo up, which is an advantage that be­ comes visible after 13 Jlxf6?! ..i.xf6

56 White Plays �g5

1 4 �h5 b5. The game went on 1 5 l:he1 �b7 1 6 e5? ! (Better is 1 6 l:.e3 CUb4 1 7 l'!g3 '1Ph8) 1 6 . . . dxe5 1 7 t0e4? (The decisive mistake. White should have played 1 7 f5 ! CUb4! 1 8 ..te4! with a n unclear position) 17 ... �e7 1 8 f5 exf5 19 .!:txf5 CUb4! and Black, eliminating White's ac­ tive pieces, achieved a winning posi­ tion. 12 Axf6 13 lrh5! 1rc7 We see that compared to Ostojic­ Polugaevsky, Black is a tempo down - he has not played ... b5, which is an important difference. Instead of 1 3 . . . �c7, according to R.Byrne, 13 .../t:}b4? is weak: 14 e5 ! dxe5 1 5 fxe5 4Jxd3 1 6 cxd3 �e7 1 7 .!:tf3 ..td7 18 .l:tg3 Wh7 19 .l:!.fl ..tes 20 �g4. 14 ];lae1 (D) The complications brought about by White in the game Gufeld-Zaichik, Daugavpils 1 978, with 14 g4 b5 1 5 e 5 led only to perpetual check after 15 . . . dxe5 1 6 g5 g6 1 7 gxf6 gxh5 1 8 .l:!.gl + 'ifi>h8 1 9 .l:tg7 �b6 20 .l:lh7+ 'Oti>g8 2 1 .l:tg7+.

From the diagram, R. Byrne­ Fedorowicz, USA eh 1977, contin­ ued 14 ... b5 1 5 l::t e 3 b4 16 CUd1 CUe7 17 l:tg3 'Oti>h8 18 4Jd2 .i..b7 19 4Jf3 lUgS 20 b3 a5 21 CUe3 (All White's pieces are directed towards the black king) 21 ... a4 22 e5 dxe5 23 CUxe5 g6! 24 'ifg4 and now, according to Byme, instead of 24... h5? 25 l:th3 CUh6 26 .!:txh5+- Black could have held his position with 24 ... �a6 ! . But even if his assessment is correct, there remains an impres­ sion that White 's chances in the variation 1 0 . . . 0-0 1 1 f4 h6 1 2 ..txf6! are better. B:

10 'llc7 (D) Now that the white king has taken a tempo to prepare f2-f4, the queen has done her job on b6.

w

B

f4 11 1 1 a4 b6 1 2 f4 ..tb7?! (It's inad­ visable to abandon the control of the e6 point quickly. Better is 1 2 ... 0-0) 1 3 f5 4Je5 14 CUd4 ± Kindermann-

White Plays �g5 57

Liberzon, Beer-Sheva 1 984. 0-0 11 The best move. The alternatives are weaker: a) In this particular position where Black has not castled, l l ... h6?! is dubious. White plays 1 2 �h4! and now 1 2 ... �xe4 1 3 tt:Jxe4 �xh4 doesn't work because of 14 'ii'g4 with a clear advantage. In the game Mednis-Gulko, Sombor 1 974, Black continued 12 Ad7 but his position after 1 3 Ag3! 0-0 14 'ii'e2 tt:Jb4 1 5 e5 tt:Je8 1 6 �e4 f5 ! 1 7 exf6 Axf6 1 8 l:tf3 was clearly weaker. b) The plan with . . . h6 also ap­ peared dubious in the game R.Byme­ Benjamin, USA eh 1 984, in which there followed l l .. Ad7 12 'ii e2 h6 1 3 �h4 gS ? (Over-optimistic) 14 �g3 with better chances for White. 13 ... �xe4? is also weak: 14 "ifxe4 �xh4 1 5 f5 ! with the initiative. The best is 13 0-0 although there too White retains the advantage. c) ll ..bS (D) is an active move. After 12 ffe2 0-0 it can transpose into the main line below. However, Black here has to reckon on the pas..•

.

...

.

w

sible 12 Axf6 with the idea that af­ ter 1 2 . . . �xf6 he sacrifices at b5 (variation c3). Some possible lines: c l ) 12 fin Ji.b7 1 3 a3 0-0-0? ! ( 1 3 ... 0-0) 1 4 Ah4 ± Ribeiro-Vitor, Lisbon 1 994. c2) 12 Ve2 ii.b7 (instead of 1 2 ... 0-0) 13 %be l b4 1 4 CLJa4? (A mistake after which White gets into trouble by force; better is 1 4 CLJd1 ) 1 4 ... CLJd7! 1 5 il..xe7 tt:Jxe7 (White has problems with his a4-knight) 1 6 e5 .ltc6 1 7 exd6 'iYxd6 1 8 Ae4 �b5 1 9 'ift2 :b8 and White lost mate­ rial, Pokojowczyk-P.Popovic, Pol­ anica Zdroj 1 982 c3) 12 Axf6 when: c3 1 ) 12 ...gxf6 (Black recaptures with his pawn, avoiding the possible sacrifice) 13 f5 b4 (Black cannot or­ ganise an adequate defence in the case of 1 3 . . . 0-0 1 4 'ifh5 and the fur­ ther �f3-h3, because the plan ...'it>h8, ... �g8 is slow - the f7 pawn is hang­ ing.) 14 tLle2 a5 1 5 tLlbd4 tt:Jxd4 16 tLlxd4 e 5 1 7 tDb5 'ifb6 18 c4 �d7 1 9 a3 ± Maciej ewski-Mochalov, Katowice 1 993. c32) 12 ... Axf6 13 Ji.xb5 !? axb5 ( 1 3 ... �xc3 ! ? 1 4 Axc6+ 'ifxc6 1 5 bxc3 'fi'xe4 1 6 'iYxd6 ± ) 1 4 tt:Jxb5 'ii' b6 1 5 CLJxd6+ 'Ot>ffi 16 e5 with com­ pensation for the sacrificed piece. Still, this was probably a better choice for Black because after 1 2 ... gxf6 he gets a positional inferiority. 12 'ffe2 12 1tf3 has not been tested in tour­ nament practice. In the case of the sharp 1 2 ... b5 (Possible is 12 . . . CLJd7)

58 White Plays �g5

13 e5 dxe5 1 4 fxe5 lLlxe5 Black seems to stand well in the coming complications because 1 5 'ifxa8? ! doesn't work due to 1 5 ... .i.b7 1 6 'f!fa7? .i.xg2+, while in the event of 1 5 'i!Vg3 Black has 1 5 . .. lLlh5. It is best for White to forget 13 e5 and instead play 13 llael, intending to respond to 1 3 . .. .i.b7 with 1 4 'ft'h3. b5 12 Possible is 12 b6 1 3 l:tae1 lLld7! (An important freeing manoeuvre in this variation) 1 4 'it'h5 .i.xg5 1 5 'irxg5 lLlb4 1 6 l:e3 'it'd8 with an equal game, Ivanovic-Chiburdanidze, Vinkovci 1 982. 13 llael (DJ The prophylactic 13 a3 favours Black: 1 3 ... .i.b7 1 4 l:tae1 h6 1 5 .i.h4 b4 1 6 axb4 lLlxb4 1 7 .i.f2 e5 1 8 fxe5 dxe5= Tiviakov-Velikov, Sochi 1 986. ...

B

phasises the threat e4-e5 but Black, although required to play precisely, has ways to deal with this threat ad­ equately. In practice Black has achieved solid positions with the continuations 1 3 . .. .i.b7 (d) and 1 3 ... lLld7 (e) that are not mentioned in ECO, while with other moves Black has hit problems: a) 13 !Qb4?! (This way of par­ rying the e5 threat is not satisfactory.) 1 4 e5 ! lLlfd5 (14 ... dxe5 1 5 fxe5 lLlfd5 1 6 lLlxd5 lLlxd5 1 7 'ife4 g6 1 8 .i.f6 ± ) 1 5 lLlxd5 ! (Stronger than 1 5 .i.xe7 Wixe7 1 6 lLle4 dxe5 1 7 fxe5 lLlxd3 1 8 cxd3 .i.d7 19 lLlbc5 .i.c6 20 'ti'g4 �h8 21 l:tf3 l:tae8 22 lLld6 f5 23 '*'d4 l:td8 24 l:.t2 Y2- � Van der Wiei-Benjamin, Wijk aan Zee 1 9 89) 1 5 . . . lLl xd5 ( 1 5 . . . exd5 1 6 Axh7+ �xh7 1 7 Wih5+ �g8 1 8 �f6 is winning for White) 16 'it'h5 g6 1 7 'ifh6 l:e8 1 8 : n .JI..:ffi 1 9 'i!Vh4 .i.b7 20 l:th3 h5 21 'irg3 ± Wang Zili. b) 13 b4?! 1 4 lLld5! exd5 15 exd5 lLlxd5 1 6 Wie4 g6 1 7 'ifxd5 ..te6 1 8 'it'e4 .i.f5 ( 1 8 . . . Axg5 19 fxg5 �xb3 20 axb3 lLle5 ! 21 'ti'xb4 lLlxd3 22 cxd3 ;I; Wang Zili) 1 9 'irc4 .i.xd3 20 cxd3 .i.xg5 21 fxg5 Wib6 22 lLld2 lLle5 23 Wih4 l:tae8 24 lLle4 ± Wang Zili-Gostisa, Belgrade 1988. c) 13 h6! ? 14 .i.h4 b4 1 5 lLld1 lLld7 16 .i.xe7 lLlxe7 17 lLle3 e5 1 8 f5 ( 1 8 l:f2 ;t Kaminski) 1 8. . . lLlf6 1 9 lLlg4 lLlxg4 20 'irxg4 f6 2 1 lLld2 .i.b7 oo Kaminski-Petrienko, Kat­ owice 1 992. This is almost the only example ofthe .i.g5 plan to be given in ECO section B33 (note 1 7). ...

...

...

After 1 3 l:ae l the key position for the 9 .i.g5 continuation arises. The same position, with the difference that White has played .i.d2 instead of .i.g5, was examined in the previous chapter. The more active Ag5 em-

White Plays .l.g5 59

d) 13 Ab7 1 4 'tWo ( 1 4 a3 b4 1 5 axb4 tt:Jxb4 1 6 l:tal h6 1 7 �xf6 .i.xf6 1 8 tLla5 Jlab8! 19 tt:Jxb7 l:lxb7 20 tLld1 tLlxd3 21 'ifxd3 .axb2 22 :txa6 l:.c8 and Black had a minimally better endgame, G.Kuzmin-Kurajica, Lyon 1 994) 14 ... tLlb4 1 5 'i!Vh3 tt:Jxd3 16 cxd3 l:.ac8 1 7 tLld4 tLle8 1 8 il..xe7 'flxe7 1 9 a3 l:tc5 20 f5 il.. c8 with a more passive but solid position for Black, Yudasin-Smirin, Moscow 1 994. In these two high-level exam...

pies White did not demonstrate how to achieve the advantage after 1 3 .. . il.. b7 . e) 1 3 /()d7 (With this move Black reduces the tension in the cen­ tre and achieves a solid game.) 1 4 1L.xe7 tLlxe7 1 5 e5 tLlg6 16 'iVf3 l:tb8 ( l 6 . . . il.. b7? 17 exd6) 1 7 exd6 'ti'xd6 1 8 tLle4 W/c7 19 tLld4 tt:Jc5 20 tLlxc5 'ii'xc5 21 c3 �b7 22 'ii'h3 l:tbd8 with a satisfactory game for Black, Kaminski-Grivas, Moscow OL 1 994. ...

6

7

. .

.

Jtb4 Variation

In the whole 2 . . . 'Llc6, 4. . .'tlr'b6 complex, there are two important lines where Black plays the move ... -'.b4. These two variations are fun­ damentally different and are given separately. In the first one, Black, as soon as the 7th move, plays .. . -'.b4 after the introductory moves: c5 e4 1 i(:}c 6 2 �f3 cxd4 d4 3 'ffb6 4 i(:}xd4 i(:}f6 5 �bJ e6 6 i(:}cJ 7 Ad3 The second, fundamentally differ­ ent variation where Black plays ... .tb4, is characterised by the moves 1 e4 c5 2 'Llf3 'Llc6 3 d4 cxd4 4 'Llxd4 'i!Vb6 5 'Llb3 'Llf6 6 'Llc3 e6 7 i.e3 'fic7 8 f4 i.b4 and it is dealt with in Chapter 7, line A. Before starting with the variation 7 .td3 .tb4, I think that here it should be mentioned that it is imprecise for White to play 7 Ae2 early, that is before Black has committed himself with the development of his dark­ squared bishop. The reason for this is the pinning 7 ... .tb4, which in sev­ eral examples from practice proved

effective: 8 0-0 0-0 (8 . . . a6 9 .te3 'f//c 7 1 0 f3 b6 1 1 'ifd2 h5 oo Li Ruofan-Zhang Zhong, Beijing 1 997) 9 �d3 i.xc3 10 bxc3 d5 1 1 exd5 exd5 1 2 .1f4 .l:te8 1 3 .l:tab 1 'Lle4! (With the idea ... �f5; this seems to be stronger than 1 3 ... 'Lle5 14 'i¥d4 't!t'xd4 1 5 'Llxd4 b6 16 'Llb5 'Llg6 1 7 -'.e3 .1a6 1 8 .l:tfe 1 :!: Fischer-Benko, Stockholm IZ 1 962) 14 c4? 'Llb4 I S '4W f3 't!t'f6 I 6 .1d3 'Llc3 1 7 .l:!be1 i.e6 I 8 �e3 'Llxd3 I 9 cxd3 dxc4 20 dxc4 'Ll xa2 + Zelcic-Kurajica, Vinkovci 1 995. Ab4 (D) 7

w

This early pin is seldom played in practice. The chief adherents of this system are V .Karasev and GM Bonsch. In practice they achieved relatively solid results with it.

7. .. �b4

The price of compromising the white pawn structure after the most often played 8 0-0 �xc3 9 bxc3 is quite high. Black, in the early phase of the game, abandons his dark­ squared bishop, which reduces his defensive potential on the kingside. This exchange determines the aims of both sides. While White's further strategy is based on the opening of the position and the attempt to organ­ ise a kingside attack, Black strives to give the game a blocked character, where in the long run his better pawn structure would be important. 8 0-0 (D) The most consistent. Other con­ tinuations where White abandoned the �g5 possibility are less energetic: a) 8 Ad2 0-0 and now: a 1 ) 9 0-0 �xc3 (9 .. . d5 10 exd5 i.xc3?! { 1 0 ...exd5 } 1 1 dxc6 �xd2 12 cxb7 �xb7 1 3 'ifxd2 ± Suetin­ Reshko, Moscow 1 966) 1 0 �xc3 e5 1 1 �h l d6 12 'i!Ve2 �e8 1 3 f4 �e6 ( l 3 . . . .)tg4! ?) 14 f5 i.xb3 1 5 axb3 �ad8 1 6 i.c4 a6 1 7 .te1 'Lld4 1 8 'i\fd3 � Polugaevsky-Reshko, Mos­ cow 1 966. a2) 9 a3 i.e7 (9... �xc3 10 �xc3 e5 1 1 0-0 d6 1 2 .i.d2 �g4 1 3 'tWe 1 �e6 14 i.e3 'f!lc7 1 5 h3 i.xb3 1 6 cxb3 d5 1 7 exd5 'Llxd5= Chuprikov­ V.Karasev, Simferopol 1 989) 1 0 f4 d6 1 1 'fll f3 e5 (Better is 1 l ...a6) 1 2 f5? ( 1 2 'Lld5 ! 'Llxd5 1 3 exd5 'Lld4 14 'Llxd4 'fixd4 1 5 0-0-0 .tf6 16 c3! 't!Ya4 1 7 f5 ! ± ) 1 2 ... 'Lld4! 1 3 'Llxd4 exd4 14 'Lld5 'Llxd5 1 5 exd5 �h4+! 1 6 g3 l:te8+ with the advantage for

Variation 61

Black, Suetin-Reshko, USSR 1 97 1 . a3) 9 f4 i.xc3 ! 1 0 .)txc3 'fie3+ 1 1 Wle2 'fllxe2+ (After 1 l .. .Wfxf4? ! 1 2 l:tfl White has the initiative for the sacrificed pawn) 1 2 'ifi>e2 e5 1 3 fx e 5 'Ll g4 1 4 'Ll d4 � Brunner­ Bonsch, Dortmund 1 990. b) 8 Ae3 Wlc7 and now 9 f4 (rec­ ommended in Beating The Sicilian J) transposes to Chapter 7, line A . White's alternative is 9 0-0 Axc3 (Forced; 9 ... 0-0?! is weak after 1 0 'Ll b 5 ! 'i!Vb8 1 1 f4 ± Gheorghiu­ Forintos, Monte Carlo 1 968) 1 0 bxc3 and now: b 1 ) 10 ...0-0 1 1 f4 d6 12 'Lld4 e5 1 3 'Llb5 W/e7 14 c4 'Llg4 15 i.d2 exf4 16 l:txf4 W/e5 with equal play, Hohelj-Kishnev, MUnster 1 993. b2) To open the position before castling and without having the dark­ squared bishop is not advisable : 10 d5?! 1 1 exd5 'Llxd5 1 2 .)tcs is clearly in White ' s favour, Oral­ Vokac, Luhacovice 1993 . ...

B

8 Axc3 In the case of 8... 0-0, White can

62

7. .. _j,b4

Variation

transpose into the main line with 9 i..g 5 i..x c3. Instead: a) 9 �a4 doesn't give any advan­ tage: 9 ... 'i/c7 1 0 c4 d5 1 1 exd5 exd5 12 cxd5 li:Je7 1 3 li:Jc3 .l:.d8 14 li:Jb5 'ile5 1 5 'ile2 Y2- Y2 J. Horvath­ Bonsch, Budapest 1 989. b) 9 .i.e3 leads into unexplored positions where it's important for Black to react promptly in the centre in order not to get into an inferior position: b l ) 9 1td8 1 0 f4 .i.xc3 1 1 bxc3 e5 1 2 c4 exf4 1 3 �xf4 d6 14 �h i li:Jg4 1 5 i.. e2 Cbge5 16 li:Jd4 Wie7 1 7 :bi li:Jxd4 Y2-Yz Y.Griinfeld-Svidler, Haifa 1 995. b2) The provocative 9 ffc7?! forcibly leads into a difficult position after 1 0 li:Jb5! 'ilb8 1 1 a3 i..e 7 12 f4 e5 1 3 c4! exf4 1 4 .i.xf4 li:Je5 1 5 c5 ± Asrian-V .Karasev, Russia 1 997. 9 bxc3 0-0 An unavoidable move. In this sys­ tem Black avoids the ...d6 move as long as possible. a) Tlte immediate 9 d6 is incon­ sistent. In the game Emst-Kouatly, Thessaloniki OL 1 984 there followed 10 �a3 'i!lc7 1 1 .l:.e1 (Or 1 1 �b5 { 1 1 f4 e5 1 2 f5 b6 13 .i.b5 We7 oo Radulov-Andonov, Warsaw 1 987} I l ...d5 { l l ...li:Jxe4?! 12 'i!ld4 ± } 12 exd5 li:Jxd5 1 3 fr'd4 with the initia­ tive) 1 1 .. .0-0 12 li:Jd4! ( 1 2 e5 dxe5 1 3 .i.xf8 c;f;>xf8 with compensation) 1 2 . . . J:.d8 1 3 lll b5 Wia5 1 4 �xd6 li:Je8 15 e5 a6? ( 15 lt:lxd6 li:Jxd6 1 6 li:Jxe5 ..txh7+ is unclear according to Emst) 1 6 �xh7+! q,xh7 1 7 'i!h5

'1Pg8 1 8 .l:.e3 f6 1 9 .l:.h3 axb5 20 'ifb8+ q,f7 21 Wif8 q,g6 22 exf6! with a decisive attack. b) Another example where Black avoids castling, Conquest-Giffard, Clichy 1 99 1 , is also discouraging from Black's point of view: 9 e5? 1 0 ..ia3 'ilc7 1 1 .i.b5 lt:le7 1 2 i.. d6 'ifb6 1 3 'i/d3 lt:\g6 1 4 l:tadl li:Jf4 1 5 'ti"c4 a6 1 6 .i.a4 li:Jg6 1 7 lt:lc5 1 -0. 10 .i.gS �e8 (D) ...

...

w

...

...

This is the basic position of the line. White ' s chances lie on the kingside where he will try to use the absence of black pieces and organise the attack. Black is forced to re-group his pieces, patiently refraining from the idea of quickly exploiting the weakness of White's queenside pawn structure. If White does not achieve anything concrete on the kingside, then, in the long run, the weaknesses of his pawn structure will become prominent. Among the many continuations for White that have been tried in the dia­ gram position, from the theoretical

7.

and practical point of view the most interesting are the continuations: A: 1 1 'i!Vh5 and B: 1 1 e5 Also seen: a) 1 1 Wh1 'flc7 1 2 f4 f6 1 3 .i.h4 b6 1 4 'il!fh5 .i.b7 1 5 l:t ae 1 l:tf7 1 6 :Ie3 Ci:Je7 (This is the characteris­ tic defensive set-up for Black in this variation.) 1 7 c4 J:tc8 1 8 e5 f5 1 9 l:th3 g6 20 'fih6 'flc6 2 1 .l:rg 1 'fla4 2 2 Ci:Jd2 ! with the idea Ci:Jf3 , Ci:Jg5, Wedberg-Bonsch, Stockholm 1 989/90. b) 11 /Lld4 f6 12 iLe3 'fla5 1 3 '»Vel ! CUeS ( 1 3 . . . Ci:Je7 ! ? with the idea 1 4. . . b6) 1 4 f4 Ci:Jxd3 1 5 cxd3 d6 1 6 f5 e 5 1 7 Ci:Jb3 'Wa6 1 8 c4 ;l; Saltaev­ V.Karasev, Azov 1 99 1 . c) 1 1 c4 d6 1 2 c5 'flc7 ( 1 2 ... dxc5 1 3 �e3) 1 3 .i.b5 ( 1 3 cxd6) 1 3 .. . e5 14 'fld3 ( 1 4 cxd6) 1 4... dxc5 1 5 Ci:Jxc5 Ci:Jd4 1 6 Ci:Jb3 Ci:Je6 1 7 .i.e3 Ci:Jd6 1 8 fi'd5 Ci:Jxb5 1 9 'ifxb5 .i.d7 20 'ii'e2 .l:tfc8 :'i' Klovans-V.Karasev, Lenin­ grad 1 989. A:

11 'ifhs This is the most frequently played continuation. f6 11 A playable but weaker plan was s e e n in the game I . Gurevich­ Yermolinsky, New York 1 99 3 , where after l l . e S 1 2 �c4 d6 1 3 llad 1 'ii' c 7 1 4 f4 White had the more promising play. 12 Ae3 'irc7 13 f4 (D) ..

.

. � b4 Van'ation 63

This is the main position for the 1 1 'Wh5 continuation.

B

a) 13 ... 'Lle7 1 4 f5 e5 1 5 c4 b6 1 6

nn .l:.t7 1 7 c 5 .i.b7 1 8 l:.h3 h6 1 9

'fl g4 'it>f8 2 0 c 4 d6 2 1 cxd6 'flxd6 22 %ld1 'flb4 and since Black has re­ moved the direct threats, he now has a chance to use White's pawn weak­ nesses, Kindermann-Bonsch, Munich 1 990. b) Black also has another plan where . .. f5 can be carried out, al­ though the idea of opening the posi­ tion early doesn't seem convincing. In two games an unbalanced complex position arose: 13 ... g6 (This is a weaker continuation than the other two) 1 4 'i!Vh6 Ci:Jd8 ( l 4... d6 1 5 :n 'fl g7 1 6 'ifh4 j,d7 1 7 l:tg3 'it>h8 1 8 Ci:Jd4 Ci:Jxd4 1 9 cxd4 f5 2 0 l:tb1 b6 2 1 exf5 exf5 2 2 d5 ± Semeniuk-V. Karasev, Russia 1 992) 15 l:tf3 Ci:Jf7 1 6 'it'h4 'it>g7 1 7 g4 ;l; V.Orlov­ V.Karasev, St Petersburg 1 997. c) 13 ...d6 14 l:tf3 ( 1 4 l:tad1 f5 1 5 exf5 exf5 1 6 'i!Vh3 j,e6 1 7 J:tfe 1 'il!ft7 1 8 a4 Ci:Jc7 1 9 Ci:Jd4 Ci:Jxd4 20 j,xd4

64

7. .

.

� b4 Van'ation

�d5 21 'i!fg3 lLle6 oo A.Kuzmin­ V.Karasev, Blagoveschensk 1 988) 14 ... f5 1 5 exf5 tLlf6 16 �h4 exf5 1 7 .l:th3 h 6 1 8 'Oth l fi f7 1 9 l2Jd4 l2Jg4 20 .i.g1 CLle7 2 1 l:r.f3 ..td7 22 h3 l2Jf6 23 .l:.e1 d5 with great complications, Bonsch-Sznapik, Stara Zagora 1 990.

w

B:

11 e5! This is an unpleasant possibility for Black, preventing him from con­ structing a defensive set-up with ...f6, . . . ltJe7 etc. I consider this to be the most test­ ing continuation for Black, who now faces the dilemma: a) to open the position after ll f5 ( I l .. .f6 1 2 'i!Yh5) 1 2 exf6 gxf6, or b) to sacrifice the exchange with l l laxe5 (D). The second alternative was seen in two games . In Matulovic-P . Kovacevic, Belgrade 1 989, after I 2 1&.e7 lLl f6 1 3 ..txf8 (Even bet­ ter is 1 3 1&.c5 ! 'ikc6 { 1 3 . . . 'ifc7 1 4 ..td6+-} 1 4 ..txf8 c;;txf8) 1 3 . . . Wxf8 14 c4 d6 1 5 'ikd2 a5 1 6 a4 flc7 1 7 l:tfd 1 b6 1 8 ..te2 White had an ad­ vantage although Black had good ...

...

chances to hold on . In Totsky-V.Karasev, Povedniki 1 992, Black also did not achieve complete equality after 14 �e2 (In­ stead of 14 c4 above) 14 ... fic7 1 5 'iVd4 b6 1 6 f4 lLlc6 1 7 'iVd3 .!tb7 1 8 CiJd4 ltJe7 19 CiJb5 'ii'c 5+ 20 'i!Vd4 'tlfc6 21 An 'ikxb5 22 j,xb7 :ct.b8 23 ..te4. From these two examples, we see that Black does not have an easy game after the exchange sacrifice 1 1 ... lLlxe5. As for the other option - the possibility 1 l . . . f5 1 2 exf6 gxf6 - although this original posi­ tion requires a practical test in or­ der for the final evaluation to be given, at first sight White's chances here too are a bit better.

7 White Plays 8 f4

1 e4 c5 2 ltlf3 ltlc6 3 d4 cxd4 4 ltlxd4 'Cfb6 5 ltlb3 ltlf6 6 ltlc3 e6 7 i1.e3 fllc7 (D) The lines where White immedi­ ately disturbs Black's queen with 7 �e3, are divided into three separate chapters. The present one deals with lines where, after 7 ... Wlc7, White im­ mediately plays 8 f4. In this case Black can choose between two com­ pletely different variations. The first is to respond with 8 . . . .tb4 (A) while the second is the playable but more passive 8 . . . d6 (B). Although the choice is the matter of taste, from the theoretical point of view preference should be give to the continuation 8 . �b4. Chapter Eight deals with the pro­ phylactic move 8 a3 that prevents the possibility . . .tb4. In Chapter Nine, we examine the standard development 8 ..td3 . Po­ sitions from this chapter are very similar to those described in Chap-

ter Eight, so the transpositional possibilities in practice are more or less unavoidable and frequent. The variations where White, after 8 . . a6 9 f4 d6, castles queenside are those which gives Chapter Nine a spe­ cial significance. .

. .

.

Before moving to a detailed review of the main continuations, let us men­ tion that the plan with 8 f3 does not create problems for Black. By quickly advancing ... d5, he achieves good

66 White Plays 8 f4

play as in the game Nunn-Grivas, Athens 1 99 1 , where there followed 8 . . . .i.b4 9 1!Vd2 d5 1 0 a3 i.xc3 1 1 'ifxc3 dxe4 1 2 fxe4 0-0 13 i.d3 'ife5 1 4 �d2 'ifh5 1 5 0-0 tll g4 1 6 i.f4 tll g e5. As indicated in the previous chap­ ter, 8 i1.e2 is a mistake since Black can reply 8 Ab4 when the e-pawn lacks protection. In G.Magnusson­ Kveinys, corr. 1 985, White gave up the pawn by 9 0-0 but after 9 . . . i.xc3 he did not have compensation for it and lost rapidly. 8 f4 As was mentioned above, Black can now choose between: A: 8 . .. i.b4, and B: 8 . . . d6 ...

squared bishop and he also does not have the �g5 possibility, which as we saw in Chapter Six can be rather unpleasant for Black when he lacks the bishop on e7. 9 Ad3 After 9 Wn d5 10 �d3 dxe4 1 1 �xe4 tll x e4 1 2 1!Vxe4 0-0 1 3 0-0 �xc3 14 bxc3 tll e7 15 �c5 .l:te8 16 :ao �d7 Black had the more com­ fortable game in Kresovic-Efimov, Badenweiler 1 990. Axc3+ 9 Black's idea of reacting with ... d5, utilising the pin on White's knight, is one of his basic motifs in this line. But, in this particular case, it would be a weaker option. For instance: 9 d5 10 e5: a) IO lLle4 1 1 �xe4 dxe4 12 0-0 �xc3 1 3 bxc3 b6 1 4 �g4! .i.b7!? (In case of 1 4 ... g6 or 14 . 0-0 White would play 1 5 tll d2 with a clear ad­ vantage.) 1 5 'i\fxg7 0-0-0 1 6 l:!fd l � Ovanesian-Nadanian, USSR 1 99 1 . b) The pawn sacrifice with 10 d4? is very dubious, as illustrated by the following two examples: 1 1 tll xd4 tll xd4 ( 1 1 . tll d5 12 tll b5 Wie7 1 3 .i.d2 is also better for White, Tverskaya-Bazhina, Moscow 1 986) 12 �xd4 tll d5 1 3 0-0 tll x c3 14 bxc3 JJ..e7 15 �0 0-0 16 �e3 g6 1 7 l:1ae 1 .i.d7 1 8 f5 exf5 1 9 �xf5 .i.. x f5 20 l:txf5 gxf5 2 1 1!Vg3+ Wh8 22 e6+ f6 23 '1Yfxc7 1 -0 Farkas-Papp, Szeged 1 998. By a different move order, the posi tion w i th 9 a6 instead of 9 . . . �xc3 was played in the game •..

•••

A:

8

AM (D)

w

. .

...

. .

The pin .. . i.b4 is more sensible here than in the variation 7 �d3 i.b4. The difference lies in the fact that White has already committed himself with the development of his dark-

. . .

White Plays 8 [4 67

Arencibia-Anastasian, Lucerne 1993. Black proved the vitality of the . . . �b4 system after 1 0 0-0 �xc3 1 1 bxc3 b6 1 2 lZ:\d2 d5 1 3 e5 lll d7 14 c4 d4 1 5 �f2 lllc 5 1 6 �g4 .ab? 1 7 �h4 lZ:\e7. d6 bxc3 10 We see that, in comparison with Chapter 6, things are more favour­ able for Black. White doesn't have the unpleasant .tg5. Another possi­ ble plan is 1 0 b6 1 1 0-0 �b7 1 2 �e2 ( 1 2 'ii'e 1 lll e7 1 3 .td2 0-0 Gast­ Wirthensohn, Switzerland 1 98 3) 1 2 . . . d6 1 3 �f2 llle7 1 4 c 4 lZ:\g6 1 5 j_ e 1 0-0 1 6 �c3 12- Y2 Mnatsakanian­ Gufeld, Tbilisi 1 983. 11 0-0 e5 (D) One should be careful and not hasty to castle. Superficial is 11 0-0 12 g4 with advantage for White. ...

...

w

This is the basic position for the variation. Both sides have a lot of prominent weaknesses, so the situa­ tion is very sensitive and requires un­ derstanding and precise play.

Black should be patient in his at­ tempt to make use of White's pos­ itional weaknesses. White's chance is tactical play, which can be easily achieved if the position is opened up. Superficial treatment can quickly bring either of the players into a bad position. a) Black 's pieces would be active in the event of 12 fxe5 lllx e5 1 3 �g5 .i.. g4 1 4 �d2 lZ:\fd7. b) The plan with the 12 f5 block­ ade and the further advance of the kingside pawns is not efficient either. The point is that Black does not cas­ tle at all but with the important ma­ noeuvre . . . lZ:\b8-d7-c5 soon obtains counterplay by attacking the white e4pawn. For example, after 1 2 ... h6: b 1 ) 13 c4 b6 1 4 �e 1 .i.b7 1 5 'iWg3 'lt>f8 1 6 .i.d2 lll b8 1 7 �b4 lZ:\bd7 and, managing to neutralise White's bishop pair, Black achieved the bet­ ter position in the game Andrijevic­ Z.IIic, Zlatibor 1 989. b2) 13 1'ff3 b6 14 'iWg3 'itf8! and now the best plan for White is to start the kingside pawn roller as soon as possible. Avshalumov mentions 15 1'ff3 ! ? .tb7 1 6 g4 lZ:\b8 17 h4 lll bd7 with an unclear assessment. In practice, 15 .1tc1 ?! has been played, the beginning of an incor­ rect plan. White transfers the bishop to the a3-f8 diagonal with the idea of exerting pressure on the d6 square but Black has a convincing way to parry that and target the e4-square: 1 5 . . . lll b 8 ! (D)

68 White Plays 8 f4

White plays 1 2 f5 (see the examples above). c2) Black treated the variation better in the game I s tratescu­ S .Atalik, Bucharest 1 995 . After 12 /t)g4 ! 1 3 ..'tg1 exf4 1 4 l:xf4 lLlge5 1 5 lLld4 0-0 16 lLlf5 (D) the critical position for the continuation 1 2 Wh 1 arose. ...

The manoeuvre . . . lLlb8-d7-c5 eas­ ily solves all the problems of the d­ pawn. In I . Rogers-Avshalumov, Belgrade 1 988, White was outplayed unexpectedly quickly after 1 6 a4 lLlbd7 1 7 a5 �b7 1 8 axb6 axb6 1 9 l:ha8 �xa8 2 0 �a3 .i.xe4 21 l:rdl Wg8 22 �xe4 lLlxe4 23 �d3 lLldf6. Let us go back to the basic posi­ tion after l l ...e5. It's best for White not to commit himself with the f­ pawn yet and to go on with the pro­ phylactic 1 2 Wh 1 or 1 2 h3. c) Vouldis-Grivas, Greece Ch 1 993, is cited as an important ex­ ample in BTSJ to show that White need not expend a tempo on a2-a3 to prevent the pin. In this game, White was successful with the 1 2 Whl continuati on: c l ) The game went on 12 h6 1 3 'i!Ye l b6 1 4 fxe5 dxe5 1 5 'i!Vg3 Wf8 16 lLld4 lLlh5 17 'f!Vg6 exd4 1 8 cxd4 lLlf6 1 9 l:txf6 gxf6 20 iVxf6 l:tg8 2 1 �f4 'Wd7 22 �d6+ We8 23 �b5 .tb7 24 d5 l:tc8 25 h!dl a6 26 dxc6 �xc6 27 :d5 1 ·0. The plan Black chose in this game works only if ...

B

In the further course of the game, with an original plan, Black succeeded in neutralising White 's initiative. There followed 16 ... f6 (16 ... l:te8) 1 7 .tb5 %:td8 1 8 .ta4 �xf5 1 9 �b3+ ..'te6 20 ..'txe6+ Wfll 21 'i!Yh5 We7 22 ..td5 h!h8 23 'iVh3 fVd7 24 'iVg3 WeB 25 l:.dl nd8 26 c4 'iVe7 27 'ifa3 b6 28 'i¥a4 'f!lc7 29 ..'td4 Yz-Yz. d) The second prophylactic con­ tinuation that maintains the tension in the centre, namely 12 h3, is also interesting. For example 1 2 ... b6 1 3 c 4 ..'tb7 1 4 fxe5! ( 1 4 'iVe1 lL'lb8 1 5 ..'td2 lLlbd7 1 6 r! d l 0-0 1 7 f5 .ta6 + Daifas-Grivas, Ano Liosia 1 997) 14 . . . lLlxe5 15 lLld4 .a.cs? 16 'f!lel 0-0 1 7 l:.xf6! gxf6 18 �g3+ and

White Plays 8 f4 69

White had excellent compensation for the exchange sacrifice, Tosic­ Z.Ilic, Nis 1 997. Black's 1 5th move was in conflict with basic chess principles. It is clear that Black cannot take on e4 because of 1 6 lZ'lb5 but interesting is 15 ... �ed7! ? 1 6 etJf5 �f8. with the idea of exerting pressure on the e4-pawn with 1 7 . .. l:te8. B:

d6 8 A more passive continuation that leads to a complex battle where White soon achieves a significant spatial advantage on the kingside. 9 g4! (D)

B

same as in the above diagram. Of course the difference lies in the number of moves played. For the sake of improved presen­ tation of material, the author has taken the liberty of matching the number of moves of all the examples given below, affecting the early se­ quence of certain games. (For exam­ ple, Speelman-Gulko and Kudrin -Gufeld reached the diagram position with the above quoted move order). a6 9 This is the main continuation in ECO B60/4. Others: a) 9 . . h6 1 0 1Wf3 a6 1 1 �g2 (The second option is 1 1 0-0-0!? retaining the bishop at the fl -a6 diagonal.) l l . . . etJd7 ( l l . . .b5? 1 2 e5) 1 2 h4 b5 1 3 0-0-0 lZ'lb6 1 4 �bl �d7 15 g5 0-0-0 16 'ife2 lZ'lc4 1 7 � c l ( 1 7 �f2) 1 7 . . . �e7? ! ( 1 7 . . . �b8) 1 8 � f3 %:r.he8 1 9 'il'fl ! �b8 20 .i.e2 ± Beliavsky-Cabrilo, Lvov 1 98 1 . b) 9 d5?! 1 0 e5 etJd7 and unlike the French Defence, the positions that arise in the case of . . . d5, e5, ... lZ'ld7 in the system "Sicilian 4 ... 1Wb6" most often favour White. But here Black had no choice because 1 0... lZ'le4 1 1 lZ'lxe4 dxe4 1 2 ..tg2 ± is weak. Now comes 1 1 lLl b5 ! : b l ) ll •d8 1 2 h4 f6 1 3 etJd6+? �xd6 1 4 exd6 etJb6 oo Speelman­ Gulko, Hastings 1 989/90. Instead of 1 3 etJd6, Speelman gives 13 exf6 lZ'lxf6 1 4 g5 lZ'le4 1 5 �g2, assessing the position as ± . b2) l l .ffb8 1 2 g5 ! a6 1 3 etJ5d4 .

...

An aggressive reaction quite suit­ able for this particular moment. In practice this position is most often reached by an unusual move order from the Richter-Rauzer: I e4 c5 2 etJf3 lZ'lc6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lZ'lxd4 lZ'lf6 5 lZ'lc3 d6 6 �g5 1Wb6 7 etJb3 e6 8 .i.f4 lZ'le5 9 .iie 3 1Wc7 1 0 f4 lZ'lc6 1 1 g4. It can be seen that this position is the

...

..

70 White Plays 8 f4

W/c7 1 4 W/f3 lLlxd4 1 5 lLlxd4 .tb4+ 1 6 �f2 ! ii.. e 7 1 7 h4 ± Topalov­ Smirin, Elenite 1 994. 10 gS 1Cid7 (D)

w

This is the position most frequently reached in the variation 8 f4 d6. Both sides have to continue in an enter­ prising manner. White has a spatial advantage, and objectively speaking, his chances are better. But Black is not without chances either and he can obtain counterplay on the queenside. In practice, players with the White pieces have developed their queens on various squares (d2, f3, e2).

a) 11 Wd2 b5 1 2 0-0-0 ( 1 2 h4 lLlb6 13 W/t2 �b8 14 �d3 lLlc4 1 5 0-0-0 lLlxe3 1 6 Wlxe3 :;l;; Kovalev­ Giffard, Clichy 1 99 1 ) 12 ... .te7 1 3 h4 ICicS?! 14 .tg2 b4 1 5 ftJe2 lLlxb3+? ! 1 6 cxb3 ! lL\d4 1 7 �b 1 ttJxe2 1 8 W/xe2 0-0 1 9 W/t2 ± Kudrin-Gufeld, Palma de Mallorca 1 989. The move . . . ftJc5 has more sense when White develops his bishop on the d3 square, so better is 13 ... 1Cib6 or 13 ...Ab7. b) 11 �g2 1i.e7 ( l l . . .b5 12 0-0 itJb6 1 3 W/e2 and now instead of 1 3 . . . � e 7 ? ! 1 4 a4 ± P e t k e v i c ­ Budovsk i s , U S S R 1 9 7 5 , B l ack should have played 13 . . . lLlc4) 1 2 h 4 ( 1 2 0- 0 ! ? ) 1 2 . . . b 5 1 3 Wle2 itJb6 ! = Yurtaev-Gufeld, Helsinki 1 992. c) 11 Wf3 b5 12 Wif2!? (An inter­ e sting manoeuvre that prevents ... lLlb6) 12 . . . 1i.b7 1 3 ..tg2 �e7 14 0-0-0 0-0-0 !? 1 5 �b1 �b8 1 6 h4 J:tc8 17 .l:.he 1 �a8 ( l 7 ... l:the8!?) 1 8 J!d2 l:thd8 with a complex game in which the chances are approximately equal, Kudrin-Gufeld, Las Vegas 1 997.

8

White Plays 8 a3

1 e4 c5 2 �f3 �c6 3 d4 cxd4 4 �xd4 lrb6 5 �b3 �f6 6 �c3 e6 7 il.e3 flc7 8 a3 (D)

B

The idea is to prevent . . . �b4. If White wants to play this move, it's better to make it on the 7th move, before 7 �e3 is played. The point i s that then, if Black doesn' t play precisely, White can achieve an ad­ vantage with .i.f4 - see Chapter 1 0, line D. The negative side of the 8 a3 move is that it sometimes limits White's option to castle queenside because Black's chances of organising quick counterplay on the queenside are im­ proved when a2-a3 has been played. Therefore there are very few exam-

pies where White decides to castle long after this move. In my opinion, Black faces more problems when White avoids or post­ pones the prophylactic a3 move. 8 a6 9 f4 d6 Here White can choose among several different plans: A: 10 g4 B: 1 0 VWf3 C: 1 0 �e2 D: 1 0 .td3 Undoubtedly, the most ambitious plan is the one where White immedi­ ately, or one move later, plays g2-g4 (lines A and B). The avoidance of the standard .td3, preferring to de­ velop the light-squared bishop on the a8-h 1 diagonal (�e2-f3), leads to a kind of Scheveningen. Several exam­ ples i llustrating this theme are given under C. The classic continuation for this chapter is discussed in line D. A:

1 0 g4 The most ambitious move. Now Black has different, equally playable, continuations. It is a matter of taste whether to play this position with or without ... h6.

72 White Plays 8 aJ

a) 1 0... h6 1 1 Ag2 g6 (A non­ standard way to treat the line; Black's usual plan i s . . . b5, . . . Ab7, and . . . li.Jd7-b6) 1 2 1We2 .iLg7 1 3 0-0-0 0-0 1 4 h4 h5 1 5 �fJ hxg4 16 .1Lxg4 Ad7 1 7 h5 %t fc8 1 8 hxg6 fxg6 Makarichev-Vasiukov, USSR 1 978, and now 19 e5 ! dxe5 20 li.Jc5 would give White a definite advantage. b) 10...b5 1 1 .iLg2 .iLb7 12 'ife2 �e7 1 3 h3 0-0 1 4 0-0 l:tfe8 1 5 g5 li.J d7 1 6 "it'f2 A f8 oo Yilmaz- S . Hansen, Budapest 1 992. c) 10... /0d7 1 1 Ag2 .1Le7 12 g5 b5 1 3 0-0 li.Jb6 1 4 li.Jd2 .1b7 oo Yilmaz-Kurajica, Pula 1 997. B:

1 0 'Wf3 i1..e7 This position can also arise from the Scheveningen: 1 e4 c5 2 li.Jf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 li.Jxd4 li.Jf6 5 li.Jc3 a6 6 f4 e6 7 'iff3 'ff b6 8 a3 li.Jc6 9 ll:lb3 ii.e7 10 .i.e3 f4c7. 11 g4 (D) Instead of this sharp advance, the more peaceful 11 iJ..d 3 is also possi­ ble, but after 1 1 ...0-0 1 2 0-0 b5 it transposes into the classical line

where the early a2-a3 helps Black. See Chapter 2 (page 1 9). 11 /Od7 12 g5 b5 In this position White can develop his light-squared bishop on e2 or d3. The second option is more logical. a) 13 i1..e 2 b4 1 4 axb4 li.J xb4 1 5 llc1 .'tb7 1 6 0-0 0-0 1 7 '®'h5 .Uae8 ( 1 7 ... l:tfe 8 ! ? 1 8 l:.f3 li.Jf8) 1 8 l:. f3 g 6 1 9 'ifh6 f5 2 0 l:th3 l:.t f7 2 1 exf5 exf5 22 ..td4 li.Jf8 (22 . . . .tf8? 23 'i!Vxg6! +-) 23 .:f.e3 with chances for both sides, Jahr-Liicke, Porz 1 989. b) 13 iJ..d 3 Ab7 ( 1 3 . . . b4) 14 'i!Yh3 li.Jb6 ( 1 4 ... g6) 1 5 g6 fxg6? ( 1 5 ... li.Jc4) 1 6 e 5 ! ( 1 6 'ifxe6? .tc8 1 7 ll:ld5 'fib7-+) 1 6 . . . �f7 ( 1 6 ... li.Jxe5 1 7 fxeS i.xh1 1 8 'i!Yxe6 'f!Vd7 1 9 .txg6+! ± ) 1 7 exd6 .txd6 1 8 li.Je4 1&.e7 1 9 0-0 ll:ld7 20 li.Jg5+ i.xg5 2 1 fxg5+ We7 22 li.Jc5 with a strategically winning position for White, Kogan-Payen, Singapore 1 990. C:

b5! 10 i1..e 2 11 0-0 i1..e7 (D) This i s more precise than 1 1 iJ.. b 7, which leaves the e6-spot un­ defended too early. In principle, this move should be played only when White plays AD. Janosevic­ Korchnoi, Belgrade 1 964, took a sharp course, where after 1 2 f5 exfS 1 3 a4 b4 1 4 ll:ldS ll:lxd5 1 5 exdS ll:le5 1 6 l:!.xf4 White had the better chances. The next diagram has all the char­ acteristics of a classic Scheveningen. ..•

White Plays 8 aJ 73

w

Black manages to complete his de­ velopment by playing a subsequent . . . 0-0 and . .. .i.b7, so he can be satis­ fied with the position. In other varia­ tions of the 4 . 'tWb6 system he has more problems to face than here. 12 tre1 White 's usual plan is 'it'e 1 -g3, with or without .i.f3. If White has aspirations to start an attack on the kingside, then it is far more favour­ able for him to have his bishop on the d3 square. The plan with the g2-g4 advance is less efficient here than in the vari­ ation when the diagonal d1-h5 is open for the white queen. In almost all the examples from tournament practice, Black achieved a good game. a) 12 /Qd2 0-0 1 3 g4 lt:Jd7 14 g5 l:te8 1 5 .td3 b4 1 6 lt:Je2 .t b7 1 7 lt:Jg3 .tf8 1 8 lt:Jh5 bxa3 1 9 bxa3 lt:Je7 20 'ii'g4 lt:Jg6 2 1 l:f3 d5 with an ex­ cellent game for Black, Adams­ Kurajica, Eupen 1 997. b) 12 An when: b 1 ) 12 Ab7 1 3 'ir'e 1 0-0 (Dubious is 1 3 . . . h5?! 14 h3 g6 1 5 J::t d 1 0-0-0 1 6 'i¥f2 lt:Jd7 1 7 a4 ± Kiss..

...

S inkovics, Hungary 1 99 1 ) 1 4 'it'g3 �h8 ( 1 4 ... b4 15 axb4 lt:Jxb4 1 6 l:tf2 J::t a b8 oo Batakov-Vokac, Lubnie­ wice 1 994) 15 l:tad1 l:ad8 ( 1 5 ... lt:Jd7 1 6 lt:Jd4 lt:Jxd4 I 7 �xd4 e5 I 8 �e3 exf4 1 9 �xf4 lLle5 20 .ixe5?! dxe5 2 1 lLld5 .i.xd5 22 exd5 J::t ae8 :;: Guadalpi-Z.Ilic, Orange 1 989) I 6 �h i b4 1 7 axb4 lt:Jxb4 1 8 'iVf2 l:c8 1 9 lt:Jd4 'it'b8 20 J::t d2 '1Wa8 with good play for Black, Heidrich-Rabiega, Dudweiler I 996. b2) Another plan characterised by the . . . J::t b8 move was seen in the game Bonsch-Kurajica, Olot 1 99 1 , in which after 1 2 0-0 1 3 �e 1 llb8 1 4 g4 b4 1 5 axb4 lL:lxb4 1 6 �f2 lLld7 Black obtained satisfactory play. 0-0 12 13 "Wg3 Wh8 The usual prophylaxis against the threats f5 and �h6. Also possible is 1 3 1le8 1 4 f5 (If 1 4 lt:Jd4, then Black plays I4 . . . lL:lxd4 15 ..txd4 e5 with equality) 14 ... �h8 1 5 lLld4 ( 1 5 l:tad1 ) 1 5 . . . lt:Jxd4 1 6 .i.xd4 e 5 1 7 .te3 �b7 1 8 �d3 .ic6 1 9 �g5 b4 and Black had a nice game, Fougler­ Z.Ilic, Lesneven 1 989. After I3 . . .h8 White has tried: a) 14 Wh1 b4 I 5 axb4 lt:Jxb4 1 6 lt:Jd4 e 5 ! 1 7 fxe5 dxe5 1 8 l:ac l lt:Ja2 l 9 lt:Jxa2 lt:Jxe4 20 'iV e 1 exd4 2 1 ..txd4 .i.b7 with an equal game, Herrera-Alvarez, Colon 1 993. b) Or 14 /Qd4 ..ib7 15 l:tad1 l:tg8 ( 1 5 . .. l:tad8, 15 . .. lt:Jxd4) 1 6 ..td3 e5? (It is a mistake to allow lt:Jf5, so bet­ ter is l 6 ... lt:Jd7 with the idea 1 7 . . . �f6) 1 7 lL:lf5 exf4 1 8 .i.xf4 lt:Jh5 1 9 ...

...

74 White Plays g aJ

�h3 ll:lxf4 20 �xf4 �g5 (Black does not have 20 . .. ll:le5 because of 2 1 ll:lxe7 Wixe7 22 :th4) 2 1 t:Ud5 Wi d8 22 e 5 ! ll:l xe5 2 3 t:Uxd6+­ Jakovljevic-Djukic, Kopaonik 1 992.

w

D:

10 Ad3 This continuation offers transpo­ sition into the variations with 7 .i.d3 discussed earlier. b5 10 u ffo After 1 1...Ae7 1 2 0-0 0-0 we again have transposition into the clas­ sical line with the a2-a3 move, which was dealt with in Chapter Two (page 1 9). Here we consider only examples which avoid that transposition. 11 Ab7 a) ll �b8!? 12 0-0 b4 1 3 ll:le2 ( 1 3 ll:lb1 ) 1 3 ... e5 ( 1 3 .. . bxa3) 14 a4! ll:la5 15 ll:lxa5 Wixa5 1 6 ll:lc1 Wic7 17 a5 ::!; Marjanovic-Kurajica, Yugo­ slavia 1 979. b) l l Ae7 12 g4 (For 1 2 0-0 and 1 3 g4 s e e Chapter Three) 1 2 . . . .li.b7 1 3 g5 t:U d7 1 4 �h3 t:Uc5?! ( 1 4 ... 0-0) 1 5 t:Uxc5 dxc5 1 6 g6 with an advantage for White, S chulz-Plachetka, Copenhagen 1 988. Ae7 (D) 12 0-0 The move order with 8 a3 ena­ bles Black to avoid the main line where he, instead of . . . J.b7, has ...

. . .

played .. . 0-0. This has its positive sides, but also the drawback that the control of the e6-point is aban­ doned too early. After 12 ... ..te7 we have: a) 13 g4 is inefficient here because Black reacts 1 3 . . . d5 and after 14 exd5 ( 1 4 e5 d4) 1 4 ... exd5 1 5 g5 the move 1 5 . .. d4! is strong. b) 13 �d4 0-0 14 �h3 ll:lxd4 1 5 .i.xd4 e5 16 j_e3 l:!.fe8= Tsarsitalidis­ Karayannis, Ano Liosia 1 996. c) 13 tig3 g6 ( 1 3 . . . 0-0 14 f5 Wh8 1 5 I/Wh3) 14 l:.ac 1 l:!:d8 1 5 h3 b4 1 6 axb4 t:Uxb4 oo Kolesnik-Marasin, Minsk 1 980. d) 13 'lih3 b4 1 4 axb4 ll:lxb4 1 5 ll:la5 .i.c8 1 6 t:Uc4 ( 1 6 �0 l:tb8 17 'fWe2 0-0 1 8 Wh 1 ll:ld7 1 9 ll:lb3 ll:lxd3 20 I/Wxd3 l:!.b4 and Black had a very active game, Schrei ber­ Kuraj i ca, Zaragoza 1 9 94) 1 6 . . . lt::l xd3 1 7 cxd3 0-0 1 8 ll:l b6 l:!. b8 1 9 ll:l xc 8 1Wxc8 20 1 H2 � d8= Mozaliov-Balashov, Russia 1 996.

9

White Castles Oueenside

The topic of this chapter i s the set of variations where White plays 0-0-0. As in all other systems of the Sicilian Defence where White cas­ tles long, positions arise which are extremely sharp and inevitably de­ mand enterprising play from both sides. The well-known strategic plans for Black and White in the Si­ cilian Defence apply here, too. 1 e4 c5 2 �f3 �c6 3 d4 cxd4 4 �xd4 1fb6 5 �b3 �f6 6 �c3 e6 7 �e3 'flc7 8 i!.d3 a6 It should also be noted that: a) 8 iLe7 will normally prove to be only a transposition, e.g. after 9 f4 d6 1 0 'flf3 ( 1 0 0-0 a6 see Chapter 2) 10 a6 reaching line C below. b) 8 iLb4 is certainly playable. After 9 f4 it transposes to Chapter 7, while if9 0-0 we have Chapter 6, note b to White 's 8'h move. 9 f4 d6 (D) At this point it is still possible for Whi te to transpose by 10 0-0 il.e7 to the main lines of Part One, Chapters 2-3. ...

...

...

w

In the system when White intends to play 0-0-0, three cases should be distinguished: A: 1 0 g4! ? B: l 0 'i!fe2, and C: 1 0 �f3 As in the other variations of the 4 . . . 'iWb6 system, here, too, Black has more problems in the case of the con­ tinuation 1 0 'i!ff3. A:

10 g4!? (D) As Nunn and Gallaghcr point out in BTSJ, this move is also playable immediately, reserving the decision about the placement of the queen.

76 White Castles Queenside

Now comes 14 'iVt2! lt:lb4? ( 1 4 ... lt:lxd3+) 1 5 l2Jxc5 dxc5 1 6 .te2 and with the queenside pawn structure that has arisen, Black organises his counterplay more slowly. An impor­ tant factor is that the c-file is closed: 16 .. . j,e7 1 7 f5 l:tc8? ( 1 7 ... l:td8 !?) 1 8 �g4 and White had already achieved a decisive advantage, Beliavsky-Gufeld, Sukhumi 1 972. b5 10 Possible is 10... h6!? I I fVe2 b5 1 2 a4 ( 1 2 0-0-0 !?) 1 2 b4 1 3 lt:ldi d5 ! 14 lt:lt2 �b7 I 5 0-0-0 l2Ja5! I6 l2Jxa5 't!Vxa5 I 7 �d4! 'i¥xa4 1 8 b3 fVa5 1 9 g5 with a sharp position where White had an initiative for the sacrificed pawn, Mokry-J.Polgar, Brno I 99 1 . �d7 11 g5 12 1Wd2 The queen is more seldom played here compared to 1 2 'We2 and 1 2 'ii' f3 . In the game Lukov-Cabrilo, Vama 1 983, there followed 12 ffo l2Jc5 ( 1 2 .. . �e7 13 0-0-0 transposes into the main line) 1 3 0-0-0?! (Lukov suggests 1 3 lt:lxc 5 ! dxc5 14 0-0-0) 1 3 . . . b4 14 l2Je2 lt:lxd3+ 1 5 llxd3 (White did not pl ay 'lfo>b1, so he has to take with the rook, which is far more favourable for Black than the type of the position where White strengthens the centre with cxd3) 15 . . . .i.b7 1 6 lt:lg3 a5 and Black had excellent play. 12 �b7 13 0-0-0 �c5?! Here 13...�e7, 13...�c8 or 13 ... �b6 are all better moves.

B: 10 We2 �e7 In the game Bologan-Kurajica, Las Palmas 1 993, Black developed his light-squared bishop on the d7square, but this is inadvisable. More common and sounder is to use that square for manoeuvring the knight to the queenside by . . . li:Jd7 -c5 (or -b6). The game continued: 10...b5 1 1 0-00 �b4 12 'lfo>b 1 .td7 1 3 l::t c l ! e5 1 4 h 3 �e7 1 5 g4 exf4 1 6 .txf4 .i.e6 1 7 ttJd4 0-0 1 8 g5 ttJd7 1 9 l2Jd5 (Pre­ mature; 1 9 a3 ! would give White the advantage.) 1 9 .. . Ji.xd5 20 exd5 l:tfe8 2 1 nhe 1 g6 22 .te4 li:Jb6 with a com­ plex game. After 1 0 . .. b5 1 1 0-0-0 a possible plan is 11 ... .t:lb8 1 2 Wb1 ttJd7 1 3 g4 lbb6 14 'fVt2 lt:Ja4 1 5 lt:Je2 and now Black should have continued 15 ... �e7, instead of 1 5 .. g6 1 6 lt:Jed4 .i.g7 1 7 lt:Jxc6 'f!Vxc6 1 8 i.d4 e5 1 9 .i.a7 l:ta8 2 0 f5 with an advantage to White, as in the game Palac- B . Knezevic, Cannes 1 996. 11 0-0-0 b5 (D) This line is very similar to the Sozin where White plays 6 .i.c4, so .

White Castles Queenside

w

several comparative examples are given below with the aim of enabling the reader to better understand the es­ sence of the line and to make his own conclusions by looking at the differ­ ences between them. The diagram above can arise from the Sozin Variation after the follow­ ing moves: 1 e4 c5 2 CDf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 CDxd4 lLlf6 5 CDc3 lLlc6 6 �c4 �b6 7 tt::l b3 e6 8 �e2 �e7 9 f4 �c7 1 0 �d3 a6 1 1 .i.e3 b5 1 2 0-0-0. The position is the same but it should be noted that with this move order Black is a tempo up because White was forced to play �c4-d3, so in this basic Sozin line, Black is to move. He has three continuations at his disposal : 1 2 .. . �b7 (a), 1 2 .. . CDd7 (b) and 1 2 . . . lLlb4 (c). a) 12 .ab7 13 'lii>b l 0-0 14 g4 tt::l d7. Here White has to be cautious. It is best to play 15 1rf2 strengthening the control ofthe a7-g l diagonal and freeing the e2 square for the knight. In the fo l l owing two examples White chose weaker continuations: .•.

77

a 1 ) After 15 gS b4 1 6 CDa4 one can see the drawback of the move �e2 - White hasn't the possibility lLle2-g3 and his knight stands badly on the a4 square. Black plays 1 6 ... lLl a 7 ! - a n original manoeuvre, worth remembering. Since White will have to defend the knight with the b3 move, his weakened squares c3 and a3 become the target. Ilincic-Kozul, Kladovo 1 990, continued 1 7 lL!d4 ( 1 7 'it'f2!?) 1 7...�a5 1 8 b3 l:tfc8 1 9 �cl CDc5 ! 20 lLlxc5 dxc5 2 1 CDf3 CD b5 22 �b2 CDc3+ 23 �xc3 bxc3 24 Wal c4! 25 �xc4 'Wa3 26 llbl �b4! and Black soon won. a2) 15 l:lhg1 b4 1 6 lLla4 lLla7 ! (Again) 1 7 CDd4?! (Better i s 1 7 e5!? �c6 18 exd6 �xd6 1 9 lL!ac5 tt:Jxc5 20 tt:Jxc5 CDb5 - Grosar) 17 ... �a5 18 b3 tt:Jc5 19 tt::l xc5 dxc5 20 tt::l f3 tt::l b5 21 �d2 .l:!.fd8 22 tt::l e5 CDa3+ 23 Wa1 �f6 24 .i.c1 c4 25 bxc4 g5 ! and Black achieved a preferable po­ sition, G.Hemandez-Grosar, Manila OL 1 992. b) 12 .ft)d7 1 3 g4 (Or 1 3 �bel 0-0 14 g4 tt::lc5 1 5 tt::lxc5 dxc5 1 6 e5 c4 1 7 �e4 �b7 1 8 �f2 b4 1 9 .tb6 f!Yc8 20 tt:Ja4 b3 with complicated play, Nijboer-Smirin, Tilburg 1993) when: b 1 ) 13 .lt�c5 14 tt:Jxc5! (The best reaction: White gains space and the e4 square in the centre, and Black's queenside phalanx is less dangerous than it looks) 1 4 ... dxc5 1 5 e5 ..tb7 and now: b l l ) 16 il.e4 (This is consistent with the previous move, and with the whole idea started with 1 4 CDxc5) ..

..

78 White Castles Queens/de

1 6. . . 0-0 1 7 g5 ( 1 7 �f2!?) 17 ... b4 1 8 l2Ja4 l2Ja5 1 9 �xb7 'i:Wxb7 and now instead of 20 b3 , Wedberg-Kozul, Novi Sad OL 1 990, White should have taken the pawn by 20 l2Jxc5 with better chances. b 1 2) Imprecise is 16 fff2 lLlb4 1 7 .l:l'.he 1 0-0 1 8 g 5 l2Jxd3+ 1 9 l:txd3 .ilad8 20 1:1ed1 .l:l'.xd3 21 �xd3 b4 22 l2Ja4 c4 23 .l:l'.d1 �c6 with better chances for Black, Knoppert-Gulko, Tilburg 1 992. b2) A better plan in this particular position would probably be 13. ..lLlb6 with the idea of 1 4 . . . l2Jb4, and then 1 5 . . . l2Jc4 or 1 5 . . . l2Ja4!?. c) 1 2...�b4 (D)

w

The idea of this move is to remove the attacking piece, the d3-bishop, and then push the pawns on the queenside. The same position appeared in the game J.Polgar-Fedorowicz, Wijk ann Zee 1 990, except that the moves g4 and ... h6 were interpolated there. The value of the . . . h6 move is, as usual in such positions, questionable. Black

slows down the white kingside ad­ vance by depriving himself of the possibility to castle. The game con­ tinued 14 c;i;>bl l:tb8 1 5 .l:l'.c1 l2Jd7 1 6 a3?! l2Jc6 1 7 l2Ja2 g5 1 8 h4 gxf4 1 9 �xf4 l2Jde5 2 0 l:thg 1 l2Jxd3 2 1 \Wxd3?! b4 22 axb4 l2Jxb4 23 �c3 'lixc3 24 lLlxc3 e5 25 i.. d2 �e6 and Black had the more favourable end­ game. In the diagram position, the im­ mediate 13 g4 is less precise than 1 3 c;i;>bl because it enables Black after 13 ... lthd3! to force White to recap­ ture on d3 with the rook. In the game Malinin-Krivun, corr. 1 989, Black didn't take this opportunity. There followed: 13 ... 0-0 1 4 g5 l2Jd7 1 5 �hg 1 !? l2Jxd3 1 6 l:txd3 b4 1 7 i.d4 bxc3 1 8 'i:Wh5 cxb2+ 1 9 c;i;>bl . Now, an interesting analysis that favours Black is 1 9 ... �b7 20 .l:l'.c3 'lidS 2 1 l2Jd2 .l:l'.e8 2 2 l:th3 l2J f8 2 3 g 6 fxg6 24 l:hg6 e5! 25 fxe5 dxe5, but it shouldn't influence the final assess­ ment of the continuation 1 3 . . . 0-0. After 13 Wb1, Black has tried dif­ ferent continuations: c l ) Now 13 ...�xd3 is ineffective. After 14 cxd3 b4 1 5 l2Ja4 Black lacks the knight on d7 in order to play 1 5 ... 'lic6. Of course 1 5 ... l2Jd7 is slow because of 1 6 .:C:.c 1 . c2) 13 ....1ld7!? is met by 1 4 l:tc 1 ! - a skilful manoeuvre, which dis­ courages Black from 1 4 . . . l2J xd3 since, after 15 cxd3, the black queen doesn't have an adequate retreat from the c-file. In that way Black is halted on the queenside, while White takes

White Castles Queenside

the initiative on the other side of the board. Thus 1 4.. . 0-0 1 5 g4 lifc8 1 6 g 5 l2Je8 1 7 f5 when: c2 1 ) 17 ... t!'fd8?! 1 8 f6! j_ffi (The opening of the g-file is not a better alternative) 1 9 �f2! (Threatening 20 j_b6, White gains an important tempo for the pressure along the f­ file.) 1 9 . . Jhb8 20 l:tcfl l2Jxd3 21 cxd3 b4 (If 2 l .. .g6, there follows 22 h4 with a fast break along the h-file) 22 fxg7 l2Jxg7 23 �xf7+ �h8 24 l2Je2 ii..b5 25 l2Jbc 1 with a winning position for White, Velimirovic­ Cabrilo, Kladovo 1 990. c22) 17...Af8 1 8 f6 a5 1 9 l2Jd4 a4 20 a3 l2Jxd3 2 1 cxd3 "i'Vb7 22 fxg7 �xg7 23 l2Ja2 d5 oo Minic-Portisch, Palma de Mallorca IZ 1 970. c3) 13 ... e5 14 l:tc 1 ! 0-0 (D)

w

Now: c3 1 ) 15 Ilhgl ..te6?! ( 1 5 ... exf4 16 �xf4 ..tg4 ! ) 1 6 g4 exf4 1 7 ..txf4 l2Jd7 1 8 l2Jd5 ! and Black encountered serious problems, Kuczynski-Kozul, Novi Sad OL 1 990. c32) Or 15 Ithn ..te6? ! (Better is 1 5 . . . exf4) 1 6 f5 ..tc4 1 7 g4 d5 1 8

79

exd5 e4 ( I 8 ... tt:Jfxd5 1 9 tt:Jxd5 tt:Jxd5 20 g5 is better for White) 1 9 ..txc4 'iVxc4 20 'iVxc4 bxc4 2 1 l2Jd2 l2Jfxd5 22 l2Jxd5 l2Jxd5 23 l2Jxc4 l:tac8 24 .l:!.cd1 l:tfd8 25 l:txd5 .l:!.xd5 26 l2Jb6 and White was a pawn up in Ivanovic­ Kozul, Cetinje 1 990. c4) 13 . .il.b7 and now: c4 l ) 14 .tlct 0-0 1 5 g4 d5 1 6 e5 l2Je4 1 7 ..td4 l2Jxc3 1 8 �xc3 l2Jc6? ! ( 1 8 . . . d4!?) 1 9 l::thfl b4 20 �d4 a5 2 1 'ife3 l2Jxd4 22 l2Jxd4 ± Z.Varga­ G.Hernandez, Santiago Wch-jr 1 990. c42) 14 klhg1 0-0 1 5 g4 d5 1 6 e5 l2Je4 17 �xe4? ! ( 1 7 �d4 ! ?) 1 7 . . . dxe4 1 8 "i'f f2 l2Jd5 ! 1 9 l2Jxe4 lhc8 20 l2Jbc5? (20 .l:!.d2) 20 . . . l2Jxe3 ! 2 1 .l:!.d7 ..txe4 22 1:hc7 ..txc2+ 2 3 �a1 .!:txc7 24 b4 l:txc5 25 bxc5 ..txc5 0-1 Sion Castro-Komljenovic, Seville 1994. c43) In the previous two examples we saw that Black reacted in the cen­ tre with ... d5 . This option is much more seldom available if the basic position (in the diagram on page 77) is reached via the 4. . . "i'Vb6 move or­ der where Black is a tempo down. In a few examples, Black success­ fully carried out the classical plan of transferring his king's knight to the queenside: 14 g4 �d7 ( 1 4 . . . 0-0 !? 1 5 g 5 l2Jd7 1 6 .!:thg 1 ? { 1 6 l:!. c 1 ! } 1 6 ... l2Jxd3 1 7 ifxd3 { 1 7 cxd3? b4 1 8 l2Ja4 �c6} 17 ... .!:tfd8 1 8 l2Jd4 l2Jc5 1 9 'ife2 l2Jxe4 20 f5 'ifxc3 -+, Shernoff­ Castaneda, North Bay 1 996) IS l:lhgl ( 1 5 l:he I 0-0 1 6 g5 l2Jxd3 17 l:hd3 b4 1 8 'tfh5? .l:.fc8 19 �d4 bxc3 20 .l:!.xc3 1i'd8-+, Ibraheem-Chan Peng, .

80 White Castlt:!s Queens1de

Dubai OL 1 98 6 ) 1 5 . . . ttJc5 ! ? 1 6 �xb5+ axb5 1 7 1Wxb5+ ttJc6 1 8 tt:Jxc5 dxc5 1 9 �xc5 0-0 20 �xe7 1Wxe7 2 1 e5 l:tab8 22 l:td6 .i.a8 23 'i¥d3 Wia7 24 l:Id 1 Wia3 25 b3 ttJb4 26 Wid2 �e4 2 7 l:I c 1 l:Ibc8 0- 1 Leyva-Vera, Las Tunas eh 1996. After this survey of the Sozin move order, w e re turn to the 4 ... 'i¥b6 line . 12 g4 Another idea is to play in the cen­ tre: 12 label ti:Jd7?! 1 3 'Lld5! exd5 ( B l ack i s also in trouble after 14 . . . ti:Jb4 15 �d4) 1 4 exd5 ti:Jde5 1 5 dxc6 .i.g4 1 6 Wi f2 tt:Jxc6 1 7 l:Id2 ± Velimirovic-V.Dam\janovic, Bel­ grade 1 99 3 . H owever, if White doesn't play g2-g4, then Black has no reason to hurry with . . . ti:Jd7. Bet­ ter is 12 ...0-0. l0d7! 12 A flexible move order which can easily confuse White. A superficial treatment of this dynamic position was seen in the game Abramovic­ B . D am ljanovic, Belgrade 1 984, where after 12 b4 13 tt:Ja4 l:Ib8 1 4 �b1 g6?! 1 5 l:tg1 ..td7 1 6 Wif2 .i.d8 1 7 g5 ttJh5 1 8 e5! dxe5 1 9 ttJc5 ..t.c8 20 fxe5 0-0 2 1 .txa6 White had a clear advantage. 13 Wbl (D) A precise move order. Consider­ ably weaker is 13 g5?! 'Llb4 ! , after which Black accomplished two goals - exchanging White's light-squared bishop while forcing him to recap­ ture with a piece, and starting the queenside pawn storm.

This way of playing was seen in the game Abramovic-A. Fishbein, New York 1 990, which abounded with mutual tactical breaks and which Black won in great style. The whole game is worth seeing: 1 4 l:Ihg1 (The point was that 1 4 'itb 1 ti:Jxd3 1 5 cxd3? b4 1 6 tt:Ja4 loses a piece to 1 6. . . 'i!Vc6) 1 4 . .. 'Llxd3+ 1 5 Wixd3 b4 1 6 ti:Jb1 a5 ! (Black is already better) 1 7 ti:Jd4 tt:Jc5 1 8 'i¥b5+ �d7 1 9 Wic4 Wib7 20 ti:Jd2 0-0 2 1 f5 l:tfc8 22 g6 fxg6 23 fxg6 a4 24 vwn b3 ! 25 ti:J2xb3 axb3 26 gxh7+ �h8 27 �xg7 ! ti:Jd3 + ! 28 .!:.xd3 bxa2 ! 29 l:Ig8+ l:txg8 30 hxg81W �xg8 3 1 Wig2+ 'itf7 32 Wif3+ ..tf6 33 'fi'h5+ 'itf8 34 .Ah6+ �e7 35 ..tg5 a1 'iY+ 36 'itd2 'i¥a5+ 0- 1 .

B

..•

13 Ab7 In the earlier examples (Sozin move order) Black was a tempo up, as he had already played this move. The question is whether this is of cru­ cial importance. Namely, when Black plays . . . .i.b7, his alternative plan . . . I:I.b8 followed by . . . ti:Jd7-b6-a4, which looked rather attractive, is less

White Castles Queenside

efficient. Also, the defensive role of the black bishop along the c8-h3 di­ agonal is significant. One example where Black avoided playing the standard 1 3 . .. �b7 is the game Nevednichy-Grivas, Debrecen 1 992. Black carried out a quick knight manoeuvre 13 .lllb6 14 .l:.he 1 lt:Ja4 and achieved an acceptable position after 1 5 �d2 ft:Jxc3+ 1 6 �xc3 e5 17 f5 h6. 14 g5 14 l:lhfl ft:Jb4 15 'fi'f2 .l:.c8 16 g5 0-0 1 7 f5 ft:Jxd3 1 8 cxd3 b4 1 9 lt:Je2 lt:Je5 ( 1 9 . .. exf5) 20 f6 lt:Jg4 21 'iff4 'ifc2+ 22 ..tal 'iVxe2 23 fxe7? (23 .l:.fe 1 ! wins) 23 .. . ft:Jxe3 with an ad­ vantage for Black, Tringov-Cabrilo, Prokuplje 1 987. 14 lllc5 14 ... lllb4 1 5 a3 ! ft:Jxd3 1 6 cxd3, with the idea 17 .l:. c 1 , seems to be unpleasant for Black. But Akopian's suggestion 14 l:lc8!? is acceptable for Black and an alternative is 1 4 . lllb6. In the latter case, the line 1 5 �xb5 axb5 1 6 ft:Jxb5 'iVd8 1 7 .ltxb6 '@'xb6 1 8 ft:Jxd6+ �xd6 1 9 .l:.xd6 0-0 should not worry Black. 15 l:lhfl ! In the event of 15 �xc5 dxc5 White is too late with 1 6 e5 and 1 7 �e4, because after 1 6 . . . ltJd4 h e would lose the exchange. Therefore it's necessary to move the rook. In the game Velimirovic-Djukic, Svetozatevo 1 990, White chose 1 5 l:thg1 and after 1 5 ... b4 ( 1 5 .. . lt:Ja4!? is a promising alternative) unexpect­ edly sacrifi ced a piece with 1 6 ..

81

�d5!?. 1t is questionable whether the sacrifice was correct, but it's certain that it's not easy to refute it in an actual battle. The alternative is 16 �xc5 dxc5 ( 1 6 . . . bxc3 1 7 lt:Jxb7 fr'xb7 is also possible) 1 7 lt:Ja4 'ifa5 ( 1 7 . .. ft:Ja5 1 8 c4!) 1 8 b3. After 16 ft:Jd5 !? the game contin­ ued 16 ... exd5 1 7 exd5 and now Black incorrectly returned the material im­ mediately with 17 . �xd3? 1 8 dxc6, which gave White a big positional ad­ vantage. Black should have played 17 . llla5 and in that case 18 ltlxc5?! dxc5 1 9 d6? �xd6 20 �xc5+ Wie7 is losing for White. The critical line is 1 7 ... ft:Ja5 18 �xa5 'ifxa5 1 9 �d4. 15 llla 4! (lJ) ..

.

.

w

••.

.

.

The best way to create counter­ play. Both 15 ... b4?! 1 6 lt:Jxc5 dxc5 1 7 lt:Ja4 lt:Ja5 ( 1 7 ... ft:Jd4 1 8 'iVf2 ± ) 1 8 c4! and 1 5 ... �xb3 1 6 axb3 0-0-0 1 7 'i¥f2! (Akopian) are less promism g. 16 ltlxa4 bxa4 1 7 itld2 itlb4 18 .ad4 0-0! 19 ltlc4

82 White Castles Queenside

Perhaps th e sharper 19 f5!? is a better option. d5 19 �xd3 20 exd5 21 cxd3 .i.xd5 22 l:lcl 1lrb7 23 �b6 l:lad8 and this complex position of­ fers chances to both sides, Kengis­ Akopian, Manila OL 1 992.

C:

. .

.

Jl.e7 10 lff3 Or 10 ... b5 1 1 0--0--0 (According to BTSJ, 1 1 g4 is also possible) 1 l . . . �b7 1 2 � b 1 lZ:laS 1 3 'Oxa5 'i!r'xa5 14 g4 0-0-0 1 5 g5 COd7 16 a3 �b8 17 'it'f2 Ae7 18 Ad4 e5 19 fxe5 dxe5 20 .ta7+ �aS 21 COdS ± King­ Wirthensohn, Bern 1 988. 11 g4 This direct thrust is one of the rec­ ommendations for White in BTSJ. Of course 11 0-0 transposes to Chapter 2. The immediate g2-g4 is more pre­ cise than 1 1 0-0-0 b5 1 2 g4, as in that case after 12... �b4 1 3 ..t>b1 ( 1 3 g5 lUxd3+! 14 lhd3 lZ:ld7 or 14 cxd3 b4 ! ? seems to be fine for Black) Black can react in the centre with 1 3 . d5 ! (D) ..

w

This is the game Hjartarson­ Agdestein, Tilburg 1 989. In the bal­ anced position after 1 4 e5 lUd7 1 5 .l:he1 lLlb6 1 6 f5 lUa4 1 7 �d4 lZ:lc6 1 8 fxe6 lZ:lxc3+ 19 Axc3 Ae6 20 Ad4 the draw was agreed. The quick . dS is possible when the knight is not driven away from the f6-square. In practice, instead of 1 2 ... lZ:lb4 and 1 3 ... d5, the standard 12 . . �d7 is attempted more often. This plan is also playable. There are several ex­ amples from tournament practice, following 13 �b1 : a) 1 3 ... �b6 (If l 3 ... �c5, then after 14 lLl xcS dxc5 1 5 e5, with the idea 1 6 �e4, White obtains the advantage) 1 4 g5 lUa4 1 5 lUe2 j_d7 16 f5 lZ:leS 17 'it'h3 lZ:lcS 1 8 COf4 0-0-0 1 9 'Wg3 lLlxb3 20 axb3 Wb8 2 1 l:thfl ;!;; Kotronias-Grivas, Heraklion 1 992. b) 1 3 . . . Ab7 14 g5 lLlc5 (Or 14 .. . lLlb4 1 5 a3 lZ:lxd3 1 6 cxd3 'Oc5 17 lZ:ld4 g6 1 8 'it'e2 e5 19 'Of3 exf4 20 j_xf4 lLle6 with an unclear posi­ tion, Guedon-Ilic, Clermont-Ferrand 1 989) 1 5 'it'h3 'Oa4 1 6 lLle2 (The position after 16 g6? ! lLlxc3+ 1 7 bxc3 fxg6 18 'it'xe6 'it'c8 is unclear accord­ ing to Akopian) 1 6 ...'it'd7 ( 1 6 ... 0-0-0 1 7 f5 ± ) 1 7 .l:hfl 0-0-0 1 8 'i!r'g3 �b8 1 9 f5 e5 ( 1 9 . . . lZ:le5 20 Af4 f!ic7 2 1 fxe6 fxe6 22 lUed4 i s in White's fa­ vour, but 1 9 ... �a8 !? 20 fxe6 fxe6 21 %:lf7 l:hg8. with the idea lZ:leS, is the possible line suggested by Akopian) 20 f6 ! gxf6 21 gxf6 j_f8 22 'ife 1 ! ± Kotroni as-Akopian, Debrecen 1 992.

White Castles Queenside

b5 11 The most consistent. Black did not have success with the alternatives in practice: a) 1 1 ...0-0 12 g5 lLld7 13 0-0-0 b5 14 e5! dxe5 1 5 .te4 .tb7 16 f5 ! (By playing the instructive advance e4e5 and f4-f5 at the right time, White gets the important e4-outpost for his pieces) 16 ... g6 1 7 f6 .tb4 18 h4 1:tfc8 1 9 h5 CLlf8 20 hxg6 fxg6 2 1 lLld5 ! exd5 22 .txd5 'ofr>h8 23 f7 "ii'd6 24 .l:.xh7+! lLlxh7 25 .l:. h 1 �g7 26 .l:.xh7+ �f8 27 'ii' f6 1 -0 Hellers­ Djukic, Malmo 1 988. b) 11 . .h6 12 0-0-0 b5 13 l:hg1 CLld7 14 'it'f2! and now it is hard for Black to redeploy the knight on d7. For example, 14 ... l:b8 1 5 'ofr>b l lLlb6? 1 6 .txb5 axb5 1 7 lLlxb5 �d8 1 8 lLlxd6+ .txd6 1 9 e5) 1 4 . . . .tb7 1 5 'ofr> b 1 %1 c 8 (As Nunn says, Black should play the standard 15 . .. lLlb4; 1 5 . . ..tf6? is careless because of 1 6 e5 ! dxe5 1 7 .txb5 ! 0-0 { 17 . .. axb5 1 8 lLlxb5 'ti'b8 1 9 'it'd2!+- } 1 8 g5 hxg5 and now instead of20 lLle4?! , Estrin­ I.Kopilov, Omsk 1 973, White could have developed an irresistible attack after 20 "ii'h 4! axb5 2 1 .l:.g3) 1 6 h4 lLla5 1 7 g5 hxg5 1 8 hxg5 b4 1 9 lLla4 lLlc4 20 g6 lLlxe3 2 1 gxfl+ 'it>xfl 22 'it'xe3 .tf6 (22 ... .tc6 23 'it'd4) 23 e5 ! dxe5 24 .tc4 l:thd8 (24 ...lLlf8 25 lLlac5 wins) 25 l:txd7+! l: xd7 26 lLlac5 l:d5 27 "it'h3 1Vb6 28 .txd5 .txd5 29 fxe5 .te7 30 1Vh5+ 'lt>g8 3 1 'it'g6 .tf8 32 CLld7 1 -0, Tiviakov­ Yuanning Rong, Singapore 1 990. A nice achievement by Tiviakov. .

83

c) 1 1 . .b6 (The idea of this move is to support ... c5 in anticipation of the manoeuvre ... lLld7-c5) 12 g5 lLld7 1 3 0-0-0 lLlc5 1 4 �bl .td7 1 5 h4 "ii'b7 16 .te2! (Now the c5-knight isn't doing much) 1 6 . . . lLla7 1 7 f5 lLlb5 1 8 .td4 .tc6 1 9 fxe6 lLlxc3+ 20 .txc3 lLlxe6 21 l:!:hfl 0-0 22 .td3 b5 22 a3 lLlc5 24 lLlxc5! dxc5 25 'it'f5 .l:.ae8 26 .txg7! .td7 (26 ... 'lt>xg7 27 e5) 27 'it'e5 .td8 28 "ii'd6 'it>xg7 29 'tfh6+ �h8 30 e5 f5 3 1 exf6 .te6 32 .l:.de1 c4 33 .tg6 .l:.fl 34 .txfl 'ii'xfl 35 g6 'it'xg6 36 f7 1 -0 Kavalek­ Hlibner, Buenos Aires 1 978. d) 1 1 ...g5 (An unjustifiable ex­ periment in thi s position) 1 2 e5 dxe5 1 3 fxg5 lLld5 14 lLle4 ± Fris­ Yegiazarian, Czestochowa 1 992. 12 g5 12 0-0-0 lLlb4 1 3 'itbl d5 ! ? trans­ poses into Hjartarson-Agdestein, see above. 12 �d7 13 0-0-0 (D) .

B

Black has tried several moves here: C l : 1 3 ... lLlb4 C2: 1 3 ... lLlb6

84

White Castles Queenside

Also possible is 13 ..1l.b7, which often has a transpositional character and leads into the main line of the variation. In the case of14 Wb1 lLlb4 we have the main line C l , while the following examples have an inde­ pendent character: a) 14 ffhJ (Nunn' s recommenda­ tion) 14 ... lLlb4 1 5 g6 f5 ( I 5 ... ltJxd3 !?) 16 liJd4 lLlc5 Jorgensen-S.Hansen, Lyngby 1 990. b) 14 W b 1 'Llc5 1 5 h4 lLlb4 (15 ... 0-0-0 1 6 'Wf2 h6 17 e5 lLlxd3 1 8 cxd3 �d7 1 9 � b6 l::tdffl 20 exd6 �xd6 2 1 lLle4 ± Fercec-G.Kuzmin, Pula 1 994) 1 6 �d4 iLl bxd3 1 7 cxd3 lLlxb3 1 8 axb3 e5 1 9 .i.e3 exf4 20 �xf4 'ii'd7 2 1 h5 with slightly better chances for White, Ernst-Astrom, Haninge 1 997. Other continuations from the last diagram are weaker, as can be seen from the examples given below. a) The immediate 13 . 0-0? is pre­ mature because of 1 4 e5! dxe5 1 5 f5 . I n Beckemeyer-Daverkausen, Germany 1 990, B lack soon got into a lost position after 1 5 . . . liJd4 1 6 ltJxd4 exd4 1 7 f6 ! lLle5 1 8 �xh7+ 'it>xh7 19 'ifh5+ 'it>g8 20 fxg7 'it>xg7 21 �h6+ 'it>g8 22 �xd4 etc. b) The manoeuvre 13 ...b4 14 lLle2 a5 is too slow in this particular posi­ tion. In the game Magem-Sarmiento, Spain 1 989 after 1 5 ttJbd4 'Llxd4 1 6 l2Jxd4 a4 1 7 l2Jb5 'i'b8 1 8 'it>b 1 lta5 19 'Lld4 'i!/c7 20 f5 e5 21 'Lle2 White had better chances. c) If 13 . 'Llc5, then White has an unpleasant option in 14 ttJxc5 ! (Pos.

..

.

.

sible also is 1 4 '8tb 1 .i.b7 1 5 h4 'Llb4 1 6 f5 Sieiro Gonzalez-Bellon, Ha­ vana 1 997) 1 4. . .dxc5 1 5 e5 (Over­ ambitious is 1 5 'Lld5? exd5 1 6 exd5 'Lla5 1 7 d6 �b7 1 8 j,e4 �xd6, or 1 8 �e2 �xd6 1 9 .i.xc5+ �e7 and Black is winning in both cases ac­ cording to Tiviakov) 1 5 . . . �b7 1 6 .i.e4 l::t d8 1 7 h4 and White's space advantage in the centre and at the kingside ensures a long-lasting (though not big) positional advantage, Tiviakov-Anastasian, USSR 1989. It should be noted that the prom­ ising manoeuvre 1 4 'Llxc5 dxc5 1 5 e 5 i s possible only if the moves �bl and . . . �b7 have not been in­ terpolated. In practice there have been games where Black earlier played . . . .i.b7 instead of ... .i.e7, in which case there are differences. In Kindermann-Stohl, Hamburg 1 995, the critical position arose with the Scheveningen move order: 1 e4 c5 2 l2Jf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 ttJxd4 l2Jf6 5 lLlc3 a6 6 f4 e6 7 �f3 'i!Vb6 8 'Llb3 Wfc7 9 g4 b5 1 0 g5 l2Jfd7 1 1 �e3 ..i.b7 1 2 0-0-0 l2Jc6 1 3 ..i.d3 lUeS (D).

w

White Castles Queenside

As mentioned above, 14 lLlxc5 is ineffective here because Black has played ... .tb7. The game went on 14 Wbl CLJb4?! (Stohl suggests 14 ... 0-0-0 1 5 'ilt'h3 �b8 1 6 g6! fxg6 1 7 l2Jxc5 dxc5 1 8 'ifxe6 with a slight advantage for White) 1 5 'tl'h3 ! CLJbxd3 1 6 cxd3 b4 ( 1 6 . . . lLlxb3 1 7 axb3 g6 I 8 l:rcl 'flle7 1 9 .td4 e5 20 fxe5 dxe5 21 CLJd5 ! ± ) 1 7 lLle2 lLlxd3 1 8 l:rxd3 ..txe4 1 9 l:!. d 1 :cs 2 0 �a1 ..tf5 21 'iffl lLlxd3 22 l:hd3 .1ie7 23 f5 with the initia­ tive for White. C l:

13

/l)b4 (D)

85

White simply plays 1 5 cxd3 and af­ ter 1 5 . . . b4 he has 1 6 lLle2 when 1 6 .. . a5 1 7 l:!.c1 was better for White in Dussart-B . Knezevic, Argente 1 997. If the queen were posted on e2, then White would be forced to play 1 6 lLla4, which loses to 1 6 ... 'i!Yc6. The continuation 14 Ab7 is the most logical. However, this move, in a way, favours White. The thing is that the e6-square becomes very vul­ nerable, which is going to cause se­ rious problems for Black later. Perhaps it's better to keep the bishop temporarily on the c8-square and try another plan by playing 14 1lb8 (D). ...

...

w

w

This is considered the main con­ tinuation, but in future one can expect that Black will pay more attention to the alternative l 3 ... lLlb6 (C2). 14 Wbl Ab7 The difference between this posi­ tion and the one from line B is ap­ parent. Here the queen is on the f3-square and this favours White. Namely, in the case of 14 /l)xd3,

The idea is, in the event of 15 'ff h 3, to continue 15 ... CLJb6 and then 1 6 ... lLla4 or 1 6 . . . lLlc4, with which Black would achieve counterplay on the queenside more quickly than with the continuation 1 4. . . .tb7. White does have other possibili­ ties after 14 ... l:!.b8. For example, 15 a3 lLlxd3 16 cxd3 b4 and 15 l!cl CLJb6 1 6 a3 CLJc6! with the idea 17 .. b4

...

.

86 White Castles Queenside

(or 1 7 . . . 'Da4) and in both cases Black will have satisfactory play. Doubtless, the idea 1 4 . . . l:tbB deserves to be tested in practice. Finally, it is worth mentioning that the immediate 14 �b6 is imprecise because after 1 5 a3 'Dxd3 1 6 cxd3 Black doesn't have 1 6 ... b4. 15 lrh3 (D) A logical and multi-purpose con­ tinuation. The white queen moves from the a8-h 1 diagonal, strengthen­ ing the pressure on the kingside and the e6-point. Other moves pose fewer problems: a) 15 fff2 0-0-0 ( 1 5 . ..0-0!?) 1 6 l:.hel 'iii'b 8 1 7 �fl ;!;; Tolnai-S.Peric, Balatonbereny 1 988. b) 15 f5 'De5 1 6 'Wf4 exf5 (16 ... CDc5 1 7 'Dxc5?! dxc5 1 8 a3 CDxd3 19 cxd3 'iii'b8 20 e5 'iii'a8 21 'De4? l:txd3 ! and Black won, Walter-Liicke, Ger­ many 1 990) 1 7 'ifxf5 0-0 1 8 h4 l:tac8 19 h5 CDbxd3 20 cxd3 b4 2 1 'Dd5 (21 'De4? l:txd3 ! ) 2 l .. .�xd5 22 exd5 'Wc2+ 23 'iii'a 1 't!Ve2 with counterplay, Loffier-Grivas, Cannes 1 995. c) 15 Dhfl l:c8 (In the game Wallace-Bellon, Osterkars 1 995, White played over-ambitiously, ne­ glecting Black's possibilities. There followed 1 5 .. . 0-0 16 'ii'h 5 l:.ac8 1 7 .l:.f3? 'Dxd3 1 8 l:th3 h 6 1 9 l:txd3 ..txe4 20 �d4 e5 21 l:tde3 �g6 and Black achieved a decisive advantage) 16 Wf2 'Dxd3 1 7 cxd3 b4 1 8 'Da4 'ifc6 1 9 'Db6 'Dxb6 20 .i.xb6 0-0 2 1 C0a5 'tWd7 with chances for both sides, Z.Almasi-Kurajica, Moscow OL 1 994.

B

.•.

The diagram position after 1 5 Wh3 is the key one of the 4 ... 'ifb6 system when White castles long. Now White directly threatens g5-g6. His further plan is to play f4-f5, which will en­ able him to be the first to achieve a concrete breakthrough and take the initiative. In order to avoid playing the inferior role and being exposed to attack, Black must, as soon as pos­ sible, organise counterplay either on the queenside or in the centre. The frequent motif of his counterplay is the e4-point. Black players have tried several different plans. The radical way to prevent the 1 6 g6 threat by playing 1 5 . . . g6 (line ' a ' ) is inadvisable. In practice, players have usually pre­ ferred the more challenging . . . 0-0 ( ' b ' ) either at once or a move later. Although it seems to be the most reasonable al ternative, B l ack ' s practical experience with this plan is not encouraging. The relatively unexplored c on tinuation w i th which Black has had success in practice is 1 5 . . . C0c5 (line ' d ' ) . a) 1 5 g 6 1 6 l:t hfl l:t c8 (Or . . .

White Castles Queenside

1 6 . . . 0-0-0 1 7 f5 gxf5 1 8 exf5 e5 1 9 f6 it.:ffl 20 .i.f5 d 5 2 1 a 3 d4 22 tLlxd4 exd4 23 l:txd4 'Llxc2 24 'iPxc2 1 -0 Grosar-Gostisa, Maribor 1 990) 1 7 l:[ d2 tLlxd3 1 8 cxd3 tLlc5 1 9 tLlxc5 dxc5 20 f5 'ifd7 2 1 fxg6 and in the game Beulen-Ravikumar, Dieren 1 990, White prematurely accepted the draw. b) The position after 15 0-0 was tested in several games in practice: b 1 ) 16 J:lhgl l:r.ac8 ( 1 6 . .. tLlxd3 1 7 cxd3 l:r.ac8 1 8 l:cl tLlc5 1 9 �d4 'it'd7 20 �f6 l:fe8 2 1 l:tg3 b4 22 �xg7 bxc3 23 tLlxc5 l:.xc5 24 �d4 �f8 25 g6 ± Z.Almasi-Ricardi, Bue­ nos Aires 1 996) 1 7 f5 exf5 1 8 exf5 tLlxd3 19 cxd3 b4 20 tLle4 d5 21 l:r.c 1 'lfd8 22 tLlec5 tLlxc5 23 tLlxc5 �xc5 24 �xc5 l: e8 25 �d4 and with the centralised bishop White had better chances, P.Wolff-Akopian, Adelaide 1 988. b2) 16 �d4 l:r.fe8 ( 1 6 ... tLlxd3!? 1 7 cxd3 l:r.ac8) 1 7 f5 exf5 1 8 g6 ( 1 8 ltJxf5) 1 8 . . .hxg6 ( 1 8 . . . fxg6) 1 9 exf5 g5 20 l:thg1 tLlxd3 2 1 �xg5 and here the opponents unexpectedly quickly agreed a draw, Vouldis-Grivas, Komotini 1993. b3) 16 l:lhfl (D) Probably the best. There are two fine examples, both illustrating the difficulties Black has in finding an adequate way to parry White's attack. b3 1 ) 16 Dfe8 1 7 f5 exf5 ( 1 7 .. . .i.ffl 1 8 fxe6 fxe6 19 tLld4 tLlc5 20 g6 ± ) 1 8 exf5 tLlxd3 19 l:hd3 tLlf8 (This move loses directly, but if 19 . . . .i.:ffl , then 20 l:f4 with the idea

87

B

...

...

2 1 l:h4 is very unpleasant) 20 f6 it.d8 2 1 tLld4 (The knight enters the game with decisive effect. In order to pre­ vent tLlf5, Black is forced to aban­ don the d5 square) 2 l .. ...i.c8 22 'iff3 l:b8 23 fxg7 �xg7 24 tLld5 ft'b7 25 tLlc6 ! 1 -0 Sax-Urday, Manila OL 1 992. b32) 16 Dfc8 17 f5 tLlxd3 ( 1 7 . . . exf5) 1 8 fxe6 ! lLJxb2 1 9 exf7+ 'iPh8 20 g6 tLlf8 2 1 �d4 tLlxg6 (2 1 . . . tLlxd1 2 2 ft'h6 ! ) 2 2 l: f5 tLlh4 2 3 l:t g 1 tLlxf5 24 fi'xf5 .i. ffl 2 5 't1Vf6 The final point. Black is defenceless, Vehi Bach-Anastasian, Groningen 1 993 ( 1 -0, 34). b33) It is better to take first: 16 �xd3 1 7 cxd3 and then 1 7 . . . l: ac8. c) Let us also mention Black 's option o f castling one move later, i.e. after 15 l:lc8. In the game Petelin­ G.Kuzmin, Saint Petersburg 1 993, White was outplayed because he hesi­ tated to carry out the basic plan f4-f5 as fast as possible. There followed 16 l:ld2 0-0 1 7 l:tg1 ( 1 7 l:tfl ) 17 . . . tLlxd3 1 8 cxd3 l:tfe8 1 9 tLld4 ( 1 9 f5) 1 9 . . . b4 20 tLlce2 tLlc5 2 1 f5 exf5 22 ...

...

...

88 White Castles Queenside

exf5 �f8 23 lt:l f4 g6 24 'tWg3 �g7 25 h4? lt:le4! 26 dx.e4 �xe4+ 27 lt:ld3 'ifc4 and it is obvious that Black has won the tactical battle. Instead of 1 6 l:.d2, better is 16 �d4 0-0 1 7 f5 exf5 1 8 lt:l x f5 Petrov-Todorov, Sofia 1 994. The fact that, in such types of posi­ tion, White has to be cautious and take care of his sensitive d3- and e4-points in the centre is also illustrated by the following example where there was another tactical duel in the centre. d) 15 ... /l:}cS!? (D)

to be a better continuation. After 1 6... dxc5 in the case of 17 g6 fxg6 1 8 'tWxe6 �c8 1 9 lt:ld5 lLlxd5 20 'tWxd5 �b7 2 1 'ife6 �c8 if White avoids the draw by repetition, Black would obtain good play, for exam­ ple, after 22 'ir'b3 c4 23 'iVc3 0-0 with the idea .. . �e6. Instead of 1 7 g6, 17 Jle2 is better, after which the black knight on b4 is misplaced. Nevertheless, 1 5 ... lLlc5 !? is an in­ teresting continuation that should be seriously considered by both sides in the future. C2:

w

13 /l:}b6 This is the best alternative to the main continuation 1 3 ... lt:lb4. 14 Wb1 (D)

B

Exerting pressure on the e4- and d3-squares, Black forces the game: d l ) 16 llhfl lZ'lbxd3 17 cxd3 b4 18 lLle2 liJxd3 19 .l:.xd3 �xe4 20 �d4 'ifc4 2 1 liJec l 0-0 22 'i!Ye3 � xd3 + 2 3 ltJ x d3 a5 S . P o l g ar­ Saltaev, Debrecen 1 990. In this com­ plex position, Black's chances are slightly preferable. d2) If White wants to avoid the tactical complications that unavoid­ ably follow the previous variation, he can play 16 /l:}xc5, which I consider

There are several examples from tournament practice where, as a rule, a complex game arose, with mutual chances: a) 14 ... �b8 1 5 h4 lLlc4 16 �cl 0- 0 1 7 h 5 �d7 1 8 VWg3 :fc8 oo Tolnai-Vragoteris, Katerini 1 992.

White Castles Queens1de

b) 14 . Ad7 (A weaker continua­ tion) 1 5 h4 b4 1 6 'Lle2 a5 1 7 'Llbd4 'Llxd4 1 8 .i.xd4 ;t Rios Alejandro­ Bakre, Argentina 1 997. c) 14...b4 1 5 'Lle2 and the ques­ tion arises, whether in such types of position it is useful for Black to react in the centre with ... e5. I think that the drawbacks of this move are more prominent than its advantages: 1 5 ... e5 1 6 f5 a5 1 7 f6 gxf6 1 8 gxf6 �f8 1 9 'Llg3 a4 2 0 'Ll c 1 a3 2 1 b 3 �h6! 22 ..

89

'Llce2 (22 �xh6? loses after 22 . . 'Lld4 with the idea 23 ... 'ifc3) 22 .. . .i.xe3 23 1Wxe3 oo Urday-Bellon, Benasque 1 993 . d) 14 ... /t)a4 1 5 'Lle2 �d7 1 6 't!Yg3 0-0-0 1 7 'ite 1 �b8 1 8 'Llbd4 l:.c8= Vouldis-Grivas, Ilioupolis 1 995. 13 ... 'Llb6, not mentioned in BTSJ, is a relatively uninvestigated continu­ ation. Some higher level examples are needed in order for more reliable con­ clusions to be made. .

1 0 Whi te's Alternatives At M ove 7

The fundamental position of the whole 4 .. .'tib6 system arises after 1 e4 c5 2 �f3 �c6 3 d4 cxd4 4 �xd4 'Wb6 5 �b3 �f6 6 �c3 e6 (D).

w

Now we shall consider: A: 7 g3 B: 7 't!Ve2 C: 7 �g5, and D: 7 a3. Although these continuations are seen less often, all of them deserve respect and should not be under­ estimated. A:

7

g3 (D)

B

In the previous Parts, we dealt with the two main continuations, 7 �d3 and 7 �e3. In this Third Part, we shall exam­ ine various deviations that White can make in the early phase of the game. This chapter discusses moves for White in the above position other than 7 ii..d3 and 7 �e3. Chapter 1 1 ex­ amines the variation where instead of defending the e-pawn with the knight, White plays 6 �d3. Chapter 1 2 deals with various moves that White can make at move five instead of 5 lLlb3, namely 5 �e3 and 5 lLlb5.

The fianchetto line is quite play­ able and sound, although a bit too reserved for my taste. 7 �b4 Black takes his chance to react quickly in the centre with . . . d5 . Instead, the continuation 7 d6 ...

White 's Alternatives A t Move 7 91

transposes into lines analogous to the Scheveningen fianchetto, 1 e4 c5 2 lZJO d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lZJxd4 lZJf6 5 lZJc3 e6 6 g3 lZJc6 7 �g2 �d7 8 0-0 �e7 9 lLlb3 (ECO B80). I recom­ mend those players who are familiar with the finesses of the Scheveningen to use this possibility. The positions that arise after 7 ... d6 are, as usual, very complex with positional manoeuvring that demands patience and skill. An example is the game Pohl­ Efimov, Philadelphia 1 990, where there followed: 8 �g2 il..e7 9 0-0 0-0 1 0 ..-e2 a6 1 1 .i.e3 ... c7 1 2 f4 b5 1 3 e5? (This move only creates weak­ nesses in the white position; he should have continued 1 3 .l:.ad1 or 1 3 g4) 1 3 . . . dxe5 1 4 fxe5 lZJd7 1 5 .i.f4 �b7 16 l:tae 1 b4 with a clear advantage for Black. d5 (D) 8 Ag2

w

Only this main line seems to give some hope for achieving a certain advantage in the opening. Two other modest possibilities don't cause Black any problems: a) 9 .A.d2 dxe4 1 0 lZJxe4 lZJxe4 1 1 �xe4 ..txd2+ 1 2 't!Vxd2 0-0 1 3 0-0-0 a5= Xie Jun"Gant, Novi Sad OL 1 990. b) 9 exd5 lZJxd5 10 i.d2 lZJxc3 1 1 bxc3 .i.e7 1 2 0-0 0-0 when although White has a lead in development, this advantage can easily evaporate, leav­ ing his weaknesses along the c-file prominent: in the later phase of the game: b l ) 13 lre2 i.d7 1 4 l:tab1 ..-c7 1 5 l:fe 1 l:tad8 1 6 lZJd4 'ffc8 ! 1 7 �f4 lZJxd4 1 8 cxd4 J/..c6 =i= Inkiov-Lukov, Vama 1983. b2) 13 �bl f!ic7 1 4 lZJd4 l:d8 15 lZJxc6 bxc6 16 ...e2 'iVa5 ! 17 l:fd1 ( 1 7 �xc6? i.a6) 1 7 ... .i.a6 18 11Ve1 11Va4 and Black in this example, too, achieved the advantage, Stoinev­ Kovalev, Berlin 1992. 9 Axc3 9 d4 is also possible although the position that arises by force af­ ter 1 0 e5 lZJd7 1 1 lLle2 lZJdxe5 1 2 lZJexd4 0-0 1 3 c 3 il.. e 7 i s slightly more favourable for White. For ex­ ample 14 Ae3 lZJxd4 1 5 'f!V xd4 'it'xd4 1 6 lZJxd4 i.d7 1 7 l:ad1 Romero Holmes-B e l l on, Ceuta 1 993, or 14 lre2 lZJxd4 1 5 cxd4 lZJc6 1 6 l:td1 lLlb4 1 7 d5!? lZJxa2 1 8 l:xa2 'it'xb3 19 l:a1 .i.c5 20 d6 .i.d7 2 1 �e3 and the strong d6-pawn turned to be more than sufficient corn...

Experience with this position is still fairly limited. White has tried several continuations. 9 0-0!

9.1 White 's Alte.matives At Move 7

pensation in the game Campora­ Kurajica, Bor 1 983. After 9 ... ..i.xc3, White has the choice between: Al : 1 0 bxc3, and A2: 1 0 exd5 A1:

10 bxc3 �xe4 This move leads to sharp compli­ cations in which White does not hesi­ tate to sacrifice pawns to get the initiative. Simpler is 10 ... 0-0, which after 1 1 exd5 tt:lxd5 transposed into the variation I 0 exd5 (A2). 11 c4! Risky is 11 Axe4 dxe4 1 2 'Wg4 ..i.d7 1 3 'ii'xg7 0-0-0 with the idea . . . tt:le5-0, but 1 1 1l'g4 is worthy of consideration. The game A.Ivanov­ Gufeld, USSR 1 983, had an exciting course: 1 I . . ..i.d7 ( I l . . . g6 ! ?) 1 2 �xg7 0-0-0 1 3 c4 l:thg8 1 4 'ii'b2 ( 1 4 'ii'h6 oo ) 1 4. . . tt:lxg3 1 5 hxg3 %hg3 1 6 �e3 l:.xg2+! 1 7 Wxg2 d4! with a dangerous attack. 0-0 11 Or ll /t)e7 1 2 cxd5 exd5 1 3 c4 ..i.e6 1 4 ..i.e3 with compensation, D .Pavlovic-Djukic, Svrljig 1 994. 12 Jte3 1Wd8 /t)f6 13 lle1 1 4 cxd5 /t)xd5 l:le8 15 Acs /t)b6 16 c4 e5 17 1fc2 18 l:::ta d1 and White had a very active posi­ tion in Cam pora-Akopian, D o s Hermanas 1 992. .

...

A2:

10 exd5 /t)xd5 0-0 bxc3 11 11 ... /t)xc3 1 2 'ifg4 is out of the question. 1 2 c4 /t)de7 c5 13 ffa6! (D)

w

It is not a good idea to retreat as the queen will be disturbed down the open d-file. In Tosic-B. Damljanovic, Vmjacka Banja 1 984, after 13 .. 11d8 1 4 'iYe2 e5 1 5 ..i.b2 f6 1 6 l::t adl , White had the better chances with the option of occupying the d6-square. e5! 14 Ab2 15 f4 Ae6 16 1fe1 Ads Axg2 17 fxe5 18 Wxg2 1l'c4 l:Iad8 19 l:ln 20 'i'fe2 fldS+ ft)g6 21 Wg1 with good play for Black, Szmetan­ Panno, Buenos Aires 1 995. .

B: 7 'ff e2 (D) An unpleasant continuation :

White 's Altematives At Move 7 93

White's idea is to castle long and push the kingside pawns as soon as possi­ ble. The light-squared bishop won't be exposed on the a8-h1 diagonal and will support the pressure on Black's position. If he plays superficially, Black can easily face serious prob­ lems. Practice has shown that this system can be extremely dangerous for an unprepared opponent.

Examples with that continuation are not promising from Black's point of view: a) 7...d6 8 g4 a6 (8 . . .h6 9 h4 a6 10 �h3 g6 1 1 �e3 'f!lc7 1 2 0-0-0 b5 13 g 5 hxg5 1 4 hxg5 lLl h5 1 5 �g4 ± P.Popovic-Skembris, Greece 1990) 9 g5 (9 �g2 'ii'c7 10 �e3 �e7 1 1 g5 lL:ld7 1 2 f4 b5 1 3 'i\ff2 .l::tb 8 1 4 lL:ld4 lL:lxd4 1 5 �xd4 0-0 1 6 0-0-0 �b7 1 7 h4 :res oo Savicevic-Cabrilo, Nis 1 994) 9 ... lL:ld7 1 0 f4 'fllc 7 1 1 �e3 ( 1 1 �g2 b5 1 2 �e3 lLlb6 1 3 lLld2 �e7 14 0-0 0-0 1 5 a3 �b7 16 f5 exf5 1 7 exf5 .l:!.fe8 1 8 'it'f2 ..td8 1 9 g6 lLle5 oo Zlatanovic-Z.Ilic, Svrljig 1 994) l l ...b5 12 'f!lt2 �b7 1 3 a4 b4 1 4 lLle2 lLla5 1 5 lLlg3 .l::t c 8 1 6 lLla5 'f!la5 1 7 i.g2 d5 oo Gavri lakis­ Cabrilo, Kavala 1 990. b) 7 $J..e7 (A weaker version of the main line with 7 ... i.b4; Black allows White to play e4-e5) 8 e5 lL:ld5 9 lL:lxd5 exd5 10 i.f4 'ii' b4+ 1 1 i.d2 '4!r'e4 1 2 'it'xe4 dxe4 1 3 i.c3 0-0 14 0-0-0 with a positional advantage for White, Zontakh-V.Damjanovic, Bel­ grade 1 993. c) 7 flc7 8 g4! h6 (8 ...d6 9 i.g2 a6 10 a4 b6 1 1 0-0 i.e7 1 2 f4 .l:b8 1 3 g5 lL:ld7 1 4 �e3 lLla5 1 5 i.d4 with a considerable advantage for White, Velceva-J.Ivanov, Burgas 1 993) 9 i.g2 a6 10 f4! d6 1 1 �d2 (D) Experts on the 4 .. .'YWb6 system such as Akopian, Anastasian and Avshalumov - have had problems with this position: c l ) ll ...iJ.e7 12 h4 g6 1 3 0-0-0 i.d7 14 �f1 0-0-0 1 5 g5 (White ...

After 7 'ii'e2 Black has the choice between two completely different systems, leading to quite different types of position. 7 �b4 An old continuation - but still the most reliable and flexible. The moves 7... 'flc7, 7 . d6 and 7 . �e7 lead to a more complex game and the types of positions that arise resemble the Keres Attack in a more favourable form for White. White's spatial ad­ vantage is the dominant factor and it i s not easy for Black to organise counterplay. This claim is most con­ vincingly confirmed by those games where both sides castle queenside. .

.

..

...

94 White 's Altematives At Move 7

B

but less ambitious than 9 ... JI..x c3. 10 eS �dS Possible is 10 . . �e8. In the game V.Spasov-Kuraj ica, Moscow OL 1 994, after 1 1 0-0-0 'filc7 12 f4 a6 1 3 lL!e4 d6 1 4 exd6 lL!xd6 1 5 g 3 bS 1 6 .i.g2 lL!xe4 1 7 .i.xe4 .tb7 1 8 .i.c3 a draw was agreed. exd5 11 /Qxd5 d6 1 2 0-0-0 13 exd6 .axd6 14 .t.c3 (D) .

missed I S lL!xdS ! exdS 1 6 exd5 lL!b8 1 7 'it'xe7 ± ) 15 ... lLlh5 1 6 l:lhe1 hxgS 1 7 hxgS .i.f8 1 8 'iVf2 bS 19 lLJdS ! exdS 20 exdS lL!b8 2 1 .i.aS 'iib7 22 .i.xhS l:txhS 23 'fi'd4! .i.e8 24 l:le3 ! 1 -0 Mik.Tseitlin-Avshalumov, Balat­ onbereny 1 989. c2) ll . .bS 12 0-0-0 .i.b7 13 .i.f3 Jl..e 7 14 h4 lL!d7 IS lL!xdS exd5 1 6 exd5 lL!ceS 1 7 fxeS lL!xe5 1 8 .i.e4 w i th th e superior position, Y e Jiangchuan-Anastasian, Beijing 1 99 1 . c3) l l ...b 6 1 2 0-0-0 .i.b7 1 3 h4 0-0-0 14 g5 lLJd7 15 g6 lL!cS 16 fS 'iPb8 1 7 gxf7 'it'xf7 1 8 fxe6 'ifxe6 1 9 lL!d5 with an advantage for White, A.lvanov-Akopian, New York 1 994. Now we return to the main con­ tinuation, 7 ... .i.b4. 0-0 8 .ad2 9 a3 Here Black again faces the choice: B 1 : 9 . .. J.. e 7 and B2: 9 . .. .i.xc3

B

.

B1:

9 .ae7 This older continuation is playable

Black remains with an isolated pawn in the centre, but as compensa­ tion he has a harmonious develop­ ment of his pieces and the possibility of play along the c-file. In the game Short-Gufeld, Dort­ mund 1 983, White chose another plan but after 14 .ae3 f!lc 7 1 5 Wb 1 (In the case of 1 5 l:txd5 .i.e6 1 6 l:.d1 :ac8 Black would have had good compensation) 1 5 . . . .i.e6 1 6 .tcS l: fd8 17 .i.xd6 l:hd6 18 lL!d4 lL!xd4 19 l:[xd4 .tfS 20 'fild2 'i!Vc5 21 l:lf4 d4 Black had an equal game. 14 Jle6

White 's Altematives At Move 7 95

15 •d2 •c7 More precise is 15 ... J:lac8. Ae5 16 g3 1 7 �xe5 White also achieved a small ad­ vantage in Klinger-Wirthensohn, Graz 1 984, after 17 Ag2 lhc8 1 8 .i. xe5 'tixe5 ( 1 8. . . lt.Jxe5 1 9 'iii b 1 lt.J c 4 20 1lld3 ;t ) 1 9 lt.Jd4! ;t . 17 1rxe5 18 .S.b5 l:lac8 19 Dhe1 •f6 Ag4 20 Wb1 21 J:lct l:lfd8 bxc6 22 Axc6 23 .b4 The control of c5 and the possi­ bility of making a blockade on the dark squares are the factors that en­ sure a small positional advantage for White, P . Cramling-Wirthensohn, Zurich 1 984. Still, there remains the impression that with precise play Black can hold the balance. B2:

Axc3 9 This, the most challenging con­ tinuation, is relatively unexplored. It leads to a more complex game than 9 . . . J&.e7. e5 10 Axc3 11 0-0-0 (D) The diagram shows one of the critical positions for the whole sys­ tem with 7 1lfe2. Although at first sight it doesn't look it, the position is full of dynamics and hidden tactical possibilities. Black's basic idea is to free himself from the pressure along

B

the d-file and make the ...d5 advance. However, it is not easy to realise this idea successfully in practice, as can be seen from these examples. a) l l .l:le8 1 2 g4! d5 (The only move) 1 3 exd5 J&.xg4 14 f3 lt.Jd4! 1 5 lt.Jxd4 exd4 1 6 J&.xd4 1lld6 with a sharp position that is playable for both sides. A lot of tactics were seen in the further course of the gam e Sorokin-V.Karasev, Blagoveschensk 1 988: 1 7 'it't2 1lff4 1 8 l:.d2 J&.xf3 ( 1 8 . . . 1Wxf3 1 9 l:. g 1 ± ) 1 9 J&.xf6 l:.e4?! ( 1 9 . . . gxf6 !) 20 J&.g2 l:le2 2 1 'ti'd4 l:.e4? ! (2 I . . . 'ti'xd4) 2 2 l:.fl ! l:tae8 23 'il:Yg l l:te2 24 �c3 'ti'xd2+ 25 .i.xd2 l:txg2 26 'it'd4 f6 1 -0. b) l l .Dd8 is met by 12 Dd6! which prevents ... d5 and threatens 1 3 .1&.a5 or 1 3 l:.xf6; this i s stronger than 12 g4 d5 1 3 exd5 lt.Jxd5 1 4 J&.xe5 � xg4 1 5 'il:Yxg4 lt.Jxe5 1 6 'iVe4 'it'h6+! and now if 17 'iifb l ?, then 1 7 .. . lt.Jc3+ wins. Also, the positional treatment of the position with 12 g3 doesn't cause Black any trouble. In the game Kudrin-Yermolinsky, Chi­ cago 1 993, Black had good play af­ ter 1 2 ... d6 1 3 J&.g2 .i.g4! 1 4 f3 �e6 ..

..

96 White 's Alternatives At Move 7

1 5 f4 �xb3 1 6 c x b3 �xb3 1 7 'iiib 1 b5 ! 1 8 l:. d3 'fi' e6 1 9 exf4 20 l:.xb5 fxg3 21 hxg3 lUeS. After 12 �d6! Black cannot avoid the exchange sacrifice because of the threat �a5 . For example 12 ... �d4? loses to 1 3 l:.xd4 exd4 1 4 �a5. There­ fore he must try 12 .Oc7 1 3 l:.xf6 gxf6 14 �g4+ 'ii?h 8 (Better is 14...c;t.f8 15 'it'h4 d6 16 'ilt'xf6 �e6 1 7 f4 'itie8 1 8 ..tb5 with compensation accord­ ing to Adams) 1 5 "Wh4 'it'd6 ( 1 5 ... d6) 1 6 f4! (Black has insoluble problems on the a1 -h8 diagonal) 16 ... 'f!Ve7 1 7 �b5! rle8 (Or 1 7 . . . d6? 1 8 �xc6 bxc6 1 9 fxe5 dxe5 20 �b4 .e6 21 CUeS 'ille7 22 CUb7+-) 1 8 .:d1 d6 1 9 'Lla5 �d7 20 CUb7 CUd4 2 1 l:.xd4! �xb5 (2l ...exd4 22 �xd4 'it>g8 23 �d3 ! 'ilt'e6 24 f5+-) 22 CUxd6 with a deci­ sive attack for White, Adams-B . Knezevic, Royat 1 997. After this game it became clear that 1 1 .. J:td8 is not satisfactory. Bet­ ter alternatives are 1 1 ... .l:le8 (line 'a') and the modest but probably most reliable ll . .�e8 with the idea . . . d6 and ... �e6. Though relatively slow, this idea deserves attention. The tem­ porary abandonment of control of the d5-point does not have direct conse­ quences because the white knight is on the b3-square. I think that the further fate of the 9 . . . �xc3 tine depends on the assess­ ment and practical testing of the con­ tinuation 1 1 . .. ctJe8. ..

.

C: 7

ilg5 (D)

ile7 7 If Black doesn't want to play the Rauzer Sicilian type of position, he has a fine alternative in 7. Ab4. For example: 8 �xf6 gxf6 and now: a) 9 1ff3 �e7 1 0 ..te2 (The greedy policy is unjustifiable: 1 0 'f!Vg3 d6 1 1 'illg7? ! lt f8 1 2 'ifxh7 .i.d7 13 0-0-0 0-0-0 14 'it'h6 'it'xt2 + Grabics-Kerek, Hungary 1 994) 1 0 .. . d6 1 1 0-0 �d7 12 'i!fh5 0-0-0 1 3 a4 l:.dg8 with a balanced position, Novak-Papacek, Karvina 1989. b) Or 9 Vd2 a6 10 a3 (White achieves nothing after 1 0 'fih6 �xc3+ 1 1 bxc3 'ii?e7 12 V/iig7 V/ii d 8) �e7 1 1 0-0-0 d6 1 2 f4 .i.d7 1 3 �e2 h5 14 l:.hfl 0-0-0 1 5 l:.f3 .:dg8 with equal play, Milosevic-Karpman, Beta Crkva 1 989. 8 1td2 Instead 8 _ad3 transposes into the 9 �g5 line (Chapter 5) and this is the most often played plan in prac­ tice. 8 Ae2 has its independent char­ acter: 8 .. . a6 (8 .. .h6?! 9 ..te3 'Wic7 1 0 f4 d6 1 1 0-0 a6 1 2 a4 Genin-Reshko, Leningrad 1 967) 9 0-0 d6 (9 ... W/c7 1 0 f4 h6?! { 1 0 ... d6} 1 1 �xf6 gxf6 ..

WhJfe 's Alternatives At Move 7 97

1 2 .i..h 5! b5 1 3 ..t>h 1 .i.b7 1 4 'i!Ve2 ± Maki-Ce. Silva, Malta OL 1 980) 1 0 a4 ( 1 0 .i..xf6 gxf6 oo ) I O .. . 'i!Vc7 1 1 a5 0-0 ( l l ...b5 ! ? 1 2 axb6 'ifxb6) 1 2 l:t e 1 b5 1 3 axb6 'f!Yxb6 1 4 .i.fl .l:.d8 1 5 .l:.a4 lt:Jb4 1 6 lLla5 J.d7 1 7 .l:.a3 J.e8 1 8 lLlc4 'fli c7 oo Gii .Garcia­ Z.Ilic, Saint John 1 988. 8 a6 9 0-0-0 (D) A more peaceful plan doesn ' t promise any advantage: 9 Ae2 'file? (Less precise is 9.. . 0-0 1 0 f4 d6 1 1 g4 Vatter-Bialas, Germany 1 989) 1 0 0-0 b5 1 1 a3 .i.. b7 1 2 .l:r.ad1 .l:.d8 1 3 f4 d6 1 4 'ife3 h6 1 5 J.h4 b4 1 6 axb4 lLlxb4 with good play for Black, Timmerman-Piket, Netherlands 1 987.

lLJxd5 lLlxd5 1 7 J.f3 ± Badalov­ Kevorkian, corr. 1 994) 1 1 ... lLle3 1 2 lLla4 'iWc6 1 3 'iWxe3 'iWxa4 1 4 'i¥c5 lLlc6 1 5 a3 b6 16 .i.b5 and White won, Klovans-Kveinys, Riga 1 986. b) 9 d6 10 h4 J.d7 1 1 f3 fife? 1 2 h 5 ! h6 1 3 .i.. e 3 ;!; Rossolimo­ R.Byme, USA 1 968. c) 9...0-0 10 f4 d6 ( 1 0 ... h6 1 1 J.xf6 J.xf6 1 2 h4 { 1 2 e5? lLlxe5 ! 1 3 fxe5 .i.g5 } 1 2 cl5 1 3 e5 il..e7 1 4 g 4 a 5 oo Emunds-Liicke, MUnster 1 992) 1 1 .i.e2 jtd7 1 2 .i.f3 ( 1 2 .i.xf6?! .i.. xf6 1 3 e5 dxe5 1 4 'iWd7 l:ad8-+ and 1 3 'fixd6 .i.xc3 + do not satisfy either) 1 2 ... l:tac8 1 3 .tlhe 1 .l:.fd8 oo Calcado-Antonio, Parana 1 993 . ...

. . .

D: B

This position is similar to those that arise in the Richter-Rauzer At­ tack. There are several examples from tournament practice: a) 9 /0g4?! (Too early. Black isn't sufficiently developed to sup­ port this active play) 1 0 il..xe7 lLlxe7 1 1 f3 ( 1 1 lLld4 d6 12 h3 lLlf6 13 g4 h6 14 .i.e2 d5 15 exd5 lLlfxd5 1 6 ...

7

a3 (D)

Similarly to the line 7 .i.e3 "i/c7 8 a3 (Chapter Eight), the idea of this move is to prevent the pinning ... �b4. However, one should note a differ­ ence between these two cases. Here White still hasn 't committed himself

98 White 's Altematives At Move 7

with his dark-squared bishop, so it is possible - if Black continues care­ lessly - for White to play the con­ venient .i.f4, w i th the idea of exploiting the d6 square. This is what happens in several examples given below. For Black it's best to play 7 ...d6 or 7... "fkc7 and thus offer a transposi­ tion into a kind of Scheveningen or Paulsen, where White has played the moves t0b3 and a3 . In general, these two moves can be useful for White but one should have in mind that fre­ quently opponents don't have in their repertoire those lines of the Schev­ eningen which include these two moves. Now Black has several moves to consider: D l : 7... a6 02: 7... �e7 03: 7 ...d6 04: 7 ..."fkc7!?

Dl:

7

a6

Imprecise.

8 .i.f4! (D) A strong move. White threatens 9 eS and prevents Black from playing the logical continuations 9 ... �e7, 9. . . d6 and 9... flc7. In practice after 8 .i.f4 Black has had problems: a) 8 dS?! 9 exdS t0xd5 10 lDxdS exdS 1 1 "fkxdS .i.e6 12 'ife4 0-0-0 13 .i.e3 "fkc7 14 �c4 .i.xc4 1 5 _.xc4 �b8 1 6 0-0 and Black didn't have adequate c ompensation, Zakic.•.

B

Djukic, Kladovo 1 991 . b) 8...eS 9 �gS �e7 10 ii.e2 ( 1 0 .i.xf6 .i.xf6 1 1 /OdS "fkd8 1 2 CZJd2 b5 13 a4 :b8 14 axb5 axb5 1 5 .i.d3 0-0 1 6 0-0 d6 1 7 tZ:lf3 g6 1 8 'i!Ve2 b4 1 9 ..tb5 .i.b7 20 .l:a4 ;t Si on Castro­ Bellon, Spain 1 994) 1 0 ... 0-0 1 1 0-0 'ird8 1 2 'ii'd3 tt:le8 1 3 ..te3 d6 14 tt:ld5 ..te6 15 .i.b6 'i!Vd7 1 6 c4 ± Wahls-Bonsch, Dortmund 1990. c) 8...�e7 (An original manoeu­ vre which seems to be better than the two previous continuations) 9 e5 tt:ledS 1 0 tt:lxd5 tt:lxdS 1 1 ii.g3 ( 1 1 �d2 !?) 1 l . . .h5 12 h4 lDe3 1 3 "fkd2 tt:lxfl 1 4 :xn 'i!Vc6 1 5 f3 b5 16 tt:la5 fJJc 7 1 7 0-0-0 ;l; Novik-V .Karasev, Novosibirsk 1 989.

D2:

7 .i.e7 (D) This continuation is also inad­ visable. 8

.i.f4!

White emphasises the weakness of the d6 square. Less enterprising is 8 .i.e2 d6 9 0-0 a6 10 ..te3 'f!/c7 1 1 f4 b5 1 2 .i.f3 �b7 Pienski-Carlier, Baden-Baden

White 's Alternatives At Move 7 99

w

1 99 1 , which transposes into a kind of classic Scheveningen. Several ex­ amples of this type are given in Chap­ ter Eight, line C. Black could also obtain a solid game with the quick central reaction ... d5 which occurred in the game Karai-Zitin, Tallinn 1 997, where after 8 �e2 0-0 9 0-0 d5 ! 1 0 exd5 l:td8 1 1 .i. f4 l2J xd5 Black equalised. 8 0-0 9 eS tOes 10 .*.d3 a) lO a6 1 1 0-0 Wlc7 1 2 l:te1 g6 ( 1 2 . . . f5 !?) 1 3 'ifd2 d6 14 exd6 ..txd6 1 5 ..txd6 'f!Vxd6 1 6 l:tad1 Wlc7 1 7 l2Je4 ± Ljubojevic-Panno, Vina del Mar 1 988. b) lO f6 1 1 exf6 (1 1 .te3 'i¥c7 12 exf6 l2Jxf6 1 3 0-0 d5 1 4 l2Jb5 'f!Vd8 1 5 f4 ± ) 1 l ...l2Jxf6 12 0-0 d5 1 3 .i.g3 ..td7 14 l2Ja4 'i¥d8 1 5 l2Jac5 e5 16 c4 ± Enders-Avshalumov, Budapest 1 989. ...

•••

D3:

7 d6 This continuation is better than the previous two. Some examples are given below where the transition into

the earlier examined variations is avoided. a) 8 Ae2 (If 8 Af4 Black plays 8 .. . l2Je5) 8 ... ..te7 9 0-0 0-0 1 0 ..te3 Wlc7 1 1 f4 a6 1 2 .to b5 1 3 g4 l:te8 14 g5 l2Jd7 1 5 ..tg2 l:tb8 1 6 :n b4 with a typical sharp Sicilian battle, Rajna-Cabrilo, Pancevo 1 987. b) 8 Ae3 'f!Vc7 9 ..td3 (9 f4 a6 10 g4 ..te7 1 1 g5 l2Jd7 12 a4 b6 oo Dukaczewski-Giffard, Torcy 1 991) 9 ...a 6 1 0 0-0 ..te7 1 1 f4 b5 1 2 'itr>h1 b4?! (Premature. Better is 1 2 ... 0-0) 1 3 axb4 l2Jxb4 14 W/d2! d5 15 e5 l2J d7 1 6 l2Jb5 'i¥b8 1 7 l2J 5 d4 ± Luther-Grivas, Corfu 1 99 1 . D4: 7 tfc7! ? Probably the best move order. Black immediately avoids the ..tf4 possibility and the game inevitably transposes into some kind of Schev­ eningen or Paulsen where White played l2Jb3 and a3 early. This early commitment by White, theoretically speaking, favours Black, who thus manages to avoid many variations. White can continue in various ways. For example: a) 8 f4 d6 9 ..td3 a6 1 0 0-0 ..te7 1 1 �h 1 b5 1 2 ..td2 ..tb7 1 3 'iVt1 0-0 1 4 l:he 1 M.Cid-Panno, Femeda Cup 1 99 1 , leads to the main line that has been considered in Part One. b) 8 g3 a6 9 f4 d6 10 a4 b6 1 1 ..tg2 ..tb7 1 2 0-0 j.e7 1 3 ..te3 0-0 1 4 'We2 l:tfe8 1 5 l:ad1 l2Jb4 with equality, Pesic-Z.Ilic, Nis 1 99 1 .

1 1 Dev iations on White's Sixt h Move

After l e4 cS 2 /t)O /t)c6 3 d4 cxd4 4 /t)xd4 1rb6 5 �b3 /t)f6 The alternative to 6 tLlc3 is 6 �d3 (D) with which White retains the pos­ sibility of c2-c4. This continuation doesn't cause any difficulties for Black, who achieves a good game by reacting at the right moment in the centre with . .. d5.

Kurajica, Bor 1 983, after 7 0-0 i.g7 8 i.e3 'Wic7 9 tLlc3 0-0 1 0 h3 d6 1 1 f4 a6 1 2 a4 b6 1 3 'Wie2 t2Jb4 1 4 t2Jd2 'Lld7 1 5 CDc4 4::\ c 5. A:

6 7 8

0-0 c4 (D)

e6 �e7

B

Black has at his disposal two equally good continuations: A: 6 ... e6 and B: 6 ... d5. Black also equalised with the con­ tinuation 6 g6 in the game Pavlovic...

Black rnustn't underestimate this position. If he plays superficially, he could easily get into a kind ofHedge­ hog that is unfavourable for him be­ cause he played an early . . . 4::\ c6. The right way to treat the position was demonstrated by GM Epishin, who

Deviations on White 's Sixth Move 101

reacted at once in the centre with 8 . . . d5 ! (line 'c'). a) 8 d6 9 lLic3 "f!lc7 10 .tf4 b6 1 1 l:tc 1 'illd7 1 2 'iVe2 .i.b7 1 3 l:tfd1 ± Rechlis-Maryasin, Israel 1 997. b) 8 ltle5!? (As Black wants to play a flexible Hedgehog, he has to transfer this knight to d7) 9 lLic3 d6 (Weaker is 9 ... a6 1 0 .i.f4 d6 1 1 l:r.cl lL\fd7 1 2 .i.e3 'flc7 13 f4 lLixd3 1 4 � x d3 b 6 1 5 $. d 4 Filguth-Van Riemsdijk, Lone Pine 1 978) 1 0 .i.e3 Wic7 1 1 Ae2 0-0 1 2 l:.c1 a6 1 3 lLid4 b6 1 4 b3 l:te8 1 5 f4 lLied7 1 6 J.f3 �b7 transposing into a classical un­ clear Hedgehog. c) 8 d5! 9 cxd5 (9 lLic3 d4 10 c5 'l!Wd8 1 1 lLib5 0-0 1 2 $.g5 e5 1 3 l:tc1 lLie8 14 .i.d2 .i.e6 15 f4 exf4 1 6 .txf4 a6 1 7 lLia3 .i.g5 'i' Brooks­ Epishin, New York 1 989) 9.. .exd5 1 0 lLic3 dx.e4 1 1 lLixe4 0-0 1 2 'ilfe2 ( 1 2 j_e3) 1 2 ... lLid4 1 3 lL\xd4 �xd4 1 4 l:td1 ? ! .i.g4 1 5 lLixf6+ J.xf6 1 6 �xh7+ Wh8 1 7 l:Xd4 .i.xe2 1 8 .:d2 l:.fe8 1 9 .i.c2 l:tac8 and Black had excellent compensation for a pawn, Geo. Timoschenko-Epishin, Tbilisi 1 989. ...

...

...

B:

d5 6 7 exd5 itlxd5 8 0-0 (D) This is the basic position for the 6 . . . d5 continuation. 8 .axh7?! l:txh7 9 Wixd5 e5 is not advisable for White. e5!? 8 At first sight this active move ap­ pears risky but practice has shown

that it is quite playable. Others: a) The most logical continuation 8 e6 - doesn't promise an easy and complete equality. In two exam­ ples from tournament practice, White was more successful . After 9 c4 lLif6 1 0 lLic3 ii.e7 1 1 �e2 0-0 the games diverge: a 1 ) 12 .ags .i.d7 1 3 1lad1 ( 1 3 J.xf6 i.. x f6 1 4 Axh7+? c;i;>xh7 1 5 'ti'd3+ c;i;>g8 1 6 \i"xd7 l:tad8) 1 3 . . . .:tfd8 1 4 lLib5 ! lLib4 1 5 .i.e3 1!fc6 1 6 .i.b 1 ! ± Kuzmin-Gufeld, USSR 1 975. a2) 12 .ar4 .i.d7 13 l:lad1 e5 14 lLid5 (14 .i.xe5? .i.g4) 14 ... lLixd5 15 cxd5 lL\b4 16 J.xe5 l:te8! 17 i.. d4 \'f"h6 1 8 .i.e3 .i.g5 1 9 Axg5 1!fxg5 20 "f!/f3 and now instead of 20 . . . lLixa2? 2 1 lLic5 ± Vogt-Z.Ilic, Bern 1 990. Instead of 20 ... lLixa2 Black should have played a useful interme­ diate move 20 . . . h6! with the idea . . . .i.g4. b) Geller's recommendation 8 g6 is playable and solid: b 1 ) 9 Vn .i.e6 1 0 c4 lLif6 ( 1 0 ... lLidb4!?) 1 1 .i.f4 J.g7 12 lLic3 0-0 -

...

...

102 Deviations on White 's Sixth Move

1 3 lLlb5 ! .l:.ac8 (If 1 3 . . . .tg4!? 1 4 'ifg3 e5 1 5 ..t.g5 ! oo Uhlmann) 1 4 J.. c 7! .l:.xc7 1 5 c 5 lLle5 1 6 cxb6 lLlxO+ 17 gxO l:d7 1 8 lLlc5 l:xd3 1 9 lLl xd3 axb6 ! Yz- 'l) Rajkovic­ Gufeld, Skopje 1 97 1 . b2) 9 .1lxg6?! i s weak as after 9 ...hxg6 I 0 'ilxd5 Black has compen­ sation for the pawn sacrifice. b3) But 9 c4 is possible: 9... lLldb4 (9 ... lLlf6 is safer) l 0 �e4 .tf5?! 1 1 .txf5 gxf5 1 2 lLlc3 e6 1 3 lLlb5 'ir'd8 1 4 'ii'h5 with advantage for White, Holzl-Felsberger, Austrian Bund­ esliga 1 989. 9 .1lc4! (D) According to Sax and Hazai, this is White's best chance to obtain a minimal advantage. Others: a) 9 Axh7? is bad: 9 ... lLlf6 1 0 j,d3 e4 1 1 l:te I .tfS with the idea 0-0-0 + . b) 9 c4 lLldb4 and now: b l ) 10 l0c3 J.e6 1 1 ..te3 'ti'a6 ! 1 2 lLld5? i.xd5 1 3 cxd5 'ii'x d3 1 4 'ifxd3 lLlxd3 1 5 dxc6 bxc6 1 6 lLla5 c5 17 lLlc4 .te7 18 .l:.adl l:d8 and Bl a c k remained a pawn up i n Mortensen-S.Hansen, Copenhagen 1 992. b2) 10 .1le3 'i¥d8 ! 1 1 .te4 'ir'xd1 1 2 l:lxd1 f5 ! (Weaker is 12 ... ..i.e6 1 3 lLla3 f5 1 4 .td5 ! 'l;t7 1 5 lLlb5) 1 3 Axc6+ bxc6 ! 1 4 lLla3 and now in the game Sax-B.Andonov, Warsaw Z

1 987, Black should have continued 1 4 ... e4! 1 5 lLld4 .td7 with an unclear game. Black also doesn't have to worry about 1 5 .tc5 lLld3 1 6 .txf8 l:txf8 17 l:d2 with equal play accord­ ing to Sax. This is a quite convincing example from Black's point of view, that is, for the continuation 8 ... e5. c ) Editor 's Note: ECO cites Andonov's recommendation 9 a3!?, to take away the b4 square from Black ' s knights before advancing c2-c4.

Sax and Hazai 's analysis of the diagram position after 9 Ac4! goes as follows: 9 . . . lLlf6 1 0 lLlc3 i.. e7 ( 1 0 ... a6?! 1 1 .i.g5 ! Ae7 1 2 i.xf6 Axf6 1 3 lLle4 J..e7 1 4 lLlxd6+ j,xd6 1 5 'i!Vxd6) 1 1 J..e 3 'f#c7 ( l l .. .'f#d8 12 'ii'xd8+ .txd8 1 3 lLlb5 0-0 1 4 .tcs ;t ) 1 2 lLl b5 'i¥b8 1 3 Ac5 0-0 14 Jixe7 &iJxe7 1 5 'Wd6 with a slight advantage for White.

1 2 Deviations o n White ' s Fifth M ove

After 1 e4 c5 2 'Llt3 'Llc6 3 d4 cxd4 4 'Llxd4 'ffb6 some moves not yet analysed come into consideration: A: 5 .ie3 B: 5 lll b5 Editor 's Note: 5 'Llxc6 is rarely seen. Hector-Grivas, Katerini 1 992, continued 5 ... bxc6 6 .i.d3 e5 7 0-0 lll f6 8 lll d2 .i.e7 9 lll c4 'fllc7 10 f4 d6 1 1 fxe5 dxe5 1 2 'fll f3 0-0 1 3 'fl!g3 l:te8 14 '>Ph 1 llld7 oo . A:

B

5

.i.e3 (D)

An aggressive idea that has been seldom exploited in practice. Com­ pared to other variations of the Sicil­ ian Defence, where White obtains a dangerous initiative by sacrificing the b2 pawn (as for instance the Najdorf Poisoned Pawn Variation), here we have a case where the benefits are quite unclear. The sacrifice can be assessed as "semi-correct". 5 1rxb2 Black doesn't have any alternative. 6 'Llxc6 The alternative 6 'Llb3 was tested in the game Vitolins-Zaichik, Mos­ cow 1 983, where White obtained enough compensation for a pawn but it still feels as if Black could have played better. There followed 6...'flle5 7 lLl 1 d2 lLlf6 8 f4 •c3 9 .i.d3 d5 1 0 e 5 lll g4 1 1 .i.cS h 5 1 2 0-0 e6 1 3 .i.xf8 Wxf8 1 4 'it'e 1 t!fb4 (Better is 14 ... lll b4) 15 c4 dxc4 1 6 lll xc4 'fixe 1 1 7 l:.fxel . Maybe the modest 8 'ffc7 is a better choice because the white ...

104 Deviations on White 's Fifth Move

knights don't have access to the d5 and b5 squares. bxc6 6 It's logical that anybody who plays this line as White must be prepared to answer 6... ffxal. Unfortunately that position hasn't been tested in practice. A possible line is 7 .td4 'i!Yxa2 8 lt:\c3 '\We6 (8 ... 'ifa3? 9 lt:\b5) 9 lt:\xa7 with the idea lt:\d5 or lt:\b5. 6... dxc6! ? is also possible. d6 7 �d2 'i!'fc3 8 .x::lb t This position arose in the game Van der Wiel-Kouatly, Cannes 1 990, where the opponents agreed a draw after 9 R.d3 lt:\f6 1 0 0-0 ti'a5 1 1 lt:\c4 'flc1 1 2 f4 e5 1 3 \'We 1 Ae6 14 lt:\a5 exf4 1 5 �xf4 lt:\d7 1 6 .l:tb7 'iVc8 1 7 �a6 !il..e7 1 8 'iVe2 0-0 1 9 .l:txa7. B:

5

�b5 (D)

B 1 : 5 ... a6 and B2: 5 ... lt:\f6. Bl:

5 a6 6 .i.e3 White achieves less with 6 �5c3 e6 7 �d3, for example: a) 7 . 'flc7 8 0-0 b5 9 a3 lLlf6 1 0 �g5 $.e7 1 1 lt:\d2 l:b8 1 2 'ire2 d6 1 3 f4 h6 oo Danilovic-B.Knezevic, Budva 1 996. b) 7...�f6 8 0-0 ii.e7 9 lt:\d2 0-0 1 0 �h1 d5 1 1 exd5 exd5 1 2 lt:\b3 .l:td8 13 �f4 !il..g4= Dvoirys-Lastin, Russia Cup semifinal, Perm 1 997. After 6 �e3 Black has the options: B 1 1 : 6 . . . 'li'a5+ and B12: 6... 'ifd8 ! . .

.

Bl l :

6 Vas+ An enterprising but dubious con­ tinuation. The exposed queen will help White to accelerate his devel­ opment. 7 �5c3 e6 Or 7 �f6 8 lt:\d2 b5 9 lt:\b3 'filc7 1 0 �e2 e6 1 1 a3 ..tb7 1 2 0-0 d6 1 3 f4 $.e7 1 4 !il.. f3 0-0 oo Sanchez­ Schreiber, Zaragoza 1 994. 8 �d2 Or: a) 8 .i.d3 b5 9 lt:\d2 Wlc7 (9... �b4 1 0 a4! �xc3 1 1 axb5 ! ..txd2+ 1 2 �xd2 ± Yudasin) 1 0 0-0 lLlf6 1 1 f4 b4? (1 L.d6 � ) 1 2 lt:\a4 l:tb8 1 3 '*i¥e2! 'f/a5?! (Better is 1 3 ... a5) 14 lt:\c4 'ifxa4 1 5 b3 'ifb5 1 6 lt:\d6+ and Black doesn't have enough compen...

This, the main alternative to 5 lt:\b3, is slowly starting to enjoy a respectable theoretical status. Black has to choose between:

Deviations on White 's Fifth Move

s ation for the queen, Yudasin­ J.Polgar, Madrid 1 992. b) 8 .i.e2 b5 9 lUd2 lUf6 1 0 0-0 '¥ii c 7 1 1 f4 d6 1 2 il.f3 .i.. e 7 1 3 a4 b4 1 4 lUe2 l:.b8 1 5 lUb3 e5 1 6 a5 0-0 1 7 f5 � - � I . Almasi-Csom, Zalakaros 1 995. b5 8 Others: a) 8 Jlb4 9 lUc4 �xc3+ 1 0 bxc3 't!Vxc3+ 1 1 il.d2 'ii' d4 1 2 c3 ! is also favourable for White (Donchev-Teo Kok Siong, Thessaloniki OL 1 988). b) But 8...ffc7 is interesting: 9 lUc4 b5 1 0 lUb6 l:tb8 1 1 lUxc8 l:[xc8 1 2 a4 b4 1 3 lUb1 l:.a8 1 4 lUd2 lUf6 1 5 f4 d5 1 6 e5 lUxe5 (0- 1 in 3 1 moves) Lugo-A.Annas, Cuba 1 988. b4 9 a4 10 �c4 'ffc 7 11 �d5! (D) This knight sacrifice is the best way to utilise the opening advantage. Less enterprising is 11 'Llbl a5 1 2 lUb6 l:tb8 1 3 lUxc8 l:.xc8 1 4 lUd2 lUf6 1 5 �a6 l:ta8 1 6 �b5 �e7 1 7 0-0 0-0 1 8 f4 d5 1 9 e5 lUd7 20 lUb3 and now in the game Arnason­ Avshalumov, Belgrade 1 988, Black ...

105

could have equalised after 20 ...f6 2 1 �xc6 't!Vxc6 2 2 exf6 il.xf6. Following the excellent 1 1 �d5!, Black's position soon collapsed in the game Ehlvest-Smirin, Moscow 1 992, after 1 l ...exd5 1 2 exd5 lUd8 ( 1 2 . . . lUes 1 3 d6 ± ) 1 3 'i¥e2! d6 1 4 �b6+ 'fie? 1 5 lUxd6+ 'it>d7 1 6 lUe4! (With the idea 1 7 'Wb5+! axb5 1 8 i.. b 5+ mate) 1 6 ... i..b7 1 7 0-0-0 f5 1 8 lUc5+ �e8 19 d6! 'irxe2 20 �xe2 lUf6 2 1 ..txd8 �xg2 2 2 �xf6 ..txh 1 23 ..th5+ g6 24 �xh8 1 -0. B12:

'C'fd8! 6 7 �5c3 Others: a) Interesting and original play was seen in the game I .Gurevich-J. Polgar, New York 1 992, where there followed: 7 �5a3 b5 8 c4 b4 9 lUc2 lUf6 1 0 lUd2 il.b7 1 1 f4 d6 1 2 'ifn g6 1 3 0-0-0 �g7 1 4 e5 dxe5 1 5 fxe5 CLJd7 16 e6 fxe6 with a complicated game. b) The second alternative is 7 �d4. Now, depending on Black's reaction, different types of Sicilian position can arise. The most ener­ getic, quick reaction in the centre with 7 ... e5 gave Black a solid play in two games following 8 CLJf3 lUf6: b1) 9 �c3 �b4 10 il.c4 0-0 1 1 'li'd.3 d5 ! ? ( 1 1 ... i..xc3+!? 1 2 bxc3 d6) 1 2 i.. xd5 CLJxd5 1 3 'fixd5 �xc3+ 1 4 bxc3 i..e6 1 5 �xd8 lHxd8 1 6 0-0 l:lac8 �-�, Micic-Z.Ilic, Novi Becej 1 994. b2) 9 .i.c4 'fia5+ 1 0 lUbd2 CLJxe4

106 Deviations a.n White 's Fifth Move

1 1 0-0 lLlxd2 1 2 .i.xd2 'it'c5 1 3 'it'e2 iL.e7 1 4 b4 lLlxb4 1 5 lLlxe5 0-0 1 6 iL.xb4 'it'xb4 1 7 'W'h5 d5 1 8 iL.xd5 \11- Yz Svicevic-P.Kovacevic, Tivat 1 995. e6 (D) 7

w

This position was tested in several games: a) 8 .i.e2 lLJf6 (8 . . . b5 9 f4 iL.b7 10 0-0 iL.e7 1 1 J.D d6 1 2 lLl d2 l0f6 1 3 'it'e 1 0-0 1 4 'ii'g 3 'ith8 oo Hendriks- Z . I li c , Sas van Gent 1 994) 9 f4? ! (Carelessly played: Black's position has a strong hid­ den possibility) 9 . . . d5 ! 10 e5 lLld7 1 1 .to g5! + 1 2 fxg5 lLldxe5 1 3 iLxd5 e x d 5 1 4 lLJ xd5 iL. g 4 ! - + Rogers-Karpman, Belgrade 1 98 8 . White should have been satisfied with the solid 9 0-0. b) 8 g3 lLl f6 9 iLg2 iLb4 1 0 0-0 0-0 1 1 f4 d6 1 2 'ithl .l:te8 1 3 .i.gl d5 1 4 e5 lLld7 1 5 llle 2 iL.c5 with an unclear game, A.Rodriguez-Alvarez, Colon 1 993. c) 8 �a4! ? b5 9 lLlb6 .l:tb8 1 0 lLJxc8 'it'xc8 ! (With the idea . . .lZJ f6,

... d5) 1 1 .i.f4 e5 ! 12 iL.e3 lLlf6 1 3 iL.d3 d5 1 4 exd5 lLlxd5 1 5 0-0 lLlxe3 16 fxe3 with a playable position for both sides, Kaidanov-Yermolinsky, Asheville 1 992. B2: s �f6 The postponement of the unavoid­ able . . . a6 move is only temporary. After this move the main line is dif­ ficult to determine. 6 �lc3 There are several unexplored pos­ sibilities. a) 6 �Sc3 e6 7 iL.e2 J.e7 8 0-0 0-0 (8 . . . a6) 9 lLld2 d5 10 exd5 exd5 1 1 lLlb3 d4 ( l l .. .iL.e6 is more solid) 1 2 lLlb5 l:ld8 1 3 a4 l:ld7 1 4 a5 'tWd8 1 5 l:a4 ;!; Rantanen-Akopian, Palma de Mallorca 1 989. c) 6 .i.e3 'it'd8 (Weaker is 6 ... 'it'a5+ 7 'ii'd2 'it'xd2+ 8 lLJxd2 'itd8 with a considerable developmental advantage for White) when: c I ) The variation 7 �d2 a6 8 lLlc4 axb5 9 ..tb6 bxc4 10 iL.xd8 c;Pxd8 1 1 iL.xc4 lLlxe4 12 .i.xf7 e6 1 3 iLxe6 iL.c5 Yeo-Mendez, Havana 1 994, leads to great complications. c2) 7 �lc3 a6 (7 ... d6?! 8 lLld5) and now: c2 1 ) 8 �d4 e5 when: c2 1 1 ) 9 �xc6 bxc6 10 J.c4 iL.b4 1 1 'it'd3 0-0 1 2 .l:td1 'it'e7 1 3 iL.g5 h6 14 .i.xf6 'it'xf6= Paramos-Kurajica, La Corufia 1 995. c21 2) 9 �fS d5 ! . c2 1 3 ) 9 �b3 .i. b4 1 0 ..tc4 b5 1 1 iL.d5 lLJxd5 1 2 'ii'xd5 0-0 1 3 0-0 'Wic7

Deviations on White 's Fifth Move

14 l:.ad1 d6 1 5 'tlt'd3 ti:Je7 with good play for Black, L. Papp-Z.Papp, Szeged 1998. c22) 8 �a3 b5 (8 ... e6? 9 ti:Jc4) 9 ti:Jd5 :Z.b8 1 0 ti:Jxf6 gxf6 1 1 �d3 e6 1 2 0-0 (If 1 2 f4, then Black plays 1 2 . . . 'tlt'a5+! 1 3 ._,d2 Wxd2+ with equality; if instead 1 3 �d2 ._,b6 � ) 1 2. . .ti:Je5 ! 1 3 Ji.e2 Ab7 1 4 f4 ti:Jg6 1 5 Ji.d3 l:tg8 16 l:tf2 l:tc8! and Black had active play for his pieces, Kotronias-Z.IIic, Lenk 1 990. 6 a6 7 �a3 Or 7 Ae3 Wa5 8 ti:Ja3 b5 9 Ad3 e6 1 0 ti:Jb1 b4 1 1 ti:Je2 d5 1 2 ti:Jd2 A b7 Yz-Yz Howeii-Voka�, Lazne Bohdane� 1 995. 7 e6 (D)

w

This way of playing for White cer­ tainly doesn't promise him any ad-

107

vantage. In all the games where the diagram position arose, Black was more successful than his opponent: a) 8 g3? ! is an unreasonable con­ tinuation in this particular position. In the game Shabalov-Anastasian, Podolsk 1 990, White was clearly in­ ferior after 8 ... Axa3 9 bxa3 ._,c5 1 0 Ab2 b5 1 1 Ji.g2 Ji.b7 1 2 l:l b 1 ti:Ja5 1 3 0-0 e5 14 �h1 0-0 1 5 'tlt'd3 l:.ac8 1 6 h3 l:fe8 17 f4 ti:Jc4 =F . b) 8 �c4!? is playable but insuf­ ficient to obtain the advantage. After 8 . .. ..-c7 9 Ae3 b5 1 0 ti:Jb6 .l:.b8 1 1 ti:Jxc8 White had played seven moves with his knight in order to exchange it for Black's undeveloped piece. Now in the game Amold-IIlner, Karlsruhe 1 997, after 1 l ... l:.xc8 1 2 a3 ..ktd6!? White played badly with 1 3 Ji.xb5? and lost in a few moves after 1 3 .. . axb5 1 4 ti:Jxb5 'iVa5+ 1 5 c3 'fi'xb5 1 6 ._,xd6 ti:Jxe4 17 'tlt'f4 'tlt'xb2 1 8 0-0 ti:Jxc3 etc. c) Finally let's mention the game Zhelyandinov-Gufeld, USSR 1 97 1 , where White was also outplayed af­ ter 8 J\.d3 ._,c7! (Black has already equalised) 1 1 ti:Jc4 b5 1 0 ti:Je3 Ji.b7 1 1 0-0 �e7 1 2 f4 d6 1 3 1fe 1 0-0 1 4 a4? ( 1 4 b3 oo ) 1 4 . . . ti:Jd4! 1 5 e5 dxe5 16 fxe5 'tlt'xe5 ! 1 7 ti:Jf5 -'.c5 ! with a decisive advantage for Black.

1 3 Kvei nys Variation : I ntrod uction and 5 �c3

1 2 3 4

c5 e6 cxd4 'ffb6 (D)

e4 �f3 d4 �xd4

This is deservedly called the "Kveinys Variation" after the Lithua­ nian GM Aloyzas Kveinys who has been playing it for many years. The system is similar to but also fun­ damentally different from - the pre­ viously examined system 2 . . l2lc6, 4 ... 'it'b6. The basic strategic idea is the same - the decentralisation of the white knight from the d4 square. However, the way it is applied here -

.

is less direct because the knight at d4 is not already attacked twice on the fourth move. This fact makes White's choice wider at the beginning. Black's idea of exerting pressure along the a7-gl diagonal with ... .ii. c5 gives this variation an independent character. Of course there are trans­ position options between this and the system examined earlier, if Black sooner or later decides to play ... l0c6. But in practice, in most cases he pre­ fers the flexible method of playing with the development . . . l0b8-d7. Sometimes this line may transpose into a branch of so-called Basman Variation characterised by the follow­ ing introductory moves: 1 e4 c5 2 lOO e6 3 d4 cxd4 4 l2lxd4 �c5. White has a wide spectrum of op­ tions after 4 ... �b6 but two continua­ tions make the essence of the system: 5 l0c3 (this chapter) and 5 l0b3 (Chapters 1 4- 1 5). The first allows the option 5 ... .i.c5 that can provoke tactical play in the early phase of the game. With the calm 5 lLlb3 White avoids early con-

Kveinys Variation: Introduction and 5 -0cJ

flicts and the positions that arise are similar to those from the Schev­ eningen and Paulsen Sicilians. Other quite reasonable and less investigated options for White are 5 Ae3, 5 c3, 5 'Oa3 and 5 'Ob5 which are all dis­ cussed in Chapter 1 6. 5 /()c3 The main continuations now are: A: 5 . .. tt::lf6 and B: 5 ... .i.c5. Also possible is 5 ... a6 after which the position of the black queen on b6, which exerts pressure on the points d4 and b2, prevents White from trans­ posing the game into the standard Scheveningen/Paulsen lines. The fol­ lowing two examples have an origi­ nal course, which is difficult to evade if White does not want to play tt::lb3 : a) 6 Ae2 tt::l c 6 7 tt::l x c6 �xc6 (7 . . . bxc6) 8 0-0 .i.c5 9 �h1 tt::l e7 1 0 f4 f5 1 1 �h5+ g6 1 2 A n Wkc7 1 3 �d3 0-0 oo German-Panno, Villa Martelli 1 996. b) 6 a3 tt::le7 7 ...te3 tt::l g6 8 h4 'ilic7 9 h5 tt::l e5 1 0 f4 tt::l ec6 l l tt::l b 3 d6 1 2 �d2 tt::ld7 1 3 0-0-0 b6 1 4 .i. f2 tt::l c5 15 Wb 1 with a preferable position for White, Short-J.Polgar, Novgorod 1 996. A:

/()f6 5 In practice this position can arise from the move order 1 e4 c5 2 tt::l f3 e6 3 d4 cxd4 4 tt::lxd4 tt::l f6 5 tt::l c3 �b6. 6 e5! (D) White has no reason to refuse this

109

challenge. This provocative continu­ ation leads by force to complex tac­ tical complications. Another option is 6 'Ob3, which transposes into the 5 tt::l b3 line (Chapter 1 4). 6 Ac5 7 Ae3 Weak is 7 'Oa4? �a5+ 8 c3 �xd4 9 lifxd4 tt::l c6 + . /()d5 7 The only move. Both 7 ffxb2? 8 tt::l a4 and 7 . /0g4? 8 'irxg4! 'ii'xb2 9 tt::l d l 'ii'x a1 10 'i!Vxg7 :rs l l tt::l b5 are losing for Black. exd5 (D) 8 'Oxd5 This is the key position for the continuation 5 ... tt::l f6. In the early phase of the game ...

.

w

.

JlO Kveinys Variation: Introduction and 5 .fJcJ

there has been a radical transfonna­ tion of the pawn structure. The main drawback of Black's conception is the weakening of the f5- and d6-squares, which influences the further course of the battle. The absence of minor pieces on the kingside makes the safety of the black king problematic, and if we add to that the problem of the develop­ ment of Black's light-squared bishop, it becomes evident that the whole idea 5 . . . 'Llf6 is dubious. However, White too has the weak e5-pawn, and, since in the position there are hidden tactical possibilities, any imprecision can easily cause the assessment of a White advantage to be overturned. In practice White has ventured several continuations. The most in­ teresting are: A 1 : 9 'Llf5 and A2: 9 -'.e2 ! . Alternatively: a) 9 c3 'Llc6 (9 ... -'.xd4 1 0 'ifxd4 'ifxb2 l l l:tc 1 ; 1 0 .i.xd4!?) 1 0 b4!? (For 1 0 -'.e2 see the 9 -'.e2 line) 1 0 ... -'.xd4 1 1 Axd4 'Llxd4 1 2 'tlfxd4 't!Vxd4 1 3 cxd4 with a somewhat bet­ ter endgame for White. b) 9 'Llbs 0-0 (9 . . . -'.xe3? 1 0 'Lld6+ 'iiti>d8 1 1 fxe3 't!Vxe3+ 1 2 -'.e2 is winning for White according to G.Camacho) 10 .ixc5 't!Vxc5 1 1 't!Vd4 (This way of playing is certainly not the refutation of the continuation 5 . . . 'Llf6) 't!Vxd4 12 'Llxd4 'Llc6 1 3 0-0-0 'Llxe5 1 4 g3 'Llg4 1 5 l:t d2 b6 1 6 -'.g2 -'.b7 17 'Ll f5 l:t fd8 1 8

'Lle7+ �f8 1 9 'Llxd5 ;t De Zeeuw­ Beulen, Netherlands 1 995. A1:

9 'Llrs The sharpest continuation, that leads to wild positions, where the positions of both kings get unavoid­ ably compromised. 9 1rxb2 9 .i.xe3? 1 0 'Lld6+ transposes into the 9 'Llb5 0-0 -'.xe3? line given above. 10 Ad3! (D) ...

B

The critical continuation. Other options, according to Pia Cramling's analysis in Infonnator 67, favour Black: a) 10 Ad4 -'.b4+ 1 1 �e2 'iia 3 + . b) 1 0 !Li d 6+ -'.xd6 1 1 exd6 'it'b4+ + . c) 10 'Llxg7+ 'iiti>d8 and White have problems with 'Llg7 and the e5 pawn. d) 10 f4 .i.xe3 1 1 'Llxe3 'iVb4+ 1 2 'ii'd2 'ifxf4 1 3 'Llxd5 't!Vxe5+ 1 4 'ii'e2 'iVxe2+ 1 5 -'.xe2 'iiti>d8 1 6 0-0 d6! + . e) 10 AxeS 'it'c3+ 1 1 'iifi>e 2 ( 1 1

Kveinys Van'ation: Introduction and 5 ttJcJ

111

Wfd2 'it'xa l + 1 2 �e2 'it'xe5+ 1 3 Wfe3 'i\Vxe3+ 1 4 �xe3 d6! 1 5 lZJxd6+ �d7 1 6 lZJxfl :es+ 1 7 �d2 lZJc6 + P.Cramling) 1 L.'ihc5 1 2 lZJd6+ 'it>f8 1 3 f4 lZJc6 14 �f3 f6! 1 5 lZJxc8 fxe 5 1 6 fxe5 lZJxe5+ and Black made use of the exposed position of the white king, Skripchenko-P.Cramling, Belgrade 1 996. 10 11 wn 1 1 ..0-0 doesn't work because of 12 .i.xc5 'it'xc5 1 3 lZJxg7+ �xg7 1 4 'ii' g4+ 'it>h8 1 5 'iff5 and White wins. We7! 12 itld6+ This suggestion by GM Mar­ janovic is the only satisfactory option for Black. 1 2...Wf8? loses after 1 3 'ii'f3 ! while 1 2... �d8 was played in the game Joa.Diaz-Bellon, Cien­ fuegos 1 996, in which White after 12 ...Wd8 1 3 lZJxfl+ �c7 14 lZJxh8 had the decisive advantage accord­ ing to Diaz. After the correct 12 ... �e7 ! , one can't see a forcing tactical variation that would bring White some concrete advantage. In the case of the most logical 1 3 lZJf5 + �f8 1 4 lZJxe3 'i\Vxe5, it is not easy to give a proper assessment of the position.

develop his light-squared bishop without adverse consequences. 9 ftlc6 10 c3! The continuation 10 itlf5 doesn't give any advantage. After 1 0...0-0 1 1 �xc5 'it'xc5 1 2 0-0 d6 1 3 lZJxd6 lZJ x e 5 1 4 lObS ( 1 4 lZJ x c 8 \tl - Y2 Peelen-Beulen, Netherlands 1 994) 14 . .. lZJc4 1 5 .i.xc4 dxc4 1 6 a4 .i.f5 Black has an easy game, Belkhodja­ Beulen, Hyeres 1 992. 10 Axd4 Or 10 ... /tlxeS 1 1 b4 �xd4 12 �xd4 'ife 6 1 3 0-0 f6 1 4 f4 lZJc6 1 5 �f3 with a strategically win­ ning position for White, Szalanczy­ Wiedermann, Vienna 1 99 1 . 11 cxd4 •xb2 d6 {D) 12 0-0

A2:

In the case of 12...0-0 the black king can easily be exposed to attack, which can be seen from the game Holzke­ Svensson, Gothenburg 1 993. White won efficiently by 1 3 .i.d3 'it'a3 14 �g5 ! d6 15 .i.f6 gxf6 16 exf6 l:r.d8 1 7 'it'd2 �ffi 1 8 l:tael .i.e6 1 9 :xe6

.

9 Ae2 The most solid continuation that gives White a permanent advantage without great risk. White calmly com­ pletes his development while on the other hand, Black will not be able to

w

112 Kveinys Vuiation: Introduction and 5 tiJcJ

fxe6 20 'iVh6+ �e8 2 1 f#g7 1 -0. lfa3 13 l:lb1 lfxa2 14 .tlb3 0-0 15 exd6 Ag4 16 i1.d3 Ae6 17 f3 18 Dxb7 and the d6 pawn, supported by the rook on the seventh rank, guarantees White an advantage, Milos-Bellon, Oviedo rpd 1 993. B:

Ac5 5 This seems to be more reason­ able than 5 ... co f6 . Now White is at a crossroads: B l : 6 �e3 is for those who like original and wild positions, while the alternative B2: 6 COa4 has more of a positional nature. B1:

l:tbl 'ii'x bl 9 COxb1 �f4 1 0 g3 a6 1 1 gxf4 axb5 1 2 COc3 COe7 1 3 COxb5 and White soon won, Morphy-Paulsen, New York (7) 1 857. This position after 6 ... COc6 more often arises in practice from the Basman Variation move order: 1 e4 c5 2 COf3 e6 3 d4 cxd4 4 COxd4 .i.. c S 5 COc3 'iYb6 6 .i..e 3 COc6. Black maximally strengthens the pressure on the d4-point, so now White has to commit himself. At his disposal he has either the sharper and relatively unexplored continuations: B 1 1 : 7 codb5 and B l 2: 7 l0cb5, or the calmer B l 3 : 7 coa4. Bl l :

7 8

�db5 fxe3 (D)

Axe3

6 Ae3 �c6 (D) Note that 6 ...ffxb2? loses by force after 7 codb5 �xe3 (7 . 'ilb4 8 .: b 1 and 7 ... �b4 8 �d2 lose as well.) 8 . .

w

In practice there are few examples with this sharp position. 8 1rxe3+

Kveinys Variation: Introduction and 5 .fJcJ

Not 8 . a 6 9 ctJ d 6+ � e 7 1 0 'Wd2 ! ( 1 0 ctJc4 'Wc7 1 1 "i!Yg4 ctJ f6 1 2 "i!Yf4 'ii x f4 1 3 exf4 b5 1 4 ctJb6 l:[b8 1 5 lL\xc8+ �hxc8= Hoynck van Papendrecht-Galje, corr. 1 997) 10 ... ctJf6 1 1 0-0-0 'fkc7 12 'it'f2! ctJe5 1 3 "i!Yg3 ctJg6 14 e5 ctJe8 1 5 .i..e2 ± Tosic-Milovanovic, Cetinje 1 996. Since IM Miroslav Tosic has dem­ onstrated a convincing plan for White to achieve an advantage in the case of 8 . . . a6, Black has no better choice than to enter the uncertain complica­ tions that arise after the text move. 9 .a.e2 Wf8! Black loses after 9 .1!rf4? 10 l:tfl 'fi'xh2 1 1 ctJd6+ �d8 12 liJxf7+ or 9 tfb6 1 0 \!Yd6 ! 1 -0 Segovia­ H.Martin, corr. 1 986 10 U.n Although two examples from Basman's practice are very old, they unmistakably show the intricacy of the complications that inevitably anse. a) 10 .. ftlf6 1 1 'ifd6+ 'ifii> g8 1 2 :xf6! gxf6 1 3 .l:td1 h5 1 4 l:td3 'iVc l + 1 5 � f2 h 4 1 6 ctJc7 ctJe5 ! 1 7 lLlxa8 'YWf4+ 1 8 'ifii>g 1 ctJxd3 1 9 'ifxd3 b6 20 'ifc4 Ab7 2 1 lLlc7 'iWe3+ 22 �fl 'tlif4+ 23 Wg1 'it'e3+ Yz-Yz Hartston­ Basman, Hastings 1 973. b) 10 ttlge7 1 1 a4 ctJg6 1 2 l:!.f2 ctJge5 13 �fl h5 14 h3 h4 15 l:ta3 �c5 16 a5 l:th6 oo Hartston-Basman, England 1 974. .

.

..

••.

.

...

B12:

7

113

ttlcb5 (D)

B

7 ltlf6 a) The alternative 7 ... a6 is unsat­ isfactory. According to Velicka and Didisko, all possible variations after 8 ctJxc6 give advantage to White. For example: a 1 ) 8.. .xc6 9 kxc5 'fi'xc5 1 0 ctJd6+ ± ; a2) 8 .a.xe3 9 ctJd6+ Wf8 1 0 fxe3 \!Yxe3+ 1 1 ile2 bxc6 1 2 ctJxc8 llxc8 1 3 'fi'xd7 ± ; a3) 8 .. axb5 9 ctJd4 ;!; . b) It is necessary to check in prac­ tice the continuation 7 ...d5!?. The move seems to be quite playable. For instance, White's attempt to directly refute this ambitious plan with 8 lLlxe6 is unsuccessful, as is shown by the variation 8 ... .txe6 9 .txc5 �xc5 10 ctJc7+ We7 1 1 lLlxa8 ctJf6 1 2 exd5 ( l l ctJc7 'i!Va5+) 12 ... ctJxd5. 8 ftlxc6! .a.xe3 9 fxe3 Stronger than 9 ttld6+ 'ifii> f8 I 0 fxe3 because in that case Black can play 1 0 ... 'ifxe3+. In the game Rogulj­ Sale, Zagreb 1 996, after 1 1 .te2 bxc6 1 2 l: fl We7 1 3 ctJc4 'it'c5 ( 1 3 . . . �xe4 !?) 1 4 e5 lL\ d5 1 5 'fkd2 f6 1 6 .

...

.

114 Kveinys Variation: Introduction and 5 tiJcJ

0-0-0 .ta6 White had problems along the diagonal a6-f1 and with the e3point. bxc6! 9 It is better to retain the queen along the a7-gi diagonal. 9 ffxc6 is inferior: I 0 lb d6+ rJiJe7 I I e5 lLJeS ( I I . . .lLJe4 12 .tb5 1Wd5 1 3 lLJf5+) 1 2 il.b5 'Wc5 1 3 lLl xcS+ 'Wxc8 1 4 0-0 f6 I 5 'it'd4 'ii'c 7 1 6 .:tadl ± Velicka-Hracek, Czecho­ slovakia 1 99 3 . We7 1 0 �d6+ 'Wcs 11 �c4 �dS (D) 12 eS ...

In the game Boudenne-Sale, Cannes 1 995, there followed from the diagram 13 c3 (threatening 1 4 b4) 1 3. .. a5 1 4 e4?! (As 1 4 1Wg4 .ta6 is good for Black, White's best is I 4 ._,d4! with a slightly better endgame after 1 4 . . . 'it'xd4 I 5 exd4 .i.a6) 14....ta6! I 5 exd5 .txc4 1 6 d6+ eS 17 .i.xc4 't!Vxc4 I S 't!Vf3 :lb8 and White's spatial advantage was not of primary importance in the position that arose. The advanced white pawns in the centre became a target, which was the factor that dictated the fur­ ther course of the game. Bl3:

w

7 �a4 In practice this continuation has been the least problematic for Black. 1ta5+ 7 8 c3 .a.xd4 �xd4 9 .a.xd4 eS (D) 10 •xd4

w

An important position for the con­ tinuation 7 lLJcb5. White's plan is to chase away the centralised black knight and exploit the weakened dark squares in Black's position. But Black has time to carry out the key defen­ sive manoeuvre ... .tc8-a6, which enables him to eliminate the impor­ tant c4-knight and establish a dy­ namic balance. For example, in reply to 1 3 e4 it i s possible to p lay 1 3 ... .ta6.

This position arises by force after 7 lLla4. With the important move I O . e5 Black achieves simplification ..

Kveinys Vanation: Introduction and 5 tiJcJ

into an equal endgame. Weaker is 1 0 ... 'Llf6 1 1 e5 'Lld5 1 2 'Llc5 0-0 1 3 ..t.c4 ( 1 3 ..t.d3) 1 3 . . . 'Lle7 1 4 ..t.d3 'Llc6 1 5 We3 ;t Botterill-Basman, London 1 973. 11 ..b4 Or 1 1 'ff d 1 'Llf6 1 2 �d3 0-0 1 3 0-0 b5 1 4 'Llc5 1Wb6 1 5 'Llb3 �b7 16 .l:te1 l:He8 � Mohmann-Kveinys, Sankt Ingbert 1 990. 11 1 2 cxb4 b6 13 �c3 There is no need to hurry with the move ... d6, which would give White a target. By developing the bishop on b7, Black forces the move f2-f3 and the text is therefore more precise than 13 ...d6 1 4 g3 (Or 1 4 f3 h l 0-0 55 B: 1 0 'ifi>h l Wc7 56 1Wc7 9 d6 10 f4 11 en Others: 1 7, 30 0-0 11 12 Aael 12 a4 (by transposition) 15 1 2 a3 without g4 19 with g4 31 Chapter 2. 17 1 2 ttJd4 19 1 2 'ifi>h l 20 Chapter 3. 30 31 1 2 g4 A l : 1 2. . . '2Jb4 32 A2: 1 2 .. . b5 ( 1 3 g5 ttJd7 14 'it'h5) 32 A21 : 1 4 .. . l:teS 34 A22: 1 4 ... g6 35 37 A23 : 1 4 . .. '2Jb4 b5?! (D) 12 1 2 . . . '2Jd7 22 C l : 1 2 . . . l:lb8 23 C2: 1 2 . . . '2Jb4 23 13 g4 Others, Chapter 2 25-28 13 Jlb7

1 3 .. . ttJd7 42 14 g5 15 1Wh5 B l : 1 5 .. . '2Jb4 41 B2: 1 5 .. . l:lfe8 42 Part Two: 7 Jle3 Chapter 7. 66 8 f4 A: 8 . .. �b4 66 B: 8 . . d6 69

�d7

flc7 (D)

.

Chapter 8. 8 a3 a6 9 f4 d6 A: 1 0 g4 71 72 B: I 0 '@'f3 C: 1 0 �e2 72 D: 1 0 �d3 74

71

Chapter 9. White Castles Queenside 8 �d3 a6 9 f4 d6 75 A: 1 0 g4 75 B : 1 0 'We2 76 C: 1 0 '1Wf3 ( 1 0 .. . £e7 1 1 g4 b5 1 2 g5 ttJd7 1 3 0-0-0) 82 C l : 1 3 . . . '2Jb4 85 C2: 1 3 .. . '2Jb6 88

144 Index of Variations

Part Four: Kveinys Variation 1 e4 c5 2 lQn e6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lQxd4 Wb6

B: 5 lba3 131 C: 5 �e3 131 C l : 5 . . . �xb2 132 C2: 5 . . . �c5 132 D: 5 lt::l b5 133 5 flc7 5 ... lt::l f6 118 5 ... a6 119 6 lQc3 6 g3 119 6 c4 120 6 �d3 121 6 a6 7 Ad3 b5 (D) 7 . . . lt::l f6 122 ...

w

...

5

lQb3

Chapter 13. White Plays 5 lQc3 108 A: 5 ... lt::l f6 6 e5 �c5 7 �e3 lt::l d5 8 lt::lxd5 exd5 109 A l : 9 lt::l f5 110 A2: 9 .i.e2 111 B: 5 ... �c5 112 B l : 6 Ae3 lt::l c6 112 B 1 1 : 7 lt::l db5 112 B l 2: 7 l2Jcb5 113 B l 3 : 7 l2Ja4 114 B2: 6 lt::la4 115 Chapter 16: Various Deviations after 2 ...e6, 4...tlb6 130 A: 5 c3 130

{OR 1 e4 c5 2 lQf3 e6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lQxd4 a6 5 lQc3 b5 6 Ad3 1Vb6 7 lQb3 (Others: 124) 1 'Y!Ic1} ...

Chapter 15. Enhanced Kveinys Variation 124 8 �e3 125 126 8 f4 127 8 0-0