Beating the French

Gary Lane

B. T.BatsfordLtd, London
First published 1994

\302\251
Gary Lane 1994

ISBN 07T34 7390 8

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Dau.

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.

Typesetby John Nunn GM

and printed in Great Britain by

Redwood Books,Trowbridge, Wilts

for the publishers,

B. T. Batsford Ltd,
4 Fitzhardinge Street,

London W1H0AH

To Regula, Samuel and Benjamin Zutter

The photograph on the back cover wastaken by Jean Lane

A BATSFORD CHESS BOOK

Adviser: R. D. Keene GM, OBE
TechnicalEditor: Graham Burgess
Contents

Symbols 4
Introduction 5

1 Modern Variation 13
2 Milner-Barry
Gambit 49
3 Classical Variation 63
4 Euwe Variation 75

5 Systems with
...4bge7 107

6 5...\302\243>h6 119
7 Kupreichik Variation 123
8 White Deviates on MoveFour 127
9 Wade Variation 137
10 Systems with ...b6 145
11 3...&d7 155

Indexof Variations 159

Symbols

++ Double check
# Checkmate

iff) Slight advanuge to White (Black)

\302\261(T) Clear advanuge to White (Black)
+-(-+) Winning advanuge to White (Black)
= Level position
j Good move
? Bad move
ii move
Outstanding
?? Blunder
!? Interesting move
?! Dubious move
Ch Championship
Wch World Championship
Z Zonal
IZ Interzonal
C Candidates
OL Olympiad

corr. Posul game

Introduction

It has a fine pedigree with early

, |K^4.1i*H&I devotees such as Jaenisch and
Paulsen. It was a frequent choice of Aron
Nimzowitsch who transformed the
understanding of the line. Since the
1930s its popularity has fluctuated as
players began to follow fashion by
exhaustively analysing the Tarrasch

and Winawer variations. In the

1980s and 1990s the reversal of

fortunes has been accomplished by
shedding the unfair image as a
A Brief History gambit line to concentrate on
reliable
adventurous, systems that are still
The surge of popularity in the being explored.
Advance French during recent years has
seen it become one of the most Ideas in the Advance
challenging openings available. The
French
question of how to respondto the

French Defence has in the

concentrated on 3 &c3 and 3 &d2, with

past
1) The Centre

a mass of theoretical analysis to

absorb. Consequently, attention has
turned to the lesser known Advance,

with a wealth of promising new

ideas being contributed by such

world-class playersas Anand, Nunn

and Short. This book aims to present

the common variations with an

emphasis on the most popular lines and

allow the reader to create a repertoire
suited to his or her style.
6 Introduction

This is the critical positionof the 14 \302\243>b3f6?! 15 exf6 Axf6 16 &c5

Advance French. Black has Scd8 17\302\243>e5Axe5 18 Axh7+

developed so as to put pressure on d4. Black's

shattering defences. See the note
The 'Nimzowitsch'pawn centre (d4, to Black's 11thmove in Game 13.
e5 for White, e6, d5 for Black) A number of gamesexaminethe
requires
White to support d4 and be consequences of Black preventing
ready to meet ...f6. White's space b4 with 6...c4, followed by queen-
advantage affords him the luxury of side castling. This leads to a long
choosing between positional and manoeuvring game where White has

tactical continuations; thus White a slight edge thanks to his space

can sometimesinstigate a kingside advantage. Black often tries to obtain
attack, or can otherwise try to restrict counterplayby a rapid pawn push on
Black's forces further. the kingside. The usual problem with
The current trend is 6 a3, which is this is that lack of co-ordination
discussed in Chapter 1. The idea is amongst Black's cramped minor
that b4 will gain greater space and pieces results in White either picking
rule out the prospect of a qucenside off the pawns themselvesor else
pawn advance by Black.In using the vacant squares in their wake
tournament practice Black tends to adopt a to infiltrate Black's camp. It is also
directplan of putting pressure on d4 possible for White to launch a
and controlling the c-file with his queenside attack. This can be
queen's rook. A less positive achieved with the b4 thrust which, if
response can see Black's game taken, enables the queen's rook to
deteriorate due to the lack of active enter the fray on the b-file; if
squaresfor his minor pieces. ignored, then a4 will help to reduce
The following position is typical: Black's activity severely. The

following position demonstrates that

knowledge of a standard idea in this
line can have a dramatic effect.

w: mm mi

Now White plays 10 Ad3 \302\243>g411

 Introduction 7

White now plays 14 \302\243.hl! 0-0-0

15 \302\243>g2g4 16 &e3 2dg8 17 t>4 &c6
18 a4 h4 19 \302\243tdxc4! and White has
excellent prospects. See Game 5.
Thus Black cannot completely
ignore White's attacking prospects by
merely launching a pawn storm.
Therefore an early ...f6 to contest '
the centre is sometimes considered
the antidote. However, this move
m iwm m
leaves e6 weak and backward, and
White can then focuson controlling Chapter 2! In view of the defensive
the e-file. In return Black has more problems experienced when both

freedom to find better posts for his pawns are taken, Black will often
pieces, resulting in a double-edged settle just for the d-pawn, when
game. See Games 7 and 8. White has to rely on positional
advantages as a form of compensation
White's most ambitious approach rather than a direct attack. See Game
is the Milner-Barry Gambit. 6 &d3, 16. It is worth taking an interest in

placing the bishop on its most active the bizarre 9 \302\243>g5

featured in Game
square,is regardedas an extremely 14, note to White's 9th move.
aggressive continuation. It is
renowned for numerous tactical
possibilities with White sacrificing his
d- and e-pawnsfor active play. Black
often has trouble neutralizing White's

lead in development, since the black

queen is constantly hounded. The

following position shows a key point

of the gambit; the e- and d-files are

open(seefollowing diagram):
Now White can convert his leadin
development into a mating
17
combination: g3 Wg5 18 WxdS+l exd5 19 A move that has largely been
&b6+ axb6 20 2e8 mate. The explored
in Scandinavian postal
complete game can seen in the note to games, it has tremendous surprise
Black's 12th move in Game 14. value and there is still a lot of scope
There are various ways for Black for new ideas.The initial point is to
to shield his exposed queen; note provoke Black into weakening his
how many variations there are in kingside pawn structure while trying
5 Introduction

to make use of the open lines to maintain a pawn on eS and then seek
launch an attack. to exploit the resultant space

Chapter 3 deals with 6 &e2, advantage.

which is a solid and reliable line.

White will develop steadily while
keeping d4 securelyguarded.Black
relies on queenside expansion to add
tension to the position. The
position
following demonstrates the type of
slight edge for which White is
aiming:

An idea of White's attacking

possibilities can be gauged from Ro-
manishin-Ivanchuk, Irkutsk 1986.
White won in fine style with 18

\302\243>b5!! Axb5 19 Axb7+ 1-0. The

note to Black's 9th move in Game 20
illustrates the game.
The standard response is 6 \302\243.e2,
Now 12 a3! Axc3+ 13 \302\243>xc30-0 in the knowledge that 6...11)6 would
14 0-0 Sac8 15 b4 with advantage to transpose to a poor line that is
White - see line *b' in the note to demonstrated in section 4 of this
Black's 11th move in Game 17. introduction. Instead, Black follows a
plan of ...\302\243}ge7-f5 while White
2) Black Avoids 5...Wb6 counters with &a3-c2 before trying
to make progress on the kingside.
The desireto follow an independent See Games21,22and 23. Also

path has prompted research into a possible is 6 a3 which is less convincing

variety of alternatives. The common with the queen on d8 but is perfectly
approach is 5...\302\243.d7 which is feasible. The disadvantage is that
discussed in Chapter 4 and often ...Wcl will put pressure on eS; Black
transposes to established lines. It has the follows up by ...f6 or the manoeuvre
benefit of not committing the queen ...Qe7-c8-b6, having saved a tempo
until White has declareda plan of with hisqueen.
action. Sometimes Black follows up Chapter 5 examines an early
..-:.\302\253. rr, ti... .....(. r~\302\273 .,.
:,\342\226\240
wi,;,\342\200\236
 Introduction 9

similar to the previous chapter The most radical way to invite

although White has the option of JLd3. complications is toplay c4 which is

A likely continuation is ...&f5 to discussed in detail in

Chapter 9. If
increase pressure on d4. White can Black routinely exchanges on c4
reply
with &a3-c2 and &d3 which can then White can cause disruption with

be seen in Game 31. A more active the pawn thrust dS. Thus after 7 c4
course of action is to be found in Axc4 8 Axc4 dxc4 9 d5 \302\243>e7 10
Game 30 by responding with &d3 dxe6 fxe6 11 0-0 Wc6 12 Ve2 &f5
and g4 to oust the knight on fS, 13 *xc4 \302\243e7 14 &c3 0-0 15 \302\243g5

followed by a kingside attack. *a6 16 \302\243>b5Axg5 17 \302\243>xg5 \302\243>d4

After 5...&H6 White can follow 18 #xc5 \302\243>xb5 19 a4 White will

the illustrative game in Chapter 6 take on bS the extra when
pawn
with 6 dxcS or transposeto other should secure victory.Seethe note to
lines. It represents one of Black's Black's 8th move in Game 39. For
most fashionable defences and the those preferring a more positional
relative lack of theory has approach, Game40examines7 dxcS
encouraged
a growing band of followers. &xc58 0-0 &xe2 9 \302\253xe2 Wa6 10
Vlicl &d7 11 a4 which also gives
3) Exchange of Light-Squared White good prospects.
Bishops It is also possibleto try to

exchange bishops with 3...b6, planning

These lines feature Black resolving ...iU6. This was onceconsidered to

to exchange White's king's bishop. be one of the main defences, but the
However, while this is positionally modern treatment 4 &b5+, which
desirable,it involves a loss of time has beenchampioned by Anand, has
which allows White to seize the forcibly demonstrated that White

initiative. One of the most popular is can pose Black numerous problems.
the Wade Variation, which involves The point is that 4...\302\243.d7 is answered

the manoeuvre ...iLc8-d7-b5. strongly by 5 &d3 when the

uncompleted fianchetto is a potential
weakness. The main alternative 4...c6 5
iU4 gives White sufficient time to
exploit his territorial advantage,
especially as there is little pressure on
d4. SeeGame41.
Chapter 11 features a rare move:
3...JLd7, aiming to continue with
4...a6 and S...l.bS. Black's
positional aims are laudable, but this is
10 Introduction

4) White exchanges on c5

The burden on White to maintain the

chain of pawnsc3,d4 and eS has led
Black to tempt fate by avoiding an
exchange of pawns in the centre for
as long as possible.While the aim

may be to reduce White's options,

very often the opposite is the case.
Thus there are caseswhen White can
break up the pawn structure by
taking on cS, generally followed by b4 advanuge with 7 dxcS! Wcl (or
intending to limit Black's activity 7...\302\253xc5 8 b4 Wb6 9 b5 8 \302\243>d4
\302\261)

further: \302\243>xe5? 9 \302\243>b5#xc5 10 \302\253U4 +-.

The example is from the note to

Black's 6th move in Game 17.

5) White Deviations

5 &e3, which is examined in

Chapter 7, represents White's soundest
way to avoid well-known lines. It
has the benefit of keepingthe option
of &e2 which allows White to adopt

a set-up different from that which is

usually associated with the opening.

Now White plays 7 dxc5!&xc58 The d4 pawn is well supported,

0-0 f6 9 b4 Ae7 10 Af4 fxe5 11 freeing White's hands to atuck on the
\302\243>xe5\302\243>xe5 12 Axe5 \302\243tf613 &d2 kingside.It has only recently been
and the outpost on eSgives White the subjected to seriousattention at

advantage. See the note to Black's tournament level and so the theory of the
6th move in Game 14 for details. line is still evolving.
The exchangeon cScan also Chapter 8 deals with various

occur when Black has temporarily miscellaneous ideas for White. These
blocked the bishop's route to cS by offer independent lines which require
playing ...\302\243}ge7. Consider the little knowledge of theory to play. 4
following example: Wg4 is an aggressive line that

This position (see following attempts to disrupt Black's

diagram) is from Euwe-Kramer, Zaan- development by targeting g7. However,
An~* lO/IA Whito nmu nain^H sin while the activitv of White's queen
 Introduction 11

can prove useful, Black can gain 1) Meet 5...Wb6 by either 6 a3

counterplay by undermining White's (Chapter 1) or 6 \302\243e2
(Chapter 3),
pawn centre. and answer 5...&d7 by 6 &e2

By omitting 4 c3 in favour of 4 (Chapter 4).

\302\243>f3
(like 4 ^4, an idea pioneered 2) The Wade variation can be met
by Nimzowitsch) White aims to by 7 dxc5.
accelerate his development. The 3) The recommendation 4 &b5+

consequence
of this may be that White is suitable for all playersto seek an
must gambit the d4-pawn, in return advantage in Chapter 9.
for a firm grip on the eS square and
piece play. With best play White Secondly, for more aggressive
should restore material equality after players who delight in

a while, when the chances ought to complications:

be equal. 1) The games contained in

4 dxc5 is an interesting line. Chapter2 should provide suitable

White continues by quietly inspiration.

and
developing maintaining support of eS. It 2) Meeting 5...&d7 by 6 &d3
offers Black some chances to go will usually transpose to a Milner-
wrong but is considered relatively Barry Gambit, but consideration
harmless. should also be given to 6 dxc5 (see
Game29).
6) General Strategy and Suggested 3) The Wade variation is well met
Repertoires by 7 c4.

For those interested in creating a However, in order to obtain a feel

repertoire with the Advance French, the for the characteristic middlegame
following alternatives might be positions which arise from the
considered. Advance French, the reader is
Firstly, for players who wish to recommended to play through each
build up methodically: illustrative game.
1 Modern Variation

The Modern Variation was originally

Hi
inspired by Paulsen. However, it is

only in recent decades that its AH HAHA

popularity has expanded to the point
where it is considered the main line. A
The ideaof 6 a3 isto gain space on
the queenside. This forces Blackto
mm
resolvec5-d4 pawn tension, which
can then allow White to develop his
light-squared bishop to its optimum
square. The variation has been
championed by such players as Fe- usually consists of a long
dorowicz, Korchnoi and Tal. manoeuvring phase. White aims to
control the kingside by advancing his
Game 1 pawns, while Blacktakes charge on
Sveshnikov-Timman the opposite flank.
Tilburg 1992 The main alternatives 6...\302\243Mi6,

6...a5 and 6...&d7 are examined later

1 e4 e6 in this chapter.
2 d4 d5 The rarer continuations do not

3 eS c5 merit detailed coverage:

4 c3 \302\243te6 a) 6...f6?i and now:
5 &f3 Wb6 al) 7 exf6ftxffi 8 Ae2 (8 b4
6 *3(1) cxd4 9 cxd4 Ad6 10 Ab2 0-0 11
White's plan is to continue with 7 Ae2 a6 120-0&e4 13&bd2 = Me-

b4 and take the pressure off the stel-Comay, Tel Aviv 1977) 8...&e7
centre by removing the tension on d4. 9 b4 c4 10 0-0 0-0 11Ag5 a5 =

6 ... c4 Corvi-Santis, Rome 1990.

With this move Black pinpoints a2) 7&d3!&d7(7...cxd48cxd4
b3 as a weakness.The next stage &d7 9 b4 \302\243
Nilsson-Thorbergsson,
14 Modern Variation

Munich 1958) 8 0-0 (8 b4!?) 8...fxe5

9 dxe5 0-0-0 10 #c2 \302\243\302\273ge7
11 Axh7

g6 12 Axg6 \302\243>xg6 13 *xg6 Ae7

and Black has active play in

compensation
for the sacrificed pawns;
M.Schlosser-McDonald, Oakham '
1988. 01 B WQM
b) 6...\302\243>ge7 7 dxc5! Wxc5 (or
7...#c7 8 \302\243>d4! #xe5+ 9 Ae2 \302\261
'..'...\342\226\240'.\"'\342\226\240/nAn

ECO) 8 Ad3 9
\302\243>g6 We2 Ae7 100-0
0-0 11 g3 Wb6 12 Ae3 #c7 13 Ad4
&d7 14 \302\243\302\273bd2
\302\243>xd4 14 cxd4 Hac8 the queen adopting a more positive
16 h4 f5 17exf6 gxf6 18h5 \302\243>h819 role. The pawn on b7 is attacked,
20
\302\243>h4\302\243>f7 ^\302\2435\302\261
HlouSek-MiSta, while &d3 will prove to be
Olomouc 1977. bothersome if Black envisages castling
7 \302\243>bd2 Ad7 kingside.
7...&ge7? would be a disaster 12 ... &c6
after 8 Axc4! (Xie-Akhsharumova, Black may try to reinforce his
Thessaloniki OL 1988) 8...dxc4 9 control over c4 with 12...b5.

&xc4 intending &d6+ winning. However, this can be undermined by 13

8 b3!? &d3 intending &c2 and a4.
This is unusual, but the In Prif-Apicella, Paris 1990,
opportunityto free the position has White's unusually placed queen
presented itself since Black has avoided proved its worth after 12...b6 13
the more common move-order &d3 \302\243\302\273e7
14 0-0 Ec8 IS \302\243>elg6 16
7...&a5. Now 8 &e2 would \302\243>c2
kgl 17 #c618
\302\243>e3 a4 Wcl 19
transpose to the next illustrative game, c4 Ac6 20 cxd5\302\243\302\273xd5
21 &xd5
but Sveshnikov reveals a different Axd5 22 Ab5+ *f8 23 Be1#d824
approach. #b4+ *g8 25 Exc8 txc8 26 #e7
8 ... cxb3 Af8 27 #xa7 \302\253U8 28 Eel h5 29
9 \342\202\254>xb3 &a5 fic7 Eh7 30 #xb6 Wh4 31 h3 #e4
The preparatory move 9...Bc8 32 &fl g5 32 Bc8 1-0.
should be consideredas a possible 13 Ad3 \302\243>e7

improvement.
14 0-0 h6?!
10 \302\243xa5 #xa5 Timman prefers 14...&c8with the
11 Ad2 #a4 idea of ...&b6 and and ...Ed8 with
12 Wbl!(2) decent chances. However, White can
A delicate switch which results in play the aggressive 15&xh7 g6 16
 Modern Variation 15

16 &xg6 fxg6 17 Wxg6+ *d7 18 24 f6

\342\200\242\342\200\242\342\200\242

WfuSg8 19 \302\243>g5forcing l9...Exg5, 25 a4 Ae7

and White is better according to 26 Af7 *d7
Sveshnikov. 27 d5! exd5
15 Eel \302\243>c8 28 e6+ 1-0
16 c4 dxc4?
In a difficult position Black walks Game 2
into a crafty trap. Necessary was Sveshnikov-Eingora

I6...\302\243fo6, after which White would Palma de Mallorca 1989

still be better placed: 17 cxdS exdS
(17...\302\243>xd5 18 Bc4 \302\253T)519 Bb4 +-) 1 e4 e6

18 e6! with the advantage. 2 d4 d5

17 fixc4 Wb5 3 e5 c5
18 #xb5 &xbS(3) 4 c3 \302\243>c6

5 \302\243>f3 Wb6

5...f6 which aims to undermine

mm* the chain, but Nimzowitsch
m mi pawn
demonstrated the way to handle this
idea: 6 Ab5! Ad7 (6...a6!? 7 Axc6+

\302\261m m bxc68 0-0cxd49 cxd4 cS 10 exf6

mm m gxf6 11 Bel 7 0-0

\302\261) #b6 (7...\302\243>xe5?

8 \302\243>xe5Axb5 9 Wh5+ *e7 11 Wn+

mmm
*d6 12dxc5+*xe5 13Eel+*f5
14 Wh5+ g5 14 g4#; 7...f5?! 8 c4!a6
9 &xc6 bxc6 10 \302\243>c3cxd4 11 \302\243\302\273xd4

\302\243
Maudsley-Wise, British Junior Ch
19 Bxc8+ 1970) 8 Axc6 bxc6 9 exf6 \302\243>xf6

White engineers a won ending. (9...gxf6 10 \302\243>e5!) 10 &e5 Ad6 11

19 ... Ixc8 dxcS Axc5 12 Ag5 Wd8 13 Axf6

20 Axb5+ *d8 #xf6 14 Wh5+! g6 IS #e2 Ed816

21 *fl *c7 0-017
\302\243>d2 Bael Efe8 18 *hl Ad6
22 Ecl+ \302\253b8 19 f4 c5 (Nimzowitsch-Levenfish,
23 Exc8+ *xc8 Karlsbad 1911) 20 Wa6!\302\261.

24 4e8 In Vasiukov-Velimirovil, VrSac

White can demonstrate his 1989, an attempt to stifle White's
superiority by pursuing the kingside attacking ambitions S...fS?! failed
with

pawns and consequently wrecking after 6 \302\243e2c4 7 b3 cxb3 8 axb3 ktl

their structure. 9 h4 \302\243>h610 Axh6 gxh6 11 Wcl
16 ModernVariation

#b6 12#xh6#xb3 13 Vg7fif8 14 bxc3 dxc4 18 Ve2 Efe8 19Wxc4 +-

0-0 \302\273c2 IS &dl 11)2 16 \302\243>g5*d8 Kharlov-Guedon, Torcy 1991.
17 Ee8
\302\243\302\273xh7 18 Ah5 &d7 19 \302\243>a3 b) 8...&d79 0-0and now:

Axh4 20 &xe8 Axe8 21 \302\243>f81-0. bl) 9...0-0-0 10 b3! cxb3 11

6 a3 c4 \302\243>xb3 #c7 12 Ebl Ae8 13 Af4 h6
7 \302\243\302\273bd2 \302\243>a5 14 c4 \302\261
Sveshnikov-Meshkov,
Without doubt the safest choice at Podolsk 1990.

Black's disposal. b2) 9...^aS 10 Eel \302\243k\302\2737

11 &fl

Attempts to destabilize the centre \302\243>g612 h4! fxeS 13 h5 e4 14 hxg6

are not so good, for example 7...f6!? exf3 15 \302\243>xf3\302\243>b316 \302\243>e5!\302\243>xal

8 Ae2 (8 g3!?fxe5 9 \302\243>xe5\302\243>f610 17 \302\253M7

hxg6 18 \302\243>xh8H)3 19 #13
f4! \302\261Cooley-Brown. Middlesex 1983) 0-0-0 20 &g5 Ee821Exal +- Khar-
and now (4): lov-Edelman, Maringa 1991.
8 Ae2
Thereis little to be gained from
trying 8 b3?! cxb3 9 Bbl Ad7 10
Ad3 Aa4 11 c4 dxc4 12 &xc4 &xc4
13 &xc4Ec8 14 Axb3 Axb3 15
Hxb3 #a6 16 &d2 h6 17 Ve2
#xe2+18*xe2 b6 19 a4 \302\243>e7
20 a5
&d5 with at least equality; Emodi-
Glek, Budapest 1989.

8 ... Ad7
9 0-0 ^e7(5)

a) 8...fxeS 9 \302\243>xe5 &f6 (after

9...\302\243>xe5 10 dxe5 \302\243>h6 11 &xc4!
dxc4 12 &xh6 Ad7 13 Ag5 #xb2
140-0 Wxc3 IS Ah5+ g6 16 Wbl
White is better according to Pahtz)
10 f4 Ad6 11 \302\243>df3! (11 Ah5+ g6
12 Af3 0-0 13 We2 Ae7 14 0-0
\302\243\\xe5 IS fxeS &e8 16 Ag4 fixf 1+
17 *xfl Ad7 18 g3 19 h4
\302\243\302\273g7

Ef8+ 20 *g2 Wd8 21 \302\261

\302\243>f3 Prif-

Wintzer, Lugano 1989) II.-0-0 12

0-0 Ad7 13 ftxd7 14 g3
\302\243\302\273xd7 \302\243>f6 Black has tried a number of
15 *g2 16 Axc4!
\302\243\302\273e4 \302\243>xc3 17 other moves:
 ModernVariation 17

a) 9...h6 and now: fxe5 15 c5 #c7 16 17

\302\243>xe5 \302\243\302\273xe5

al) 10 a4 &e7 II Wei g5 12 Bxe5 Axc5 18 Ad6

\302\243\302\273xb3 19 \302\243\302\273xa5

*hl \302\243tg613 g3 &e7 14 Adl h5 IS #xa5 20 &d2 #c7 21 Ee3 *b8 22

&c2 0-0-016Wdl g4 17 &el Ac6 Bcb3*a8 23 Exb7 #xb7 24 Exb7
18 \302\243>g2Edg8 19 Eel \302\253U820 *xb7
\302\243\302\273fl 25 &b4 \302\261
Anand-Prasad, New
#f8 21 *gl #e2 Wg7 23
Ad7 22 Delhi 1987.
i.d2 Ad8 24 Eebl &c7 25 \302\243\302\273f4
\302\243>e7 10 Bel
26 \302\243>g2Sf8 27 Eel *b8 28 Ae3 This isa safe continuation that

5ig6 to-'A Vasiukov-Kuzmin, offers White a small advantage with

Moscow 1991. which to play for a win. The

a2) 10 Ebl 0-0-0 11 b3 \302\243>xb3 12 alternativesare:

\302\243}xb3 cxb3 13 c4 dxc4 14 &xc4 a) 10g3\302\243*3(10...\302\243ec61lEbl

Zbtl 15*d3 Ac6 16 Bxb3 Wcl 17 &e7 12 &el 0-0-0 13\302\243tg2*b8 14
i.e3 *t>8 18Sfbl *a8 19\302\243>d2V2-V2 \302\243tf4*a8 15 &f3 Ac8 16 Eel Ag5
Kjeldsen-Jensen, Lyngby 1989. 17b4cxb3 18\302\243>xb3h6 19^d3 with
b) 9...0-0-0 and now: an unclear position; Nikolenko-Ris-
bl) 10Eblf5 11b3cxb3 12 c4 tovic, Moscow 1991) 11 &xb3 &a4
Aa4 13 cxd5exd5 14 \302\243>g5E>h6 15 12 Wd2 Axb3 13 \302\243>g614
\302\243>h4 \302\243>g2

Ab2 Ae7 16f4*b8 17&c3\302\243>c4 18 \302\243>c715 h4 \302\243>c616 \302\243>e3h5 17 f4

&xc4 dxc4 19 &xc4 #c6 20 Axb3 0-0-0 18 *h2 f5 19 exf6 gxf6 20
#xc3 21 Axa4 #e3+ 22 *hl Exd4 &f3 = Morales-Bell6n,Palma 1991.

23 1*3 *xb3 24 Axb3 25

\302\243\302\273g4 b) 10\302\243>g5h6 11 \302\243>h30-0-0 12
Bd2
\302\243\302\273c6 26 27 Exf2
\302\243>xg7 \302\243\302\273f2+ f5 13
\302\243\302\273f4 exf6 gxf6 14 Af3 Wd6 15

Sxf2 28 Ad5 Sd8 29 &f3 Eb2?? 30 \302\243fo5e5 16 Eel e4 17 Ae2 f5 18 a4

Ixb2 1-0 Wcsterinen-Tisdall, Gaus- Ae8 19 b4 &xh5 20 Axh5 \302\243\302\273ac6

dal 1992. 21 b5 22
\302\243>a5 g3 23
\302\243>g8 Aa3 \302\253U7

b2) 10 Eel \302\243>h611 \302\243>flE>f5 12 24 f4 25

\302\243>f6 Axf8 Sdxf8 26 Erf 1
h6 13
\302\243\302\273e3 Sfl Ae714 \302\243>el\302\243\302\273xe3Bhg8 27 \302\243>e3*c7 28 Ba2 Eg7 29
15 Axe3 f5 16 exf6 gxf6 17 Ebl *hl Efg8 30Egl *b631#e2#e6
Ac8 18 Ah5 Axh5 19 Wxh5 Axa3 Wdl 32#dl 33 #e2 #e6 '/2-Vj
20 \302\243>f3Ae7 21 Efel #d6 22 fth4 GroSar-Bareev, Bled/RogaSka Slat-
\302\243>c623 \302\243>g6Bh7 24 Af4 \302\273d7 25 ina 1991.

l'g4 e5 26 #xd7+ Sxd7 27 dxe5 10 ... #c6

fxe5 28 \302\243>xe5\302\243>xe5 29 Bxe5 Ad6 The queen makes room for the

30 Be8+ *c7 31Ae3 a6 V2- V2 Muk- king's knight to shuttle along to b6.
hametov-Naumkin, Leningrad 1991. Sucha slow process is possible due
c) 9...f6 10 Ebl 0-0-0II fie 1 to the lack of feasiblepawn breaks.

\302\243>e712 &fl \302\243>g613 b3 cxb3 14 c4 Black has also tried alternatives,

18 ModernVariation

but has received little reward for the the pawns are easilypicked off as it
endeavour: is difficult for Black to mobilize
a) 10...\302\243>c8 11 #c2 h6 12 a4 a6 forces in their support.
13 &dl &a7 14h4 Ec8 IS h5 Ae7 15 &h5 #c7
16 Sc3 *d8 17tfbl \302\243>7c6 18 Wa2 16 a4
g5 19 \302\243>h2f5 20 exf6 Axf6 21 \302\243\302\273g4 White has no desire to allow
Ag7 22 Ibl e5 23 b4 cxb324 \302\243>xb3 16...&a4, dislodginghis queen.
25 Bxb3
\302\243\302\273xb3 #c7 26 Si-
\302\243>xe5\302\261 16 ... Ac6

nowjew-Piskov, Dortmund 1992. 17 &dl *b8

12h4f5
b) 10....\302\243>g611g3&e7 18 He3!(<5;
13h5^f8 14fibl g5 15 b4 cxb3 16
c4 with an unclear position; Mot-
wani-I.Gurevich, Hastings 1991.
c) 10...h6 and now:

cl) 111^20-0-012 Ebl&b8 13

Wb3
\302\243\302\273fl 14 #xb3 \302\243>xb3 15 Af4
\302\243>c816 \302\243>g3V2-V2 Sveshnikov-Nik-

olenko, USSR 1991.

c2) HSbiac8 12^fl Wb3 13

Wxb3 \302\243>xb3 14 Af4 Aa4 15 \302\243>g3b5

16 \302\243>h5\302\243>b617 g4! Sveshnikov-
\302\261

Luce, Berlin 1989.

11 #c2 3*8 With this useful move White
12 \302\243>g5 prepares to torment Black's kingside
The best way to break down pawns. The long-term plan is to
Black's fortress is to provoke exploit the resulting weaknesses by
concessions as part of a patient rapidly transferring the queenside
manoeuvring game. pieces to the other flank.
12 ... h6 18 ... Ec8
13 &h3 \302\243tb6 19 Eg3 g6
14 \302\243f4 0-0-0! 20 Qf6 \302\243>d7

Black rightly judges that his king 21 \302\243)xd7+ #xd7

will be safer on the queenside. Now a 22 Bf3
standard misjudgment is that the Sveshnikov suggests 22 h4!as a
kingside pawns need only to be way to pursue the initiative. This is
pushed forward to force White to similar to the actual game but saves
take defensive measures.In reality, time in view of the fact that the rook
such schemes are invariably flawed; soon returns to g3.
 ModernVariation 19

22 ... Bc7 30 ... Sg8

23 Wbl #e8 31 \302\243>g5 Ah6
24 h4 h5 32 \302\243>h3 Ag4
Now 24...&e7 25 Hh3 (25 n5 gxh5 33 Ag5 Axh3
with an unclear position) 25...h5 26 34 Sxh3 Axg5
\342\202\254Jf3
intending &g5 gives White the 35 hxg5 #d8
g5 square as a jumping-off point for 36 Eg3 Ec6
invading Black's position. 37 *fl Ea6
25 Eg3 &d7 38 Wb5 Ee8!
26 &I3 \302\243>b3! The other rook comes across to
This simplifying exchange makes the queenside to add to the defence.

White's task of steadily claiming This ensures equality.

more space rather less smooth. It is 39 c4 dxc4
necessaryto hold on to the important 40 Ec3 Ec6
dark-squared bishop but the 41 Exc4 Exc4

drawback is that a4 is now under attack. 42 flfec4 WxgS

27 Axb3 cxb3 43 a6
28 a5 Ab5 A blunt attack with 43 Eel?!
29 Ag5 &e2 actually manages to allow Black to
30 Af6?! (7) contemplate trying to win the game
after 43...*rd8! 44 a6Se7!,when d4
will come under pressure.
43 ... Ec8
44 #xb3 Ecl+
45 Excl #xcl+
46 *h2 Wf4+

Game 3
Haba-Knaak
Halle 1987

At this stage a finesse is required 1 e4 e6

to present Black with more problems 2 d4 d5
by temporarily shifting attention to 3 e5 c5
the loose pawn on b3: 30\342\202\254k!2
Wb5 4 c3 \302\243>c6

31 Ee3 Ac4 32 Wd a slight

1 with 5 \302\243>f3 Wb6

advantage according to Sveshnikov. 6 a3 c4

20 Modern Variation

7 \302\243>bd2 With this useful move White is

The rare alternatives are as cleverly trying to save a tempo.
follows: Normally White will castle, but then he

a) 7 \302\243>g5(suggested by Ciocal- must play Sel in order to free f 1 for

tea) 7...&d7 8 Hi5 9 \302\243>h3g6!.
\302\243>h6 the knight to transfer to the kingside.
Kcres evaluated the position as By playing Qfl first, White saves
slightly favourable to Black. the tempo with the rook.
b) 7 b4 a5 8 Ab2 axb4 9 axb4 After the routine 10 0-0 Black
Exal 10 Axal #a6 11\302\243tbd2 Axb4! may play:
12 cxb4 \302\243>xb4 (intending ...Wxal) a) 10...h61lEel(llg30-0-012
13 &c3 &a2 followed by ...&e7-c6 \302\243h4 *b8 {12...f5 13 exf6 gxf6 14
and ...bS-b4 is Keres' Ag4 e5?15b3! cxb3 f5 17
16 \302\243\302\273xb3

to gain
recommendation Black an advantage. Ah3 Aa4 18 \302\243>xa5! Zaitsev-
\302\261

c) 7 Ac2 Ad7 8 0-0 f6?! (or Farago, Szolnok 1975} 13 Ah5 g6

8...&ge7 9 &bd2 &a5, transposing 13&e2 #c7 15 \302\243>g2Ac6!
= was

into Game 2, Sveshnikov-Eingorn) 9 Timman-Liberzon, Venice 1974)

fxe5
\302\243\302\273bd2 10 \302\243\302\273xe5 11 dxe5
\302\243\302\273xe5 11...&C612\302\243\302\273fl
Wb3 13 &f4 Aa4
0-0-0 12 a4 13
\302\243k\302\2737 b3 cxb3 14 (13...Wxdl 14 Axdl intending g4
&xb3 t Bastrikov-Zurakhov, USSR and 14
\302\261)
\302\243\302\273g3 #cl Wb6 15 \302\243>3d2!
1955. 16
\302\243>g6 &e3 \302\243fo4

7 ... \302\243\302\273a5 USSR

(Sveshnikov-Eingorn, Ch 1985) 17 Ag4!?
8 Ebl with equal chances.
A popular idea that prepares a b) 10...\302\243fc3? 11 &xc4! 12
\302\243\302\273xd2

future b3 or b4. \302\243>xd2 dxc4 13 &xc4 followed by

8 ... &d7 &d6+ and &f7 +-.
9 Ae2 &e7 c) 10...&c611 b4 cxb3 12 c4
10 &fl (8) dxc4 13&xc4h6=.
d) 10...ftg6 11 Sel &e7 12 g3
Wcl 13 &f 1 Ac614 h4 \302\253U715 h5 =
Tischbierek-Vogt, Halle 1987.
e) 10...\302\243kec6 11 #c2 &e7 12 b4
cxb3 13\302\243>xb3\302\243>xb3 14 Exb3 Wcl
15 c4 &a5 16fic3 Ec817c5Ac618
\302\243>g5Wd8 19 Eg3 Axg5 20 \302\243xg5

\302\273d721 Ad2 Bartolome-Goldsch-

\302\261

midt, Acasusso 1991.

f) 10...*c7 11 \302\243>g5h6 12\302\243>h3

0-0-0 13 \302\243tf4*b8 (13...g6!?) 14

 Modern Variation 21

with
\302\243Mi5 an unclear game; Zaitsev-
Vasiukov, Moscow 1969.
10 ... f6
Black follows the traditional
theme of striking at the centre in an

effort to open up the position. In

Sveshnikov-Eingorn, Sochi 1985,

Black managed to defuse the

situation by opting for an ending:

10...*b3I? 11 Af4 &a4 12 *xb3

&xb3 13 \302\243te3\302\243>g614 Ag3 h5 15 h4

keJ 16 \302\243>g5Ad8 17 \302\243>h3\302\243>c618 18 b4 cxb3
\302\243>f4\302\243>xf4 19 Axf4 20
\302\243\302\273e7Ag5 19 Exb3 #a5
21 Axd8
\302\243\302\273g6
Exd8 22 g3 &a4 23 20 &d2 Ehe8

*d2 *d7 24Baf1\302\243>e725 Hh6

\302\243\302\273g2 It is difficult for Black to justify
26 =.
\302\243>f4 his pawn sacrifice, for example
11 h4 0-0-0 20...d4 (20...Ede821 c4!)210-0d3
12 h5 &ec6 (21 ...Ae6 22 Bb5 #xa3 23 \302\243\302\273bl
+-)
13 Af4 22 e6 (22 &g4 Hhe823 e6 Exe6!?
White is reluctant to release the \302\261)22...dxe2 (22...&xe6 23 Ag4
tension with 13 exf6 gxf6 as Black Ad7 24 c4 +-) 23 exd7+ Sxd7 24
can attempt to force through ...e5 \302\253fxe2\302\261(Haba).

with bright prospects. 21 0-0 \302\243kxe5

13 ... fxe5 22 Wbl! Wc7 (10)

14 \302\243>xe5 \302\243\302\273xe5

15 Axe5 Gte6
If 14..JLd6, then White maintains
his territorial gains with IS f4!.
16 \302\243g3 tSV.(9)
Without a supporting pawn on f6,
this gallant gesture lacks conviction.
The quieter 16...&e7isa steadier
option, although 17 \302\243te3 and 5ig4
keeps a hold on the important e5

square.
17 dxe5 Ac5
Not 17...d4? 18 &d2 with a A practical choice, as it is the
winning game. obvious way to defend b7. Other
22 Modern Variation

treatments invite complications but Game 4

White emerges on top: Degraeve-Delmont
a) 22...h6 23 Bxb7\302\243b6 24 \302\243>b3 Belfort 1992/93

#xa3 25 &c5! #xc5 (25...\302\243xc5 26

flb8+ *c7 27 \302\243xe5+ fixeS 28 1 e4 e6

Kb7+ and 29 Bxd8) 26 \302\243a6\302\243b527 2 d4 d5
#f5+and White wins. 3 e5 c5

b) 22...\302\243>c6 23 Bxb7 \302\243b6 24 4 c3 ^c6

#xa3
\342\202\254M>3 25 Bxd7 flxd7 26 &g4 5 \302\243tf3 Wb6

\302\261. 6 a3 c4
23 c4 &a4?! 7 \302\243>bd2

This leads to a speedy dSbScle. White can experiment with 7 h4,

Black has slightly more chance of aiming to increase his control of the
surviving after 23...d4 24 &e4 b6 kingside while keepingoptions open

(24...&f825 &h4 &eJ 26 \302\243xe7 as to where to position the king's

Bxe7 27 Bxb7 +-) 25 \302\243>xc5 #xc5 bishop. It is relatively unknown,

26#xh7\302\261. although Black tends to secure

24 cxd5 Bxd5 by
equality forming a defence based upon
Grabbbing the exchange also an early ...f6.
does not enable Black to defend: a) 7...Ad78 h5 and now:
24...&xb3 25 \302\243>xb3Bxd5 26 Bel b6 al) 8...f69lre2&a5(9...fxe5l0
27 #e4 #d6 28 \302\243>xc5 Bxc5 \302\243>xe5\302\243>xe5 11 dxe5 \302\243c5=) 10 \302\243f4

(28...bxc5 29 f4 +-) 29fidl #c630 \302\243M>311 fia2 0-0-0 12 g4 &h6 13

#xh7 \302\261. \302\243h3\302\243>f714 0-0 g5! 15 \302\243e3\302\243e7 16

25 &e4 \302\243xb3 exf6 \302\243xf6 17 \302\243te5flhfS 18 \302\243>xd7

26 #xb3 fled8 Bxd7 19 \302\243>d2\302\243>xd2 20 *xd2 #d6

There is no redemption for Black: 21 Baal = Djuri6-Vaganian, Bled/

a) 26...fld4 27 Wb5 Bxe4 28 RogaSka Slatina 1991.

#xe8+#d8 29\302\243g4++-. a2) 7...&d7 8 h5 h6 9 \302\243fo4&a5
b) 26...#a5 27 ficl *b8 28 \302\243c4 10 0-0-011
\302\243>d2 flbl \302\261
Khomiakov-

Bd4 29 Aa6! #xa6 (29...&b6 30 Kabadze, Budapest 1992.

#f7 +-) 30\302\243>xc5H>6 (30...#c6 31 b) 7...f6 8 exf6 (8 We2) 8...\302\243>xf6

\302\243xe5+ Bxe5 32 &a6+ +-) 31 #f7 9 &M2 \302\243d6 10 b3 cxb3 11 #xb3

Ifb5 32&e6+-. #xb3 12 &xb3 0-0 = Miljani6-

27 \302\243c4 Bd4 Miiller, Budapest 1989.

28 \302\243e6+ *b8 c) 7...&a5 8 g3 transposes to
29 \302\243>xc5 #xc5 Game6, Sveshnikov-Eingorn, Sochi

30 #e3 1-0 1986.

 Modern Variation 23

7 ... \302\243>a5 12 ... \302\243a4

8 \302\243e2 \302\243d7 13 \302\243*3 \302\243>c6(12)

9 Ml? (11)

12
// IB B*B\302\253B W
mm HAH
B
BABi-BABA \342\226\240*\342\226\240!\342\226\240\"\342\226\240

9Bj BB *Wt WNk H HAgg HA

m mim m .HUB \"'B
\342\226\240

mm m a
a m mm
9HJW4
m mmm &MMM \342\200\242\342\200\242\342\200\242
&MHC &0&0I fwwi mmwm mz
a mmm im
14 *fl
The closednature of the position A
preliminary measure to lessen
allows White a certain amount of the influence of a possible
room for creativity. Normally when discovered attack on the queen. Now
advancing his h-pawn, White has in 14...Wa6can be met with *el
mind the possibility of continuing followed by g3 and &g2 with a

with g3 and \302\243h3. In this case, the complex middlegame.

purpose is to stifle Black's kingside 14 .- \302\243xa3!?

play with h5. An interesting, if not completely

9 ... h5 sound, continuation. Black offers
A reflex move which blocks two pieces for the rook, which is

White's intended push, but gives up dangerous due to the threat of the
the gS square for future operations. queenside pawns romping to the
10 flbl &e7 eighth rank. \342\226\240

11 &fl 15 bxa3 \302\243td2+

This deviceto save time can be 16 Vxd2 #xbl+

recognised from the game Haba- 17 &el Wal
Knaak. White delays a decision 18 f4!
about castling whilst the knight can White has no choice but to
leaptog3ore3. relinquish his a-pawn, so opts for a
11 \342\200\236. \302\243>b3 lightning assault on the black king: Note
12 \302\243g5 that \302\243xc2 leaves
18 \342\202\254k:2 White
The drawback of ...h5 is clear; the passive, while the a-pawn drops
bishop can take up an active post. anyway.
24 Modern Variation

18 ... Wxa3 The culmination of White's

19 f5 \302\243>a5 attack: the two bishop: > are about to

The straightforward I9...b5!? is a snare the hapless king

suggestion by Jadoul to try to create 28 nre

\302\253\342\200\242\342\200\242

a passed pawn which will distract 29 no *d7

White from his campaign. Now the 30 \302\243xb7

knight is added to the task of Also crushing is 30 Sf7+ flxf?

hassling the queen but more importantly (30...*e8 31 \302\243g6) 31 #xf7+ *c8
it takes away another defensive 32#g8+ *c7 33 #xa8 +-.
piece. 30 Sxf3
\342\200\242\342\200\242\342\200\242

20 Af3 \302\243>b3 31 \302\243xf3 flf8

21 Wf2 &cl 32 d5 Wb6
22 flh3 #xc3 33 dxe6+ *c7
23 fxe6 fxe6(13) 34 &e3 #xe6
35 \302\243xa7 c3
36 #c5+ 1-0
Game 5
Yilmaz-Manni

Budapest 1992

1 e4 e6

2 d4 d5
3 e5 c5
4 c3 \302\243>c6

5 \302\253M3 Wb6
24 \302\243>xd5!

It is hardly surprising that with the 7 g3

black king shielded by a thin line of White declares his intention to

pawns there is an opportunity for a develop the bishop on h3. The idea is to
tactical explosion. The knight is reduce the effectiveness of Black's
taboo due to 24...exdS 25 \302\243xh5+ basic plan (...f6 to break up the pawn
flxh5 26 flxc3. chain) by targeting the potentially
24 ... Wa5 weakpoint e6.

25 \342\202\254k3 ftd3 7 ... Ad7

26 \302\243>xd3 #xc3 8 &h3( 14) h6
27 \302\243>el Wb4 One of the most ambitious
28 Ae4 defences; Black simply envisages an
 Modern Variation 25

b) 90-00-0-0 10\302\243>bd2( 10\302\243>el

g5 11 f4 gxf4 12 gxf4 f5 \302\261
Makro-

poulos-Gavrilakis, Greek Ch 1976)

10...\302\243>a5 11 ^el gS 12 f4! gxf4 13
gxf4 h5 14 \302\243}h615
\302\243>g2 &e3 fldg8+
16 *hl \302\243>g4!? 17 &xg4 hxg4 18
&xg4 f5 19exf6\302\243xf6 20 flgl #d6
21 $b3
\302\243>f3 22 flbl \302\243e8 23 #e2

flxg4 24 Sxg4 \302\243h525 *g2! Axg4

26 #xg4 &a5 27 f5! +- Ciocaltea-
Heim, Romania 1979.
avalanche of pawns to smother 9 \302\243>bd2 \302\243>a5

White's kingsidc. This line requires 10 0-0 g5

careful handling by White who 11 Obi \302\243e7

needsto employ an unusual In the game Silman-Kushnir,

to
manoeuvre thwart the problem. 8...JiLe7is Lone Pine 1975,Blackpreferred to

alsoworth consideration. For activate her king's knight: ll...Qge7

example: 12 \302\243g2 0-0-0 13 h4?! (13 \302\243>el!?)

a) 9 \302\243Mx)2and now: 13...g4 14 h5

\342\202\254tel 15 16
\302\243hl \302\243>\302\2435

al) 9...0-0-0 I0\302\243>fl f5?! II exf6 \302\243>g2&h6 17 Bel f6 18 \302\243>flBdf8

\302\243ixf612 e5
\302\243te3 13 \302\243xd7+ Sxd7 14 19 exf6 Hxf6 20 Axh6 S8xh6 21
dxeS 5ie4 15 e6 \302\261
Jezck-Lundquist, \302\243>le3 &d6 22 4^f4 flxf4! 23 gxf4
corr. 1956/59. #d8 24 f5 #xh4 25 fxe6 \302\243xe6 26

a2) 9...&a5 10 0-0 (10 flbl Vf6

\302\243>g2 27 #d2 \302\243f528 fiadl \302\243e4

Bc8?!110-0 h5 12 \302\243telg6? 13 \302\243>g2 29 *f4 #g7 30 \302\243>h4Bf6 31 Wh2

t Walther-Frank, Amsterdam 1954) #g5 32 Ag2 Gc6 33 fle3 \302\243>e734
10...h5 11 \302\243>el(11 flbl 0-0-0 12 Blel \302\243Y7f535 \302\243xe4 \302\243>xe436Bxe4

&el g5 13 \302\243g2 \302\243>h614 &hl \302\243>f5 dxe4 37#e5&xh4 0-l.

15 \302\243>g2with an unclear position; 12 \302\243>el h5

Bosboom-Brenninkmeijer, Holland 13 Ag2 \302\256h6(15)

12\302\243>g2g6
1992)I l...g5(11...0-0-0 14 Ml
13 \302\243>li6\302\243
\342\202\254te3 Vitolins'-Zelinsky, An essential move if White is to
Latvian Ch 1978) and now: create dynamic play. In practical

a21) 12 \302\243>c2\302\243a4 13 Obi g4 ? tournament play, White often

Blatny-Drvota, Deem 1978. becomes congested and Black can
a22) 12 f4 g4 13 \302\243g2 \302\243>h614 steadily build up his forces behind
lfe2 \302\243tf5 ? Storm-Casper, Deem the pawn shield. The difference here

1978. is that White embarks on a clever

26 Modern Variation

24 #d2 \302\243>f5
(16)

16 m&sm m
w
\302\2471A 11.11111
A HI Ht

Aiti mm.

mv
o m
manoeuvre to transfer the el knight
m
to a more prominent post.
14 ... 0-0-0 25 b5!
15 \302\243>g2 g4 All of a sudden, the queen is on
16 &e3 Sdg8 the verge of being trapped by 26
Simple development, adding Sb4, forcing Black to take evasive
another rook to the offensive. However, measures.
the next step (\342\200\236.h4)
carries no 25 ... a5
immediate threat, so White can now follow 26 bxa6 #xa6

up his minor-piecemanoeuvre with 27 c4

queenside counterplay. The pair of bishopsdirected
17 b4 Qc6 towards the opposing king will
18 a4 h4 enhance their influence once the c- and
19 \302\243>dxc4! d-pawns advance. It is too late for
A scintillating sacrifice. The Black to switch his kingside forces
knight is given up in order to to the other flank to create a
penetrate into the heart of Black's camp. defensive barrier.

The attack will gather momentum as 27 ... \302\243>xd6

the queenside pawns roll forward. 28 d5 e5

19 ... dxc4 29 \302\243xe5 Sh5

20 \302\243>xc4 *c7 30 &f4 Jtf5

21 &f4 \302\243kd8 31 Sbcl
22 \302\243kd6+ \302\243xd6 There is no respite for Black, as
23 exd6 #c4 White energetically maintains the
Upon 23...1fb8 White's pawn pressure.
avalanche crashes through with 24 31 ... &e4

bS and c4-c5-c6. 32 \302\243xe4 \302\243>xe4

 Modern Variation 27

33 *d4 \302\243d6

34 c5 \302\243>e8

35 c6
The reward for having faith with

the speculative 19 &dxc4 is the c-

pawn reaching the sixth rank with a

vengeance.
35 ... bxc6
36 dxc6 &xc6
37 fifdl *b7
38 Vd7+ *a8
39 flxc6 1-0 a) 9...h5 and now:
al) 10\302\243>g5!?\302\243ie7 11 #13 \302\243>f5

Game 6 12 \302\243h3 g6 13 \302\243xf5! gxfS 14 #e2

Sveshnikov-Eingorn Jb4 15\302\243>df3\302\243>b3 16flbl\302\243>xcl 17

Sochi 1986 Sxcl \302\261
Degraeve-I.Sokolov, Baguio
City 1987.
1 e4 e6 a2) 10 \302\243h3\302\243>h611 0-0 \302\243e7 12

2 d4 d5 \302\243>elg6 13 \302\243>g20-0-0
14 Sbl *b8
3 e5 c5 IS \302\243>f3!H>3 16 *e2 \302\243a4 17 \302\243g5

4 c3 \302\243>c6 \302\243xg5 18 \302\243>xg5#c2 19 #f3 20

\302\243>b3

5 \302\253M3 Wb6 #f4! \302\261

Sax-Ree, Amsterdam 1979.
6 a3 c4 b) 9...h6 10 &h3 (10 h5 \302\243le7 11

7 g3 \302\243d7 \302\243h3 \302\243>b3? 12 \302\243>xb3 \302\243a4 13 \302\243>fd2

8 h4 5k6 14 0-0 \302\243>a5 15 f4 \302\243>xb3 16

Since Black may have in mind a \302\243>xb3 \302\243xb3 17 #e2 was

\302\261 Bron-

pawn storm commencing with ...gS, stein-Mestel, London rapid 1976)

White takes immediate steps to 10...0-0-0110-0\302\243>e712 Sbl *b8
prevent such activity. 13 \302\243lel \302\243>f514 \302\243>g2\302\243e7 15 #f3
8 ... &a5 \302\243c8 16 h5 Hhf8 17 \302\243>f4\302\261
Sax-

9 \302\243>bd2 #c6!?(77j Knaak, Szirak 1985.

A sortie to disrupt White's plan of c) 9...0-0-0 10 \302\243h3 f5 (more
kingsideexpansion.Black prepares
accurate than 10...*b8?! 11 0-0 h6 12
to offer the trade of queens and, h5 \302\243>e713 Bel g6 14 \302\243>h2
gxh5 15
should White avoid the exchange, #xh5 \302\243e8 16 #f3 \302\261
Hodgson-Lee,
infiltrate the opposition's camp. London 1977) 11 0-0 \302\243>h612 \302\243el

A number of other moves have \302\243>f713 \302\243>g2g5 14 hxg5 \302\243>xg5 15

been tried: \302\243>f4

\302\243>xh3+ 16 \302\243>xh3 \302\243e7 17 Sbl
28 Modern Variation

fldg8 18 \302\243>f3? Klinger-Portisch, 15 b4! cxb3(18)

Dubai OL 1986.
d) 9...\302\243>e7 10 h5 h6 11 \302\243>h4
0-0-0 12 \302\243h3 f6 13 f4 Sg8 14 #g4
f5 15#e2 g5 16hxg6 \302\243>xg6 17 &g2
Ae7 18 \302\243>b319
\302\243>B Sbl \302\243>xcl 20

flxcl Ig7 21 *f2 = Pri6-Ree,

France-Netherlands 1990.

10 \302\243tg5

It is natural that White is keento

makeroom for the queen to escape
Black's attentions.
After 10 \302\243h3?! (10 \302\243e2 gives
White a slight plus) 10...Va4 11 16 Ad3

#e2? #c2 120-0 \302\243>b3 Black is As the knight has not been
better. obliged to occupy e3, White's
10 ... h6 thematic pawn sacrifice allows him to
11 \302\253Ui3 #a4 gain time by attacking the enemy
12 Vf3! queen. The main point is that as

Sveshnikov suggests that the Black has transferred the queen to

ending after 12 \302\243e2 #xdl+ 13 \302\243xdl the kingside, White now signals the
slightly favours White. However, the attack on the opposite flank. As
text declaresmore aggressive usual with the advance of the b-
intentions. pawn, the priority is not necessarily
12 ... #c2 to recapture on b3 but to open up the
13 \302\243tf4 position with c4.

The knight is heading for the 16 ... Vg8

central
post e3 to oust the queen. 17 flbl &a4
13 \342\200\236. \302\243>e7 18 &e3 Ic8
14 \302\243g2 Wh7?! If 18...bS then 19 c4! bxc4 10
An interesting idea to bring the \302\243kixc4 is strong due to the d-pawn
queen to the defenceof the kingside beingpinned.
and enforce ...gS. It would, however, 19 c4 dxc4

be more preciseto preserve control 20 &dxc4 \302\243>xc4

of b3 in order to keep the queenside 21 \302\243tocc4 &d5

closed: 14...&a4 (14..&\302\2435 IS \302\243e3i) The flurry of tactics fails to make

15 \302\243ie3#h7 16 Ah3 \302\243b3 17 \302\243>xb3 an impression: after 21...Bxc4 22
Axb3 when White has a slight edge. \302\243xc4 &c6 23 #xb3! Axhl 24 f3 the
 Modern Variation 29

bishop is blocked and White will return for control of the hl-a8
demolish the qucenside. diagonal. 30...\302\243c6 31 \302\243xc6+ bxc6 32
22 &d2 &e7 Sxb3 is better for White, but the
23 0-0?! more restrained 30...&d8!? deserved
As the king is quite safe in the consideration.
centre, Sveshnikov recommends 31 Axc6+ bxc6

dislodging
Black's most active piece: 32 Sxb3! Axb3
23 Qe3 \302\243c624 \302\243e4with the 33 flbl 0-0
superior chances. Now Black can create On 33..~&.d5 comes 34 Sb8+
some counterplay by utilizing the \302\243d8 35 \302\243a5 (35 Hxd8+? *xd8 36
power of his dormant queen. 36
#a6 f5 37 Aa5+ *e7 *) 35...0-0
23 ... gS! \302\243xd8 \302\261.

24 h5 \302\253g7 34 Sxb3 Id8

25 &e3 \302\243c6 35 Aa5 fle8

26 \302\243>xd5 i.xd5 36 #e4 Sc8

27 &e4(19) 37 Ad2!
Black can no longer adequately

defend his shattered queenside pawn

structure.
37 ... Ad8

38 flb7 \302\243b6

39 Ae3 fld8
40 a4 *h8
41 Wxc6 Wh7

42 a5 &xa5
43 Bxa7 14)

Game7
27 \342\200\236. g4 Sax-Uhlmann

Black will not readily allow a Sarajevo 1982

bishop exchange, as the blockade of
d5 is soonundermined by 27...Sd8 1 e4 e6
28 &xd5 flxd5 29 Sxb3b6 30Sb5!. 2 d4 d5

28 #e2 &c4 3 e5 c5

29 Ad3 \302\243d5 4 c3 Qc6

30 Ab5+ Ic6?! 5 Wb6
A valiant attempt to create 6 a3* c4
counterplay by offering the exchange in 7 g3
30 Modern Variation

Black employs a popular method b2) 9...\302\243>a5 10 \302\243>bd2 \302\243d6 11

of attacking White's pawn chain. 0-0!? (11 We2 transposes to the note

8 exf6 above) 11...0-0 12&e5(l2flel <&>h8

In Malaniuk-Uhlmann, Tallinn 13 \302\243xe6 \302\243xc6 14 Bxe6 Bac8 IS

1987, White preferred to allow Sxe8 Hxe8 with an unclear position
exchanges on eS: 8 \302\243h3!? fxeS 9 according to Botterill) 12...i.xe5 13
\302\243>xe5 \302\243>xe5 10 dxe5 \302\243c5 11 #h5+ dxe5 \302\243>d7 14 \302\243>f3\302\243tt>3 15 \302\243e3

g6 12 #e2 \302\243d7 13 \302\243>d2\302\243>e714 tbkS 16 Bbl #c7 17 \302\243xc5 &xc5 18

h6
\302\243>f3 IS 0-0 0-0-0 16 Bel t. John #e2.fi.d7(l8...\302\243>d3?! W^kMWxeS
Watson has suggested 8 &h4!? fxeS 20 *xe5 &xe5 21 f4 23
<\302\243^d3 &xe6

(8...Wc7!?)9 Hi5+ g6 10&xg6 19

\302\261) SM4 Bae8 20 f4 Bc7 (Botter-
11
\302\243>f6 Wh4 Hg8 12 #xf6! Hxg6 13 iU-Botto, Llanelli 1977) 21 \302\243g2=.

Wh4 exd4 14 \302\243e2! dxc3 15 bxc3

with good play, but curiously there
have been few devoteesof the plan.
8 ... &xf6
9 &gl(20)
The alternatives are rare guests at
tournament level:
a) 9 \302\243>bd2 \302\243d6 10 &g2 0-0 11
0-0 Ad7 12 Ve2 #c7 13Oel*h8
14 \302\243ie5\302\243c8 IS f4 &h5 = Ratsch-
Franz, Germany 1958.

b) 9 &h3 and now:

bl) 9....\302\243d6 10 #e2 (100-0 0-0 9 ... \302\243d6

and now: 11 Bel?! eS! 12\302\243xc8 10 0-0 0-0

Saxc8 13 dxeS \302\243>g4!+ or 11 \302\243bd2 11 #e2
eS 12 \302\243xc8 Baxc8 13 dxeS &xe5 14 It is necessaryto prevent ...eS;
Bel fife8 IS \302\243>fld4 I6cxd4 &xd4 Przewoznik-Uhlmann, Poland 1980,
17 \302\243e3 \302\243xe3 18 \302\243>xe3 Qe4 19 continued 11 \302\243>bd2?! e5! 12 dxeS
#d5+ *h8 20 SMI #c5 ? Gillen- \302\243xe5 13 \302\243>xe5 (13 #c2 is equal)
Harding, Dublin 1991) 10...0-0 11 13...&xe5 14 #e2?! (14 \302\243>f3!? may

\302\243xe6+ \302\243xe6 12 #xe6+ *h8 13 0-0 be better) 14...Bc8! IS &f3 Ag4 16

&a5 14\302\243>bd2 Iae8 IS Wh3 Oe2 16 #dl Had8 17Jfce3ttxb218 Ad4b6
Bel Bxel+ 17&xelWb5 18 &c2 19 h3 \302\243>xf3+ 20 Axf3 &xf3 21
#e8 19 h6
\302\243>e3 and Black has #xf3 We2 22 #f4 #e4 23*g5 h6

compensation for the sacrificed pawn; 24 Vd2 #f5 25 \302\243xf6 #xf6 26 Eadl

S.Arkell-J.Cooper, British Ch 1990. bS 27 Wb2 a6 28 a4 bxa4 29 Bal

 ModernVariation 31

#f3 30 flxa4 Be2 31 tfcl? Bf8 32 The other paths are pleasant for

#dlflxf2 0-l. White:

11 ... *h8 a) 14...\302\243>c5 15 \302\243>d2#a5 16 f4

This is the most popular try in Ad7 (Alexander-Uhlmann, Munich
contemporary practice but the OL 1958) 17 \302\261.
\302\243>f3

alternatives merit consideration: b) 14...#c7 15 f4 \302\243>a516 \302\243kl2

a) 1 l...\302\243d7 12\302\243ie5 \302\243e8?! (Uhl- &c5 17 \302\243xc5 #xc5+ 18 #f2

mann prefers 12...Sae8! whereupon #xf2+ 19 *xf2! \302\243d7 (I9...g5?! 20
13 &xd7 &xd7 14 \302\243e3 keeps an *e3 20
\302\261) *e3 Sae8 (Mestel-Bot-
edge for White) 13 \302\243>xc4! \302\243>xd4 terill, London 1978)21 fiael!fie7
(I3...dxc4 14 #xe6+) 14 cxd4 dxc4 22 f5!? 23 \302\243xd5 Bxe5+
(22...exf5
IS &c3 \302\261
Alexander-Uhlmann, 24 *d4 fixel 25 fixcl \302\261)
22...fixf5

Munich OL (prelims) 1958. 23 Bxf5 exd5 24 *d4 \302\243>c6+ 25

b) ll...\302\243a5 12 \302\243>bd2 \302\243d7 13 *xd5&e6+26*d6\302\261.
\302\243e8\302\261.
\302\243>e5 15 f4 \302\243>c5

12 \302\243>e5 Axe5?! 16 &12 \302\243d7

Black instantly exchanges the 17 fiadl!

powerful knight but according to White accentuates his control of

Uhlmann a more restrained approach is the position by centralizing the
necessary. For example: 12...&d7! queen's rook while threatening 18

13 f4 (or 13 \302\243>xc6 #xc6 14 #xe6 \302\243>xc4 dxc4 19 #xc4 b6 20 \302\243xc5

&f6 intending ...iLfSwith an unclear +-.

game) 13...\342\202\254klxe5 14 fxeS Bxfl+ IS 17 ... \302\243e8

&xfl \302\243e7=. 18 f5! exfS

13 dxe5 \302\243>d7 After I8...\302\243>xe5 19 fxe6! Black
14 \302\243e3 WaS(21) has double trouble in the form of back-
rank mate and a vulnerable d5 pawn.

19 JbcdS &d3!
20 \302\243>xc4!

White is exposed on the light

squares after 20 \302\243xc6?! \302\243xc6 21

\302\243>xc4#d5 22 Sxd3 *xc4 intending

...Ab5 and Black is better.

20 ... *xd5
21 *xd3 Vxd3

22 Sxd3 \302\243h5

If Black aspires to steal the e5

pawn then White's greater activity
32 Modem Variation

triumphs: 22...J&.f7 23 \302\243>xe524

\302\243kl6 34 Ag7! h5
\302\243>xf7+ Hxf7 25 Hd5 26
\302\243>c4 Ad4! 35 *g5 2c8
\302\243>xb2 27 fidxfS fixfS 28 fixfS 36 2d2 *f7
intending 29 Sf7 or 29 fibS with 37 <\302\261>h6 2c7
advantage. The | josition is bleak after

23 ficl?! 37...\302\243>e7 38 &e5+ *g8 39 Af6 and

The problem with this move is the g-pawn must fall.

that the pressure is taken off fS, so 38 &g5+ *e7 f22)

the previous note is now redundant.
On 23 Hd2! b5 24 \302\243kl6\302\243>xe5 25
fid5 White has a clear advantage.
23 ... Af7!
24 \302\243kJ2

Not 24 \302\243ki6? \302\243>xe5 and Black

wins.
24 ... \302\243>xe5

25 2d6 Sfe8
16 Ad4 \302\243ic6

27 Hxe8+ &xe8
Otherwise White will invade the
seventh rank: 27...2xe8 28 2d7 2c7 39 Af8+!
29 2xe7 \302\243>xe730 Axa7 +-. A stylish way tc > deliver the
28 &f3 *g8 knockout blow.
29 *f2 b6 39 ... *f6
30 *e3 *f8 40 2d6+ *e5
31 *f4 *e7! 41 Se6+ *d5
32 2d5 g6 42 Sxe8 \302\243>e5

33 h4 h6? 43 Ag7 1-0

It appears logical to deprive the

king of the g5 squarebut it proves to Game 8
be only a temporary measure and Zaitsev-Pokojc
>wczyk
merely weakens g6. The best way to Sochi 1976
ensure equality is swap the roving
rook: 33...2d8 34 2xd8 &xd8. 1 e4 e6

Approaching from another angle with 2 d4 d5

33...&f7 also works,since34 &f6+ 3 e5 c5
*xf6 35 2d6+ Ae6 36 2xc6 2c8 4 c3 \302\243>c6

37 2d6 *e7 37 2d2 *f6 is equal. 5 \302\243>f3 Wb6

 Modern Variation 33

6 a3 c4 9 ... f6?!f23)
7 \302\243>bd2 White is well prepared to meet
This flexible move-order is this typical freeing move. Black has
favoured by those who wish to a choiceof alternatives:
incorporate g3 in their play but prefer to a) 9...h6 100-00-0-0 Upland
avoid the complications of the now:
previous game. al) ll...f5?! 12 cxf6 gxf6 13

7 ... \302\243>a5 &ef3! \302\243>e714 Hel &g6 15 Hbl f5

8 g3 Ad7 16 1^2 VKc7 17 b3 cxb3 18 &xb3
9 &h3 \302\243>c419 4Md2 \302\243fo620 Ag2 *b8 21
The old line 9 &g2 is no longer c4! Ivanov-Suetin, RSFSR Sparta-
popular because in some instances kiad 1978.

g2 is useful for the manoeuvre &el- a2) ll...\302\243>e7 12 Hbl *b8 13

g2-c3 and the bishop on h3 can stifle &g2 *c7 14Wtt Ae8 15 &f4 Aa4
the option of ...f6. The game Clarke- 16 Ag4 Ac2 17Sal g618Wg2 h5 =
Petrosian, Munich OL 1958 Ni\302\243evski-Vilela, Decin 1978.
provides a good example of likely play: a3) ll...g5 12Ag2.fc.e7 13 Sbl
11 h5 14 We2
9...0-0-010 0-0h6!?(10...*b8 (14 Ahl!? and \302\243>g2)

2el \302\243>e712 <tifl &b3 = Alexander- 14...\302\243>h6! 15 \302\243>c2*b8 16 &e3

O'Kelly, Hastings 1953/54)112el Hc8 17 Hel h4 18 g4 f6 ? Pinter-
Ae7 12 \302\243>fl(12 #e2 g5!? 13 \302\243>fl Schmidt, Budapest1977.
14
\302\243>g6 &3d2 Ae7 = Casper-Knaak, b) 9...\302\243>e7 10 0-0 h6 (lO...!^
East Berlin 1982) 12...&f513 \302\243>e3 11 \302\243lh4<tic8 \302\261
Pinter-Mednis,

(Clarke suggested 13 g4 5ie7 14 Budapest 1976; 10...&g6 11 0-0-0

\302\243>el

Hbl as better) 13...&xe314 2xe3 12 Hbl f6 13 exf6 gxf6 \302\261

Giulian-

Ac7 15 Hel Wb3! 16 We2 Aa4 17 Ilersic, corr. 1982/83) 11 \302\243>h40-0-0

18Sadl!
i.c3 *b8 (17...Wc2!) Wc2 12 &g2 and now:
19 2d21UK5 20 Sfl g5 (20...\302\243>b3 21 bl) 12...*b813Sbl lfc7 14 \302\243>e3

Hdd 1!) 21 h3 h5 22 &h2 2dg823g4 f4 g6 16 f5 gxf5 17 g4

\302\243>c815 fxg4

*g6 24 &f3? (24 f4!?) 24...hxg425 18 &xg4 Ae8 19 \302\243>f6 \302\261

Zaitsev-

i.xg4\302\243>c626 f3?! Ad8 27 Af2 \302\243>e7 Savon, Dubna 1976.

28 Hel Sh6 29 &fl?! (29 Ag3 b2) 12...g6 13 \302\243>e3h5 14 Sbl

Hgh8 30 Wg2!) 29...Hgh8 30 Ag3 J&.h6 15 Ag2 Hdf8 = Platonov-Ree,

13xh3!31 Axh3 Hxh3 32 Wg2 Wh7 Kiev 1978.
:<3\302\243>c3<^g6 34 4^g4 &f4 35 Axf4 c) 9,..Wc6 10 0-0*34 11 We2
gxf4 36 *f 1 Hg3 37 Wn lli3+ 38 #c2 12 &el #g6 13 f4 \302\243>e714

*e2 fig239 Hgl Hxf2+ 40 &xf2 \302\243>g2\302\243>f515 \302\243>e3\302\261

Stihlberg-An-
ni7 4iahi#g6o-i. gos, Munich OL 1958.
34 ModernVariation

Wf\\ Ac4 (17...\302\243>c6 18 Af4+ *a8

23 i ii*fg 19 \302\243>d2 18 Af4+ *a8 19 Wei!
+-)
w
mmsm iu +-.
a mim m 16 Hxb3!
m sab m The consistent continuation. After
mm m m 16 Wxb3 Wc6 17 &f4+ *a8 18Wc2
&e8 19 Heel the attack is less
m m \342\226\240&!!&
effective.

16 ... Aa4?
Itfjfl Ifi
Krogius suggested 16...#86!? as
an alternative.

10 exf6 gxf6 17 &xb6 Axdl

11 0-0 0-0-0 18 &bxe6 Axft
12 Sel 19 Af4+ *a8(25;
White continues in a logical
fashion by pinpointing the pawn at e6.
12 ... Ag7

13 Hbl! &b&(24)

20 Ac7!
This is the point; the sting in the
tail is revealed.The dangerof back-
rank mate swings the game in

13...&ge7 canbe answered White's favour. Nothing can be

strongly by 14 b3 &xb3 \302\261 gained from 20 &e8 &h6 but after
cxb3 15
jSLa4? 16 Hxe6 winning. the text 20...&C8 (20...Hf821He8+)
14 b4! cxb3 21 &e8 22
\302\243ke7 &8xe7 Hcg8 23 Ae6
15 \302\243\302\273b3 \302\243fcb3 wins.
Black would dearly like to pin the 20 ... \302\243kh6

knight but this would allow a clever 21 Axd8 Sxd8

riposte: 15...&a4162xe6&xb3
17 22 &e8 1-0
 ModemVariation 35

A brave effort to complicate

matters by proposing a kingside
San Francisco 1991 offensive while simultaneously fending
attack. It is
off White's based on the
1 e4 e6 misguided premise that the closed
2 d4 d5 nature of the queenside allows
3 e5 c5 sufficient time for a build-up of forces.
4 c3 \302\243>c6 After the better 10...Ad6!? 11 Ah3
5 &f3 #b6 0-0 12Axe6+ *h8 13 Axd7 &xd7

6 a3 c4 (13...Sae8 14 Axe8 Hxe8 IS \302\243ke5

7 &bd2 Ad7 &xe5 16 0-0 +-) 14 0-0 Hae8 15
8 g3 f6?! (26) Wdl Black has some compensation
for the pawn.
11 Ag2 *b8
This is too cautious and
therefore slow. At least ll...h6 intending
12...gS poses White some problems
and aims to fight for the initiative.
12 0-0 &c8
13 b3! (27)

The recurring theme ...f6 is not

appropriate is rather
here, as 7...jSLd7
slow compared to 7...&a5 which at
least uncovers the queen to support
e6 and reduces the movementof the
opposing queen's knight.
Havana 1966, m m \302\253ga i
Kavalek-Fuchs,
saw yet another approach: 8...h6!? 9
\302\243fo4(9 h4) 9...\302\243ta5 10 f4 \302\243>e711 It is of considerable importance
&h3 g612&g2\302\243>f5!? 13 g4&e7 14 for White's attack that the b-file be
h5
\302\243>e3 15 f5 hxg4 16 fxe6 Axe6 17 opened. This is not just for the rooks
i.xg4 0-0-0=. to make an impression, but to
9 exf6 &xf6 facilitatec4 allowing the rest of the forces
10 We2 0-0-0 tojoininthefray.
36 Modern Variation

13 ... cxb3
14 flbl b2
15 &xb2 i.d6
16 c4

The opening has been a complete

successfor White. Black has failed
to register any aggressive intent,
while Torre has set in motion the
decisive storming of (he queenside.
16 ... Wa6

17 fifcl Hhe8
18 \302\243te5 Black resignedin view of the
After this move the king's bishop variation 27...*a8 28 #xa5! Wxa5

is uncovered to add weight to the 29 Axb7#.

onslaught.

18 ... Axe5 Game 1G

19 dxe5 \342\202\254kl7 Kharlamov-Shinaui

20 #c3 Moscow 1991

At last the queen steps aside to
avoid the pin, leaving Black with all 1 e4 e6
sorts of problems. 2 d4 d5
20 ... \302\243A6 3 e5 c5
21 cxd5 exd5 4 c3 &c6
22 &d4 5 \302\243>f3 Wb6

Now both rooks are revealed to 6 a3 a5!?

exert immense powerby dominating Now 7 b4 is not feasible;however,

the b- and c-files. On 22...&a4? 23 the drawback is that this move
Af 1!WaS 24 fixc6 wins a piece. creates a weakness on bS.
22 ... \302\243>c4 7 \302\243d3 (29)

23 &xc4 dxc4 This is considered the antidote.

24 &al Sd3 The idea is to reach a favourable
25 #c5 \302\253>a5 form of the Milner-Barry Gambit

26 e6\\(28) where Black's inability to play ...a6

The loss of the pawn is inelevant causesextra defensive problems.
when it allows the queen's bishop to The quieter 7 jSLe2 is also
deliver a devastating check. possible:

26 ... Axe6 a) 7...cxd4 8 cxd4 &ge7 9 b3 (9

27 Ae5+ 1-0 &c3!? &f5 10 &b5; Keres evaluates
 Modern Variation 37

21 fixe1 Ad8 22 h4! h6 23 \302\243tf4g5

24 hxg5 hxg5 25 &xd5! exd5 (or

25...f426 &xf4 gxf4 27 &xf4 +-)
26 #xd5+ 27e6
*g7 (26...1rf7 #e7

28 Axg5 +-) 27 f4! g4 28b3 Hf7 29

#88! +- Georgadze-DraSko, Tbilisi

1985.
8 0-0
The old-fashioned 8 &c2!? has
some followers:
a) 8...&ge79 0-0cxd4(9...\302\243tf5
the position as better for White) 10 dxc5! Axc5 11 &bd2 \302\261
Tal-Sok-

9...\302\243tf5 10 \302\243b2Ae7 11 0-0?! (11 g4 olsky, USSR 1955) 10cxd4 \302\243tf511

&h6 12Sgl 1 l...\302\243d7
\302\243) 12*hl hS Axf5 exf5 12 <&c3\302\243e6 13 \302\243\\a4(13
I3^kc3g5! 14 &a4 #a7 ? Kliavin- Wa4 fic8 14 Wb5 Wxb5 15 \302\243>xb5

Klasup, USSR 1955. with equality, Koch-Schwertfcger,

b) 7...Ad7 8 b3 cxd4 9 cxd4 corr. 1964) 13...1ra7 14Ae3 Ae7 15
&ge7 100-0 &f5 11 Ae3! Ae7 12 Hcl h6 16 \302\243tc50-0 17 \302\243>el*h7 18
&c3 0-0 13 Ad3 \302\243xe3 14 fxc3 f6 f4?! fig8 19 \302\243ted3Ac8 20 #b3 Sd8
15 &g5!? (15 exf6 gxf6 16 &a4 21 &a4 b5! 22 1^5 &xd4! T

Wd8 17 Ha2 with an unclear Leisebein-Hunger, corr. 1985/86.

position) 15...f5 (15...fxg5 16 1Ti5 g6? b) 8...h6 9 h4 h5 10 b3 &h6 11
17 Axg6 hxg6 18Wxg6+ *h8 19 Axh6?! Hxh6 12 dxc5 Axc5 130-0
Sf6! +-; 16...Hf5! with unclear 14
*f8 \302\243>bd2f6 15 exf6 gxf6 T Vat-
play) 16 \302\243ka4Wd8 17 Ae8
\342\202\254th3 18 ter-Korchnoi, Lugano 1986.
Af7
\302\2532if4 19 g4 g5? 20 \302\243>xe6Axe6 c) ^.-Ito 9 c4 dxo4 10 \302\243>c3

21 gxf5 b5 22 fxe6 l-OCortlever-van H>6 exd5 12 \302\243>xd5 Wd8 13

11 d5
Seters, Beverwijk 1958. 0-0 Ae6 14 Ae4 \302\243kd415 \302\243tf4Ag4
7 ... Ad7 16 Axb7 Hb8 17 Ae4 \302\243>xf3+ 18
The acceptanceof the gambit is Axf3 Wxdl 19 Axdl Af5 20 \302\243>d5
(he acid test but Black has also 21
\302\243>e7 Aa4+ *d8 22 Ad3
\302\243>e3 23
preferred increasing the pressure on d4, Sdl *c7 24 Ad2 *b6 25 fiacl \302\261
e.g. 7...\302\243>ge7 8 0-0 cxd4 9 cxd4 &f5 Kiselev-Shaposhnikov, USSR 1989.
10Axf5 exf5 11 &c3 Ae6 12 &a4! 8 ... cxd4
Wb5 13 Ae3 Ae7 14 \302\243>el0-0 15 In answer to the push 8...a4 White
Hac8
\302\243>d3 16 Hcl \302\243>a7
(16...Hc7 17 should not follow the example of
\302\243>ac5b6? 18 a4 +-) 17 &ac5 b6 18 Dowden-Beliavsky, Lucerne OL
a4 We8 19 &xe6 fxe6 2011)3 Sxc 1 1982, which continued 9 dxc5?!
38 Modern Variation

Axc5 10 \302\243>bd2 f6 11 Ve2 &ge7 ?. Wd4 17 fidl Vg4 18 Afl fig6 19

A better try is 9 #62 or even 9 *h 1 Wf4 Hi5 20 Ae2 lfh3 21Wf3 e5 22
to play a future f4 after the Wxh3 Axh3 23 g3 Ae6 ? Shtcin-
exchanges on d4. berg-Silov, Kharkov 1967.
9 cxd4 &xd4 b3) 12 Ve2 &e7 13Ag5 h6 14
In the game Maki-Hadjiyiannis, i.d2 g6 15 &e3 d4 16\302\243te4&d5 17
Haifa 1989, Black reactedcautiously &d2 Ae7 18 h4 Ac6 19fifcl \302\273c7
with 9...h6?! 10 &xd4
\302\243>c3 11 &xd4 20 &c5 Axc5 21 Hxc5 We7 22 Hac 1
Wxd4 12 We2 \302\243>e713 *hl Hc8 14 #xh4 23 Ab5 0-0 24 Axc6 bxc625
f4 1^ 15&b5 Axb5 16 Axb5+ g3 Wh3 26 Hlc4 27
\302\243>e7 Hxd4 &f5
\302\243c6 17 f5 Ae7 18 Axc6+ Hxc6 19 28 Sd3 +- Schlosser-Claesen,
Wg4
exfS 20 Wxg7 Hf8 21 Wg3 Adelaide 1988.

fig6 22 #13 We6 23 Af4 Hfg8 24

fif2 Ac5 25 Hc2 b6 26 b4 Ad4 27
fidl 1-0.
10 \302\243\302\253d4 Wxd4

11 \302\243>c3 WxeSfJOj

As can be seen in the chapter on

the Milner-Barry, at this stage Black
often inserts ...a6 to stop &b5. As
this is not possible here, other paths
have been followed:
a) ll...\302\243fo6!? 12 &b5 WxzS 13
Sel Wb8 14 Wf3 Ad6 15 \302\243>xd6+

#xd6 16 Af4 #e7 17WgV. f6 ('/1-V2 12 Sel Wd6

Zaitsev-Uhlmann, Berlin 1982) 18 In normal lines of the Milner-

Ad6! Wf7 19 Sacl Ac6 20 b4 axb4 Barry 12...Wb8 is popular, but now

21axb4\302\261. 13 &xd5 has more venom due to the

b) ll...Wb6andnow: threat of &b6.

bl) 12&hl\302\243ke7 13 \302\243>b5
13f4g6l4Sel Wb8

(14 #62!?) 14...Ac6 15 Ae3 d4 16 13...&xb5 leaves Black's king

Af2 &f5 17 Ae4 Ae7 18#0 0-019 stranded in the centre of the board,
Axc6 Wxc6 20 \302\243te4 Hac8 21 g4 after which a game Pri6-ViUeneuve,
\302\243te322 Axe3 dxe3 23 Hxe3 Hfd8 Paris 1990, continued 14 &xb5+
24 Hc3115525 Hb3 = Rosenthal- *d8 15!li5 \302\243>f616 WxfJ WeJ 17
Gerstner, Bundesliga 1991/92. Vxe6 Wxe6 18 Hxe6Ac5 19Ag5
b2) 12#g4?! f5 13 exf6 &xf6 14 Ad4 20 Hdl Axb2 21 Hxd5+ *c8

Wg3 Ae7 15 Wxg7 Hg8 16 Hi6 22Hc5+*d8 23Hc21-0.

 Modern Variation 39

14 Wf3 Ad6 Game 11

15 Wxd5 Axh2+ Pri^-dela Villa Garcia

16 *hl 0*1(31) U6n 1991

1 e4 e6
2 d4 d5
3 eS c5

4 c3 <5k6
5 \302\243>f3 Wb6

6 a3 -5ih6 (J2j

17 Wd4

White is poised to demolish the

opposition.The queenexerts
considerable pressure by hitting g7, while
preventing castling due to the need
to defend d7.
17 ... Ac6
18 Ag5! f6 This systemhasexperienced
19 Sxe6 fluctuating bouts of popularity. The idea
Now White's rooks crash through is to exert pressureon d4 while

into Black's position, sealing his taking White outside normal lines.
fate. 7 b4 cxd4
19 M* Ae5 8 cxd4
20 Wc5 0-0 The alternative 8 jSLxh6 doubles
21 Sxe7 Axb5 the h-pawns at the cost of openingup
22 #xb5 Wd8 the g-file. Practice indicates that it
23 Sxe5 ficg5 deserves respect: 8...gxh6 9 cxd4
24 fiael Wf6 Ad7 (9...Ag7 10&c3 f6 11 &a4
25 SB Wh6+ intending JiLbS
\302\243;
9...Sg8! followed
26 *gl Hfd8 by ...&g4 is unclear accordingto Fe-
27 #xb7 Hab8 dorowicz) 10 Ae2 (not 10 <&c3?
28 #f7+ <\302\261>h8 \302\243>xb4 -+) 10...a5 (10...2g8 10 0-0
29 Hfe5 1-0 i; 10...\302\243g7 11 0-0 11 b5 \302\243>e712
\302\261)
40 Modern Variation

\302\243>c3a4 13 0-0 WaS 14 #d2 \302\243>c8 12

\302\261) Axf5 exf5 13 \302\243>c3Ae6 14

(14...Hc8? 15 &xd5 +-) 15 Hfcl &a4 \302\253fc5(14...1rd8 15 b6

\302\243>c5 16
&b6 16 h3!Hc8 17 4^h2 \302\243>c418 &xe6 fxe6 17 ficl 2c8 18b5 &a5
&xc4 2xc4 19 &g4 Axb5 20 Wb2! 19 Hxc8 #xc8 20 &xg5! \302\261)
15 \302\243>c5

Ac6 21 Hxcl+ (21...Wxd5?

&xd5! g4 16 &el J&.xc5 17 dxcS a5 and
22 \302\253if6+ +-; 21...Axd5 22 Hxc4 now 18 Wd3! Wxd3 19 &xd3 gives
Axc4 23 &f6+ *d8 24 #xb7 +-; White a clear advantage.
21...exd5 22 Hxc4 dxc4 23 \302\243lf6+ b) 10 Ae2Ad7 11 0-0is an
*e7 24 d5! Axd5 (24...c3 25 #a2 attempt to revive Fedorowicz's plan,
-\302\253-)25 Wd4! *e6 26 fidl +-) 22 which so far has proved uniformly
fixcl Axd5 (22...exd5 23 Hxc6! successful:
bxc6 24 ^f6+ +-) 23 \302\243>f6+ *e7 bl) U...0-012Wd2a613Bdlf6
24 \302\243>xd5+! #xd5 25 1*b4+ *e8 14 \342\202\254tc3
fxe5 15 dxe5 Sad8 16 Had

(Rogers-Velimirovic\\ VrSac 1987) #37 17 Ad3 &h4 18 \302\243>xh4 Axh4

26 Hc8+!*d7 27 Vc3 +-. 19 Hfl \302\243>xe5 20 Abl &g4 21 g3

8 ... \302\243>I5 Ag5 22 Wc2 Hf5 23 Heel Hdf8 24
9 Ae3! He2 Ae3 25 \302\243kdl Ab5 26 &xe3
The question of how to defend the \302\243>xe3 27 Hxe3 Axfl 28 g4 d4 29
d-pawn is important. The text is a gxf5 dxe3 30 fxe6 1-0 Grosar-Jelen,
refinement on the old line that was Bled 1992.
based on two games at Wijk aan Zee b2) 1l...Hc812Wd2 0-0 13 fidl
in 1989; 9 Ab2 Ae7 (9...Ad710g4 ^h4 14 &xh4 Axh4 15Wf4 Ae7 16
&h6 11 h3 f6 12 Qc3 fxe5 13 dxe5 Ad3 f6 17 Wh4 h6 18 #g3 fxe5 19
Ae7 {13...\302\243>f7 14 tU8
\302\243>a4 15 h4 dxe5 Ag5 20 Qc3 Af4 21 Wg6
14
\302\261} G&4 #d8 15 Hcl 0-0 16 \302\243>c5 \302\243>xe522 Wh7+ *f7 23 Ae2 Hg8 24
Axc5 17 Hxc5 &f7 18 Ag2 = Ah5+ *f8 25 \302\243>e2Hc4 26 \302\243>xf4

Sveshnikov-Lputian, Sochi 1993) Hxf4 27 Axe5 Wxf2+ 28 *hl 1-0

and now: FrenchCh 1993.
Relange-Bauer,
a) The stem game, Fedorowicz- 9 ... f6

Dokhoian, Wijk aan Zee 1989, 10 Ad3!(JJ)

continued 10 (10...aS!? 11
Ad3 Ad7 This move has largelyput 6...&h6
Axf5 exf5 12\302\243>c3Ae6 13 b5 a4! 14 out of business. Black sprung a
0-0 \302\243>b8 15 Acl &d7 is unclear; surprising sacrifice to secure a draw in

Campora-Dokhoian, Wijk Romanishin-Lputian, aan Zee Erevan 1988.

1989) 11 0-0 g5 (11...0-012 \302\243>c3 After 10 b5 \302\243>xe5! 11 dxe5 &xe3 12
\302\243>cxd4 13 \302\243>xd4 #xd4 14 Axf5 fxe3 Wxe3+ 13Ve2 Wcl+ 14 fUl

Wxdl 15 Hfxdl exf5 16 \302\243>xd5 \302\261; with perpetual check.

1 l...Qfxd4 12 &xd4 \302\243>xd413 Wg4! 10 ... &xe3
 Modem Variation 41

11 fxe3 fxe5?! Once again the weakness in

White also has a pleasant position Black's camp imposedby the lack of
after the safer 1 l...f5 12 0-0 Ae7 13 control over eS is emphasizedby the
&c3 intending 14 &a4 and IS ficl manoeuvres of the knight, which

or \302\243>e2-f4 and Wei with some constitute a prelude to taking control

advantage. of the seventh rank.
12 b5 e4 22 Ad6
\342\200\242\342\200\242\342\200\242

After I2...&a5 13 &xe5 the 23 \302\243>e5+ *c7

central knight is strong and the threat of 24 WI7+ Wxf7

Wh5+ is lethal. 25 Bxf7+ *b6

13 bxc6 exd3 26 Hbl+ <\302\261>a5

14 \302\243>e5 27 &xc6+ sfca4

There is no hurry to take on d3 28 *f2 Axa3

when the king can can be pursued 29 *el Ac4
instead. 30 Sxa7+ Sxa7
14 ... bxc6 31 \302\243>xa7 Ad6
15 Wh5+ g6 32 \302\243c8 Ac7
16 &xg6 hxg6 33 \302\243>b6+ *a3
17 Wxh8 Wc7 34 *d2 <\302\261>a2

In response to 17...Wb2, White 35 Hb4 1-0

can avoid a calamity by means of 18

0-0!+-. Game 12
18 0-0 Wg7 Galdunts-Ambartsumian
19 Wh4 Aa6 Armenian Ch 1991
20 \302\243>d2 Ae7

21 Wf4 *d7 1 e4 e6
22 GX3(34) 2 d4 d5
42 Modern Variation

3 e5 c5 The alternatives 9 &e3 and 9 &e2

4 c3 \302\243>c6 are discussedin the next illustrative
5 E>f3 Wb6 game.
6 a3 \302\243d7 9 ... \302\243>a5

Black is prepared to allow A game Roos-Paulsen, Baden-

White's plan of gaining space on the Baden 1990,sawa passive approach

queenside, since he plans seize

to being exploited: 9...a6 10 &d3 &a7
control of the c-file. 11 \302\253ic3<2ks7 12 0-0 \302\243>b513 &a4
7 b4 cxd4 Wa7 14 $c5 \302\243c6 15 a4 \302\243c7 16 b5
8 cxd4 Hc8 (35) b6 17 &xa6 &xa6 18bxa6\302\243d7 19
Wei &c6 20 Sfcl &b4 21 \302\243a3
&xa3 22 Bxa3 23
\302\243tt>4 2xc8+ \302\243xc8

24 \302\243b5+ *e7 25 Wd2 \302\243>xa6 26

Wg5+ 1-0.
The spectacular 9...\302\243>xb4?! used
to be acknowledged as a refutation
of the variation. Angelov-Poriazov,
Plovdiv 1988 continued 10 axb4
Wxb4+ 11 Wd2 (11 &c3 Hxc3 12
\302\243>xc3 Wxc3+ 13 &d2 Wxd4 and
Black wins) ll...Sc2 12\302\243c3 #b3
13 We3 ^h6 14 \302\243e2\302\243>f515 Wd3
The move-order is important, as 2cl+ 171^5+1^5
16\302\243dl.S.b5
now 9 &c3?is ruled out by the reply 18*d2 Hxdl+0-1.However, Abra-

9...\302\243>xb4. movi6 pointed out that the sacrifice

The text is an improvement on is faulty: 12 &a3! Wb3 13 Wd3

8...\302\243>ge7,
as played in Kamber- \302\243t>4+ 14 Qbd2 Sc3 15 &xb3 Sxd3
Michaud, Germany 1993,which saw 16^.xb4with a clear advantage.
White secure a crushing advantage: 10 Qbd2
9 \302\243>c3&f5 10 &a4 Wcl 11 \302\243b2 In Petroni6-Pauli\302\243, Belgrade

iLe7(ll...b6l2Hclg613ila6iLh6 1988, White conceded the c4 square

14 Sc3 Sb8 IS h4 wasslightly better to Blackand equality arose after 10
for White in the game Zaichik-Roz- .6x3?! &c4 11 #b3 (after 11 \302\243d3,

entalis,USSR1987)12&d3 2c8 13 Parma considers ll...Qh6 12 0-0

0-0 f6 14 Hcl Wd8 IS \302\243c5 b6 16 &e7 13Qbd2 fce3 14fxe3 Hxc3 15
E>xd7 Wxd7 17 Wa4 \302\243d8 18 Hxc6! We2 0-0 unclear, whilst 1 l...ile7 12
Hxc6 19 \302\243b5\302\243*720 Hcl 1-0. 0-0 \302\243h613 Wei =
\302\253M5 was Klinger-
9 &b2 Arencibia, Gausdal 1986) U...a5 12
 Modern Variation 43

\302\243d3a4 13#dl &e7 140-0.fi.b5 15 h3 h5 20 f4 with an unclear position;

ilc2Wc6l6Helh6. Motwani-Wegcner, Vienna 1991) 15
10 ... \302\243c4 We4 Qe7 16 \302\243e2\302\243d5 17 #d4 b5
11 \302\243>xc4! 18 0-0 Wb7 19 Hfdl &e6 (19....fi.c6
This is the best way to seek an 20 e6! +-) 20 \302\243>g5\302\243>f521 #f4
edge. After 11 &xc4 dxc4 12 Scl SLtl 22 \302\243>xe6fxe6 23 \302\243f3#c7 24
(12 \302\243c3?! \302\243e7 13 4&e4 4&d5 14 0-0 Ad5! 11)6 (24...exd5 25 #xf5
&e7 15 \302\245c2 h6 Afek-Khuzman,
\302\245 intending e6 +-) 25 g4 Hf8!? 26 Ahl
Berlin 1990) Black equalizes by E>h4 27 Wg3 Hd8 28 Hxd8 Wxd8
sacrificing a pawn: 12...c3! 13 ,fi.xc3 29 Ve3 a6 30f4 \302\261
Afek-Psakhis,

&e7 14 0-0 \302\243>d515 \302\243>e4\302\243e7 16 Israel 1990.

Ad2 0-0 17 \302\243c5.fi.c6 18 .fi.g5 Wd8

19 Wd2 \302\243>c720 We3 b6 21 &e4
36
lh-lh Sax-Nogueiras,Lucerne1989.
w
11 ... dxc4

12 Scl 95(36) *sc

Black counter-attacks by
the defence
neglecting of c4 in favour of an Hi
assault on b4. At this critical
juncture, Black has investigated other H if A

possibilities:
a) 12...C313Sxc3Sxc314&xc3 vmama.

&e7 15 Ad3 \302\253Jd516 Ad2 $Ltl 17

0-0 0-0 18 \302\245c2 h6 19 Scl Hc8 20 13 &d2 axb4
Wxc8+ .fi.xc821 Hxc8+ .fi.f8 22 b5 14 \302\243kxc4 \302\245d8

g5 23 a4 a5 24 h4 *g7 25 hxg5 hxg5 In the game Sveshnikov-Neved-

26 &xg5 ilc7 27 Ae3 &b4 28 $LeA nichy, Bled 1991, Blacklost control
Wa7 29 &xd5 exd5 30 .fi.g5 ilf8 31 of d6:14...1fa7?! 15 axb4 Axb4+16
Af6+ *g8 32 Ae7 1-0 Murey- .fi.c3\302\243xc3+? (I6....fi.e7!?) 17 2xc3

Touzane, Podolsk 1991. *f8 19 Ha3 #b6 20 \302\243>d6Hd8 21

b) 12...\302\243b5 13 &d2!? (13 d5 is Irf3fch6 22.fi.d3\302\261.

possible) 13...c3 14 Sxc3Sxc315 15 axb4 b5

Axc3 SLxfl 16 \302\243>xfl! &e7 17 &e3. The b-pawn is taboo due to the

Psakhis considers the positionto be danger of 4bd6+: 15...\302\243xb4+ 16

in White's favour. Ac3 .fi.xc3+ (16....fi.e7 17 Aa5 +-)

c) 12..:Va6 13d5!exd5M^xcS 172xc3 \302\261.

Ae6 (14...\302\243te7 15 \302\245e4 b5 16 \302\243e2 16 \302\243>d6+ .fi.xd6

Wg6 17 We3 \302\243tc6 18 Qh4 We6 19 17 exd6 &f6

44 Modern Variation

18 Hc5
Sveshnikov has suggested 18
19 0-0 \302\243c620 d5! \302\261
as
\302\243d30-0

another course of action to be

considered.

18 ... 0-0
19 &d3 \302\243ld5

20 0-0 \302\243xb4?!

The act of stealing a pawn allows

a violent attack to be unleashed.
Black has to find recourse in the
alternative. After 20...\302\253rb6 21 WhS f5 The battering of the kingside will
22 fife 1 play might proceed: reach a climax after 21...g6 (or
a) 22...Ha8!? 23 We2 Ha2 24 21...\302\243>xd3 22 Wxd3 g6 23 d5!) 22
\302\243bl fla6 25 \302\243d3 Wxd6 26 \302\243xb5 d5! when the domination of the dark
\302\243xb5 27 Hxb5 Ha2 28 Sa5 &f4! squares ensures victory: 22...&xd5

29 #d2 fixb230Wxb2 \302\243ki331 Wd2 (or 22...gxh5 23 i.xh7+ *xh7 24

Ekxcl 32 Wxcl WxM 33 Se5 Wxd4 Wxh5+ *g8 25 #h8#) 23 2xh7
34 Sxe6 Sd8 = Sveshnikov-Lputian, *xh7 24tfh5+ *g8 25#h8#.
Moscow 1991. 22 d5!

b) 22...1rxd623 \302\243xb5 is better This advance of the d-pawn is the

for White according to Sveshnikov. keystone of White's attacking
c) 22...\302\243>xb4 23 2xc8 i.xc8 24 ambitions: it opens the long dark-squared
We2! (24 Hxc8?Hxc825d7 2f8 26 diagonal and disrupts Black's pawn
\302\243fl &d5 27 We8 Wd6! 28 d8W structure.
#xd8 29 Wxe6+ *h8 30 &xbS \302\243>c7 22 ... cxdS
31 1^5 E>xb5 32 Wxb5 11)8 -+) In his notes to the game (upon
and now: which these notes are based) Gal-
cl) 24...^xd3? 25 2xc8 &f4 26 dunts demonstrates the possible
2xf8+*xf8 27 UltcS +-. complications:
c2) 24...1fxd6? 25 \302\243a3 i.b7!? a) 22...\302\243>xd3 23 Wxd3 Hc4 24
(25...*xd4 26 \302\243xb4 WxM 27 2xc8 #h3 h6 25 dxe6!\302\243xe6 26 2xh6
+-) 26 1^2! Iti5 27 Afl \302\243>c6 gxh6 27 Vxh6 2g4 (27...1rd728
(27...\302\243>a2 28 2c5! #b3 29 2xb5 Wh8+ *f7 29 *Ti5+ *g8 30 Wg6+
Wxa3 30 Exb7 &c331 We3! +-) 28 +-) 28 h3 Hg5 29 We6+ intending

\302\243xf8 *xf8 291T4 +-. Scl+-.

c3) 24...\302\243d7 25.S.a3fra5!=. b) 22...&xd5 23 \302\243xf5 exf5 (or

21 Hh5 fS(37) 23...2xf5 24 2xf5 exf5 25 Wxd5+
 Modern Variation 45

*f8 26 Hel +-) 24 WxdS-t- *h8 25 Now victory is only achieved by

1U2!! +-. Black failing to fathom the on-

23 Wb3 \302\243kxd3 slaught.
24 Wxd3 Hc4 36 ... *g7
The game is brought to an abrupt 37 \302\253li5 \302\243f5

finish after the alternatives:24...Sf7 38 g4 \302\243d3?

25 Wh3 h6 26 Hxh6 gxh6 27 Wxh6 SS.-.WeS is a sterner defence.

+- or 24...\302\243e6 25 \302\253h3h6 26 2xh6 39 He6 *f8
gxh6 27lrxh6+-. 40 He7 \302\243g6

25 Wxd5+ 41 H16+ 1-0

The point of Black's defensive

rook manoeuvre is revealed upon 25 Game 13
Wh3 h6 26 Hxh6gxh627 \302\273xh6 d4 Langner-Bashkov
28 Wg6+ *h8 29 Wh6+ with a draw. Ostrava 1991
25 ... *h8
26 \302\245d2! 1 e4 e6
Now 27 Wh6 is ominous. 2 d4 d5
26 ... *g8 3 e5 c5
27 \302\243xg7 *xg7 4 c3 \302\243>c6

28 H16+ *f7 5 \342\202\254>f3 n>6

29 Hel 6 a3 Ad7
The rook is brought into play to 7 b4
aid the king hunt. White has experimented with the
29 ... Set flexible 7 \302\243e2:

30 Sxe4 fxe4 a) 7...C4 8 \302\243fod2 &a5 transposes

31 Wxh7+ *f6 into Game 2, Sveshnikov-Eingorn,
32 #h6+ *f7 Palma 1989.

33 Hi7+ b) 7...\302\243>ge7 8 dxc5 \302\273c7 9 0-0

It would bea fitting fmish to a fine \302\243tg6 10 b4 &gxe5 11 Qbd2 g6 12
game if White (in time-trouble) had Sel \302\243>xf3+ 13 &xf3 \302\243g7 14 \302\243>d4

found 33 Hg5! Wf6 34 Wh5+ *e6 a6 15 \302\243g5 0-0 16 Wd2 f6 17 \302\243h6

35 2g6 +-. e5 18 &xg7 *xg7 19 &xc6 &xc6
33 ... *f6 20 \302\243d3Had8 21 He3 Wd7 22 Eael
34 Wxe4 Hg8 SO 23 \302\243c2 Wcl 24 Sh3 \302\243d7 25

35 Hh6+ *f7 Wh6+ *g8 26 &xg6 Hg7 27 &xhl+

36 Wd5+ *f7 28 Hf3 Wc6 29 Hi5+ *e7 30
36 flh7+ *f6 (36...flg7 37 1U5+) Sxe5+ fxe5 31 Wxe5+ 1-0 Kettner-
37 Se7 is a cleankill (Nunn). Schmitt, Baden-Baden 1990.
46 ModernVariation

c) 7...\302\243Ui6 8 b4 cxd4 9 Axh6 (9 Sxcl 12 Wxcl Wxd4 13 Wc3?! (13

cxd4 &f5 10 Ab2 \302\243e7 11 0-0 f6 = Wcl! Wxal 14#b8+ *e7 IS Wd6+

Beckett-Bus, Oakham 1992)9...d3! *e8 16 Wb8 13...ilc5!

\302\261) 14 0-0
10 &xd3 gxh6 11 0-0 &g7 12 Hel Wxc3 IS &xc3 \302\243d4 16 Sacl \302\243xe5

0-0 13 \302\243fod2 f6 14 exf6 Axf6 ? + Strikovic-Cabrilo, Prokupjle 1987.

Sveshnikov-Razuvaev,Palma 1989.

7 ... cxd4
8 cxd4 2c8
9 \302\24363(35,)

With this useful move White aims

to developthe kingside briskly. It has
grown in
popularity as a viable
alternative to the standard 9 &b2. The
position offers fresh challenges as
the bishop can be easily exchanged,
but at least that would boost the
support for d4 and openthe f-file for
future attacking operations. White 9 ... &h6
has occasionally employed 9 \302\243.e2: Thereare a lot of supporters for

a) 9....&ge7 10 0-0&f5 11 \302\243b2 9...&ge7, which is designed to

(11 \302\243e3 $Ltl 12 \302\243>bd2 f6 13 \302\243d3 occupy f5 as a way to put pressure on
\302\243txe3 14 fxe3 *d8!? 15 2c 1 &xe5 d4 while reserving the option of
16 Hxc8+ JLxc8 17 &xe5 fxeS 18 taking on e3. The problem is that it

^4 is unclear; Blatny-Teske, allows White to exchange on fS. After

Leipzig 1988) ll...\302\243e7 12 Wd2 13
0-0 10 &d3 \302\243>f5
play might proceed:
Hdl f6 14 \302\243k:3fxeS IS dxeS &e8 a) 11 \302\243xf5exf5 12 0-0.fi.e7 13
(15...*h8?! 16 Had Wd8 17 &d3 0-0
\342\200\242d2 14 &c3 .fi.e6 IS h4 (IS
intending &e2 t) 16 Sacl JUtf! Hfcl aS 16b5 &a7 17 \302\245d3 h6 18

(I6...\302\243>h4? 17 b5! \302\243ixf3+ 18 Axfi &d2 Wd8 19 &a4 b6 20Sxc8Vxc8

&xe5 19 fcxd5 &xf3+ 20 gxf3 exd5 21 \302\243>bl#b7 22 \302\243>bc3Sc8 23 .fi.d2
21 Sxc8) 17 &a4 Wd8 18 \302\243>c5 .fi.d8 24 \302\243tb2= Haba-Schmidt,
\302\243xc5 19 Hxc5 \302\243fo420 &xh4 \302\243xe2! Prague 1990) 15...a5(15...Hfe8 16.fi.g5
(20...Wxh4 23 f3 21
\302\261) Wxe2 #xh4 a5 17 Axe7 2xe7 18 b5 \302\243>a719

22 Sdcl with equality, Sveshnikov- Sfbl Hc4 20 \302\243tdl2cc7 21 a4 \302\261

An-

Lputian, USSR 1990. drienko-Danielian, Jurmala 1991)

b) 9...&xd4?!10\302\243>xd4Sxcl 11 16 b5 fta7 17#b2 Hc418\342\202\254td2
Sc7

Irxcllrxd4 12lrc3\302\261. 19 Hfbl f4 20 .fi.xf4Wxd4 21 &e2

c) 9...a5 10 b5 &xd4 11 &xd4 Wxb2 22 Hxb2 &c8 23 Ae3 .fi.xh4

 Modern Variation 47

24 b6 Hd7 25 \302\243ib3d4 26 &exd4 Hc3 22 a4 h6 23 &gf3 \302\243xa4 24 He 1

Hd5 27 $c5 \302\243g428 \302\243>xb72xe5 29 b5 25h4 2fc8 26h5 2cl0-l.

\302\243>c62h5 30Hcl \302\243f631 Hbbl &e7 However, White's
play can be
32 \302\243foxa5 1-0 Andrienko-Kiriakov, dramatically improved by launching
Alma-Ata 1991. a kingside attack using both his
b) 11 0-0 &e7 (ll...\302\243>d8!? 12 knights to invade the dark squares
\302\243xf5 exfS 13 Wd2 \302\243b5 14 2c 1 around the black king.
2xcl IS Wxcl \302\243e7 16 &c3 = 13 &c3 (39)
Shrentzel-Pein, Haringey 1989) 12
\302\243kbd20-013 fcb3 \302\243>b814 &b5
\302\243>c5

IS \302\243g5Axd3 16 Wxd3 h6 17 \302\243xe7

\302\243>xe7 18 Hfcl Wc7 19 Wd2 #b6
20 h3 Hc7 21 a4 Qbc6 22 Habl
Hfc8 23 bS Qa5 24 g4 He825*g2
Hcc8 26 \302\243tf7 Wd8 27 \302\243>f6+! gxf6
28 exf6 *h7 29 fxe7 #b6 30 \302\245f4

1-0 Grosar-Ottavi, Rome 1990.

10 &d3 ^g4
11 0-0 \342\202\254fcxe3

In the game van der Werf-Jolles,

Groningen1990,White had a 13 ... &h6

vigorous offensive after ll...\302\243.e7 12 14 Wei 0-0

&bd2 fcxe3 13 fxe3 0-0 14 \302\243fo3 15 &dl
f6?! 15 exf6 \302\243xf6 16 \302\243c5Hcd8 17 This is the start of a slow but
&e5! \302\243xe5 (17...ilc8 18 Wh5 g6 powerful manoeuvre to harass the
19 \302\243xg6 +-) 18 \302\243xh7+! *xh7 19 bishop.
Hxf8 Hxf8 20 &xd7Wd8 21 \302\243>xf8+ 15 ... \302\243g7

Wxf8 22 Wh5+ *g8 23 dxe5 Wb8 16 E>f2 Wd8

1-0. Even at this early stage Black is
12 fxe3 g6 obliged to go on the defensive by
The system involving this move thwarting White'splan of an
has a good reputation, basedon the eventual Wh4. On I6...f6 17 exf6 &xf6
game PiriSi-Khuzman, Balatonber- 18\302\243>g4&g7? 19 Wh4 Wd8 20 \302\243>gS
eny 1988, which continued 13 *hl h5 21 ^.xg6 Black is destroyed.
(not 13 \302\243>g5?\302\243*xe5!T) 13...Ag7 14 17 \302\243>g4 a6

15 Wg4? &xe5! 16dxe5

\302\243>g5?! 0-0 18 Wg3 HhbSV. (40)
Wxe3 172a2 *xd3 182af22c4 19 Black chooses a faulty plan,
fh3 Wxh3 20 gxh3 &e8 21 \302\243>d2 which he will not get the time to put
 48 Modern Variation

19exf6&xf6 20 &xf6+ Hxf6 21

&g5!, but this is in White's favour
nevertheless.
19 Wf4 &b5
20 &xb5 axb5
21 &f6+ \302\243xf6

Now 21...*h8 loses to 22 &xh7!

*h7 23fcg5+*g8 24#h4.
22 exf6 *h8
23 \302\253ie5 Hc7

24 Bf3
into effect. After ...&b5 the idea is The final key to White's victory;
that White's attack will be stunted, the rook will be added to the attack
while a rook invading at c3 will on the h-file.
prove to be a distraction. 24 ... Hg8
The only way to make an 25 Hi4 *tt
impressionon the game is to play 18...f6 26 Sh3 1-0
2 Milner-Barry Gambit

The concept of 6 &d3 followed by

sacrificing at least the d-pawn was
popularized by the Englishman Sir
Stuart Milner-Barry. This cavalier
approach naturally attracted Tal who
revelled in the tactical possibilities.
In recent times, Rozentalis and

Sveshnikov, in particular, have

refined the approach to the point where
only one pawn is discarded in pursuit
of the black king. The gambit is

difficult to contend with, and will appeal 6 ... cxd4

to aggressive players. If Black is It is misguided to try to transpose
unprepared for them, the complications to other lines with 6...&ge7?!. This
are extremely difficult to fathom occurred in Milner-Bany-Trott,
over the board. England 1951: 7 dxc5 1^7 (7...1rxc5 8
b4 Wb6 9 Ae3 8
\302\261) fca3 \302\243>xe5 9

Game 14 \302\243>xd3+10
\302\243>b5 Wxd3 Wxc5 11 \302\243e3
Strauts-Kantoris d4 12 \302\243xd4 Wc6 13 &e5 Wxg2 14
USSR 1985 \302\243>d6+*d8l5.S.b6+l-0.
A common error is 6...\302\243.d7 when

1 e4 e6 White can continue with 7 0-0 as in

2 d4 d5 the illustrative game or take the

3 e5 c5 chance to seize the initiative. After 7

4 c3 \302\243*6 dxc5! Axc5 (7...#c7 8 i.f4 i.xc5 9

5 \342\202\254>f3 n>6 0-0&ge7 10 b4 \302\243b6 11 a4 \302\261)
play
6 &d3 (41) might proceed:
The most active posting for the a) 8 0-0 and now:
ishop. al) 8...&ge7?9 b4 \302\243xb4 10
50 Milner-Barry Gambit

cxb4 \302\243>xb4 11 \302\243e3 Mel 12 \302\243&3 0-0 \302\243tge7 13 \302\243d2 &g6 14 \302\243fod4!

Wc3 13 \302\243>b5Wxd3 14 \302\243kc7+ *d8 \302\243e7 IS Hfel 0-0 16 h4! f5 17exf6

15 Wxd3 &xd3 16 &xa8 +- Mol- \302\243xf6 18 Habl Wa7 19 &c3 &xd4
nar-Joppien, Vienna 1990. 20 cxd4 \302\243e8 21 &g5 \302\243xg5 22

a2) 8...f6 9 b4 \302\243e7 10 \302\243f4fxe5 hxg5! &f4 23 \302\243xf4 Sxf4 24 g3 Sf8

(10...Ec8 11 &M2 Wd8 12a3 fS 13 25 lrxe6+ \302\243lH (Hort-Andersson,
c4 g5? 14&xg51-0Almeida-Purgi- Reykjavik 1972) 26 #h3! g6 27
mon, Andorra 1987) 11 &xe5 &xe5 \302\273g4\302\261.

12&xe5\302\243>f6(12...&f6 13 Wh5+ g6 7 cxd4 \302\243d7

14 \302\243xg6+ hxg6 15 1^6+ +-) 13 It would be a grave error to grab

thdl 0-0 14\302\243>f3\302\243d615 \302\245e2! Hac8 the pawn because of 7....&xd4?? 8
16 &d4 Wcl 17 &e5 &e8 18Hael \302\243>xd4 #xd4 9 \302\243b5+ picking up the
^.xeS 19 &xe5 Nimzowitsch-
\302\261 queen.
Salwe, Karlsbad 1911. 8 0-0
a3) 8...a5!? 9 a4 (9 Ve2 f6 10 The move-order involving 8 &c3
\302\243f4 \302\243kge7 11 \302\243>bd2 ^g6 12 &g3 is also perfectly playable.Theolder
0-0 13 4^b3 \302\243e7 14 exf6 2xf6 15 linesare somewhat doubtful:

\302\243fod4 = Rubinetti-Ivkov, Palma de a) 8 \302\243e2?! fcge7 9 b3 fcf5 10

Mallorca 1970) 9...&ge7 (9...&ce7 &b2 &b4+ 11*f 10-012&d3 f6

10 \302\243>g611
\302\243>a3 We2 &8e7 12 \302\243>b5 13 &xf5 exf5 and Nimzowitsch felt
\302\243xb5 13 \302\243xb5+ \302\243k:6 14 h4 h6 15 Blackwas better, so he switched to 6

g3 &ge7 16 *g2 Hd8 17 \302\243d2Wa7 $Lt2 to save a tempo.

18 Hadl &b6 19 h5 0-0 20 &d3 b) 8 \302\243c2?! \302\243ib49 \302\243k:3&xc2+

with unclear play; Mellado-Byk- 10 Wxc2 Hc8 11 0-0 &e7 12Hdl

hovsky, St. Barbara 1992) 10&a3 &c613 a4 &a5 +\" Basjouni-Uhlmann,

\302\243>g611 We2 0-012 Had8

\302\243>b5 13 h4 Prague 1954.
f6 14 exf6 gxf6 15&h6Hfe8 16 b4! 8 ... \302\243>xd4

axb4 17 a5 &xa5 18cxb4 Axb4 19 9 \302\243>xd4

h5 \302\243k:420 hxg6 \302\243xb5 21 gxh7+ The speculative 9 \302\243>g5!? can be

*f7 22 Babl Wd6 23 ^g5+! fxg5 traced to the game S0rensen-Thap-
24 \302\243xg5 e5 25 Wh5+ *g7 26 Sxb4 per, Karlskrona 1963, which
e4 27 Hxb5 Wc6 28 2xb7+ Jonk- continued9...g6 10 \302\243e3!? \302\243c5 11 \302\243c3h6

man-Na\302\243inovi6, Holland 1993. 12 \302\243xa4

\302\243>a4 13 Wxa4+ *f8 with
b) 8 We2 a5 9 \302\243>bd2 a4 (after an unclear position. It has since been
9...1rc7?! 10 0-0 \302\243>ge7 11 \302\243>b3 heavily analysed by the Malmfi
intending \302\243fod4 White has the chess club and has become popular

advantage; C.Hawthorne-Evans, Bristol in correspondence chess. It is

1983) 10 b4 axb3 11\302\253*xb3\302\243a3! 12 certainly
useful as a surprise weapon,
 Milner-Barry Gambit 51

although its soundness has not yet 12 \302\243>c3Hd7 13 ilg6 intending 14

been confirmed by strenuous ile3 \302\261
(Krantz).

competitive play. For example: c) 9...f6?10\302\253h5+g611.fi.xg6+

a) 9...g6 10 \302\243e3and now: \302\261
(Krantz).

al) 10...1rxb2 ll\302\243k:3!?(not 11 d) 9...\302\243e7?!10\302\243>xh7\302\261.

Axg6? &e2+! -+; 11 \302\253*xf7 Wxal e) 9..15 10exf6\302\243ixf6 11 \302\243xh7!

12 &d6+ or 12 \302\243>xh8&c6 is unclear 0-0-0 (1 l...\302\243>xh7 12 \302\253h5+ *d8 13

according to Krantz) ll...!^ 12 Axh7 14
\302\243>c2 \302\243g5+ Ae7 15 Axe7+
Hcl Wa5 13 \302\243xd4 \302\243h6 14 h4 &e7 *xe7 16 lrg5+; 14...*c8 IS Scl
15 Wfi \302\243xg5? (15...0-0 16 \302\243c5 Wxb2 16 \302\273g6+-) 12 \302\243d6
\302\243>g5 13

#d8 17 Wf6 \302\243xg5 18 hxg5 is h3 Hh4 14 Ae3 Hdh8 (14...1rxb2

unclear) 16 hxgS 0-0 17 &c5 Hfe8 18 15ftc3 intending 16&xf7) 15 &d2
#f6 &c619 Hfel Wd8 20 Wf4 b6 \302\243>g4!? 16 Axd4 Wxd4 17 \302\243>df3
21 \302\243d62c8 22.fi.a61-OKrantz-Tie- M2+ (Stork-Ohlsson, Sweden 1987)
mann, corr. 1992. 18 \302\243>xh2 \302\243>xh2 19 *xh2\302\273e5+ 20
a2) 10...&c5 11&c3andnow: g3+--
a21) ll...\302\243>f5? 12 \302\243xf5 Axe3 f) 9....fi.e7and now:

(Stork-Pinarelli, MalmS 1979) 13 fl) 10h4h5? 11 Ae3! Ac5 (or

&xd5! exd5 14 &xd7+ *xd7 15 ll...lrxb2 12\302\243>xf7!*xf7 13.fi.xd4;

*xd5+ *c8 16 fxe3 Ete7 17Sacl+ ll...ilxg5 12 hxg5 Wxb2 13 g6

*b8 18 WxH Wxe3+ 19 *hl Wxg5 Wxal 14 gxf7+ *xf7 15 Axd4) 12
20 Wf8+!+- Krantz. 13
\302\243k:3\302\243>e7 Scl Sc8 14&a4 .fi.xa4
a22) ll...&e7 12 Scl 0-0 (or 15 Wxa4+ ftec6 (S0rensen-Dehl-
12...&c8 13 \302\243>a4Wb4 14 \302\243>xc5 ryd, Malmo 1979) 16 Sxc5! Wxc5
Bxc5 15 Sxc5 WXC5 16 \302\243>xf7! 0-0 17Sclandl8.fi.xd4+-.

17 \302\243h6+ *g7 18 Hc8

\302\243>g4 19 \302\243kf6 f2) 10 \302\243tfi7?! 4^6111^5 0-0-0
Sc7 20 Wg4 &ec6 21 Wh4 h5 22 12 WxH WdA 13 Wxg7 Qxe5 14
\302\243>xh5+ gxh5 23 Wf6+ *g8 24 *hl (14 Wxh8? \302\243f3+!) 14...1rxd3

Wg6+ *f8 1-0Keogh-Walsh, 15 Hel Wxh7 16 Wxe5 \302\243f617 Wd6

Dublin 1976; 12...\302\243ib3!? Krantz) 13 e5 18 \302\243f4exf4 19 Scl+ \302\243c6 0-1

^4! h5 14 Wf4 Qef5 15 \302\243xf5 Rohrich-Heyken, Dortmund 1993.

\302\243>xf5 16 Axc5 WxcS 17 \302\253ice41^7 g) 9...\302\243>c6!? 10 Sel (Harding
18 \302\243>f6+ *g7 19 Sc7 Hfd8 20 g4 considers 10 ,fi.xh7 QHh6 followed by
hxg421Wxg4 b6 22 h4 a5 23 h5 +- ..Ael to be unclear) 10...\302\243c5
corr.1989.
Schipper-Luers, (10...g6 11 WE \302\243tfi612^6!? =) 11
b) 9...h6?! 10 Wh5 (10 \302\243>xf7!? \302\273f3 \302\243>xe5 (ll...\302\253ih6 12 h3!) 12
*xf7 11 Wh5+ *e7 12 \302\243c3is Sxe5 f6 13 Wh5+ *e7 14 1T7+
another idea) 10...0-0-0 11 \302\243>xf7,fi.e8 *d8 151^7 \302\243xf2+ 16 *hl Wd4?
52 Milner-Barry Gambit

17 \302\243>xe6+ \302\243xe6 18 Sxe6 Wxd3 19 Wg4! \302\261

Mohring-Forintos, Halle
Wf8++- (Harding). 1958) 12 Ae3 Wd8 13 Ag5! h6 14
h) 9...\302\243c5!? 10 \302\243>xh7 (10 \302\243c3 \302\243>b5!&c6 15 &d6+ *d7 16 &xf7
g6 11 &e3 transposes to note 'a') Wc7 17 \302\243>xh8hxg5 18 We2 19
\302\243>f5

10...&C6!111115(with the idea 12 \302\243xf5 exf5 20 e6+ *e7 21 #h5

\302\243>f6+) 1 l...\302\243lh6 (11 ...0-0-012 Wxf7 *xe6 22 Hfel+*d6 23b4 d4 24
12
\302\261) &c3 intending 13 &a4 with Wg6+ 1-0 Moles-Miyasaka, Skopje
equal chances (Harding). 1972.
9 ... Wxd4 c) I0...\302\243>ge7?! 11 Wxe5
\302\243>b5 12
10 \302\243lc3 HtxeS(42) Bel (Keres suggests 12 f4! Wb8 13

The major alternative 10...a6 is f5 a6 14 WG with advantage to

examinedin Game 16, Sveshnikov- White) 12...\302\253b8 13 Wf3 Axb5 14
Razuvaev. Black should accept the \302\243xb5+ \302\243c6 15 Wxd5 &d6 16
challenge as the less common ideas Axc6+ bxc6 17fxc6+ *e7 18Ae3
are just not good enough: Sc8 19 We4 h6 20 Ad4 &xh2+ 21
10...Ab4?!
a) 11 \302\243>b5Wxe5 12 *hl W(4 22 Wb7+ Wc7 23 Wb3
Wg4! Aa5 13 Af4 &h6 14 Wg3 Ad6 24 Axg7 Wa5 25 Wb7+ *e8
Wh5 IS Wxg7 Sg8 16 *xh6 Wg4 26 Wf3 ttab8 27 fiadl &e728*gl
17 Ag3 a6 18 \302\243>d6+ *e7 19 We3 Sb5?29 Wd3 fid5 30 #h7 &fg 31
Ab4 20 \302\243)\302\2435+
1-0 Kottnauer-Palmer, Axf8 1-0Corden-Knox,British Ch

England 1961. 1969.

b) 10...*b6?! and now:

bl) llWg4h5 12Wg5g6l3a4!

&h6 (not 13...a6?14Axg6 fxg6 15

Wxg6+*d8 13...&e7
16\302\243>xd5!+-;
14 Wf4 Wb4 15 \302\243>b5with

compensation according to Tal) 14 tth4 a6

15 \302\243xh6 \302\243>xh6 16 Wf6 SfB 17
\302\243>xd5 1H8 18 Wf4 exd5 19 Wxh6

We7 20 We3 Ac6 21 Had Sg8 22f4

*f8 23 f5 gxfS 24 #h6+ Sg7 25
Hxf5 Ad7 26 Sc7 *e6 27 #h8+!
Sg828 Wxh5 Sc8 29 Sxc8 Axc8 30
Sf6 We7 31 *h6+ Sg7 32 Sd6 11 lei Wd6
Wxe5 33 #h8+ 1-0Tal-Stahlberg. This old-fashionedmove attempts
Stockholm 1961. to hang on to the d-pawn, but it is the

b2) 11 a4 &e7 (U...a5? 12Ae3 first step on a perilousjourney for

Ac5 13 &xc5 Wxc5 14 Scl \302\2531>615 Black.

 Milner-Barry Gambit 53

The more resolute ll...Wb8is Wxf8+ *c7 20 Hcl+ 1-0 Moyer-

covered in Game 16, Borg-RNik- Kozmarek, corr. 1969.
olic\\ b2) 14...*e7 15 #h4+ &f6 16
It is not wise to play 11...1^7? A.d2! a5 17 fiacl intending &.(4
since 12 &xd5 merely gives White a with excellent chances according to
tempo. Play can continue: Griffiths.
a) I2...1H813 Af4 Sc8 14 Wb3 b3) 14...We715Af4 (15 Ag5!?)
Ac6 15 JLc4 Ae7 16 \302\243>xe7\302\243>xe7 17 15...\302\243>f6 15 *G Sac8 16 fiacl \302\261.

Sadl with a clear plus for White,

Clarke-Elliott, England 1959.

b) 12...1fa5 13 Bxe6+fxe6
(certainly not 13...\302\243xe6? 14 Ab5+*d8
15 a4f Axd5 16Wxd5+ 1-0 Fried-

mann-Beneda, corr. 1974) 14 Hi5+

*d8 (14...g6?15 \302\253if6+) 15 Ag5+
\302\243>f6 16 &xf6 Ae7! 17 &e4 and
White has the better game due to
Black's strandedking.
12 \302\243>b5 Wb8 (43)
JMfflB
\342\226\240

are still those reckless

There
enough continue 12...jbtb5 13
to 13 W(3 \302\243d6

&xb5+ 4?d8 and hope to survive the 14 Axd6+

onslaught White should be able to Flashy play led to success in Tal-

claim a sizeable advantage by Nei, USSR1958,which finished in

following general attacking ideas based brilliant fashion after 14 Wxd5

on sacrificial combinationsat d5, &xh2+ 15 *hl Ac6 16lfg5! &f6

penetrating on the c-file and 17 f4 h6 18 Wxg7 Sg8 19 Hxe6+!
Black
preventing developing his forces. For fxe6 20 Ag6+ *d8 21Wxf<5+ 1-0.

example: 14 ... Wxd6

a) 14\302\243e3 &e7 15 ficl \302\243>f516 15 MA Wb6
\302\243c5 Wf4 (I6...*xc5!) 17 g3 Wg5 16 Wg3 g6
18 Wxd5+!exd5 19&b6+ axb6 20 On I6...*f8 comes 17 Ac7! Wc6
He8# (1-0) Foulds-Lang, New (17...1rxb2? 18 Ae5!) 18 fieel Wa4
Zealand 1956. 19 b3 Wd4 2lAe5+-.

b) 14 Wh5! and now: 17 Ae5 f6

bl) 14...g615Wfi (6 (15...f5 16 18 \302\243xg6+ *e7
Af4 \302\2531>617 lfxd5+! +-) 16 Af4 e5 There is no long-term reward in
17 SxeS!fxe5 18\302\243xe5 *xe5 19 taking the offered piece: 18...hxg6
54 Milner-Barry Gambit

19 Wxg6+ *d8 20 Wg7 fxe5 21 with a slight plus for White, Nun-

Wxh8 *e7 22 Wg7+ *d6 23 h4! \302\261. Razuvaev, Sochi 1989.

19 Ah5! fxe5 b) 9...\302\243>c6!? 10 \302\243>b3\302\243>ge7 11

20 Wg7+ 1-0 Ae3 Wc7 12 fiel \302\243>g6and White

has insufficient compensation for
Game 15 the pawn; Nun-Schmittdiel, Prague
Borg-P.Nikoli* 1990.
Kavala 1985 9 ... Wxd4

10 \302\243te3 Wxe5

1 e4 e6 11 fiel Wb8
2 d4 d5 Black's intention is to avoid his
3 e5 c5 queen being harassed and to develop
4 c3 4k6 his kingside quickly.
5 \302\253M3 11)6 12 ftxd5 Ad6
6 &d3 cxd4 13 Wg4

7 cxd4 Ad7 This is Milner-Barry's original

8 0-0 Qaid4(44) idea to maintain the tension. Now the
queen targets g7 and sets a trap if the
h-pawn is grabbed:13..Jfc.xh2+? 14
44 rm m*m*m *hl Ae5 15 Af4 &xf4 16 Wxg7
W
Wd8 17 Wxh8 +-. The obvious 13
m mm \342\226\240 Wh5 to protect h2 soon runs into
trouble: I3...*f8 14 &c3 \302\243>f615
Hi Wm mm mm #h4 Ac6 16 \302\243g5 \302\261c5l (16...5M5?
,
17 \302\243>xd5 Axd5 18 Ac4! 17 f4?!
m mm&m \302\261)

(after h6 the pin

17 Ab5!7 of the
&B H 0AIS pawn is ineffective due to the threat
K&iitfBaffiH of 18...Axh2+) 17...\302\243d4+ 18 *hl
h619 f5 *g8 20 Ae3Axe321fixe3
9 ftxd4 exf5 22 Axf5 g5! 23 Wd4 Wf4 and
The Czech player Jiri Nun has Black can hang on to the extra pawn;
investigated the intriguing alternative Bisguier-Westerinen,Netanya 1971.

9\302\243>bd2: 13 ... *f8

a) 9...&e7 10 \302\243>xd4 Wxd4 11 14 Ad2 h5
Wa4
\302\243>f3 12 b3 Wa5 13 Ad2 Wd8 14 The queen is dislodgedfrom its

fiel h6 15 b4! a6 16a4 &c617fibl optimum square. Less accurate is

Ae7 18 b5 axb5 19 axb5 &a5 20 14...\302\243c6 15 Ac3! e5 16 &e3 h5 17
\302\243>d4&c4 21 Axc4 dxc4 22 Wg4 Hi3 \302\243>f618 fiadl e4 19 \302\243c2Ae5
 Milner-Barry Gambit 55

20 \302\243b4+ *g8 21 \302\243>f5

g6 22 Ad6 34 fxg3 1-0 Finkel-Slutzkin, Ramat
We8 23 &e7+ *g7 24 Axe5Wxe7 1992; 17 g3 is unclear -
Borg)
25 Wc3 Shd8 26 h3 Hac8 27 Sxd8 n..Ac7 18 Wxh5 \302\243>f5 19 Wg5
Sxd8284.xe4 \302\261
Soylu-Ziiger, Haifa Axh2+ 20 *f 1 is again unclear.

1989. Another approach is possible:

15 Wh3 (45) 15...&C6 16 &e3 (16\302\243>b4Ad7 17
\302\243ki5Ac6 18 \302\243>b4'/:-'/: Motwani-

Brunner, Clichy 1991) I6...\302\243lf6 17

\302\243>c4Ac7 18 Ac3 \302\243>d5 19 &e5

\302\243>xc3 20 \302\243>xf7!? Ah2+ (20....*xf7
21 Wxe6+ *f8 22 Wf5+ *g8 23
Ac4+ \302\243d5 24 Axd5 &xd5 25
Wxd5+ *h7 26 Wf5+ with a drawn

position - analysisby I.Kuznekov)

21 *hl \302\243te4 22 &xe4 *xf7 23
Axc6 Hh6 24 \302\243d7Ae5 25 f4 \302\243xf4

26 &xe6+ *f8 27 fiadl 1-0 Sal-

nikov-Prudnikov, USSR 1991.
15 ... exdS?! 16 Wxd7 Axh2+
The start of an hallucinatory 17 *hl &f6
sequence. Black's idea is to add 18 Wf5

another pawn to the war chest and It is essential for White to

develop his knight with gain of maintain a grip on the situation by
tempo. However, there is still the keeping his queen strongly centralized.
nigglesome problem of There is no joy to be gained from 18
the rooks,
co-ordinating while the black king is We7+ *g8 19 g3 \302\243>g4!when Black
liable to be threatened with back- is on top.
rank combinations. 18 ... SLd6

In Pyhala-McDonald, Gausdal 19 fiacl

1990,Blackpreferred to activate his The dormant rook is brought to

knight immediately: 15...Qh6!? 16 the scene of battle.

&e3*g8 17 &c4 (17 Ac3! &g4 18 19 ... Wd8

\302\243>xg4hxg4 l9lrxg4iLxh2+20*fl 20 \302\243g5 Ae7?!

Wf8 21 g3 Sd8 22 He5!Ac8 23 &c2 A possible improvement is to seek

SdS 24 Hael f5 25 Wg5 Sxe5 26 sanctuary in the ending: 20...Wd7 21
JixeS Ad7 27 fidl Wf7 28 Wd8+ \302\243xf6 *xf5 22 Axf5 gxf6 23 Sedl
Ae8 29 Aa4 *h7 30Axe8*xe8 31 with
equal chances.
Wxe8 flxe8 32 Sd7 f4 33 *g2 fxg3 21 Se5! &g*(46)
 56 Milner-BarryGambit

Sxb7 i.d4 29 f3 when a queenside

pawn will romp home to promotion.
26 ... g6
27 \302\243c4 fih7

28 Sdl Sg7!
A stubborn manoeuvre which
shields the king and protects the g-
pawn after the bishop takes on f7.
29 Sdd7 *h7
30 Axf7 Sc8

31 g3 Hc2
22 JLxt6 32 *g2 a5
White has the luxury of another The task is easy after 32...Sxb2
line that preserves an advantage: 22 33 Hxa7 Ac3 34 a4 +-.
Seel &f8 23 &xf6 (23 Se8 Wxe8 33 fia7 Sxb2
24 0xe8 0xe8 25 Axf6 gxf6 26 34 Hxa5 &c3
Wxd5 23...Wxf6
\302\261) 24 Wxf6 gxf6 25 35 Sc5?
Sxd5 \302\261
(analysis by Borg). White prepares to meet 35...i.d4
22 ... \302\243xf6
by 36 &xg6+ *xg6 37 Sxd4,but f2
23 Sxd5 We8 can be attacked from another
24 Bd7?! direction. The right response is 35 Sa6!
After this move it is clear that *h6 36a4 Ael 37 fif6 winning.
White has managed to establish a 35 ... \302\243el

commanding position, although it 36 Scc7 fixf2+

will take time to convert to victory. 37 *h3 *h6
However, the strongest remedy 38 \302\243c4 Bxd7

against the
prospect of exchanging 39 Id7 Vi-Vi

queens is to allow the other rook to

take up residence on the seventh Game 16
rank: 24 Sc7! \302\243xb2 (24...Hd8 25 Sveshnikov-Razuvaev
Hxd8 \302\243xd8 26 Sd7 +-) 25 &c4 g6? Belgrade 1988
26 Wxg6+! fxg6 27 Bf5+ +-.
24 ... We5 1 e4 e6
25 Wxe5 &xe5 2 d4 d5
26 Sxb7 3 e5 c5
To exploitthe initiative to the 4 c3 &c6
utmost. Black should be forced into 5 \302\243tf3 Wb6
complete passivity: 27 i.c4 Sf828 6 Ad3 cxd4
 Milner-BarryGambit 57

7 cxd4 &d7 b) 11 fie 1 and now:

8 0-0 \302\243>xd4 bl) ll...\302\243>e7 12 Ac3 (12 \302\243>e2

9 &xd4 WxA4 #xe5 13 Af4 Wf6 14 lfc3 e5? 15

10 \302\243lc3 a6 Wxb7! &c6 16 Wc7 \302\261
Natapov-
Tal introduced this move, which Karlsson, USSR 1972) 12...Wxe5 13
has the virtue of ruling out \302\243M>5. WG \302\243>g6 14 Axg6 hxg6 15 Af4
11 W*2(47) #h5 16 g4 #h3 17 Wxh3 fixh3 18
This is an important moment for &xd5 fic8 with unclear play; Par-
White. For some time the kanyi-Anka, Budapest 1990.
alternativeswere the trusted continuations. b2) ll...\302\243b4? 12 Ae3 Wxe5 13
However, theory has evolved to the Ac5 Wf4 14 \302\243>xd5 +-.

point where the text is accepted as b3) U...Vb612*c2(12*g4!?)

being the best chance for the 12...^7 13 Ag5 &c6 14fiadl Ae7

initiative, as the rook is free to hasslethe 15 &cl 0-0-0 16 a3 (6 17exf6gxf6

queen from dl and the e-pawn is 18 b4 ? McDonald-McKay,
preserved. The other paths are: Scotland 1988.

a) 11 tf?hl and now:

al) ll...\302\243>e7 12 f4 g6? (12...\302\243c6

13 a3! 12...0-0-0
\302\261; 13 We2 H>6 14
Ae3 d4 15fiacl <\302\243>b8is unclear -
Schwarz) 13 We211)6 14Ae3 Wd8

15 Wf2 ftc6 16 Ab6 WcS 17 f5!

\302\243>xe5 18 fxe6 Axe6 19 \302\243>xd3
\302\273\302\253

20 Wxh8 Wc6 21 Wd4 Wc4 22 We3

fic8 23 fiadl \302\243>xb2 24 \302\243>xd5\302\243>xdl

25 \302\243>f6+ *e7 26 Wa3+ 1-0 Wade-

Cafferty, British Ch 1957.
a2) 1l...*xe5 12Hel (12f4 *d6
13 Ae3 \302\243e7 14 Ad4 Af6 15 &e5 11 ... &e7
Axe5 16fxe5 Wxe5 17 Wg4 h5 18 The knight heads for c6to put
Wb4 ^e7 + Wade-Menvielle, Palma immediate pressure on e5 and prepare
de Mallorca 1966) 12...Vd6 13 Wf3 ...&b4 to exchangeon d3.The
Ae7 14 &f4 Wb6 15 Wg3 \302\243>f616 alternative treatments are not so forcing:
\302\243e5*f817 fiacl Sc8 18 &e2 fixe1 a) ll...\302\243b4?! 12 fidl \302\243>e7

19fixel Qe820
Sc7 Ab5 21 3c8 f6 (12../Vb6 13 Wg4 4) 13 \302\243xa6 Wb6
22 Jid4 Wa5 with an equal position, 14 Ad3 0-0 15 \302\243e3Wc7 16 #h5 g6
Brinck-Claussen-S0rensen, 17 Vh4 \302\243c6 18 f4 Ae7 19 #h6 \302\261

Copenhagen 1989. Rozentalis-Neverov, Odessa 1989.

58 Milner-Barry Gambit

b) !l...*rh4 12f4&h6 13Ae3 1967. after 12...1rh4 13 f4 Ac6 14

Hc8 14 Hf3 Ac5 15 JLxcSHxc5 16 b4 \302\243>f5 15 JLxfS Axb4 16 &d2
flaf 1 We7 17 Hh3 \302\243>f518 Wf2 Ac6 Axc3 17&xc3exf518Vc2\302\245g4 19

19 g4 d4 20 \302\243>dl\302\243>e321 \302\243>xe3dxc3 If 12...\302\243>g6?

\302\243b4 \302\261. to hit e5 then
22 Wxe3 Ha5 23 a3 g6 V2-V2 Rozen- the knight soon becomes a liability:
lalis-Epishin, USSR Ch 1990. 13 f4 #b6 14f5 exf5 15 \302\243>xd5Wa5

c) ll...fic8andnow: 16 \302\243c4 Ae6 17 fidl fic8 18 \302\243e3

cl) 12a3g6 13*hl\302\243g7 14 f4 Ac5 19 b4! &xb4 20 Ab6 Wa4 21
Wa7 15 Ae3 11)8 16 Wf2 flc6 17 \302\243>c7+ *e7 22 Axe6 fxe6 23 Wc4
fiael Ac5
\302\243>e718 h5 19 Ab4 Wd8 fihd8 24 Ac5+ 1-0 C.Hawthorne-
20 &e2 21 Wa7 fie8 22 ^M)4
0-0 Boyne, Paignton 1983.

fic8 23 Wxb7 a5 24 Ad6 +- Pirrot- 13 f4 \302\243>b4

Maiwald, Bad Warishofen 1991. On 13...\302\243c5 comes 14 a3! (14

c2) 12 fidl Ac5 13 &c2 (13 Ad2 \302\243>b415 HO \302\243>xd3 16 fixd3
Axa6 Wxf2+ 14 Wxf2 &xf2+ 15 Wf2 17 Wg4 0-0-0 18 b4 Aa7 19
*xf2 bxa6+) I3...\302\253h4 14 g3 We7 = Wdl \302\243c6 \302\245
Zila-Borsov, Budapest
Cuartas-Mecking, Bogota 1977. 1990) 14...\302\243a7 15 Ad2 g6 16 fift
c3) 12*hl Ac5 13 &g5 h6 14 Wb6 17 Ae3 Wc7 18 \302\243xa7 fixa7 19
Ad2&e7 15 fiacl (perhaps 15 f4!?) Wf2 with reasonable chances for

15...1rh4 16f4\302\243>f5 17&xf5exf5 18 both sides; Luchan-McEntee,

b4 Aa7 19 \302\243>xd5 0-0 =
Padevsky- Chicago 1989.

Darga, Siegen OL 1970. 14 fidl

d) Il...lra7 12*hl&c5 13f4\302\261 Not 14 \302\243bl?! Wc4 15 Wdl d4 16
Lane-Sims, Cardiff 1981. &e4 Ab5! 17field3+ Miles-Wise,
12 *hl British Junior Ch 1970.
A necessary precaution as the e- 14 ... &xd3
pawn has to be supported, otherwise The principal argument against
Black has a comfortable game. For 14..JS.c5 is line V, with which

example: 12 fidl *Ti4 (12...\302\243c6 13 White secures an enduring edge in

Axa6 Wxe5 14 Axb7 Wxe2 15\302\243>xe2 the endgame:
fia7 16\302\243xc6\302\243xc6=)
13g3Wb4 14 a) 15 Ab5? Wf2 16 &xd7+
SLdl Hj6 15 b4 \302\243c6 16 a3 Wc7 17 *xd7 17 Wg4 <2M3! 18 h3 h5 19
f4 \302\243>d418 Wf2 \302\243>b319 Ha2 \302\243>xd2 Wxg7 fiag8 20 WxH+ *d8 -+.
20 lrxd2 ? Ozanne-Bauza, Novi Sad b) 15 Axa6 Wf2 16 Wxf2 (16
OL 1990. Ab5 Wxe2 17 Axe2 =) 16...\302\243xf2

12 ... \302\243>c6 (Organdziev-DraSko, Skopje 1992)

White obtained an advantage in 17 Ae2 0-0 (17...*e7 18 f5!) 18
the game Formanek-Byrne, Atlanta Ad2 (intending &e4) 18...\302\243c2 19
 Milner-Barry Gambit 59

Sabl &e3 20 fidcl fifc8 is unclear 19 &e2? Wc2!) 18...\302\253b7 19 1^2

(DraSko). (19 f5! b4 {19...Bg820 fxe6fxe6
Axh7 Wf2 16 Wxf2 Axf2
c) 15 21Hi5+ g6 22 Wxh7 Bg7 23 #h8
17 Abl *e7 18h3 fiac8 19f5 exf5 &c6 24 \302\243>e2\302\261;I9...\302\243e7 20 f6 \302\261;

20 fifl t Blasek-Kishnev, Gelsen- 19...Bc8 20 Sfl 20

\302\261) \302\243>xd5 exd5

kirchen 1991. 21 e6 fxe6 22 23f7+

f6 Bc8 {22...g6
15 fixd3 Wc4 +-; 22...gxf6 23 #h5+ *e7 24 #h4
The retreat 15...IT^ is aimed at Bg825 Axf6+ *e8 26#xh7+-} 23
nullifying White's attack by fifl *d8 24 fxg7 \302\243xg7 25 Axg7
shielding
the queen behind the rest of fig8 26 We5 fic6 27 fidf3 Ae8 28
Black'sforces: Ah6 Wc7 29 Wd4 \302\253T>6?! {29...a5 is

a) 16 \302\243e3 \302\243c5 17 &xc5 Wxc5 unclear) 30 Hi4+ *c8 31 Sf8Sxf8

18 f5 (18 *d2 0-0? {18...\302\243c6 19 32 fixf8 *d7 33 Af4 \302\243g6
34 Wf6
Scl 4} 19 \302\243>xd5! &b5 20 b4 *a7 fic8 35 Wg7+ 1-0 Mololkin-Pechen-
21 &e7+ *h8 22 fih3 b6 23 f5 kin, Volvograd 1993) 19...Hc8! 20
Wxe7 24 f6 Sfd8 25 Wc2 1-0 Ro- Sdl Ae7 21 f5!?b4 22 \302\243>xd5 exd5

govskoi-Kolomoitsev, Volgograd 23 f6 Ae6 24 fxe7 Wxe7 25 Bg3 g6

1989) 18...\302\243c6! (18...exf5 19\302\243>xd5 ?. Byrne and Mednisonly consider
\302\243b520 ito Wxe3 21 \302\243>c7+*e7 22 18 f5? b4 19 \302\243>d
1 \302\243b5winning but I
$M5+ *f8 23 Hxe3 g6 24 e6 =; believe there is significant room for
18...d4 19 Wcl {U.-Wxlrt 20
b4! improvement on White's play: 18
\302\243\\e4is unclear) 20 Sadl dxc3 21 f5! b4 19fxe6!fxe6 20 \302\243>xd5exd5

Sxd7 *xd7 22 Sxd7 *xd7 =) 19 21 e6 and now:

Wg4 0-0-0 20 fxe6 fxe6 21 &e2(21 a) 21...&b5 22 #h5+ g6 23
\302\243>a4!? Wa5 {21...ife7 22 &b6+ Wxd5 &c6 24 Scl Axd5 (24...Bc8
*c7 23 Wd4} 22 Scl *b8 23 \302\243>c5 25 Bxc6! WXC6 26 Wd7+ +-) 25
d4 =) 21...*b8 22 &d4 Sc8 23 h3 Bxc7 &e4 26 Bdd7! Bg8 27 e7
We7 24 Sf3 \302\243d7 25 \302\243>b3= Pirrot- \302\243g7 (27...\302\243h6 28 Af6! {intending
Miiller, Bundesliga 1989/90. Bd8+ and e8Vl+) 28...*f729eM+l
b) 16a4 g6 17f5 gxf5 18 Sxd5 30
*xe8 Se7+ +-) 28 &xg7 Hxg7
Ac6 19 a5 *c7 20Bd3Sg821Bg3 29 Sd8+ Sxd8 30 exd8l'+*xd8
Sxg3 22 hxg3 0-0-0 T Dyke-Henly, 3lHxg7+-.

New York 1989. b) 2l...\302\243c622Hcl 0-0-023 Sf3

16 b3 (23 H3d2!? *b7 24 Hdc2 d4 25
Wc7
17 Ab2 &c6 Sxc6 Wxc6 26 Sxc6 *xc6 27
A game Wallyn-Mednis, Cannes Wxa6+ *d5 28 *c4+ *e5 29 Wc7+
1992, saw another approach:17...b5 Ad6 30 Wxg7+ *xe6 31 Axd4
(17...Bc8 18f5!)18 Scl (18 Wf2 b4 Hhf8 32 g3 =; 24...Hd6 25 Ae5
60 Milner-Barry Gambit

fixe6 26 JLxcJ Sxe2 27 fixe2 *xc7 WM\342\200\224SM\342\200\224WtilxTSBk

48 m m&m
28 Sec2+-; 24...Hac8 25 Bxc6
W
m

Wxc6 26 Sxc6 Sxc6 27 e7 +-) mfm* ^\342\204\242

jmHW.,3^ *W\"L^^ ffl!W\342\200\236^

23...fld6
(23...*b8 24 Hf7 Ab5 25 iSAE m m
Wxb5+ +-; 23...*b7 24 Hf7 Ae7 25 \342\226\240 \342\226\240*\302\243!*\342\226\240

\302\243e5 Sd6 26 Axd6 Wxd6 27 fixc6! \342\226\240 ES M \342\226\240

*xc6 28Wxa6+ *c5 29 Wa7+ *c6
\342\226\240&\342\226\240&\342\226\240 \342\226\240
30 Bxe7 +-) 24 Wxa6+ Wbl (or
24...*b8 25 Ae5 Ab5 26 ffxf8+
m mmm
85BB tSBk SB W$&*&\\
Sxf8 27 *xd6 Hf 1+ 28 Sxf 1 Wxd6
29 Axd6+ +-; 24...*d8 25 Hf7 Ae7
26 Ae5 Ab7 27 Wxd6+ Axd6+ 28 \302\243>xf5)25...f6 26 e6 Wcl 27 e7 HHxtl
Hcxc7Axc7 29ffxc7 Aa6 {29...Aa8 28\302\243>xf5++-.

30 e7+ *e8 31 Hc8+ +-} 30fla7 If instead 23 \302\243)xf5, Black can

Ac8 31 &xg7 Hg8 32 Af6+ *e8 confuse the issue by 23...d4! 24
33 Sa8 +-) 25 Wxb7+ *xb7+ 26 Sxd4lfe6 which activates the light-
Sf7+ *a8 (26...*a6 27 Ad4; squared bishop.
26...*b827 Ae5) 27 e7 Axe7 28 23 _ g6
Sxe7 = is analysis by Lane and Ady. 24 *f4
18 Scl Hd8 Another direct move which
Black must be constantly on threatens Hi6 and fih3.
guard against the familiar theme of 24 - fife8

undermining d5: 18...\302\243.e7 19 f5! \302\261. 25 QxfS \302\24318

19 Wf2 Ae7 26 Ad4 fie*

20 &e2 0-0 The rook thwarts a future e6
21 &d4 which would release the bishop. On
White continues to manoeuvre 26...f6!? comes27 exf6 Se428
with great verve and preparesfor an \302\243>e7+ (281T2 Sde8 with counter-
attack based around the advance f5. play) 28...*f7 29 *f2 with a clear

21 ... Wd7 plus for White.

22 f5 ex(S(48) 27 Qh6+ &xh6
23 Sg3! There is nothing to be gained
The final phase attack
of the from 27...*g7 when 28 fifl seals
commences; the major pieces are Black's fate.
transferred to the kingside to storm the 28 Wxh6 fide8

monarch's citadel. Now 23...\302\243h4 29 Oil *c7

can be rejected in view of 24 2xg7+ 30 Bh3 15
*xg725 Wxh4 (intending Wf6+ and 31 exft WH(49)
 Milner-Barry Gambit 61

A classy finish is available after

49
31...Hel 32 Wxh7+! Wxh7 33 f7+
W
_*\342\226\240jnrpA Wxf7 34flh8#.
32 Wxh7+! 1-0
a mi

\342\226\240&\342\226\240 m ms.
&\342\226\240 m mm
3 Classical Variation

Modern practitioners of the Advance

have often adoptedthe positional 6

\302\243e2 to claim a slight advantage

without undue risk. It has been
incorporated into the repertoires of
such players as Bronstein, Kosten

and Nunn. The line has a reputation

for the middlegame to drift into

equality if White is not accurate.

Game 17
Nunn-Schmittdiel of dubious possibilities:
Dortmund 1991 a) 6...&ge7? 7 dxc5!fc7 (after
7...#xc5 8 b4 Wb6 9 b5 Keres
1 e4 e6 claimedthat White is much better) 8
2 d4 d5 \302\243>d4&xe5? (8...#xe5 9 0-0 9
\302\261)

3 e5 c5 &b5 Wxc5 10 Wd4 +- Euwe-Kra-

4 c3 \302\243k6 mer,Zaandam 1946.

5 fcD Wb6 b) 6...f6 7 0-0 fxe5 (7..JLd7\302\243a3)

6 &e2(50) 8 dxeS! g6 (8...&ge7 9 Ad3!? &g6
The bishopis developed on e2 in 10Oel &d7 11 We2 0-0-0 Lane-
\302\243

order to keep d4 over-protected.If Mitchell-Baker, London 1981) 9

left undisturbed, White intends a Oel &h6 10 &a3 \302\261
Mackenzie-

gradual build-up of forces which Gunsberg, Frankfurt 1887.

would benefit from the extra space c) 6...i.d7 7 0-0and now:

afforded by the Advance Variation cl) 7...Ec88dxc5&xc5 9Qbd2

6 ... cxd4 (9 b4 Af8 10 &a31 Antoshin-Ban-
The double-edged alternative nik, USSR 1955) 9...fc7 10&b3
6...\302\243ih6 is examined in Game 19, &b6 11 &f4 &ge7 12 Oel f5 13 h4
Kosten-Brunner.There area number 0-0 14 h5 Qd8 15 h6 &f7 16 hxg7
64 ClassicalVariation

*xg7 17 #d2 \302\243>g618 \302\243>bd4&xd4 8 ... \302\243kf5

19 cxd4 Wc2 20 Ad3 lfxd2 21 9 Gte4(51)

Axd2 a6 22 a4 Ac6 23 a5 fifc8 24 To deflect pressure off d4. Less
fia3 \302\243
Thipsay-Depasquale, Thcssa- convincing is 9 $fl when Black
lonikiOL 1988. can play:
c2) 7...0-0-0 8 \302\243>a3cxd4 9 cxd4 a) 9...&d7!? 10 \302\243ia4 Wa5 11
*b8 10 \302\243>c2fic8 11 Hbl \302\243tfi612 b4 &d2 #d8 12 \302\243f4f613 &d3! \302\243tfxd4

Ac7 13 Axh6 gxh6 14Wd2 Zlot-

\302\261 14 \302\243>xd4 \302\243ixd4 15 Hi5+ *e7 16
nik-Damsky, Moscow 1968. Ae3 Axa4 17 \302\243xd4 Ae8 18 Hi3
7 cxd4 \302\243>h6 with unclear play; Dunhaupt-Kha-
A transposition normally occurs sin.corr. 1975-77.
after 7...\302\243ige7 8 \302\243>c3. b) 9...&e7 10h4h5 11 g3 Ad7
However, White has an extra 12 \302\243a4#d8 13 Af4 g6 14 fiel Hc8
option available. Play may continue 8 = Hecht-Pietzsch, Germany 1964.
&a3!? (8...\302\243xa3 is no longer c) 9...h5 10 h4 &d7 11\302\243ia4fd8
possible) 8...\302\243>f5 9 \302\243>c2Ab4+ (9...h5 10 12 g3 &e7 13 \302\243f4Sc8 14 ficl \302\243>a5

0-0 Ad7 11 Ag5 Ae7 12 Axe7 15 \302\243>c50-0 16 b4 Axc5 17 dxc5

*xe7 13 1U2 a5 14 &d3 \302\243>cxd4 15 &c4 18*g2 b5 19 &d4 &xd4 20
\302\243>fxd4 \302\243>xd4 16 We3 +- P.Morris- #xd4 f6 21 flhel fxe5 22 Axe5
S.Morris, Dublin 1991)I0&fl \302\243e7 &xe5 23 Wxe5 Bf5 24 Wd4 Wf6 25
Ilh4(llg3&d7 12*g2h513h3\302\261 #xf6 gxf6 26 ficdl e5? 27&d3 +-
Klaman-Chistiakov, USSR 1949) Lane-Dighton, London 1981.
ll...f6 12 g4 \302\243ifxd4 (12\342\200\236.^h6 13 d) 9...\302\243tfxd4!? and now:
exf6 +-) 13 \302\243>cxd4 fxc5 14 &xc6 dl) 10 &e3 Wxb2 11 &xd5
bxc6 15 &xe5 0-0 16 f4 Ad6 17 #xe2+! 12#xe2 \302\243>xe2 13 \302\243>c7+

\302\243>c4Wc7 18 &xd6 #xd6 19 *g2 *d7 14 &xa8 &c3 15 Qd4 Ab4 16

1-0Bronstein-Borges,
USSR 1988. a4 &xd4 17 Axd4 b6 18Ac3 Aa6
Lesser known alternatives are: -+ Schuermans-Claesen, Belgian
a) 7...&b4+ 8 *fl!? Ad7 9 a3 Ch 1987.
Ae7 10 f6
\342\202\254k3 11 b4 fic8 12 &a4 d2) 10Qa4l'b41lAd2*e712
Wd8 13 h4 b6 14 fih3 *f8 15&f4 \302\261
\302\243g5 f6 13 exf6 gxf6 14 &xd4 fxg5
Diickstein-Lombard, Austria 1974. 15 Ah5+ *d8 16 ficl &xd4 17
b) 7...&d7 8\302\243>c3&h69a3!\302\243>f5 Wxd4 iLg7 and in Boey's opinion
10 Wd8
\302\243>a4 11 h4 \302\261
Hubner-Duck- Black is better.
stein, Clare Benedict 1972. 9 ... Wa5+

8 \302\243>c3 9...&b4+ 10 Ad2 Va5 transposes

The alternative 8 b3 is studied in to the text

the next game. 10 \302\243d2 \302\243b4

 Classical Variation 65

Other continuations make fewer

demands on Black's forces:
a) 15 Wa4 \302\243d7 (15...Wxa4 16
fixa4 \302\243d7 17 g4 \302\243tfe7 180-00-019

fifal fiab8 ?) 16 Wxb4 \302\243>xb4 17 0-0

\302\243)c2! 18 fiadl *e7 19 Sd2 &b4 20
Sal a5! % Dushak-Voronkov, corr.
1973.
b) 15 Sa4 Wxb2 16 <2M>5 0-0 17
0-0 \302\243d7 18 Sal &xe5! 19 Sbl
&xf3+ 20 gxf3 #xbl 21 #xbl
11 \302\243c3 b5 fiab8 22 Wal \302\243xb5 23 Axb5 Hxb5
Black has tried other moves here: and Black is better according to

a) ll...\302\243xc3+ 12 &xc3 1*6 Hutchings.

(12...WM is met by 13 a3!) 13 Ab5 15 ... \302\243d7

(the line 13\302\243>a4!? WaS+ 14 *f 1 is 16 \302\243xc6

unclear according to Kercs)13...0-0 Also worthy of interest is 16

14
(13...Ad7 &xc6 &xc6 15 Wd2 \302\261 #a4!?fxb2 17\302\243>xd5!?exd5 180-0

Gurtner-Jurkovic, Geneva 1991) 14 \302\243)fxd4 19 fifbl \302\243>f3+20 gxf3 #c3

\302\243xc6 #xb2 15 &a4 Wb4+ 16 *d2 21 Scl Wb4 22 \302\243xc6 #xa4 23
Wxd2+ 17 *xd2 bxc6 18 \302\243>c5! \302\261 Bxa4 jLxc6 24 fixc6 \302\261 Kupreichik-

Nimzowitsch-StShlberg, 1934. Ulybin, Moscow 1989.

b) ll...\302\243d7 12 a3! Axc3+ 13 16 ... \302\243xc6

\302\243ixc3 0-0 (13...h5 14 0-0 fic8 15 17 Wd2 (52)

Wd2 with a distinct plus for White;
Nimzowitsch-Spielmann, Stockholm

1920) 14 0-0 fiac8 15 b4 \302\261

Mokry-

Casper, DeCin 1978.

c) ll...a6!? 12g4ftfe7 13 0-0
h5 14 \302\243xb4 #xb4 15 a3 Wa5 16 h3
hg 17 hg &g6 18 b4 #d8 19 Wd2
\302\243>h420 Wf4 \302\261
Kupreichik-Seoyev,
Sukhumi 1973.
12 a3 \302\243xc3+

13 &xc3 b4
14 axb4 *xb4
15 Ab5 This position is critical for the
The best chance for success. future of the line. White can activate
66 ClassicalVariation

his rooks along the a- and c-filesand Now that the rooks have found
possiblyadvance his kingside pawns strong posts, the second stage of the
to keep Black busy on both flanks. long-term plan is instigated. The
Black has play against b2 and a fairly kingsidepawns begin an advance to
solid position. force the knight to retreat and create
17 ... \302\243b5 various attacking possibilities.
A device to temporarily prevent 24 ... \302\243>e7

White castling, and misguidedly 25 h4 Sfb8

encouraging White to exchange pieces Black is banking on the threat to
to steer the game towards a draw. b2 to curtail White's ambitions.
Completing developmentwith the 26 h5 Wd8

obvious 17...0-0 is a less committal 27 Wcl #f8

strategy: 28 g5!
a) 18 g4 \302\243>e719 0-0 a5 20 \302\243>el Despite the quiet nature of the
(20 h4!?) 20...f6 21 \302\243>c2H>6 22 f4 position, White is pursuing vigorous
fxeS 23 fxeS = Zankovich-Nedoche- action on the kingside to provoke
tov, Simferopol 1989. weaknesses.
b) 180-0Sfb819fiablandnow: 28 ... *h7
bl) 19...We720 flfel Sb7 21 29 Wf4 \302\243f5

&b5
\302\243>e2 22 &g3 &xg3 23 hxg3 \302\261 30 fic7 Wd8
Dunworth-Bus, Cappelle la Grande 31 Wcl
1991. The rookis maintained on the

b2) 19...&b520flfdl Ac4 21 g4 seventh rank and under the stifled

&h6 22 h3 Eb6 23 &g5 &b3 24 conditions Black is running out of useful
fidclSab825 Wd3 g6 26 We3 *g7 moves.
27 \302\243f3We7 28 Wf4 &g8 29 Sal \302\261 31 ... Sb3
Kamber-Borgstadt, Lugano 1989. 32 Sc8 Bxc8
18 &xb5 #xb5 33 Sxc8 WaS (53)
19 &a5 Wb6 34 Wc6!
20 0-0 0-0 This is the culmination of White's
21 Scl strategy. The c-filehas proved to be
Naturally, White activates his of the utmost importanceto infiltrate
king's rook in an attempt to control the heart of Black's camp, while the
the c-file. kingside pawns cover the monarch's
21 ... Sab8 escape squares.Thereis no time to

22 fic2 h6 take the knight: 34...flxf3 (34...\302\243>e7

23 &ac5 Sb7 35 We8 ftxc8 36 g6+) 35 &h8+!

24 g4 (certainly not 35 fe8?? fel+ -+)
 Classical Variation 67

35...*xh8 36 Wfe&+ *h7 37 g6+ P.Morris-Ryan, Dublin 1991.

fxg6 38 hxg6#. 8 ... \302\243K5

v\"\302\273 Wal+
\342\200\242\342\200\242\342\200\242 9 \302\243b2 \302\243b4+

35 *g2 &h4+ Also possible is 9...\302\243e7 10 0-0

36 $xh4 1-0 g4 (11 *hl
\302\243d7 11 0-0 12 \302\243d3 %
Lputian; 11 Ad3 g5 {U...&fxd4 12
Game 18 &xd4 &xd4 13 fg4 Ac5 14 #xg7
Galdunts-Naroditsky 0-0-0 with unclear play} 12 \302\243xf5

Moscow 1991 exfS 13 &c3 Ae6 14 a4 Wd8 with an

unclear game according to Hert-
1 e4 e6 neck) ll...\302\243lh4 12 &xh4 &xh4 13
2 d4 d5 &a3 0-0 14 f4 f6 15 *g2! fxe5 16
3 e5 c5 dxeS fif7! 17 Wd2 fiafS (Kuprei-
4 c3 \302\243>c6 chik-Hertneck, Debrecen 1992) 18
5 \302\243>f3 Wb6 gS Wb4 19 Wxb4 &xb4 20 &cl d4
6 Ae2 cxd4 21 &c4!&d5(21...h6 22&d2 \302\243>c6

7 cxd4 &h6 23 g6 fifS 24 \302\243d3 Ae8 25 &xf5

8 b3(54; Bxf5 26 &b5 Axg6 27 Qd6 \302\261;
White embarks on a plan to 21...&c6+ 22 *h3 Ag5 23 Ad2!
reinforce d4 at the cost of giving up the +-) 22 Axd5 exd5 23 \302\243>c2!Ab5 24

right to castle. fif3 Ae2 25 \302\243ixd4 Axf3+ 26 \302\243>f3

It is an error to seek a positional Hxf4 27 \302\243f4Sxf4 28 Bel \302\261.

treatment by doubling the h-pawns: Black chose to develop the

8 \302\243xh6? Wxb2 9 &bd2 gxh6 10 queen's bishop in the game Yudasin-
0-0 Ag7 (or even 10...&xd4! T) 11 Illescas, Le6n 1993: 9...&d7 10g4
&b3 Va3 and White has \302\243>fe7 11 \302\243>c3 \302\243>g6 12 fd2 f6
insufficient compensation for the pawn; (12...&b4 13 Scl! intending a3 and
68 Classical Variation

b4 12...h5
\302\261; 13 g5 with the aim 0-0 pawn storm when the rook is ideally
and 12...&e7
\302\243>a4-c5 \302\261; 13 Bel placed on hi. Black often takes
-
followed by 4&a4-c5 Yudasin) 13 \302\243ia4 advantage of the by ...f6 and
situation
(13 Ad3? fxe5 14 Axg6+ hxg6 15 then utilizing the f-file. This can lead
dxe5&e7 T) 13..\342\200\236\302\243b4!?
(l3...Ws6 to a direct attack on the king or the
14 #xa5! &xa5 15 \302\243k5\302\261;
13...1fc7 undermining of the protection given
14 Scl! fxe5! 15 &xe5 &gxe5 16 tod4.
dxe5 13..;\302\273d8
\302\261; 14 exf6 #xf6 15 10 ... 0-0
is
\302\243>c5 unclear) 14 &xb6 &xd2+ 15 This is Watson's recommendation
*xd2 axb6 16exf6gxf6 17 h4! h6! and is potentially the most

(17...&f4 18 &fl h5 \302\261;

17...e5 18 dangerousline available. Less
dxc5 &gxe5 19 &h2 intending f4 \302\261) confrontational
approaches are feasible:
18 h5 &f4 19 &fl Sg8 (19...e520 a) 10...\302\243e7 and now:
dxe5 Axg4 21 fih4 \302\243xf3 22 fixf4 al) 11 h4\302\243d7(ll...h5 12 Ad3
Axh5 23 Sxf6 20 fih4
\302\261) e5 21 dxeS intending 12
\302\243xf5 \302\261) \302\243>c3(12 g4
fixg4 22 Hh2 (22 exf6 Hxh4 23 &h6 13 figl f6 with unclear play)
&xh4 *f7 T) 22...f5 23 &d4 &xd4 12...&cxd4 13 &xd5 exd5 14&xd4
24 Axd4 25
\302\243>e6 &xb6?! (25 Ab2! &xd4 (14...&c5? 15 e6! Axd4
&c5 26 Ae2! \302\261)
25...fib4!=. {15...fxe616&xf5exf5 17#xd5\302\261}
10 *fl(5JJ 16 exd7+ *xd7 17 fibl Axb2 18
#xd5+ 15
\302\261) &xd4 (15 Wxd4!?)
15...&c5 16 &xc5 fxc5 17 ficl
Wa5 18 h5!? (18 &g4!? &e6 19
\302\243xe6 fxe6 {19...Wa6+ 20 We2
Wxe6 21 fih3 0-0 22 fihc3 =} 20
Hi5+ g6 21 Wg4 0-0 with unclear
play) 18...h6 19 \302\243g4 Ae6 20 flh3
0-0 (20...fxa2 21 f4!) 21 *gl =
Kosten-Lputian, Altensteig 1989.
a2) Hftc3Wd812g3f6l3*g2
fxe5 14 dxeS 0-0 15 ficl \302\243d7

(15...b6!? 16 &b5 Ab7 17 &bd4 \302\261)

The king serenely side-steps the 16 \302\243d3 (16 &b5 and &bd4 \302\261)
check to ensure the safety of d4. 16...1fe8 (16...g5?! 17 h3 \302\261)
17 \302\243>e2

White can solve with the problem of Wn 18 fifl Sad8 19 a3 g5 20 h3

activating the rook by playing h4 Ae8 (20...h5 21 b4 g4 22 hxg4 hxg4
followed by flh3. Another idea is g4, to 23 Etfi2 +-) 21 b4 a6 22 #d2 h6 23
push back the knight, followed by a Seel d4 24 &e4 d3 25 \302\243>cl&fd4
 Classical Variation 69

(Sveshnikov-Portisch, Biel IZ 1993) bl) 15 gxh6 flf7 16 &d3 e5 17

and now 26 #xd3! gives White the Wh5e4 18 \302\243e2\302\243e6(18...g6! + Bot-

advantage. terill) 19 \302\243>c3Axc3 20 Axc3 \302\243ixd4

b) !0...hS and now: 21 #e5 \302\243>f5!22 Ah5 Se7 23 \302\243g4

bl) 11 \302\243>c3Axc3 (ll...&xd4? and now Botterill-Ligterink, London
12 \302\243>a4+-) 12 &xc3 &d7 13 fd2 1978 was agreeddrawn, but Botter-
a5 (Kholmov-Petrosian, USSR Ch ill felt that 23...d4! 24 *el &f7 25
1949)14h4!=. Wxf5 e3! 26 f4 dxc3 27 fg5 ff6
b2) Ilh4&d7(ll...h5 12fibl!? would have left Black clearly
Ad7 13 b4 Sc8 = Lane-Bowden, better.

London 1981) 12 a3 &e7 13b4 a6 b2) 15&xf3&f516fig4.fi.d717

14 g3 0-0 15 *g2 f6!? 16 \302\243>c3! \302\243>c3! \302\243>cxd4 18 &xd5 1*5+ 19
&cxd4 17 &xd5 exd5 18 &xd4 *g2 \302\243>xf3 20 \302\243>c7Wc6! 21 Wxfl
fxe5 19 &f3 \302\261
Bigot-Watzl, corr. Wxcl intending ...\302\243c6 and ...\302\243Mi4+

1954-6. gives Black the edge according to

11 \302\243>c3 J.Watson.
It used to be assumed that the old
main line was unclear after 11 g4

Qh6 but exhaustive analysis

indicates that Black has a pleasant game.
For example:
a) 12 h3 Ad7 13 a3 Ae7 14 b4
f6! 15 exf6 Bxf6 and now:
al) 16&c3!?flafS 17 &a4 fc7
18 Scl?! (18 *g2!?) 18...fixf3!19
&xf3 Wf4 20 *g2 &xd4 21 &xd4
Axa4 22 #d3 Ac6 23 We3 Wf7 24
fifel eS! 25 b5 exd4 26 Wb3 d3 27
fie3 d4 28 #xf7+ *xf7 29 Bxe7+
*xe730 bxc6 bxc6 +\" Franke-Tref-

fler. New York 1975. 13 h4!

a2) 16 *g2 Baf8 17 &bd2 &f7 This is an improvement on the
18 b5 (18 fifli?) 18...&a519 a4 standard reference: 13 a3?!&e714
&g5! 20 Sfl &xf3 21 &xf3 \302\243k4 b4 fxe5 15 dxe5 Ad7 ? Sorokin-
22 \302\243cl &d6 ? Bonsch-Thormann, Sokolsky,USSR1951.
E.Gennany 1975. Rather than instantly trying to
b) 12figl f6!13exf6 fixf6 14 g5 contain Black on the queensidc,

(14 &c3!?) 14...Bxf3! and now: White signals aggressive intentions.

70 ClassicalVariation

13 ... fxe5 Game 19

14 dxe5 &e7 Kosten-Brunner
15 &d3 Altensteig 1989

White is combining the merits of

attack and containment Now the 1 e4 e6
bishop has more scope and g4 is a 2 d4 d5
real possibility. 3 e5 c5
15 ... h5 4 c3 \302\243>c6

16 Scl We8 5 GX3 Wb6

17 *gl Wf7 6 \302\243e2 &h6

Black has doubledon the f-file but This is a sly way to avoid the line
it is still difficult to conjure up coun- given in Game 17, Nunn-Schmittdiel
terplay. Another problem is by delaying the capture on d4.
to
responding White's increasing influence Instead of White's next move, the

on the queenside, with the only other option is 7 b3 cxd48cxd4

bothersome Qc5 difficult to prevent. Qtf5 which is featured in Game 18,
18 We2 g6 Galdunts-Naroditsky.
19 a3 We8 7 \302\243xh6

20 &h3 The most testing way to treat this

The long-term plan is working move-order.For the sake of doubled
extremely well. White is gradually h-pawns, Black counts on steering
closing down the queenside with a3 the gametowards relatively

intending b4, while the rook has unfamiliar

territory by castling swiftly and
emerged on the kingside. All this is followingup with ...f6.

designed to severely limit Black's 7 ... gxh6

opportunities by forcing cramped Black fell for a trap in the game
conditions. Survila-Skoblikov, Podolsk 1978,
20 ~. \302\243d7 after 7...#xb2? 8 \302\243e3! Wxal 9 Wc2
21 Qc5 Sb8 cxd4 10 \302\243ixd4 &xd4 11 \302\243xd4 Aa3

22 b4 \302\243d8 12 \302\243b5+ *d8 13 0-0 Wb2 14 Wa4

23 b5 \302\243a5 Ae7 15 fa5+ 1-0.
24 \302\243>d4 8 fd2 &&(57)
At the moment, the black knight It is difficult for Black to get by
is denying the rook access to g3 so it without following the plan laid out in

is logical to liquidate it the text. For example:

24 ... \302\243ixd4 a) 8...cxd4 9 cxd4 \302\243d7 10 0-0
25 \302\243xd4 Hf4 0-0-0 11 fcc3 Qa5 12flfcl *b8 13
26 Sg3 1.0 Wf4 \302\243e8 14 Ad3 fic8 IS Sc2 Wd8
 Classical Variation 71

&xd7 fixd7 19Ag4 Sd6 (19...\302\243tf4

20 fiael 2d6 21 g3 h5 22 Adl is

slightly better for White) 20 &xe6!
fifxe6 21 Axe6+ Sxe6 22 Wxd5
1T7 (22...&f4 23 Wxbl Axc3 24

Badl\302\261)23f4!fie7 24WO\302\261.

11 cxd4 Ad7
12 \302\243k2 f6

13 exf6 Hxf6
14 Ml (58)

16 Sacl &c4 17 &e2 &b6 18 58

Hxc8+ &xc8 19 &g3 &b6 20 \302\243fo5
B
\302\243>d721 &f6 &xf6 22 exf6+ fd6
23 &e5a624 g3fig8 25 Sc3 Sh8 26 ftHi
Wcl Wd8 27 &xa6! bxa6 28 Sb3+
*a8 29 &xf7! 1-0 Lukin-Geor-

gadze, Spartakiad 1967.

b) 8...\302\243d7 9 0-0 &g7 10 &a3 0-0
11 &c2cxd4 12cxd4 f6?! 13 \302\243d3

fxeS 14 &xe5 &xe5 IS dxeS #xb2 m mm

16 f4 fiac8 17 fiabl Wc3 18 We3 b6
19Qd4 Wc5 20 \302\243a6 Wc3 21 &d3 An energetic response to the
Wc5 22 g4 We7 23 Bf3 *h8 24 fie 1 situation. The aim is to dislodge the
fice8 25 Sh3 fig8 26*hl \302\243f827 black knight from control of eS, so

fig 1 Wb4 28 g5! \302\243c529 Oxh6 fig7 White can occupy the dominating
30 Wh3 fiee7 31 Axh7 Oxh732 g6 square and contain the backward e-

1-0 Sveshnikov-Filipenko, USSR pawn. If 14...a6 15a4 ensures b5.

1975. 14 ... fiaffi

9 0-0 0-0 15 b5 \302\243>e7

10 Qa3 cxd4 16 \302\243te5 Ae8

A natural reaction is 10...f6?! to 17 a4

undermine the The theme of expansionon the
centre, but in Ku-
preichik-Khuzman, Sverdlovsk 1987, queenside and maintaining the
it was shown to be flawed: 11 exf6 stronghold on e5alsofeatured in the

fixf6 12 dxc5! Wxc5 13 b4 Wf8 14 game Kupreichik-Lautier, Belgrade

Ad715
\302\243>c2 b5 \302\243>e7
(or 15...&a5 16 1988: 17 g3 h5 18 a4 \302\243tf5 19 a5

c4 16
\302\261) \302\243te5fid8 17 &d4 &g6 18 fc7 20 Bad Qd6 21 \302\243>e3#e7 22
72 Classical Variation

Wb2 h4 23 d3 hxg3 24 hxg3 \302\243te425

&xe4 dxe4 26 b6 axb6 27 #xb6
Wa3 28 &eg4 Hxf2 and now Byk-
hovsky supplies the following line to
demonstrate that White can win: 29
&xf2! #xg3+ 30 *hl Sf6 (or

30...flxf2 31 fixf2 #xf2 32 We6+

32
*h8 33fh3 +-) 31&fg4Hi3+
&h2+-.
17 ... OSS
Black has insufficient
for
compensation the exchange after Bykhov- rook swings across to the c-file
sky's suggestion 17...&g618&g4 revealing the hidden agenda. With
Sf4 19 g3 Hxd4 20 &xd4 #xd4 21 Black's pieces in disarray the time is
#xd4 Axd4. right to penetrate the enemy camp.
18 Eael *h8 28 ... \302\243g7

19 f4 Wd8 29 212 208

20 Ete3 \302\243>d6 30 \302\243>g2

21 g3 There is still need for caution: 30

White has managed to implement Sfc2? Exf4 31 gxf4 Axe5+ 32 Bg2
the short-term plan of securing eS Axd4-+.
and stunting the power of the 30 \342\200\236. &b
doubled rooks with f4 and g3. The next 31 2fc2 Wb6
stageis to increaseoperations on the 32 fic5 h5
kingside to force the black pieces 33 Wd2 Wd6

into a passive role. Still Black continues to put up

21 ... \302\243*4 stubborn resistance. The idea is
22 Vb4 Sg8 34...&xg235 *xg2 (the queen is

23 Q3g4 \302\243R now obliged to guard d4) 35...h4 to

24 H>2 815 undouble the pawns.
25 Ad3 34 Qh4 Ag4
White plays to eliminate Black's 35 Ec7 \302\24316

only genuinely active piece. 36 &g2 Bg7

25 ... \302\243h5 37 2xg7 &xg7
26 \302\243xe4 dxe4 38 We3 4.15

27 \302\243e3 Sf6 The loose e-pawn requires Black

28 Zcll (59) to take defensive measures.
A high-class quiet move. The 39 &h4 *g8?
 ClassicalVariation 73

An understandable mistake, as the 40 &x(5 exfS

the rook was obliged to guard 41 H>3+ *h8
against \302\243}f7+. 42 \302\243M7+ 1-0
4 Euwe Variation

The first prominent player to 6 \342\200\236. f6!?

recommend 5...J&.d7 was Max Euwe. It is Black takes the opportunity

to

now acceptedas oneofBlack's

main attack the pawn chain now that the e-

lines due to the flexibility available file has been blocked.

by retaining the options of ...f6, 7 0-0! (60)

...\302\243>ge7 and ...Wb6. The theory and

understanding of the positions that
arise have been influenced by such
players
as Mikhail Gurevich, Viktor
Korchnoi, Nigel Short and Predrag
Nikoltf. White has various
alternativesthat can gain the initiative with

the confrontation commencing in the

middlegame.

Game 20
Ivanchuk-Short
Novi Sad OL1990 In the game Wang-Galliamova,
Subotica worn XL 1991, White
1 c4 e6 managed to secure a slight pull after 7
2 d4 d5 exf6&xf68 0-0Ad6 9 Ae3 \302\243>g410

3 e5 c5 <ft.g5Wb6ll<&a3 0-012\302\243>b5.ft.b8

4 c3 <2k6 13 h3 \302\243tf6 14 dxc5 WxcS 15 Ae3

5 \302\253M3 iLd7 lfe7 16 c4a6 17Qc3#d618Bel
The starting point of the variation. Ac7 19 Wd2 fiad8 20 fiadl Ae8 21
6 Ae2 cxdSexdS22g3. However, Black's

This natural move has long been play can be improved upon and
White's most popular choice. The taking on f6 is considered harmless.
main alternatives 6 dxc5 and 6 a3are A poor alternative is 7 c4!? cxd4!
discussedlater in this chapter. 8 cxdS exdS9 exf6 \302\243>xf6 10 &xd4
76 Euwe Variation

JLc5 11\302\243>xc6?! (11 \302\243>b3?Axf2+ 12 \302\243ge7 10 ffd2 \302\243>g611 Ag3 Wb6 =)

*xf2 \302\243k$4+ -+) ll...Axc6 12 0-0 9 &xe5 &xe5 10dxe50-0-0 with an

0-0 13 \302\243kJ2H>6 14 Wb3 Hae8! IS unclear position according to

lfxb6 Axb6 16 Ad3 \302\243kg417 \302\243tf3 J.Watson.

Sxf3! 18gxf3\302\243>e5 19Ae2d4TKu- 8<\302\243)xe5 \302\243>xe5

preichik-Dolmatov, USSR 1980. 9dxeS JLc6l1(61)

7 ... fxeS

Not 7...Vb6 8 dxc5 \302\243xc5 9 b4

61 *\302\273*
Ae7 10 Af4 \302\253fc7? 11 exf6 \302\253fxf4 12
W
fxg7 Af6 13 g3 lfd6 14 gxh8\302\253(
Axh8 15 &g5 +- Andruet-Tal, \342\226\240UUB \342\226\240

Marseille 1989. An interesting try is to A

put pressure on e5 with 7...1Kc7:

a) 8 Af4 &gc7 and now:
al) 9 \302\243d3 f5 10 Sel c4 11 \302\243c2
\302\243g6
12 Ag3 Ac7 13 h4 0-014 b3 b5
15 \302\243bd2 lfd8 16 h5 \302\243tfi817 a4 cxb3
18 &xb3 b4 19 \302\243c5 bxc3 20 Sa3
JLxcS 21 dxc5 IfaS 22#d3 \302\243>b423 The idea is to strengthen the

lfxc3 Sfc8 V2-V2 Galdunts-Koma- centre in preparation for castling queen-

rov, USSR 1991. side.
a2) 9 \302\243g3&f5 10 exf6 &xg3 11 The game Glek-Yurtaev, USSR

f7+! (11 fxg3 gxf6 12 \302\256h40-0-0! T 1987 featured a different approach:

J.Watson) 12fxg3*g8 13
ll...*xf7 9...\302\243>e7!? 10 Ag5 \302\253fc711 Ah5+ g6
dxcS \302\243xc5+ 14 *hl Sf8 IS c4 d4 12\302\243f6Bg8 13^.g4^.g7(13...0-0-0
16a3 Ae7 17 \302\243>bd2 g6 18 b4 e5 19 14 Qd2 14
\302\261) Sel *f7 15 c4! d4
c5 *g7 20 Ad3 He8 21 lfe2 a6 22 (15...Axf616exf6*xf6 17Qc34)
h3 Shf8 23 g4 Ae6 24 \302\243e4 \302\243b8 16\302\253M2Ac617 b4! b618 b5 Ab719
25 Sacl \302\243d8 26 \302\243c4 Axc4 27 Af3\302\261.

lfxc4 fif4 28 Seel \302\243>d729 g3 Bf7 In recent times, Black has strived
30 &xd4! +- Prifi-Dimitrov, France to take advantage of the loose e-
1990. pawn by 9...tfc7, but with only
a3) 9 \302\243>a3!? a6 10 Ag3 \302\253M511 limited success:

exf6 &xg3 12 f7+ *xf7 13 fxg3 a) 10 c4 and now:

14
<\302\261>e8 c4 cxd4 15 cxd5 exd5 16 al) 10...#xe511 \302\243h5+! g6 12

Ad3 Ae7 17 &c2 *d8 \302\261

Bastian- \302\243f30-0-0 (12...d4 13 &xb7 Sb8 14
Lobron, Bundesliga 1990. Af3 Ag7 13 Bel
\302\261) \302\253fd6(I3...\302\253d4

b) 8 Sel fxe5 (8...0-0-0!? 9 Af4 14 lfxd4 cxd4 15 cxd5 exd516Af4!

 Euwe Variation 77

13...Wf5
\302\261; 14Qc3!d4 15 Vb3.ic6 10 Ad3
16 Axc6 bxc6 17&e4 \302\261)14 \302\243>c3! Now 11 #h5+ is White's threat.

dxc4 (14...d4? 15 H>6

\302\243>e4 16 b4! The game Sax-Speelman, Hastings
wins) 15 \302\253fe2\302\243if6(15...\302\243g7!? 16 1990/91,continued 10 c4!?\302\243>e711
Wxc4! 16
\302\261) Wxc4 \302\243e717 Af4 lfd4 4g4 lfd7 12 Qc3 dxc4 13lfe2 \302\243>f5
(17...Wb6 18 b4! \302\253xb4 19 Habl! 14 lfxc4 Qd4 15 a4 h5 16Ah3 1T7
+-; 17...Wa6! 18 #xa6 bxa6 19b4 17 f4 Sd8 18 Sf2 with equality.
c4 gives White an edge) 18 \302\243fo5!! 10 ... Ifd7
\302\243xb5 19 Axb7+ 1-0 Romanishin- 11 Ag5

Ivanchuk, Irkutsk 1986. A necessary move if White wants

a2) 11 Af4 \302\243>e712 \302\243kJ2
10...d4 to maintain the pressure by
4tif5 13 i.d3 Ae7 14 \302\243>e40-0 15 queenside
preventing castling. On 1 l..JLe7
#g4 *h8 16 Wh3 lfd8 17 4.d2 Ae8 12 Wh5+ g6? 13Axg6+ wins.
18 g4 \302\243>h419 f4 Ag6 20 \302\243elh6 21 11 ... \302\243>h6

Axh4 Axh4 22 f5 Af7 23 fxe6 1-0 12 \302\243>d2 \302\243f7

Zaitsev-Tarjan, Quito 1977. 13 Ah4 \302\243e7

b) 10 f4 and now: If the pawn is taken, then White

bl) I0...\302\243>e7 11&d2g612\302\243>f3 exploits the open e-file: I3...&xe5?!
4.g7 13 \302\253(el 0-0 14 WM \302\243>f515 14Wh5+ \302\243tf715 flfel Ae7 16 \302\243>f3

Wh3 Wb6 16 g4 ^e7 17c4 Sae8 18 Axh4 17 ffxh4 lfe7 18 lfg4 0-0 19
b3 Qc6 19 Ad3 Se7 20 with
\302\243>g5 a Sxe6\302\261.

small plus for White; Rozentalis- 14 Axe7 lfxe7

Pahtz, Germany 1991. 15 f4 0-0-0
b2) 10...0-0-0 11 Ae3 \302\243>e7 12 16 We2

\302\243>a3?! g5 13 Axb5
\302\243M>5 14 Axb5 White is busy centralizing his
\302\243f5 15 Ad2 c4 16 Aa4 Ac5+ 17 pieces to have greater influence, and
*hl g4 18 Ac2 &g3+! 19 hxg3 preparing f5 in an attempt to secure a
lfg7 20 f5 Wg6! 0-1 passed pawn.
Becker-Bruckner,
Bundesliga 1985/86. 16 ... *b8
c) 10 Af4 \302\243>e711 \302\243kJ20-0-0 12 17 fiael g6
\302\243f3h6 13 h4 g5 14
hxg5 \302\243>g615 18 a3
4g3 Ae7 16 Ad3 fidg8 17c4 dxc4 Now White embarks on a task to
18 Axc4 hxg5 19 Wb3 20
\302\243>f4 Hfd 1 disturb Black's pawn formation.The
Sg6 21 Axf4 gxf4 22 a4 Shg8 23 idea is b4 followed by a future a4,
*f 1 *b8 24 a5 \302\243c625 a6 Hxg2 26 while ...c4would give up control of
4xe6 Ah4 27 Sd2 Axf3 28 \302\243xg8 the d4 square.
Bgl+0-1 Kholmov-Naumkin, USSR 18 ... c4

1983. 19 Ac2 Wc5+

78 Euwe Variation

20 Wf2 d4! . c3!

2\302\260 ..h4
(2\302\260. 30 &e4 intending
Black must not allow White to *f?-g4-g51 30 K\\c3 Sxc3 31 \302\243xe6

consolidate with \302\243i3.25 ; knight on \302\243xj3and Cebalo evaluates the

d4 would be strong. ' position as unclear.

21 4e4 \302\243h6 30 g4 hxg4

22 cxd4 Wxd4 31 hxg4 \302\243g7

23 \302\243tf3 \302\253rf2+ If Jt...&h6 (31...\302\243e7 32 Sd6 \302\261)

24 Hxf2 Zc$ (62) 32 Shi! (not 32 *g3? c3 33 bxc3

Sxc3+ 34 *h4 UhS -f) 32...\302\243>xg4+

33 \302\243f3.White wins a piece.

32 Shi! c3
33 bxc3 IXxc3

34 Sh7 S3c7
The kni$tu
is trapped after
3-...2Sc7 35 SdS+ *b7 36Sg8+-
35 Zh6 Sf8

36 **3 a5
Trying
to create sufficient coun-
terplay
is a forlorn effort: 36...flc3+
3\" Sd3 Z\\d}+ 38 *xd3 Sxf4 39
The ending offers Wfciie Sxg6+-.
reasonable
prospects since his forces enjoy 37 2xg6 flh8

&xe6
greater harmony and be holds the 38 \302\243xe6

initiative. Black is relying on his 39 Zxe6 Hc3+

queenside pawn majority

to pose
On 39..-Zh3+ 40 *e4 Hxa3 41

problems. 2b6+ Sb: 42 2xb7+ *xb7 43 e6

Not 24...Axe4?! 25 Ixe4 Sdl+ White wins.

26 Hfl Sxfl-f- 27 *xfl ZcS 28 3g5! 40 \302\253\302\2534 Sxa3

when White win a 41 2)6+ 1-0

must pawn.
25 4xc6 iic6
26 Bd2 &S Game 21
27
&g5 hi An*ad-M.Gurevich
28 *f2 Ihc8 Mjnila IZ1990
29 h3 bS?!
With White poised to push bark 1 <4 e6

the take another 2 d4 d5

knight and step
nearer a 3 *5 c5
passedpawn, u would be
better to invite complications:
4 c3 \302\243>c6
 Euwe Variation 79

5 \342\202\254M3 \302\243d7

6 Ae2 Qge7
If 6...JXc8, play can transposeto
the note to Black's ninth move after
7 0-0 cxd4 8 cxd4 &ge79 &a3 (9

Qc3!?) 9...\302\243>f5 10 &c2 !T>6 (or

10...^.e7 11 g4.'? &h4 12 \302\243>xh4
i.xh4 13 f4 \302\243
Torre-Gausel, Manila

OL1992) 11 g4. In the game Bastian-

Korchnoi, Baden-Baden 1981, an
independent approach was employed:
7...&ge7 8 dxc5! &g6 9Ae3Qcxe5 a) 9...ffa5+10 \302\243d2Wb6114c3

10\302\243>xe5&xe5 11 b4 Ae7 12 f4 Qc6 \302\243e7 12 0-0 a5 13 a4! (13 \302\243>e3g6 14

(12...\302\243>g6 13 &12 b6 14 &b3 \302\261)

13 #d2 h5 15 g3 Sc8 16Sfdl \302\243>b417
\302\243kJ2Af6 14 Bel 0-0 (14...d4?! IS a3 *f8 18 \302\243>xf5 exf5 19 h4 with
cxd4 \302\253kd4 16 <&e4 15
\302\243) \302\253fe7
\302\243>f3 unclear play; Lein-Dizdar,Berlin
16 Wd2 Scd8 17 \302\243d4 ^.e7 18 Ve3 1987)13...0-014 <&a3 f6 15 exf6
f619Ad3Bf7 20acel\302\243. Hxf6 16 \302\243>b5Saf8 17 Wd2 \302\243kJ618

7 Qa3 Bad \302\243>e4 19 We3 &.& 20 \302\243kJ2

A standard idea to manoeuvre the \302\243>xc3 21 bxc3 e5 22 Sbl exd4 23

knight to c2 where it can reinforce \302\243xd4 lfa7 24 JLD \302\243f725 Sb5 \302\243c5

d4. 26 <&2b3 Se8 27 &x\302\2515* Bxc6 28

In the game Pri6-Kindermann, lfd2 Sd8 29 Sbl b6 30 &xc5bxc5

Uzes 1990, White tried the 31 Sb7 lfa6 32 lfg5 lcc8 33 Blb6
7
adventurous h4!? cxd4?.\302\273 (7...Bc8 8 <&a3 #d3 34 Bxf7! *xf7 35 Bb7+ *e6
cxd4 9 cxd4 \302\243tf510 &c2 &b4 =) 8 36 Be7+ *d6 37ffe5+ 1-0Rozen-
cxd4 &f5 9 g4!<&h6 10 Axh6 gxh6 talis-King, Mondorf 1991.
11 g5! Wb6 12 lfd2 hxgS13hxg5 b) 9...Wb6l00-0andnow:
&a5 14 Qc3 0-0-0 15 g6 fxg6 16 bl) 10...a511 g4^fe7 12 \302\243>h4

&g5 and achieved an advantage. (12 \302\243>felh5 13 gxh5 &f5 14 Ae3 f6

The main alternative 7 0-0is 15 Ad3 0-0-0 16 4xf5 exf5 17exf6

examined later in this chapter. {17 \302\243kJ3!? &.<& 18 Wf3 Bxh5 19
7 ... cxd4 exf6 gxf6 20 Af4 \302\243}
17...Ae8! 18 h6

8 cxd4 &f5 18 gxf6 19 \302\253fd2 = Sveshnikov-

9 0*2(63) \302\243>M Razuvaev, Moscow 1985) 12...&g6
The most popular continuation, 13\302\243g2Ae7 14 f4 0-0 15 Ae3 f5 16
although other paths have been exf6 Sxf6 17 h4 (17 Ad3?! Ad6 18

investigated:
h4 Baf8 19 g5 &6f7 20 \302\243xg6 hxg6
50 Euwe Variation

21 h5 gxh5 22 Hi5 g6!23\302\253fxg6+ Ae7 28 #g4 *f7 29 Ag5 Wh3 30

Sg7 24 lfd3 25
\302\243>e7 Wb3 lfxb3! 26 \302\243xf5 exf5 31 e6+ *e8 32 ff4
axb3 b6 27 Ad2 \302\243>f528 Sf3 Sh7 Axg5 33 lfxg5 Sh6 34 W(6 1-0
29 flafl?! Ab5 30 Bel *f7 with a Sveshnikov-Skalkotas, Athens 1983.
clear plus for Black; Benjamin- b32) 12 4&h4!?\302\243>b4 13 \302\243>xb4
Gulko, USA Ch 1992) 17...Ad6 18 lfxb4 14 f4 Qc6 (or 14...Ab5 15
h5 \302\243>ge7 19 Ad3 Hc8 20 lfe2 Hff8 lfd2 Wa416 b3 lfa617 AxbS WxbS
21 fth4 h6 (2l...\302\243>b4 22 \302\243xb4 18 f5 \302\243>c619 \302\243b2 \302\261
Sveshnikov-

lfxb4 23 Sadl 22
\302\261) gS hxgS 23 Gleizerov, Russia 1992) 15 \302\243e3

fxg5 24
\302\253M5 h.6!? &ce7 (24...&xh4? Ae7 16 f6
\302\243>g2 17 a3 \302\253xb2 18 Sbl
25 Wh5 g6 26 Axg6 27
\302\243>e7 Af7+ lfa3 19 Sb7 \302\243kJ820 Sd7 *d7 21
*h8 28 #xh4 \302\243kf529 Wh5 \302\261)
25 \302\243b5*c7! 22 Wbl \302\243b4! 23 f5 *b6
Wb5 Ag3? 26 g6! Axh4 27 hxg7 24 \302\243d7 &c3 (Sveshnikov-Ulybin,
28
*xg7 Wh7+ *f6 29 #xh4+ *g7 Russia 1992) 25 fxe6 Se3 26e7fib3
30 1117+ *f6 31 Ah6 1-0 Svesh- 27 Wh7 Ae7 28 lfh8 \302\253to429 #xg7
nikov-Gulko, USSR Ch 1985. \302\253(d430*hl\302\253(d3 3lBgl\302\261.
b2) 10...&a5 11 g4! \302\243>e7 (or 10 &xb4
U...Eih6?! 12 h3 \302\261)
12 fcfel Ab5 The main alternatives 10 &e3 and
13 42M3 h5 14 gxh5 \302\243>f515 Ae3 10 0-0 are examined later in the
&c4 16 a4 &cxe3 17 fxe3 Ac4 18 chapter.
\302\243>f4!4b3 19 Ab5+ *d8 20 ffe2 10 ... &xb4+
Axc2 21a5Wc7 22 Sfcl Sc8 23 a6 11 4d2 IfaS
b6 24 Aa4 Wc4! (24...\302\253fe7 25 Axc2 Anand suggests the alternative
lfgS+ 26 *hl gives White an edge) H...Wb612^.xb4(12a3^.xd2+13
25 Hxc2 Wxe2 (Sveshnikov-Dolma- lfxd2 \302\243b5 =) 12...1fxb4+ 13 \302\253d2

tov, USSR 1988) 26 Sxe2 \302\243e7 27 Hfxd2+ with equal chances. For
Sg2! flc4 28 *f2 Ah4+ 29 *e2 example:
14 *xd2 &e7 15 Sacl Qc6
Hb4 30*d3\302\261 16 b4 a6 17 a3 f6 V2-V2 Blasek-

b3) 10...&C8 11 g4 \302\243>fe7 and Ztiger, Gelsenkirchen 1991.

now: 12 a3!
b31) 12\302\243>felh5l3gxh5\302\243>f514 Thisis an improvement on Sieiro-
Ae3 \302\243>b4(14...1fxb2 IS Sbl \302\253xa2 M.Gurevich, Havana 1986, when
16 Hxb7 15
\302\261) \302\243>xb4 Axb4 16 \302\243kJ3 Black equalized after 12 JLxM
Ab5 17 a4 Ac4 (not 17...\302\243.xd3? 18 WxM+ 13 Wd2 lfxd2+ 14 *xd2
Axd3 \302\243>xd4 19 a5 +-) 18 a5 Wb5 19 15
\342\202\254ke7! She 1 f6! 16Bc5*d8.
b3 4xd3 20 Axd3 #d7 21a6 b6 22 12 ... \302\243xd2+

*hl Sc323Bel Bxcl 24 Axel g6 13 \302\253(xd2 \302\253(xd2+

25 hxg6 fxg6 26 Sgl Wh7 27 Sg2 14 *xd2 16(64)

 Euwe Variation 81

22 Sfl Ab5
23 15?!
The simple23 Eel isgood while

23 exf6 gxf6 24 Bel 8g8! allows

Black back into the game.

23 ... h5?!
A more precise method is
necessary: 23...\302\243xd3! 24 *xd3 h5 25
&g6 Hh6 26 &f4 hxg4 27 &xe6+
*e8 27 &xg7+ *f7 when Black has
at least equality.
15 Sacl 24 &g6 \302\243kxg6

The basis of White's game is to 25 exf6! gxf6

make the most of the extra space 26 fxg6 &el(65)
availableto manoeuvre the pieces and The line 26...Axd327*xd3 *e7
force Black into a cramped position. (27...hxg4 28 Bxf6 *e7 29 g7 Sg8
15 ... \302\243ie7 30 Bg6)28g5 fxg5 29 Bf7+ leaves
16 b4 *d8 White with a clear advantage.
If 16...\302\243>c6 17 b5!? \302\243ia518 *c3
a6 19 a4 intending *b4 gives White
excellent prospects.
17 \302\243.d3 Hc8

18 Hxc8+ \302\243tacc8

19 g4 h6?!
This is not the way to defend
against the potential kingside pawn
advance, especially when g6 is made
vacant for a knight to occupy.

A more commendable solution is

suggestedby Anand: 19...&b6! 20
b5 (20 exf6 gxf6 21 g5 \302\243>c4+ 22 27 g5 15

kxcA dxc4 23 gxf6 \302\243c6 with 28 &xb5 axb5

unclear play) 20...*e7 21 Sell? when 29 Bel *d6

White has a smalledge. 30 *e3
20 \302\243>h4 \302\243>e7 The passed g-pawns provide the
21 f4 a6 cessary distraction to allow the
On 21...fxeS 22 dxeS!maintains lite king to advance
the initiative. 30 \342\200\242\342\200\242\342\200\242
Sg8
82 Euwe Variation

31 *f4 b6
32 Sc3 Hxg6

33 Sh3 Hg8
34 Hxh5 Sc8
35 g6 Sc4
36 Sg5! Bxd4+
37 *e3 He4+
38 *f2 1-0

Game22
Sax-Brenninkmeijer
Wijk aan Zee 1992 as it
pawns is agreeable bolsters the

d-pawn and opens up the f-file.

1 e4 e6 10 ... \302\243xe3

2 d4 d5 11 fxe3
3 eS c5 Stean states that 11 \302\243xe3 Sc8 12
4 c3 &c6 0-0 &c2 offers a level game.
5 \302\243>f3 Ad7 11 ... 4e7
6 Ae2 Qge7 12 0-0
7 Qa3 QfS A new idea which has revived
The unusual 7...&g6, which interest in the set-up. This differs from
Larsen originally suggested, is the game Spassky-Korchnoi,
occasionally tested: Belgrade C (18) 1978 which catapulted
a) 8 Qc2 \302\243e7 9 0-0 0-0 10 Bel the line into prominence: 12 a3 &c6
Wc7 11 \302\243d3!? c4 12 \302\243xg6 hxg6 13 13 b4 a6 14Sbl &a7 15a4 &c6 16

Ag5 h6 14 \302\243xe7 \302\243>xe7 15 \302\243k$3= \302\243d2 a5 17 b5 \302\243>b418 0-0 0-0 19

Zude-Kishnev, Munich 1992. Ifel *h8 20 ffg3 f6 21 Sbcl f5 22

b) 8 h4!? i.e7 9 g3 (9 h5!7) h4Sc823h5Sxcl 24Sxcl Eta225

9...cxd4 10 cxd4 0-0 11 h5 fth8 12 Hal\302\243>b4 26Wh3=.

&c2f6!13 exf6 \302\243xf6 14 b3 ^kf7 15 12 ... 0-0

Ab2 lfa5+ (de la Villa Garcia-Kor- 13 4d2 1T)6?!
chnoi, Pamplona 1990) 16 *f 1 with Thequeen makes little impression
unclear play. here because the usual pressure on
8 &c2 cxd4 b2, which restrains the development
9 cxd4 \302\243ib4 of the cl bishop, is absent
10 2*3(66) Brenninkmeijer has put forward
The idea is to challenge the 13...a5!? as an alternative, with

knight, while the prospect of doubled unclear play.

 Euwe Variation 83

14 a3 Qc6 The only way to avoid instant

15 b4! calamity: 24...\302\243>h4 (24...&16 25 Aa3
White has gained space by and \302\243>e5+-) 25 \302\243>xh4 Axh4 26

employing a typical pawn structure Ah7+*h8 27Bn+-.

while pushing back the knight 25 Wxcl \302\243d6

15 ... fS 26 &e5 Sc8

Another approach is 15...a6, 27 Wbl 4e8
intending ...Qa7 followed by ..JLb5 Now the game couldhave been
in order to exchange the light- finished off in style after 28 h4!
squared bishop. intending 29 g5 hxg5 30 hxg5 Axg5
16 exf6 \302\243xf6 31 Hf8+ IfxfS 32 \302\243h7+ *h8 33
17 Ad3 \302\243>e7 Hxf8#.
18 H>1! h6?! 28 g5 hxg5
It is a better ideato play 18...g6 in 29 Ah7+

an effort to blunt the effectiveness of White to lose his way

is beginning
the bl-h7 diagonal. as 29 &g4 would quickly secure the
19 a4 Qf5 win.

20 b5 aS(67) 29 ... *h8

30 SO g4
31 \302\243xg4 \302\243h5
67 m
^^^ WfWSr m
^Myffv mm,^^^
WIWIW WWW*
32 Bg3
W
WkW&M M clear cut is the ending that
Less
H WkkWk H can be forced: 32 &xf6 gxf6 33 Sh3
\302\273ABAH*| #xh7 34 lfxh7+ *xh7 35 Bxh5+
AH \302\24711 *g6.
32 ... Ah4

33 Sg2 Ag5
\342\226\240 B HAgg
34 Ag6 \302\243xg4

35 Sxg4 Axe3+
36 *g2 eS
21 Acl! 37 Wei fcc4

A neat way to introduce the 38 an Wt6(68)

queen's rook into play via a2-f2 39 %3?
while adding the option of Aa3. In time-trouble White misses a
21 ... Sfc8 superb opportunity to demolish his
22 Sa2 lfd8 opponent by 391114+ Ah6 40 ffxh6+!
23 Saf2 #e7 gxh6 41Bh7+ *g8 42Af5+ +-.
24 g4 Bxcl 39 ... Ah6
84 Euwe Variation

1 e4 e6
2 d4 d5
3 e5 c5
4 c3 &c6
5 \302\253M3 Ad7
6 Ae2 &ge7
7 \302\243>a3 cxd4
8 cxd4 \302\243rf5

9 \302\243>c2 &b4

10 0-0(69)

40 Hh4 fte3+ vim WkJmWt W&

69
41 *f2 *g8 B
42 Hf3?! BUHAHlSH

Brenninkmeijer shows how White \342\226\240 BtiSB \342\226\240

can still make progress: 42 Sxh6! \342\226\240 Mimm

&g4+
43 *g2 &xh6 (the other mS m m
capture is no better: 43...gxh6 44 Af5! Wm mm IMS^-JlMS
Hc2+45 *h3 #xf746#g4+ *f8
ABQBABAE!
47 Axc2 mi+ 48 1^2 +-) 44
(WWW ^^\342\204\242
#g4 46 Wxg4
WWWS \"\302\273^
bWS\302\273 W^^W
Hxg7+ *f8 45 Hxb7
&xg4 47 Hf7+ *g8 48 b6 +-.
42 ... e4 Sveshnikov has pioneered this
43 Iff4?! Hc2+ course of action.The ideais that the

44 *xe3 *e7?! defence of d4 can still be adequately

Black would actually have the maintained despite allowing Black
better chances upon 44...Hc3+ 45 to fulfil the plan of exchanging on
*f2 Hxg346 Af7+ WxH 47 Hxf7 c2.
Ae3+48*xg3*xf7?. 10 ... \302\243\302\253c2

45 Af7+ #xf7 11 #xc2 hS!?

46 Sxh6 Hc3+ Black is concerned about the

47 *f2 Sxg3 prospect of a future g4 while even

48 flxf7 *xf7 harbouring ambitions of a minor
49 Hd6 Va-Vi pawn storm The policy of
with ...g5.
direct action against d4 by U...#b6
Game 23 is more logical although it can be
Sveshnikov-Dreev easily contained. On 12 Wd3 play
St. Petersburg 1993 might continue:
 Euwe Variation 85

a) 12...a613Ad2h5 14a4a5 15 squares: 15 #b3 exf5 16 #xd5 Ae6

fifdl Ae7 16 h3 fic8 17 Ac3! h4 18 17#a5 #xa5 18 Axa5 b6 19 Ad2
#d2 fia8 19fidbl \302\243b4 20 \302\243b5 JLdS 20 fifcl *d7 21 \302\243>ela5! 22
Axb5 21 Axb4 \302\243d7 22 \302\243c5 Wd8 \302\243>c2g5 23 \302\243>e3*e6 24 a3 f4?!
23 b4 b6 24 Ad6 f6 25 ficl Ha7 26 (24...h4 is unclear)25 &xd5*xd5
b5 &xd6 27 exd6g5 28 Ha3 0-0 29 26h4 g4 27 Axf4 Axh4 28 a4 with
fiac3 Ae8 30 fic7 Hf7 31 Hc8 #d7 an edge for White; Yagupov-Dreev,
32 filc6 Hf8 33 #c2 Ah5 34 fi8c7 Rostov-on-Don 1993.
Hxc7 35 fixc7 1-0 Sveshnikov-Zlot-
nik, Moscow 1991.

b) 12...Ae7 13 a4 0-0 14a5 #c7

15 Ad2 a6 16 fifcl Ac6 17 #b3 \302\261
Sveshnikov-Nikolaev, Sibenik 1990.
c) 12...Hc8 13 Ad2 Ab4! (or
14g4!
13...&e7 with a clear plus for
White) 14 Af4?! (14 Axb4 #xb4

15 a3 #b6 4) 14...a6 15 a4 &e7 16

h4 Aa5 17 fifcl fixcl 18Axel h6
(V2-V2 Sveshnikov-Dreev, Rostov-
on-Don 1993) 19 b3 0-020Ab2 =.

12 Ad2 Ae7 15 Ag5!

13 Ad3 This is the point of White's play.
On 13 H)3?!, 13...g5!poses Black cannot castle without
some problems due to the threat of allowinga strong to be posted
knight on

...g4. g5, while grabbing the d-pawn

13 ... Wb6 invites the white rooks to seize the
The situation has changed to the central files.

extent where the standard attack on 15 ... Axg5

d4 is no longerfeasible. Sveshnikov 16 &xg5 #xd4
suggests that 13...g5 14 Axf5 exf5 The quieter 16...0-0 17 #d2
15 Hj3 is unclear, although the leaves White in a commanding

kingside pawn rush should fail position.

without significant support from the 17 fifdl fh4

major pieces. It would appear that 17...#04

14 Axf5 exfS(70) defending d5 and offering the

An enterprising idea is 14...fic8 exchange of queens is Black's
which seeks counter-play on the salvation but it fails to 18 Wxc4 dxc4 19
basis of the bishop exploiting the light \302\243>xf7! *xf7 20 Hxd7+ *e6 21
86 Euwe Variation

fiadl If
\302\261. 17...Wb6 18 SxdS Ae6 30 #d8+ *g7
19 Hd6 \302\261. 31 fh8+!
18 Wd2! #c4 An unpleasant surprise for Black
19 flacl Wb5 which brings the game to an abrupt
20 a4 finish.
White spends some time 31 ... *xh8
the
molesting queen in order to take on dS 32 \302\243fcf7+ *g7
without
permitting an exchange of 33 &xe5 *f6
queens. 34 f4 g5
20 ... \302\253T>3 35 *f2 gxf4

21 Hc3 Wb6 36 \302\243kd3 b5

22 #xd5 0-0 37 \302\243>xf4 h4

23 a5 38 *e3 *e5
Not23tfxd7?Had8-+. 39 &g6+ 1-0
23 ... Wxb2 (71)
Game24
Hort-Tukmakov
Bern 1992

1 e4 e6
2 d4 d5
3 e5 c5
4 c3 \302\243>c6

5 \302\243kf3 Ad7

6 Ae2 \302\243>ge7

7 0-0
A standard procedure which is the
24 Wf3! g6 latest fashion. The intention is to

Now the bishopleavesthe board, relieve the pressure on d4 by

but there is no escape after 24...fifd8 undermining the knight when it occupies
25 Vxh5 #xc3 26 \302\253fxf7+ *h8 27 f5.
#h5+ *g8 28 Wh7+ *f8 29 Wh8+ 7 ... cxd4
*e7 30 1^7+ *e8 31 \302\253T7#. This relieves the tension, allowing
25 fixd7 Hac8 the bl knight to develop quickly on
26 Bxc8 Bxc8 c3. In the game Thipsay-Speelman,
27 fidl Bel London 1992, the queen's rook
28 Wd5 flxdl+ played a greater role after 7...fic8 8
29 #xdl #xe5 Sell? (or 8 &a3, transposing to
 Euwe Variation 87

notes in Game 21, Anand-M.Gure- There is little to recommend the

vich) 8...cxd4 9 cxd4<^f5 10 \302\243>c3
a6 meek 10...\302\243>h6?! after 11 h3 0-0 12
(10...Ae7?! 11 Ad3! is a suggestion Ae3 f613 exf6Sxf614\302\243)eSHfB IS
by Larsen) 11 *hl JLeJ (ll..:ib6? f4 Ab4 16 Af3 Axc3 17 bxc3\302\261
12&a4 #c7 13g4! 12
\302\261) g4 <&h4 13 Sveshnikov-Lali6, Sochi 1987.
\302\243>xh4Axh4 14 Ae3 0-0 IS figl f6! 11 Efcb.4 Axh4
16exf6 Axf6 and now 17 Wd2 g6 12 Ae3 0-0
would have been unclear. 13 f4 Ae7

Psakhis prefers the more patient This retreat is an attempt to

alternatives 7...4M5 and 7...&g6 improve on the critical encounter Nunn-
which are examined later in this Anand, Munich 1991. That game
chapter. proceeded: 13..16 14exf6Axf6 IS

8 cxd4 fcf5 Bel (Nunn considers IS gS Ae7 16

9 Qc3 Ae7 Ad3 g6 intending ...Ad6 and ...\302\243ie7

See the next game for 9...fic8. unclear) 15...g6 16 #d2 Ag7 17
10 84(72; AG?! (17 \302\243a4! i) n.JtaS! 18
10 a3 would bring about Kamsky- Ag2 *h8 19*hl Sac820h3 Wb4

Kasparov, New York (exhibition 21 Sfdl b6 22 Afl \302\243)a5 23 b3

game) 1989, where White's passive Ac6?! (23...1fe7 =) 24 \302\243>e4! #e7

play was punished: 10...fic8 11 (24...#xd2 25 \302\243>xd2 intending \302\243tf3

Af47! g5! 12Ae3 g4 13\302\243>elhS 14 and

\302\261) now 25 <&f2 followed by *g 1
f6
\302\243>c2 15 exf6 Axf6 16 Ad3 \302\243>ce7 and &d3 ofifers White the better
17 #d2 0-0 18 Ag5 &g6 19 Axf6 chances.
#xf6 20 Sael GtfM with advantage 14 Ad3 f6

to Black. 15 #c2
A clear indication of White's
vm m+m m intentions, this forces a
72 Awl mvm m aggressive

weakening of the pawn structure

B fflimmimi because 15...g6? fails to 16 \302\243xg6!

hxg6 17 #xg6+ *h8 18 Sf3

m mmm winning.

\342\226\240 !!\342\226\240\302\243\342\226\240 15 h6
16 Wg2l (73) Ae8
\342\226\240 m mm
The light-squared bishop is added
AH \342\226\240jUQ B
to the defence to meet White's Abl
ffi fflWWB.Wi and Wc2 by either ...g6, blocking the
diagonal, or by ...$h8 followed by
10 ~ Qh4 ...Af7-g8.
88 Euwe Variation

Continuing the onslaught while

73 xm m m*h out Black's
snuffing counterplay by
B
mmm m defending d4.
\302\256.*\302\256im m 26 ... Ah7

M HaH M 27 g6 Ag8
W, H SAB 28 &b5
Hon acknowledgesthat
Hi &&.W H d4 is a winning
28 \302\243te2

AH 1 H\302\253e
to over-protect
strategy as it releases the queen and
IS M HUSK
bishop for the attack.
28 ... fid8
Not so good is 16...fxe517fxeS 29 Ag5 #d7
H)6?18\302\243>xd5!+-. 30 \302\243e3 #e7
17 Sadl fxe5 31 \302\243g5 1^7(7^
18 fxe5 Af7

19 flf3
74
White conducts the attack with

commendable energy. Now that

Black has had to waste time coping ftliHA
with the threats along the bl-h7
diagonal, White can successfully
switch plans and prepareto double

on the f-file.
19 ... &D1 :
Ag5
20 &f2!
The bishop is conserved in order
to protect d4 and contemplate h4. 32 \302\253T4!

20 ... *h8 In a moment of mutual time-

21 fin &g8 trouble White finds the winning

22 fixfS #xf8 combination by preparing 33 Af6

23 h4 with the threat 34 #xh6+.
Bringing the kingside pawns into 32 ... a6
the offensive has the effect of 33 Af6 gxf6

restricting Black's mobility. 34 exf6 Ah7

23 ... Ad8 35 g7+
24 Ae3 #e7 White is in the enviable position
25 g5 \302\243b6 of having a choice of wins; 35 Wxh6
26 #f2! and 35 f7 were also effective.
 Euwe Variation 89

<93 \342\200\242\342\200\242\342\200\242
*g8 10 &e3(75)
36 #xh6?! White continues in traditional
A quicker solution is 36 f7+ fashion by supporting d4.

*xg7 37 fB#+ HxfB 38 #xfB#. In Petkovski-Efimov, Corfu 1991,

<jO Af5
\342\200\242\342\200\242\342\200\242 White tried to make progress on the
37 #h8+ *f7 queenside: 10a3Ae7 11g4 (11 Ad3
38 \302\253fh5+??
g6 12 \302\243>e2irb6 13 *hl QuS 14 b4
The pressures of time-troubletake \302\243>c415 g4 &g7 16 \302\243tf4a5 17 bxa5
their toll as 38 fixfS! exf5 39 \302\243xf5 WxaS 18 fe2 \302\261
Antonio-Nolte,
!fxf540\302\243>d6+wins. Manila 1991) ll...&h4 12ftxh4 Axh4
3o *xf6
\342\200\242\342\200\242\342\200\242 13 \302\243e3 Ae7 14 ficl &a5 15 \302\243>a4
39 #h6+ *f7 \302\243>c416 Axc4 dxc4 17 Ac6
\302\243>c5 18
40 \302\243xf5 exf5 f3 h5 19 gxh5 b5 20 \302\243ks4Hxh5 21
41 \302\243>d6+ #xd6 #d2 f5 22 #g2 *f7 23 \302\243>g3Hh4 24
42 2x15+ *e7 g5 25 Af2
\302\243>c2 Hh7 26 Ae3 g4 27
43 #g5+ *d7 &f4 \302\243g5 28 d5 &xf4 29 dxe6+
44 Hxd5 \302\243xd4+ *xe60-l.
45 *fl Hg8! 10*hl!?a6 11g4fcfe712.fi.d3!
46 1T5+ V2-V2 \302\243)a5?! (Vatter-Kindermann, Baden-
Baden 1993: 12...h5 13 gxh5 Bxh5
Game 25 14 \302\243>g5g6 15 Wf3 4iif5 16 Axf5
Blatny-Ghinda \302\243>d417 Axe6 Axe6!; 15 Ae3 \302\261)
and

Stara ZagoraZi990 now 13 &g5! h6 14 &h7 gives

White the better chances.
1 e4 e6
2 d4 d5
3 e5 c5

4 c3 \302\243>c6

5 \302\243tf3 Ad7

6 Ae2 &ge7
7 0-0 cxd4
8 cxd4 \302\243>f5

9 0x3 fic8

This move represents the major

diversion in the line. The rook is
brought into play as a watting tactic

to deter b3 before deciding where to 10 ... Ae7

develop the rest of the pieces. 11 Ad3 g6

90 Euwe Variation

If U...&xe3 12 fxe3 0-0 13 #e2

White has a good plan in doubling
rooks by fif2 and Saf 1,with a small

advantage.
12 Bel 0-0?!
Blackhopesthat in return for
allowing the king to be exposed, he
can take possessionof the g-file with
his rook.
Blatny suggests 12...&xe3 isa
superior alternative but after 13 fxe3
0-0 14Abl intending Sc2-f2 White On 17...*g8 18 &xe6! allows
has good prospects. #g3++-.
13 Axf5 gxf5 19 #h4 Axg5

14 Ah6 He8 There is no way out of the

15 h4! calamity: 19...*g8 20 #g3 f4 21 #g4
A clever attacking device that *h8 22&xe6+-.
prepares the deadly &g5 and #hS. 20 Axg5 (6

15 ... &xh4(7<5) 21 Axf6+ Sxf6

In his analysis of the game, Blatny 22 exf6 #g8
reveals the depth of the offensive: 23 \302\243tf>5 #g4 (77)
15...f6 16 #d2 (16 &b5? fxe5 17 The f-pawn proves its worth on

dxeS a6! 18 \302\243>d6Axd6 19 exd6 #f6 23...*g6 24 f7 Hf8 25 \302\243>d6e5 26

20 #d2 d4! foUowed by 21...e5 \302\245) Zxc6JLxc6 2lWe7+-.
16...*f7 (16...fxe5 17 dxe5 *f7 18
&g5+ *g6 19h5+ *xh5 20 \302\243tf7

#c7 21 Af8U +-; 16...&f8 17exf6

#xf6 18 Axf8 2xf8 19 Sfel 17
\302\261)

exf6 &xf6 18 #e7

\302\243>b5 19 Af4! e5
20 dxe5&xe521#d5+ +-.
16 #d2! Ae7

17 #f4
Black is unable to deal with the

mounting pressure adequately. Now

the immediate Wg3+ is threatened,
while &g5 and Wh4 is dangerous.
17 ... *h8 24 #h2! f4

18 &g5 XU8 25 \302\243kd6 Sf8

 Euwe Variation 91

26 #h6 *g8 13 g4 \302\243>xe3 14 fxe3 #d8 IS Wei f5

27 17+ flxf7 16gxf5exf5 17Hblb618Wg3 &e7
28 &xf7 *xf7 19 &g5 Hc3 20 Hb3 Hc6 21 *hl
29 #xh7+ *e8 Hg6 22 Wh4 fih6 23 #f2 #c7 24
30 Hc3 *d8 figl Hg6 25 fibbl h6 26 &h3
31 fiel a5 flxgl+ 27 fixgl #c6 28 Wh4 Hf7

32 Sf3 *c7 29 \302\243>f4*f8 30 #h5 Ae8 31 Wh3

33 Wh2 e5 \302\243d7 32 #g3 \302\243e6 33 \302\243b5 #c8 34

34 dxe5 Wh4 1-0.
35 Sxf4 &e2+ 8 dxc5 is an unusual line with
36 flxe2 #xe2 similarities to Game 29, Sveshni-
37 Vg3 #xb2 kov-Popovifi, discussed later in this
38 e6 Axe6 chapter. After 8...&xc5 9 b4 play
39 Hb4+ 1-0 might continue:
a) 9...\302\243e710 Ad3 g611 flel #c7
Game 26 12 \302\243f4 a6 13 \302\243fod2 \302\243a7 14 ficl

Kupreichik-Levitt Ac6 IS &b3 with an unclear

Badenweiler 1990 position; Braga-Micalizzi, Rome 1990.
b) 9...&b6 10 b5 Qn5 11Ad3 a6

1 e4 e6 12 a4 Wc7 13 Af4 0-014 Vc2 h6 15

2 d4 d5 &bd2 with equality; Carlier-Barsov,
3 e5 c5 Holland 1993.
4 c3 &c6
5 \302\243>f3 Ad7
6 Ae2
78 ZB H+B M
\302\243>ge7
B
7 0-0 fcf5
BAB4.BABA
waiting move allows White
This B4BAB B
to cast aside traditional methods and B BAOftB
repositionhis bishop to adapt to the B O B B
changing situation.
8 km (78)
B E34B&B
AH B HAS
The regular move, although Roz-
B&BWBfiSI
entalis-Ziiger, Chiasso 1991, saw
White try to transpose to a previous
main line in this chapter, but Black 8 ... QM
replied with an independent The decision to exchange the
continuation: 8 &a3 cxd4 9 cxd4 Axa3 10 kingside knights can be linked to
bxa3lfb6 11Ae3 0-0 12 Ad3 Bac8 corilinued pressure on d4.
92 Euwe Variation

The alternative 8...cxd4 has been play) 16 #xd4 Wa5 17 \302\243>ec2! h5 18

explored.For example,after 9 &xf5 #d3 0-0-0 19 \302\243>d4g4 20 &ab5 a6
exf5 10 &xd4 Ae7 play might 21 \302\243>xe6 fxe6 22 \302\243>d4lfb6 23 b4
continue: fig5 24 fiael *d7 (Romanishin-

a) llWrtandnow: Hort, Biel 1987) 25 c4! dxc4 26

al) ll...\302\243>xd4 12 cxd4 lfb6 13 #xc4 fic8 27 Hj3 and fidl +-.
#xb6 (13 Wxd5? Ac6 14 #b3 #xd4 c) 11 fiel &xd4 12 #xd4 Ae6
15 e6 fxe6 16Vxe6#d5 ?; \302\243>c3 13 13 #34+ #d7 14 #xd7+ *xd7 15
\302\243e6 14 #a4+ Ad7 =) 13...axb6 14 Ae3 g5 16&d2f4 17 Ad4 b5 18 a4
\302\243>c3Ae6 IS Ad2 *d7 16 a3 (16 Vt-'A
Gallagher-Ziiger, Switzerland
\302\243>b5fihc8 17 a4 Hc4 {17...Hc2 18 1992.
\302\243c3 f4 19 fifel and fta3 =} 18b3 9 fcg5
Hc2 ?) 16...fihc8 17 \302\243\\a2 Hc4 White is prepared to take risks by
(17...Hc2 18 Ac3 f4 19fifel offering the d-pawn and thereby
&b4
intending =) 18 Ac3 f4 19 fifdl Af5 inviting complications.
(Romero Holmes-Ulybin, Las Pal- A steadier response, 9 &xh4, is
mas 1992) 20 Ab4! Ac2 21 fide 1 the standard continuation. Upon
(not 21 Hd2? Axb4 -+) 2t...Ab3 9...Krxh4 play might proceed:
22
(21...Ag5?! \302\243>c3Ab3 23 \302\243fo5! a) 10&d2 cxd4 11&f3 #d8 12
fiac8 24 Bel! with the idea &d61) cxd4 *b613 Ae3 &b4 14\302\243.b1 Ae7

22 fixc4 &xc4 23 Axe7 Axa2 = 15 a3 <&c6 16 b3 a5 17h4 h6 18 h5

(Ulybin and Lysenko). 0-0-0 19 b4 axb420 axb4 Axb4 21

a2) 11...Ac812f4 0-0 13 Ae3 f6 Ad3 *c7 22 ficl #a5 23fial #b6
14 exf6 (14\302\243>d2fxe5 15 &xc6 bxc6 24fibl #a5 25Sal V2-V1 Prid-

16 fxe5 is unclear) 14...&xf6 15 \302\243kl2 Murey, France 1991.

fie8 16fiael Hxe3?! 17
(I6...*h8\302\261) b) 10&e3andnow:
\302\243xc6 #e8 18 \302\243te5fixel (18.JLxe5 bl) 10...#d8 11\302\243d2 Wb6! 12
19 Hxe3 Ad4 20 cxd4 +-) 19fixel &f3 c4 13 Ac2 #xb2 14#d2 Hj6
\302\243e6 20 #xb7 fib8 21 #xa7 Hxb2 0-0-0 17 \302\243tf4 15 &g5 h6 16 <^h3
22 &df3 Wc8! 23 #a3 Hc2 24 He3
fidg8 19 fifbl #d8 20 Ae7 18 &h5
d4 25&xd4Hxa226#d6Ba6 27 a4 &a5 21 #dl g6 22 \302\243f4 h5 23
*Vl Ad5 28 &xf5 h6 29 H>5#a8?
Acl *b8 24 Aa3 and White has

30&g4!fial+31*f2fia2+32*g3
some compensation for the pawn;
fixg2+ 33 *h3 1-0 Kupreichik-Kos- Vasiukov-Levitt, Graested 1990.
ten, Torcy 1989. b2) 10...cxd4 11 cxd4 #d8 (or
b) 11&13Ae6 12Ae3g5!?13 ll...Ab412a3 Aa5 #e7 14
13 g3
\302\243>a3!f4 14 Ad4 fig8 15 \302\243>el\302\243txd4?! \302\253k:3f5 15 b4 Ab6 16 Ac2 0-0 17
(l5..Ma5 16 &ac2 MS with unclear Wd2 with an edge for White, as in
 Euwe Variation 93

the game Kupreichik-Levitt, Any attempt to castle must first

Copenhagen 1988, but not ll...\302\243\\xd4? 12 deal with the threat to h7: 16...g6 17
g3 +-) 12 Ae7
\302\243>c3 13 f4 g6 14 g4 181^5 0-0
Wh6(17tfe5.S.f6 with

H)6 15 a3 0-0-0(15...\302\243>xd4? 16 unclear play) 17...Af8(17...a6!?) 18

*hl! a5 17\302\253te2 Ac5 18b4!axb4 19 Wf4 \302\243g7 19 \302\243fo5!\302\243>xb520 Axb5+
axb4 Hxal 20 #xal +-) 16b4 Hdf8 *e7 21 Wb4+ \302\253U622 \302\243g5+ f6 23
17 Wd2 *b8 18 JXabl #d8 19 b5 Hxe6+ +-.
&a5 20 &a4 b6 21 fifcl \302\243c8 22 17 \302\243f4

#c3 &b7 23 \302\243>c5!t Blatny-Ruxton, Now the rooks are connected. The
Oakham 1990. immediate 17 &b5 fails to make an
9 ... cxd4 impression on the position: after
10 cxd4 &xd4 17...\302\243>xb5 18 \302\243xb5 1^5 19 Sxe6
11 Wh5 &g6 Wd7 Blackhas a material advantage.
12 0x3(79) 17 ... h6
White needs to exercise caution, Kupreichik suggestsBlackshould
for example 12 \302\243>xf7? (12 &xh7? bring the knight back as a
\302\243>f5
-+) 12...*xf7 13 Axg6+ hxg6 defensive measure: 17...Qc6!? 18 &b5
14\302\245xh8Qc2-+. (18 Bxe6Wxe6 19\302\243xd5&d8 is

unclear) 18...fic8 19 Hxe6 #xe6 20

i.f5 #e2! 21 \302\243>c3#xb2 also with
unclear play after either 22 &xc8!?
#xal 23 \302\243>xd5 or 22 Hbl #xc3 23
.fi.xc80-0 24.ft.xb7.
18 &b5! \302\243>xb5

19 i.xb5 #xb5
20 Sxe6 *18
If20...tfd7 2lSaelwins.
21 #15
White also has fine prospects after
21 Hxe7 *xe7 22 Hel+ *f8 23
12 ... &xe5 Ad6+ *g8 24 He7 fifg 25 fic7.
13 \302\243>xe6 21 ... m7i(80)
The only way forward, as 13 fie1 Black is under the
g6 14 Wh4 <&ec6 is good for Black. that
misapprehension White must head for the
13 ... \302\243>ef3+!
ending with 22 Se5; instead there
14 gxft &xe6 was an amusing (for White) finish.

15 *g2 Ae7 The game could have continued

16 fiel #d7 21...\302\243g5! 22 fiael *g8 23 Hd6!?
94 Euwe Variation

Wxd2 17 *xd2 *e7 18 b4 Sac8 19

fihcl Shd8 20 f6 21 Ad3 g6 fiabl

22 Sel *d6 23 Sfl *e724Sf3e5

25 Sh3 Sh8 26 b5 &a5 27 fxe5 fxe5
28Sb4e4 20Sa4 1-0.
7 ... &&(81)

(23 \302\243xg5 hxgS 24 Se7 Hf8 25 fileS

#xb2 26Sxf7 Bxh2+!
=) 23...Wb2

(23...&xf4? 24 Se7 Sf8 25 Sd8 +-)

24 Hd7 Hf8 25 Se8! (25 Ae5 Wd2
26 Ad6 g6 27 Ve5 is unclear)
2S...Vf626 Sxf8+*xf827 #xd5!

\302\261
(Kupreichik).
22 Sxh6! Wxf5 Korchnoi acknowledges that
23 ttxh8#(l-0) Werner Hug first suggested this

setup. On g6 the knight is less active

Game27 than on least
f5, but at it avoids the

Hjartarson-Korchnoi threat of Ae2-d3xf5.

Amsterdam 1991 8 g3
In the game Mephisto Lyon-Psak-
1 e4 e6 his, Berlin 1991,the computer used a
2 d4 d5 new approach: 8 \302\243g5f6!? (8...Wb6
3 eS c5 9 Wd2 h6 10 Ae3 \302\261)
9 exf6 gxf6 10

4 c3 \302\243te6 Ae3 cxd4 11cxd4Ad6 12 \302\243>c3

&f4

5 \302\243>f3 Ad7 13 &b5 Ab8 14 Wd2 (14 Sel!?)

6 \302\243e2 \302\243>ge7 14...\302\243>xe2+ 15 Wxe2 #e7 16 Ah6
7 0-0 Wn and now White can improve
Black faced the unusual 7 dxc5 in with 17^2! Wh5 18 i.f4\302\261.

the game Velimirovid-Zuger, The major alternative is 8 &e3:

Lucerne 1989:7...\302\243)g6 8 Ae3 &gxe5 9 a) 8...cxd4?!9cxd4&e7(9...f6!?
\302\243>xe5 &xe5 10 f4 \302\243>c611 \302\243>d2b6 10 &c3 Ae7 11 Ad3 0-0 12 exf6
12 &b3 bxc5 13 &xc5 Wb6 14 Sxf6 13 Sel Wc7 14 g3 Ae8 =
&xd7 Wxe3 15 &xf8 *xf8 16Wd2 Thipsay-Gulko, Manila IZ 1990)10
 Euwe Variation 95

0-0
\302\243>c3 &e8 12 Bel f6 13
11 Ad3 &d3 h6 (Romanishin-Nikolic,
exf6 14 Wd2*h8 IS Abl Bc8
Axf6 Leningrad 1987) 15 Hfel =.
16BfelSc7 17 Bcdl Sd7 18 *hl b4) 9<^el0-0l0f4Wb6lllrd2
Ae7 19 &g5 Bf6 20 f4 \302\261 Sax- cxd4 12cxd4f6 13 \302\243>f3fxe5 14 fxe5
Korchnoi, Wijk aan Zee C (2) 1991. Bac8 15 \302\243k:3\302\243>a516 Bf2 \302\243k:4 17
b) 8...Ae7 and now: Axc4 Bxc4 18 Baf 1 Bcc8 19g3Bf5
bl) 9 dxc5 &gxe5 (or 9...\302\245c71? 20 h4 = Kupreichik-Nikolic,
10 &a3 \302\243>cxe5 11 \302\243>xe5 \302\243>xe5 Ljubljana 1989.

{U...VxeS?! 12&d4#g5 13g3!\302\243} 8 ... Ae7

12 \302\243>b5
Axb5 13 Axb5+ 14
\302\243>c6 c4 9 h4
Bd8 {14...a6 IS Axc6+! bxc6 16 This advance forces the knight to
cxd5exd517&Mt) IS cxd5 exd5?! retreat. Black relies on eventually
{15...Bxd5!?} 16 &xc6+ Wxc6 17 breaking out of the cramped
Ad4 0-018b4 &f619 a4 Kharlov-
\302\261 conditions whereupon White's kingside
Sakaev, Podolsk 1992) 10 \302\243xe5 pawns might become a liability.
&xe5 11 f4\302\253fc612&120-013 Ad3 9 ... cxd4
g6 14 Wf3! Af6 (14...b6 IS cxb6 10 cxd4 0-0
axb6 16#f2 15
\302\261) Wf2 Ag7 16 \302\243>f3 11 h5
\302\243te717 h4! f6 (17...<&\302\2435 18 Ad4! \302\261) On 11 &a3 comes ll...f6 12exf6
18 h5 eS 19 h6 Ah8 20 fxe5 fxeS 21 i.xf6 13 <&c2 &ge7 with equal
\302\243g5 We8 (21...e4 22 Wh4 Bf7 23 chances.
Bael Wf8 24 Axe7 Wxe7 25 Wxe7 11 ... \302\243tfi8

Bxe7 26 &g5 is slightly better for 12 h6

White) 22 Oael &c6 (22...e4?23 To combat Black's plan of

2xe4! dxe4 24 &c4+ and Whie breakingout with ...f6 it might be
wins) 23 c4 \302\261
Kharlov-Sakaev, Sao advisable to consider 12 &d3!?, e.g.
Paulo 1991. 12...f6?! 13#c2 with excellent

b2) 9 Ad3 Wb6 10 Wd2 cxd4 11 prospects. Thus, 12...&b4 13 h6 g6 14

cxd4 &b4 12 Ae2 Ab5 13 \302\243>c3 \302\243>xd3 15 #xd3
\342\202\254kc3 is likely, when
Axe2 14 Wxe2 &c6 15 g3 0-0 16h4 White has relinquishedthe useful
Bfc8 17 Sadl &a5 18 \302\243>el&c4 19 light-squared bishop in return for
&d3 \302\243>f820 Qa4 #d8 21 b3 <&a3 greater control of e5.
22 h5 <2ic2 23 Qdc5 b6 24 \302\253M>7#d7 12 ... g6
25 &d6 V2-V2 Sax-Nikolic\\ Manila 13 \302\243>bd2

OL 1992. The queen's knight will support

b3) 9 g3 cxd4 10cxd4f6 11 exf6 d4 although Korchnoi suggests that
Axf612 0-013
\302\243k:3 Wd2 (13 &d3!? 13 &c3 should be considered,to
Ae8 14 Wd2 e5 =) 13...&ge7 14 contest the central light squares. The
96 Euwe Variation

reason for the exchange 9...cxd4 aim for f5 to hinder White's

becomes
apparent because otherwise progress. On 19...e5? 20 \302\243>xe5! &xe5
White could now play 12 dxc5 (12 21 dxeS \302\243xg4 22 Wxg4 \302\243>xe5 23

13
c4!?)12..Jbcc5 c4 with We6+ White has a big plus.
advantage. 20 ficl b6
13 ... (6 21 a3 \302\243>e7

14 exf6 Axf6 22 fixc8 Wxc8

15 \302\243>b3 \302\253M7 23 \302\243Ad2 ^f5
16 QhV.(82) 24 Af4?!
Korchnoi prefers 24 &xe4dxe4
25 &e5 Axe5 26 dxe5 \302\243>xe327 fxe3
82 is m m\302\261
fixfl+ 28 *xf 1 Ab5+ 29*g2 \302\243d3
B
wmmtiMk 30 Wd2 30 Wf2 with a
intending
clear advantage.
24 \342\200\236. #f8?!

Black would have equal chances

after the superior 24...&xd4! 25
Ifc
\302\243>xd4e5.
Al
25 Hel Qxh6
frgg 26 Axh6 Wxh6

27 &xe4 dxe4
White intends either &g4 to 28 fixe4 *g7 (S3)
restrain ...eS, or &g4 to target e6.
Not 16 Af4? gS and ...&xh6, nor
83 \342\226\2403L.
16 Ae3 &d6 \302\245.
w
16 ... &d6
Now 17 &g4 &f5 is satisfactory. AHA
After 16...e5 17 dxe5 \302\243>cxe5 18
Wxd5 Ac6! 19 Wxd8 fifxd8 Black \342\226\240jbuumi
hasinsufficient compensation for the

pawn.
17 Ag4! fic8
18 \302\253M3 &e4
Vim* wSm ^\302\273
HSM

18...b6 19 fiel 20
\302\243>f5 Axf5 exfS
2 li.f4 is better for White. 29 \302\243xe6?

19 \302\243e3 fin?! Just one more preliminary move

Black is slow to sense that the would have ensured White a decisive
queen's knight should immediately advantage: 29 Wc2! fif8 (29...fie7
 Euwe Variation 97

30 d5! e5 31 Axd7 Sxd7 32 \302\243>xe5) This continuation is a popular

30Vc7fff7 3lVc4. idea,which often results in play very
Now Black can activate his queen similar to linesarising from 5...Wb6
to cause a few problems. 6 a3. The difference is that Black is
29 \342\200\236. Axe6 not obliged to transpose into such

30 Sxe6 Hi5 lines, but can delay moving the

31 Wb3 Hd7
queen; this offers increased
A sterner test is 31...WfS (intend- flexibility.

ing 32...&xd4) when Black has 6 \342\200\236. &&7(84)

counterplay after either 32 d5 gS or
32 He2h5.
32 Se8 Wd5

33 Wb4 Wd6

34 Wc4 Wd5
35 Wb4 Wd6
36 #xd6 Hxd6
37 He4 h5
38 ifl?!
The best practical try is 38 &e5
followed by f4.
Oo Hd5
\342\200\242\342\200\242\342\200\242

39 He3 gS There are valid alternative

40 Hc3 g4 treatments:

41 Hc7+ *h6 a) 6...f67 Ad3 (7 b4?! fxe5 8

42 Hc6 *g7 dxcS e4 9 &d4 \302\243tf610 \302\243f4Ae7 11

43 flc7+ &h6 Ab5 0-0 ? Popchev-Dolmatov,Po-
44 Hc6 %-Vi lanica Zdroj 1987) 7...\302\253fc7 8 0-0 c4
9 \302\243c2&ge7 10 Sel \302\243>g611 &h4!
Game 28 Qxh4 12 Wh5+ g6 13 Wxh4 fS 14

Mescas-Speelman Ag5 Wb6 15 Ha2 h6 16 \302\243f6 Hg8

Linares 7992 18 a4 aS 19 *hl
17 \302\243>d2\342\202\254kd8 <&f7

20 Hbl Wc7 21 g4 \302\243>g522 gxfS

1 e4 e6 exf5 23 Wg3 &e6 24 b3 \302\243>e425
2 d4 d5 \302\243>xe4dxe4 26 bxc4 Axc4 27 fiab2
3 e5 c5 bS 28 fixbS Axb5 29 OxbS gS 30
4 c3 \302\243>c6 \302\243b3Hg6 31 *h3 Wd7 32 iThS \302\273h7
5 &f3 Ad7 33 Sb7 1-0 Donguines-R.Rodriguez,
6 a3 Cebu 1992.
98 Euwe Variation

b) 6...fic8 7 Ad3 (7 b4 cxd4 8 Aa2 Sc3 19 d5 fia3 20 \302\243c4Axa4

cxd4 10>6 9 i.b2 transposes
to 21 Wd2 Wc5 22 Wxb2 ttxfi 23 Wc 1!
Game 12, Galdunts-Ambartsumian) Ad7? (23...b6! 24 gxfi \302\243>xe5 25
7...cxd4 8 cxd4Wb6 9 \302\243c2gS 10 h3 Ab5+ Axb5 26 #xc5 \302\243>xf3+ 27
\302\243>xd4 11 \302\243>xd4Ac5 12 \302\243>e2Axf2+ *hl bxc5 28 Hxb5 exd5 29 fixc5
13 *fl f6 14 \302\243>bc3aS IS Aa4 \342\202\254k>7 fif7 \302\261)
24 Hxb7 Wc8 25 fixa7 \302\243>xe5
16 Axd7+ *xd7 17 exf6 with an 26 dxe6 Axe6 27 Ab5+ *d8 28
unclear
position; Afek-Welin, Biel #g5+ fif6 29 #xg7 1-0 Nikolic-
1989. Schulz, Lugano 1986.
c) 6...c4 and now: c3) 7 Af4!? Wb6 (7~&ge7 8 h4
cl) 7 g3 and now: \302\243k:89 \302\243>bd2h6 10 g3 \302\243>b611 \302\243h3

ell) 7...1fc78 h4 f5 9 Ag2 Ae7 12 h5 \302\243>a5 13 Ae3 Aa4 =

&ge7 10 0-0 h6 11\302\243>bd2\302\243>a512 a4 Khalifman-Yusupov, Minsk 1987) 8
0-0-0 13 b3 cxb3 14 \302\243>xb3\302\243>xb3 15 Wcl \302\243>ge79 \302\243>bd2 f6 10 exf6 gxf6
Wxb3 \302\243k:6 16 Wa2 \302\243>a5 17 Ae3 11 Hbl \302\243>g612 Ae3 \302\243>a513 h4?!
*b8 18 &d2 fic8 19 fifel Ae7 20 Ad6 14 h5 15 &h4
\302\243>e7 0-0-0 16 g3
h5 \302\243te4 21 \302\243>xc4 Wxc4 22 Wb2 \302\243>f5! 17 \302\253M5 exf5 18 \302\243g2 Hhe8

tthd8 23 ii.fl Wc7 24 c4 Ac6 25 19 0-0 &xg3! 20 b4 cxb3 21 fxg3

fiabl dxc4 26 Axc4 Wd7 27 Wa2 Hxe3 22 \302\243>xb3fixg3 23 \302\243kxa5Wxa5

Ad5 V2-V2 Adams-Levitt, British Ch 24 Wf4 Hdg8 25 flf2 Wxa3! 26 fiel

1989. H3g4 27 Wd2 f4 28 Wd3 Hg3 29

cl2) 7...\302\243>a5 8\302\243fod2\302\243>e7 9.a.g2 Wfl Ah3 0-1 J.LitUewood-Adams,

\302\243>c810 0-0 \302\243>b6 11 \302\243>el#c7 12 Sheffield 1991.
fibl 0-0-0 13 \302\243>df3 h6 14 h4 Ae7 c4) 7 h4 \302\243>ge78 h5 h6 9 g3 &a5
15 We2 #c6 16 \302\243h3 Wa4 17 &g2 10 \302\243tod2 \302\243>c8 11 \302\243A4! \302\243>b6 12

Wb3 18 Ae3 Aa4 19\302\243>d2Wc2 20 \302\243>g2Wc7 (12. Jb4 13 Ve2 Ac2?

f4 Ad7 21 \302\243f2\302\243>b322 &el \302\243>xd2 14 \302\243>xc4! <\302\243tb315 \302\243>xb6 axb6 16
23 Axd2 g6 24 \302\243>e310)3 25 h5 Wxc2 17
\342\202\254kxal i.b5+ *e7 18 Wdl
fidg8 26 *h2 *b8 27fifel \302\243c828 Ha5 19b4 fixb5 20\302\243b2+-) 13 \302\243>e3

&el a5 29 \302\243f2\302\243>a830 figl \302\243>c731 0-0-0 (13...f6!? 14 f4 fxe5 15 fxe5

g4 a4 32 Ag3 Wb5 33 fibf 1 We8 34 Ae7 16Wg4 0-0 with an unclear
Wf3 with a slight plus for White; position) 14 f4 \302\243e7 15 Ah3 *b8 16
Anand-Garma, Calcutta 1992. We2 Hdf8 170-0a6 18*h2*a7 19
c2) 7 Ae2 \302\243>a58 \302\243fod2 f5!? 9 Hbl fihg8 20 \302\243>g2! &a4 21 Qf3
0-0 <&e7 10 a4!? Wb6 11 M cxb3 12 Axa3 22 f5! exf5 23 Af4 Wb6 24
Aa3 \302\243>g6(12...&xa4? 13 &b4 +-) bxa3 \302\243>xc3 25 fixb6 ^xe2 26 Hb2
13 Axf8 fixf8 14 c4 dxc4 15 \302\243>xc4 5^xf427 5^xf4 \302\243e628 ^h4 ^c6 29
\302\243>xc4 16 Axc4 b2 17 Hbl fic8 18 \302\243>xf5JLxfS 30 i.xf5 <^xd4 315^xd5
 Euwe Variation 99

and White wins; Malaniuk-Bareev, 19&b3

&a7 17a4Sa818Qd2&c8
USSR 1987. 20
\302\243>b6 Ac8
\302\243k:5 h4 22 \302\243tf4
21 <&e2

d) 6...cxd4 7 cxd4 \302\243>ge7 8 Ad3 \302\243k:423 Sxc4! dxc4 24Axc4 b6 25

9
\302\243>f5 &e3 Wb6 10 \302\243>c3&xe3 11 &e4 Ab7 26 d5 h3 27 g4 &h4 28 O
fxe3 Ae7 12 M fic8 13ficl \302\243k!814 29
\302\243>g2 Qd6+ Axd6 30 exd6 \302\243>xf4
0-0 0-0 15 Wb3 f5 16exf6Axf6 17 31 dxe6 fxe6 32 Axh8 \302\261
Galdunts-

Wc2 *h8 18 &e5 &e8 19Kf2 \302\243>f7 Orlov, Belgrade 1989.

20 &xd5! +- Masserey-Summer- b2) 10...Ae7 110-0transposes to

matter, Silvaplana 1993. the notes in Game 11, Pri6-dela Villa

e) 6...&h6 b4 7 cxd4 8 cxd4 \302\243tf5 Garcia.

transposes to the text c) 9...b5 10\302\243k:3a6(10...a5!?ll

7 b4 cxd4 \302\243>xb5 axb4 12 a4 \302\243>a513 Hcl \302\243k:4

8 cxd4 \342\202\254tf5 14 \302\243xc4 dxc4 15 fixc4 \302\243xb5 16

9 &c3?!(S5) axb5 Wd5 11

\302\261) \302\243d3 g6 12 0-0 h5
Illescas and Zlotnik prepared this 13 \302\243>e2Ae7 14 Ac3 &f4
Wb6 15
idea based on the premise that \302\243>g716 h4 aS 17 Ve2! axb4 18axb4
9...Wb6 is ineffective after 10&a4. fib8 19 fifbl 0-0 20 Ac2 Wd8 21 g3
The usual move is 9 Ab2: fic8 22 fia3 \302\243>a5!23 \302\243k!3\302\243>c424
a) 9...&e7and now: Sa7 Sc7 25 Sbal Wb8 26 \302\243>c5 Ac6

al) 10 &d30-0 11 0-0 f6 12 27 fixc7 #xc7 28 Ad2 Ha8 29#d 1

Axf5! exfS 13 Qc3 &e8 14Wd3 f4 Wb8 30 &c3 fixal 31 Wxal Wa8
IS e6! Ah5 16 2fel a6 17 Wf5! V2-V2 Grosar-L.B.Hansen, Bled/Ro-
Axf3 18 gxD \302\243>xd4 19 Wd3 Qc6 gaSkaSlatina 1991.
20 &xd5 We8 21 fiadl Bd822We4
\302\253fh523 \302\253M4 #g5+ 24 *hl Sxdl
25 flxdl fid8 26 figl 10>5
27 &g6!
Se8 (27...hxg6 28 #xg6 JLft 29
1T7+*h8 30 &xf6 +-) 28 \302\243>xe7+

&xe7 29 &xf6 +- Nikolic-Chris-

tiansen, Ljubljana/Portoroi 1985.
b) 9...\302\253b610i.e2andnow:

bl) 10...fic8 11 0-0 h5 (ll...a6

12 *hl Ae7 13 g4 Qh4 14 \302\243>c3

&xf3 15 \302\243>a4#a7 16 AxO 0-0 17

b6
\302\243>c5 18 fcxd7 #xd7 19 Ae2 b5
20 f4 f6 21 Wd2 = Kontifi-Miljanic, 9 ... fic8
NikSic 1991) 12*hl Ae7 13 \302\243>c3 9...&e710Ad3!(10 \302\243e2?! fic8

Wd8 14 \302\243d3 g6 15 ficl a5 16 b5 11 Ab2 0-0 12 0-0 f6 13 fie 1 #e8 14

700 Euwe Variation

2e 1 fxeS IS dxeS Ad8! with an edge that the best chance is 14 Wd3!? a6
for Black; Miljanovid-DraSko, IS Wxg6 hxg6 intending ...&a7,
Belgrade 1987) 10...&fxd4 11 \302\243>xd4 ...&b5 and ...Sh4, which gives Black
&xd4 12 Wg4 gives White an the better chances.

advantage. 14 ... Ae7

10 \302\243b2 \302\243tfi4! 15 Wf3 0-0

Black has
implemented a novel 16 \302\243d3 *h6

procedure in order to make the 17 0-0 f6

defence of d4 difficult. The idea of With White having to disrupt the
exchanging the king's knight is not harmony of his piecesto defend d4,
feared in the 9 &b2 lines becausethe Black is in the ascendancy. Now the
knight can be supported by & ld2 or plan is to introduce the light-squared
the bishop is on e7. bishop into the game via e8-hS.
11 \342\202\254kxh4 18 We2 fxe5
In Kimpinsky-Zysk, Bundesliga 19 dxe5 Ag5

1992, White tried the surprising 20 Heel

resource 11 &gl which proved Speelman suggests 20 Sc2 as an
dependable: ll...\302\243e7 12 g3 \302\243>f513 \302\243>ge2 improvement, based on the line
f6 14 Ah3 fxeS IS Axf5 exfS 16 20...\302\243e8 21 bS Ah5 22 g4 with
&xd5e4 17 Wb3 Ad6 18 0-0 \302\243>e7 equal chances. Illescas points out a
19 \302\243>ec3 &xd5 20 #xd5 #e7 21 refinement to tip the scales in
&b5 Axb5 22#xb5+#d7 23 #d5 Black's favour after 21...Af4! 22 g3
Ab8 24 Wb3 Wn 25 #a4+ #d7 26 Ah5 23 f3 Ae3+.
20 ... Ae8
11 ... Wxh4 21 g3 Ah5

12 \302\243\302\2732 22 f3 Ad2
The only move in view of 12 b5? 23 fidl \302\243e3+

(12 \302\243>e2?\302\243>xb4 -+) 12...\302\243>xd4! 13 24 &&(86) &xf3+?

g3 Exc3! 14 gxh4 &f3+ IS *e2 This impetuous move appearsto
&xb5+\342\200\224h be lethal but the course of the game
12 ... We4+ proves it to be faulty. Black can
12...i.e7 13 Ad3 leaves the queen retain the advantage upon 24\342\200\236.d4.

in a vulnerable state. 25 Bxf3 Bxf3

13 We2 Wg6 26 #xf3 Bf8
14 Hcl 27 \302\243xh7+!

It is necessary to thwart the The refutation of the sacrifice is

possibility of 14...&xb4 followed by revealed.Blackis overloaded and is
...Sc2. However, Illescas indicates obliged to relinquish material.
 Euwe Variation 101

up the chance of a probable draw

with 36...*h7 37 1Ti4+ #xh4 38
gxh4 Sh3.
37 Wd2 XU3

38 ^c2! e5
39 \302\243kc3 #d4+
40 Wxd4 exd4
41 &b5 d3
42*fl
If 41...Hd3 Hd2 43 Axd4

a6 44 tf?el! ensures White's

advantage.

27 ... Wxh7 42 \302\243cl a6

28 #xe3 #c2+ 43 \302\243kc3 Sf6

29 #d2 #e4+ No better is 43...*f7 44 &f4

30 #gl d4 intending 45 &g2.
31 Sel 44 h4
Blackis still posing a number of White's victory is sealed. The
problems thanks to White's rook has no opportunity to enter

difficulty in activating his forces. A White's camp due to the minor

better try is 31 &xd4 Sd8 32 &c3 pieces blocking the files, while the
#xd4 33 #xd4 Exd4 (33...\302\243>xd4 34 d3 pawn will soon leave the board.
*g2 Sc8 35 Hxd4 Hxc3 36 a4 +-) White efficiently concludes the

34 Bxd4 \302\243>xd435 *f2 36

\302\243>c6 \302\253M>5 game: 44...#f7 45 &f4 Hc646 \302\243d2
a6 37 \302\243k!6 b5 38 *e3! \302\243>xe5 39 #e6 47 *f2 *e5 48 #e3 flg6 49
$d4 which is a favourable ending &e1*f550 *xd3 Sd6 51 *e3 *g4
for White. 52 \302\243>e2!Be6+ 53 *d3 Se8 54 &c3
31 ... #d5 *f3 55 \302\243>d4+ *xg3 56 \302\243tf5+ *g4
32 &cl &xe5 57 \302\243>xg7 Bd8+ 58 *c2 Sc8 59 h5
33 Sxe5 WxeS #g5 60 *d3 *h6 61 \302\243e5 b5 62

34 Axd4 We4 Ac3 Sc6 63 \302\261e5 Hc4 64 &e6 a5

35 \302\243b2 HO! 1-0.
On 35...flc8, White could reply
36 \302\243d3! fid8 37 \302\253fg5
Sd7 38 &f2 Game 29
when the knight acts as a shield to Sveshnikov-Popovid

the king, ensuring an edge. Palma de Mallorca 1989

Now 36 &e2 is the winning try.

36 #d8+? Hf8? 1 e4 e6
In time-trouble Speelman passes 2 d4 d5
102 Euwe Variation

3 e5 c5 An almost automatic response,

4 c3 \302\243te6 although Nikolenko-Shur, USSR 1991
5 \302\243>f3 Ad7 continued 6...#c7 7 &a3! (7 Af4
6 dxc5(S7j $L%.cS 8 Ad3 h6 9 h4 \302\243>ge7 10 b4
iLb6 11 a4 is unclear; Mamedov-
Shur. USSR 1990) 7...\302\243>xe5 8 \302\253M>5

&xf3+ 9 Wxf3 ffe5+ 10 *dl fic8

11 \302\243f4Wf6 12 Wg3 #g6 13 &xa7
Wxg3 14 hxg3 fixcS IS Ae3 fiaS 16
Ab6 Ba4 17 f3 \302\243d6 18 b3 fia3 19
\302\243>b5Axb5 20 &xb5+ *e7 21 g4
fia8 22 &d4 eS 23 fiel f6 24 f4 *e6
25 *c2 \302\243>e726 a4 \302\243>c627 Af2
fiac8 28 fiadl \302\243>e729 fS+ *f7 30
Ad7flc7 3lAe6++-.
7 b4
This move has its attractions as a This is the modern treatment of
way to avoid the heavily analysed the position. The main alternative is
lines. The decision to abandon the 7 &d3, whereupon play might
centre looks odd but it can be quite proceed:

effective. Black is plungedinto a) 7...f5 8 &bd2 &ge7 9 &b3

relatively unknown positions with \302\243b6 10 0-0 &g6 11 fiel 0-0 12
White's advanced pawns staking out \302\243tod4 \302\243>xd4 13 cxd4 \302\243>h414 Ae2
a spatial plus and providing &xf3+ IS i.xf3 %-% Mascarinas-
attacking chances. The primary problem Meier,Switzerland 1991.

with the scheme is that the pawns b) 7...f6 8 b4 (8 &f4 fxe5 9 \302\243>xe5

can becomea target and are \302\243>xe5 10 &xe5 &f6 =; 8 exf6 \302\243>xf6
particularlyweak in endings. After 6 &d3 9 0-0 0-0 10 Ag5 #e8 11Ve2eS?
the game usually transposes into Potick-Fiorito, Konex 1991)8...Ae7
usual lines; in the game Kinder- 9 bS QxeS 10 \302\243>xe5fxeS 11 \302\253fh5+
mann-Bischoff, Munich 1989, Black *f8 Af6 (Sveshnikov-Sa-
12 WxeS
continued 6...<hge7 7 0-0 cxd4 8 von, Lvov 1978) 13 Wg3! e5 14 0-0
cxd4 &c8 9 &c3Ae7 10 &a4 \302\243>b6 \302\243>e715 &g5 \302\261.

11 Qc5 \302\243>xd4 12 &xb7 \302\243>xf3+ 13 c) 7...&ge7 and now:

#xf3 Wb8 14 \302\243k!6+ \302\243xd6 IS exd6 cl) 8 0-0 \302\243>g69 fiel Wc7 10
Wxd6 16 Af4 #e7 17Wg3 with We2 (10 Axg6 fxg6!11\302\243f40-0 12
unclear
play. &g3 Q&l ? Sveshnikov-Balashov,
6 ... Axc5 11exf6
USSRCh 1976)10...f6 gxf6
 Euwe Variation 103

12 c4! d4 13a30-0-014b4 Ad6 15 5...Wb6 6 Ad3 Ad7 7 dxc5 which is

c5 Af416
g3 Axel 17Bxcl \302\261
Pach- examined in the chapter on the Mil-
- see the note to
man-Voiculescu, Bucharest 1954. ner-Barry Gambit

c2) 8 Af4 \302\243>g69 &g3 0-0 10 Black's sixth move in Game 14.
\302\243>bd2f5 11 exf6gxf6 12 Ab6
\302\253M>3 7 ... \302\243b6

13 0-0Qce5 14 \302\243>xe5\302\243>xe515 Ac2 8 b5 \302\243>a5

Bf7 16 fcd4 Wf8 17 #h5 Wg7 18 9 \302\243d3 Wc7 (88)

Bfel &xd4 19cxd4\302\243>c620 Af4 f5 In the game Kharlov-Dreev,
21 fle3 Wxd4 22 Ah6 f4 23 \302\243xf4 USSR 1991,Blackchoseto bring
Bxf4 24 #xh7+ *f8 25 #xd7 Bd8 the queen's knight back into play:
26 #xe6 Bf6 27 \302\253h3 #xb2 28 9...&C410 a4 Wc7 11 Ve2 a6 12
*h8+ *f7 29 lfh7+ *f8 30Bf1d4 bxa6 Bxa6 13 0-0\302\243ke7(13...Bxa4
31 Hg3 Bf7 32 H16+ *e8 33 \302\243b3 14 Bxa4 &xa4 15 &a3 with unclear

Be7 34 Hj3 1-0 Bastian-Geveke, play) 14 &a3 Sxa4 15 &xc4 dxc4

Bundesliga 1991/92. (15...Bxal?16 \302\243k!6+ *f8 17 \302\243>g5

c3) 8 b4 &b6 9 b5 10
\342\202\254ta5 0-0 +-) Bxa4 Axa4 17 Axc4 0-0 18
\302\243>g611 a4 Bc8 12 Ba2 \302\243k:413 Be2 &d3&g6! V2-V2 and now Dreev
a6 14 bxa6 bxa6 15 &a3 \302\243>xa3 16 analysed 19 h4 &c6 20 h5 Axf3 21 gxfi
\302\243xa3 Ac5 17 Axc5 Bxc5 18 Axa6 Wxe5! (21..\302\243>e5? 22 \302\243f4f6 23 Ve4
Wa5 19 &b5 Axb5 20 axb5 Wxb5 +-) 22 hxg6 #g3+ 23 *hl #h3+
21 Qd4lrd722f40-023f5!exf5 24 with a draw.

e6 Wa7 25 erf7+Bxf7 26Be8+

Hf8 The immediate 9...&ge7 is the

27 Bxfi8+ fcxf8 28 \302\243>xf5 \302\243>g629 usual alternative. The game might

*hl Wd7 30 Wg4 *h8 31 h4 Bc4 continue: 100-0Sc8(10...1fc7
32 \302\253fg5 Hc8 33 h5 \302\243f8 34 \302\243e7 transposes to the text) 11 a4 &g6 and
Be8 35 Hf7 ^e6 36 h6 Bg8 37 now:
hxg7+&xg738 #xg7+! 1-0 Bron- a) 12 \302\243a3 Ac5 13 &xc5 Bxc5
stein-M.Gurevich, Brussels Rapid- 14 g3 Wc7 15 Bel &c4 16 We2 0-0
play 1993. 17 h4 f6 18 \302\243xg6 hxg6 19 exf6
d) 7...#c78 #e2 \302\243>ge79 Af4 (9 Bxf6 20 \302\243k!4\302\243k!621 \302\243fo3Bc4 22

b4) 9...a6 10 0-0 f5 11 \302\243>bd20-0 12 \302\243>ld2 Bxc3 23 fiacl Bf8 24 We5

Aa7
\302\243>b3 13 \302\243bd4 \302\243>g614 Ag3 f4 Bxcl 25 Bxcl Wb6 26 \302\243>c5V2-V2

15 Wxe5
\302\243>g5 16 \302\253fh5h6 17 \302\243>df3 Sveshnikov-Balashov, Lvov 1978.
Wf6 18 Qh7 *xh7 19 &h4 *T5 20 b) 12 Bel f6 13 Ba2 0-0 14
Axf5 Bxf5 21 &g5+ Bxg5 22 Axg5 Axg6 hxg6 15 Wd3 *f7 16 Ae3
Bf8 with an unclear game; Fishbein- Bh8 17 Bae2 \302\243>c418 \302\243d4 Bh6 19
Foisor, Saint John 1988. h4 a6 20 bxa6 bxa6 21\302\243fod2 \302\243xd4
e) 7. Jttb6?! transposes to the line 22 cxd4 Bh8 23 \302\243>b3fxe5 24 dxe5
104 Euwe Variation

Axa4 25 3tod4 Ad7 26 g3 We8 27 Sveshnikov suggests another

Bbl Bf8 Bb7
2\302\273
*g8 29 &g5 Bd8 possibility: 13 h4!? f6 14 Axg6+ hxg6
30 f4 a5 31 h5 a4 32 Sh2 +- Svesh- 15iLf4 with unclear play.
nikov-Naumkin, Moscow 1989. 13 ... 0-0-0
14 Ae3 &xe3
15 Bxe3 f6

16 Bae2
The e5 strongpoint is reinforced.
Now 16...fxe5 (16...\302\243}xe5 17 &xe5
fxe5 18 Bxe5 17
\302\243) Axg6 hxg6 18
*hxe5 is favourable for White so
Black chooses to delaythe capture.
16 ... *b8
17 h3 JicSV.
This move gives the queen greater
freedom, but the plan has a flaw. The

10 0-0 emphasison e5isa sufficient rdle for

Now the king's rook is available the queen at the moment and there is

to protect eS. little point in fianchettoing when e6

A refinement, 10 We2!?, was is under attack. A better way forward
tested in the game Kharlov-Kram- is 17...Bc8!when further pressure
nik, USSR 1991, which continued is applied to c3, the weak link in
10...&e7 11 h4 h6 12 0-0 Bc8 13 White's camp.
i.f4^c414a4f515h5 0-016Ha2 18 #c2! 15
Ae8 17 &h4 d4 18 cxd4 \302\243kl519 g3 The line 18...3M4 19 Bel &xd3
\302\243a520 Bc2 Wd8 21 Bxc8 Wxc8 22 20 Wxd3 &c4 21 B3e2 intending
&g2 &b3 23 \302\243e3 &xd4 24 &xd4 \302\243>bd2 is assessed by Sveshnikov to
Axd4 25 Ac4 Axh5 26Wd3 #c5 27 be goodfor White.

Axd5 Wxd5 28 3tf4 Wd8 29 *g2 19 Bel b6

JLH 30 Bdl Ab6 31 Wxd8 Bxd8 32 20 &d4 Bhe8
Bxd8+ Axd8 33 \302\243>a3a6 34 &c4 21 g4!?
with equality. A brave gesture to gain the
10 ... &e7 initiative. As Black's forces are relatively
11 a4 E>g6 constrained, it is deemedfeasibleto
12 Bel \302\243c5 open the kingside.
Black is careful not to allow White 21 ... fxg6
to incorporate iLa3 into his plans. 22 &xg6 hxg6
13 Ba2 23 Wxg6 gxh3(89)
 Euwe Variation 105

29 *g2
If 29Be2#d8! 30 fig2 (but not
30 Wxg7?? 31
Sg8 -+) 30...Wxg5
Sxg5 with equality.
29 ... \342\202\254A2

30 Shi fixhl
31 *xhl \302\243ka4

32 \302\253xg7 *b7!?

Black can also enter the queen

ending: 32...&xc333 &xc3 #xc3
34 #xd7 #xd4 35 \302\253xe6 Vh4+ 36
24 2g3?! *g2 Wg5+ 37 *h3 Wh5+ 38 *g3
The simple24 Sxh3provides Wg5+ 39 Wg4 #xe5+ 40#f4 #c7!.
excellent chances, e.g. 24...2h8?! 25 33 *g2 &c8

\302\253ixe6 #e7 26 \302\243kl8! (26 fixh8? 34 \302\253xc7+ *xc7

Sxh8 27 fihS 29
\302\243k!4Wh4 28 Wg2 35 f4?!
Se3 -&.h3 -+) 26...fixh3 27 Wd6+ Now the game meanders to a
#xd6 28 exd6ffh6 29 &f7 Sf6 30 draw. The last chance to keep slim
Se7\302\261. winning chances is 35 $g3 intend-
24 ... are
25 f3 35 *d7
\342\200\242\342\200\242\342\200\242

There is still time for 25 Sxh3 36 *ra a6!

without the need to expose the king 37 *g4 axb5
further. 38 &xb5 &a6
25 ... Ad7 39 &la3 *e7
26 Sxh3 &c4 40 *g5 Axb5
27 WgS Sh8 41 &xb5 fcc5
28 fixh8 Bxh8 42 \342\202\254td6 %-%
5
Systems with ...\302\243\\ge7

The introduction of the early knight

sortie 5...Qge7 is designed to put

pressure on d4 without the need for

...JLd7. It has been championed by
such players as Korchnoi and Par-
tisch, who have added much to the

understanding of the line. The

attraction of 4...Qe7 intending 5...Qec6
lies in its unusual knight formation
which can confuse an unsuspecting
opponentIt has been employed
occasionally by Botvinnik and Keene. blocked diagonal to manoeuvre the

The strength of Black's positional knight to c2 whence it reinforces d4.

play can be somewhat muted by 6 ... cxd4

accurate play and White should emerge 7 cxd4 \302\243tf5

with at least a slight advantage. 8 \302\243>c2 &e7

White obtained a slight advantage

Game 30 USSR
in the game Psakhis-Chernin,
Sveshnikov-Farago Ch 198S,after 8...&M 9 Qxb4

Hastings 1984/85 Axt>4+ 10 &d2 \302\243xd2+ 11 Vxd2

Wb6 12 \302\243d3-&.d7 13 JLxfS exfS 14
1 e4 e6 0-00-0.
2 d4 d5 Also possibleis a straightforward
3 e5 c5 attempt to put pressure on d4:
4 c3 \342\202\254k6 8...Wb69 \302\243d3 Ab4+ 10 *fl Ae7
5 &I3 &ge7 (90) 11 h4! (11 g3-&.d7 12 *g2 Ec8! 13
Black declares an intention to Axf5 exf5 14 b3 0-0 ? Short-Va-

attack d4 via \302\2435. ganian, Montpellier C 198S) ll...hS

6 Qa3 (1 l...Ad7?! 12g4 Qh6 13 figl &g8
White exploits the temporarily 14 flbl aS IS We2 &b4 16 &xb4
 108 Systems with ..&ge7

axb4 17 a3 \302\261
Rohde-Spraggett, New 10 g4!
York 1986) 12g3a5 13*g2&d7 14 A survey of older sources reveals
Axf5 exf5 15 Ag5 Axg5 16 &xg5 that the position is assumed to be
f4 17 WO! \302\261
Malaniuk-Lputian, equal, on the basis of the
USSR Ch 1986. 0-0. This assessment stems
continuation 10

9 Ad3 0-0?!(91) from the game Sax-F.Portisch,

At this juncture, Black has Hungary 1978, which continued 10...f6
various possibilities: 11 \302\243xf5 exf5 12 flel fxe5 13 dxe5
a) 9...\302\243d7 100-0Wb611 flbl a6 f4! 14h3Ac5 15a3a5 16flbl *h8
12 i.xf5 exf5 13&g5!0-014Wd2 (16...d4? 17 b4 d3 18 bxc5 dxc2 19
flac8 15 flfcl Sc7 16 \302\243te3i.e6 17 Wxc2 Af5 20 17
\302\253b3+ \302\261) b4 axb4
Axe7 &xe7 18 ttxc7 Wxc7 19 flcl 18 axb4 \302\253b6 19 Be2 Af5 20 Sb2
#d7 20 &el b6 21 h3 h6 22 \302\243k!3 Ae7! 21 #xd5 fiad8 22 Vb3 fldl+
flc8 23 ff xc8+ ftxc8 24 &f4 &e7 25 23 Sel Axc2 24 Wxc2 flxel+ 25
Wb4! Wc7? 26 Wd6! Wxd6 27 exd6 &xel &xe5 =.
\302\243>c8 28 &xe6 1-0 Haba-Meyer, The text, which launches a
Hassloch 1991. dangerous attack, is a strong antidote to
b) 9...fto6and now: Black's system.
bl) 10g4!?Qh411&xh4\302\243xh4 10 ~. \342\202\254A4

12 0-0 Ae7 (12...f6 13 g5!\302\243)13 If the knight retreats, then the

Ae3 i.d7 = Plaskett-Mestel, pawn barrier can be shattered:

Hastings 1986/87. 10...&h6 11 Axh6 gxh6 12 g5!?

b2) 10 0-0 Ad7 11 flbl a5 (not hxg5 13Qxg5&xg514Wh5 h6 15
1l...&fxd412&fxd4 &xd4 13 \302\243e3 h4 with good play (Kuijf).
Ac5 14 b4 +-) 12 Axf5 exf5 (Car- 11 &xh4 i.xh4
lier-Rasidovi6, Lugano 1987) 13 12 gS!
\302\243g5! \302\245. This rapid sharpening of the
position is the g4.
reasoning behind 10
The pawn traps the bishop, so Black
is obliged to take it This opens up
the g-file for the benefitof the rooks.
12 ... &xg5
13 Wh5

It would be premature to lash out

with another sacrifice: 13 &xh7+?
*xh7 14 #h5+ &h6 15flgl
(intending Sxg7+) 15...fig8 16 *e2
B mmm m% Wf8! -+.
 Systems with ...Qlge7 109

13 ... h6 White is understandably anxious

14 figl Axel to rule out any hint of counterplay
White's plan is easy to follow and has time to take precautions.
with the natural moves Wh5 and fig 1 However, Sveshnikov points out that
posing all sorts of problems.The a direct approachwould reap instant
ominous threat of IS fixgS dictates dividends: 20 fihS &xd4+ 21 *dl!
Black's response. fifft 22 \302\253xd4 Wxd4 (22...1fxa2 23
Not so good is 14...f5? (14...f6? fial +-) 23 &xd4 +-.
IS f4! wins) IS exf6 Wxf6 16fixgS! 20 ... \302\243>e7

Wxf2+ 17 *dl which is again Other paths also offer little

winning for White. resistance:

15 fixcl 15 a) 20...fcxe5 21 dxe5 Wxe5 22

Even at this early stage, Black is fihS g6 23 figl #f6 24 ffxg6+
on the brink of collapse. For #xg6 25 ffh8+ *g7 26 fixa8 +-. .
example: 15...*h8 16 *e2 (intending b) 20...fic8 21 fihS fiff8 22 figl

fixg7) 16...fig8 17 #xf7 We8 18 +-.

flxg7! +-. 21 fihS &g6
16 Wxh6 fin No better is 21...*f8 22 ffh8+

17 *e2 Wb6 &g8 23 lfh7 +-.

18 fM 22 Wg3! &f8
The opening has beena great 23 *h3
success for White. Material equality has Now the other rook will be added
been re-establishedwhile the to the attack with decisive
onslaught continues in earnest consequences.

18 ... Ad7 23 ... fie7

19 figS! #xb2 The resource 23...\302\243>g6 can be
20 *d2 (92) rebuffed by 24 figl! winning.
24 ffh8+ *T7
25 figl \302\243a4

26 #h5+ g6
27 fixg6! 1-0

Game31
Fedorowicz-Jackelen
Porz 1988

1 e4 e6
2 d4 d5
110 Systems with ...foge7

3 eS c5 7...4.xc5 8 b4 Ae7 9 b5 \302\243>a510 0-0

4 c3 \302\243>c6 0-0 11 Ad3 Wc7 12 g4! \302\243>h4 13
5 \302\243H3 \302\243}ge7 &xh4 SLxM 14 gS h6 15 f4 f6 16
6 fca3 gxf6 gxf6 17 Wh5 fxeS 18 #xh4 e4
White also has other possibilities 19 Ae2 *h7 20 -&.e3 1-0 Ekstrdm-
to fight for the advantage: Schauwccker, Switzerland 1993.
a) 6 Ae3?! &f5 7 Ad3 (7 Wd2 d) 6 &d3 isexaminedin the next
&xe3 8 fxe3 Ae7 9 Ad3 0-OTolush- illustrative game.
Botvinnik, USSR 1938) 7...\302\243>xe3 8 6 ... cxd4
fxe3 9 0-0 0-0 0-0 10Wc2 (10
Ae7! 7 cxd4 \302\243tf5

We2 Sitf 11 &b2 Vb6 \302\245)

10...h6 11 8 &c2 Wa5+(9JJ
&bd2 &d7 12 fiael fic8 13 Wbl
bS! 14 dxcS &XC5 IS &b3 &e7 16
&bd4 M 17 cxb4 \302\243xb4 18 fie2
Wo6 T Heidenfeld-Donner, Lugano
1968.
b) 6 a3cxd47 cxd4&f5 8 \302\243>c3

&e7 and now:

bl) 9 Ab5 Sitf 10SM Wb6 11

&e2 f6 12 g4 Qh6 13exf6 &f8 14

\302\243xh6 gxh6 IS Wd2 0-0-0 16 \302\243xc6

SLxgS 17 0x5 Ae8 18 0-0 \302\261
Roman-

ishin-Razuvaev, Moscow 1985.

b2) 9 \302\243d3!? \302\243tfx'd4 10 \302\243xd4 A popular way of handling the

&xd4 11 Wg4 &f5 12 \302\243xf5 exfS 13 position as it lures White's queen's

#xg7 fif8 14 0-0 Slgo IS \302\243h6*d7 bishop out This is a debatable

16 flfdl flg8 17 Wxh7 *c7 18 Sacl achievement as it will over-protect

*b8 19 i.xd5
\342\202\254>xd5 20 SxdS d4 whilst Black argues that it will
Sxg2+ 21 *xg2 \302\253xd5+ 22 *gl b6 lack scope on c3.
23 #xf5 +- PyhMla-Kanko, Helsinki Also feasible is 8...\302\243>b4 9 &e3
1989. \302\243e7 10 QxfS exfS 11 a3 <&c612
c) 6 Ae2 \302\243}f5(6...cxd4 7 cxd4 \302\243d3i.e6 13 0-0 a6 14 \302\243e3flc8 IS
\302\243>f5transposes to Game 18, Gal- b4 when White has the slightly better

dunts-Naroditsky) 7 dxc5 (7 g4!? chances; Vu\302\243ini6-Dizdar, Pula 1990.

&h4 8 fcxh4 \302\253xh4 9 \302\243e3Ad7 10 9 \302\243d2 H>6

0-0 {10 \302\243k!2cxd4 11 \302\253tf3

Wxg4! \302\245} 10 i.c3 \302\243e7

10...f6 11 f4 fxeS 12 dxeS gS! with In the game Marjanovi6-Popovi6,

the better game for Black - Psakhis) Yugoslavia 1986, Black adopted an
 Systems with ...Qlge7 111

alternative plan of development: fS and Black has very good chances.

10...&d7 11 \302\243d3Ae7 12 tfd2?!
(12 However, White can follow up with
0-0!? 12...a5!
\302\261) 13 a3 h5 and now IS Wc2, so Black is obliged to be
14 \302\243xf5 exfS IS h4 offered equal wary.
chances.
11 \302\243d3 a5

12 a3
White is keen to
nullify Black's

counterplay by ruling out the chance

of a piece occupyingb4.
It is also possibleto proceedin
more robust fashion as shown by
Sveshnikov-Ortega, Sochi 1987:12
&e3 g6 130-0 Ad7 14 Ac2 h5
(14...0-0 IS intending
\302\243>g4 \302\243if6+ \302\261)

15 Wd2 *f8 16 g3 &b4 17 Axf5!

gxf5 (17...exf5? 18 a3 +-) 18 h4 14 ... f5
\302\243b5 19 fffdl Wa6 20 ftgS fic8 21 15 gxfS &xf5
a3 \302\243>c622 &g2 *g7 23 fie 1 &C424 16 \302\243>e3

&b3
\302\243>f4 25 We3 \302\253b5 (25...Axg5? This removes a vital defender,
26 \302\243xe6+! fxe6 27 Wxg5+ *f7 28 and so increasesthe pressure on
Wf6+ and White wins) 26 fiacl \302\243c4 Black's kingside. Black's problems
27 *g2 ficg8 28 #f3 *f8? 29 are compoundedby the prospect of
\302\243}fxe6+ 1-0. 17 AxfS exfS 18&xd5,thus forcing
12 ... 0-0 the issue.
13 g4 16 ... &xe3
This is a familiar theme, 17 fxe3 Ad7

particularly when Black castles before 18 We2

White. One way to counter the White's forces are perfectly
problem is 12...h5!? but this has the poised to start an avalanche on the
drawback of weakeningthe king- flank by doubling on the g-file or
side. targeting h7. Black is unable to adjust
13 ... \342\202\254A4 swiftly enough to the changed
14 Rgl (94) circumstances when queen is a
the
A novel way to conduct the remote figure and the rest of the pieces
attack. The immediate threat is lackharmony.
illusory: IS \302\243>xh4 &xh4 16 gS &xeS! 18 ~. fif7
17 fig4 &xg4 18 Wxg4 eS 19 Wxh4 19 Wg2 \342\202\254tt>8
112 Systems with ...foge7

The start of a cumbersome

manoeuvre to transfer the knight to f8.
20 Wh3 g6 (95)

on d4 without further ado, since

delaying this decision would give
White more options.In Kupreichik-
Legky, Lvov 1984, White was
21 \302\243xg6! permitted to recapture on d4 with the

A stylish way to terminate the knight, and gained an advantage

game. after 6...&f5 7 0-0 (7 dxc5!? &xc5 8
21 ... hxg6 0-0b69 b4 &e7 10b5 &a5 11 \302\243kd4

22 Sxg6+ flg7 was unclear in Lazi6-Velimirovi6,

23 2xg7+ *xg7 Yugoslavia 1991) 7...cxd48 Axf5
24 0-0-0 Af8 exf5 9 fcxd4! &e6 10 \302\243e3Ae7 11
25 &g5 1-0 f4.
7 cxd4 \302\243tf5

Game 32 8 Axf5

Blatny-Moldovan A direct course of action to relieve

StaraZagoraZ1990 the pressure against d4. A survey of

the alternatives reveals:
1 e4 e6 a) 8&e3!?andnow:
2 d4 d5 al) 8...&e79 0-0 0-0 10 \302\243>c3

3 e5 c5 &xe3 11 fxe3 fS 12 exf6 &xf6 13

4 c3 Qc6 Wc2 h6 14 \302\243e2 Ad7 IS \302\243>c7
\342\202\254kf4

5 \302\243>!3 &ge7 (Bellon-Moles, Groningen 1968/69)

6 &d3(96) 16 Qh5 with a distinct advantage for
The most energetic reply, which White.
has Psakhis* stamp of approval. a2) 8...4.D4+9 \302\243>c30-0 10 0-0
6 ... cxd4 &xe3 11 fxe3 f6 12 exf6 #xf6 13
Black wisely prefers to exchange *hl lfh6 14e4 &d6 ISeSAe7 16
 Systems with ...foge7 113

a3 \302\243d7 17 b4 Sac8 18 \342\202\254k\302\243

Ac8 19 b) 10 \302\243g5 Wb6 11 0-0 h6 12
Wcl! Wxc 1 20Saxc 1and White has Act Ae7 13\302\243>e2g5 14 b3 Sc8 15
the better ending due to his territorial Ab2 0-0 16 <\302\261>hlf4 = Markland-

advantage; C.Hawthorne-Corfield, Moles, Birmingham 1968.

Bournemouth 1981. c) 10&e2andnow:
b) 8 0-0?! 3tfxd4 9 &xd4 &xd4 cl) I0...\302\253to6!? 11 \302\243tf4h6 12 h4
10 &c3 \302\243>c6! 11 Af4 i.e7 12 Sel g6 13 *fl (13 0-0Ae7 14 g3 a5 15

(or 12 Wg4 g5!) 12...Ag5! 13 Ag3 *g2 a4 16Sbl \302\261 Sax) 13...Ae7 14
0-0 14 WhS (Haag-Portisch, g3 0-0-0 15 *g2 *b8 (15...g516
Hungary 1959) 14...g6 15 We2 f5 16 \302\243>xe6 fxe6 17 hxg5 hxg5 18 Bxh8
exf6 JiLx{6\\ White has insufficient Sxh8 19Ag5 Ag5 20 \302\243ig5&d4 21

compensation for the pawn. Wd2\302\261Sax) 16 Sbl Ac8(16...g5 17

8 ... exf5 hxg5 hxg5 18 Bxh8Sh8 19&xe6
9 0-0 (97) fxc6 20 Axg5 &xg5 21 &xg5 &xd4
At this point, there is a major
22 Wd2 Sg8 23 b4 \302\261
Sax) 17 c6

junction. One particular value of the i.xe6 18 &xe6 fxe6 19 ficl e5!
little-known text is that it explodes 20
(19...&a5 \302\243>e5 t) 20 &xc5
the myth that it is necessary to \302\243ixe5 21 Af4 Af6 22 dxe5 lh-'/i
prevent ...g5 in order to install a knight Sax-M.Gurevich,
Munich 1993.

onf4. c2) 10...i.e7 11 h4fic8 12 *fl

After 9 &c3 &e6 play might (12 h6 13
\302\243}f4 Sh3 *d7 14 h5 Be8
continue: 15Sg3 i.f8 16*f 1 *c7 17 a3 *b8
a) Ae7 (10...h6 11 \302\243tel
10 0-0 18 b4 \302\243
Nun-Langner, Ostrava 1991)
\302\243e7 12 13 &c2 Wb6
f4 g5 14 Wd3 \302\261 12,..Wb6 13 3tf4 &b4 14Ad2 *d7

Zaitsev-Volke, Podolsk 1991) 11 15 Ac3 Wa6+ 16 *gl Shd8 17 g3

&el!(ll&e2g5! 12&elf4 13 f3 b5 18 a4 Qc6 19 We2 Bb8 20 &g5
Vb6 14 *hl AfS is even slightly h6 21 &xf7! Bf8 22 \302\243k!6Axd6 23
better for Black; Teschner-Por- exd6 Bfe8 24 &d3 *xd6 25 Ad2
tisch, Monte Carlo 1969)11... *e7 1^6
26 WXCO+ 1-0 Orr-Poulton,
(ll...flc812 0-0
\302\243>c2 13 #d3 Wd7 British Ch 1988.
14 f4 a6 15&d2 t Zaitsev-Moska- c21) ll...h6 12\302\243>f4ffb6 13 a3

lenko. Moscow 1992) 12 &e2 0-013 (13 Bh3!? g6 14 *fl 0-0-015*gl

*hl! *h8 (13\342\200\236.a514 f4 \302\261
Blatny- Sdg816Sbl g5 17 hxg5 hxg5 18
Machulsky, Alma-Ata 1989) 14 \302\243d3 Sxh8 Bxh8 19&xe6fxe620Axg5
Sac8 15 Ae3 \302\243b4 16 &a6
\302\243>c5 17 i.xg5 21 &xg5 \302\253xd4 22 \302\253xd4

\302\243>a4Wd8 18 &ac3 #d7 19 Wd2 \302\243ixd4 23 g3 = Sveshnikov-Temir-

Sfe8 20 f3 b5 21 \302\243>g3was unclear; baev, Kuibyshev 1987) 13...0-014
Tbipsay-Gdanski, Manila OL 1992. Wd3 Sc8 15 Sbl 16
\302\243>a5 b4 17
\302\243>c4
114 Systems with ...foge7

g4! g6 18hS fxg4 19 hxg6 gxf3 20 The rare alternatives are not
Bxh6 f5 21 g7 Bf7 22&xe6#b5 23 convincing:

Hh8# (1-0) C.Hawthorne-Shaw, a) 10 3tod2 Ae6 11 &b3 0-0 12

Devon 1981. \302\243e3 a5 13 Bel a4 14 \302\243>c5a3 15
c22) ll...Wa5+?! 12 *fl h6 13 bxa3 &xc5 16 Bxc5 te-'fc Piancat-
\302\253tf4flc8 14 *gl! #b6 IS hS &b4 elli-Marino, Rome 1990.
16
(15...0-0!?) Ad2 \302\243>c2?17 &xe6! b) 10a3a611b4b5 12^.e3 0-0
fxe6 18 Bel Wxb2 19 \302\243>elWxd4 20 13 &e6
\302\243>c3 14 Wd2 Vb6 15 \302\243e2
Bxc2 0-0 21 Sh3! Bxc2 22 &xc2 a5 16 \302\243g5 h6 17 Axe7 &xe7 18
Wa4 23 Bc3 Wxa2 24 Wa6
\302\243>d4 25 Sacl axb4 19 axM Bfc8 20Bc5
Bg3 4\342\200\224
Sveshnikov-Psakhis, Sochi with a slight plus for White; Salai-
1987. Hirsch,Brno/Morava 1991.

d) 10 h4 &b4 (10...i.e711\302\243ke2 10 ... gS!?

transposes to the notes above) 11 For some time this prophylactic
Ad2 Axc3 12bxc3 h6 13 \302\243}gl\302\253? move, which rules out the usual idea
0-0 14 \302\243>e2f6 15 \302\243if4Af? 16 exf6 &e2-f4,was considered the antidote
#xf6 17 h5 Bfe8+ 18*fl b5 19 a3 to White's plan.
a5 20 g3 b4 21 *g2 bxc322.S.xc3 If I0...\302\243e6 11 &el transposes to
a4 23 Bbl was equal in Vasiukov- note 'a* after White's ninth move.

Popovi6,Vrsacl989. 11 \302\243*1 f4

e) 10 a3 Ae7 11 h4 h6 12 \302\243f4 12 h4
&a5 13 *fl #d7 14 \302\243k!2 with The weakening of White's
equality; Benjamin-Vaganian, Wijk defensivebarrier is a calculated risk to
aanZee 1989. undermine Black's pawns before he
can support them with his pieces.
12 ... h6
13 #h5! gxh4

It is more critical to steal the d-

pawn: I3...&xd4!? 14 hxg5 &xg5

15 Wdl! \302\243>c6 16 *Wxd5 Af5 (or
16...JU6 17 We4) 17 &f3 when the
complications favour White.
14 \302\243xf4 \302\243e6

15 Ae3 Wd7
w.tmwmm &d3
16 &g4 (98)
17 e6!
9 ... &e7 At a stroke an escape route is
10 &c3 exposed. If 17...Axh5 (17...Wxe6 18
 Systems with ...Z&ge7 115

2 d4 d5
w
3 eS c5
4 c3 \302\243>e7
MS m m This is a prelude to
usually
ib mm 5...5ibc6 which would return to the

e m\302\261
lines already considered.
5 \302\243>f3 \302\256ec6(99)

sb.1 m&
a ma.

#xd5 Bd8 19 WbS +-) 18 exd7+

*xd7 19&f4+-.
17 ... &xe6

18 &f4 0-0-0
. Since 10...gS, Black's simplistic
plan has been to castle long and
storm the kingside. However, the
way White has contrived to shatter

the pawns and open up the position Now Black has revealed his true

reveals what a risky task that can be. intentions. The idea is to keep
19 \302\243ft>5 a6 pressure on d4 while exchanging the
20 \302\243*5! light-squared bishop after ...b6 and
The game is brought to an abrupt ...iLa6 or, as in the game, continue
finish. The knight cannot be with queenside development. Other
captured due 21 WxeS with
to 20...Qxe5 tries have not emerged with much
mate next move. Black's problems credit:
are compoundedby the threat of 21 a) 5...\302\243>f5 6 dxc5 Axc5 7 Ad3
Qxc6andlre5+-. Qc6 and now:
20 ... WeS al) 80-0&h4!?9Bel(9&bd2!)
21 ftxc6 #xc6 9...&d710 b4?! Ab6 11 b5 \302\243>xf3+

1-0 12 #xf3 \302\243>e713 &a3 Bc8 14 #g3

5ig6 Barden-Botvinnik,
\302\245 Hastings
Game 33 1961/62.
Kupreichik-Kovacevil a2) 8 &xf5! exfS 9 0-0Ae7 10

Ljubljana/RogaSka Slatina 1989 \302\243>bd20-0 11 &e6

\302\243>b3 12 #e2 #c7
13 &f4 Bc8 14 Bfel a6 IS &g5!
1 e4 e6 Axg5 16 &xg5 h6 17 &f3 &e7 18
116 Systems with ...Qge7

i
\342\202\254Mxl4 Basman-Keene, British Ch position; Dekifc-F.Portisch,
1968. Budapest 1992.

b) 5...\302\243>d76a3!lrb67b4cxd4 8 d) 6 \302\243>d77
h4\302\253? g3 (7 h5? f6! 8
cxd4 \302\243te69 Ab2 intending 10 \302\243d3 exf6 &xf6 9 h6 g6 f Sveshnikov-
is considered by Szily to give White KovaCevifc, Belgrade 1988) 7..JLe7
an advantage. 8 Ah3 b5 9 a3 a5 10 &g5 &xg5 11

6 &e3 Axg5 f6 12 exf6 Qxf6 13 dxc5 0-0

White can chooseotherpaths: 14 ^d2 Wei 15 &xf6 Bxf6 16 b4
a) 6\302\243d3andnow: Bg6 17 &f3 #f6 18 \302\243d4 We5+ 19
al) 6...b6 7 Ag5 fd7 8 0-0 &a6 *fl &d7 20 *g2 Bf8 21 #e2 #f6
9 dxcS bxcS 10 Axa6 &xa6 11 c4 h6 22Badl*h8 23 h5 Bh6 24 f4 #f7
12Ah4 \302\243te713 Ae7
\302\243>c3 14 Axe7 25 Qxb5 +- Espinoza-Paneque, Cali

\302\243>xe7 IS Bel Bc8 16 #e2 0-0 17 1990.

Bfdl Wc6 18 b3 \302\261
Sveshnikov-Lpu- 6 ... \302\243ld7

tian, Moscow 1989. Also worth consideration is 6...b6

a2) 6...\302\243>d7 7 0-0 cxd4 8 cxd4 which prepares ...iLa6and bolsters

&e7 9 \302\243te3\302\243fo6 10 a3 a5 11 Ac2 c5. Fishbein-Friedman, New York

Ad7 12 g3 \302\243>a713 h4 h6 14 \302\243>h2 1990 continued 7 &d3 &a68 &xa6
#c7 IS &d3 \302\243>c4 16 a4 &b4 17 \302\243>xa6 9 Wa4 \302\243ab8 10 0-0 #d7 11
Wg4 \302\243
Maciejewski-Spretic, Tuzla #c2 &e7 12 h4 #d8 13 Bdl \302\243d7

1989. 14 h5 0-0 15 #e2 f6 16exf6&xf6

b) 6&e2b670-0&a68.a.xa6!? 17 h6 g618 c4 cxd4 19 cxdS exdS 20
\302\243>xa69 #a4 \302\243>ab8 10 &e3 #d7 11 &xd4 \302\243ucd4 21 Axd4 &xd4 22
fc2 Ae7 12&bd2 0-0 13g3c4 14 Bxd4 &f6 23 &c3 #d6 24 #d2
&g5 Axg5 15 AxgS &a6 16 f4 \302\243te7 with advantage to White.
17 Bf3 &e8 18 f5 exfS 19Bx\302\243S\302\243te7 7 Ad3 a5
20 Bafl &e7 21 &xe7 #xe7 22 8 Qbd2
#dl &e623#f3 Bad8 24 #e3 bS Kupreichik's suggestion 8 5ig5!?
25 Blf2 h6 26 h4 *h7 27 \302\243>fl
g6 28 merits attention, for example
Bf6 &g7 29 #f3 Bd7 30&e3^h5 8...cxd4 9 cxd4 Ae7 (9...h6?! 10
31 \302\243>xd5 #d8 32 g4 1-0 Soos- #h5 hxg5
11 #xh8 \302\243>b4 12 Wh7

HavaSi, Hungary 1991. g6 13 &xg6 +-) 10 h4 (10 #h5?

c) 6 a3!? a5 7 &d3 b6 8 Ag5 &xg5! 11 &xg5 Wb6 ?) 10...#b6
fd7 9 dxc5 bxc5 10 \302\243fod2 c4 11 (10...h6 11 Wh5!) 11 ftc3 and White
Ac2 E>a6 12 b4 cxb3 13&xb3a4 has an edge.
14 \302\243fod4 \302\243te5 15 0-0 h6 16 Af4 8 ... cxd4
Aa6 17 Bel &c4 18 E>xc6 #xc6 9 cxd4 a4?!

19 <&d4 #a6 20 Be3 with an equal 10 a3?!

 Systems with ...foge7 117

Though White is gradually 16 0-0 \302\243ftc4!

improving his position, a more If given no opposition, the pawn-

adventurous course of action was called roller f4-fS would pose a serious
for to highlight the inadequacies of problem. This inspiresBlackto start
neglecting development. Rather than counterplay on the other flank.

pushing the a-pawn, 10 &g5! iLe7 17 &xe4 &xc4

10h4%b611fg4 Wxb212 0-0 was 18 #e2
called for, when the attack continues There is nothing to be gained
in earnest from trading pieces: 18iLxc4dxc4
10 ... &e7 19 dS exdS 20 #d4 &f5! 21 g4 Ad3
11 h4 U6( 100) and it is Black who has the better
game thanks to the extra pawn.
18 ... b5
100 iw\302\261ii*tt m 19 f4 Ae7
w nkmimtm 20 f5!?
h*has m It is also tempting to seek

\342\226\240 \342\226\240ah \342\226\240 complications, which emerge after 20 iLxc4

km m m m dxc4 (20...bxc421 g4!)21f5!?(21
dS exdS 22 fS d4! 23 &xd4 AxfS
& \342\226\240iSSSB
leaves Black with the better chances)
e a isai 21...exf5 22 dS.Kupreichik
m mw\302\256 mu
this
considers position to be unclear.
20 ... cxf5
12 h5 Blackis positionally bankrupt
A standard device to hem in the after 20...&g5? 21 \302\243xc4 bxc4

kingside pawns. The pawn (21 ...dxc4 22 d5! 22 AxgS

\302\261) fxgS
effectively puts a block on a future ...g6, 23f6\302\261.

so White can continue to concentrate 21 &xf5 &xe3

his resourceson direct action 22 #xe3 &g5
towards snaring the king. 23 #g3 &xf5
12 ... \302\243to6 24 naS(Wl) Bc8?
13 &h2 &a5 A perilous journey appears to
14 #g4 &f8 await Black if the rook is snatched,
An unpleasant move to make, but but Kupreichik's analysis
after 14...*f8 IS Bel White can demonstrates it is the only way to seek
continue in robust fashion with 0-0 salvation (at least). Play might
and f4-f5. continue 24...&xcl! 25 #xg7 Bf8 and
15 Bel &d7 now:
118 Systemswith ..foge7

*hl Bxe8 32 #xe8+ *c7 |)

27...*d728 <2M3 *c7 29 Bf6 fe7
30 Wg6 with an unclear game.
25 Bcfl 0-0
26 e6!
With the oppressed king finally
seeking shelter by castling, White

administers a crushing blow by a

successful breakthrough.
26 ... fc7
If 26...f6 27 \302\253f3 wins the d5
a) 26 Ba6
\302\243>g4 (26...\302\243g5!27 e6 pawn.
lfe7! ? Nunn) 27 \302\243>f6+ Bxf6 (or 27 Ifel! #e7
27...*e7 28 &g8+ *d7 29 Bf7+ If Blackplays 27...&f6 to block
Bxf7 30#xf7+*c831e6 Ae3+ 32 the f-file. White can
instigate a
with
\342\231\246fl, an unclear position) 28 thunderous attack: 28 Bxf6 gxf6 29 &g4
exf6 #d6 29Be5+*d830Be7 Be8 fxe6 30 #xe6+ *g7 31 Bxf6 with a

31 Bxe8+ *xe8 32 #g8+ #f8 33 clear advantage.

#g3! *d734Hi3+*d8 35 #g3 =. 28 Bxf7 Bxf7
b) 26 e6!? fd6 (26...1fe727 29 Bxf7 Bel
exf7+ {27 \302\243>g4 &g5} Bxf7 28 On 29...1U6 30 Bd7 Wb6 31 WeS
#g8+ #f8 29 Be5+ *d7 T Nunn) ^f632#xd5wins.
27 exf7!? (27 Bxf7 0-0-0 28 e7Bxf7 30 Ifccl #xe6
29 #xf7 &xb2!30e8# &xd4+ 31 31 Hf4 1-0
6 5...\302\243>h6

The ideais to reach positions similar might adopt an independent line:

to those which arise from 5...&ge7, 6...f6!? 7 Axh6 gxh6 8 0-0 cxd4 9
while thwarting &a3 because of cxd4 \302\243g7 10 Bel 0-0 11 \302\243>bd2H>6
...cxd4and .. .iLxa3. The attraction of 12 exf6 Bxf6 13 \302\243fo3Ad7 14 &c5
the line for Black is that it avoids Bd8 IS Bel &c8 16&bl Bdf8 17

main-line theory. Sveshnikov's lfd3 BfS 18 \302\243>xe6 Axe6 19 Bxe6

remedy 6 dxcS is the critical #xb2 20 Bfl &xd4 21 \302\243>h4\302\243>xe6

continuation, with White generally 22 &xf5 Bd8 23 E>xh6+ and now
emerging on top. White has a clear plus; Hendriks-
Crouch,Dieren1992.
Game34 The immediate 6 iLxh6 normally
Sveshnikov-Bareev transposes to the note to Black's

Match: Poliot-T.Petrosian 1991 sixth move, although the game Gof-

shtein-Soffer, Tel Aviv followed a
1 e4 e6 different direction: 6...gxh6 7 dxcS
2 d4 d5 &g7 8 AbS 0-0 9 &xc6 bxc6 100-0
3 e5 c5 f6 11 #e2 &d7 12 Bel Bb8 13 b4
4 c3 &c6 Ae8 14 \302\243>bd2Ah5 IS #e3 #c7 16
5 \302\243>f3 Gh6!? Bad Axf3 17 \302\243>xf3fxeS 18 &xe5
start of the variation. BfS 19&g4\302\261.

6 dxc5 6 ... tbg4V. (102)

Sveshnikov pounces on the Black assumes that taking away
chance to exploit the unusual move- the natural defender of eS allows the

order. The idea is that the exchange knight to enter the fray. After
on cS lures the bishop out, 6..JLxc5 play might continue:

with the options of Jbch6

White
presenting a) 7 b4 and now:
followed by #d2, or b4-bS, which al) 7...&e7 8 Ad3 \302\243>g49 Af4

oblige the bishop to retreat. After 6 f6! 10 bS EtexeS 11 \302\243>xeS&xe5 12

JLd3 the game could transpose into AxeS fxeS 13 Wh5+ *f8 = Rozen-

Game 32, Blatny-Moldovan, or Black talis-Kuporosov, Budapest 1990.

120 5...l&h6

lfe7 25 \302\243>c51-0 Sveshnikov-Duk-

hov, Moscow 1992; or 11...0-012
Bel!?;12a4!? unclear -
Glek) 12
Bel 0-0 13 a4 &d7 14 Ba2!?f6
(14...a6!?) 15 Axg6 hxg6 16 fd3 f5
17 \302\243fod2 Bfc8 18 Bc2 a6 19 Becl
m m \342\226\240\302\243>\342\226\240
axb5 20axb5Ba321fe2 #c522
\302\243ki4 Bca8 23 g4 f4 24 g5 h5 25
&2f3 *g7 26#d2Bf8 27 Ba2 &a5
iSJJHS 28 Bxa3 #xa3 29 #c2 #e7 30c4
dxc4 31 fe4! \302\261
Sveshnikov-Niko-

a2) 7...&f8 8 b5 (8 Ad3!? is laev, Moscow 1992.

worth consideration) 8...&a5 9 \302\243d3 b) 7 iLxh6gxh6and now:

f6 10 &xh6 gxh6 11 \302\243d4 #c7 12 bl) 8 b4 \302\243f89 b5 fte7 10 &d3

exf6 \302\273e5+ 13 Ae2 &d6 14 f7+ Ag7 110-0&g6(Sveshnikov-Glek,
*xf7 IS g3*g7 160-0Bf8 17 \302\243ki2 Moscow 1991) 12lfe20-0(12.J\302\273c7
Ad7 18 Ag4 Bae8 19 &h3 Be7 20 13 iLxg6 hxg6 14c4 is also unclear)
#a4 WhS 21 &g2 b6 22 c4 eS 23 13c4 with an unclear game
&c6 Axc6 24 dxc6#e2 25 Sadl to
according Sveshnikov.
&c5 26 cxdS Bxf2 27 Bxf2 #xf2+ b2) 8 Ad3 f6! 9 b4 Af8 10 b5
28*hl Bf7 29 #g4+ *f8 30 c7 1-0 <&xe5 11 \302\243>xe5 fxe5 12 Wh5+ *d7
Sveshnikov-Jolles,
Torcy 1991. 13 #xe5 Bg8 ? Khalifman-Kai-

a3) 7...&b6 8 Axh6 (8 b5 \302\243>e79 danov, Moscow 1987.

&d3 &g6 10 0-00-011 &xh6 gxh6 In the game Mukhametov-Lem-
12 a4!?f6 13 &xg6!? hxg6 14 #d3 pert, Moscow 1992,Blackwrongly
*g7 15 E>bd2 Ad7 16 c4 fxe5 17 tried to delay the capture: 6...WclV.
cxdS {17\302\243>xe5Ae8 18 Oadl Bc8 is 7 b4!&g4 (7...\302\243>xe5 8 Af4 E>xf3+
unclear} 17...exd518WxdS Af5 19 {8...f6 9 Ab5+!; 8...\302\243d3+ 9 &xd3
#xe5+ #f6 with unclear play; #xf4 10 &b5+ t) 9 #xf3 #d8 10
Sveshnikov-Moskalenko, Rostov- Ab5+ Ad7 11 Axd7+ #xd7 12 0-0
on-Don 1993) 8...gxh69 b5\302\243>e710 &f5 13 \302\243ki2&e7 14 c4 8 &f4
\302\261) f6
Ad3 \302\243>g611 0-0 \302\253fc7(not ll...f6? (8...\302\243>gxe5 9 &xe5 &xe5 10 Ab5+
12 Axg6 hxg6 13 \302\253U3*f7 14 exf6 and
\302\261) now 9 iLb5! gives White an

#xf6 15 \302\243>bd2 Bd8 16 Bael a6 17 advantage.

Ete5+ *g7 18 E>df3 Ad7 19 E>d4 7 #a4!
Axd4 20 #xd4 axb5 {20...&xb521 The point. At a stroke the queen's
Be3 Axfl 22Bf3 wins} 21 Be3 Ba4 knight is pinned while the king's
22 !T>6 Bf4 23 lfc7 g5 24 Qxd7 knight comes under attack. If now
 5..&h6 121

White
7...\342\202\254Mi6, maintains a clear White has the benefit of choosing the
extra pawn with 8 b4 or 8 JLe3. right moment for hxg4, while Black
7 ... hS would have trouble justifying ...gxh3
8 h3 \302\243>h6 which allows White to double rooks
9 Ae3 Qf5 on the h-file.
10 Ad4 14 ... a6
Even though the bishop acts like a 15 &xc6 &xc6

pawn, it has an important role. It 16 #c2 \302\253c7

protects c5 and eS, which allows White Black's wretched position is

to bring out the rest of the forces rather passive. The main concern is
with impunity. to restore material equality by
10 ... &d7 capturing on c5.
11 &b5 g5?! 17 Qd3 &b5
An ambitious measure to induce 18 \302\243tf4 0-0-0

complications by preparing g4. On If Black plays 18...\302\243xcS, White

ll...a6 comes 12 \302\243xc6 \302\243xc6 13 gains material by 19 QxdS exdS20

#c2 &xd4 14 cxd4 b6 IS cxb6 AxcS.
Wxb6 16 0-0 with a clear advantage 19 g3! *b8
to White. The same idea to the previous
12 \302\243>bd2 Bh6 note applies: 19...Axc520 iLxcS
13 0-0-0 &(103) #xc5 21 hxg4 hxg4 22 fixh6 &xh6
23#h7\302\261.

20 \302\243to3 Ae7
103 IB H*
21 hxg4 hxg4
W
mm*, 22 Bxh6 &xh6
\342\226\240*\342\226\240*! 23 *bl
mmmm*. ~ The situation has clarified. White
mm has firmly secured c5 and Black has
few prospectsof counterplay.
23 ... &f5
:nna\". 24 Hhl &g5
\342\226\240 sag \302\253a
25 Qg2!
With this manoeuvre, White starts
14 \302\243kel! an infiltration on the kingside.
It is wise to resist 14hxg4 hxg4 IS 25 ... #c8
Bxh6 Axh6 16 &el when Black has 26 Bh5 Bg8
relieved the pressureby exchanging 27 #dl &e7
the dormant rook. After the text 28 Qe3
722 5...2M

A
logical reaction to trade the 31 ... &d8
knight which covers the pivotal 32 ffh7 #c6

square d4. 33 &cl

28 ... &xe3 White's superiority is such that
29 &xe3 &e8 there is plenty of time to relocate the
30 *al *a8 knight to d3, as the central role
31 Wd41(I04) allows it to protect c5 and threaten
In view of the intended c6 to \302\243fo4.

threaten mate.Blackis obligedto go 33 ... a5

further on the defensive. 34 Qd3 Ae7
35 b3 *b8
36 *b2
The king slightly improves its
position in preparation for an eventual
b4.
36 ... Wa6

37 a4 *c8
38 *c2 &d8
39 *d2 16?!
40 exf6 &g6
41 Bg7 1-0
7 Kupreichik Variation

The system that is signified by 5

\302\243e3 is known as the Kupreichik
Variation. For a long time it has
been regarded as a doubtful
continuation,with Lewis in 1835 suggesting
S...!^,.. JLd7 and ..JIc8 as the
antidote. In modern tournament
practice the Byelorussian is predestined
to add hisnametothe line,due to his
large number of games that have

proved it to be a viable weapon. The

primary idea is to avoid the main unknown territory as early as move

lines by delaying the developmentof five.

the king'sknight The other rare moves should be

quite harmless:
Game 35 a) 5 f4 cxd4 (5...*b6 6 \302\243tf3

Kupreicbik-Farago &h6! 7 b3 cxd4 8 cxd4 &b4+ 9 *f2

Passau 1993 \302\243>f510 &b2 h5 ? Cohnen-Harber-
ditz, 1940)6cxd4\302\253b67 &d7
\302\243>f3 8
1 e4 e6 Bc8
\302\243>c3 9 Bbl &b4 10#d3 a6 11
2 d4 d5 a3 &e7 12b4 \302\243>a613 &e3 Qf5 14
3 e5 c5 Af2 \302\243>a715 g4 \302\243>b5? 16 \302\243>a4+-

4 c3 \302\243jc6 Capablanca-Paredes, Havana 1901.

5 $L&(105) b) 5 #g4 cxd4 6 cxd4 #b6 7
A committal but solid E>f3 8
\302\243>h6 #f4 9
\302\243>f5 &d3 \302\243>cxd4

continuation. It looks rather simplistic to -+ Weiss-Haberditz and Kellner,

over-protect d4 with the bishop but corr. 1933.
there is no clear way for Black to c) 5&e2f66f4fxe57dxe5\302\243>h6

take advantage of the situation. Now Ad7

8 \302\243>g3 9 Ae2 H>6 10 0-0 0-0-0
Black is obliged to enter relatively 11c4?! &d4 12 f5 fthxfS 13 &xf5
124 Kupreichik Variation

exf5 14 cxdS &a4 IS b3 (IS #xa4 ftaS 10 2cl Bc8 is unclear) 8...\302\243*xd4
E>xe2+ 16 *hl Ebccl 17 Bxcl SxdS 9 &xd4 &e7 10 Ad3 ftc6 11 &f3
-+) 15...\302\243>xe2+ 16 #xe2 Ab5 17 with unclear play.
#f3 Axfl 18 *xfl Wb5+ 19 *f2 c) 7...f6 8 Ad3 fxeS 9 &xe5 (9
Wb4 20 Ae3 f4! 21 #g4+ Bd7 22 dxeS?! fth6 100-0\302\243>f7 11 Af4 Ae7
Axf4 h5 23 #f3 Bf7 0-1 Romero 12 Bel 0-0-0 ? Wcsterinen-Ulybin,
Holmes-Korchnoi,
Pamplona 1990. Benidonn 1993)9...\302\243tf6 100-0.fi.d6
5 ... #b6 11 f4 0-0 and the position is equal
6 #d2 cxd4 according to Ulybin and Lysenko.
The backbone of the variation 7 cxd4 ^ge7

rests on its ability to deal with the 8 Ad3 \302\243tf5

flexible 6..JLd7. Kupreichik has Staking a claim to central territory

formulated a way to handle the situation and simultaneously putting pressure

by making the most of the ond4.
deployment of the queen and bishop. After 9 \302\243>c3 Ab4

7 5if3 play might proceed: 10 &ge2

a) 7...&C88 dxc5\302\243xc5 9 AxcS White now reveals his intention to
WxcS 10 Wg5 \302\243>ge7!? (10...*f8 \302\261) plant the knight on e2 rather than the

11 \302\243>bd2 (11 #xg7?! Sg8 12 #xh7 usual f3. This has the benefit of
d4! \302\245)11...0-0 12 Ad3 Ito!? supporting c3 and introduces the
(12...f6? 13 exf6 Bxf6 14 \302\243ie4\302\261; possibility of advancing the kingside
12...h6 13 fg3 t) 13 Axh7+ *xh7 pawns.
14 \302\253Ti5+ *g8 IS \302\243>g5Bfe8! 16 10 ... \302\243d7

#f7+ *h8 17 Wh5+ *g8 18 \302\243>df3 11 0-0 \342\202\254ke7

(180-0\302\253>xe5!) 18...Wb5! (18...*xb2 Not 11...0-0 12 Axf5 exf5 13

19 Wh7+ *f8 20 0-0 with unclear \302\243>xd5 Axd2 14 E>xb6 \302\243xe3 IS

play) 19 0-0-0 (19 Sdl d4! 20cxd4 &xd7 +-.

\302\243>b4!; 19 Wh7+ *f8 20 Wh8+ \302\243>g8 12 a3
21 WhS \302\243>h6 22 fth7+ *e7 23 With his development completed
Wh4+ *f7 24 \302\243>f6\302\243tf5! with White undertakes action to put
unclear play) 19...#c4! 20 g3 #a2 = pressure on Black, initially by forcing
Kupreichik-Dolmatov, Yugoslavia the trade of the bishop.
1992. 12 ... \302\243xc3

b) 7...cxd4 8 Axd4!? (8 &xd4 13 bxc3 0-0

E>xe5 9 \302\243>b5AcS; 8 cxd4 Ab4 14 Babl *c7
{8..Jk8 9 a3?^aS 10Sa2H)311 15 \302\243g5

\302\243te3Hxc3! 12 bxc3H)l+ -+ Mor- This is the type of position White

ris-Schaffner, Bern 1991} 9 &c3 was aiming for with S iLe3. Unlike
 Kupreichik Variation 125

other Advance positions, the knight 20 ... *h7

on e2 opens up different 21 \302\243>g3 b6

while
possibilities, Black has already made a After 21...f6!? 22 exf6 Bxf6 23
limited concession by transferring the &h5 (23Hxb7#xb7 24#xf6 Hf8

queen's knight to the kingside as an is unclear) 23...HH 24 f4 Hg8 25

extra defensive measure.The Hf3 \302\243ie7the position is unclear
transparent
threat of 16 g4 is sufficientto according to Kupreichik.
start a strong initiative on the flank. 22 \342\202\254Ui5 Sh8

15 ... h6 23 h4
16 Af4 \302\243>g6 With this move White shows that,
17 \302\243xf5 ex(S(106) although he has no immediate mate

threat, Black is paralysed to the

extent that the attack can at least
restore material equality.
23 #f6 is refuted by 23...*h6!.
23 ... \302\243e6

24 Hbcl #c4
25 Sfel lfd3
26 He3 #d2
27 an
A necessary precaution to prevent
Black's queen becoming a nuisance.
27 ... Sac8
18 \302\243xh6! 28 &f6+ *g7
In a seemingly peaceful position 29 h5 Sh6
White decides to lash out with a Unfortunately for Black, 29..Jffxc3
bold sacrifice. The reasoning is that allows 30 hxg6 fxg6 31 &g4!fxg4
the lack of co-ordination amongst 32 #f6+ *h7 33 #xe6 Sxe3 34
Black's piecesallows the slow &g3- #H+ *h6 35 #f4+ g5 36 Wf6+
h5 to be a powerful menace to the *h7 37 Wn+ *h6 38 fxe3 which

exposed king. Kupreichik assesses as winning for

18 ... gxh6 White.

19 Wxh6 #c6 30 hxg6 Bxg6
20 #g5 31 \342\202\254Ui5+ *I8
The immediate 20 \302\243>g3fails
to 32 Wh4
20...&xe5, so a more restrained The situation has becomemuch
response
is required, which also clearer. White enjoys a superior
introduces the prospect of h4. pawn structure, an extra pawn and
126 Kupreichik Variation

the attack is still raging. Black hasto &xe6 with a discovered attack on the
contendwith sheltering the exposed queen.
king while trying to maximize the 39 \342\202\254Ui5 *d7
value of his active queen. 40 Qf6+ *c7
32 ... Sg4 41 &e8+ *b7
33 116 Sg6 42 We7+ *a6
34 Wh4 Sg4 43 &d6 Sxd6
35 Wh2 44 exd6 e3(107)
Having conducted a little dance
with the queen for the benefit of the
clock, White is obliged temporarily
to retreat.
35 ... He4
36 Oxe4

There is a more precise way to

preservethe initiative: 36 &f4!? Sxe3
37 &xe6+ fxe6! 38 #h8+ *e7 39
Wxc8 Sxc3 40 Wb7+ *f8 41 Wb8+
*g7 42 Wxa7+ *f8 43 #xb6 ttcl
44 Wd8+ *g7 45 W(6+ *h7 46
Wh4+ \302\261
Kupreichik. White's extra exchange gives him
36 ... fxe4 a clear advantage. A forlorn gesture
37 &f4 fic6 to prolong the game by a series of
Kupreichik points out that Black checks is Black's best chance,but
can put up a stout defenceby means faced with a strong passed pawn the
of 37...ffxc3! (37...e3 38 <&e6\302\261)
38 prospects for a draw are bleak. The
#h8+ *e7 39 Wf6+ *d7 40 &xe6 as follows:
gameconcluded 45 fxe3

(40&xd5 Axd5 41 Wd6+ *e8! 42 #xe3+ 46 *h2 W16+ 47 *g3

41*T7+ *d8
WxdS e3! =) 40...fxe6 #g6+48*f2 \302\253c2+ 49 *gl Wxc3
42 Wxe6 #xd4 43 #d6+ *c8 44 e6 50 #h4 Wxa3 51 Wf4 Wa4 52 Scl
e3 with an unclear position. *b553lffl+*b454lfel+'4'b555
38 *h4 *e8 We2+ *a5 56 #b2 #b4 57 flal+
It is necessary to avoid the deadly *b5 58 WxM+ *xb4 59 ttxa7 *c4
39 Wd8+ *g7 40 Wg5+ *h7 41 60d7I-0.
8 White Deviations on Move Four

It was Nimzowitsch who Grst 4 Wg4 &c6

proposed the daring sortie 4 Wg4 in an The immediate 4...cxd4 tends to
effort to disrupt Black's transpose
to the game, although
developmentby attacking g7. The drawback there is an independent line: 5 &f3
is that the queen can become a target f5!? 6 Wg3 \302\243>c67 Ad3 Ad7 8 0-0
and the pawn chain to support eS is Wc7 9 Bel (9 a3 intending b4 is a

broken. suggestion by ECO) 9...&ge7 10a3

The intention of 4 is to
\342\202\254tf3 0-0-011b4 h6 12 h4 g6? 13 &bd2
develop rapidly while
preserving eS in *b8 14&b3\302\261
Basman-van Seters,
an effort to restrict the activity of the Bognor Regis 1964.
opposing forces. It has been adopted 5 Qf3 cxd4
by a number of players who have a The unusual move S..Ma5+ has
penchant for aggressive off-beat been tested: 6 c3 cxd47 \302\243>xd4 fS
lines such as Hodgson and Velimiro- (7...^xe5 8 #g3! intending Af4 and
vi6. &b5) 8 Wdl Qxd4 9 Wxd4 \302\253ie710

With 4 dxcS White conjuresup an Af4 \302\243k:611 \302\253d2Ae7 12 Ad3 0-0

ambitious attacking scheme. It was 13 0-0 Ad7 14Ve2*rf ISBelBf7
originally promotedby Steinitz and 16 Acl f4 17 &d2 g5 18b4 Hg7 19
attracted the attention of Keres and &b3 fif8 20 f3 Ae8 21 Ab2 a6 22 a4
Reshevsky. Ag6 23 Axg6 Hxg624 b5 \302\243>a525
These three options are usually &xa5 WxaS lh-lh Hector-Dokhoian,
employed as surprise weapons. Copenhagen 1991.
The decisionto exchange knights
Game36 on d4 also offers Black no
Hector-King advantage: 5...ftge7 6 Ad3 &xd4 7 Qxd4
London 1991 cxd4 8 0-0\302\243>c69 Hel Wc7 10 Af4
Wb6 11 \302\253kl2&b4 12 a3 Qxd3 13
1 e4 e6 cxd3 Ad7 14 flecl Ab5 IS %3
2 d4 d5 Wa6 16 &b3 \302\261
Turci-Bukal, Reggio
3 eS c5 Emilia 1987/88.
128 White Deviations on Move Four

6 JLd3(108) b2) 7...\302\243d7 8 0-0 \302\243)ge7 9 h4

Wc7 10 fiel h6 11 \302\243>bd2 0-0-0 12
\302\243>b3a6 13 Ad2 *b8 14 \302\243>c5\302\243>c8
15 \302\243xd7+ \302\253xd7 16 Habl &b6 17
b4 Qc4 18b5axb5 19Oxb5 \302\253T720
Sebl Sd7 21 Acl Ae7 22 Ab2 g5
23 Axc4 gxh4 24 Wh3 dxc4 25
&xd4 \302\243>xd4 26 Axd4 Hg8 27 #D
Af8 28 Ae3 Sg7 29 2a5Vg6 30
Aa7+ *c8 31 Ac5 Hd5 32 Ha8+
1-0 Trapl-Backwinkel, Bundesliga
1992.
c) 6...1fc7! 7 0-0 (7 &f4 &b4 8
6 ... g6?! Qxd4&xd3+9cxd3lrb6! 10&b3?
A rather passive continuation, #b4+ 11 &ld2 g5!0-1 Smolkin-

allowing White to support the strong- Matiukhin, corr. 1988) 7...&xe5 8

point of eS.Theideaof the text is to \302\243xe5 \302\253xe5 9 Af4 &f6!? (9...1T6
blunt an attack against g7 while 10 Ag5 WeS 11 \302\243ld2 with unclear

making room for the bishop to put play according to Short) and now:

pressure on eS. The whole process is cl) 10 \302\243xe5 \302\243>xg4 11 Axd4

too slow and compromises the king- Ad6T.
side pawn structure. c2) 10Vtg3Wh5T.
There are a number of options c3) 10 Ab5+ Ad7 11 Axd7+
available, but the critical line isto *xd7 12 %3 Wf5! intending ...^h5

instigate immediate threats to eS: gives Black a clear advantage.

a) 6...\302\243>ge7 7 0-0 \302\243>g68 Bel 7 0-0 f5
\302\253c7 9 #g3 Ac5 10 h4 Nimzo-
\302\261 It is now clear that the simple Hel
witsch-Szekely, Kecskemet 1927. and \302\243.f4will safeguard e5, so Black
b) 6...f5 7 \302\253g3and now: decides to try to limit the scope of
bl) 7...&ge7 8 0-0 &g6 9 h4 the queen.
Wcl 10 Hel Ad7 11 a3 0-0-0 12b4 8 Wg3 Wb6

a6 13 h5 &ge7 14 Ad2 h6 IS a4 gS Black is keen to lend support to

16 bS f4 17 Wg4 ftb8 18 c3 He8 19 the extra pawn. However, White is in
cxd4 *d8 20HclWb6 21 a5 Wa7 22 no hurry to restore material equality,
b6 #a8 23 Hc7&f5 24 ^c3! Ae7 but instead intends to complete
25 \302\243>xd5 &xd4 26 &xd4 exd5 27 development
and further compromise
#xd7+! 1-0 Nimzowitsch-Hikans- the opposing kingside with the thrust

son, Kristianstad 1922. h4.

 While Deviations on Move Four 129

9 a3 a5 co-ordination amongst his forces,

10 c3(J09) which is largely due to the lack of
spaceto manoeuvre.
14 ... 0-0
The pawn is taboo becauseafter
I4...1fxb2? the reply 15 &b5 0-0 16
flfbl picksup the queen.
15 \302\243>b5 dxc3

16 bxc3 Wc5(110)

Now that induced

Black has been
to play 9...a5,White is eager to post a
knight on bS as ...a6 is not an option.

Also, the threat to invade on d6

would disrupt Black'sefforts to

employ his dormant kingside pieces.

10 ~. Ad7
11 h4 17 Sfel
A familiar feature of the Advance The e-pawn requires extra
Variation is this pawn thrust, which reinforcements because the king's
seeks to add pressureto the attack by knight must move to facilitate f3,

keeping open the option of hS. which would further force Black on
11 ... $M to the defensive.
12 a4 &g4 17 ... \302\243>d8

13 $a3 Ag7 18 &fd4 Qf7

14 Af4 19 fiacl Sae8
The plan for White is relatively 20 O &gxe5?
straightforward with the knight A more prudent try is 20...Qgh6,
heading for bS and a desireto oust although Black remains congested
the intruding knight on g4. The main with little chance of counterplay.
theme is to secure eS, which will act 21 OxeS &xe5
as a pivot for the rest of White's 22 \302\243xe5 f4

forces. Blackhasto rely on the extra 23 Wei He7

pawn as compensation for the lack of 24 JL&6 1-0
130 White Deviations on Move Four

Game 37 5 ... Qe7

Short-Bareev This is an unusual move which

Tilburg 1991 prepares6...Wb6asa strong reply to
6 Af4, when it would so easy
not be
1 e4 e6 for White to justify jettisoning the b-
2 d4 d5 pawn. The move-order difference is
3 eS c5
important because, compared to
4 &f3 cxd4 normal lines, it is more difficult for
5 2.03 (111) White to develop swiftly:
White can also follow a different a) 5...&C6 6 0-0 and now:

path: al) 6...\302\243ge7

7 Af4 &g6 8 \302\243g3

a) 5 &xd4 \302\243>c66 &f3 &ge7 7 (8 Axg6!?) 8...Ae7 9 &bd2 (9...0-0

Ad3 &g6 which is assessedasequal 10&b3 He811fielWb612 h4 \302\243>b4

by Pachman. 13Afl d3 14 cxd3 Ad7 15h5 \302\243tf8

b) 5 Wxd4 \302\243>c66 Wf4 and now: 16 a3 Qc6 17 d4 \302\261
Heyken-Geveke,

bl) 6...f5 7 Ad3 &ge7 8 0-0 Bundesliga 1992) 9...f5 with a

ftg6 9 Wg3 Ae7 10 fiel 0-0 11 a3 further division:

\302\243>b8?! 12 \302\243>bd2 aS 13 &b3 \302\243>a6 all) 10exf6gxf6ll^h4!^geS

(Keres-Euwe, Zanvoort 1936) 14 12 #h5+ *d7 13Ab5!We814We2
Axa6 Bxa6 IS Ag5 \302\261. a6 IS Axc6+ Qxc6 16 c4! dxc3 17
b2) 6../tc7 7 \302\243>c3 a6 8 Ad3 bxc3 Wfl 18 Badl Hd8 19 &c4
&ge7 9 0-0 Qg6 10Wg3 &gxe5 11 Ac5 20 &e3\302\243>e721 *hl *e8 22 c4
&xe5 &xe5 12 fiel f6 13 &xd5! with an edge for White; Spraggett-
exdS 14 f4 3ic5+ IS *hl \302\243e6 16 M.Gurevich, Havana 1986.

fxeS fS 17 Ae3 with a small al2) 10h3 0-0 11 fiel Qh4 12

advantage for White; Velimirovic-Khol- Axh4 Axh4 13 &b3 \302\243d7 14 fcxh4

mov, Yugoslavia-USSR 1975. Wxh4 IS Ab5 fiac8 16 Axc6fixc6

17 \302\243>xd4 fic4 18 c3 bS 19 a3 aS 20
Wd3 fifc8? 21 &xf5 1-0 Hodgson-
Ree.Wijkaan Zee 1986.
a2) 6...f6 7 *e2 fxe5 (7..:tc7 8
9 Ag3
Af4?! (8 Ab5!?}8...g5! g4

10^h4f511f3^h612^d2i.g7T
Bryson-ZUger, Manila OL 1992;
7...f5 8 &bd2 &ge7 9 \302\253M>34) 8
\302\243>xe5 &xe5 9 WxeS fcf6 10 Af4
Ac5 11\302\243bS+ *f7 12 \302\243kl2\302\243d7 13

Ad3 g614 Qf3 He8 IS WgS Qh5 16

 White Deviations on Move Four 131

Axg6+ hxg6 17 &e5+ *g8 18 a7) 6...Ad7 7 Af4 (White can

\302\253xg6+ &g7 19 1T7+ *h8 20 Ah6 follow the same plan as in the
Hg8 21 &xd7 Ae7 22 \302\243f623
\302\243>e5 illustrative game, so Kogan-Djurhuus,
flfel 1-0 Bator-Ottenklev, Oakham 1992 continued 7 fiel
Stockholm 1986. &ge78 a3 fcg6 9 b4 \302\253c7 10 We2 f6
a3) 6...f57\302\243>bd2fcge7(7....a.c5 11 exf6 gxf6 12 b5 \302\243>ce7 13 &xd4
8a3a5 9&b3Ab6l0Ab5Ad7 11 e5 14 #h5 0-0-0 IS \302\243>b3*b8 16 a4
a4 &ge7 12&bxd4 =
Trapl-Miiller, Hg8 17 aS with an unclear position)
Bundesliga 1991/92) 8 \302\243M>3&g6 9 7...Hc8 8 &bd2 &b4 9 &b3\302\243>xd3
Qbxd4 (Keres suggested that 9 Bel 10 Wxd3 h6 11 &fxd4 a6 12c3&e7
\302\243e7 10 \302\243lbxd4 0-0 11 c4 is slighUy 13Ad2 \302\243>c614 f4 Wb6 IS Ae3 Wc7
better for White) 9...Ae7 10 Ab5 16 Sael \302\261
Heur-Tonningen,
Ji.d7 11 c4 a6 12cxd5axbS 13 dxc6 Germany 1992.

bxc6 14 #b3 Wc8 IS Ag5 h6 16 b) 5...#b6 60-0andnow:

Axc7 *xe7 17 Sfcl H>7 18 h4 bl) 6...&d7 7 &bd2 &e7 8&b3
Shc8 19hS \302\243tf420 QxfS+ exfS 21 Sel
\302\243k:69 g6 10 Af4 Ag7 11 Wd2
Wb4+ c5 22 Wxf4 \302\261Binham-Hajek, 0-0 12 h4!? \302\253c7 (12...f6?! 13 exf6
Vienna 1991. &xf6 14 Ad6 He8 IS Ac5 13
\302\261)

a4) 6...g6 7 a3 Ag7 8 Af4 &ge7 We2 f6!?14 exf6 Wxf4 IS Wxe6+
9 Wcl 0-0 10 b4 a6 11 fiel f6 12 Hf7 16 fxg7 \302\243>de5!? 17 \302\253e8+ *xg7
exf6 Axf6 13 Qbd2 Ve8 14 &b3 18 HxeS Ah3? (18...Sf8 19Wxf8+!
\302\253f7 IS Wd2 Be8 16 He2 Wg7 17 *xf8 20 Sxd5 was judged by Keres
Sael b6 18 Ag5 with a slight plus to be better for White; 18.. jLg4! 19
for White; Kobelev-Lobach, USSR Wxa8 &xe5 20 QxeS Wxfl+ 21
1988. *hl Wxh4+ V2-V2 Strauss-MUller,

aS) 6..JLc57\302\243f4(7\302\243bd2&ge7 West Germany 1964) 19 Wxa8 \302\243fce5

8 &b3 Ab6 9 \302\243f4Qg6 10 Ag3 (19...^.xg2 20 SfS!) 20 We8 &c6 21

intending 11 h4 is slightly better for \302\253xf7+ *xf7 22 &g5+ *f6 23
White according to Keres) 7...Qge7 fcxh3 Wxh4 24 Sel g5 25 &d2 H16
8 &bd2 &g6!? 9 Ag3 Ad7 10 \302\253M>3 26 \302\243f3 f4 27 &fg5 ItoS 28 \302\243>xh7
H>6 11 Bel fic812 h4 \302\261
Spraggett- *g7 29 Qf4 Wh6 30 fcg5 Wd6 31

I.Ivanov, Canada 1986. <&h5+ *f8 32 Se6 Wb4 33 Ag6

a6) 6...Wb6 7 Sel &ge7 8 a3 \302\253ie7 34 Sf6+ *g8 35 Ah7+ 1-0
ftg6 9 h4 f6 10 exf6 gxf6 11 c4 Keres-Stahlberg,
Warsaw 193S.

dxc4 12 Axc4 eS 13 hS &ge7 14 b2) 6...\302\243>c6 7 a3 &ge7 8 b4 &g6

&bd2 fcf5 IS <&e4 \302\243e7 16 b4 Ad7 9 fiel Ae7 10 Ab2 aS?! 11 bS a4 12
with unclear play in the game Kin- &bd2 &a7 13\302\243xd4 Ac5 14 Axc5

lay-Formanek, London 1977. \302\253xc5 15 c4 dxc4 16 \302\243>e4!#d5 17

132 White Deviations on Move Four

QA6+ *e7 18 &xc4 Wc5 19 Axg6 with the original plan by 12 \302\243kd4,
hxg6 (19...#xc4 20 Wd6+ *e8 21 when Black would be only slightly
fiadl fxg6 22 1U8+) 20 Wd6+ better.

#xd6 21 exd6+ 1-0 Nimzowitsch- 12 ... \302\243>c4?!

Leonhardt,San Sebastian 1912. Black misses a chance to fully

6 0-0 exploit White's mistake. The critical
White can also follow another reply is 12...&xg5 13 Qxg5&c4
course: 6 Af4 &d7 (as noted above, when another pawn leaves the board,
6...Wb6is logical)
7 0-0 \302\243k:6 8 giving Black a clear advantage.
\302\243>bd2 \302\243>c59 &b3 Qxd3 10 Wxd3 13 Axe7 *xe7(7/2)
Ae7 11 fcfxd4 0-0 12 Wg3 with

equal chances; Heyken-Luther,Bun-

desliga1990/91.
6 ... Qg6

7 Sel
Short has suggested 7 \302\243xg6 hxg6
8 lfxd4 Qc6 9 Wf4 as a way to
obtain equal chances.
7 ... \302\253k6

8 a3?!
The start of a dubiousplan to

advance the queenside pawns and

molest Black's queen's knight, in order It is feasibleto giveup the right to
to lessen the pressure on eS and castle in this position as the king is
allow the d4 pawn to be captured. under no immediate danger and can
A better scheme of action is 8 seek sanctuary on f8 as soon as the
Qbd2andlfe2. king's rookhas become centralized.

8 ... Ad7 14 g3!

9 b4 Wc7 In his analysis to the game(upon
There is no immediate concern which these notes are based) Short
about the effect of bS, so Black is demonstrates the problemsthat arise

contentto pileup the pressure on eS. after 14 \302\243xc4 Wxc4 IS Wxc4 dxc4
10 We2 Ae7 16 Qxd4 Shc8 17a4 Sc5 18Qf3
11 b5 \342\202\254ka5 a6!; this is in Black's favour because
12 Ag5?\302\273
of White's vulnerable queenside
A distinctly ambitious attempt to pawns.
instigate play on the kingside. It 14 ... \302\243xb5

would be more sensibleto keepfaith 15 h4

 White Deviations on Move Four 133

A more exact line is IS &bd2! threats, but 26...\302\243>xe5! seals White's

ahc8(I5...\302\243>xd2 I6*xd2 JLxd3 17 fate. For example: 27 Sexe5 exdS28

!T>4+! with unclear play) 16 &xd4 #f6
\302\243>f5 or 27 SdxeS #xd6 and in
Aa6 17 &2f3 when Black has only both cases the attack has fizzled out,
slightly the better chances. leaving Black with a devastating
15 ... Shc8! pawn advantage.
16 \302\243>bd2 27 Hddl \302\243\\xe5??

After 16 h.5, Black has a tactical A remarkable move. Black

reply available: 16...&gxe5 17&xe5 overlooks a crafty response, so his whole
WxeS 18 Axc4 (18 WxeS &xe5 19 gamecollapses.
SxeS Axd3 20 cxd3 flcl+ 21 *g2 The quieter 27...Bcd7 28 f4 \302\253xa3

Hac8 -+) 18...1rxe2 19 Axe2 Aa4! would have reaped greater

20\302\253M2Axc2-+. dividends.

A superior try is 16 &xd4 Aa6 17 28 &tSl(U3) 1-0

f4 although Black still has an edge.
16 ... &xd2
17 Wxd2 Axd3

18 cxd3 lfc3
To a large extent Blackhas
managed to snuff out White's resistance
by exchanging pieces attempt in an

to capitalize on the extra pawns.The

White strategy is now to try to

confuse matters with a kingside lunge.

19 Wg5+ *!8
20 h5 h6!
The most precise way to fend off Bareev capitulates immediately;
the attack; alternatively 20...&e7? the finish would have been 28....exfS
21 h6 gives White good prospects (28...\302\243xg4 29 Sxd8#) 29 flxd8+
against the exposed king. *e7 30 Wxg7 *xd8 31 WxeS and
21 Wg4 &e7 White wins.

22 &xd4 &c6
23 &b5 Wxd3 Game 38
24 \302\243>d6 Sc7 J.LIttlewood-Brooks
25 fiadl Wa6 Manchester 1985
26 Oxd5!? Hd8
It is not advisable to snatch the 1 e4 e6
rook due to 27 &f5 with mating 2 d4 d5
134 White Deviations on Move Four

3 eS c5 8...#b6 9 Hbl Wd8 10 0-0 and

4 dxcS C\302\243x6(114) Black is better.

A necessary preliminary measure 5 ... Axc5
as other pathsallow White the 6 Ad3 ftge7!?
initiative: Other possibilities are:

a) After 4...Axc5 5 \302\253g4 \302\243>e76 a) 6...f5 7 0-0 &ge7 8 a3

b4 Ab6 Keres felt that
7 Wxgl Black intendingb4 and Ab2 which is slightly
had no real compensation for the better for White according to Keres.
pawn. b) 6...f6 7 We2 fxeS 8 &xe5 and
b) 4...\302\243>d7 5 Qf3 Axc5 6 Ad3 now:
&e7 (after 6...f6?! Reshevsky bl) 8..&f6 9 Af4 0-0 10 0-0
analysed 7 exf6 \302\243>gxf6
8 We2 #e7 9 &e4 11 \302\243>xc6 bxc6 12 Ae3 Axe3
i.f4 0-0 10 0-0 with play on the e- 13 Wxe3 fcf6 14 <&d2 (Becker-Ma-

file) 7 0-0 \302\243>c68 Af4 \302\253c7 (8...0-0?

roczy, Kariovy Vary 1929) 14...Wb6!
9Axh7++-)9&c3a610Bellrb6 IS WeS &g4 16 #h5 &f6 with
11 Ag3 Wxb2 12 Qxd5! exdS 13 equality (Becker).
Hbl Wa3 14 e6 &f6 IS exf7+ *xf7 b2) 8...\302\243>xe5 9 \302\253xe5 &f6?!

16 Ah4 \302\261
Reshevsky-Vasconcellos, (9...Vffi = BCO) 10 Ab5+ *f7 11
Boston 1944. 0-0 Wb6 12 Qc3 Nimzowitsch-
\302\261

Bogoljubow, Stockholm 1920.

7 Af4 Ad7
Black has also attempted to wrest
an initiative from the alternatives:
a) 7...&g6 8 Ag3 0-09 f5 10 0-0
exf6 Wxf6 11 \302\243k:3 *h8 12 Qe2
Ab613 Axg6 Wxg614\302\243f4Wg4 IS
&d3 Ad7 16 a4 Ae8 17ftfeS WfS
18 &xc6 bxc6 19 aS Ad8 20 fiel i
Todorcevi6-van Setters, Nice OL
1974.
b) 7...Wb68 0-0andnow:
5 &f3 bl) 8...Wxb29 <&bd2 Wb6 10 c4
If S Af4 Axc5 6 Ad3, 6...&ge7 h6 (10...0-0? 11 Axh7+) 11 Wei
transposes to the illustrative game, (intending 12 cxdS exdS 13 fibl)
but Harding pointed out a big 1l...\302\243>b412 Ae2 Ad7 13 a3 <fta614
improvement: 6...\302\253Tb6! 7 &c3 Wxb2 8 Hbl Wc6 IS Ag3! \302\243f5?! 16 cxdS

&ge2 (8 &b5 &xe5!9 \302\243k:7+ *d8 exdS 16 e6>.fxe6 18 \302\243>e5&xg3 19

10 &xa8 &xd3+ wins for Black) hxg3 Wc7 20 \302\243xd7 *xd7 21 #b2
 White Deviations on Move Four 135

&b6 (21...flhg8 22 Sfcl! Wb6 23

Wc2 &xf2+ 24 *f 1) 22 Wxg7+ *d6

23 \302\243>c4+ dxc4 24 Sfdl+ 1-0 Keres-
Alexandrescu, Munich 1936.
b2) 8...\302\243>g6 9 Ag3 (Keres
assessed the position after 9 Wcl &xf4
10 #xf4 Wxb2 11 \302\243>bd2 as

reasonable for White) 9...Wxb2 10 &bd2

\302\243>gxe5! 11 &xe3 QxeS 12 Sbl Wc3
13 Sb3 Wd4 14 &b5+ \302\243>d7 IS

&xd7 &xd7 16 Sxb7 is unclear

(Pachman). This is the point To give his

8 0-0 &g6 queen flight squares, Black must

9 Ag3 &b4 give up the right to castle.

10 Ae2 14 ... &xb5

The light-squared bishop is worth 15 Sbl Wxa3

preserving for a future attack 16 &xb5+ *f8
whereas the knight is soon ousted 17 &g5 Ae7

from its active post Black's pieces are too

10 ... Sc8 to
disorganized present any coherent defence,
11 Qc3 for example17...h618&xe6+!
fxe6

White takes advantage of the 19 Wg4 \302\243ke7(19...*f7 20 Sb3 Wa5

omission of c3 to play the knight to a 21 Sf3+ *g8 22 Wxe6+ *h7 23
central post Ad3 +-) 20 Sb3 Wa5 21 Wxe6 and
There was a still a chance to opt Bf3 wins.
for a more usual set-up: 11 c3 Qc6 18 Hb3 Wc5

12&d3 0-0 14 &bd2 with a slight 19 ftxe6+! fxe6

plus for White. 20 Wg4 Hc6
11 ... Wb6 21 Sfbl *g8
12 a3 Qa6 22 h4

13 &d3 Wxb2V. (115) There is no hurry to start

The moment of crisis has arisen. recoveringthe material deficit, so the h-
Black has followed a regular theme pawn is used as a battering-ram to

in this line by taking on b2. The create further weaknesses.

problemis that White is already 22 ... \342\202\254tf8

developed and an initiative can be 23 ID h5

gained by hounding the queen. 24 Wf4 &g6
14 &b5! 25 1T7+ 1-0
9 Wade Variation

It was Bob Wade in his match against middlegame. After 7 cxd4 play might

Lothar Schmid in 19S0who proceed:

introduced the manoeuvre 4...Wb6 and a) 7...iLbS and now:
5...\302\243d7 to exchange bishops. It has al) 8 0-0 &xe29 Wxe2 &c6

since had fluctuating periods of (9...Wa6!? 10 mi ^c6 11 &e3 h6

popularity with Karpov and Be- 12 \302\243>bd2 \302\243>ge7 13 \302\243>b3 =
\302\243>f5 Szit-

liavsky being the most eminent key-Styblo, Czechoslovakia 1988)

players who adopted 10 &e3 \302\243>ge7 11 a3 &a5 12 b4
have it for
occasional use. The most common &c4 13 &bd2\302\243 Pietzsch-Czerniak,

reply
is 6 \302\243e2 intending to meet Varna OL 1962.
6..JLb5 with the sharp 7 c4. A a2) 8 Axb5 WxbS 9 \302\243c3 Wa6

simpler method is explored in the game (9...&b4 10 &d2 Wd3 11 Wa4 \302\243>c6

Kupreichik-Molner which examines with unclear play; Kupreichik-Ein-

a morepositional approach. gorn, USSR 1977) 10\302\243>e2Ab4 11
Ad2 &xd212 Wxd2 42>e7 13 0-0 0-0
Game 39 14 fffcl \302\243>bc615 42M4 i Kupreichik-
J.Wolf-Gerbic Kapengut, Minsk 1979.
Con 1988 b) 7...&b4+8 \302\243>c3Ab5 9 0-0
&xe2 10 Qxe2 \302\243>c611 \302\253U3 h6 12
1 e4 e6 a3 Af8 13 b4 \302\261
Hubner-Debarnot,
2 d4 d5 Las Palmas 1976.
3 eS c5 7 c4 (116)
4 c3 Wb6 It was Zaitsev who first advocated
5 \302\243>f3 Ad7 this move as a way for White to
6 &e2 Ab5 wrest the initiative.
Psakhis has recommended the 7 ... &xo4
exchange6...cxd4 avoid to the This move has been accepted as
forthcoming complications. This method the norm for years, since the other
severely reduces Black's optionsand possibilities can cause Black
the best he can hope for is a drawish problems:
755 Wade Variation

\302\273xc4 \302\243>b614 We2 \302\243>ed5 15 a4! \302\261

Zaitsev-Doda, Riga 1968.

a22) ll.J\302\273c6 12 \302\273xc4 \302\273a6 13

Wxc4
\302\243>a3 14 Qxc4 &f5 (14...\302\243tec6

15 &f4 &d4!? with unclear play) 15

b3 <&c616
Ab2 Ae7 170-0-00-018
g4 \302\243fo4 19 \302\243>xh4 Axh4 20 Shf 1 f5
21 gxf5 Bxf5 22 Bd7 \302\261Zlotnik-
Scherbakov, Moscow 1968.
b) 9...\302\243k;7 10 dxe6 fxe6 11 0-0
Wc6 12 We2 \302\243>f513 Wxc4 ktl 14
a) 7...&c680-0&d79\302\253}c3\302\243>e7 E>c30-0 15&g5Wa616 \302\243>b5
Axg5
10 dxcS &xc5 11 Wc2 dxc4 12\302\243>d2 17 \302\243>xg5 &d4 18 Wxc5 &xb5 19 a4
&f5 13 \302\243>xc4 Wd8 14 Sdl lfo4 15 &d7 20 Wxb5 Wxb5 21 axb5 \302\243>xe5

b4 \302\243>e4 16 \302\243>xe4 Wxe4 17 Wxe4 22 &xe6 Bf6 23 <&c72d8 24 Sxa7

Axe4 18 a3 Bd8 19\302\243g5 \302\261
Yanov- and White wins; Zaitsev-Bonch-
sky-Rohlmann, Moscow 1991. Osmolovsky, USSR 1968.
b) 7...dxc4 8 \302\243>c3 (or 8 d5!?) 9 &bd2 dxc4
8...&c6 9 d5 exd5 10&xb5Wxb5 11 10 a3
Wxd5 &e7 12 Wxc4 \302\261 Nikolenko- Not obligatory, as there have been
Shaboian, Pula 1990. experiments with 10 0-0:
8&xc4 Wb4+! a) 10...cxd4 11 &xd4 Eki7 12
A refinement designed to improve Wh5! Wb6 13 \302\243>4f3 Wc6 14 Sel
on the old system that has scored \302\243>e7 15 Se4 \302\261
Afek-Ghinda, Ne-

heavily in White's favour. Play tanya 1987.

might instead continue 8...dxc4 9 d5 b) 10...&C6 11 dxc5 &xc5 12
and now: We2 &ge7 13 &xc4 0-0 14 b3 Wb5
a) 9...exd510 Wxd5 and now: = Malaniuk-Vaiser, Tashkent 1987.
al) 10...Wc6 11 Wxc4 Wa6 12 10 ... WaS (117)
&a3 Wxc4 13 \302\243>xc4 <&c6 14 &f4 At this juncture the major
0-0-0 15 0-0 &e7 16Sfdl \302\261
Edel- alternative10...tfb5 deserves attention:
man-Bicknell, Los Angeles 1991. a) 110-0 &c6 12 dxc5Axc5 13
a2) 10...\302\243>e7 11 We4(ll Wxc4 We2
&ge7 and now:
Wb4+ 12 &bd2 Wxc4 13 &xc4 al) 14 Wxc4 (14 b4?!&d4!with
\302\243>ec6 14 Ae3 &b4 15 *e2 = I.Hor- an edge for Black; Stean-Forintos,
vath-Hetenyi, Hungary 1992) and Moscow 1975) 14...Wxc4 15&xc4
now: b5 16 &e3 bxc4 17 Axc5 \302\261
Mesh-

a21) ll...Eki7 12 0-0 Wc6 13 kov-Moroz, Podolsk 1990.

 Wade Variation 139

a2) 14&xc4&f515b4&cd4l6 11 0-0 \302\243>c6

&xd4 Axd4 17 Sa2 0-0 18 \302\243f4 12 ftxc4 Wa6

Sfd8 19 g4 \302\243ke720 &d6 Wxe2 21 Zlolnik considers the position to
Sxe2 &d5 22 kgi 2db823 Bd2 be equal, but the evidence suggests
Ab6 24 Sc 1 a5 25 b5 a4 26Bc4*f8 otherwise.
27 Sd3 *e7 28 g5 Sa5 29 Sf3 Sf8 13 &d6+!? \302\243xd6

30 &c8 Ad8 31 Hxd8! 1-0 Galdunts- 14 exd6 cxd4

Gavrilov, USSR 1988. 15 d7+! *e7
b) 11 We2cxd4 (ll...\302\243c6?! 12 White could meet 15...&xd7 by
\302\243>xc4 Wa4 13 dxc5 &xc5 14 We4! 16 \302\243>xd4 *e7 17 S.62 with

with a clear plus for White; Boey- advantage.

Berta,corr.1980)
and now: 16 Qxd4 GX6(118)
bl) 12&xc4Wd5 13b3&c614
Ab2 b5 15 \342\202\254fcd2
\302\243>ge7 16
a4 d3
with unclear play; M.Horvath-Rozk-
ovec, Prague 1987.

b2) 12 &xd4 Wd5 13 \302\243>4f3! (13

\302\243&f3?! Ac5 14 ke3 &xd415 &xd4
E>c6 16 0-0-0\302\243>ge7 17 h4 0-0 18
&c3 Wb5 19 \302\243>g57 Ivell-Beliavsky,
London 1985) 13...\302\243>d7 14 Qxc4
Bc8 15 \302\243>e3 Ve4 16 b4! \302\243>xe5

(16...\302\243>e7!? 17 Ab2 &d5 = Howell-

Mestel, British Ch 1987) 17 &xe5
Wxe5 18 Ab2 We4 19 0-0 \302\243ke720 17 GXS+l
Had \302\261
Pinter-Ornstein, Budapest A brilliant tactical stroke. White
1977. invests a pieceto exposethe king, so
the rest of the forces can use the
influence of the d7 pawn to stage a

daring attack.

17 ... exf5
18 Hel+ $d8
Black can fare no better with a
different retreat, according to Wolf;
18...*f8?! 19 Wd6+ *g8 20 Ah6!
and now:
a) 20...Bf821 Wxf6! gxf6 22
fie8+-.
140 Wade Variation

b) 20...\302\243te4 21 Sxe4! fxe4 22 a) 23...&d3 24 #a5+ b6 (or

Wg3 *f8 23 #xg7+ *e7 24 Sdl 24...#b6 25 #xf5 \302\243>xcl 26 #g5+
td3 25 Ag5+ *xd7 26 #xf7+ +-) 25 #xa7! Sb8 26 Sc8 Sxc827
*d6 27 k(A+ &c5 28Scl+ *b6 dxc8#+!*xc8 28Wa6++-.
29 Wc7+ *a6 30 Sxc6+ bxc6 31 b) 23...\302\243>g6 24 #a5+ #b6 25
Wxc6+*a5 32Ac7#. Wxf5fte7 26Sc8+!+-.
c) 20...\302\243>xd7 21 #g3 g6 22 Wc3 c) 23...Sf824WaS+b625Sxf8+
\302\243>6e5 23 Sxe5 Wf6 24 Sael &xe5 Wxf8 26 #e5 *xd7 27 Bc7+ +-.
25Wxe5Wxe526Sxe5+-. d) 23...b624Sc6!+-.
19 Af4 \302\243>e7 24 Wa5+ b6( 119)
The ploy of blocking the d-file The swarming pieces cannot be
appears to be strong but Black has an rebuffed, for example 24...1rb6 25
improvement on the text: 19...1irb6!? #xf5 \302\243>e2+ 26 *fl &xcl 27 Wg5+
(19...&xd7? 20 #d5 Se8 21 Wxf7
+-) 20 We2 #d4 (20...*xd7? 21
Wd3+ wins for White) 21 &g5 with

unclear play.
20 Bel &fd5
After 20...&ed5 21 &g5Wd6 22

\302\253to3Wxd7 23 Axf6+ gxf6 24 Sc5

intending Sdl wins material.

21 Sxe7! \302\243irf4

Of course, 21\342\200\236.&xe7 allows 22

Ac7#.
22 Wei Wd6
Wolf points out that there is no

respite whatever obstacles Black 25 Wxa7! Wel+

constructs: 26 Sxel Sxa7

a) 22...&g6 23 Se8+ *xd7 24 27 Ue8+ Sxe8

Be2+-. 28 dxe8W+ *xe8
b) 22...\302\243>e6 23 Sxf7 Wd6 (or 29 Bxa7 1-0
23...Wb6 24 We5 h5 25 Bel Bh6
26 Bf8+!) 24 Sdl Wc6 25 Wb4 Game 40

Wc5 26 Wh4+ g5 27 fh6 We5 28 Kupreichik-Molnar

f4!+-. Center 1990
23 Sxf7 \302\273e6

The prospects for Black are bleak 1 e4 e6

in every line: 2 d4 d5
 Wade Variation 141

3 e5 c5 b6 18 \302\243>g5&d8 19 Bel Wd7? 20

4 c3 Wb6 1Ti5+ g6 21 \302\243>xh7! +- Schmid-
5 \302\243tf3 kdl Wade, England (9) 1950.
6 k<2(120) b2) 6...cxd47cxd4ilb4+8iLd2
The alternative treatments are &c69 &c2 a5 10 Ad3 &xd2+ 11
useful as surprise weapons: Wxd2 \302\243>b412 \302\243>xb4Wxb413 \302\273xb4

a) 6 a3 J&.b5 and now: axb4 14 *d2 \302\243k;7 = Kupreichik-

al) 7 c4 Axc4 (7...Ac6?! 8 b4! Zlotnik, Cheliabinsk 1975.
cxb49cS WaS 10 &d2 Aa4 11 Wcl c) 6 J&.d3 cxd4 and now:
&b5 12 axb4 Wxal 13 &xb5+ \302\243>c6 cl) 7 cxd4 Ab5 8 0-0 Axd3
14 Wc2 1-0 Fruteau-Roumegous, (8...Wa6! =) 9 Wxd3 \302\243>c610 &c3
Paris 1993) 8 Axc4 dxc4 9 \302\243>bd2 \302\243>ge7 11 Ad2 \302\261
Natapov-Kolker,
Wa6 10 We2 cxd4 11 \302\243>xd4&c5 12 USSR 1968.
\302\243>4f3 c3 13 \302\243te4#xe2+ 14 *xe2 c2) 7 \302\243>xd4 <&c6 8 \302\243>xc6 (8 \302\243tf3

cxb215&xb2&a616Shdl \302\243>e717 f6! 8...bxc6

\302\245) 9 0-0 \302\243>e7 10 Eki2
fiacl b6 18 &d6+ *f8 19 \302\243>g5h6 &g6 11 &f3 Ae7 12 We2 Wc7 13
20 &gxf7 \302\261
Sveshnikov-Ehlvest, Sel 0-0 14 \302\243>g5(15 h4 f5 Koch-
\302\245

Leningrad 1984. Schmid, corr. 1951) 14...&xg5 15

a2) 7 Ad3 &xd3 (7...Wa6?!8 &xg5Wxe5 16 Wxe5 \302\243>xe5 17 Sxe5

&c2 &d7 9 a4 \302\261

Ciocaltea-Wade, f6 18 Axf6 gxf6 19 Sh5 2f7 20f4
Bucharest 19S4) 8 Wxd3 Wa6 9 Se8 21 Sel U8e7 intending ...i.e8
Wxa6 &xa6 with equality; Toran- and ...Sg7 with a slight advantage to
Heidenfeld, Venice 19S3. Black according to Schmid.
a3) 7 Axb5+ WxbS 8 dxcS (8 d) 6a4&c67.&e2c4=Messere-
We2!7) 8...&xc5 9 \302\243tod2 \302\243>e710 c4 Tamovsky, London 1960.
dxc4 11 We2 &bc6 12 Wxc4 Wxc4 Wb3?! \302\243>c6 7 Ae3 cxd4
e) 6
13 &xc4 \302\243>g6! 14 b4 b5 IS bxc5 (7...#xb3!) 8 #xb6 axb6 (Babrik-
bxc4 16 0-0 0-0 17&e3Sfd8!18 owski-Espig, East German Ch 1976)
Sfcl \302\243>a5 \302\245
Witkowski-Portisch, 9 &xd4! with the idea 10 &b5 gives
Munich 19S8. White the better game.
b) 6 &a3 and now: 6 ... kbS
bl) 6...&C6 kel cxd4 8 cxd4 7 7 dxc5
&b4+ 9 *fl (9...\302\243fo6!? 10 <&c2
f6 White abandons the pawn chain
&e7 11 Axh6 gxh6 12 Sbl = f6 in order to gain space and strive for
Clarke-Heidenfeld, Ilford 1953) 10 the initiative. Other paths are
<&c2fxe5 11 Qxb4 \302\243>xb4 12 dxeS available:

&b5 13 a3 <&c6 14 &e3 Wa6 15 a) 7 0-0 and now:

Axb5 Wxb5+ 16 *gl \302\243>ge7 17 b4 al) 7...\302\243>c6?! 8 Axb5 Wxb5 9 a4
142 Wade Variation

16 #xf7 Bd7 17 ffh5 Bg8 180-0-0

Axe3+ 19 fxe3 Bxg2 20 Wf3Bdg7
21 Bd2Bxd222*xd2Vb5 23 *cl
with a slight plus for White; Braun-
Muhl, Bundesliga 1986/87.
c) 7 Ae3!?Axe28#xe2 \302\243>c69
dxc5 &xc5 10 &xc5 Wxc5 11&bd2
&ge712 Vb6
\302\243>b3 13 &bd4 0-0 14
0-0 Bae8 15 Badl = Pilgaard-Jo-

hansson, Lyngby 1988.

7 ... &xc5
Wb6 10 dxc5 \302\243xc5 11 b4 iLf8 12 8 0-0
Bel \302\243>ge7 13 aS Wc7 14 Wa4 \302\261 Itused to be the accepted practice
Pietzsch-Uhlmann, East Germany to continue with the committal 8 b4,
1958. which creates dynamic positions:
a2) 7...&xe2 8 Wxe2 Wa6 9 Wd 1 a) S..At8 9 0-0 \302\243kJ7 10 &a3

(9 Wc2 \302\243kJ710 Ae3 flc8 11 &bd2 &xe2 11 Wxe2 a612 c4 &s7 13Ad2
h6 12 a3 \302\243k;7 13 h4 ^c6 14 Sfel \302\261
Widenmann-Berge, corr. 1983.
Ae7 IS &fl 0-016Wd2 \302\261 Santana- b) 8...&e7 9 0-0 (9 Ae3 Wa6 10

Turner, Pinar del Rio 1990) 9...c4 Axb5+ Wxb5 11 \302\243to3Wd7 12 0-0

(after 9...\302\243>d7,10 \302\243>e711

\302\243>a3 dxc5 h5 13 &d4! <&c6 14 \302\243>ab5 a6 15
&xc5 12 &d4 &c6 = was Netusil- &xc6 bxc6 16 &d4 c5 17 bxc5
Alster, Czechoslovakia 1988, but &xc5 18 Bbl i Gonsior-Alster,
White can try for more with 10 Czechoslovakia 1988) 9...&xe210
dxc5!? Qxc5 11 b4 &d3 12 Ae3 Wxe2 &h6 11 a4 \302\243>f5 12 g4 (12
\302\243>b213 #b3 \302\243>c414 \302\243>bd2! \302\243>xe3 \302\243>bd2!?) 12...&h6 13 h3 <&c6 14
IS fxe3 \302\261
Kaidanov-Zlotnik, Af4 &g8 15\302\243>bd2h5 16 \302\243tb3hxg4

Moscow 1979) 10 Sel \302\243ic6 11 &bd2 17 hxg4 \302\243fo618 &fd2 Bc8 19 Sfcl
0-0-0 12 \302\243>fl2d7 13 Af4!? \302\243>ge7! Wd8 20 b5 Qb821c4dxc4 22 Qxc4

14 h4 hS IS \302\243>g3\302\243>g616 k%5 &e7 \302\243kj7= Mestel-Small, Haifa 1976.

17 Wd2 #b6 18Axe7Bxe719Be2 c) However, Black has found

Wd8 20 &fl f6 21 \302\243>lh2 fxe5 22 new nuances to cause White

&xe5 (Hecht-Karpov, Bath 1973) 8...&xf2+!?
difficulties: 9 *f 1 &c6! (it was

22...\302\243>gxe5 23deBd7=. formerly thought that the dark-

b) 7 \302\243>bd2!? Axe2 8 Wxe2 cxd4 squared bishop would be trapped but

9 \302\243>xd4 <&c6 10 &2f3 \302\243>xd4 11 there is no forced win) and now:

\302\243>xd4 Ac5 12 &c2 Wc6 13 Wg4 cl) 10c4?!dxc411^a3Ad512
\302\243>e7 14 Wxg7 0-0-0 15 Ae3 \302\243>f5 \302\243>xc4 Axc4 13 &xc4 \302\243te6 14 We2
 Wade Variation 143

&d4 IS Sbl &ge7 + Nederkoorn- queenside to stifle the opposition,

Kahn, corr. 1982. and the plan is to developbehind the

c2) 10Wd2d4! Il*xf2d3+12 pawn mass before striking out with a

We3 Wxe3+ 13 Axe3 dxe2 and further advance. In the meantime, it

Black is slightly better. is difficult for Black to create coun-
c3) 10Wd3\302\243ke7 Ila4a5 12 b5 terplay against such a solid pawn
J&.d7 with unclear play; Vanka-Ma- structure and instead he must
touSek, Prague 1986. concentrate on getting the rest of his
8 ... &xe2 forces into play.
9 Wxe2 Wa6 13 ... a6
10 Wc2 14 b4 &a7

The ending offers equal chances, 15 \302\243>a3 &e7

so White prefers to avoid an It is too risky to snatch the pawn.

exchange of queens in the hope of For example: 15...Wxc3?! 16 Ad2
obtaining attacking chances with a Wc7 (16...\302\253b3? 17 Bfbl #a4 18
queenside advance. \302\243fc4
+-) 17 b5 \302\243c5 18 bxa6 bxa619
10 ... \302\243k!7 Wxa6 with a formidable passed
11 a4 Sc8 pawn.
12 a5 16 b5 axb5
Of course 12 b4? is refuted by 17 \302\243>xb5 Ac5

12...\302\243xb4 due to the pin on the c- 18 a6!

file. A neat trick which takes
12 ... #c6 (121) advantage of the opposing king being left
in the centre. Now after 18...bxa6
19 Bxa6 Wb7 (19...Wxa6 20 \302\243>c7+

+-) 21 \302\243e3 White has the better

chances.
18 ... 0-0
19 a7 Sa8

20 \302\243tfd4

This manoeuvre spells trouble for

Black. The knight is transferred to
the queenside in an effort to
exchange a defensive piece, which
would increase the likelihood of

13 We2 making use of the mighty pawn on

White's strategy is proceeding the seventh rank.

smoothly.He has expanded on the 20 ... Wb6

144 Wade Variation

21 &b3 4k6 Astute tactical awareness. The a-

22 &xc5 GxcS(122) pawn is jettisonedin order to unleash
a winning combination based on the
vulnerability of the pinnedknight.
23 ... &xa7

24 We3 Sfc8
25 &d6 Sc7
26 Sfbl Wc6

Black is overloaded with

defensiveduties and this can inevitably be
exploited.
27 &xc5 Wxc5

28 Wxc5 Sxc5
29 Sxb7 Sxc3
23 &a3 30 *fl 1-0
10 Systems with ...b6

The choice of 3...b6 is a popular way

of avoiding the main lines. It
prepares to exchange Black's light-
squared bishop, which normally has

a restricted rdle in the French. This

inevitably results in Black's

development being retarded while the

process is carried out, which can

cause problems. With 3...&e7 and

4...b6Blackis trying to avoid certain
lines. The original idea was that the
closed nature of the position would At this juncture Black has
allow Blackto activate the pieces at a experimented with 4...c6 5 \302\243a4! when

later stage, but the current trends White has used his space advantage
indicate that White gains too much to maximum effect*

territory to justify Black's passive a) S...aS 6 c3 and now:

opening. al) 6...&a6 7 \302\243>e2 h5 8 &d2
&h6 9 &f3 \302\243tf510 &g5 \302\243e7 11 h4
Game 41 &xg5 12 hxgS &xe2 13Wxe2 g614
Anand-Rogers Ac2 0-0 15 0-0-0 c5 16Axf5 exf5

Manila IZ1990 17 e6! <&c6 18 dxcS bxcS 19 exf7

*xf7 20 Wb5 1-0 Murey-Brinck-
1 e4 e6 Claussen, Copenhagen1986.
2 d4 d5 a2) 6...b5 7 Ac2 c5 8 \302\243>f3E>c6 9
3 eS b6 0-0 c4 10 Bel h6 11&bd2 \302\243>ge7 12
4 &bS+(123) \302\243>fl&d7 13 \302\243>e3\302\243>c814 b3 cxb3
A recent concept The check is 15 axb3 \302\243>b616 \302\243d3b4 17 c4 &e7
intended to disrupt Black's slow 18 Ad2 &c6 19 c5 <2M7 20 Ea2 \302\261

manoeuvring game. Lein-Gonzales, Saint John 1988.

4 ... Ad7 b) 5...&e7 and now:
146 Systems with ...b6

bl) 6 7 0-0 Ae7 8 c3

\302\243>e2GX5

\302\243a6 9 Sel 10 &d2 c5 11 \302\243tf

*f8 1

cxd4 12cxd4\302\243xe2 13ffxe2&a6 14

&xe3
\302\243>e3 15 \302\243xe3 \302\243lc716 Scl a6
17 Sec2 Sa7 18Sc6 bS 19 Wc2 \302\243te8

20 Sc8 Wb6 21 &b3 h6 22 Wc6

Wxc6 23 Slxc6 Ab4 24 fixe8+! 1-0
Marid-Mitrovid, Belgrade 1989.

b2) 6c3\302\243>f57\302\243xi2\302\243e7 8\302\243xif3

Ad7 9 Ac2 &a6 10 h4 \302\243>c711 Ag5

Ac8 12 Wd2 Aa6 13 \302\243>e2h6 14
Axe7 \302\243>xe7 15 h5 #d7 16 #f4 c5 The natural continuation 10...&e7

17&g3ffg8 180-0-00-0-019dxc5! lands Black in dire straits: 11&a3a6

bxc5 20 \302\243te4#c6 21 \302\243>d6+ *b8 22 (11...&C8 \302\261)12 Axa6! Hxa6 13
#xf7 and wins; Lcin-Blees,Belgrade \302\243fo5Wb8 14 \302\243>d6+ *d8 15 &f7+
1988. *e8 16&xh8+-.
5 \302\243d3 c5 11 c4 d4
6 c3 \302\243>c6 12 \302\243>a3

7 \302\243>f3 In his analysis of the game (upon

As usual, the knight belongs on f3 which these notes are based) Anand
to support d4. prefers a moreforceful continuation:

7 ... 16 12 \302\243xh6 gxh6 13 0-0-0

\342\202\254tod2 (not
This is the only way to put 13...&g7 14 We2 0-0? 14 We4 +-)
pressure on White's position because the 14a3\302\261.

pawn on b6 has reducedBlack's 12 ... a6

options. 13 Ae4 0-0-0
8 0-0 fxe5 There is nothing to be gained
9 dxe5 from a delay in whisking the king
The most exactreply is 9 &xe5! to safety. For example: 13..JLe7
&xe5 10 dxeS when the threat of 11 (13...\302\243tf7 14 &g5!) 14 Axh6 gxh6
Wh5+ ensures that Black must 15b4cxb4 16\302\243fo5!\302\261.

compromise his kingside. 14 \302\243>c2 \302\243tf7

9 ... #c7 15 \302\243f4

10 Sel foh6(124) White proceeds in an acceptable

After 11 iLxh6 Black
gains manner by securing e5 - by now a

compensation for the doubled pawns familiar theme. However, the

because the open g-file is available for differentcircumstances that are apparent
the rooksto start an attack. due to queenside castlingsuggest
 Systems with ...b6 147

another approach: IS b4 cxb4 16 a3 19 ... cxb4

with unclear play. After 19...a5 20 bxa5 bxa5 21
15 ... &e7 XLbl the rook invades into the heart
16 b4 g5 of Black'scamp.
17 Ag3 g4?! 20 a5! bxa5

This is the logical conclusion of a 21 &xd4

brash plan to snatch e5, despite the With the pair of bishops bearing
deployment of White's forces in an down on the
queenside White is in

attacking stance. the ascendancy. Anand prefers an

If Black had beenmorealert to the even more stylish continuation to

danger, then a way to deflectthe take advantage of the vulnerable

onslaught
could have been pursued: knight on e5:21 c5! Ab5 (21...&xc5
17...h5! 18 bxc5 bxc5!(18...h419 22 \302\243>c4+-) 22 \302\243fo3a4 23 &xb4! a5
cxb6 *xb6 20 flbl with unclear 24 \302\243>d3Axd3 25 Axd3 axb3 26
play) 19h3 Sdg8 intending 20...g4 &a6+ *d7 (26...*b827 ttxe5!+-)
21 hxg4 hxg4 22 \302\243>h2Ah4 when 27Ab5+*c8 28#xb3\302\261.

White is forced to embarkupon 21 ... \302\243c5

defensive measures. 22 \302\243>4b3 a4

18 &d2 \302\243tcxe5 23 \302\243>xc5 #xc5

19 841(725; 24 Ac2 a5
Anand supplies the following
variations to demonstrate White's
superiority:

a) 24...a325\302\253te4lrc726c5Ac6
27 \302\243>d6+ \302\243>xd6 28 cxd6 flxd6 29
We2+-.
b) 24...b3 25 Axb3 (25 \302\243>e4?!

WM with unclear play) 25...axb3 26

&xb3! (26 #xb3 Ac6) 26...#xc4!

(26...#c7 27 fixa6 Ac6 28 Wal

&b7 29 Sa5 27
\302\261) Axe5 (TJ ttel
&c6) 27...&xe5 28 SxeS Aa4 29

While Black
temporarily is Wei Wxb3 (29...\302\243xb3 30Scl Ac2
caught up in avoiding tactics based 31 He2!) 30 Hc5+ &d7 31 Sbl
on the pinned knight. White reveals Wa2! 32 Sa5 Wc2 (32...&e8? 33
his true intentions. Now there is a flxa4!; 32...*e7 331T)4+;32...ttb8
concerted effort to disrupt the 33flal 33
\302\261) Hxa6 \302\261.

defensive pawn barrier. 25 \302\243*4 Wcl

148 Systems with ...b6

26 \302\243xa4 Ac6 \302\243fo8 10 \302\243>e2\302\243foc6 11 0-0 h5 12

27 Wc2 Ab7 Ad2 fcf5 13 &g3\302\243>ce7 14 \302\243>e2c4

28 c5 Bd5 15#c2 0-0-0I6b3f6=Castro-Orn-

The demands on the defender are stein, Budapest 1977.
enormous .The text iis designed to re- c) 4 c4!? dxc45 Axc4 Ab7 6
inforcee5, while 28. ...*b8 fails to 29 \302\243tf3&e7 7 #d7
\302\243>c3 8 0-0 h6 9 We2
\302\243g5\302\253. fcbc6 10 a3 Qa5 11 Aa2 5M5 12
29 iiLb3 fihd8 \302\243d2 fcxc3 13 bxc3 cS 14 Badl c4
30 Bad! 15&el#d5 16 f4 g617 \302\243>c2 Zait-
\302\261

After 30 &xd5 fixdS 31 Sac1 sev-KSrner, 1977.

Sochi
Wc6 Black can struggle on. The d) 4 \302\243f3 #d7 5 c4 Ab4+?! 6
preferred move-order will extinguish \302\243to3\302\243te77 a3 Axc3+ 8 bxc3 dxc4 9
any lingering hopes for a revival. \302\243xc4 Aa6 10 \302\243>xa6&xa6 110-0 cS
30 Wc6
\342\200\242\342\200\242\342\200\242 12 &gS WdS?and 1-0
31 Aa4 Wc7 Bath
Hodgson-Kalinin, Z 1987.
32 &d6+ B8xd6 4 ^ Wd7

33 cxd6 Wxc2 A necessary precaution in view of

34 Bxc2+ *b8 the elementary mistake 3...JLa6?4
35 Ab3 Sxd6 iLxa6 \302\243>xa6 S #a4+ which picks up
36 Bxe5! 1-0 apiece.
5 hi (126)
Game 42 White prefers to expand rapidly
Ivanovil-Gonzales on the kingsideto take advantage of
Saint John 1988 Black's slow manoeuvring game.
Other possibilitiesare:
1 e4 e6 a) 5 f4 and now:
2 d4 dS al) 5...\302\243a6 6 Axa6 fcxa6 7 Wd3
3 e5 b6 \302\243fo88 \302\243te2g6 9 0-0 \302\243te710 b3 h5
4 c3 11 Aa3 Qf5 12 \302\243xf8 *xf8 =

Other moves are relatively Witkowskd-Raisman, USSR 1958.

innocuous: a2) 5...h5 6 f5?!exf5 7 4^h3 c6 8
a) 4 &h3 Wd7 S a4 Aa6 6 \302\243xa6 \302\243d3 g6 9 0-0 \302\243h6 10 \302\243kl2\302\243>a611

fcxa6 7 Ae3 \302\243te78 0-0 fcb8 9 a5 &f3 &c7 12 c4 &e7 13Axh6 Bxh6
\302\243*c6 10 axb6 cxb6 11 c3 &a5! 12 14 Wd2 Bh8 IS b4 dxc4 16 Axc4
&a3 Bc8 13 \302\243te2 = Velimirovie- Wd8 17 &hg5 Ae6 18 Bad \302\243xc4

Maril, Yugoslavia 1966. 19 Bxc4 WdS 20 Bfcl &e6 ? Py-

b) 4 f4 &e7 5 \302\243>d2#d7 6 \302\243kif3 haia-Nei, Helsinki 1989.

Aa6 7 Axa6 &xa6 8 c3 c5!? 9 #d3 a3) 5...c5 6 \302\256A2 cxd4 7 cxd4
 Systems with ...b6 149

\302\243A68 &df3 \302\243a69 Axa6 &xa6 10 15 #h5+ Wf7 16 #xf7+ *xf7 18

&e2 &M+ 11 *f2 &g4+ 12 *gl \302\243}f3
\302\243
Grosar-Siegal, Geneva 1991.
h5 13 h3 \302\243>h614 g3 0-0-0 15 #d3
*b7 16 Ae3 = Chekhov-Kengis,

Gausdal 1991.
126 immm*
B
b) 5 <&h3c5 6 &a3cxd47 cxd4
Aa6 8 Axa6 \302\243>xa6 9 0-0 Axa3 10
bxa3 &e7 = Mohrlok-Ivkov, Vrn-

jaCka Banja 1967.

c) 5 JLd3JLa6and now:
cl) 6\302\243c2c5 7\302\243ke2&c6 8\302\243a4
AS m m&
&ge7 9 0-0 \302\243>f510 Sel fic8 11
dxc5 bxc5 12 \302\243ki2Ae7 13 0-0
\302\243>f4

14 \302\243f3 Bfd8 IS Ac2 d4 '/:-'/:

Calvo-Andersson, Las Palmas 1972. 5 ... &e7

c2) 6 Axa6 \302\243>xa67 \302\243>e2

cS 8 0-0 Black is reluctant to impede the
9
\302\243>c7 a4 \302\243>e710 &g3 &c6 11 Ae3 pawn's progress with 5...h5 as it
c4 12&d2&a513\302\243kh50-0-0 14 b3 makes it easier for a knight or bishop
cxb3 15 \302\243>xb3 \302\243to4= Kontic-Nik- to be established on g5. White
olic, VrnjaCka Banja 1989. obtained a winning attack in the game
d) 5Ae3&e76f4h57&d2\302\243tf5 Galdunts-Paris, St Ingbert 1992,
8 Af2 &a6 9 Axa6 \302\243xa6 10 &e2 g6 after 5...c5 6 h5 f5 7 &d2 cxd48cxd4

11 \302\243f3Ae7 12 Wd3 \302\243fo813 0-0 c5 iiLa6 9 \302\243te2&c6 10 &f3 Ab4+ 11

14 c4 <tk6 15 dxc5 bxc516cxdS Ad2 &h6 12 \302\243>f4\302\243xfl 13 *xfl
\302\243fo4= Kupreichik-Vaganian, USSR &n 14 Ih3! 0-0-015 #a4 Axd216
Chl976. &xd2*b7 17 Sa3 g5 18 18 ficl!
e) 5 a4!? and now: gxf4 19Sxc6Wxc6 20 Wxa7+ *c8

el) 5...a56\302\253tf3\302\253te77Ad3Aa6 21 Hc3 +-.

8 0-0 Axd3 9 Wxd3 &f5 10 &a3 6 h5 h6
ktl 11 b3 <&a6 12 g4 \302\243xa3 13 7 \302\243>d2 c5

Axa3 &e7 14 \302\243>g5c5 15 f4! &c6 8 4ih3

16 f5 Wd8 17 h4 h6 18 fxe6 hxgS The kaight is heading for f4,
19 ttxf? 1-0Eley-MacDonald-Ross, where it will also lend supportto h5

Glasgow 1975. if there is a needfor kingside

e2) 5..JU6 6 Axa6 \302\243>xa6 7 a5 castling.

b5 8 b4 &e7 9 \302\243tf3f6 10 h4 \302\243>c611 8 ... \302\243a6

Af4 fxe5 12 \302\243>xe5 QxeS 13 Axe5 9 Axa6 &xa6

Ad6 14 ftd2 (14 We2!?)14...\302\243>b8 10 &f4 0-0-0
150 Systems with ...b6

This is where the king belongsas Of course,18 &c5+ has to be

Blackcan now form a long-term ruled out
plan based upon closing the queen- 18 a4 2kec6
side and eventually advancing on the 19 \302\243a3 *a8

kingsideto createa counter-attack. 20 b5

11 a3 *b7 The pawns advance to ensure the
12 b4 cxd4 retreat of Black's last active piece.
13 cxd4 2c8(727) Now the game enters the final phase,
which sees White in hot pursuit of
Black's king.
127
20 ... \302\243xa3
w
w*mwmi 21 Sxa3 &e7
*m mi 22 Wal Sc7
m ha 23 aS Wxb5

Good or bad, the queen is obliged

to capture the pawn to avoid instant
calamity, thus opening up another
path for the rooks.
wm mi 24 axb6 \302\253xb6

25 Qbc5 2kec6
14 Bh3! 26 fie3 txeS(l28)
Inaugurating a lightning attack by
swinging the rook across to the
queenside. This is a regular feature
of lineswith an early h4 as the closed
centremeansthat the white king can
sometimes safely stay in the centre.
14 ... \302\243b8

15 &d3 ft
16 \302\243b2 \302\243>bc6

17 &b3
The strategy of building up the
is simplebut
forceson the queenside
effective. Black is obliged to adopt a 27 2e2!
dour defensive set-up as the cramped At first sight, it appears that White
nature of the positionpresentslittle has intended to shore up eS but the
opportunity for counterplay. real purpose of the manoeuvre is
17 ... &d8 now revealed.
 Systems with ...b6 151

27 ... \302\243fo4 b4 Sde8 20 Wa6+ *c7 21 b5 +-

28 Sb2 &xd3+ Romero Holmes-Purgimon, Andorra
29 Hxd3 Wd6 1987.
30 Wa3 &f7 b) 5 h4 #d7 6 h5 h6 7 Aa6
\302\243>c3

31 Sdb3 fihcS 8 \302\243xa6 &xa6 9 \302\243te2c5 10 c3 Sc8

32 Sb7 1-0 11 0-0 \302\243lc6 12 \302\243fo2\302\243lc713 &g4
\302\261

Fedorowicz-Prie\\ Paris 1989.

Game43
Kupreicbik-Vaganian

USSR 1980

1 e4 e6
2 d4 dS
3 e5 &e7

The introduction of 3...&e7 is

closely linked to lines with 3...b6.
to avoid
The move-order is designed
various continuations by feigning a
desire to transposeto the main lines.

There are no benefits to be found 5 ... Ab7

from immediately undermining the After 5...iLa6 the simple reply 6
pawn formation: 3...f6?!4 \302\243d3! b3 avoids the trade of bishops.
(intending 51*5+) 4...g6 5 \302\243tf3\302\243>c66 6 \302\243>c3 Wd7

exf6 \302\243>xf67 0-0 Ag7 8 Ag5 0-0 9 7 cxdS

Wd2 \302\261
Weiss-Blackburne, Hamburg The prospect of opening up the
188S. a8-h 1 diagonal is of little concern
4 \302\243tf3 b6 as it is difficult to exploit, while
5 c4 (129) White can quickly develop without
A popular way to confront the distraction.
system is to open up the game as White soon had an advantage in
soonas possible. Once again, the game Sax-Short, London 1980,

gaining territory on the kingside is also a after 7 Ae2 \302\243foc6 8 0-0 dxc4 9 Axc4
viable alternative: QxSV. (9...0-0-0!?)10Ab5 Ac6 11
a) S c3 Wd7 6 h4 hS 7 a4 \302\243a6 8 &d3&d5 12 iLd2 Ae7 13&e4Ab4
\302\243xa6 \302\243>xa69 aS \302\243fo810 axb6 cxb6 14 flcl \302\243b5 15 Axb4 Axd3 16
11 \302\243fod2 \302\243>bc6 12 &fl \302\243tf513 &g3 Wxd3 &xb4 17 mi \302\243>d518 Wg5!
&xg3 14 fxg3 Ae7 150-0f6 16 exf6 *f8(18...0-0? 19&f6+gxf620exf6
gxf6 17 #e2 Ad6 18 Af4 0-0-0 19 g6 2lWh6+-)19&c3\302\261.
152 Systems with ...b6

7 ... \302\243>xd5 11 ... \342\202\254k6

8 \302\243d3 c5 12 ffibl
9 0-0 With a series of exchangesWhite
There is no problemadjusting to can exploit the opposing king being
the situation after 9...cxd4 10 &xd4 in the centre: 12 \302\243b5 a6 13 &xc6
as Blackremains congested, while in Axc6 14 &xc6 Wxc6 IS Wd3! \302\243e7

certain positions the white

queen is 16Wg3l
able to roam on the kingside via g4 12 -. kcS
orh5. 13 \302\243e3 0-0-0

9 ... \302\243>xc3 14 Ab5 \302\243xd4?!

10 bxc3 cxd4 The chance for equality is lost

If Black seeks to add pressureto Much better is to activate the queen
d4 the situation can be brought under immediately: 14...Wd5! IS \302\243xc6
control: 10...\302\243k;6 11 dxcS \302\243xc5 12 (15 c4?! We4) 15...&xc6 16 #xd5
We2 Sd8 13 Ac2 \302\261. Axd517\302\243xc5bxc5=.

11 l&xd4 (130) 15 \302\243xd4 WdS

16 SixtiS \302\243xc6

LitUe is gained from 16...#xc617

f3 fidS 18Sb4,intending a4 with a
promising attack.
17 13
A simple but effective remedy,
which blunts the power of
the
controlling diagonal.
17 ~. h5
18 a4 *b7
19 We2

The first step towards a decisive

In Kupreichik's opinion this isthe infiltration. Now Black be
must
best way to maintain the initiative. beware of the likelihood of opening up
Black's basic idea to earn equality the a-file for the rook: 20 aS WxaS 21
would be evident after 11 cxd4 &c6 Sal Wb5 22 c4 \302\253M 23 fffbl We7
12 \302\243e4 Sd8 (12...\302\243fc7 13 \302\243xb7 24 Bxa7+! *xa7 25 Axb6+ +-. It
Wxb7 14 13
\302\243a3! \302\261) Ag5?! (13 \302\243e3 would be premature to advance the
\302\243>e7
=) 13...&e7 14 Axe7 &xe7 15 pawn too rapidly: 19 a5?! Wxa5 and
&g5 Axe4! (15...h616 &xf7!) 16 now 20 We2 Wa6! 21 We3 Sd5 T or

&xe4 0-0 17 &d6 \302\243te8with good 20fialWd5 2lVe2^b5T.

chances against the d-pawn. 19 ... WaS
 Systems with ...b6 153

20 Sb4 Sd5 24 Axb6!

21 fffbl fihd8 A sparkling sacrifice that will
22 b4 *a8 launch a formidable onslaught based
23 *h2 Jk.xa4?l(131) on the might of the rooks.
24 ... axb6
25 flxb6 *a7
26 Sb7+ &a8

27 H>2 S8d7
The attempt to neutralize the

attack with 27...Bb5 results in a lost

ending: 28 fixbS #xb5 29 WxbS
Axb5 30ffxb5+-.
28 Hxd7?!
AH lines lead to victory, but

checkmate would be more

impressive: 28 Sb8+ *a7 29 Sa8+! *xa8
Black's patience finally cracks. 30Wb8#.
Vaganian hopes that the deadlock 28 ... SbS
can be broken in a positive way by 29 We2 Hxe5

stealing the a-pawn. 30 Bd8+ 1-0

11 3..JU7

The desire to exchange White's light-squared bishop.

light-squared bishop has resultedin S kg? (132)
an unusual opening strategy. It Black achieves the aim of
involves the simplistic 3..JLd7 and reaching an uncharted position after the
4...a6 to supportthe outpost bS. The alternatives:
idea is to tempt White into trading a) 5 \302\243H>d2 c5 6 dxc5 kxcS 7
pieces, which has the drawback of \302\243d3\302\243fc78 \302\243b6 9
\342\202\254M>3 \302\243f4\302\243fec6

doublingthe b-pawns, but offers 10 0-0 \302\253ig6

11 Ag3 0-0 12 Axg6
dynamic
compensation in the form of hxg613 fiel \302\243fc714 Renet-
\302\243fod4 \302\243

the open a-file.It has been Mellado, Palma de Mallorca 1989.

adopted
occasionally by a number of players b) 5c4!?dxc46\302\243xc4\302\243c670-0

who wishto seekan unbalanced &e7 with unclear play; Lau-Ben-

position. However, Bronstein's model jamin, New York 1985.

example of how to dealwith the

situation casts doubt on the viability of

132
Black's variation.
B
MRKI wsstm ^\" IWwJ\"\"
^\" mfrnt \302\253^*\302\273

Game 44 \\
km mtm m
Bronstein*K8nier mmm we w& ma h_wm
Tallinn 1981 m o m m
\342\226\240 \342\226\240 wm
1 e4 e6
2 d4 dS mm mm
3 eS &d7
mthmmmmz
4 &f3 a6!?

An ambitious and controversial 5 M Wc8?!

idea. It pavesthe way for Black to Black responds timidly to White's

relieve the traditional problem of the aggressiveplan, wishing to preserve
dormant 'French' bishop by his dark-squared bishop from

exchanging it for White's more active exchange; in that case d6 would act
156 3..Ad7

like beacon a to a white knight after a

future ...cS. The ..JLb5 idea is
unconvincing when the dark-squared
bishop is not availableto support the
pawn thrust ...b4 to undouble the
pawns.
A more acceptable line is
available: 5...\302\243te7 6 &c3 c5 7 dxc5 WaS 8
a3 #xc5 9 Ad3 \302\261
\302\243>g6 Borngasser-

Basman, Birmingham 1972.

6 c4
White is keen to open up the We4 and dS) 13..JIad8 14 Wg4 Qd5
position to facilitate a rapid deployment 15&e4\302\261.

of his forces.This has added appeal 12 dS!

due to Black's cumbersomeopening An ingenious sacrifice of a pawn

and
especially now that the queen is to keepa grip onthe position, which

misplaced. is energetically executed. Against

6 ... h6 the capture 12...\342\202\254kd5, White claims
7 \302\243e3 dxc4 a clear advantage with 13 iLxdS
8 \302\243xc4 &e7 \302\243xd5 (13...exdS 14 e6 Vxe615 fiel
9 <&c3 \302\243c6 14
\302\261) &xd5 exdS IS e6 Wxe6 17
It is a hollow victory to have flxc7\302\261.

activated the bishop at last, as the restof 12 ... exdS

the queensideremainscongested. 13 \302\243d3

10 0-0 Wd7 A calm response that gives Black

11 fiel plenty of opportunities to go wrong.
The rook moves to the most active White holds the pawn-push e5-e6 in
square and further limits the options Jk.d4.In
reserve, intending fiel and
at Black's disposal. the meantime,Blackfacesa crisisin
11 ... aS(133) deploying his pieces before the
The necessity to make space for attack gathers momentum.
the queen'sknight has resulted in an 13 ... &a6
admission that the initial opening 14 a3 g6
scheme has proved to be a failure. 15 e6!
There is no respite if the bishop is Another clever device which

given up to clear c6: 1 l..JLxf3 12 quickly opens a direct avenue to the

WxO &c6 (12...c6 13 Qe4 with an king. The e-file will be accessibleto
edge for White) 13 fifdl (intending
therookand Black's kingside can be
 3...kd7 157

compromisedby staking a claim for

control of the al-h8 diagonal.
15 ... #xe6
16 Ad4 (6(134)
If the rook takes evasive action it
makes little difference to Black's
bleak prospectsin Bronstein's
opinion: 16...Bg8 17 fiel Vd6 18 &eS
Ag7 19Qb5#d8 20Sxc6!
Axe5

21 Sxa6 bxa6 22 SxeS axbS 23

Axb5+*f8 24Ac54-.
17 Axg6+ *d8 20 fie6 #d7
18 fiel *d6 21 &xft Axf6

19 Af7 &g7 22 fixft 1-0

Index of Variations

1 e4 e6 75; 6...Bc8 79) 7 \302\243>a3(7 h4 79; 7

2 d4 d5 0-0 86) 7...cxd4(7...&g682)8
3 e5 c5 cxd4 \302\253if59 Qc2 \302\253>b4(9...1fa5+

3...b6 4 Ab5+ (4 c3 148;4 f4 148; 79; 9..;\302\273b6 79) 10 fcxM (10 &e3
4c4 148;4&f3l48)4...Ad7 82; 100-0 84) 10...&xb4+80
(4...c6 145) 5 Ad3 146
3...f6151
3...Ad7 155 A)6a3
4 c3 B)6&d3
4fg4 127 C)6Ae2
4$M3130
4dxc5 134 A)

4 ... \302\243c6 6 a3 c4
4..;\302\273b6 5 42^f3 Ad7 6 Ae2 Ab5 7 6...a5 36
c4 137; 7 dxc5 141 6...fch6 39
4...4be7 115 6...\302\243d7 7 b4 (7 Ae2 45) 7...cxd4 8
5 \342\202\254\302\2433 cxd4fic89 Ab2 (9 &c3 42; 9 &e3
5 Ae3 123 46; 9 Ae2 46) 9...<ba5 (9...a6 42;
5 f4 123 9...\302\253>xb4 42) 10 &M2 (10 Ac3
5 #g4 123 42) 10...&C411<bxc4 (11 Axc4
5fce2123 42) 1 l...dxc4 12 Bel a5 (12...c3
5 ... Wb6 43;12...Ab5 13
43;12...*a643)
5...f5 15 &1243

5...f6 15 7 fcbd2
5..&h6 6 dxc5 &g4(6...\302\243xc5 7&g5 20
119)7*34 120 7M20
5...&ge7 6 fca3 107;6 Ae3 110;6 7 Ae2 20
112
Ae2110;6Ad3 7 g3 Ad7
(7...f6 29) 8 Ah3 (8 h4
5...Ad7 6 Ae2 (6 a3 97; 6 dxc5 27) 8...H624
102;6 Ad3 102) 6...&ge7 (6...f6 7 ... Qa\302\243
160 Index of Variations

7...&ge7 14; 7...&d7 14;7...f616 10...a6lllfe2(ll*hl57;ll

8 Ae2 Bel 57)ll...<&e7 (11...AM57;
8 b3 16 ll...Wh458;ll...Bc858)12*hl
8g3 33 (12Bdl 58) I2...\302\253te6(12...1fh4
8 ... Ad7 58; 12...^g6 58) 13 f4 58

9 0-0 Qe7 11 Bel M

9...h6 17 ll...lfc7 53
9...0-0-0 17 ll...Vb853
9...f617 12 Qb5 *b8
10 Bel 12. JLxb5 53

10g3 17 13 Wf3 53
10&g5 17
10 ... *c6 Q
10...\302\243>c8 18 6 Ae2 cxd4
I0...&g6 18 64
6...Qge7
10...h6 18 6...f664
11 #c2 18 6.JU7 64

6...Qh670

B) 7 cxd4 Qh6
6 Ad3 cxd4 8 Qc3
6...&ge7 49 8Axh667
6...Ad7 49 8 b3Gf59 Ab2 Ab4+ (9...Ae7
7 cxd4 Ad7 67;9...Ad7 67)10*fl0-0
8 0-0 (10...\302\243e7 68; 10...h5 69) 11 Qc3
8&e250 (Ilg469)ll...f669
8Ac2 50 8 ... $K
8 ... &xd4 9 Qa4

9 \302\243)xd4 9*fl64

9&g5 50 9 ... #a5+

9&W254 10 Ad2 Ab4

9 ... #xd4 11 Ac3 bS

10 \302\243>c3 #xe5 ll..JUc3+65
10... AM 52 ll...Ad7 65
10...\302\253rb652 ll...a665
10...&ge7 52 12 a3 65