THE

FRENCH
DEFENCE

Svetozar Gligoric

with the collaboration of Wolfgang Uhlmann

introduction by Mikhail Botvinnik

and a contribution by Anatoly Karpov

RHMPRESS
a division of RHM Associates of Delaware, Inc.
220 Fifth Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10001
 Copyright © 1 975
RHMPRESS
a division of RHM Associates of Delaware, Inc.
220 Fifth Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10001

All rights reserved . No portion of this book may be reproduced in any form ,
except for brief passages 1n a rev1ew, without the written consen t of the
p ublishers .

Library o f C-ongress Catalog Card N o : 75-8368

ISBN 0-89058-010-3

Photosetting by Quickset , 89-97 , St . John Street, Lon don , EC l M 4A S .

Prin ted in the Unite d States of America

SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT

The reader' s attention is directe d to the back of this book where we

describe in full the whole concept of THE R H M SURVEY OF
C U R RENT CHES S OPENI NGS .

With a world-renowned Editorial Board which includes Anatoly

Karpov , Viktor Korchnoy , Boris Spassky , Tigran Petrosian , Svetozar
Gligoric , Bent Larsen , Lubosh Kavalek and other top Gran dmasters. we
are p resenting an important ne\v approach to the Openings in chess,
w hich we are s ure you will find of great interest.

Please refer to the back of this book for full details .

RHM Press

11
 Symbols

A good move .
!! An excellent , beautiful or hard-to -find move .
? A poor move .
?? A very poor move or a blunder .
!? An interesting move , possible involving some risk .
?! A dubious move.

Acknowledgements

There are m any people whom R . H . M . wish to thank for their help in the
editing of this book . The ori ginal typescript by Gligoric an d Uhlmann was
trans lated from the German by John Littlewood . Botvinnik's introduction was
translated from the Russian by Katya Young who also translated 22 of the
illustrative games from Russian and games 7 an d 2 1 from H ungarian . These two
Hungarian games appear by kind perm ission of Magyar Sakkelet. Two other
games also stem from Russian sources . The notes to part of the main game i n
chap ter 4 are by Mikhail Tal from h i s excellent book of the 1 9 60 Worl d
Championshi p match and the trans lation appears by kind permission of Hanon
Russ.e ll who published his own translation of Tal 's book . Game 39 was
translated by Dr. Ken Neat. Games 4 and 34 originally appeared in S erbo-Croat
and the translations are by Alan Fer guson . Game 1 is taken from Larsen 's
Selected Games of Chess by Bent Larsen and appears here by ki nd permission of
G. Bell and Sons. The contribu tion by World Champion Anatoly K arpov was
trans lated from the Russian by B· e rnard Caffe rty .
The Engl ish manuscript was typed by M argaret Fitzjames. The final
typescript was c hecked by Svetozar Gligori c for accuracy of content and by
Kevi n O'Connell for accuracy of typing . K evin O'Connell also prepared mos t of
the diagrams and read the proofs .

lll
 Publisher's Foreword

R�H.M. Press is proud to present the first volume in our series The R.H.!Y!.
Survey of Current Chess Openings. All the books in this series will be written by
leading International Grandmasters and the material will be presented in a way
that makes the books invaluable to players at all levels .
The French Defence has long been known as one of Black' s most solid replies
to 1 P-K4, but it was not until MikhaU Botvinnik successfully adopted the
defence in the 1930s, and made it his principle reply to 1 P- K4, that the defence
achieved the m ark of respectability . Botvinnik' s excellent results with the black
pieces throughout his long reign as World Champion did much to popularize the
French Defence, and it is therefore with particular pleasure that R.H . M .
welcomes Botvinnik' s introduction to this book . Botvinnik's article, "Under­
standing the French Defence", explains the basic ideas of the defence for all to
understand, and he traces its development in order to sho\V how and why certain
variations have become popular whilst others are considered dubious .
After reading Botvinnik's introduction the reader will understand the
principles of the French Defence and he will be ready to digest the main body of
this book. Each chapter deals with a different m ain line and the authors have
taken care to explain the point behind the key moves. There is sufficient in­
depth analysis to give the· reader a thorough understanding of each variation
without swamping him with an indigestible mass of material. And in order to
m ake the ideas behind the variations even more clearly understood, the authors
have augmented the text with 72 complete, annotated games .
Svetozar Gligoric and Wolfgang Uhlmann rank amongst the leading Inter­
national Grandmasters of today . Gligoric was an expert in the use of the French
Defence during the e arly p art of his career and at the same time he often faced it
with the white pieces . Uhlm ann 's experience on the black side of the French
Defence stretches back over twenty years and since the end of the Botvinnik era
he has been its leading practitioner in the international arena, playing nothing
else in reply to 1 P-K4 .
Between them, our two authors possess a n unrivalled understanding of the
French Defence, and their expertise is clearly shown in the pages that follow . As
an added and most valuable bonus to their work, R . H . M . is delighted to present
a contribution by World Champion Anatoly Karpov, who analyses the most
critical variation in current French Defence theory - the one employed in seven
of the games from his m atch with Korchnoy at the end of 1974 .

iv
 Please be sure that you read the description of THE R.H.M. SURVEY OF
CURRENT CHESS OPENINGS which follows the indexes at the end of this
book. As well as announcing our forthcoming titles in the series, this description
will acquaint you with our new loose-leaf updating service which will, we feel
certain, prove of immeasurable help to all chess players in attaining rapid
forward progress in the quality of their play.
We take this opportunity to thank you for your interest in R.H.M. Press
publications.

Sidney Fried
Publisher

As a free bonus to all readers of "The French Defence", we would like

to send you, with our compliments, an additional current booklet con­
taining twenty recent French Defence games. These games are all anno­
tated and they have been chosen from recent tournaments to bring you
up to date with the latest ideas in the French Defence that have ap­
peared since our book went to press.
To receive this free booklet you need send only a postcard with your
name and full address, specifying FRENCH DEFENCE BOOKLET, to
R . H . M . Press, 840 Willis Avenue, Albertson, N.Y. 1 1507. European
readers should send their postcards to R . H. M . Press Ltd.,
P . O. Box 55, London N 13, England 5BE.
There is absolutely no charge. This free booklet is our way of express­
ing our appreciation for your support.

V
 Contents
Understanding the French Defence 1

PART ONE
THE NIMZOVICH (WIN AWER) VARIATION
\.

1 The Nimzovich Variation with 6 ...N-K2 7 Q-N4 11

2 The Nimzovich Variation with 6...N-K2 7 P-QR4 74
3 The Nimzovich Variation with 6 ...N-K2 and ...Q-R4 99
4 The Nimzovich Variation with 6...Q-B2 116

PART TWO
OTHER SYSTEMS WITH 3 N-QB3
5 The Classical Variation 136
6 The Albin/Chatard/Alekhine Attack 145
7 The MacCutcheon Variation 153
8 The Rubinstein and Burn Variations 161

PART THRE E
THE T ARRASCH VARIATION
9 The Tarrasch Variation with 3...N-KB3 187
10 The Tarrasch Variation with 3 ...N-QB3 219
11 The Tarrasch Variation with 3... P-QB4 229

PART FOUR
MISCELLANEOUS SYSTEMS
12 The Advance Variation 278
13 The Exchange Variation 290
14 The King's Indian Attack 294

Index to Variations 304

Index to Complete Games 307

Vl
 Understanding the French Defence
By Mikhail Botvinnik

The defence I P- K4 P - K3 was known long ago , but it used to be less popular
th an the open g ames arising from 1 P- K4 P- K 4 . La Bourdonn ais introduced the
move 1 . . . P- K3 into m aster practice at the beginning of the l ast century and it
was used by the Paris i ans to win a correspon dence g ame Lon don -Paris ( 1 834-
36) , since when it has been called the French Defence .
For a l ong time no s trong continuati on was fou nd for White. First of all the
disadvantage of the French Defence was thought to be Black's crampe d
position , and attempts were made to constrict Black still further by pl aying 2 P­
KS and , of course, 2 P-Q4 P-Q4 3 P -KS. S ome mas ters interpreted the Fre nch
Defence in open s tyle and pl ayed 2 P-Q4 P-Q4 3 PxP PxP , trying to exploit the
a dvantage of the m ove in the resulti ng symmetrical open posi tion . From these
attempts only the vari ation 2 P-Q4 P-Q4 3 P-KS h as stood up to the severe test of
time (the exchange vari ation 3 PxP PxP is now only pl ayed as a drawing line ).
I n time it w as conclu ded that White ' s QN should be developed , and the
M acC utc heon vari ation appeared (2 P-Q4 P -Q4 3 N -Q8 3 N -K8 3 4 8 -KNS 8 -
QNS ), along with its "blood -brother" 4 ...8 - K2. Capablanc a him self played the
M acCutcheon vari ation with White . The Tarrasch variation 3 N-Q2 also saw the
light of day . C hi gorin's innovation 2 Q-K2 ( which leads to a closed game of
similar character to the King ' s I ndian Reversed ) stood apart from other systems.
I t is cu rious that Chigorin , who was such a conoi sseur of open games (the
Giuoco Piano , Evans ' G am bit, King ' s Gambit , etc. ) , i nterpreted the French
Defence as a closed opening when pl aying White .
R ubi nstein tried to create a drawing weapon for Bl ack from the French
D efence , and after 2 P-Q4 P -Q4 3 N -Q8 3 he played 3 pxp, avoiding all
. . .

com plications . This continuation h as never been e s pecially popular, as it offers

Black few ways of obtaining any counterpl ay .
To be quite frank , the real hi story of the French Defence starts with
Nim zov ich . A long with Reti , Gru nfeld and A lekhine he was the author of m any
new i deas in the openi ng , in which his b asic concept w as the control of the centre
by pieces in conjunction \\'i th an attack on the centre by pawns . Nim zovich

1
applied these ideas, which originated at the beginning of this century, to the
theory and practice of the French Defence. He breathed new life into the old
variation 1 P-K4 P-K3 2 P-Q4 P-Q4 3 P-K5 P-QB4; before his time White
automatically responded 4 P-QB3 in order to keep a pawn on the central square
Q4, whereas Nimzovich's reply was 4 N-KB3, using the Q4 square for piece
play. The variation 4 PxQP 5 QxP! N-QB3 6 Q-KB4 was considered to be good
.••

for White for a long time. It was only in the games Levenfish-Botvinnik (USSR
1937), where there followed: 4 ...N-QB3 5 B-Q3 or 5 pxp BxP 5... PxP 6 0-0 B­
B4!!

t:::4
A

7 QN-Q2 KN-K2 8 N-N3 B-N3 9 B-KB4 N-N3, and Bondarevsky-Botvinnik

(USSR 1941), which continued 7 P-QR3 KN-K2 8 QN-Q2 N-N3 9 N-N3 B-N3,
that the Nimzovich Variation suffered a blow. It transpires that if Black plays
...B-QB4 then it is he, and not White, who gets control of the centre, so that
White's main idea cannot be effected.
Even though Nimzovich did not manage to improve White's play radically in
the French Defence, he achieved as tonishing results for Black in the variation 1
P-K4 P-K3 2 P-Q4 P-Q4 3 N-QB3 B-NS. At first this variation was viewed as a
sort of eccentricity. At the beginning of my chess career, when I blindly trusted
authority, under the influence of games from the New York tournament of 1924
I played this variation as White with great pleasure, for exan1ple, against
Ragozin in 1927: 4 P-K5 P-KB3 At that time players were influenced by the
game Lasker-Maroczy, New York 1924, in which White obtained the better
game after 4... P-QB4. Nowadays it is well known that 4... P-QB4 is stronger. 5
N-B3 P-QB4 6 P-QR3 B-R4 7 P-QN4 PxNP 8 N -QN5 N -B3 9 RPxP with
advantage to White. Botvinnik-Ragozin, Leningrad 1937. However, a mere two
months after that game I started playing the variation 3... B-NS as Black. In this
the decisive influence was that of Master A.Model, who was a great believer in

2
this variation for Black . I t is true that my first attempt was ra ther unhappy: I
fell prey to a non-chess trick . though I did at least gain s ome essential
experience thereby . The variation was still viewed with suspicion for a few more
years , and it was only at H asti ngs ( 1 9 34/ 35) in my game agai nst M ilner-B arry
tha t I "mas tered" i t : 1 P-K4 P -K3 2 P-Q4 P-Q4 3 N -Q8 3 B -N5 4 P-K 5 P-Q8 4 5
P- Q R3 8xNch 6 Px8 N -K2 7 N -8 3 QN -8 3 8 8 -K2 B -Q2 9 0-0 Q-8 2 10 R-N 1 P-
85 11 N-K 1 0-0-0 12 P-84 P-8 3

H ow m any inaccu racies can a contemporary mas ter detect i n White's pl ay !

W hite h as omitted , for example, to pl ay P-QR4 followed by B - R 3; also , the
move 1 2 P -B4 is a mistake on pri nciple: it limits the sphere of ac tion of the whi te
pieces a nd weakens the light s quares . The ab ove positi on is com m onplace and
stereotyped for the contemporary master , but it was qui te a rare sight in those
days a nd it is not surprisi ng that M ilner-Barry started sinki ng . The pawns which
block the position bisect the board into two parts . White can only transfer his
strength from one flank to the other through the s quare QB 1 , w hile it is m uch
eas ier for B lack to ma noeuvre . Besides , the weakness of White' s Q- side pawns is
quite obvious . White does not have any real compensation for these
disadvantages.
If W hi te does not m ake the above- mentioned mistakes then his positi on is not
too b ad . O ne can, for exampl e , fol low A ntoshin ( A ntoshi n-Botvinnik, USS R
1955 ): 6 Px8 Q -82 7 N -8 3 N -K2 8 8 -Q3 N -Q 2 9 0-0 P-8 5 1 0 8 -K2 N -QN3 1 1
N-K 1 ! Thi s i s the heart of the matter : the knight i s prepari ng the journey N - K 1-
N 2- B4 . 11 . . . N-R5 12 8-Q2 B-Q2 13 P-N3 0-0-0 14 N -N2
Fischer also prefers this vari ation for White . It requires a sub tle pos ition al
s truggle and the person ""·ho h as prepared the better mi ddle-game plan (before
the game ! ) usually wins. I n the thirties and forties , when very fe\\' people
understood these positions, the variation w orked wonderfully. How m any games
I managed to wi n at the mos t decisive mom ents in those years !

3
 It should be noted that deviation from the strongest continuation 4 P-KS does
not bring White any particular advantage . White has played 4 B-Q3 as \\'-ell as 4
P -QR3 BxNch 5 PxB P><P 6 Q-N4 and lastly 4 N -K2. 4 B-Q3 looks quite
harmless, but 4 P-QR3 has been played by quite a few great players (suffice it to
mention Alekhine, Smyslov, K e res and Fischer); nevertheless , by giving up his
KNP Black can come out of the opening quite satisfactorily. The quiet
continuation 4 N -K2 was fruitful for a time until A latortsev, in the thirties,
found the strong move 8 . N-B3 in the variation 4...P><P 5 P -QR3 B-K2 6 NxP
N-KB3 7 N(K2) -B3 0-0 8 B-K2.
. .

,_

If now 9 B-K3 then 9 . NxN 10 NxN P-B4 followed by . . . P -BS and . . . NxP .
. .

Thus , in the variation 4 N- K2 Black gets an equal game.

S myslov has often played 4 P-QR3 against me (as in the Alekhine-Euwe
match in 1935): after 4 . . . BxNch 5 PxB PxP 6 Q-N4 N-KB3 7 QxNP R-Nl 8 Q­
R6 P-B4 9 N -K2 R-N3

4
White does not achieve any significant advantage . This conclusion also
applies to another method of defence by Bl ack, which w as pl ayed in the more
recent game Fischer-Kovacevic, Rovinj /Zagreb 1970: 8 P-N3 9 N-K2 QN-Q2
. . .

10 8-NS Q-K2 11 Q-R4 8-N2 12 N-N3 P-KR3 (see game 4, page 46) .
Thus , taking everything into account , the continuation 4 P -KS is the
strongest .
For a long time the following was the main variation: 1 P-K4 P-K3 2 P-Q4 P­
Q4 3 N -QB3 8-NS 4 P-KS P-QB4 5 P-QR3 BxNch 6 PxB N-K2 7 Q-N4 PxP. Fine
had shown that 7 . . . N-B4 8 B-Q3 P-KR4 9 Q- B4 was to White's advantage . 8
QxNP R-N1 9 QxRP

Players of the white pieces used to avoid this continuation while I , playing
Black, was aimi ng for it . This continued up to the radio-match USSR-Gre at
Britain (1946), when I was badly defeated by Alexander. It was foolish on my
part, of course , to play such a system in a radio-match . All these systems
are for practical play , where one has to make forty moves in two an d
a half hours and the depth of the game corresponds to that speed . I n a
radio game everything happens at least twice as slowly and so in the first half
of the game (before the participants become too tired) a deeper game is
possible . Alexander's play was very subtle and I did not m anage to
overcome my difficulties . The greatest blow was that everybody, at last,
perceived the inadequacies of the system and became braver . It is true that since
then Uhlmann has analyzed this variation in great detail and pl ayed it as Black
not without sucess , but that is credit to him alone ! This system can no longer
meet the demands of the arsenal of the contemporary tournament sol dier. It has
become bound up with sophisticated research which is hardly accessible to the
practical chessplayer.

5
 The need, therefore, arose for a new s ystem, and one was found based on the
variation 4 ... P-QB4 5 P-QR3 B-R4 (which was rejected by Alekhine in the
tournament book of New York 1924). This variation lived a few years until
Smyslov, in the ninth game of oQr 1954 World Championship match, played 6 p ..
QN4 P><QP 7 Q-N4! and proved that White has plentiful opportunities.
So I had to s top playing that variation.
But here was another idea! To try to defend the KNP with the queen by means
of 4 P-QB4 5 P-QR3 8xNch 6 PxB Q-82 7 Q-N4 P-84 (as in my game against
•••

Reshevsky back in 1948). In 1957, in the fourteenth game of our match, Smyslov
did not take the KNP after 8 Q-N3 N-K2 and he did not achieve anything; in
1960 and 1961, however, in the first and twelfth games of my match and return
match respectively agains t Tal, he played 9 QxNP! and won both times. So this
.....

variation had to go into the archives as well, but even so it had done its duty.
Thus the variation 4... P-Q84 5 P-QR3 8xNch 6 Px8 N-K2 7 Q-N4 pxp (which
Uhlmann has played several times) has proved to have the best chance of
survival after all.
The system without the move ... P-QB4 also deserves attention: Black plays
4... Q-Q2 followed by ...N-QB3 and if 5 Q-N4 (or 5 P-QR3) then he can play
5... B-B1. This defence has not, however, achieved wide popularity.
While the Nimzovich Variation (3... B-N5) was in its infancy, the
MacCutcheon Variation gradually disappeared from practice, apparently
because after 3 N-QB3 N-K83 4 8-KN5 8-N5 5 P-K5 P-KR3 6 8-Q2, Black has
few opportunities for counterplay.

The other sub-division of this line, 4... 8-K2, has shown greater signs of life,
thanks largely to the efforts of the Swedish Grandmaster Stahlberg who
championed Black's defence in this line for many years. However, A1ekhine

6
successfully pl ayed 5 P-K5 KN -Q2 6 P-KR4, when it is risky for Black to accept
the pawn . Also quite good for White is 6 Bx8 Qx8 7 P-84 because here too
Black 's counterplay is very limited.

Now let us consider the Tarrasch variation , which is still popular. When
White thinks of safety first the move 3 N -Q 2 suggests itself. If 3 . . . P-Q84 4
KPxP KPxP 5 KN -83 N -Q83 6 8-N5 8-Q3 7 PxP 8x8P 8 0-0 N-K2 9 N -N3
and the weakness of the QP and of Q5 makes White's chances preferable .

WJ
�

White's task is now to exchange the minor pieces (and first of all , the dark­
squared bishops), which will facilitate the attack on the pawn at Q5 and the
conquest of the Q4 square . A classical example of White's pl ay is found in the
eighteenth game of the Karpov- Korchnoy match , 1974 (see page 242 ).
If Black refrains from playing 3 ... P-Q84, then the battle has more to it , but
W hite still keeps the advantage . The move 3 ...N- QB3 suffered a serious
blow in the game Botvinnik-B oleslavsky, U SSR 1945 (and by the way Keres
achieved a quick victory against me with this variation in 1955 ) . More attention
should be paid to the continuation 3... N-KB3 4 P -K5 N (83)-Q 2 . I n the game
Abramian-Botvinnik, USSR 1938 , after 5 8-Q 3 P-Q N3 6 Q-K2 Otherwise 6 B­
R3 6 . P-Q B4 7 P -QB3 PxP 8 pxp N -Q83 9 KN-B3 N-N5 Black solved all his
. . .

..

opening problems by exchanging White's light-squared bishop .

I n the sixth game of our match in 1940 , Ragozin pl ayed 4 P-K5 N(B3) -Q2 5 8-
Q3 P-QB4 6 P-Q83 against me , and after 6 . P-QN3, instead of 7 Q-K2 trans ­
. .

posing to the Abram ian game , he played 7 N -K2, which for a time was thought
to be stronger. Against Ragozin I pl ayed 7 ... 8-R3 8 Bx8 Nx8 9 0-0 P-N3, and
White continued strongly with 10 N -83 8-N2 11 8-N5 Q-81 12 Q -Q2 P-KR3 13
8-K3 Q -N2, whereupon 14 P-KR4! woul d have given him the advantage . I n

7
1 952 I improved on 9 . . . P- N3 , playing 9 . . . N-B2! against Tolush who was unable
to achieve anything . Subsequently a strong move was found for White: 5 P-KB4!
and after 5 . . . P-QB4 6 P-B3 N -QB3 7 N(Q2) -B3 White's outlook is quite favour­
able ( for instance, 7 . . B-K2 8 B-Q3 Q-R4 9 K-B1 ) . Uhlmann , however, has his
.

own opinion on the m atter and stubbornly ( and not without success) continues
to play this variation . Uhlmann's courage and conviction in playing the French
Defence deserve full credit and the French Chess Federation should somehov1
have recognized it long ago !
Lastly I want to mention two deviations from the m ove 2 P-Q4 . The first is the
move 2 Q-K2 which was introduced to tournament practice by Chigorin (who
has quite a few original id� as to his credit in opening theory) at the end of the
last century . Fifty years elapsed before one of the shortcomings of this move
became clear: in the game S toltz-Botvinnik, Groningen 1946, the queen's
position proved to be awkward after : 2 . . . P-QB4 3 P-KN3 3 P-QN3 is somewhat
stronger. 3 . . . N-QB3 4 B-N2 KN-K2 5 N-QB3 P-KN3 6 P-Q 3 B-N2 7 B-K3 P-Q4!
8 PxP N-Q5!

W1
�

The move 2 P -Q3 sets Black a more complex task . The idea is to pl ay the
King's Indian Defence with colours reversed (and so with an extra tempo) with
the addition of the inappropriate mov·e P-K3 by Black . I n 1955 Reshevsky
played this move against me; and a year later I played it against Uhlmann . In
the latter game the continuation was quite origi nal for that time: 2 ... P-Q4 3 N­
Q2 N-KB3 4 KN -B3 P-84 5 P-KN3 N -B3 6 B -N2 B-K2 7 0-0 0-0 8 R-Kl R-Nl
9 P-K5 N -Q2 10 N -Bl P-QN4!
In the past twenty years this variation has been repeated an enormous number
of times and it is safe to j udge that Black has adequate counterplay .
Towards the end o f my competitive career I started losing with the French
Defence against players of the very first rank and I had to give up the opening

8
with which I had waged so m any successful battles over the chessboard. What is
there to be done ? Everything progresses and everything changes . I n the period
1 94 1 - 48 I was significantly stronger than my opponents and I could permit
myself to play com plex and dangerous positions wi th Black . Then , duri ng 195 1 -
63 , when I was- primus inter pares, I found it necessary to choose a more
soli d , bu t less prom ising defence, the Caro - K ann .
Does this mean that the French Defence is fading aw ay and that it will have no
rena issance? That is unlikely. Time will pass by and a new genera tion \\ill
appear which is u n ac quainted with its subtleties; a new strong practic al player
will appear who will have an equally strong talent for research . H is imagination
and intuiti on will open up new i de as in the French Defence; he will try it against
the ordinary masters , he will grow to like it and once agai n the Frenc h Defence
will become a strong weap on as it w as in the thirties and forties of our century .
Anyway , what else is there to pl ay ? The Ruy Lopez? I t has been studied even
m ore thoroug hly . The Sicilia n ? It is so "w orn out" that in the near future it will
turn into rags . The Caro - K ann ? I t is so difficult to tempt one's opponent into a
risky attack wi th it .
We m ust , however , rem ember that not everybody is suited to the French
Defence . The person who does not have a real chess charac ter, who does not
h ave the talent of a researcher or w ho is not prepared to w ork hard h ad better
play something else ! The French Defence is a difficult and dangerous opening !

M . Botvinni k
July 1 975
 Part One

The Nimzovich (Winawer) Variation

1 P-K4 P-K3
2 P-Q4 P-Q4
3 N-QB3 B-N5

10
 Chapter 1

The Nimzovich (Winawer) Variation

with 6 N-K2 7 Q-N4 . . .

White: lvkov
Black: Sofrevsky

Yugoslav Championship 1962

I P-K4 P-K3
2 P- Q4 P - Q4
3 N- Q B3 B-NS

One of the main variations of the French Defence. Nimzovich achieved good
results with this system, the main idea of which is to apply indirect pressure on
White's K4 square without allowing White to gain time as he does after 3 ... N­
KB3 4 P-KS (or 4 B-KNS). This variation usually leads to the sharpest lines of
the French Defence, because the frequent exchange of bishop for knight results

11
in an unbalanced position with points of attack on both sides of the board .
Whilst White normally conducts operations on the K-side , Black tries to exploit
the weakened pawn position brought about by the exchange of bishop for knight
on White's QB3 square . Before \Ye examine in detail the main continuation 4 P­
KS , let us consider other possibilities open to White on his fourth move .

(a) 4 B-Q3

A quiet move which in practice usually leads to equalizing exchanges .

( al) 4 }lxP This is the simplest way of achieving full equality. 5 BxP P­
...

QB4 Usually the alternative 5 . . . N-KB3 simply transposes if White replies 6 B­

B3 when Black can immediately try to solve his opening problems by playing
6 . . . N -B3. After 7 N- K2 P-K4! (8 P-Q5 P- K5 ! ) Black h as already equalized .
However, White should not answer 5 . . . N-KB3 with 6 B-N5 because of 6 . P-B4!
. .

giving him an unfavourable line of the M acCutcheon Variation , e . g . 7 pxp (7 N­

K2 PxP 8 BxN QxB 9 QxP QxQ 10 NxQ N-Q2 with equality) 7 . . . QxQch 8 RxQ
QN-Q2 9 BxN NxB 10 B-B3 BxP 1 1 KN-K2 K- K2 and Black's two bishops give
him a slight edge . Lasker-Tarrasch , 1908 . 6 KN-K2 Black has no problems after
6 P-QR3 BxNch 7 P><B N-KB3 8 B-Q3 (or 8 B-B3 N-B3 with equality) 8 . . . Qf'i­
Q2 9 N-B3 Q-B2! (or the equally good 9 . . . P- QN3 1 0 0-0 B-N2 1 1 Q- K2 0-0 12
N - KS R-8 1 13 B-KNS NxN 14 PxN Q-Q4 15 P-KB4 P-BS , as in Tartakower­
Przepiorka , Debrecen 1 925 ) 1 0 0-0 P-B5 1 1 B- K2 N-Q4 and Black's centrally
poste d knight on Q4 gives him slightly the better game . 6 N-KB3 7 B-B3 N-B3!
...

It is bad to liquidate in the centre at once , as 7 . . PxP 8 QxP QxQ 9 NxQ

.

P-QR3 10 0-0 QN-Q2 11 R- K 1 0-0 12 B-Q2 R-Q 1 1 3 P-QR3 B-Q3 14 QR-Q 1

gave White a positional advantage in Gligoric-Stahlberg , Zurich 1953 . 8 P-QR3
After 8 B- K3 PxP 9 NxP (better is 9 BxNch! Px B 10 QxP with equality) 9 . . . N -

12
K4! 1 0 B- K2 N -Q4 ! 1 1 B-Q2 Nx N 1 2 PxN B-K2! (not 1 2 . . . B-R4! ? 1 3 0-0
0-0 1 4 P-KB4 with attacking chances) 1 3 0-0 0-0 1 4 P- KB4 N -Q 2 1 5 B-Q3 N ­
B 4 1 6 Q-B3 B-Q2 1 7 Q R- K 1 NxB 1 8 P><N Q- B2 1 9 R-K3 B - K B3 20 Q- R5 P- KN3
21 Q - R6 B-N 2 22 Q - R4 Q-Q 1 ! Bl ack h as the better en ding . Fichtl -Uhlm ann ,
Zin nowitz 1 966 . 8 . . . B><Nch 9 P><B P-K4! 10 B-NS KPxP ! This is more exact than
10 . . . BP><P 1 1 B( B3)xNch P><B 12 PxP P>< P 13 QxP Q- R4ch 14 Q -Q 2 Q -Q4 with
a level game as in Hort-Pietzsch , Kecskemet 1964. 11 B ( B3)xNch After 1 1 P><P
P- K R3 1 2 B(N5)xN Qx B 1 3 P - B3 0-0 14 0-0 R-Q 1 15 Q- R4 B -Q 2 1 6 Q-B4 N ­
R 4 ! 1 7 Q-R2 B-N4 Black is a little better . Ortega- Uhlmann, Polanica Zdroj
1967 . 1 1 ... P><B 12 P>< P B-R3! 13 0-0 0-0 14 R -K 1 R -K 1 ! ? Better is 1 4 .. . P-R3
with a slight edge for Black. 15 N-N3! QxP 16 Q-8 3 with an even game . Grott ke­
Uhlm ann , East Germ any 1973 .

(a2) 4 . . . P-QB4 5 Px QP The best try for achieving a small advant age . 5 . . . QxP
S . . . KJ>xP is more sol id . After 6 P>< P N -Q B3 7 B-Q2 Bx P 8 N -B 3 KN - K2 9 0-0
0-0 10 B- K B4 B-KN5 Bl ack h as equalized . (After 10 . . . N-NS 1 1 N -QR4 Whi te
stands a little better) . 6 B-Q 2! A dangerous pawn sacri fice suggested by
Kondratiev . Altern atives are:

( 1 ) 6 B-QNSc h N -B3 7 N -B 3 pxp 8 BxN ch QxB 9 QxP BxNch with good pl ay

for Black;
(2) 6 K - 8 1 (A lekhine's move) 6 . . BxN 7 Px B N-KB3 8 N - K 2 Q-B3 9 N-84 QN ­
.

Q2 10 R-QN 1 P-QR3 1 1 Q - K 2 with a slight edge to White . Szily-Rethy,

Budapest 1 950;
(3) 6 N - B 3 pxp 7 P-Q R3 BxNch 8 Px B pxp and White has insufficient com -
pensation for the sacrificed pawns .

13
6 . . . BxN After 6 . . . QxQP 7 N-B3 Q-Q 1 8 0-0 N -KB3 9 P-Q R3 B-R4 10 Q-K2
N-B3 11 QR- Q 1 , White's lead in development is well worth the sacrificed pawn .
7 BxB pxp White has a strong initiative after the premature 7 . . . QxNP 8 Q-B3
QXQ 9 NxQ pxp 10 NXP K-B 1 (if 10 . . . P-B3 White pl ays 11 R-KN 1 or 11 N-N5)
1 1 R- KN 1 P- B3 12 B-N4ch K-B2 13 N-N5. Michel -Guim ard , M ar del Pl ata
1948 . 8 BxQP QxNP 9 Q-B3 9 Q-Q 2 ?! has not been tested in practical pl ay .
9 . . . QxQ 10 NxQ P-B3 This is the critical position arising from the pawn
sacrifice . Results so far confirm that White has good attacking chances . 11 R­
KN1 K-B2 12 0-0-0 N -B3 13 B-QBS N-R3 14 N-Q2 With his two bishops, open
files for the rooks and the ability to exploit Bl ack's weak Q3 s quare ,"White is
guaranteed a good game .

(b ) 4 pxp A move which renounces all claims of maintaining the initiative .

4 . . . PxP 5 Q-B3 In order to avoid symmetry Larsen experimented with this

move against Portisch at the Amsterdam Interzonal, 1964 (ill ustrative game 1 ).
For the less risky alternative , 5 B-Q3 , see Eley-U hlmann, Hastings 1972/ 3
(illustrative game 2) in which White played in too desultory a fashion .

(c ) 4 B-Q2

This leads to great complications but examples from practice show that Black
can accept the pawn sacrifice .

4 . . . PxP The logical continuation , attacking the QP at once . Other lines favour
White :

( 1 ) 4 . . . P-QB4 5 P-QR3! B r N 6 BxB N-KB3 (essential , as 6 . . . P>< QP 7 QxP or

.
6 . . . PxKP 7 pxp are clearly better for White) 7 P><BP NxP 8 BxP R-N 1 9 B-Q4 N­
Q B3 10 N-B3 with advantage to White ;

14
(2) 4 . . . BxN 5 BxB PxP 6 Q -N4 N -K B3 7 QxN P R-N l 8 Q-R6 again with the
advant age;
(3) 4 . . . N - K B 3 after thi s move we reach a kin d of MacCutcheon variation with 5
P - KS BxN 6 PxB N -KS , the only di fference being that Black's KRP is not on R3;
(4) 4 . . . N -QB3 5 P-Q R 3 (the only way to keep the initiative , since 5 Q -N 4 N -B3
6 QxNP R- K N l 7 Q-R6 NxQP 8 0-0-0 R-N 3 9 Q-K3 P-B4 gives an equal
game) S . . . SXN 6 BxB N -B 3 (not 6 . . . PxP 7 P -Q5! ) 7 P-KS N - K5 8 B -Q3 v.-·ith
attacking chances on the K-side .

5 Q-N4 Now there are two main lines:

{c l ) S ... QxP 6 N -B3 The stronges t contin uation , al beit leading to speedy
equality . The two main alternatives do not seem adequ ate :

( 1 ) 6 0-0-0 P- KR4! (6 . . . P- KB4 7 Q-N3 [or 7 B - K N5 PxQ 8 RxQ B - K 2] 7 B­ . . .

Q3 8 B - K B4 BxBch 9 QxB Q- B4 10 P-B3 N - K 2 1 1 PxP 0-0 1 2 N -B3 N -Q 2 1 3

pxp NxP 1 4 Q-B4! with good pl ay, according t o Keres) 7 Q -N3 ( 7 Q - N5 B - K2
gives the same position , and 7 Q-R4 B - K 2 8 B - KN5 Q - B4 9 NxP BxB 10 NxB N ­
Q B3 is equal . The retreat 7 Q - K2 i s probably White's best chance) 7 . . . B -Q3 8 B ­
K B4 P- R5! 9 Q-N4 (after 9 Q -N5 Q-B3 1 0 QxQ NxQ 1 1 BxB PxB 1 2 N-N5 N - R3
1 3 NxQ Pch K- K2 Black had the better ending in Lundquis t - Uhlm ann ,
M arianske Lazne 196 1 ) 9 . . . N - KB3 10 Q - N5 (not 1 0 QxNP? ? BxBch 1 1 K -N 1 R- R2! )
1 0 . . . BxBch 1 1 QxB Q - B4 1 2 NxP NxN 1 3 QxN N - 83 with advantage to Black.
(2) 6 KN - K 2 Q-B3! (6 . . . Q -K 4 i s also possible) 7 0-0-0 (or 7 Qx KP N - B3 8 0-
0-0 B-Q2 etc . ) 7 . . . Q-N3 8 Q-R3 N - KB3 9 P-B3 0-0 and Black maint ains hi s
extra pawn .

6 ... N -KR3 The simplest way of equ al izing . Other possibilities are:

( 1 ) 6 . . . P - K B4? 7 Q - R5ch P-N3 8 NxQ PxQ 9 N (B3)xP BxBch 1 0 NxB and

White stands better ;
(2) 6 . . . P - KR4 7 QxP( K6)ch (7 Q-B4 com es strongly into consideration, when
7 . . Q-N3 \voul d gi ve White a clear advantage after 8 Qx KP N-Q B3 9 B -Q NS)
.

7 . . BxQ 8 NxQ B-Q 2 9 NxP BxBch 10 KXB N -Q B3 with equality .

.

7 QxP (K6)ch No fin al judgement has yet been made about 7 Q -84 P-K4 8
QxP( K5)ch (inte resti ng is 8 QxN PxQ 9 NxQ PxN 1 0 NxP Bx Bch 1 1 KxB with
good pl ay for the pawn) 8 . . . QxQ 9 NxQ N -N5 (it is worth con si dering 9 . . . BxN
10 BxB N -B4 or 10 . 0-0 keeping the extra paw n ) 10 NxN B( B1 )xN 11 NxP with
an even game. 7 BxQ 8 NxQ B-Q2 9 NxP The chances are even .
. .

...

15
(c2) S...N-KB3 Theory has not yet made a final decision about this important
vari ation , giving back the pawn for speedy development . 6 QxNP R-N 1 7 Q-R 6
QxP Equally pl ayable is 7 . . . N-B3 8 0-0-0 R-N3 (not 8 . . . NxP 9 N-N5! ) 9. Q-R4
BxN 10 BxB Q-Q4 11 P-QN3 N-K2 12 P-B3 B-Q2 with chances for both sides .
Keres-Botvinnik, World Championship Match Tournament 1948 . 8 0-0-0 B-
81 Bronstein 's idea . 9 Q-R4 The best. If 9 Q-R3 QxP 10 B-K3 Q-B4 or 9 Q-K3
QxQ 10 BxQ N-N5. Black stands well in both cases . If 9 Q-B4 B-Q3 10 Q-R6 B­
B1 there is a draw by repetition . 9...R-NS 10 Q-R3 QxP So far we are following
the game Boleslavsky-Bronstein , 14th Match Game 1950, in which White now
continued weakly with 1 1 N-N5 N-R3 12 K-N 1 B-Q2 13 B-K3 Q-B4 with great
advantage to Black . The correct method of pl ay is 1 1 B-K2 QxP. Alternatives to
this exchange sacrifice are: '

(1 ) 1 1 . . . R-N3 12 P-KN4 Q-QB4 13 B-K3 Q-K4 14 B-Q4 Q-B5ch 15 B-K3;

(2) 1 1 . . . R-R5 12 QxR! QxQ 13 P-KN3 Q-R3 14 BxQ BxBch 15 K-N l B-Q2;
with equality in both cases .

12 B><R QxB(NS) 13 QxQ NxQ 14 NxP N-Q2 15 N-KB3 and White has the better
of it , since he can answer 15 . . . P- KB4 with 16 N(K4) -N5.

(d) 4 N-K2

The popularity of this move declined as soon as Black refused to accept the
pawn sacrifice . 4. PxP 5 P-QR3 B-K2 The best defence . It is risky to try to hold
..

on to the pawn by 5 . . . BxNch ?! 6 NxB 'N-Q B3 (see ·4 ); even riskier is the line
6 . . . P-KB4 and now :

16
( 1 ) 7 B - Q B4 N- KB3 8 B- KN5 0-0 9 Q-Q2 N - B 3 1 0 0-0-0 with an att ac k .
M aroczy- Seitz, Gyor 1924;
(2) 7 B- KB4 N - KB3 8 Q-Q2 0-0 9 0-0-0 N - R4 1 0 B-B4 N -QB3 1 1 P-B3! pxp
(i f 1 1 . . . NxB 12 QxN NxP 1 3 N -N5 P -B4 14 P - B3 ! ) 1 2 pxp NxB 1 3 QxN Q-Q3
1 4 Q-K3 with good attacking chances ;
(3) 7 P - B 3 PxP 8 QxP QxP (8 . . . Q - R5ch is no improvement , since after 9 P­
KN3 QxQP 10 N -N5 Bl ack can no longe r pl ay . . . Q- K R 5ch followed by . . . Q-K2)
9 Q -N3 N - K B 3 ( after 9 . . . N - K2 10 B- K3 Q- B3 1 1 0-0-0 Whi te h as an equ ally
strong att ack , accordi ng to Alekhine) 10 QxNP Q-K4ch (a little better is 10 . . . R ­
N 1 1 1 QxBP N -B 3 1 2 B- K B4! ) 1 1 B - K 2 R-N 1 1 2 Q- R 6 R-N 3 13 Q- R4 B-Q2 1 4
B-KN5 B-B 3 15 0-0-0 with a winning att ack . Alekhine-Nimzovich , Bled 193 1 .
(4) ( after 6 . . . N-QB3) 7 B -QN5 KN - K2 8 B -N5 ! P-B 3 9 B - K 3 0-0 1 0 Q -Q 2 (if
10 NxP P-B4 followe d by 1 1 . . . P-B5 wi nning the QP) 1 0 . . . P-B4 ( after 10 . . . P- K4
1 1 P-Q5 N- Q5 12 B-Q B4 K- R 1 13 0-0-0 Whi te has the advant age) 1 1 P-B3 N­
Q4 ( 1 1 . . . P- B5 gives better chances , wi th compl ications after 1 2 BxP PxP) 1 2
B x N NxN 1 3 QxN PxB and despi te Bl ac k 's extra pawn White has the better
prospects .

6 NxP N - Q B 3 There is an acceptable al ternative in 6 . . . N - K B 3 7 N( K 2)- N3 N ­

B3 8 P- Q B3 P- K4! 9 NxNch BxN 1 0 P-Q5 N - K 2 1 1 B-QB4 0-0 1 2 0-0 N -N3 1 3
N -K 4 B- K 2 1 4 Q - R5 K-R 1 ! 1 5 N -N5 BxN 1 6 Bx B Q-Q 3! Gheorghiu -U hl mann ,
Skopje Olym pi ad 1 9 72; or here 7 N(K2)-B3 N - B 3 transposing i nto o ur m ain
vari a tion . 7 B - K 3 Sharp situations arise after 7 P-Q B3 P-K4 e.g . 8 P-Q 5 N -N 1 9
P-Q B4 P- KB4 10 N ( K 4)-N3 N -K B3 1 1 P - B4 P-K5 12 N- Q4 0-0 1 3 B- K2 P-B3
1 4 B- K 3 K - R 1 15 Q- N3 P- B4 1 6 N -B 2 P-Q N3 17 0-0 Drawn . Minev- Bal anel ,
1 954. Alekhine's suggestion of 7 P-KN4 does not seem adequa te after 7 ... N-B3 8
NxNch BxN 9 B- K3 P- K R4! 10 pxp Q-Q4 wi th a positional advantage to Bl ack .
7 . . . N - 83 8 N (K 2 ) - B3 Or 8 NxNch BxN 9 Q-Q2 P- K4 1 0 0-0-0 0-0 1 1 P- Q5 N­
K 2 1 2 N-N3 N-N3 with equality. Lilienthal-Botvinni k , M oscow 193 6 . 8 ...NxN.
For 8 . . . 0-0? see Dvoretsky- Vaganian , 42nd USS R Champions hi p , Lenin -
grad 1974 (illus trative game 3) . 9 NxN P-K4! 1 0 pxp I f 1 0 P-Q5 ? then 1 0 . . . N ­
Q5 11 BxN Qx P gives Black the advant age . I O . . . QxQch wi th an even game .

(e ) 4 P-QR3 A move originally championed by Alekhine and occas ion ally

adopted by ex -Worl d Champion Fischer . The i dea is to crystallize the Q-si de
situation at once so that White can begin acti on on the K-si de before Bl ack h as
ti me to create counterp l ay wi th . . . P-QB4 . 4 . . . B><Nch 5 PxB P><P 6 Q-N4 N-K B3
7 QxNP R-Nl 8 Q- R6

This is the critical position in \\'hi ch Black has fou r conti nua tions which we
shall exami ne in turn :

17
(e1) 8 . . . R-N3

9 Q-K3 N-83 10 B-N2 Q- Q3 Perhaps 10 . . . N -K2 is better here , e . g . 1 1 P-Q B4 P­

N3 12 N - K2 B-N2 13 N-B4 N -B4 with good play for Black . Or if 1 1 0-0-0 P-N 4 ,
an interesting pawn sacrifice the consequences of which are unclear . Lebedev­
Golovko , 195 1 . 11 P -B3! The correct idea , eliminating the KP and thus in ­
creasing the scope of his bishops . 1 1 . . . PxP ? The critical variation is 1 l . . . P-K4
1 2 BPxP px p 1 3 pxp NxKP 14 0-0-0 . Now 14 . . . R-K3 is met by 15 P-QS and
14 . . . B -B4 by 15 B - K2 followed by P-N4 . So Black must play 14 . . . P -B4 with an
unclear position . A fter the text move White has too much control of the centre.
12 NxP B-Q 2 13 0-0-0 0-0-0 14 P-B4 N-KN5 15 Q-Q 2 P-B 4 16 P -Q 5! N-N 1 A
necessary evil, since Black loses at least the exchange after 16 . . . pxp 1 7 px p N­
K2 18 P-R3 N- KB3 19 N-K5! 17 P-R3 N-KB3 18 N-K5! N -K 5 19 Q-Q4 R-N6? It
was better to defend the back rank with 19 . . . R(N3)-N1 . After 20 QxP (20 N-B 7
is no longer effective , as after 20 . . . Q-BSch 2 1 K-N 1 QR-B 1 there is no need to
fear 22 pxp because the mate on Q8 is covered) 20 . . . P-N3 with a playable
position . 20 N -B 7! Q -B5ch 21 K-N 1 P-8� Black cannot play 21 . . . R-B 1 22 pxp
as mate in two follows any move of the bishop . 22 Q-K 5! After this move Black
has no defence . 22 . . . QxQ 23 BxQ R (Q 1)-N 1 24 B-Q3! The most exact winning
method . 24 . . . RxNP 25 B><N P><B 26 N-Q 6ch K-B 2 27 NxKPch K-N3 28 N-B 6!
B-R5 29 NxR BxPch 30 K-B 1 N -Q 2 31 QR-N l Resigns. Fischer-U hlmann ,
Zagreb 1970.

(e2) 8 P-B4 This logical looking move , striking at White's QP, has usually
. . .

favoured White in practice, but according to Botvinnik Black can equalize.

18
9 N-K2 R-N3 I f 9 . . . B-Q2 1 0 pxp B -B3 1 1 R-QN 1 QN -Q2 1 2 N -Q4 Q- R4 1 3 N ­
N 5 and W hite stands better. Ignatiev -Khasin , Moscow 1 959 ; o r 9 . . . QN -Q2 1 0
N - N3 Q- B2 (after 1 0 . . . Q- R4 1 1 B-Q2 P-N3 1 2 P-QR4 pxp 1 3 pxp Q-Q4 14 Q ­
K3 followed by 15 P-QB4 we prefer W hite 's position) 1 1 Q - K3 Q-B3 1 2 P -Q R 4 !
P-QR3 13 pxp QxBP 1 4 QxQ NxQ , and White stood a little better i n Fischer- R .
Byrne , U S Championshi p 1966 / 67 ; or finally 9 . . . N - B 3 10 pxp R-N 3 1 1 Q-Q2 B ­
Q2 12 R-QN l Q-B2 13 Q-Q6 ! 0-0-0 1 4 QxQch K x Q and in Smyslov ­
Botvinnik , 19th M atch Game 1 954 , White coul d have retained some advantage
with 15 N-N 3 . 10 Q-Q2! 10 Q - K3 is not so good in view of 10 . . . N -B 3 1 1 pxp Q­
R4 12 B-Q2 B·Q2 13 P-Q B4 N-KN5! 14 Q-Q B3 QxBP 15 P-R3 QxKBPch 1 6 K­
Q1 N ( N5)- K4 with advantage to Black . Boleslavsky-Uhl m ann , Krynica 1 956 .
10 ... QN-Q2 1 0 . . . N -B3 1 1 pxp transposes to the S myslov -Botvinnik game men ­
tioned above . 1 1 B-N2 Q-82 followed by 12 ... P-N3 and 13 ... B-N2 is given by
Botvinnik as equalizing.

(e3) 8...P-N3

19
9 B-KN5 R-N3 10 Q-R4 B-N2 1 1 P-B3 Black has nothing to fear from 11 B-NSch
QN-Q2 12 BxQNch KxB 1 3 N-K2 P-KR3! If 1 1 N-K2 Black must play 1 1 . . . P­
KR3 , as 1 1 . . . QN-Q2 12 N -B4 R-KN1 13 N -RS R-N3 14 B-NS P- B3 15 B-K2 is
better for White in view of the pin· . After 11 . . . P-K R3 12 BxP R-NS 13 Q-R3 QN ­
Q2 Black has excellent play for the pawn . 11 . .. QN -Q2 12 pxp P -KR3 13 BxN
QxB 13 . . . NxB is also possible . 14 QxQ NxQ 15 P -K5 N-Q4 with an unclear
position . Bronstein-Hort , Moscow 1971 . Simpler would have been 1S . . . RxP 16
BxR BxB 1 7 P><N BxR 1 8 K-B 2 with equality .

(e4) 8 QN-Q2 This move led to Fischer's sensational defeat at the hands of
...

the unknown "Y-ugoslav Master Kovacevic at Zagreb 1970 (see illustrative game
4) .

(f) 4 Q-N4?!

The weakest of the replies to 3 . . . B-NS. Black obtains the advantage as

follows: 4 ... N -KB3! 5 QxNP R-N 1 6 Q-R6 P-84 Also possible is 6 . . . P><P . See
Planinc- Ivkov , Yugoslav Team Championship 1971 (illustrative game 5). 7 P ­
QR3 R-N3 8 Q-K3 B-R4 Or 8 . . . B><Nch 9- PxB PxQP 1 0 BPxP NxP with a good
game for Black . 9 B- Q2 PxQP 10 QxP N-B3 and Black stands better after 1 1 Q­
Q3 N-K 4 12 Q-Q4 N(K4) -N5.

4 P-KS

The most common move , leading in almost all lines to situations full of
tension . After the coming exchange of bishop for knight on his QB3, White
strengthens his pawn chain on QB3 , Q4 and KS and usually attacks Black's

20
weakened K- side . Black ' s chances lie in a counter- attack against the \\'eakness
of White ' s doubled Q BPs . In spite of a wealth of games with this line , along with
theoretical analyses , it is still impossibl e to pass a final judgement on this \vhol e
variation .

4 . . . P-Q B4

The most flexibl e repl y. Bl ack tends to undermine White's exposed pawn
centre and al so to devel op position al pressure along the QB-file an d the QR4 -K8
diagonal .

(a) 4 . . . N -K 2 u sually transposes to one of the main lines by 5 P-QR3 BxNch 6

PxB P -Q B4 , but the move can take on an independent character iL after 5 P­
QR3 BxNch 6 P><B, Black pl ays 6 . . . P-QN3.
This variation was made popul ar for a brief period during the mid- 1960s by
Robert Byrne and lvkov , but it soon fell out of favour . 7 Q-N4 N-N3 The natural
way to defend the K N P . 7 . . . P-Q B4 8 B-Q 3 is even better for White th an the
obsolete vari ation 6 . . . P-Q B4 7 Q- N4 N-B4 8 B-Q3 (page 30) because the del ay in
pl aying . . . P-QB4 retards Bl ack ' s Q-side counterpl ay . 7. . 0-0 allows White to
.

build up a quick attack: 8 B - KN5 Q- Q2 9 P- K R4 N - B4 10 N - B3 P-B4? 1 1 B - B6 !

K- R 1 1 2 N -N5! Px B 13 KPxP P-K R3 14 Q- R5 pxp 15 B-Q3 \\'ith tremendous
pres sure ag ainst Black ' s Icing . Klovski- Nei, Riga 1968. Las tly . 7. . . N-B4? is met
by 8 8-Q3 P- K R4 9 Q- R3 wi th a difficult game for Bl ack . e . g . 9 . .. P-KN4 1 0 P-
N4 N - R5 1 1 pxp P- K B4 12 PxPe . p . Qx P 13 Q-N4 R-N 1 1 4 P- K 84 . 8 P-K R4 P­
K R4 9 Q-83 Also possible is 9 Q-01. See Levy- B irnboim. Netanya 1 973 (il l us ­
trative game 6) . 9 Q- N 3 , on the other hand , puts the queen on a less effective
square . 9 . . . Nx RP Even worse for Black is 9 . . . B- R 3 10 Bx B Nx B 11 B-NS Q-02

21
(or 1 1 . . . Q-B1 12 N-K2 P-QB4 13 R-R3 N-N 1 14 P-B4!- Keres) 12 P-R4 Q-B3
13 N-K2 Q-B5 14 0-0 P-Q B4 15 KR-Q 1 ( 15 N-N3 pxp 16 NxP is also crushing)
15 . . . P><P 16 pxp QxBP ? 17 QR-B1 Q-K5 18 Q-QR3! P-B3 (if 18 . . . QxN 19 Q-Q6
followed by 20 Q- B6ch) 19 P-B3 QxN 20 R-Q2 Resigns . lvkov-R. Byrne , Havana
Olympiad 1966 . 10 Q-R3 N-B4 Inferior is 10 . . . N -N3 ? 1 1 B-Q3 Q-Q2 12 Q-N3
N-B3 13 BxN PxB 14 QxPch Q-B2 15 QxQch KxQ 16 P-N4 B-R3 17 pxp with a
clear plus for White. Parma-lvkov, Bled 196 1 . 11 P -N4 N-K2 12 B-KNS! Now
Black cannot reply . . . P-KB3 and for this reason 9 Q-B3 is possibly stronger than
"
9 Q-Q1 (compare the note to move 1 1 in the Levy-Birnboim game, page 50) .
12 . . . Q-Q2 Also very good for White is 12 . . . B-R3 13 BxB NxB 14 Q-Q3 N-QN 1
15 RxP RxR 16 P><R K-Q2 17 P-QB4! pxp 18 QxP QN -B3 19 0-0-0 and Black
is in serious trouble. M atulovic-A ntoshin, Yugoslavi a-USSR M atch 1964. 13 N­
K2 B-R3 14 N-B4 B><B 15 KxB Q-N4ch 16 K-N2 QN-B3 17 NxRP R-KN1 18 Q­
B3 K-Q2 19 P-. R4 Q-BS 20 B-B6! with an overwhelming position . Lukin-Rizkov ,
USSR 1972 .
After 4 . . . N-K2, White can take advantage of the omission of 4 . . . P-QB4 to
launch an immediate attack on the K-side : 5 Q-N4 N-B4 (if 5 . . . 0-0 ? 6 B-Q3 P­
QB4 7 B- KN5, or 5 . . . P-QB4 6 pxp with some advantage to White in both cases)
6 N-B3 N-B3 7 B-Q3 P-KR4 8 Q-B4 N(B3)-K2 9 0-0 N-N3 10 Q-Q2 and Black
has a passive position .
Yet another alternative for White is 5 N-B 3! ? aiming to support the KP so
that . . . P-QB4 can be met by QPxP. See Honfi-Farago , Hungarian Team
Championship 1973 (illustrative game 7).
Apart from the (usual) text m ove and 4 . . . N- K2, Black has two other moves
that should be mentioned .

(b) 4 . . . P-QN3

22
 The idea of this move is to exchange white -squared bishops . White has t\\'O
good continuations:

(b 1 ) 5 Q- N4 8-8 1 I f 5.. . K-B 1 6 B-02 and 7 0-0-0. and if 5 . . . P-N 3 6 P-KR4

\\'ith good play . 6 N-8 3 The attempt 6 P -Q R4 proved successful in the game
Ljubojevic-A nders son , Hilversum 1973 , after 6 . . . B- R3 7 N-N 5 ! 0-Q 2 8 B-Q 3 N­
K2 9 0- K2 B-N 2, as Black has not managed to exchange bi shops . Ho\\'ever ,
B lack has better wi th 6 . N -OB3 7 P-R4 B-N2 8 N-N1 Q-02 9 P-0B3 N -R4 10
. .

N-Q 2 P-Q B4 11 PxP pxp 12 KN -B 3 0-0-0 13 B -Q 3 P-B4 wi th good pl ay .

K urajica -Planinc, Yugoslav Cham pionship 19 72 . A lso possible is 6 B - K N 5 .
6ooo Q - Q2 7 8- QN5 For 7 P - Q R4 see Ljubojevic- Andersson , Am sterda m , 1 9 7 2
(illustrative g a m e 8 . ) 7oooP- Q83 8 8- K2 8 - R 3 9 0-0 N - K 2 1 0 8- KN5 N-84 1 1 N­
KR4 P -R3 1 2 NxN PxN 1 3 Q-R3 and White stands a little bette r . Cherepkov­
M okacjan , USS R 1955.

(b 2) 5 P- QR3 8xNch Again 5 ... B- B 1 is po ssibl e. e . g . 6 P-K B4 N-K2 7 B-K3 P­

K R4 8 N - B3 Q-Q2 (more exact is the immedi ate 8 . . . B- R 3 9 Bx B NxB 1 0 Q-Q3
0- B 1 ) 9 B-B2 N-B4 10 B-Q3 B- R 3 11 BxB (there is nothing in 1 1 BxN PxB 1 2 0-
Q2 N - B3 1 3 0-0-0 B - K 2 14 KR -K1 0-0-0! ) 11 . .. NxB 12 0-03 N -N1 1 3 N- K 2
P- B4! ? and now instead of the 1 4 P- QN 3 o f Zuidem a-Andersson , Wijk aan Zee
1 9 73 , White st ands better after 1 4 P-B4! 6 PxB Q- Q2 7 N-R3 A nother
i mportant line is 7 0- N4 P- KB4 8 0-N 3 B- R 3 9 BxB NxB 10 N - K 2 0-0-0 (if
1 0 . .. N - K2 1 1 Q-Q3 N-QN1 12 P-Q B4; or 10 . . . K - B 2 11 P- QR4 P -B4 12 0-Q3 0-
B1 13 B-R3 with the better cha nces for White) 11 P-Q R4 K- N 2 ? (he shoul d play
1 1 . . . N-N 1 12 P -R5 N -O B3 with equality) 1 2 0-0 Q -B 2 1 3 P-Q B4 "'ith advan­
tage to White . Fischer-B isguier , USA Championship 195 8 . 7ooo 8-R3 8 8><8 Nx 8
9 Q-N4 P-K8 4 1 0 Q- R5ch P-N3 Not 10 . . . 0-B 2 11 0- K2 N - N1 12 P-0B4 . Now
the chances are about even . Cioca lte a - Hecht , Budapest 1 97 3 (illustrative game
9) .

(c) 40 o O Q-Q2 A refinen1ent of the 4 . . . P-QN3 system designed to avoid the

disadvantages of variation b 1 . Now , after 5 Q-N4, Black does not need to retreat
his KB, as he can play . . . P- KB4 . 5 P- QR3 The usual continuation . If 5 Q - N4 P­
KB4 (even now Black can play 5 . . . B-B1 if he wishes , e . g . 6 B - K3 P -ON 3 7 P- B4
P- KB4 8 0- R5ch P-N3 9 0- R4 B-N5 1 0 N- K2 B - R3 1 1 0-0-0 N -QB3 with
equal chances . Vasyukov-Gulko , Moscow 1 97 2 . White can , however. improve
on this with 6 B- Q2 P-QN3 7 P- QR4! B - R3 8 N - N5. e . g . 8 . .. P- K B4 9 0- B4 N - R 3
1 0 0- B3 N- B2 1 1 P- B4 P- B3 1 2 pxp KPx P 1 3 B-Q3 ! PxN 1 4 BxBP \\'ith a
winning attack . M uchej- M uratov , US S R 1 972) 6 0-N3 ( no practical tes t of 6 Q ­
R5ch has yet been m ade) 6 . . . P-ON3 with three lines:

23
( 1 ) 7 B-Q2 B-R3 8 BxB NxB 9 KN-K2 B-B 1 10 P-KR4 N- N5! 1 1 0-0 -0 0-0-0
1 2 Q-R3 P-B4 1 3 P-KN4 PxNP 14 QxP N -QB3 15 pxp BxP 16 N-B4 N- Q5 ! with
good play for Black . Tringov-Bronstein , Amsterdam Interzonal 1 964 ;
(2) 7 N-B 3 B-R3 8 BxB NxB 9 0.;0 B-B 1 (better is 9 . . . BxN 10 P><B N-Nl and it
is not easy for White to find a plan against Black's intended . . . N -QB3 an d . . . 0 -
0 -0) 10 N -K2 0-0-0 1 1 P�QR4 N-N5 1 2 P- B3 N- QB3 1 3 P -N4 and White
stands better . Cherepkov- Stoljar , Leningrad 1964;
(3) 7 P -Q R3 B -B 1 (for 7 . . . BxNch see the main variation ) 8 N -B3 (better is 8
N-R3 B-R3 9 BxB NxB 10 0-0 with a sligh t plus for White) 8 . . . B-R 3 9 BxB NxB
10 P-KR4 P-B4 1 1 B-N5 N-R 3 12 P-R5 N - KB2 13 0-0-0 NxB 14 QxN N-B2 15
P-KN4 PxNP 16 QxP(N4) Q-0-0 with equality. Boleslavsky-Bannik, USSR
1957.

S BxNch 6 PxB P-QN3 7 P-QR4 For 7 N-R3 see variation b2, page 23 . 7 B­
R3 8 BxB NxB 9 Q-N4 If 9 Q-Q3 N -N 1 10 P -R4 N-QB3 1 1 N-B3 ( 1 1 P- KR5 P-
... ...

B 3 ! ) 1 1 . . . N -R4 gives Black a good game . Diez del Corral-Hort, Las Palmas
1 973 . 9 P-KB4 The chances are roughly equal . Tringov -Spiridonov, Varna
...

1973 (illustrative game 10) .

5 P- QR3

The most usual reply, though two other moves deserve a mention :

(a) 5 B-Q2 A less aggressive continuation , but nevertheless a sound developing

move which avoids the weakening of White's Q- side pawn structure .

5 N-K2 The best reply. After 5 . . . N-QB3 or 5 . . . PxP, 6 N-N5 gives White the
.. ..

edge, e . g . 5 . . . PxP 6 N-N5 BXBch 7 QxB N-Q B3 8 N- KB3 (also possible is 8 P-

24
KB4) 8 . . . P-B3 9 Q-B4 N -R3 10 N -Q6ch! K-B 1 1 1 B-N5 N - B 2 12 N xN KxN 13
BxN PxB 14 pxp pxp 15 N -K 5c h with a clear advantage to White. Fine­
Capablanc a , A V R O 1938 . 6 N-NS There are two important alterna ti ves.

(1) 6 pxp 0-0 (6 . . . BxP 7 Q-N4 N -N 3 is more exact , with an even game) 7 Q­
N4 QN -B3 8 0-0-0 BxP ( and here 8 . . . N -B4 is better, with equal ity) 9 N -B3 N ­
N 3 10 Q- R5 P- B3 1 1 pxp pxp 1 2 B-Q3 R - B 2 13 BxN PxB 1 4 QxNPch R - N 2 15
Q-R5 R - R 2 1 6 B - R 6 B-Q 2 17 P - K R4 BxP 1 8 R -Q 2 an d White stood a l ittle
better in lvkov -Uhlmann , 1957;
(2) 6 P- QR3 is weaker. See Pachman-Uhl m ann , Dresden 1 957 (illustrative
game 1 1) .

6 . . . BxBch 7 QxB 0-0 8 N-K B3 Other possibilities are :

(1) 8 P- Q B3 (Black has good pl ay after both 8 N - Q 6 PxP 9 N -B 3 QN - B3 , an d 8

PxP N -Q 2 9 Q-B3 P- Q R3 10 N - Q 6 Q- B 2) 8 . . . Q N - B3 (after 8 . . . N -B 4 9 B-Q3 B­
Q2 10 N -B3 BxN 11 BxB Q-N 3 1 2 B-Q3 N -B3 White stood slightly better in
S tol tz-Nimzovich , 1 934) 9 P - K B4 pxp 10 pxp N -B 4 11 N - K B3 P-B3 1 2 B-Q3 P­
QR3 13 BxN PxN 14 B-Q 3 Q- R4 with good pl ay for Black . Lilienthal - M ikenas ,
M os cow 1940;
(2) 8 P- K B4 Q-N 3 9 pxp QxP 1 0 N - K B3 B-Q2 11 N (N5)-Q4 QN -B3 1 2 B-Q3
NxN 13 N xN N -B 3 14 N -B3 (better is 14 N -N3 Q - N 3 15 Q - B 2 with equal
chances ) 14 . . . N -N5 15 P- B3 NxBch 16 QxN B .. N4 17 Q-Q4 Q- K 2 and Black has
the in itiative . Dubinin -Bondarevsky , Leningrad 194 7.

8 . . . PxP 9 B -Q 3 QN-B3 The chances are equal .

(b ) 5 Q-N4 A very ambitious , doubl e-edged attempt at a direct attack on

Bl ack's sensitive K -side . The idea temporarily disregards the necessity of taking
protective measures on behalf of Whi te's threa tened Q-si de . S N-K2 6 pxp 6
. . .

QxNP is too ri sky after 6 . . . R - N1 7 Q- R6 (no t 7 QxRP? px p 8 P-Q R3 Q- R4 wi th

a clear advantage to B lack ) 7 . . . Px P 8 P-Q R 3 B- R4 (or 8 . . . BxNch 9 Px B Q- B2) 9
P-Q N4 B - B2 10 N - N5 P- R3 11 N x Bch QxN and Black stands better . 6 P-Q R3
seem s even m ore s uspect , as is s hO\\'n in Jansa - K orchnoy , Luh acovice 1 969
(il lustrative ga me 12) . 6 QN- B3 Also possible is 6 . . . BxNch 7 Px B N -02 8 N - B3
. . .

( Black s tands \\'ell after 8 QxNP R - K N1 9 QxRP Nx KP 1 0 B- K2 Q- R4 as in

R eshevsky- Botvinni k , 1946) 8 . . . Q- B2 9 QxN P R- K N1 10 Qx RP NxKP 1 1 Q- R5
NxNch 12 Qx N B-Q2 1 3 B- K B4 Qx P with even chances . 7 B-Q 2 7 N- B3 is ba d
after 7 . . . P- Q5! 8 B-Q N5 (8 P-Q R3 Q- R4 ! ) 8 . . . Q- R4! 9 BxNch Px B and no\\'
Black wi ns after both 10 QxN P R - K Nl 11 QxR P B- R3 !. and 1 0 OxQP N - B4! 11
Q - K4 BxNch 12 Px B QxP(B6 )c h 13 K- Q 1 R -QNl ! or here 11 Q-0 84 B- R3 12 Q­
N 3 Q- N4! etc. 7 0-0 8 N- B3 P - B4 9 PxPe.p. After 9 Q- N3 P-05 10 N-Q N l Q-
. . .
Q4! Black is better. 9 RxP 10 0-0-0 P-K4 1 1 Q-RS R-B4 12 Q-R4 BxN! 13
. . .

P><B I f 13 BxB R- B5 ! 1 3 . . . Q-R4 14 K-N2 N-N3 15 Q-N3 QxP (B4) and Black had
the advantage in Pietzsch-Uhlmann , East Germany 1963 .

Now let us return to the normal move, 5 P- QR3 .

5 •• • BxNch

Both 5 . . . PxP and 5 . . . B- R4 have almost disappeared from tournament prac­

tice . For example: S . . . P><P 6 PxB PxN 7 N-B3 (7 Q-N4 is equally promising, e. g.
7 . . . PxP 8 BxP P- KN3 9 P- KR4 P- KR4 10 Q- KB4 N-QB3 11 N-B3 B- Q2 12 N ­
N S N-R3 13 P- N5! N- K2 14 P-N4 px p 1 5 Q- B6 R- KN 1 1 6 N- R7 N(K2)-B4 1 7 Q­
N S ! R- R l 1 8 N- B 6ch K- B l 19 B-Q3 P- R3 20 P- R5 ! , and White had a decisive
attack in Batik- Skoda, 1961 ) 7 . . . Q- B2 (after 7 . . . PxP 8 BxP N-Q B3 9 P-N5 QN­
K2 10 B- Q3 N-R3 1 1 Q- Q2 B- Q2 12 P- KR4 N- B l 1 3 R- KR3 N-N3 14 R-N3 N­
B5 15 BxN PxB 16 N-04 QxP 17 0-0-0 , White had the advanta�e in Bannik­
Tolush, U SSR 1 963) 8 Q- Q4 N-K2 9 B- Q3 N- Q2 10 0 -0 , and White 's lead in
development guarantees him an advantage .
5 . . . 8-R4 was for a long time an important variation . The move became well
known during the early 1950's , but after Smyslov' s powerful play in the 9th
game of his 1954 World Championship match against Botvinnik , 5 . . . B-R4
suffered a decline in popularity . Nevertheless , it is still seen in occasional master
games, in particular those of Duckstein , Enklaar and Hug .

26
6 P-QN4 A dynamic move , offering a pawn in return for a big lead in develop ­
ment . Apart from this main reply , White may also try 6 B -Q 2 , e . g . 6 . . . PxP (or
6 . . . N -Q B 3 7 N -N5 BxBch 8 QxB NxQP 9 NxN PxN 10 N - B 3 N - K 2 1 1 QxP 0-0
1 2 B -Q3 N -B 3 1 3 Q- K3 P -B4 1 4 0-0 B-Q2 15 P -B4 with a slight plus to Wh ite) 7
N -N5 N - Q B3 (After the retreat 7 . . . B-B 2 8 P - K B4 N -QB3 9 Q-N4 P- K N 3 1 0 N ­
KB3 White is better , as in Janosevic-M atanovic , Yugosl av Championship 1 955)
8 N - K B3 K N - K 2 9 B -Q3 N - N3 10 BxN RPxB 1 1 0-0 B -B 2 12 B -N5 Q-Q2 13
NxBch QxN 14 R - K 1 B-Q2 15 NxP N xN 16 QxN P-B 3 17 B-Q 2 P- KN4 18 P­
KB4 PxBP 19 BxP and White has the edge . Kurajica-Enklaar , A msterdam
1 9 7 1 . 6 PxQP 6 . . . PxN P is much too risky , as White 's strong centre allo\\'S
. . .

him to use all his forces for the att ack , e . g . 7 N -N 5 ! N -Q B 3 (if 7 . . . P -N 6ch 8 P­
Q B3 ! or 7 . . . J>xPch 8 P-Q B3 N -Q 2 9 N -Q6ch K - B l 10 Q-B3 P-B4 1 1 BxP N - K 2
1 2 N -R 3 with a clear advantage) 8 pxp BxPch 9 P-Q B3 B - K 2 10 B-Q3 P-Q R 3 1 1
Q-N4 K- B 1 1 2 B-R3 , and White has more than enough compensation for the
pawn . Now White has two strong continuations :

(a) 7 N - NS B- 82 Not 7 . . . B-N 3 8 N -Q6ch K - B 1 9 Q-R5t 8 P-KB4 N -K2 9 N ­

KB3 9 Q - N 4 N-B4 1 0 B-Q3 P- K R4 is unclear. 9 QN -B3 A fter 9 . . . 0-0 10 B-Q3
. . .

P- B3 1 1 0-0 B-N3 1 2 B- N 2 P-Q R3 1 3 N (N5)xP QN-B3 1 4 K- R 1 P-B4 15 P- B4

White had good pl ay in Zuidem a-Enkl aar , Dutch Cha mpionship 1 9 72 . 1 0 B-Q 3
B-N 1 O r 1 0 . . . P-Q R3 1 1 NxBch QxN 1 2 0-0 B -Q 2 1 3 B-N 2 Q - N 3 14 K - R 1 0-0-
0 15 P-Q R4! ? NxNP 1 6 P- R5 Q - B 2 1 7 BxQP Q R - N 1 18 B-Q N 6 Q - B 6 19 Q-N 1
N ( N5) - B3 20 R - R4 with a clear advantage . I brahimoglu-Capello , Lugano
Olympiad 1 9 68 . I f here 15 . . . QxP then 16 B - R 3 Q- R4 1 7 Q- K 2 with good pl ay
for Whi te down the Q N - file after 1 8 K R -QN 1 . 1 1 N (NS)xQP P·Q R 3 Or
l l . . . NxN 12 NxN P-Q R3 13 B-K3 B- R 2 14 Q - K 2 B-Q2 15 0-0 0-0 16 R - B 3
with advantage to White . Westerinen -Diickstein , Lugano Olympiad 1968 . 12 B-

27
K3 B -R2 13 P-B3! P-R3 14 0-0 B-Q 2 15 Q-K 1 NxN 16 BxN BxB 17 NxB P-KN�.
18 K-R1 P-KR4 19 P-B 4 with excellent play for White. Tal-Koblenz, Rig "
Championship 1954 . I

(b) 7 Q -N4 N-K2 Not 7 . . . Q-B2 8 QxNP QxNch 9 K-Q 1 with advantage to
White. Nor 7 . . . K-B 1 8 P xB PxN 9 N -B3 (also good is 9 Q-N4ch N - K2 10 QxBP
QN-B3 1 1 B-Q2) 9 . . . N -K2 10 B-Q3 N -Q2 (after 10 . . . QN-B3 1 1 0-0 QxP 12 R­
K 1 White has the initiative) 1 1 Q-N4! Q-B2 12 0-0! with an excellent game for
White . Unzicker-Botvinnik, Amst�rdam Olympiad 1954 . 8 PxB A lso playable is
8 N-N5 B-B2 9 QxNP R-N 1 10 QxRP. See Timman-Hug , Nice Olympiad 1974
(illustrative game 1 3)" 8 . . . PxN 9 QxNP R-N 1 10 QxRP QN-B3 I n the game
Gligoric-Duckstein , Zagreb 1955, White had the better game after 10 . . . N -Q2 1 1
P - B4 QxP 12 N-B 3 N-B 1 13 Q-Q3 B-Q2 14 N-N5 R-B 1 15 R-QN 1 P-N3 1 6 P­
KR4! ; or 10 . . . N -Q2 1 1 N -B3 Q-B2 (if 1 1 . . . N -B 1 12 Q-Q3 QxP 13 P-K R4 B-Q2
14 B-N5 R-B 1 ? ! 15 N -Q4 with advantage to White. Smyslov-Botvinnik , 9th
Match Game 1954 , but be tter here is 14 . . . N- B3) 12 B-Q N5 P -QR3 (or 12 . . . RxP
13 K-B 1 R-KN 1 14 R-KN 1 ! ) 13 BxNch BxB 14 0-0 P -Q5! 15 B-N5! (if 15 N-N5
0-0-0 16 NxBP B-B 3 17 B-N5 N-B4! ) 15 . . . B-B3 1 6 BxN KxB 17 Q- R4ch ! (not
17 N - N5? RxN 18 Q- R4 QxKP 19 P-B4 Q-K6ch 20 R-B2 R-KN 1 21 PxR RxP
with advantage to Black in view of his well posted bishop) 17 . . . K- K 1 18 N -N5
QxKP 19 P -B4 with unclear play . 11 N-B 3 Weak is 1 1 P-B4? QxP 12 N-B3 B·Q2
13 N -N5 R-K B 1 (After the exchange sacrifice 13 . . . RxN 14 PxR 0-0-0 15 B-Q 3
Q-B4 16 Q-R4! NxP 17 Q-Q N4! White stands better. ) 14 R-QN 1 (After 14 B- K2
0- 0-0 15 NxBP RxN ! 16 QxR N -Q5! 17 B-Q3 Q-B4 18 P-QR4 N(K2)-B4! Black
had the better game in Jesso- Harzer , 1961 . ) 14 . . . 0 -0-0 15 NxBP RxN 1 6 QxR
B-K 1 ! 17 QxPch B-Q2 18 Q-86 B-B4 19 B-K2 ( If 19 B-N5 BxP 20 BxN NxB 2 1
R-R 1 Q -B4 and Black has the advantage. ) 19 . . . Q-B4! 20 R-N5 Q-Q5 21 Q-R4
Q- K5 ! 22 Q-B2 QxQBP 23 0-0 P -Q5 and Black's passed pawns proved a
decisive factor in Fichtl-Blatny, Czechoslovakia 1964 . l l . . Q-B2 12 B -QNS 12
.

B- KB � B-Q2 13 B-Q3 0-0-0 14 B-N3 N -N3 offers approximately equal

chances . 12 . .. B-Q2 13 0-0 White has a clear advantage . Fischer-Tal , Leipzig
Olympiad 1960 (illustrative game 14) .

6 P><B

In this position Black must m ake his first serious decision. His choice lies
between 6 . . . N - K2 and 6 . . . Q-B2. There are many transpositional possibilities
from one variation to the other, particularly if White chooses the quieter of the
two pl ans at his disposal .
We first examine the more flexible move .

28
 6 • • • N - K2

. �/

..
"a
ei
'

A u seful developing m ove that Bl ack will h ave to play sooner or l ater . By
playing it at once he preserves the option of where to pu t hi s queen ( Q R4 or
QB2) . F or 6 . . . O-B2 see Chapter 4 .

7 Q -N4

The sh arpest and most i nteresting m ove at Whi te •s di sposal . The more
positional continuati ons 7 P- Q R4! and 7 N - B3 are examined in chapters 2 and 3 .
With the text move White threatens t o decim ate Black's K-side by 8 QxN P R ­
N 1 9 Qx R P . Black c a n either try to hol d hi s K- si de together (some,vhat passive)
or seek im mediate cou nterpl ay on the opposite wi ng .

7 Q - B2!

The mos t active move and the best . O ther lines are :

(a ) 7 . . . P><P Thi s usually transposes to the main line , by 8 OxN P R - N 1 9 QxR P

0 -B2 but Whi te ca n avoi d thi s :

( 1) 8 P>< P 0 - B 2 9 R - R 2 ( A gainst Lu tikov in 1960 S passky played 9 K-Q 1 N -B4

10 N -B3 N - B3 11 B-Q3 N ( B3)- K2 12 B-Q2 B-02 13 P-QR4 with a very good
game, but Black has better \Vith 9 . 0-0 10 B-03 P-B4 . After 9 N - K 2 Black can
. .

equalize by 9 . . . N -B4 1 0 B - 0 2 N -B3 , whilst after 9 B-02 Ox BP 10 OxN P R-N 1

1 1 Q - R 6 Q - N 7 12 R -B 1 OxQP 13 B-B3 0- KSch White has insufficient pl ay for
the sacrificed p aw n . ) 9 . .. N - B4 10 N -B3 N - B3 11 B-03 ( I nteresting is 1 1 K -0 1 ! ? )

29
1 1 . . . P- KR4! 12 Q-N5 N(B3)xQP 13 NxN Q- B6ch 14 K- B 1 QxN 15 B- N2 Q- KN5
16 Q-Q 2 Q-QR5 and is doubtful if White has enough for the pawn;
(2) 8 B-Q3 (This move of Geller' s w as first played by him against Sokolsky in the
18th U SSR Championship , 1950 . The idea is to develop as quickly as possible. )
8 . . . Q-R4 ( 8 . . . Q-B2 transposes to the note on 8 B- Q3, p age 3 1 ) 9 N- K 2 0 -0 ( also
possible is 9 . . . N- N3 10 0 -0 P><P 11 P- K R4 B-B3 . 12 P-B4 P- R4 13 Q- N3 N(B3)-
K2 1 4 N- Q4 when White has some compensation for the pawn) 1 0 0-0 ( 1 0 R ­
QN l is a suggestion o f Keres) 1 0 . . . PxP 1 1 N- N3 , and White has some
compensation for the pawn - Keres .

It should also be mentioned tha t after 7 . . . PxP 8 QxNP R- N 1 9 QxRP, 9 . . . Q­

R4 is over optimistic . Alexander- Botvinnik, Great Britain- U SSR Radio M atch
1946 continued 10 R-N l ! QxBPch 1 1 B- Q 2 Q- B2 (if 1 l . . . QxRP 12 B-N4, or 12
P- KB4 QN- B3 1 3 N- B3 as in the game, when 1 3 . . . B-Q2 would have been
impossible) 1 2 P- KB4 QN- B3 13 N- B3 B- Q2 14 N -N5 RxN ! 15 P><R 0-0-0 16
QxP QxPch 17 K- Q l N- B4 , and now White' s strongest continuation is probably
B otvinnik' s suggestion 18 B- Q3 N- K6ch 19 BxN QxB (if 19 . . . P><B 20 Q- B6 is
still strong) 20 Q- B6 ! P- K4 2 1 R- K l B- N5ch 22 B- K2 BxBch 23 RxB Q-N8ch 24
R- K l "with good chances for a win" .

(b) 7 . . . N-B4 A common variation at one time, but discredited by the games
Gligoric-Pachman and Y anofsky- Uhl mann , e. g.: 8 B-Q3 P-KR4 9 Q-B4! The
best move; after 9 Q- R3 PxP 10 N-B3 Q-B2 1 1 R-QN l pxp 12 P- N4 N- K2 13
pxp QN- B3 14 B- KB4 N-N3! 15 B -N3 N(N3)xP 16 NxN NxN 17 K- B l B-Q2
B lack stood very well in Tal- Korchnoy , Riga 1958; and after 9 Q-B3 N-B3 10
BxN P><B 11 Q- N3 P- KN3 12 B- N5 Q- R4 13 B -B6 NxQ P Black has nothing to
fear. 9 . . . Q-RS The attempted improvement 9 . . . J>xP gave White the better
ending in Yanofsky-Uhlmann , Stockholm Interzonal 1962 , after 10 pxp Q- R5
1 1 QxQ NxQ 12 B- KN5! N- B4 13 N- K2 N -B3 14 P- Q B3 N-R4 15 N -B4! N- K2 16
B- K2 P- KN3 17 B-B6 R- R2 18 B- QNSch B-Q2 19 BxBch KxB 20 N-R3 P- R5 21
K- K2. 1 0 N -K2 QxQ 11 NxQ N-K2 Thi s retreat is essential, as White wins a
pawn after both l l . . . P><P 1 2 BxN P><B 13 NxQP and 1 1 . . . P-KN3 12 P><P N-Q2
13 BxN N P><B 14 N-Q3 . 12 B-K2! White has a slight advantage . Gligoric­
Pachman , Munich Olympiad 1958 (illustrative game 15) .

(c ) 7 . . . 0-0 Although this move is seldom played it is perfectly acceptable . 8 N ­

B 3 (after 8 B- KN5 Q- R4! 9 Q-R3 [ not 9 BxN QxBPch 10 K- K2 N -B3 winning]
9 . . . N- N3 10 B- Q 2 Q- R5 1 1 N- B3 P- B4. 1 2 PxPe. p . RxP 13 B- Q3 N -B3 the
chances are equal. Gligoric- Pietzsch , 1962) 8 . . . QN- B3 9 B-Q3 P -B4 10 P><Pe . p .
(in the game Klovan-V agani an , U SSR 1 970, the game was even after 1 0 Q-N3
Q- R4 1 1 B- Q2 pxp 1 2 pxp Q- R5 13 Q- R4 B- Q2 14 0-0 N-N3 15 Q- R5 B- K 1 16

30
N - N5 P - K R3 1 7 NxP N - B5! 1 8 N - B5 B><Q 1 9 NxQ NxB 20 P><N NxQP) 1 0 . . . RxP
1 1 B-KN5 R - B2 ( White has the advantage after 1 1 . . . P-K4 12 BxPch ! KxB 13 Q­
R5ch K-N 1 1 4 Bx R P>< B 1 5 P>< K P) 12 B>< N (after 1 2 Q - R3 P - K R3 1 3 B-N6 R - B 1
1 4 N -KS NxN 1 5 P><N Q-B2! Black stood well in Levy-Farago , 1 9 73 . Or 1 2 N - K5
NxN 1 3 PxN Q-B2 1 4 BxN QxPch 1 5 K-Q2 P - B5 with equality . Fichtl-Fuchs ,
1 960. Or 1 2 Q - R5 P-KN3 1 3 Q - R6 Q - R4 1 4 B -Q2 P-B5. Or 1 2 Q - R4 P - K R3 1 3
0-0 P-B5 14 B-N6 NxB 1 5 BxQ NxQ 1 6 BxN B-Q 2 with equality. Parma-Fichtl ,
1 962) 1 2 . . . RxB 1 3 Q- R4 P- KN3 14 0-0 P- B5 1 5 B- K 2 B-Q2 1 6 K R - K 1 Q - R4 1 7
N - K5 Q R -K 1 1 8 N -N4 Qx BP ! 1 9 Q- B6 with an even ga n1e ( K orchnoy - Brons tein.
U S S R 1 958) . Bl ack \\70uld h ave the better ch ances here after 1 9 N - B6ch K-N 2 20
NxR ch RxN 21 R ( K 1 )-Q l QxBP .

8 QxNP

The sharpest and most interesti ng variation of the French Defence. The move
8 B-Q3 is worth noting , contribu ting much more by develop i ng Whi te ' s K-side
than the s om ewhat premature , time-consuming destruction of Black' s K-side
pa\\rn formation in the m ain line. The idea origi na ted with Geller and has
frequently been used of late by Veli mirovic, e. g. 8 P><P I f 8 . . . P-B5 9 B - K 2 N ­
. . .

B4 1 0 Q- R3! 9 N -K 2 pxp N ot 9 . . . Qx KP 1 0 B - K B4 Q-B3 1 1 pxp P- K R4 1 2 Q­

N3 Q N - B3 13 B - KN5 N - B4 1 4 BxQ NxQ 15 BxP R - K N 1 1 6 RP><N Rx B 1 7 RxP
with the better ending for White. 10 QxNP R-N 1 1 1 QxRP Velimirovic ' s idea of
1 1 Q-R6 is m ore risky , e. g . 1 1 . . . N -Q 2 1 2 B - K B4 (not 1 2 BxP R- R 1 1 3 Q -N 7
QxP) 1 2 . . . N - B 1 1 3 N -N 3 B -Q 2 14 N - R5 0-0-0 \\rith unc lear pl ay . O r he re 1 2 0-
0 NxP 1 3 B- K B4 (or 1 3 BxP N - N5! ) 1 3 . . . N - N5! 14 BxQ NxQ , or 1 2 P- B4 N - Q B4
1 3 BxP RxP 1 4 K - B 1 RxN 1 5 KxR B-Q 2 with good play for Black in both cases .
1 l QN-B3 12 B-KB4?! K eres recom mends 1 2 P-B4 bu t after 1 2 . . . Q-N3 Black
. . .

31
is no worse . 12 . . . B-Q2 13 0-0 .0 -0-0 Black already has a clear initiative .
U nzicker-Uhlmann , Varna Olympiad 1962 (illustrative game 16) .

8 ••• R-Nl
9 QxRP px.p
10' N-K2
The usual continuation . White has a chain of sensitive spots on QB3 , Q4 and
K5, and this move protects agai-nst Black's m ai n threats to White ' s Q-si de
(w hich has been deserted by White's queen) and to White's unstable pawn
centre .
The alternative , Dr: Euwe's recommendation of 10 K- Ql , dep rives White of
his right to castle in order to obtai n the m ore natural developing square KB 3 for
White' s knight , from where it does not obstruct the action of the KB . After 10
K-Q 1 , if Black captures Whi te' s Q B6 pawn or the KP with his queen, it will not
be with check . Euwe ' s tnove has fluctuated in popularity , with the latest results
favouring Black .

10 . . . QN-B3! N ot 10 . . . QxKP 1 1 N-B3 Q-B3 1 2 pxp and White stands better.

For a long time 10 . . . N-Q2 was thought to be play able , but the gan1e Bronstein­
Uhlmann, Zagreb 1965 , changed this opinion (illustrative game 17) . 1 1 N ­
B 3 White has n o time t o play 1 1 P- KB4 B-Q2 1 2 N -B3 pxp 13 N-N5 RxN ! 14
PxR 0-0-0 with good play for Black . 11 . . . PxP 12 N -NS After 12 B- KB4 B- Q2
1 3 B-N3 0-0-0 14 B-Q3 Q-N 3 15 K-K2 N-B4! Black had good play in Kuij pers ­
Padevsky, 1963 . 12 . . . NxP Thi s is the critical position in this variation . I n the
game Matulovic-Uhlmann , Budapest 1967 , play continued 13 B-KB4 Q-N3 ! 14
BxN RxN 15 P- K R4! (not 15 BxP QxP) 15 . . . R-KN 1 16 K- K 1 B-Q2 17 R-R3 R­
N5 18 R-B3 0-0-0 19 B-B6 (it would be risky to play 19 RxQ BPch because of

32
1 9 . . . N - B3 or 1 9 . . . B - B3) 1 9 . . . R - K 1 20 BxN ? (20 B -03 v.·as essential) 20 . . . RxB?
( Black cou ld ob tai n a decisive advantage by the zwische nzug 20 . . . R - KSch 21 B­
K2 [if 21 K-0 1 Q - N 7 22 R -B 1 Qx Rch 23 KxQ R - K8 mate] 21 . . . B-N 4 22
RxOB Pch K - Nl 23 B -B S [or 23 K - B 1 RxB 24 B-BS 0- R4 25 B -N4 R - KSch and
26 . . . RxB \\'i nni ng , or 23 R -K 3 Rx R 24 Px R OxP 25 B-06c h K - R 1 26 0- RS Bx B
27 Qx B 0-0B6ch \vins] 23 . . . Q - R4 24 B-N4 Rx B( NS) 25 P>< R Ox Rch 26 K-02
BxB \\'inni ng for Black ) 21 0-R&h R - K 1 22 OxPch B - B3 23 RxP RxR P and
Black s tood a little be tter . Thi s line needs fur ther prac tical tes ts.
We shall exa m i ne the alternative 13 P - B4 by fol lo\\·ing a game .

13 P - 84 RxN 1 4 Px R N ( K4) -N3 .

E i
'/
/

E E E
- �- · w
�

:M •
-c
>
"""'= � /,
�
A highly i n teresting position \Vhi ch theory has not yet fully explored . I S 8-
K2 If 15 B-03 P- K4 16 R - B 1 B-NSch 17 K- K 1 0-0-0 18 Rx P P-KS and Black
had an excellent game i n Adorjan -F . Portisch . 1 5 P- KR4 may be an improve ­
tn ent . See H ansen -Wirth , Correspondence Game 1 973 (illustrative game 1 8) .
1 S . . . P-K 4 16 R- 8 1 8-K3 1 7 8 - N Sch Once agai n 1 7 P- K R4 i s worth consideri ng .
1 7 . . . K -Q l ! 1 8 8-K3? 1 8 P- K R4 still offered the best chances , though Black can
play 1 8 . . . O - B4L whi lst in reply to 18 Rx P he has the powerful zwische nzug
1 8 . . . O-N3! 18 . . . P-QS 19 8 - N l Q -84! 20 8 - K 2 Q - Q4 Black 's strong pa\v n
centre and mobile minor pi eces clearly give him a v.·inni ng game . 21 R-83 K-82
22 Q - N 7 R - Q l 23 K-K l Q - K S 24 K - 8 1 Qx P 25 8-Q3 Q - N 7 26 R - K l 26 R -N 1
fai l s to 26 . . . P- 87 . 26 . . . P- 87 The pa\vns cannot be stoppe d . 27 Bx8P Qx 8 28 B­
B2 R - K N I 29 Q-R7 P-Q 6! 30 B-N3 P-Q7 31 RxK P P-Q8= Q ch 32 R-K lch K -Q2
33 RxQ Qx Rch and Bl ack \\ron . M atulovic -Tatai , Venice 1969 .

10 QN - B3
11 P-KB4 B-Q2
12 Q- Q3

33
 This is the normal move here, but Robert Byrne produced the interesting
innovation 1 2 P-R3 in his game with Uhlmann at Monte Carlo , 1968 (illustrative
game 19) .

12 ••• pxp

tiJ
�

White now has six possibilities open to him , of which 13 N-N3 is the most
solid. First, however, we shall look at the alternatives:

(a) 13 QxBP N-B4 14 R-QN 1 ! Preventing . . Q -N3 . Weaker is 14 B- Q2 , for

.

which see Bogdanovic-Uhlmann , Sarajevo 1963 (illustrative game 20). 14 P .. . . .

Q5 Another possibility is 14 . . . R- QB 1 . 1 5 Q-B4 Q-R4ch 16 B-Q2 QxRP 17 RxP

Q-R8ch? White now had the advantage in Portisch-Uhlmann , Monte Carlo
1 968. The correct idea is 1 7 . . . N- K6 18 BxN FxB 1 9 Q -B3 QxQch 20 NxQ N - Q5
2 1 N - K4 B-B3! 22 N -Q6ch K-Q1 when White has nothing better than perpetual
check.

(b) 13 NxP?! It is wrong to expose him self in this way . White should first
develop . 1 3 . . . P- QR3 The best reply, since 1 3 . . N-B4 14 N-N5 Q-Q1 is unclear.
.

14 R-QN1 N-R4! Better than 14 . . . R- QB1 15 P- KR4! N-R2 1 6 R-R3 N-N4 1 7

R-QN3 N-B4 with an edge to White, Bednarski-Uhlmann , Marianske Lazne
1965 ; or here 15 . . . NxP 1 6 FxN QxNch 1 7 QxQ RxQ 18 RxP RxBP 19 B- KNS is
better for White; or 15 . . . N -B4 16 R-R3 N(B3 )-Q5 1 7 P-R5 N-N4 18 N-Q l
N(N4)-QS 1 9 P-B3! B-N4 20 RxB and White has the better prospects . An
instructive illustration of this idea went as follows : 1 5 P-KR4 N-B4 16 R-R3 0-
0-0 17 P-R5 White has insufficient after 1 7 QxN FxQ 18 NxP QxBP 19 R­
QB3ch QxRch 20 NxQ B- K3 , as occurred in Fuchs -U hl mann , 19 67. 17 R­ . . .

N5! This is more exact tha n 17 . . . N-BS 18 R-N4 B- B3 19 N - K2 with

34
complications , Hort- Uhlm ann , H astings 1 9 70/7 1 . 1 8 P-R6 R-R1 1 9 P-R7 R-N2
20 R-N4 N - BS

2 1 QxN (KB5 ) ? A n interesting but incorrect queen sacrifice . B ut in any case

it is almost impossible to find a s atisfactory move for White . Black ' s forces
are extremely well co-ordinated and he has full compensation for the sacrificed
pawn . 21 NxP is also bad in view of 2 1 . . . P>< N 22 QxP N - R4 ! 23 BxP N- K2
\\'inning . 21 . . . PxQ 22 NxP Q-R4! 23 BxN R (R 1 )xP! 24 R - Q B3 If 24 N-N6ch K­
B2 25 R- Q3 B - B3 wins for B lack . 2 4 . . . R-R8ch 25 B- B 1 ch K- Q I ! 25 . . . K -N 1 is
more complex , but still better for Black after 26 N -N6 B -N4 27 R- B8ch K - R2 28
N-B4 BxN 29 B- K3ch P- N 3 30 R (N4)x B R- N 3 , etc . 2 6 N-N6 B-N4 27 N-
84 Force d , since 27 R- B8ch K - K2 28 R-B7ch K- K3 loses at once . 27 . . . BxN 28
R ( 83 )x8 I f 28 R(N4)xB R-N6! 28 . . . RxP 29 B-K3 QxRP 30 B-N6ch K-K2 3 1
Resigns . Dueb a ll - Uhlm ann , Raach 1 9 69 .

(c) 13 R- Q N 1 0-0-0 After 1 3 . . . N-B4 1 4 P- N3 P-Q5 1 5 B- KN 2 0-0-0 the

situ ation is unclear . Shamkovich-Uhlmann , Sarajevo 1 963 . However , the
refutation m ay lie in 1 4 P - N4 ! as 1 4 . . . RxP 1 5 B- R 3 followed by 1 6 BxN seem s
very good for White . 1 4 N x P Black has the a dv antage after 1 4 B- K3 N - B4 1 5 N­
Q4 (or 15 B - B2 P- Q5 1 6 P- R3 P-B3 1 7 pxp P- K4 18 P- N4 P- KS ! 19 QxKP
R(N 1 )- K 1 20 Q -Q3 QxP , etc . ) 15 . . . N( B4)xN 16 BxN P- B3 ! 1 7 R-N3 pxp 1 8 PxP
R-N5 ! 1 4 . . . N-R4 1 5 N-NS 8xN 1 6 Rx8 Or 1 6 QxB N - BS . 1 6 . . . K-N 1 and Black
has excellent pl ay for the pawn .

( d ) 13 8-K3 ? ! N - 84 14 N - Q4 I f 1 4 B - Q4 0-0-0 1 5 BxP P- Q5 1 6 B- Q2 P- B3 ! 1 7

PxP P- K4 ! Fichtl-Golz , Dresden 1 959 ; or 1 4 B - B 2 0-0-0 1 5 NxP P- Q5 1 6 N- K4
NxP 1 7 PxN Qx KP 1 8 0-0-0 B- B3 1 9 N-N3 N- K6 20 R - K 1 B - R5 a nd Black has
a strong attack . Walther-Diaconescu . 1 4 . . . N (B4 )xN 15 8xN 0-0-0 1 6 P-N3 P-

35
B3 ! 17 pxp P-K4 18 PxP R-NS with advantage to B l ack. Padevsky-Berthold ,
Dresden 1 959.

(e) 13 P-KR4 N-B4 14 P-RS 0-0-0 15 P-R6 R -N3 16 P-R7 R -R1 1 7 R-QN1 P­
B3 Or 1 7 . . . P-QS followed by 1 8 . . . B - K 1 . 18 pxp B-K1 19 QxBP RxRP 20 RxR
Qx R 21 R-N3 ( Vasyukov - D oroshkevich , M oscow 1 9 67) , and now , with lvkov 's
suggestion 21 . . . P- QS ! , Black has a good game .

13 N-N3

The m ost reliable c� ntinuation . Creating some cover on the K N-file , this
move enables White to complete the development of his K -side and keep the
position on the other wing more closed so that Black' s counterplay and initiative
will have fewer prospects of success .

13 0-0-0
14 B-K2 N-B4

The normal move here , but a good alternative is 1 4 . . . Q-N3 to m ake castling
difficult and to prevent R-QN 1 .

15 NxN PxN
16 o .. o

A fter 1 6 B -B3 the game Ree-Darga , Amsterdam 1 969 , continued 1 6 . . . Q-N3 ! ?

1 7 QxQB P K-N 1 1 8 Q-N3 (or 1 8 Q - N2 Q- B4 1 9 R-QN 1 P-N3 20 P-B3 P - QS 2 1
B- Q2 with unclear complications) 1 8 . . . QxQ 1 9 PxQ N- QS 20 K-B2 NxP 2 1 R·
QN1 B - RS with an unclear position .

36
 16 ... P-QS
17 R-QN1

If 17 B-B3 P-B3 with equality, though Pachman suggests 1 8 B-QS as giving

White a slight advantage.

17 ••• P-B3

Black must not allow White time for B- R3-Q6 .

18 pxp KR-B1

Why not the Q R ?

19 B-B3 RxP
20 R-K1 R-K3
21 RxR BxR
22 P- QR4

Otherwise the situation would be tragic for White. The text move is the only
way to create a square for the underdeveloped QB and to connect White' s heavy
pteces .

22 ••• P-R3
23 B-R3 Q-Q2
24 B-K2 B-Q4
25 QxRP P>< Q
26 BxPch K-B2
27 R-N7ch K-B 1
28 R-N1ch K-B2
29 R-N7ch K-B 1
30 R-N1ch Drawn
 GAME 1 K2 White's position is quite at­
tractive .
White: Larsen Because of this game 5 Q-B3
Black : Portiscb became almost popular for a short
while , but is disappeared again
Amsterdam Interzonal 1964 because of the reply 5 . . . Q-K2ch ! , for
instance 6 N-K2 N-QB3 7 QxQP N­
Notes by Larsen B 3 with more than enough for the
pawn .
1 P-K4 P-K3 During the game I thought of the
2 P-Q4 �Q4 possibility 5 . . . Q- K2ch and toyed
3 N-QB3 B-NS with the idea 6 B-K3 BxNch 7 PxB
4 pxp px p Q-R6 8 K-Q2, which m ay look
5 Q-B3! ? strange but is very good for White .
However , a Yugoslav g ame
Mestrovic-Maric , Kraljevo , 1967 ,
seems to prove that 6 B-K3 is of
dubious value because of 6 . . . N-KB3
7 B-Q3 P-B4! After this I tend to
believe that S . . Q- K2ch is Black 's
.

strongest move .
Immediately after the game
O ' Kelly stated that the easiest
solution for Black was 5 . . . B- K3 , but
I don 't agree ; after 6 B-Q3 Q-B3
White ought to play 7 B-KB4!
Also 5 . . . P-QB4 has been recom ­
mended , but 6 pxp P-Q5 7 P-Q R3 Q­
R4 8 R-N 1 looks very good for White .
This set Portisch thinking ! The ex ­ Portisch had enough to think
change variation has had a about !
reputation as a dull drawish line for
m any years; for instance , 5 B-Q3 N- ..
QB3 (also see the next game) 6 N-K2 5 N -QB3
KN-K2 followed by . . . B-KB4 , and 6 B-QNS N-K2
there are no problems for Black . 7 B-KB4 0-0
The text move , which I had pl ayed
in some blitz games against my Konstantinopolsky , Bronstein �s
friend Palle Ravn (Danish champion , second during this tournament , l ater
1 95 7 ) , is directed against the very recommended 7 . . . B-KB4. The idea
m anoeuvre . . . KN- K2 and . . . B - KB4; must be 8 0-0-0 Q -Q2 followed by
after 5 . . . N-K2 6 B-Q3 QN-B3 7 N- . . 0-0-0 . This 1s probably a
.

38
satisfactory developm ent for Bl ack . Here Portisch probably overl oo ked
but can 7 . . 0-0 be a mi stake ? As
. an i mportant defensi ve resource for
Porti sch 's next move clearly demon­ White . Afterwards 1 3 . . . P-R4 was
strates , he is nO\\' in a fighting mood recom mended , but after , for in ­
and doesn 't mind that the t\\'O ki ngs stance , 1 4 Q- N J P-R5 15 P-N5 P­
do not seek she l ter on the same side . K B4 16 BxN QPxB 1 7 P- R 3 , Bl ack is
faced \\'i th al most the same p robl ems
8 0-0-0 N - R4? as in the game .

14 BxN Q P><B
A premature attack , as far as I can
see . But afterwards \\'e are all so very
\Vise . 8 . . . B- K B 4 has been recom ­ After 14 . . . N Px B it \\'Oul d be di f­
ficul t for Bl ack to m ake use of the
mended , but it is not obvious to me
Q N -file . And he wo ul d give up al l
why Bl ack sho ul d let White 's P - K N4 ,
hopes o f a pa\\·n storm .
p art of a bro ad advance on the K ­
side . g ain a tempo by attacking the
IS P-R3!
bi shop . To me 8 . . . B - K 3 l oo ks like
the right move .
The resource mentioned earl ier
\\'as a trap for the queen : 15 . . . B><R P
9 K N -K2 P -Q B3
1 6 PxB Qx Pch 1 7 K-Q2 P-N5 1 8 R ­
10 B-Q3 P-Q N4
R 1 PXNch 1 9 NxP Q-N5 20 K R -Q N 1 !
11 P- KR4!
But after thi s exchange White 's
The right prel ude to the att ack , advantage is clear . Bl ack is very \\7eak
because it very quickly creates a on the bl ack squ ares , and White oc ­
threat , gaining an important tempo . cupies the K - file fi rst.

11 N -8 5 16 NxB Q-Q l
12 P-RS P-83
A sensibl e decision . After 1 6 . . . P­
NS 1 7 pxp QxP 1 8 K R - K l Black has
There it is . Why does Bl ac k not a \\'retched game . Now Whi te mi ght
play 12 . . . Q-R 4 or 1 2 . . . P - R4 . ? p l ay 1 7 NxP , but Black gets goo d
Because of the threat 1 3 P - R 6 P-NJ counter-chances : his very best reply
1 4 B- B 7 ! Qx B 1 5 Q- B 6 an d \\ri n s . is 1 7 . . . Q- Q4!
That Bl ack does not like 1 2 . . . P­
KRJ is un de rs tandable : the advance 17 K R -K l P-R4?
of the \vhi te KN P \\'Ould create
pO\\'erful threats . I t is easy for the com1nentators to
\\'rite that Porti sch ought to pl ay
13 P- KN4 Q - R 4? 1 7 . . . N -Q4 . The ending after 1 8 NxN

39
QxN 19 QXQ P><Q 20 P -KB3 is very
unpleasant for Black in spite of the
bishops of opposite colours . The
black bishop is very passive, and
White controls the only open file . In
some variations the white king goes
to QB3 , threatening to march right
into the black position . This must be
prevented with . . . P-Q R4, but then
this pawn becomes vulnerable .

18 Q-N3 R-R2

To 18 . . . P-NS 19 B-Q6! was a nasty 21 . . . K-82

reply .
Or 2l . . . N -Q4 22 NxN PxN 23
19 P-R6! QxBP! QxQ 24 RxRch K-B 2 25 R­
B8ch K- K3 26 R- K1ch! or 23 . . . R­
It is not necessary for White to KB2 24 Q-R4!
open any lines on this side, the K-file
being there to be used . But a further 22 B-KS P-KB4
weakening of the black squares tn
Black's position is welcome . A draught is blowing through the
black s quares now! But 22 . . . N-N l 23
19 P-N3 N -K4 and 22 . . . N -Q4 23 NxN PxN 24
20 8-Q6 R-K1 BxP! are no better .

23 B-N8 R-N2
Weakens KB3 . But also after 24 Q-KS!
20 . . . R-KB2 21 R-K2 Black is lost .
The most elegant solution . But
21 Q-84! naturally 24 N - K4 N-Q4 25 N -Q6ch
K- B l 26 NxR(N7) was also good
enough .
White has a clearly won position .
Would that have happened just as 24 R-KNl
quickly with a theoretical line? (I 25 P-NS P-NS
have only played 5 Q-B3 in a tour­
nament game on this one occasion: After 2S . . . N -Q4 26 NxN PxN 27 P­
since then it is no longer a surprise B4 Black is completely paralysed and
weapon . ) White wins by doubling rooks on the

40
K -file . That w as my pl an , I believe , 32 BxN P><N
and it is very pretty . But 27 B-Q 6 ! is
a quicker metho d . Or 32 . . . QxQ 33 B-BSch . Or
32 . . . Rx B 33 RxRch .
26 Q-86ch K-K l
27 QxQBPch K-82 33 B-N4ch Resigns

Or 27 . . . Q-Q2 28 RxNch KxR 29

Q-B6ch or 2 7 . . . R -Q2 28 N -QS or GAM E 2
27 . . . K - B l 28 B-Q6 P><N 29 RxN RxR
30 R - K 1 . White : Eley
White h as m ore than one winning Black : Uhlmann
continuation . Good enough , for in ­
stance , is 28 QxBPch K-B 1 29 RxN Hastings 1972/3
RxR 30 PxP . But I found something
I P-K4 P-K3
that looks more energetic .
2 P-Q4 P-Q4
3 N-QB3 8 -NS
28 Q-86ch K-K l
4 pxp pxp
29 P-QS
5 8-Q3 N-Q83
6 N-K2 KN-K2
Another idea was 29 N -QS QxN 30 7 0-0 0-0
B -06 Q-B 2 31 BxN Rx B 32 Q-B6ch
K-Q 1 33 Rx R KxR 34 Q-B 7ch B-Q2
35 R- K 1 ch or 33 . . . QxR 34 Q -QSch .
But Bl ack m ay prolong the game
\\rith 3 1 . . . QXQ.

29 ... R-8 1

After 29 . . . PxN 30 P-Q6 Bl ack has

no reasonable move .

30 Q- 86ch Q-Q2

O r 30 . . . K- B 2 3 1 QxBP .
O r 7 . . . B- K B4 8 N-N3 B- N3 9 QN ­
31 B-Q6 R-K B2 K 2 Q-Q2 1 0 P-KB4 P-84 "·i th
equal ity .
Or 3 l . . . QxQ 3 2 PxQ R - R 2 33 N­
O S R- K B2 34 P- 8 7 . 8 N-N3?

41
 This move already hands over the 20 B-Q2 N-RS
initiative to Bl ack . White h ad to play 21 P-RS Q-N4
8 B- KB4 or 8 P-QR3 . After 8 B-KN5 22 N-B3 QxQ
P-KR3 9 B-R4 B-K3 10 P-QR3 BxN
1 1 pxB Q-Q 2 Black has a goo d game This weakening of White's pawn
as in Hennings-Uhlmann . structure ensures Black the better
endgame.
8 ... P- B4!
23 PxQ P-B3
Also satisfactory is 8 . . . B-K3 9 QN- 24 N-R4 B-KB4
'

K2 B -Q3 1 0 P-QB3 N -N3 1 1 N-B5 25 N-BS R-B2!

26 QR-K1 RxR
BxN 1 2 BxB N(B3)- K2 with an equal
27 B><R
game.
The best defence , as White loses at
9 QN-K2 B-Q3
least a pawn after 27 RxR QBxN 28
10 N-RS
PxB P-B6! etc .

It was essential to play 10 P-KB4. 27 N-N3

28 B-B3 P-R4
10 ... Q-K 1 29 N-B2 P-NS
11 N(R5) -B4 P-KR3
12 B-QNS? Obtaining a greater advantage in
space .
This pointless move brings White
into serious trouble . He should try 12 30 pxp pxp
P-B4 . After 12 P-KN3 P-KN4 13 N­ 31 R-K 1 P-N6!
N2 P-B5! 14 pxp Q-R4! Black has a 32 pxp pxp
winning K-side attack . 33 N-R1

12 P-N4 A sad retreat for the knight , but

13 BxN QxB the only w ay to avoid lo�4i of m aterial .
14 N-Q3 P-BS! After 33 N-R3 Q B.xN 34 PxB N-R5!
15 P-KB3 N-B4 35 R-KB 1 (not 35 N- K6ch? K-B 3 ! )
16 N-KS Q-N3! 3 5 . . . R-K2 the black rook penetrates
17 N-N4 B-Q 2 to the seventh rank , with a win .
18 P-QR4 QR-K 1
19 Q-Q3 ! K-N2 33 P-N3!
34 N -K6ch
Countering the threat of 20 NxRP
eh NxN 21 Q-N6ch . If 34 pxp px p 35 N-R4 BxP 36

42
NxQNP B - K BS followed by 37 . . . B­ 43 pxp
K6ch and 38 . . R-B8 m ate .
. 44 K-B l
45 Resigns
34 K-B3
35 N-Q8 R-B2
36 P-R6 B-B5 GA. M E 3
37 R-Q 1 B-N 5
38 R-K 1 R -B 1 White: Dvoretsky
Black : Vagani an
This roo k no\\' penetrates
deci sively into White 's K -si de , at the US S R Championship 1 9 74
same time decentral izing the white
knight . Notes by Dvoretsky

39 N-N7 R-K R I ! 1 P-K4 P-K3

40 B-N4 R-R7! 2 P-Q4 P-Q4
41 N-Q 8 3 N-Q B3 B-N5
4 N-K2 px p
There is no defence as 41 B -Q6 5 P- Q R 3 B- K2
fails to 41 . . . Bx B 42 NxB N -BS! 6 Nx P N -Q B3
7 B-K3 N-B3
8 N ( 2 ) - B3 0 -0?
� �
/.
�
' .'1-
�
. . 1,: .I
rr� �� � /
,

fl - I' i //,-1
:/'�
/ ��
/

'/ i
(vl / fl 1. Q
.,. -=- -.::x:.- 7 /' ,/,

'1-
# � fl i
fl - fl � �

,i( m�
41 P-B4!
A definite in accuracy . Bl ack can
A fi ne move. cu tting off the e qual ize at once by 8 . . . NxN 9 NxN P�
bishop . so that White c an not ans\\'er K4 1 0 pxp QxQch 1 1 RxQ NxP since
. . . N �RS \\ith B� K 7ch . 1 0 P-QS doesn 't \\'Ork for White -
10 . . . N -QS t 1 BxN QxP !
42 P><P N-R5 A part from 9 . . P- K4 Bl ack co uld
.

43
also consider 9 . . . 0-0 creating the Then , straight away I realized that
characteristic thre at in this line of 1 4 P-KB4 would leave the KNP en
. . . P-B4-B5 . prise , and otherwise Black gets in
. .. . P-BS with an excellent game . Thus
9 N-N3! N-Q4 my gross miscalculation at move 1 3
robbed m e of al l my advant age .
Against Alekhine in his 1935 world
title m atch Euwe got an ap­ 14 P-KN3 P-BS!
proximately level game by 9 . . . P-QN3 15 Q-Q2 B-NS
10 B-K2 B-N2 1 1 0-0 Q-Q2. 16 0-0-0 Q-B3

10 NxN PxN Black has seized the initiative , but

11 B-Q3 P-B4 White's position is quite sound �

A move that is interesting and 17 P-QB3 N-R4

characteristic of V aganian 's style , 18 Q-B2 Q-KR3
but insufficiently thought out . 19 K-N 1 B-B6
However , Black already stands 20 KR-N1 pxp
slightly worse .
If 20 . . . QxP then the simple 2 1
12 N-K2 QR-K l i s good , since Black c an then
easily find himself under attack .
In Fyodorov -Gulko , Moscow
Championship 1974, White played
21 RPxP N-BS
the weaker 12 Q-R5 P-KN3 13 Q- R6
22 QR -K 1 B-KS
R-B2 when Black has adequate coun ­
ter-play . The text prepares to fix the
enemy KBP .

12 ... B-N4

While Black prepares to advance

the said p awn . At this point I
thought a long time to see which line
was better - 1 3 Q-Q2 BxB 14 pxa
followed by 15 0-0-0 with a clear
adv antage , or 13 BxB QxB 14 P-KB4
preparing to transfer my knight to
KS . After a lot of hesitation I chose
the latter line .

13 BxB? QxB 23 N-B4?

44
 I saw that after 23 BxB PxB (not Coul d Black not have taken ad ­
23 . . . N -Q7ch 24 K-R l pxB ? 25 R- R l vant age of White 's oversight at move
Q - N4 26 N - B4 or 24 . . . NxB 25 N -B4 23 ? Yes ! He shoul d have reversed the
v.'i th the better game for White) 24 N ­ order of his moves : 23 . . . RxN ! 24
B4 QR- K l 25 K- R l White stands no PxR Q-Q N 3 25 BxB NxRPch 26 K­
v.·orse , but I deci ded to see i f I co ul d B l NxQ 27 BxQPch K-R l , or 24 RxB
achieve more . I calcul ated th at after RxR 25 BxN Q- K 3 26 B-Q3 R- K8ch
23 N - B 4 Bl ac k cannot pl ay 23 . . . QR­ 27 RxR QxRch 28 K- R2. In both
K l because of 24 RxB ! RxR 25 BxN , variations White still has some
and then I st arted analysing chances but there is no doubt abo ut
23 . . . B>< B 24 QxB Q-Q N 3 25 R - K 2 . Bl ack's advantage . (Note that in the
I established tha t after 25 . . . N x second vari ation White has the
RPch ( 25 . . QR- K l 2 6 K- R2 Q -N4
. threats 29 BxPch and 29 Q-N 3 . )
27 R( l )- K l ) 26 K - B l N -B5 27
NxP Q-Q R3 28 N - K7ch K- R l 29 R- 25 RxB! RxR
R l Q-R8ch 30 Q-N l QxQch 3 1 KxQ 26 BxN Q-K3
KR-K l 32 P-B4 (threat 33 RxPch ! )
32 . . . P- K R3 33 R ( l ) - K l , White h as Or 26 . . . R-K2 27 BxPch and Whi te
the advant age . So I confi dently is all right .
pl ayed 23 N -B4 and immediately
realized that Bl ack can pl ay . . . Q­ 27 B-Q3 R -K 8
QN 3 at once wi thout exchangi ng 28 BxPch K- R l
bishops first . Without m uc h thought 29 B-BS Q - K2
my opponent cho se thi s line .
Or 29 . . . Q- K7 ? 30 R-R lch ! K- N l
23 Q-QN3 3 1 B-R7ch etc .

With t\VO fearson1e threats : 30 P-KB4!

24 . . . NxRPch and 24 . . . RxN 25 Px R
BxB . Forcing the dra\v . After 30 R- N 2
For a m oment i t seemed to m e that R - K R 8 i t woul d be a hard fi ght wi th
White coul d save himsel f by the some advantage to Bl ack .
queen sacri fice 24 Bx B NxRPch 25
K - B l NxQ 26 BxQ Pch K- R l 27 R ­ 30 RxR
K6, threatening 28 N -N 6ch . 31 Q-R2ch K-N l
H O\\'ever . after 27 . . . RxN ! 28 RxQ 32 Q- R7ch K- B l
R px R 29 PxR Bl ack v.; ns by 29 . . . R- 33 Q- R8ch K-B2
1{8ch 30 KxN RxR . Stil l , White does 34 Q - RSch Drawn
have a defence .
If 34 . . . P - K N3 35 Q- R 7ch ! etc .
24 K- R2! RxN

45
 GAME 4 After 9 P -B 3 P-B4 a sharp
situation arises , not yet tested in
White: Fischer practice - Uhlmann .
Black : Kovacevic
9 P-N3
Rovinj /Zagreb 1970 10 B-NS Q-K2

Notes by Kovacevic The key m ove ! White must meet

the threat of 1 1 . . . N-NS, forcing 1 2
1 P-K4 P -K3 BxQ NxQ 1 3 B- R4 B-N2 14 B-N 3 0-
2 P-Q4 P-Q4 0-0 with better play for Black .
3 N- QB3 B-NS
4 P-QR3 BxNch 11 Q-R4
5 PxB PxP
6 Q-N4 N -KB3 This creates a very similar position
7 QxNP R-N 1 to that in the game Watson -Whiteley
8 Q-R6 QN-Q2 (8 . . P-N3 9 B-KNS R-N3 10 Q-R4)
.

but with the basic difference that the

w
black rook is not on KN3 so th at
� White cannot play N-B4 with tempo .
Apart from that , with 10 . . . Q- K2 !
Black is preparing to castle, while at
the same time preventing White from
doing so . Finally , by employi ng the
correct sequence of moves ( . . . N-Q2,
. . . P-N 3 , . . . Q- K2, . . . B-N2) according
to Alatortsev 's plan , Black h as even
saved two tempi in the opening . This
is decisive , since after the text move
Black is in a rather m ore favourable
position .

The opening move to Alatortsev's 11 B-N2

plan wherein Black saves time by 12 N-N3
omitting the move . . . P-QB4 . The
game Foguelman-R . Byrne , Buenos 12 N -B4 would have led to 1 2 . P­ . .

Aires 1964 , went 9 B-N2 N-N3 10 P­ KR3! and if 13 BxP R -R 1 or if 1 3

Q B4 N -RS 1 1 0-0-0 B -Q2 12 P- KB3 QxRP 0-0 -0 ! with dangerous
Q-K2 with advant age to Black . threats .

9 N-K2 12 P -KR3!

46
 A logi ca l move \vhich rel ieves 16 QxRP
Whi te 's pressure on the KR 4-08
diagonal and effectively demolishes 1 6 O - R 3 is no better beca use of
his strategi cal plan . White does not 1 6 . . . N-Q4 1 7 QxRP N -R5! 1 8 P-0 B4
dare to accept the gift with 13 QxR P , R - R 1 1 9 0-N5 P- K B3 20 Q -N 4
since he loses a piece after 1 3 . . . N -N 5 R (Q 1 )- N 1 2 1 QxKP(4 ) N-0 B6 22 0-
1 4 B x Q Nx O 1 5 B - R4 R -N5 , nor K3 NxBch 23 QxN BxP , and Bl ack 's
\\ith 1 3 BxP on account of 1 3 . . . R­ att ack penetrates .
N 5! 1 4 0-R3 0-0-0 15 B - K 2 (if 15
B-Q2 R (1 )- N 1 16 B- K 2 R (5 ) -N 2 wi th 16 R -R 1
a da ngerous attac k) 15 . . . R (5 )-N l 1 6 17 Q-NS R (Q 1 )- N 1
0 - R 4 R -R 1 1 7 Q-B4 N -04 1 8 0-02 18 P- 83
R(Q 1 )- N 1 1 9 P - Q B4 P - K 6 ! 20 BxP
NxB 2 1 QxN BxP 22 R - K N 1 RxP
with advant age to B lack .

13 B -Q 2?

He sho ul d have pl ayed 1 3 B- B 1 to

leave open the possibil ity of wi th­
dra\ving the queen , nO\\' standi ng
quite pas si vely on KR4.

13 0 - 0 -0 �-8'
14 B-K2 N -8 1 �

Su dde nl y Black 's fi ne ly positione d Whi te offers h i s queen for a rook

pieces threaten the \\'hi te q ueen . N ot and a knight - e . g . 18 . . . N - R5 ? 19
1 4 . . . P-K 6? ? 1 5 PxP BxP 1 6 R - K N 1 PxP RxO 20 BxQ followe d by BxN
B-N2 1 7 P- K4! "'ith a great ad ­ a nd W hite \\'Ould g ain a clear ad ­
va ntage to White . vantage .

15 0 -0 18 ... P-K6

This i s simply su ici dal . Better is 1 5

N - R 5 N -04 16 O x O N x Q 1 7 N - N 3 An effective response to the trap .
"·i th eq ual chances . but no t here 1 7
Bx P R x N P 1 8 N -N 3 P- K 6 ! 1 9 B xP ? 19 BxP
R xN \\'i nni ng . - Uhlma nn .
After 1 9 QxP con1 es 19 . . . N-04
IS ... N -N3 and . . . O- R 5 \vi th irresistible threats .

47
 19 N-B1 3 N-QB3 B-N5
20 Q-NS N -Q4 4 Q-N4?! N-KB3
21 K-B 2 5 QxNP R-N1
6 Q-R6
This reply is forced . After the
retreat of the bishop comes . . . P-R3
and . . . Q-RS.

21 P-R3
22 Q-Q 3 R xP
23 R-R1 Q-R 5
24 RxR QxR
25 N-Bl

25 N -K4 would allow 25 . . . Rx Pch

26 K-K 1 P-KB4 27 N-B2 NxB 28
QxN P-BS .

25 RxPch Here 6 . . . P-B4 is accepted as the

26 K-K 1 Q-R5ch most energetic m ove . Ivkov ,
27 K- Q2 N -N3! however , prefers another , quieter
28 R-K 1 N (3 )- B5 p ath : he t akes a pawn and then
29 BxN NxB
hastens to develop his Q-side .
30 Q-K3 R-B7!
6 pxp
Because of the threat of . . . BxP and 7 N -K2 P-N3
. . . N-N7 White loses at least a piece . 8 B-N5 QN-Q2
9 0-0-0 B-N2
31 Resigns 10 P-Q5

GAME S This looks strong . 10 . . . P><P can be

advantageously met by 1 1 NxQP, but
White: Planinc Bl ack has a refutation which Planinc
Black : lvkov did not reckon with .

Yugosl av Team Championship 197 1 10 B-KB1

11 Q-R4 pxp
Notes by I sayev 12 RXP

1 P-K4 P-K3 This is forced , since 1 2 NxQP now

2 P-Q4 P-Q4 fails against 12 . . . RxB 13 QxR NxN

48
14 R x N QxQ 15 RxQ B-K R3 , (thi s is GA ME 6
Vv·hy 10 . . . B- KB 1 ! w as necessary) 1 6
P - K R4 P- KB3. White: Levy
Black: Bimboim
12 BxR
13 Nx B B-K2 Netanya 1973
14 NxNch NxN
15 N-B3 N-N5 N otes by Levy

This forces exchanges , after \\'hi ch 1 P-K4 P-K3

Bl ac k has not only the advantage of 2 P-Q4 P-Q4
the exchange , but also the initi ative . 3 N-Q B3 B-N5
4 P-KS N-K2
16 QxN BxBch 5 P-Q R3 BxNch
17 K-N 1 K-B 1 6 P>< B P-Q N3
18 B-B4 7 Q-N4 N -N3
8 P-KR4 P-KR4
18 QxP is of course met by 18 . . . Q­ 9 Q-Q l
K1 .

18
19
20
B-Q5
Q-B5
Q -Q5
R -Q 1
B-B3
i i
· � !

21 Bx KP R-N4 �
22
23
Q-B3
R- Q l
R-N4!
RxPch
i
24 K- B1 fl
I f 24 KxR then 24 . . . Q- N5ch 25 K­
B 1 B - N 4ch .

24 ... R-N8ch

9 B-R3
If25 KxR then foll0\\1S 25 . . . Q­
N5ch 26 K- B 1 B-N4ch 27 Q - K3
Natur al ly 9 . . . NxRP 10 P-N3 N -N3
BxQch 28 PxB RxRch .
1 1 RxP is very much to White's
advantage .
25 Resigns

10 Bx B NXB
11 B- N5 Q-Q2? !

49
 After 1 1 . . . P-KB3 1 2 Q-Q3 K-B2 1 6 P-R4 would transpose to the
13 pxp pxp White's advantage is game Sakharov-Lein , USSR 1968 , in
somewhat less than in the game . But which the advance of the QRP
on 1 1 . . . Q-B1 White can continue seemed to bear little relevance to the
strongly with 1 2 N-K2 P-QB4 1 3 R­ manner in which White won :
R3 N-N1 ! 14 N-N3 ( also good is 1 4 1 6 . . . FxP 1 7 pxp N(N3)-K2 18 Q-Q 1
P-QB4 ! ) 1 4 . . . N-Q2 1 5 NXP R-R2 N-B4 19 NxP ! N(BJ)xQP 20 B-B6! R­
when Black has insufficient counter­ B5 21 P-QB3 N-B3 22 BxP NxB 23
play for the pawn ( Kostro -Sokolsky , N-B6ch winning .
Poland-Byelorussi a match 1966) . The text is a direct attempt to take
advantage of Black's K- side weak­
12 Q-Q3 nesses.

Also quite strong and even more 16 ... N ( B3) -K2

effective is the immediate 12 N-K2
Q-B3 13 0-0 N-N1 1 4 P- KB4 N-Q2 On 1 6 . . . N(N3)-K2 I had originally
15 Q-Q3 N(Q2)-B 1 16 P-B5 , e . g. intended 1 7 P-B5 PxBP 1 8 NxBP
1 6 . . . P><P 1 7 RXP N-K3 1 8 Q R-KB1 NxN 19 RxN pxp 20 pxp NxQP ! 2 1
NxB 19 PxN 0-0-0 (or 19 . . . 0-0 20 P-K6 ! e . g. 2 1 . . . FxP? 22 R-K5 N -B3
N-N3 P-R5 2 1 N-R5 with a 23 Q-N6ch K-B 1 24 R-KB1 ch K-N 1
devastating attack) 20 RxP R(Q1 )­ 25 RxKP; or 21 . . . QxP 22 R(B5)-B 1 ,
N 1 2 1 Q-B5ch K-N2 22 Q-Q7 and both of which are very good for
White won . Portisch-I vkov , Zagreb White . But after 21 . . . NxKP! 22
1 965 . RxQP Q-B3 it is Black who stands
better. So 1 6 . . . N(N3)-K2 should be
12 . . . N-N1 met by 17 BxN NxB and then 18 P­
13 N-K2 P-QB4 B5 pxp 19 NxBP NxN 20 RxN when
Black's Q-si de counterplay is too
slow .
If 13 . . . Q-B3 14 0-0 Q-B5 15 QxQ
PxQ 16 P-B4 followed by P-B5 with a
good game .

14 0-0 N-B3
15 N-N3 R-QB1

1 5 . . . N(N3)- K2 followed by . . . P-N3

would be a more passive approach to
Black' s problems .

16 P-KB4

so
 Similarly , 1 6 . . . P><P 1 7 pxp N(N3)­ 26 R-86! !
K2 18 BxN QxB 1 9 P-BS is also good
for White : 1 9 . . . QxK RP 20 pxp One point of this sacrifice is that if
QxPch 21 QxQ NxQ 22 P><Pch K- K2 black declines it with (say) 26 . . . Q-B2
23 QR-Q 1 with m uch the better White can win quickly by giving up
ending . his queen : 27 QxN ! PxQ 28 RxRch
K- R2 29 R - K8 and 30 R(B l )-B8
17 P -BS Nx8P mating . Other queen moves fail
18 NxN P><N either to the same idea or to 27 P-K6 .
19 RxP 0-0

Saidy quipped that Pe trosian

would probably try to defend Black's
position by 1 9 . . . R - KN l and then
. . .N-R1 .

20 QR-KB1 pxp
21 pxp R-85

2 1 . . . Q-RS loses to 22 RxP ! Rx R 23

RxR Kx R 24 Q-BSch K-N1 25
QxRch K-R2 26 P-B3 followed by P­
K6 and P-K7 etc .

22 P-B3 Q -B3 26 PxR

23 Q-83 RxBP 27 RXP
24 Qx RP R-KN6
Attempts to mate at KN7 permit
En ticing the king to the KR2-QN8 Black to turn the tables : 27 BxP
diagonal so that after an eventual P­ RXQP 28 Q- R6 QxB ! and
K6 Black may have a useful queen 29 . . . RxPch, or 27 pxp Q-Q3ch 28 K­
check (see, for example , the note to R 1 R - B 1 and now Q- R6 can be met
27 RxP concerning the failure of 27 by . . . Q-B 1 .
P><P).
If 24 . . . RxP 25 Q-N4 and White
27 ... Q-B7

wins because of the threat of 26 P-RS My opponent, understandably, did

N- R l 27 B-B6 . 24 . . . Q-BS loses to 25 not relish his position after 27 . . . Q-82
P- K6 QxPch 26 K- R 1 pxp 27 RxRch 28 RxNch (not 28 Q-N4? RxQP! )
NxR 28 Q-B7ch K-R2 29 B- B6 . 28 . . . px R 29 QxPch Q- N2 30 QxR ,
e. g . 30 . . . Q - R2 3 1 Q - K N 3 Q-N3 3 2 P­
25 K-R2 R-Q6 K6.

51
 28 P-K6 Q- B2ch 2 P-Q4 P-Q4
29 K-Rl RxRP 3 N-QB3 B-N S
30 P><Pch RxP 4 P-KS N-K2
31 QxNch K-Rl 5 N-KB3!?
32 B-B4

Not 32 QxR ? ? R-R8ch 3 3 R-B1

QXQ.

32 Q-K2
33 B-KS R-R8ch
34 K-R2 R-N2
35 R-84 R-K8

If 35 . . . QxB 36 Q- R6ch and then I

take the queen.

36 Q-RSch K-Nl
37 BxR QxB
5 P -QB4
Played with only seconds to sp are. 6 PxP QN-B3
But in any case Black cannot save his 7 B-Q3 P-QS
queen: 37 . . . KxB 38 R-N4ch K-B 3 39
R-N6ch K-B2 40 Q-R7ch K- K 1 4 1 R­
N8ch and 42 R-N 7 .
7 N-N3 is less happy after 8 B x N
. . .

RPxB 9 B-K3 with a slight advantage

38 R-N4 Resigns
to White .

8 P-QR3 B-R4
GAME 7 9 P- QN4 NxNP
10 PxN BxP
White: Honfi 11 0-0
Black : Farago
This is best : to complete his
Hungari an Team Championship development as quickly as possible .
1973 I t is weaker to play 1 1 B-QNSch B ­
Q2! 12 QxP BxNch 1 3 QxB(B3) BxB
Notes by Csom when Black has the better game .

1 P-K4 P-K3 11 ...

52
 If 1 1 . . . pxN , 12 N -N 5! IS 16 Q -Q4
d angerous . 17 RxQP QxKP
18 R- K 1 Qx8P ?
12 R·N 1 P -KR3
A sign of over -con fi dence . The
This move is necessary to prevent o nly effective defence is 1 8 . . . Q - B3
N-N5. upon whi ch White h as two possibl e
contin uations :
13 N ·Q2! ? a) 19 B-B3 0-0 20 R-Q B4 Q-N4 2 1
Q- R3 N -N 3 22 BxN Fx B 23 Qx KPch
A sharp and di fficul t struggle oc ­ K - R 2 wi th equality ;
curred in a correspondence game b ) 1 9 B - K 3 , which is not so good on
Zinser-Ackermann , 1 964 : 13 N -R4 account of 19 . . . P-K R4 20 Q-R 3 (if 20
Q -Q4 14 P-B4 B-Q2 1 5 P-B5 etc . Q -N 3 then 20 . . . P- R5 21 Q-N4 P - R6
22 P-N 3 Q-B 6) 20 . . . P-KN4! ?
13 8x N ! We can safely write under the
fol lowi ng di agran1 "White to move
The knight cannot be al lowed to and win " , for the followi ng sacrifice
reach Q6. tears Black 's defences to shreds .

ml
14 8x 8 8-Q2? !

Farago \voul d l i ke to sacri fice his � i i

QNP in order to gai n control of t he
'
diagon al Q R 1 - K R8 as qui ck ly as
i i
possible and then attack the pa\\'ns
on K4 and QB4. Hon fi , with the en ­
s ui ng i nteresti ng , if somewhat over ­
bol d conception , tries to wi n a di f­
ferent , m ore i mportant p awn . In my
opinion Black can equalize more
quickly by means of 1 4 . . . 0-0 1 5 Q­
N4 N -B4 1 6 Q - K4 B-Q 2 ! 1 7 RxP (or
1 7 QxNP) 1 7 . . . Q- B 1 . 19 RxP ! ! PxR

The sacri fi ce \\i n s , \\'hether ac ­

IS Q·N4 8-83 cepted or not . 1 9 . . . B-Q2 20 R x B !
16 R·N4! ? Kx R 2 1 R - K5 dis eh P- B4 22 Bx B Pch
\\'ins the queen .
So he h as his eye on the QP : of
course 1 6 Qx N P loses to 1 6 . . . R - K N 1 . K· B 1

53
 Or 20 . . . NxB QxNch K-B l 22 B-N4
winning .

21 R-KB4ch Q-B4

Or 21 . N-B4 22 B-N4.
. .

22 B-N4! K-N 1
23 BxQ �B
24 Q-K2 N-N3
25 Rx P K-R2
26 R-B7 KR-K1
27 Q-Q 1 K-N 1 7 B-R3
28 R-B7 N-B5 8 N-Q N5 N-K2
29 Q-N4 N-K3
30 B-B3! Resigns Not 8 . . P-QB3? because of 9 N­
.

Q6ch BxN 10 QxNP .

9 Q-RS N-N3
10 P-R4 P-QB3
11 N-B3 BxB
GAME S 12 KxB

White: Ljubojevic It is clear that White has achieved

Black: Andersson nothing and stands worse.

12 P-QB4
Amsterdam 1972 13 P-R5 PXQP
14 N (KB3)xP B-B4
Notes by Balashov 15 N-N3 N-B3
16 P-B4 0-0
17 NxB PxN
1 P-K4 P-K3 18 Q-Q1 P-83
2 P-Q4 P-Q4
3 N-QB3 B-NS Black has succeeded in completing
4 P-KS P-Q N3 his develop ment and proceeds to
5 Q-N4 B-81 operate actively in the centre .
6 N-B3 Q-Q2
7 P-Q R4 19 pxp

54
 A critical position , in which
Andersson missed his c hance of
developing his attac k .

24 ... K-R l ?

White would h ave repulsed the

attack after 24 . . . RxPch 25 BxR
RxBch 26 K- N2 or 24 . . . Q- K B2 25 K­
N l RxP 26 BxR QxB 27 K- R 1 . The
correct solution was 24 . . . P-N 4 ! After
25 pxp e . p . RxNP or 25 R - N 2 Q - R6
26 Q-N4 ? QXB 27 QxPc h R-N3
Black keeps up a strong attack . I t is
19 N-Q5 ! ? a pity that Ande rsson failed to bring
his con ception to its logical con ­
A very interesting con tinu ation , elusion .
which involves the s acrifice of a
piece . Nevertheless , it \\rould have 25 K-Nl pxp
been stronge r to pl ay the straightfor­ 26 BxN pxs
w ard 1 9 . . . RxP 20 N - K4 R - B 2 2 1 NxP 27 QxP Q-N5ch
( 2 1 N-NS R - B4 gives Whi te nothing) 28 R-N2 QxP
21 . . . Q-03 22 N-Q3 P- K4 , with
advantage to Blac k . If 28 . . . Q - R6 then 29 P- KR6!

20 P-R5 NxKBP 29 NxP Resigns

21 P-KN3

The knight at K B4 has nowhe re GAME 9

to go , b ut B l ack h as a men acing
initiative in return for his piece . White: Ciocaltea
Black : Hecht
21 RxP
22 P><N P-K4 Budapest 1 973
23 B-K3 QR-KBl
1 P-K4 P-K3
23 . . . R-Q 1 to defend the p awn at 2 P-Q4 P-Q4
Q4 is also of interest , but the move 3 N-Q B3 B-N5
pl ayed is more energetic . 4 P-K5 P-Q N3
5 P-QR3 B><Nch
24 R-K R2 6 P>< B Q-Q2

ss
 7 N-R3 B-R3 A positional pawn sacrifice giving
8 BxB NxB Bl ack a clear superiority on the Q­
9 Q-N4 P-KB4 side .
10 Q-RSch P-N3
16 QxP

After 16 P-Q R4 P-NS! 17 P-Q B4

N-B6! 18 BxN PxB 19 P-QS pxp 20
P- K6 Q-Q3 , Black has the ad ­
vantage .

16 ... R-QN 1
17 Q-K2 N-R4
18 P-QR4

Better drawing chances are offered

by 18 P-QB4 NxP 19 QxN RxB 20
0 -0 Q-N4 with a s light plus to
Black.
11 Q-K2 N-N 1
12 P-QB4! ? 18 Q-B3
19 0-0 Q -BS!
After 12 0-0 N-QB3 13 P-QR4 N ­ 20 Qx Q
R4 1 4 R-Q 1 N -BS 1 5 R-Q3 P-KR3 1 6
N-B4 Q - B 2 1 7 R-KR3 P-KN4 18 N­ The exchange sacrifice also fails
RS 0-0-0 Black has good pl ay . after 20 Q-Q2 N-N6 21 Q-R6 NxR 22
Bednarski-Andersson , Lund 1972. BxN Q-Q6! threatening . . R-N8.
.

12 N-QB3 20 NxQ
13 P-QB3? 21 B-R3 K-Q2

White should play 13 B-N2 pxp 14 An inexact move . It was important

QxP KN-K2 15 Q-Q3 R-Q 1 16 R-Q 1 to complt!te the blockade by 2 1 . . . P­
P-QN4t with an unclear position . Q R4!

13 ... KN-K2 22 P-RS! NxBP

23 B-BS P-QR3
Also good is 13 . . . P><P 14 QxP N ­ 24 N-B4 R-N6
R4 .
After 24 . . . N-Q4 White obtains
14 pxp KNxP counterplay by 25 NxN PxN 26 P­
15 B-N2 P-QN4! K6ch .

56
 25 P- R4 R -K 1 13 P- 84 pxp
14 QxP P -K R3
25 . . . KR -ON 1 is better . 15 B- N 2 KN -K2
16 0-0 P -K N4
26 KR-Bl Drawn 17 K R -Q 1 P - N5

If 1 7 . . . N -R4 18 Q-K2 Q- B 3 19 N -
GA M E 1 0 0 2 0-0-0 (not 1 9 . . . Qx BP 20 B- R3
threateni ng both R -Q B 1 an d Q -RS)
White : Tri ngov 20 P-Q B4 P- BS , and now in Tri ngov­
Black: Spi ridonov Pl ani nc , Athens 1 97 1 , 21 0 -0 3
\\:ould have given White the ad ­
Varna 1 973 vantage .

I P -K4 P-K 3 18 N-Q2 R-Q 1

2 P-Q4 P-Q4 19 Q- 8 1 ?
3 N - Q BJ B -N5
4 P-K5 Q-Q2 Thi s allows Black to take the
5 P-Q R3 BxNch i niti ative . Correct is 19 N - B 1 0-0 20
6 Px B P-QNJ 0 - K 2 (or 20 N -N 3) \Vi th chances for
7 P-QR4 B- R3 both si des .
8 Bx B NxB
9 Q-N4 P -K B4
19 0-0
- 20 N-N3 N -N 3
_, · �ji . - - � 11
[f
� 21 P-Q B4 Q - 82
� �
-
22 Q - K2 KR - K 1
� 1 ·� i iI 23 P- R 5 K-R 2
l� i %1 � /
-//,
24 P- B3?

. . i . ,g i �
<
Thi s only helps Black .
,g ,g
�
- �: �
'

/·
/ ...;

f1 24 R-KN 1 !
.,
// :;. //h
/
25 BPxP N -B5
� ,g fl fl ,g 26 Q-B3 RxNP !

i ·.�1 � .
/� ]! /
(/ .!::::! 27 P-N3

A ccept ance of the sacri fi ce loses

10 Q- R 5ch P-N3 quickly after 27 QxON RxNPch 28
11 Q-K2 N -N 1 Ox R NxQ 29 KxN Q- R4! \Vi nning at
12 N - 83 N-Q BJ leas t a piece .

57
 27 Q-R4! GAME 1 1
28 K-R1
White: Pachman
If 28 QxQN QR- KN 1 ! and there is Black: Ublmann
no defence to the threat of
29 . . . RxPch . Dresden 1957

28 QR-KN1 ! 1 P-K4 P-K3

29 pxp 2 P -Q4 P-Q4
3 N-QB3 B-NS
If 29 QxQN RxP, threatening 4 P-KS P-QB4
30 . . . QxPch 3 1 KxR R-R6 mate . If 29 5 B-Q2 N-K2
PxN R-N8ch ! followed by mate in 6 P-QR3
two .

29 RPxP
30 N-Q2 N-NS??

Endangering his well pl ayed at ­

tack . The correct move was 30 . . . N­
R4 ! 3 1 RxN (not 31 P><N NxP 32 NxN
R-N8ch ! ) 3 1 . . . pxR 32 pxN Q-RS! 33
R-KB 1 R-N6! 34 Q-B2 Q-R6 35 N ­
B 3 R-N7 3 6 Q-R4 RxPch followed by
mate .

31 B-B3??
6 BxN
Missing his one chance of saving 7 BxB P-QN3
the game by 3 1 pxN N-Q6 32 QxN R­
N7 33 N-B3 R( 1 )-N6 34 Q- B 1 etc . Or 7 . . . QN-B3 8 N -B3 pxp 9 NxP
(9 BxP equalizes ) 9 . . . NxP! 10 NxP
31 ... QN-Q6! BxN 1 1 BxN 0-0 12 B-Q3 N-B3 13
32 P-QS B-N3 Q-B 3 ! and Bl ack has the
initiative . Tringov -Uhlmann , Skopje
If 32 PxN Black wins br_i lliantly by Olympiad 1972.
32 . . . R-N8ch ! ! 33 RxR QxQch 34
NxQ N- B7 mate . 8 P-QN4 Q-B2
9 N -B3 PxNP
32 ... RxP 10 BxP B-R3
33 Resigns 11 B-Q3 B><B

58
 12 P><B QN-B3 26 P- QR4
13 R-Q B 1 Q-Q2
14 B-Q6 0-0 The threat of . . . N-N3 and . . . Q- R5
forces White's hand .
More exact was 14 . . . R-QB 1 15
0-0 N- B4 16 Q- R4 NxB 17 Px N 0-0 26 PxP!
1 8 R-B3 QxP 1 9 KR-B 1 N- K2 with 27 Q-N6 QxQ
the better ending . Not, however , 1 4 . . . 28 RxQ P-Q R4!
N-B4 15 0-0 N x B 1 6 PxN with 29 K-K3 P-R4!
advantage to White . 30 R -N7 N-N3
31 PxP?
15 Q-R4 KR-Q 1 !
16 K-K2
31 B -Q6 offered better chances of
counterpl ay , whereas now White 's K­
Not 1 6 0-0 NxKP wi nning a
side is in ruins .
pawn .

16 QR-B l 31 N-R5
17 P-N4 Q-N2 32 K-B4 N-B4
18 R-B3 P-Q N4 33 N-B3 R-N 1 !
19 Q - N3 N-R4! 34 R -B7

The exchange of one pair of rooks White dare not exchange rooks in
helps Bl ack to expl oit his Q -si de view of hi s poor pawn position .
pa\\'n majority .
34 N-N5
20 Q-B2 RxR 35 R- R7
21 QxR N (4) -B3
22 R-Q N 1 R-QB 1 Or 35 N- K l P - R6 etc .
23 Q - N2 P-Q R3
24 N-Q2 35 N ( N5) xPch
36 K-N5 R-N5!
24 P-Q R4 offered better chances . 37 K-N4? Nx BPch

24 Q-N3! Not , of course , 37 . . . NxB 38 R­

25 B- B5 R8ch followed by mate in t\VO .

25 N - N 3 fails to 2S . . . N-N3 followed 38 K-B4 N-Q6ch

by . . . Q-Q l -RS . 39 K-N4 N-B7ch
40 K- B4 N-K5!
25 ... Q-Q I ! 41 P-R4 R-N8

59
 Threatening 42 . . . R-KB8 There is already no way of avoiding
complications . If 7 B-Q2, P><P would
42 R-R8ch K-R2 be unpleasant .
43 N-NSch NxN
44 P><N R-KB8ch 7 QxR
45 K-N4 N-K6ch 8 K-Q l pxQp
46 K-N3 N-BS 9 N-N S 0-0
47 R-KB8 R-B4
48 Resigns Eliminating all dangers .

10 N-KB3
GAME 12
The intended 10 N-B7 fails to
10 . . . B-Q2 1 1 NxR N -R3 12 QxQP N­
White: Jansa
B3 followed by 1 3 . . . KNxNP . Or here
Black: Korchnoy
1 1 P-NS Q-R4! 12 NxR BxP with a
clear advantage to Black .
Luhacovice 1969

1 P-K4 P-K3 10 QN-B3

2 P-Q4 P-Q4 11 B-Q3 N-N3
3 N-QB3 B-NS 12 R-K1 NXNP !
4 P-KS P-QB4 13 N-R3
5 Q-N4 N-K2
.
6 P-QR3? Trying m vatn to trap Black's
queen .

13 NxB
14 pxN B-Q 2
15 NxP QR-B1
16 N(4) -B2 RxN!
17 KxR R-B lch
18 K-Q2

A sad necessity. Having returned

the exchange Bl ack h as kept the
initiative and he still has an extra
p awn .

18 P-N3
6 Q-R4! 19 Q-N4 B-K1
7 pxB?! 20 N .. B2 Q-R3

60
 21 N- Q4 N-85! GAME 13

With the double threat on 06 and White: Timman

KN 7 . Bl ac k now wins a second pawn Black : Hug
and hi s m ateri al advantage is
decisive . Nice Olympiad 1 974

22 Q - R3 QxQ 1 P- K 4 P- K3
23 P>< Q NxNP 2 P-Q4 P-Q4
24 R -N 1 N -85 3 N -Q B3 B-N5
25 K-K3 N -N3 4 P-K5 P-QB4
26 P- 84 B-Q2 5 P-Q R3 B-R4
27 B- N2 P-83 6 P-Q N4 pxQP
7 Q- N4 N-K2
Mobilizing hi s central pawn 8 N - N5
m ajority .

28 pxp pxp
29 P- KR4
i i
29 P - BS PxP would give Black a
different p assed p awn but the end
resul t \voul d be the same .

29 K-82
30 P-RS N -K2
31 R-N2 P-K4
{>
jl

32 pxp pxp
33 R- KB2ch K -K l
34 N-83 N - B 4ch
This is a less often played con ­
35 K-Q2 P-K5!
tinuation than the sharper 8 PxB
36 pxp px p
PxN 'Nhic h offe rs chances to both
37 R-K2 P-K6ch
sides .
38 K-K 1 R-85
39 N-K5 R-KR5
8 8- 82
40 R-N2 R R 8ch
9 QxNP R-N l
-

41 K-K2 B-N4ch
10 QxRP QN-83
42 N -Q3 R-QN8!
43 Resigns
Th is \\·ay Bl ack \\·ill never ge t
Wh i t e ' s K P , b ut a·f ter 1 0 . . P- R3 1 1
.

Nx Bch QxN 1 2 N - K 2 B-02 1 3 B - N 2

61
QN-B3 14 0-0-0 0-0-0 15 NXP 18 Rx P
NxN 1 6 BxN N-B4 17 Q- R3 NxB 1 8 19 K-B2! 0-0-0
RxN QxKP 1 9 Q-K3 ! White would 20 R -KN 1 RxR
still maintain the advantage . . 21 KxR P-B3
22 pxp R-B1
11 P-KB4 P-R3
In case of 22 . . . P-K4 23 P><P NxKP
1 1 . . . B-N l 1 2 N-KB3 P- R4 was 24 Q-B4 R-N1 ch 25 B-N 2 B-B3 26 Q­
sharper and more consistent in con­ BSch K-N 1 27 QxN RxBch 28 K-B 1 !
nection with Black's lOth move (13 BxN 29 QxQch KxQ 30 P-B7 , White
N-NS! '? RxN 14 PxR BxP gives Black wins easily .
'

counter-chances).
23 R-Kl RxP
12 NxBch QxN 24 R-K4 R-N3ch
13 Q-Q3 B-Q2 25 K-B2 Q-Q 1
14 N-B3 N-B4 26 P-Q R4 Q-N3!

With the idea of playing This is the best ch ance now that
1S . . . N(B3)-K2 and 16 . . . B-N4. Black's knight is unstable.

15 P-N4! 27 P-NS pxp

28 pxp P-Q6ch
An excellent idea, to capture the 29 Q-K3 QxP
initiative with this sacrifice of a 30 BxP Q-KR4
pawn . 31 P-B5! R-8 3

15 ... N-K6 Black' s queen would be trapped

after 3 1 . . . PxP 32 R-K R4 , \.vhile
Or lS . . . RxP 16 B-R3 R-KN l 17 3 1 . . . QxBP 32 R-K B4 loses a whole
BxN with the advantage . rook.

16 BxN PxB 32 R-KR4 Q-K1

17 QxKP P-QS 33 R -R4 K-B2?
18 Q-Q2
Better was 33 . . . K-N 1 , but after 34
In the case of 18 NxP Black would N-KS pxp 35 NxNch RxN ( a must
quickly bring his QB onto the long because of the threat 36 Q-B4ch) 36
diagonal and have very active R-Q4! Black would have little hope
counterplay. Naturally White does of being able to survive the ending .
not wish such a reverse in his
superior position . 34 N-Q4 pxp

62
 35 N-N5ch Resigns 13 0- 0-0

If 3S . . . K- N 1 36 R- R8ch ! The most critical moment of the

game . At this poi nt I spent about 40
m inutes assessing the position
GAM E 14 ari sing after 1 3 . . . Nx KP 14 NxN QxN
15 BxBch Kx B 16 Q-Q3 . At first
White: Fischer sight it appears very attractive for
Black : Tal Black . He has good chances both in
the middlegame (in vie\\' of the open
Leipzig Olympi ad 1960 files on the K-side ) , and in the end ­
game , thanks to his far advanced
Notes by Tal pa\\'n on B6 . But at the board I
someho\\' could not find a way to
1 P-K4 P-K3 strengthen my position signi ficantly ,
2 p Q4
.. P-Q4 while at the same time the QN -file
3 N- QB3 B-N5 gives White considerable counter ­
4 P-K5 P-Q B4 chances . For example : 1 6 . . . Q R-QB 1
5 P·Q R3 B-R4 1 7 R-N 1 K- B2 18 R-N5! K-N l 19 B­
6 P·Q N4 PxQP K 3 , and White has activated his for ­
7 Q -N4 N -K2 ces . It is very di fficult for Black to set
8 FxB FxN his central pawn m ass in m otion , an d
9 QxNP R-N 1 therefore I rej ected 13 . . . Nx KP ,
10 Qx RP QN -83! preferri ng the sharper m ove in the
11 N-83 Q-B2 game .
12 B-QN5 B-Q2
13 o .. o 14 B- N5

No\\' head-spinning complications

arise , finally endi ng in perpetu al
check . White coul d al so have con ­
tinued 1 4 BxN , when I intended
throwing caution to the \\i nds :
1 4 . . . B><B 15 QxP P-Q5 , with very
. /
sharp pl ay .
I
•
.

/�

� t [ Editor ' s comment : I n " My 60

� -
/
/ '

' "

Mem orable G am es " Fischer analyses

;'i_£_J
I
� ;' this continuation out to a \vin : 16

�-
,,

-::-
A

/
., QxPch B-Q2 17 QxN RxPch 18 KxR
B- R6ch 19 KxB QxQ 20 B-N5 . ]

63
 BXR R-R 1 18 QR-K1 QXR 19 RXQ
RxQ 20 B-B6) 1 7 KR-K 1 ! (not 17
QR-K 1 Q-N 1 ! ) 17 . . . QxRch 18 RxQ
RxQ 1 9 BxR KxB 20 BxB KxB 2 1 R­
K3 P-QS 22 R- K4 to a certain ad­
vantage for White .

w��-� w��� 16 NxP BxR

·� .% .
�· ·� 'P)
� w� w�
�- � � �m....�
'· . /,

A curious variation could have

/.':" .. . � :% /, resulted after 16 . . . QR -B 1 17 B-R6
11 �
. . •

�If -
� ...
/

�. .�
� :;::;: �
' ,

0
�%, �x BxR 1 8 BxR BxP 19 N-Q6ch ! QXN
20 BxN .
14 NxKP!
17 NxR RxB
18 NxKP RxPch
Were it not for this move , Black 's 19 K-R l!
position would be unenviable . Now
White has to switch to the calculation White would lose after 19 KxB
of intricate vari ations . RxRP !

15 NxN! 19 Q-K4

Bad , of course , is 15 BxN NxNch When starting his combination

16 K-R1 R-R 1 with the threats of with 14 . . . NxKP, Bl ack thought that ,
1 7 . . . RxQ and . . . QxKRP mate . In besides the move in the game which
the case of 15 BxBch Black has a guarantees him a draw , he also could
choice between 15 . . . KxB and play the sharper 19 . . . Q-QBS 20 QxN
1S . . . RxB 16 NxN QxN 1 7 BxN R-R l R-N 1 , but on actually reachi ng this
18 QR- K 1 RxQ 19 RxQ RxB with the position he realized that after 21 N ­
better chances in the ending . Now it B4! P-QS 22 Q-K4! the stranded
is Black's move , and with it comes black bishop has no way of coming
his turn to solve complicated� into play , whereas White can himself
problems . gradually build up a dangerous at­
tack .
15 ... BxB!
20 RxB
The attempt to pl ay in analogous
fashion to a variation given Agreeing to the draw . Possible was
previously, 15 . . . QxN , would lead af­ 20 . . . R-N3 , but even then , by con­
ter 16 BxN R-R 1 (or 1 6 . . . B><B 17 tinuing 21 QxN RxN 22 Q-B5ch K-

64
N 1 23 P-R 6 ! , Whi te woul d be able to strong .
draw \\i tho ut di fficul ty .
13 N-R5
21 KxR Q-N 5ch
22 Drawn No\\' 1 3 px p \\'oul d not be so clear
after 1 3 . . . QN -B3 14 N - Q3 P-Q5 \\'i th
GA M E 1 5 counterpl ay .

White : Gligori c 13 ... K- 8 1

Black : Pachm an
I n the game Gligoric -Fog uel man ,
M unich Olympi ad 1 958 Bel grade 1 962, pl ay went 1 3 . . . R - R2
1 4 B- KN5 pxp 1 5 pxp QN - B3 1 6
I P-K4 P-K3
0-0-0 N - N3 1 7 P-N4 B -Q2 1 8 P­
2 P- Q4 P-Q4
K B4 P-R3 1 9 KR - B 1 \vith the bette r
3 N - Q 83 8-NS
game for Whi te .
4 P -K5 P -Q 84
5 P-QR3 8XNch 14 8-KN 5 PxP?
6 Px 8 N -K2
7 Q-N4 N -84 14 . . . QN -B3 is better .
8 8- Q3 P -K R4
9 Q -84 Q-R 5 15 pxp P-Q N3
10 N-K2 Qx Q 16 P-N4
11 Nx Q N -K2
12 8-K 2 Not 1 6 BxP N - 8 4 and 1 7 . . . N x P .

4'" !=! G>

'm � -X-
I -
a � m '®' ' 16
17 8PxP
PxPe . p .

i i
8-R3
� i /i 18 P-N4! Bx 8
i '/ ·�
'i. ;,
1, ;:;
19 Kx8 Q N - 83

i i E g� i
20 P-83 R-81
21 P-K R4 K-N 1
E � 22 K R -K 8 1 ! N -N3

E
23 R - 83 R - 82
24 Q R -K 8 1
E E E E� !
,"·'"

{>
B l ac k loses mai nl y because he can -
!J w �m
"

� � . not activate his badly pl aced KR .

12 P-R5 24 R -R2
25 K-82! N -R4
If 1 2 . . . P- KN3 then 1 3 px p IS 26 K-N3 N - Q 85

65
 27 P-R4 N·B1 40 K-RS etc.
28 R( 1 ) -B2 N-N3
29 N-B4 NxN 39 RxR RxBch
30 BxN R-R1 40 K-N4! R-B5
31 B-Bl N-R4 41 K-R5 Rx QP
32 B-Q2 N-B5
33 B-N5 N-R6 Or 4l . . . RxRP 42 R-K7.
34 B-B1
42 RxRP R-KB5
• � -- � --- fi

' '�. , �
43 R-K7 P-Q5
- �
'/. ''
�- · 44 P-N6ch !
�� �-�-���.sr� l w�
'l.

�
�. �
-� �- �
¥
�
�. . .�. B i
�
Not 44 RxKP ? P-N3ch 45 RxP
RxPch drawing .
- i W�@. . .� � ,%

� ��..�
� �t %
� W�@
.�
44
45 RxKP
K-N 1
K-Bl
- ���t�.�.
��,,�
� �
� it �/ ,

�
�- .
" �

�
� 46 K-N5 R-B6
- 11
- -

...� �

g�
If 46 . . . R-KS 47 K-BS RXRP 4S
/

�. RxP wins .

34 N-N8? 47 RxP Resigns

A grave error ; after 34 . . . N -BS GAME 16

White would have had to build up
pressure by 35 P-KRS followed by 36 White: Unzicker
R- KR2 and 37 P-NS . Black : Uhlmann

35 B-N2 K-R 2 Varna Olympiad 1962

36 RxP?
1 P-K4 P-K3
I t would be simpler to win the· 2 P-Q4 P-Q4
knight by 36 R-Q3 KR-Q B l 37 R­ 3 N-QB3 B -N5
QB2 followed by 38 R-B l . 4 P-K5 P-QB4
5 P-QR3 BxNch
36 KR-QB1 6 PxB N-K2
37 P-NS NxP 7 Q-N4 Q-B2
38 BxN RxR 8 B-Q3 pxp
9 N-K2 pxp
Or 38 . . . RxBch 39 K-N4 R( l )-B2 10 QxNP R-Nl

66
 11 Qx RP QN -B3 19 NxR
12 B-KB4?! B-Q2
13 0-0 0 -0 -0 The best reply, as 19 RPxR would
rob White of his only trump -c ard .
the passed K RP .
i!!JI ,�
.. - � --

Q -:-
i t � _t � t 19
20 P>< N
NxB
N -N3!
� . i 21 N-K2

:t � 2l . . . N -BS must be prevented .

21 Q-Q2
22 P-KR4 P-K4
23 P-R5 Q-N5
24 N-N3 N-B5
25 P-R6

14 Q - R5 P-Q 5 White banks everything on this

15 B-N3 B-K 1 ! pawn . After 25 RxP NxQP 26 R-K NS
Q - K 3 ! Black's p assed pawns c annot
A multi -purpose move , threat­ be cont ai ned .
eni ng . . . P -B4 and guardi ng the K BP
and Q P . 25 ... Nx NP

16 Q -B3 Risky , when 25 . . . Q-N3 26 QxQ

NxQ shoul d give Black a won endi ng .
The best defence is 1 6 B-K4 .
26 P- R7 Q-R6!
16 NXP ! 27 RxP??
17 Q - KB6 B -B3! !
18 KR -K 1 White should have pl ayed 27 Q­
BSch QxQ 28 NxQ when 28 . . . Nx R
1 8 BxN fail s to 1 8 . . . Rx Pch and produces an i nteresting situation in
19 . . . RxBPch etc . which Whi te is al lowed to queen his
p a\\'n . After 29 N- K7ch K-N 1 ! 30 N­
18 ... N 8 N -B 6ch 31 K-B l P-K4 ! ! (the
point : White cannot play 32 px p B-
F arced , but very strong , as Bl ack 's N4ch 33 K-N2 N- RSch and 34 . . . N-N3)
well posted bishop ensures him the 32 P- R8= Q px p 33 Q - R 7 P- Q 7 34
advantage . N -B 6 P-B 7! 35 QxQBP B-N4ch 36 K-

67
N2 N-K8ch , Black wins . 15 P-KR4? Black had the advantage
in Yanofsky-Uhlmann . White should
27 N-K6 pl ay 15 R-N4! with excellent pros ­
28 Resigns pects � but Black could earlier have
played 13 . . . NxBch .

GAME 17 11 NxP
12 B-KB4 QxP
White: Bronstein 13 NxN QxRch
Black : Uhlmann 14 B-B1 P- Q6?
'

Zagreb 1965 Better is 14 . . . R-B 1 15 B-NSch N­

B3 16 NxN B-Q2 with equality ; or
1 P-K4 P-K3 here 15 B-Q3 B-Q2 16 K-K2 N-B3 1 7
2 P-Q4 P-Q4 NxP ! RxN 1 8 Q-N8ch R-B 1 19 B­
3 N-QB3 B-NS N6ch K-K2 20 Q-N7ch K-Q3 21 B­
4 P-KS P-QB4 B4ch RxB 22 RxQ R-NS 23 Q-R6 N­
5 P-QR3 BxNch K4 24 B-Q3 RxP with equal chances .
6 PxB N-K2 But at the time this game was pl ayed ,
7 Q-N4 Q-B2 it was thought that 14 . . . R-B 1 15 B­
8 QxNP R-N l Q3 was good for White ( 1 6 . . . N -B3
9 QxRP pxp had not yet been discovered) and
10 K- Q1 N-Q2 Uhlmann ' s 14 . . . P-Q6 was intended
to improve on the older line . As the
course of this game shows , the sh arp
attacking positions that arise from
. . . P-Q6 offer the better chances to
White .

15 QxBPch K-Q l
16 Q-B6 PxPch
17 K-Q2 Q-QSch
18 B-Q3 K-Kl
19 K-K2 B-Q 2
20 B-K3 Q-N7
21 R-QBl R-QB 1
22 NxB! P-QS
11 N-B3!
Now Bronstein could have gained
After 1 1 R-QN 1 N-QB4 12 B-Q3 the advantage with the problem move
pxp 13 N-B3 B-Q 2! ? 14 B-KNS B-B 3 23 N-N8! ! or he coul d have tried 23

68
Qx KP P>< B 24 N -B6ch K - B l 25 N ­ GAM E 1 8
Q S ! \\'hen Bl ack's situation \\'Oul d
have been much more di fficult than White: Hansen
in the gam e . Bl ac k : Wi rt h

Correspon dence Game 1 973

1 P-K4 P-K3
2 P-Q 4 P-Q4
3 N - Q B3 B-N5
4 P-K5 N-K 2
5 P-Q R3 BxNch
1 6 P><B P-QB4
fl 7 Q · N4 Q-82
8
1
QxNP R-N 1
)llJ;
�
9 QxRP pxp

L _
g_ 10 K-Ql QN-83 !
11 N-83 pxp
12 N-N5 NxP
23 B-Q2 KxN RXN
13 P-84
24 B- N4 KR- K 1 P><R N (K4) -N3
14
25 B-NSch R-83 15 P-K R4! ?
26 K-Q2 N -Q 4
27 Q - 8 7ch R-K2 - --
/
-

28 B ( N4) x R Q -8 6ch
29 K-K2 P-Q6ch

Thi s saves Bl ack from losing the

exchange . I f 29 . . . NxB , 30 Bx Rch
and 3 1 Q - R 7 wi ns Bl ack 's m ost im -
portant passed pa\vn .

30 BxP NxB
31 Rx P Q - K 4ch
32 K- Q 1 Q - R 8ch
33 K-Q2 QxP
34 Rx R PxR
35 B-B4 Q-N 5ch 15 ... Q- N6?
36 K-Q3 Q-N 8ch
37 K-83 Q-Q B 8ch More solid was 1 5 . . . P- K4 1 6 P- RS
38 K-Q3 Q - Q N 8ch N - B 1 1 7 B - NSch N-B3 1 8 Q- N7 B­
39 Drawn NSch 19 K- K 1 0-0-0 20 BxN QxB

69
2 1 P-R6 P-QS 22 K-B2 (White lost 28 . . . BxB 29 KxB is equally hope­
after 22 QxBP? in Presson-Hurt , less , or 28 . . . B-R4 29 P-N4 .
Arkansas 1 969) with unclear
chances. 29 BXB PxB
30 R-B6 Resigns
16 P-RS N-BS
If 30 . . . R-KN 1 31 RXP !
This was the point of Black's pre­
vious move.
GAME 19
17 Q-R8ch K-Q2
18 B-NSch N�B3 White : R. Byme
Black : Uhlmann
The only move . 1 8 . . . K-Q3 (not
1 8 . . . K-B2 19 Q-KSch ! ) 19 Q-Q8ch
Monte Carlo 1968
K-B4 20 QxNch K-QS (not 20 . . . KxB
2 1 Q-N4ch winning the other black 1 P-K4 P-K3
knight) 2 1 Q-N4ch K-K4 22 BxNch 2 P-Q4 P-Q4
QxB 23 R-K 1 ch K-B4 24 R-K B 1 is
3 N-QB3 B-NS
obviously bad. 4 P-KS P-QB4
5 P-QR3 BxNch
19 B(B1 )xN QxB 6 P><B N -K2
20 QxP K-Q3 7 Q-N4 Q-B2
8 QxNP R-N1
There is no time for 20 . . . QxP 21 P­
9 QxRP pxp
R6!
10 N-K2 QN-B3
11 P-KB4 B-Q2
21 P-R6 P-K4
12 P-R3
22 Q-Q2 B-NSch
23 K-B1 QxQch
24 KXQ N-QS
25 R-R4 B-B4
26 R-KB1 B- N3
27 RXN! PXR
28 B-Q3

With the exchange sacrifice White

has rendered his opponent's central
pawns worthless and his own K-side
pawns very mighty.

28 •• . K-K4

70
 12 pxp with excellent pl ay ; or here 24 pxp
13 P- N4 Q-Q B4 v.rith unclear com pl ications .

This is the idea , counteri ng the 23

pressure down the K N -file , ad ­ 24 Rx8
m ittedly at the cost of some time .

13 0 -0-0
14 Q-Q3 P-Q S
15 R-Q N 1

Directed against . . . Q- N3 , but

Bl ack nov.' pro duces the surprising
sacri fice of a piece .

15

Based on the occupation of the

long light s qu ared diagonal and the
exploitation of White's \veak centre .
24 ... RxR?!

16 PxN 8-83!
A great pity , as Black would h ave
17 R-N 1 N-N3!
goo d winning chances with
18 8- 84 Nx8
24 . . . RxNch ! 25 K-Q l R-Q7ch 26 K­
19 NxN QxPch
Bl RxBPch 27 K - N l R -Q l ! 28
20 N-K2 R-Q4!
BxPch K- B2 29 B - K4 R-K7 etc ; or
here 25 K - B l RxBP 26 BxPch K- B 2
The point of the sa cri fi ce , 2 7 B -K4 R-Q l !
threatening 2 1 . . . B -N4 and thus
giving White no time to consoli date . 25 NxP pxp
26 K- Q 2 R-N 7
21 8-N2 8-N4 27 8-K4 P- 88=Qch
22 Q-K4 P-06! 28 Kx Q R -N 6
29 K-82 Rx RP
Thematic. 30 R -K81 R-N 2
31 R-84 K-N 1 ?
23 QxQ
The sin1ples t v.·ay t o draw was
A fter 23 Rx B Rx R 24 QxQ RxQ 25 3 l . . . P-B4! 32 px p R -Q B2! 33 R-B3
pxp comes 25 . . R -Q 1 26 B-K4 P- B7!
. pxp 34 BxBPch K-Q l 35 P-R4
thre a tening both . . . RxP and . . . P-B4 RxNch etc .

71
 32 B-Q3 R-R8
33 P-R4 R-R8
34 P-N5 R-R7ch
35 K-N3 K-B2?

It was essential to play 35 . . . P-R3

first , as Black is now lost .

36 N-N5ch K-Q2
37 NxP P-K4
38 R-QN4 P-N3
'

39 B-B5ch K-B2
40 R-QB4ch K-N2
41 N-N5 K-R3
14 Q-N3!
42 N-Q6 P-N4
K-R2 15 P-QR4
43 R-B6ch
44 NxNPch K-N2
45 R-B4 Resigns
15 Q-QN3 is possible, when after
15 . . . Q-B4 16 Q-QB3 Black m ust
probably accept a repetition of
moves . After 15 P-N3 R-QB1 16 Q­
GAME 20 N 3 N(B3) -Q5 Black has good play .

White: Bogdanovic 15 R-QBl

Black: Uhlmann 16 P-R5 Q-Q1
17 Q-Q3 P-R3!
Saraj evo 1963
In order to take the initiative on
1 P-K4 P-K3 the Q-side with . . . N-R2.
2 P-Q4 P-Q4
3 N-QB3 B-N5 18 R-R3 N-R2
4 P-K5 P-QB4 19 R-B3 B-N4
5 .P-QR3 BxNch 20 RxR QxR
6 PXB N-K2 21 Q-QB3 B-B5!
7 Q-N4 Q-B2 22 P-N3 N-N4
8 QxNP R-N 1 23 Q-N2 Q-B3
9 QxRP pxp
10 N-K2 QN-B3 All Black's pieces have reached
11 P-KB4 B-Q2 ideal posts , and 24 B-N2 now fails to
12 Q-Q3 pxp 24 . . . N -R5 25 R-N 1 NxBch 26 RxN P ­
13 QxBP N-84 Q5 when the black queen penetrates
14 B-Q2 decisively into White's position .

72
 24 R-N 1 R-R 1 ! 3 1 K- B 1 loses to 3 t . . . N-R7ch .
25 R-N2
27 ...
25 P-N4 loses t o 2S . . N-R S 2 6 R ­
.

N3 P-QS 27 K - B 2 N- K B 6 ! 28 RxN
The culmination of Black's
RxPch 29 K - N3 BxN ; or here 29 B ­
str ategy . 27 . . . N - K6 \\'O uld h ave been
N2 RxBch 3 0 KxR BxN 3 1 Q - N 3 P ­
a blunder in view of 28 N- N3 ! Q-N8
Q 6 , \\inning in both cases .
29 BxN PxB 30 R -N2 \\rinning the
queen .
25 P -Q 5
26 R-82 Q-R8!
28 PxN

A fter 28 RxR QxR 29 pxN Q- RSch

30 K- Q l Q-B7! wins .
i
28 RxR
29 KxR Q-R7ch
30 K-K 1

/ The re is no defence , as Black wins

after both 30 B -N 2 B -Q4 or 30 K- B3
B-Q4ch 3 1 K- N4 PxPch 32 K-NS Q­
R 2! followed by . . . Q-N 3ch and . . . Q ­
NS mate .

27 P-N4 30 Q - R Sch
31 K Q1
- Q - 87
There is no defence , as 27 Q -N4 32 8-K1 QxKB
fails to 27 . . . 8XN 28 Rx B P-Q6! 29 33 N -N3 Q-86ch
pxp N(B4) -QS or 29 R - B 2 N(B4)-QS 34 K-8 1 Q-K6ch
30 Q - BS NxPch 3 1 K-Q 1 RxP wins . 35 K- Q 1 N -B6ch
I f here 28 KxB Q- KSch 29 K - Q t 36 BxN Px8
N- K6ch 3 0 BxN N - B6ch wins , as 37 Q-N6 Q-Q 7 Mate
 Chapter 2

The Nimzovich (Winawer) Variation

with 6 N- K2 7 P-QR4
'
. . .

W·h ite: Williams

Black: Keene

British Championship 1 973

1 P-K4 P-K3
2 P-Q4 P- Q4
3 N-QB3 B-NS
4 P-KS P- QB4
5 P-· Q R3 BxNch
6 PxB N-K2
7 P-QR4

74
 The quiete r of the t\\'O pl ans at Whi te's di sposal . I ns tead of pl aying aggres ­
sively \\'ith hi s queen . Whi te pl ans the more pos itional approach of holdi ng fas t
in the centre and pl aying o n Black 's pos ition al \\'eak nesses and lack o f n1 ob ility .
The direct poi nt o f the text move is rn·o fold - i t n1 akes \\' ay for White ' s Q B to
occupy the QR3- K B 8 di agonal and it prevents Black from bl ockadi ng Whi te' s
Q - si de b y the m anoeuvre . . . B- Q 2 follo\\·ed by . . . B- R5 ( see , for example , the
conti nu ati on 7 N -B3 B-Q2 8 B-03 ? ! B - R5 n1entioned below ) . A lso , Black some­
times carries ou t a similar ma noeuvre with hi s queen ( . . . Q-R4 follov:ed by . . . Q­
R5 ) . Since White's P-Q R4 is virtu ally oblig atory in the position al lines , he plays
this move at once to retai n as many op tions as possible for hi s mi nor pieces .
7 N - 83 8-Q2 8 P-Q R 4 tra ns poses back to the tex t , bu t if Whi te meets 7 . . . B-
0 2 \\'ith 8 8-Q3?! he is soon in trouble after 8 . . . 8- RS! \\'hic h blockades the Q R P
and exerts perma nent pressu re on the back\\·ard Q B P . e. g. 9 0-0 Q- B2 1 0 R - K 1
P- K R3 1 1 R -N 1 N -Q 2 1 2 P- B4 0-0 13 PxQ P NxQ P 1 4 BxP? ! and Black
m an aged to defen d ag ainst the attack in Westerinen-U hlm ann , H alle 1 963 ; or 9
R- Q N 1 Q - B 2 10 0-0 P-B5 1 1 B- K 2 QN-B3 1 2 N - 0 2 0-0-0 with good pl ay for
Black . K okkori s - U hlm ann , Varna Olyn1piad 19 62 .
A f ter 7 N-B3 Black has fou r alterna tive possibi lities to 7 . . . B-Q 2.

(a ) 7 . . . Q - R4 8 8-Q2 Probably the strongest reply , as unclear pos itions arise

after 8 Q - 0 2 P- QN3 ! ? e . g . 9 P-B4 Q- R5! 10 PxQ P KPxP 1 1 P-B4 ? ! P>< BP 1 2
pxp QN -B3 1 3 pxp 0-0 1 4 B- K 2 P><P 1 5 0-0 B-B4 and Black stood better in
Estrin-K hasin , Corresponde nce Game 1 97 1 . H O\\'ever , Whi te could have tried 9
px p P>< P 1 0 P - 84 ! 8 . . . Q-RS A fter 8 . . . P- B5 9 P-QR4 N -Q 2 10 N -N5 P- K R3 1 1
N - R3 N -QN3 ( 1 1 . . . N - KN3 1 2 B-R5 is u npleasant for Bl ac k) 1 2 N - B4 P-N3 1 3 P­
R4 B-02 1 4 P- R5 P-N4 15 N - K 2 0-0-0 1 6 P-N4 Q R -N l 1 7 B- R3 NxP 18 P-B4
pxp 19 0-0 Whi te also has a good ga me . Brons tei n-Sai gin , M oscow 1 945 . I n
the game Ivkov- Bro derm an , Havana 1 963 , this blockading idea proved too great
a loss of ti me : 9 px p N -Q 2 10 N -Q4 P-QR3 11 Q -N 4 N -84 12 Q -84 P-KN4 13
QxP NxN 14 P><N QxQP IS R -Q 1 QxKPch 16 Qx Q NxQ 17 8-83 P-83 18 P-84
N - Q2 1 9 P-85! \vith the better en ding .

(b) 7 . . . Q - B2 8 P-QR4 I f 8 B-03 P-Q N3 9 P-Q R4 B - R 3 10 P-R5 ( 1 0 B-QN5ch

Bx B 1 1 P><B P-Q R4 is also equal) 1 0 . . . Bx B 1 1 P><N P PxN P 1 2 RxR B- R3 13 Rx B
NxR 1 4 Q-03 N -Q N 1 \\rith equal cha nces . U nzicker-Petros ian 1 965 ; or 8 B - K 2
B-02! 9 P -Q R4! Q N - B3 10 0-0 P- 83 1 1 R - K 1 (i f 1 1 B - R3 P>< K P 1 2 BxP P- KS
1 3 N - N5 P - K R3 14 N - R3 0-0 ; or 1 1 K PxP NPxP 1 2 px p 0-0-0 \\'ith unclear
pos itions in both cases) 1 1 . . . P><KP 1 2 P>< K P 0-0 13 B-03 \\'ith equa lity .
A fter 8 P-Q R4 we have trans posed back to the n1ain line .
(c) 7 P-QN3 8 B- QNSch B-Q2 9 P- QR4 Q-B2 10 B- Q3 Again we have trans­
. . .

posed to the m ain line .

(d) 7 QN-B3 8 P-QR4 After 8 B-Q3 Q-R4 9 0-0 (9 B-Q2 P-B5 10 B-K2 Q-R5
. . .

is unclear; or Black c an refrain from 1 0 . . . Q-R5 and continue 1 0 . . . B-Q2 1 1 0-0

0-0-0 12 R-Kl P-B3 13 B- K B l QR-N l 14 P-N3 P-B4 15 P-QR4 N -Q 1 16 Q-B l
P-KR3 17 Q-R3 N( K2)-B3 1 8 KR-N l P-KN4 with chances for both sides .
Damjanovic-Gligoric , Porec 1974 . ) 9 . . . P-B5! (not at once 9 . . . QxBP 10 B-Q2 Q­
N7 1 1 R-N l QxRP 12 R-N3 Q-R7 13 Q-B l P-B5 14 R-R3 winning the queen) 10
B- K2 QxBP 1 1 B -Q 2 Q -N7 12 R-Nl QxRP 13 R -R 1 White has only a draw .
Better is 8 B-K2 Q-R4 9 Q-0 P-B5 1 0 B-Q2 Q-R5 (for 1 0 . . . B-Q2 see Szekely­
Toth, Hungarian Correspondence Champions hip 197 1 / 2 . I llus trative game 21 )
1 1 N-N5 B-Q2 with chances for both sides , or here 8 . . . B-Q2 9 P-Q R4 P-B3 10
KP><P P><BP 1 1 P><P Q- R4 12 Q-Q2 QxP( B4) 13 B-R3 Q-R4 14 P-B4 and White
stands better. 8 Q-B2 8 . . . Q-R4 transposes to the section on 7 . . . QN-B3 in the
. . .

notes to the main line . 8 . . . B-Q2 transposes to Fischer-Larsen , 1 st M atch Game

1 97 1 (illustrative game 22) . 9 B-K2 If 9 Q-Q2 P-B3 10 Kpxp P><BP 1 1 B-K2 P­
B5 12 Q-R6 (if 12 0-0 N-B4 1 3 P-N4 R- KN 1 ! but Keres suggests 12 N-R4 with a
slight plus for White) 12 . . . N -N3 13 N-R4 R-KN l 14 B-RS Q-N2 with equality .
Smyslov-Bondarevsky , 1947; or 9 B-Q3 pxp 10 0-0 (not 10 P><P NxQP 1 1 NxN
Q-B6ch etc . ) lO . . . P><P 1 1 R-K 1 N-N3 12 BxN RP><B ? (better is 1 2 . . . BP><B 1 3 B­
R3 N-K2 with an unclear position) 13 B-R3 N-K2 14 N ·Q4 B-Q2 15 R-K3 and
White has a strong attack . Vasyukov-Brenstadt , 1957 . 9 B-Q2 10 0 - 0
. . .

lO P-83 I f 10 . . . P- KR3 1 1 B-R3 P-QN3 12 P>< P pxp 1 3 BxP NxP 14 NxN QxB
. . .

15 NxB KxN 16 B -N5ch K-B2 1 7 Q-RS P-N3 18 Q - K5ch with good play for
White . Smyslov -Botvinnik, USSR 1943 ; or 10 . . . N -R4 1 1 R-K l pxp (better

76
1 1 . . . P-Q N3) 1 2 P>< P N - BS 13 B-03 P- K R3 14 N -Q 2 with advant age to Whi te .
Fischer-S ch\\·eber , Buenos A ires 1 970; or 1 0 . . . P - B4 1 1 B-R3 P-QBS 1 2 N - R 4 0-
0 13 P- B4 ! \vith advantage to Whi te . 1 1 KPxP P>< BP 12 P-B4! 0-0-0 1 3 8-R3
N - 84 1 4 BxP pxp 15 Bx8P N ( B3)xP 1 6 B><N QxB 1 7 B>< BP B- 83 1 8 N -KS! Rx Q
1 9 NxQ RxR ( B8) ch 20 KxR R - B 1 21 B -K S B -Q 4 22 N -Q 6ch \\'i th the better
ending for Whi te . Gufeld-Bagi rov , Leni ngrad 1960 .
Let us no\\' return the position after 7 P-Q R4 .

7 Q - B2

7 . . . Q N - 83 8 N - B3 Q - 82 Tra nsposes back to note (d) above , bu t instead of

8 . . . Q-B2 B l ack can try 8 . . . Q -R4 pu tting direct pressure on Whi te ' s pa\\'n at
Q B3 and threa teni ng (though i t is rarely good to execu te the threa t) to win
Whi te 's Q R P by . . . B-Q2 follo\\red even tually by moving aw ay the QB3 kni ght .
F or 8 . . . Q - R4 see Chapter 3 .

8 N-B3

This pos ition often arises frotn the al terna tive n1ove order 6 . . . Q-B2 7 N-B3 N ­
K 2 8 P-Q R4 .

8 P-QN3

The idea of thi s n1ove is to ex change off Bl ack 's tradi tion a l ly bad bi shop by
. . . 8 - R3 .
D uri ng the past fe\\' years this i dea h as becon1 e a pop ul ar \\' ay for Bl ack to
hand l e White ' s posi tion al sys ten1 . but the ol der 8 . . . QN- 83 is also \\'orthy of
cons idera tion .

77
 �
�

White now has several plausible continuations :

( 1 ) 9 B-R3 pxp Weaker is 9 . . . P-QN3 ? ! 10 B-Q3! P-KR3 1 1 0-0 P- BS 1 2 B-K2

B-N2! ? 13 R-K1 0-0-0 14 B-KB 1 Q-Q2 15 P-N3 QR- K 1 16 N-R4 with advan­
tage to White because of his active K-side pl ay . Mecking-Bronstein , Petropolis
I nterzonal 1973 . 10 PxP Q-R4ch 11 Q-Q2 QxQch 12 KxQ N-B4 13 B-N2 with a
slight endgame advantage to White .

(2) 9 Q-Q2 Transposes to note d , page 76 (subnote to White's 9th move) .

(3) 9 B-K2 Transposes to the main part of note d , page 76 .

(4) 9 B- Q3 Transposes to Fischer-Larsen , illustrative game 22 .

9 B- QN5ch!

Virtually forcing Black to interpose with the bishop , and thereby preventing
the exchanging manoeuvre . . . B-R3 .
The game Bertok-Geller, Zagreb 1955 continued 9 B-Q3 B-R3 10 0-0 BxB 1 1
PxB N-Q2 1 2 B-R3 0-0 with equal chances .
An alternative worth testing is 9 P-RS B- R3 10 BxB NxB 1 1 0-0 0-0 (maybe
better is 1 1 . . . P-R3) 12 N-N5 with the initiative . But instead of 9 . . . B-R3 Black
may be able to capture the RP: 9 . . . PxRP 10 B-Q3 B-R3 1 1 0-0 BxB 12 QxB N­
Q2 1 3 B-R3 P- KR3 1 4 N-Q2 0-0 15 P-QB4 KR- K l and Black might be able to
hang on to the pawn . Scholl-Markland , Holland-England Match 1971 .

9 • • • B- Q2

78
 A fter 9 . . . QN-B3 Black cannot excha nge the light squared bishops by . . . B- R3 .
v;hile 9 . . . KN -B3 1 0 0-0 B - R3 1 1 N-NS P-R3 1 2 N -R3 is good for White who \\'ill
continue hi s attack \\'ith Q-N4 and N - B4 - RS .

10 B- Q3

If 10 0-0 Bx B 1 1 P><B P-Q R4 1 2 N-NS (or 12 P>< BP P><P 13 P- B4 pxp 14 Q-K2

N-Q2 \\'ith equality . Nezhmetdinov- K atal imov . U S SR 1 959 ) 12 . . . P-R3 1 3 N - R3
N-Q2 14 N-B4 0-0 15 N - RS K - R 1 1 6 Q-N4 R - K N 1 the pos ition is approx i ­
mately even . Ivkov- R . Byrne . Sousse I nterzonal 1 9 67 .

10 QN-B3
11 0 -0 P-KR3

Naturally 1 1 . . 0-0? ? wou ld lose quickly to 12 BxPch KxB 13 N-NSch and the
.

standard mating attack .

The alternative 1 1 . . . P-BS is ex am ined in Fischer-Darga , Berlin 1 960 (illus­
trative game 23 ) . and Bannik-Tal , 25 th U S S R Championship 1 958 (illustrative
game 24) .
The text i s Krogi us ' move , first pl ayed ag ainst G ufeld i n 1 967. I t prevents N­
NS and therefore prepares . . . 0-0.

12 B-R3

1 2 R - K l is more popular bu t not ne cessari ly stronge r . The move \\'as used by

Robert Byrne . M ec ki ng an d Karpov to good effect ag ainst M arkl an d at

79
Hastings 197 1 / 2 . The British Master lost all three games (and another to
H artston who played 1 2 B-R3) and since then the British players h ave discovered
new resources for Black . Let us look at some of these examples :

( 1 ) 12 N-R4 1 3 Q -Q2 13 B-R3 0-0 transposes to Hartston-Portisch , Nice

. . .

Olympiad 1974 (illustrative game 26) 13 R-QB1 Weaker is 1 3 . . . 0-0? ! 14

. . .

Q-B4 P-B4 ? ! 15 PxPe . p . QxQ 16 BxQ RxP 17 B-K5 R-B2 18 PxP PxP 19 B-B7!
N(R4)- B3 20 P-B4! with a clear advantage for White . Mecking -M arkland ,
H astings 1971 / 2 . 14 P-KR4 The immedi ate 14 Q-B4 is satisfactory for Black
after 14 . . . P-B4 15 PxPe . p . Qx Q 16 BxQ PxBP ; or 15 Q-N3 K-B2 followed by
. . . QR-KN 1 . Analysis by K�rpov . 14 0-0 We are following Karpov-Markland ,
. . .

Hastings 1971 /2 (illustrative game 25) .

(2) 1 2 . . . 0-0 see Hartston-Portisch, Nice Olympiad 1974 (illustrative game

26) .

12 ••• N-R4

The only reasonable way to deal with the problem of the attacked QBP .

13 N-Q2!

13 R-K 1 0-0 transposes to Hartston -Portisch .

13 ••• 0-0

Not 1 3 . . . B><P? 14 PxP , threatening 15 Q-N4.

14 PxP pxp
15 N-N3 NxN

15 . . . N (R4)- B3 1 6 BxP QxP 17 N-Q4! was successful for White in Hartston ­

M arkland , H astings 1 971 /2: 1 7 . . . KR-Q 1 ? (Better is H artston 's suggestion of
17 . . . Q-B2 though after 18 P- KB4 Q-R4 19 B-R3 KR-Q 1 20 R-B3 White has a
firm grip on the position) 1 8 N-N5! B-K1 1 9 P-KB4 Q-B3 20 Q-K1 R-Q2 2 1 N ­
Q4! with a substantial advantage for White .

16 PxN KR-Bl

This move prepares for . . . P- B5 but it has the disadvantage that it weakens
Black's K-side . However, the suggested improvement 16 . . . P- B3 17 PxP RxP

80
seem s to f a il t o Keene ' s strong in nov ation 18 P- QN4 ! , \\'hen Black has a bad
game \\' hether or n o t he exch anges pa\\'ns .

17 R- K 1 N-N3
18 B-QB1 !

I n t e n di n g 1 9 Q - K 2 .

18

Th i s \\' i l l cr e a te \\'ea knesses along t he K - fi le . Bl ack is impatient and does not

\\ a n t t o ,,· ai t u n t i l W h i t e s t r e n g t h e n s h i s po s i t 1 o n \\'i t h 1 9 Q - K 2 B u t 1 8
' . . . . QR-N 1
\\· a s p l ay a b l e . c re a t i n g s o n1 e p r es s u re a l o n g t h Q N - fi l e .

19 B - K B4 P - B3
20 R - K3 ! B-Kl
21 Q - K2 Q R- N 1
22 B - 82 P - BS

S hort o f ac t i o n . B l a c k \v ea k e n s the d a rk s q u a res i n the cen tre even more ,

c o u n ti n g o n t h e t ac t i c a l b r ea k . . . P - QS .

23 P - Q N4 R-Q1
24 Rx N Px R
25 Bx i( P Q - Q2
26 Bx R Rx B
27 Q - KS R-Q1
28 Q - Q4

Fr e e i n g t h e KS s q u a re for the r o ok . 2 8 R - Q l \\'O u l d r eg r o u p Wh ite's p i e c es

l e s s e f fe c t i \·e l \' . ve t i t \Y a S t h e tn o re ca u t i o u s c h o i ce .

28 Q- QB2 ?

M i s s i n g t h e o n l y a c t i ve ch a n c e : 28 . . . P - K 4 29 Q x K P P - Q5 JO px p QxQ P 3 1
Q x Q R x Q b e c a use h e ,,·a s a fr a i d o f 3 2 R - 0 1 \\· h e n Wh i t e h as son1 c \\' i n n i n g
cha nces i n t he en d ga n1e ( 3 2..__
. . . 1� x R c h JJ B x H B - N J 34 K - B l P - 8 6 35 B - N 3c h !
and 36 K - K 2 ) .

81
 29 R-K1 B- B2
30 P-RS! R-K1
31 P-B4

Blac k has a bad bishop , worthl ess bloc ked central pawns and he i s doomed to
passivi ty .

31 ... P- R3
32 R-KS R-K2
33 K-B2

Whi te controls the whole board and he may activate his king as well .

33 • • • Q-Q1
34 B- Ql R-K1
35 P-N3 B-N3
36 B-N4 Q - B3
37 P-R4! K-R2
38 P-RS B- B2
39 K- N2 P-N3?

A m istake i n a bad position on the eve of the time control .

40 RxQP QxQ
41 RxQ P-K4
42 R- Q7 K-N1
43 P><NP Resigns

82
 G A M E 21 P - R 4? 0-0-0 14 Q - B 1 P-B 3 Bl ac k
had the advantage o n the K-side , but
White: Szekely in the 3rd European Correspondence
Black : Toth Championship Thiele imp roved on
the variation : in a simil ar position
H ungarian Correspondence against Cvachonceh he pl ayed 13 B­
Championship 1 97 1 / 2 R S (instead o f 1 3 P-R4) and after
1 3 . . . QN - K 2 14 Q-N 1 he had a goo d
Notes by Toth g ame . Under the infl uence of this
g ame I deci ded to play the following
I P-K4 P-K3 paradoxical move .
2 P-Q4 P-Q4
3 N - Q B3 B-N5 11 P - B3!
4 P-K5 N -K2
5 P-Q R3 BxNch "I am wea kening the K-side so
6 Px B P-Q B4 th at my opponent does n ot weaken
7 N -B3 QN -B3 it " ; this move is dynamic , attacking
8 B-K 2 Q -R4 and tactically soun d .
9 B-Q 2 B-Q2
10 0-0 P-B5 12 pxp pxp
13 B- R5ch N-N3
14 N - R3 0 -0 -0

With thi s move Black finishes his

development . The open KN -file and
a preponderance in the centre gives
Bl ack prospects of breaking through
on K4 . For this reason 1 2 pxp is
questionable , but not a decisive
m istake . The correct treatment of
simil ar positions c an be fou nd , for
example , in the strategic pl ay of the
first gan1e of the Fi scher- Larsen
match (p age 85) , giving up the KP to
open up the position .
11 N -N 5!
15 Q - B3? P-K4
The only possibility of weakening 16 K R-Q 1
Bl ack's K -si de . Th at is why this is a
typical move in thi s vari ation . I n a If 1 6 QxBP pxp 1 7 Q-B3 N ( N3)­
game Bakuli n - Khasi n , U SS R 1 966 , K4 1 8 Q-0 1 px p 1 9 B-B4 P-QS and
after 1 1 . . . P- K R 3 1 2 N -R3 N -N 3 1 3 Bl ack \\i ns .

83
 16 QR-B 1 23 B-N7 QxQ
17 B-R6? 24 BxQ N-B5!
25 BxR RxB
An awkward pl ace for the bishop . 26 B-B7 N -K2
1 7 K-R l woul d have been better . 27 R-N7 P-KR4!

17 N-R5! My previous move prevented the

18 Q-K3 R(B1 ) - N 1 exchange of rooks - I need mine to
19 K- R1 create mating threats . My 27th move
in retrospect looks a simple one , but
This , though perhaps not the most I had to see it as early as the 17th
attractive , gives the best hope of move in the midst of hair-raising
defence . If here 19 P-N4? either complications , and it was for this tac ­
. . B><P or . . . N -B4 wins a pawn . A
. tically quiet move that I rejected
grotesque picture : every square on 19 . . . PxP, which gains more
the K R -file is occupied . material .

28 QR-KN 1 B-N5
29 R-N3 N -K7
30 R (N7)xB P><R

White's courageous resistance is

hopeless now , because he cannot stop
the bl ack king's intrusion into the
pawn phalanx .

31 B-K6ch K-B2
32 R-K3 N-B5
33 BxNP N (K2) -N3
34 P-B3 pxp
19 NxNP 35 RxP R-K 1
36 R-N3 K-N3
This is not j ust a way of winning , 37 B-BS R-K8ch
but the beginning of a precisely 38 R-N1 RxRch
calculated combination . See the note 39 KxR K-R4
after move 27 . 40 K-B2 K-R5
41 BxN NxB
20 Q-B3 P-K5 42 K-N3 KxP
21 QxBP BxN 43 K-N4 K-N 7
22 R-KN 1 Q-Q 1 ! 44 K-N5 N -R 1
45 K-86 P-R4
I f 2 2 . . . QxBP? 2 3 B-N7! 46 Resigns

84
 GA M E 22 r� \�
�2
iy··
r: �-
t=:=!
'=::,

White: Fischer
i i ·�· �
C3 i 11
.....:x,_

� ·/ i - �
Black : Larsen

1 st M a tch Gan1e 1 9 7 1 i �w� � �%

Notes by Khol mov

fl
<}.e.
i E
fl (� �

I P-K4 P - K3 fl . -! ,.. fl fl E
2
3
P -Q 4
N -Q B3
P-Q4
B-N5 L
12! wm _____J

4 P-K5 N -K 2 A risky decision . Larsen is one of

5 P - Q R3 BxNch those players \\rho happily accepts a
6 P><B P - Q B4 challenge . The m aj ority of Grand­
7 P-Q R4 Q N- 83 masters would have castled lon g or as
8 N -83 B-Q2 an e xtreme meas ure played 1 3 . . . K­
9 B-Q 3 Q-82 B2 .
10 0-0 P-85
11 B-K 2 P-83 14 px p N ( B3)xP
12 R -K l ! 15 NxN NxN

Fisc her develops his rook in pre­ A gainst 15 . . . QxN there is the
p aration for an interesting p awn strong reply 1 6 BxP Qx BP 1 7 BxP
sac ri fice . 0-0-0 1 8 R- K3 , and as in the other
case Black' s king feels discomfort .
12 N-N3
16 Q-Q4 N-N3

Black n1 ista ken ly th in ks th at this

It is hard to fin d anything safe r to
n1ove forces Whi te to take on B6 .
recommen d . 1 6 . . . N - B3 fails to 1 7 B-
1 2 . . . 0-0 1 3 B - R 3 R -B2 1 4 pxp pxp
R5ch ! Nor is 16 . . . 0-0-0 su fficient
\\'as be tter, and if 1 5 N- R4 then
on accoun t of 1 7 Qx RP N-B3 18 Q­
15 . . . N-N3 1 6 B - R5 R -N2 ! with
R 8ch Q - N 1 1 9 QxQch KxQ 20 B­
chances for both si des .
Q6ch K - R 2 21 P- B4 .
[ A fter 1 2 . . . 0-0 1 3 B-R3 R - B 2 ,
White should con tinue 1 4 B - Q 6 ,,·ith
17 B-R5!
s i rnilar play as in Bann ik-Tal ,
ill u s tr a tive ga me 24 - Gligoric . ] Fisc her increases the pressure
\\� ithou t \\'a sting ti n1e cap turing on
13 B-R3! N7 .

85
 17 ... K-B2 21 B-8 3

If 1 7 . . . 0-0-0 White does not win It becomes clear that this is not the
back the pawn (18 QXRP P-N3 19 Q­ strongest continuation ; both 2 1 B-Q6
R8ch Q-N1 20 QXQch KxQ 21 B­ and 21 P-N4! deserve consideration .
Q6ch K-N2 22 KR-N 1 K- B3) , but After 21 B-Q6, 2 1 . . . Q-B3 fails
continues 18 P-RS! , after which to 22 Q-Q4ch K-B2 23 B-B3
Black's king has fallen out of the fry­ Q-N3 24 B-QSch B- K3 25 B-BS
ing pan into the fire . On 1 8 . . . K-N1 Q- Q1 (if 25 . . . Q-R3 then 26
there would follow 19 B-BS and the BxBch RxB 27 Q-Q7ch) 26 RxB RxR
pawn cannot be defended. The same
'
27 BXRch KxB 28 R-K1 ch K-B2 29
move is also unpleasant after 1 8 . . . P- QxBPch K-B3 30 Q-K6ch K-N4 3 1
QR3. It is true that in this case Black B-K3ch P-B5 3 2 BxBPch! KxB 3 3 R­
could go into an opposite-coloured­ KB1 ch K-N4 34 R-BSch K-R3 35 Q­
bishop ending a pawn down: 19 . . . P­ K3ch N-BS 36 QxNch P-KN4 37 R­
K4 ! 20 QXQP N-BS 21 QxKP QxQ B6ch K-N2 38 QxPch K-R1 39 Q­
22 RxQ NxB 23 RxN. Possibily KS ! etc.
1 7 . . . 0- 0-0 was the best chance for Nor is it any use to play 23 . . . Q-B 1
Black. (instead of 23 . . . Q-N3) because of 24
B-QSch B-K3 25 RxB ! RxR 26 R-K 1
18 P-B4 KR-K l and Black ' s position is b ad . 23 . . . Q ­
19 P-BS px p R 3 fails to 24 B-Q5ch B-K3 25
20 QxQPch K-B3 RxB RxR 26 BxRch KxB 27 R­
K1ch K-B 2 28 Q-QSch K-B3 29 R­
If 20 . . . B-K3 then 21 RxB RxR 22 K6ch.
QxKBPch R-B3 23 Q-QSch R-K3 24 An attempt by the black king to
R-KB1ch and White wins . slip off to R3 also leads to a fiasco :
22 . . . K-N4 (instead of 22 . . . K-B2) 23
B-B3 Q-N3 24 B-B5 Q-B2 25 P- R4ch
K- R3 26 Q-Q2ch P-BS 27 B-Q6 Q­
N3ch 28 K- R2 NxP 29 QxPch K-N3
(29. . . P-N4 30 Q-B6ch N-N3 31 K­
N3 ! ) 30 Q-N3ch K-B2 31 B-Q5ch B-
K3 32 Q-B4ch etc.
The best move appears to be
2 1 . . . Q-Q 1 (instead of 21 . . . Q-B3) ,
but even then after 22 QR-Nl or 2 2
P-N4 Black still has the hardest part
of the game ahead of him .
2 1 P-N4! is still more energetic for
White . Then , in view of the threats of

86
22 R- KB l , 22 B-Q6 and 22 Q - Q4ch 22 Q-Q4 K-N3
K -B2 23 pxp BxP 24 R-KB l , it is 23 RxN QxR
hard for Black to escape defeat . For
example , 2l . . . Q-B3 22 Q-Q4ch K ­ Of course not 23 . . . RxR because of
N4 (22 . . . K - B 2 23 pxp BxP 24 R ­ 24 B-Q 6 !
K B l ! ) 2 3 P- R4c h ! (23 B- B l ch ? P-BS
24 BxPch NxB 25 R -KSch RxR 26 24 QxB QR-Q I
QxRch K -R3! 27 QxNch P-K N4
leads to very unclea r play ) 23 . . . KxRP Larsen put all his hopes in this
24 BxN QxB 25 B- K 7ch RxB 26 RxR position , and indeed White's back
and White wins . There is no rank is so weak that Black ' s threats
salvation in 24 . . . pxB because of 25 look very strong .
B - K 7ch P-KN4 26 pxpch K - R4 27
25 QxQNP
QxNP R - K N l 28 Q-R7ch K-NS 29
QR-Q l R-R l 30 R -Q4ch K-B6 3 1
Wt � \.W
§ §
BxP !

21 N-K4!
/.

Larsen finds the best practical

chance ! O ther continuations \vere
weaker. For example, 2 l . . . B - K3 22
Q -Q4ch K-B2 23 QR-N l ! (after 23
RxB ? RxR 24 B -QS N -BS 25 R-K l
QR- Q l Bl ack h as nothing to fear)
23 . . . QR-Q l 24 QxRP ! B-B l 25 RxR
KxR 26 Q-BS ! QxQ 27 BxQ R-Q 2 28
P- RS an d Black' s position is dif­
ficult . If B l ack plays 23 . . . K R-Q l 25 Q-K6ch
instead o f 2 3 . . . QR-Q l then White
wins by 24 Q- K 3 B - B l 25 RxP ! M any com mentators deprecated
The attempt to simplify the this move believing that Lars,e n could
position \\'Oul d also be un successful have achieved equality by play ing
after 21 . . . RxRch 22 RxR R-K l 23 Q ­ 25 . . . QxB P . I . Zai tsev wrote in
Q4ch K-B2 24 R -N l ! (after 2 4 RxR " Shakhm atn aya Mos kva" that after
KxR 25 QxNP Q-N3ch ! 26 K- B l Q­ 26 Q - N l R-K4! (a suggestion of
N8ch 27 K-B2 Qx Pch 28 B - K 2 B-K3 M urei) B lack's counterp l ay is suf­
29 Qx RP B-B2! the p osition is fi cient . I n confi rm ation he adduced
extre mely unclear) 24 . . . P-N3 25 P­ the following vari ation s : 27 B-N2 Q­
RS, an d it is very h ard for Black to K6ch 28 K - R l R-QN l and 27 B-QN4
meet the in1pending attack . Q -QSch 28 K-Rl P- B6. The first of

87
these is unquestionable but the not be countered) 29 P-N4ch! pxp
second raises some doubts. Black is e. p. 30 K-N2 Q-Q5! 31 KxP QxR .
threatening 29 . . . R-QN 1 and there­ Now the black queen has a check on
fore 29 Q -N3 suggests itself in order KN8 as soon as White's bishop leaves
to meet 29 . . . R-Q N 1 with 30 BxP ! the b ack rank ; nor can White mate
However 29 Q-N3 i s refuted decis­ the enemy king without a quiet move .
ively by 29 . . . Q-Q8ch! with a win For example, 32 B-N4ch K-K4 33 Q­
for Black ! White must therefore play B5ch K-B3 34 Q -B2ch K-K4 35 Q­
29 B-R3 but then after 29 . . . Q-Q7 ! K 1 ch K-Q5 and White has nothing
Black's position is fine. better than perpetual check .
Alatortsev, however, in tpe weekly
newspaper ' '64 " , disagreed with this 26 K-Bl R-Q7
assessment. He did n ot notice the
move 26 . . . R-K4! and gave 26 . . . R-Q7 Larsen was counting on this tempt­
27 B-QN4 Q- K6ch 28 K-R1 R-B7 29 ing counter- attack , but bitter dis­
Q-Q1 ! etc. However, instead of illusionment awaits him .
27 . . . Q-K6ch , 27 . . . Q-Q5ch 28 K-R1
RxBP! is not bad . It is true that in 27 Q-B6ch R-K3
this case 29 B-B5! is unpleasant; but 28 B-BS! R-B7ch
it is unclear which is the stro nger, 29 K-Nl RxNPdbl eh
White's QRP or Black's QBP . 30 KxR Q-Q7ch
Black's twenty-eighth move . . . R­ 31 K-Rl RX Q
B7 is also dubious ; instead , the 32 B><R QxP (B6)
energetic continuation 28 . . . P- B6 29 33 R-KNlch K-B3
P-R3 Q-Q5 30 Q-N3 R-K6 gives 34 BxP
Black the initiative.
In judging the move 26 Q-B6ch
Zaitsev concludes that Black can The passed QRP plays a decisive
draw with precise play . His analysis role in this ending . Black cannot
runs: 26 Q-B6ch K-N4 27 B-B 1 ch P­ hold it in the presence of the two
B5 . (Here 27 . . . K-R5 fails against 28 strong bishops. A point of particular
P-N3ch K-R6 29 B- KN2ch K-N5 30 importance is the fact that they pre­
P-R3ch KxNP 31 Q-B7ch [ but not 3 1 vent the approach of the black king
R-R3 R-K8ch 32 B-B 1 RxB ( KB8)ch
33 KxR R-Q8ch 34 K-K2 R-K8 34 ... P-BS
m ate] 3l . . . Q- K4 32 QXQch RxQ 33
B-N5 ! R-QB 1 34 R-K B 1 and there is 34 . . . P-N4 is hardly any better , for
no satisfactory defence against the then White can ensure the advance of
threat of m ate. ) 28 P- R4ch K-B4! (if his pawn by means of 35 B-N6 P-N5
28 . . . KxP then 29 K-R2! QxR 30 BxP 36 P-R5 Q-N7 37 B-Q8ch K-N3 38
and the threat of 31 P-N3 mate can - P-R6.

88
 35 B-N6 QxP
36 P-R5 Q - Q N7 !! �
ttli
i
-·

37 B-Q 8ch K - K3
38 P-R6 Q - R6
39 8-N7 Q-B4?
I
Bl ack could h ave o ffered n1ore I�
stubborn resi stan ce by pl aying
39 . . . Q-N7 ! 40 R- K 1 ch K-Q3 41 B­
N5 , and White wins the K8P,
deferring the advance of h is own
0
Q R P . A n d if 39 . . . P-Q B6 ? White \\'ins a
by 40 8-N6 P-8 7 41 P-R7 P-B8=Q
42 Rx Q ! QxRch 43 B-N 1 .
12 ... P-83

40 R-Q N 1 P-QB6 The al tern ative ts 1 2 . . . P-B4

41 8-N6 Resigns obta ining some sp ace, avoiding
p roble ms along the K-file an d hop ing
On 41 . . . P- B7 there follo\vs 42 R­ a little for a K - si de paw n storm . But
K l ch . that move has the disadvantage th�t
Whi te's Q 8 could be even s afer and
G A M E 23 m ightier on the QR3-KB8 diagonal in
a blocked position .
White: Fischer 1 2 . . . 0-0-0 h as al so been tried ,
Black : Darga but after 1 3 N -N5 (less promisi ng is
1 3 B- R3 N - B4 1 4 P-N4 ! ? N - R3 15 B­
US A - West Germ any M atch Q6 Q-N2 [he re it is an adva n tage for
Berl in 1 960 Black to have played . . . P -QN3 ,
which provides a bol thole for the
1 P-K4 P-K 3 quee n , thus avoi ding White' s
2 P-Q4 P-Q4 standard attack that results from B ­
3 N -Q B3 8-N5 Q6 , . . . Q - R 4 ; K R-N 1 - N5] 1 6 N-R4 P ­
4 P-K5 P-Q 84 B3 a n d 1 7 . . . N-82) 1 3 . . . Q R- B 1 1 4 B ­
5 P-Q R3 8xNch N 4 P- K R3 1 5 N-R3 P-84 16 pxp e . p .
6 px 8 N-K 2 RxP 1 7 P - 84 N -84 1 8 N -B 2 N-Q3 ! ?
7 P-Q R4 Q-82 1 9 B - B3 P - K R4 ! 20 N- R3 (s afer than
8 N-83 P-QN3 20 8x RP R( B3)-R3 21 B - N4 RxP ! 22
9 8-Q N5ch 8-Q 2 N -R3 ? ! R(R7)xN 23 Px R N-K5 with
10 8-Q3 Q N -83 rather good compensa tion for the ex ­
11 0-0 P-85 change . M oles- Henry , Ballyclare
12 B-K2 1 97 1 ) and White can keep the

89
advantage .

13 B-R3! ?

For 1 3 R-K1 see game 24. The

move in the text is more aggressive,
involving a pawn sacrifice . Fischer
tried the same idea against Mednis in
the 1962/3 U S Championship with
the slight but significant differe nce
that Black's QNP was still on N2,
and he came to the conclusion that it
m ay well have been unsound .

13 ... pxp 15 ... N (K2)-B3

Mednis declined the pawn and Better than 15 . . . N(K4)-B3 (or

castled , but after 14 R-K 1 ! he had a 15 . . . N(K4)-N3 16 P-R4! N-B3 17 N­
cramped position (14 . . . FXP is NS and Black' s king has no good
answered by 15 NxP ! keeping the K­ escape . ) 1 6 N-N5 ! 0-0 (if 1 6 . . . P­
file open) . KR3 17 B-R5ch P-N3 1 8 NxP BxN 1 9
RxB PxB 20 QxQP ! R-Q 1 21
14 pxp QXRPch K-Q2 22 QR-K l regaining
the piece) 1 7 B - KN4 Q-B5 (if 1 7 . . . P­
Black gains time and White has K4 18 B-K6ch K-R1 19 BxP ! ) 18
nothing after 14 NxP NxN 15 P><N BXP<;h ! BxB 19 NxB QxBPch 20 K­
QxP 1 6 R-Kl QxBP 1 7 B-R5ch P-N3 R 1 R-B4 21 R-K2 Q-R5 22 N-Q4! R­
1 8 B-N4 (not 1 8 BxN KxB 19 QxP? R4 23 N-B3 Q-B3 24 Q-K1 R-K 1 25
QXQR ! ) 18 . . . Q-B3 . R-K6 Q-B2 26 Q-K2 R-R3 27 R-K3
followed by R-K1 and White is
14 winning .

In case of 1 4 . . . 0-0 1 5 N-Q4! 16 NXN

followed by P-B4, White would h ave 17 P-B4
sacrificed nothing and he would
would have his KR even more favour­ Playable is 1 7 Q-Q4 (similar to
ably placed on KB 1 . Fischer-Larsen , illustrative game 22 ,
where Black' s QNP was on N2 )
15 R-K1 1 7 . . . 0-0-0 (in the Fisc her-Larsen
g ame there occurred 1 7 . . . N-N3 1 8 B­
The threat is 16 NxN QxN 17 B­ RS K-B2 19 P -B4) 18 B-RS N-N3 19
RSch. P-R5 ! P-N4 (or 19 . . . Q-B5 20 BxN

90
QxQ 21 pxQ pxB 22 pxp pxp 23 B­ Commencing operations against
K7 Q R- K 1 24 R- R7 ! ) 20 P-N3 K-N2 the king while Black's queen is
2 1 P- R6ch K-R 1 22 P-B4 with a bind temp ora ri ly cut off from the Q - si de .
on the d ark squares . Pri tchett­
M arkl an d , Bri tish Champion ship 24 ... N -B3?
197 1 .
Allowing the decisive opening of
17 N-B3 the Q R-file . Correct was 24 . . . P-Q N4
with an even g ame.
B ad is 17 . . . N-B2 18 B-RS P - N3 19
P-BS! 0-0-0 20 P>< KP BxKP 21 RxB 25 pxp pxp
PxB 22 Qx RP or 1 7 . . . N-N 3 ? 1 8 P­ 26 Q -N 1 ! K-B2
BS.
Not 26 . . . K-N2 27 B -BS or 26 . . . R ­
18 B-K N4 N 2 2 7 P - B 6 px p 2 8 RxP P-QS 29 Q­
NS etc .
Better is the finesse 1 8 B - RSch ! P­
N3 19 B - K N4 0-0-0 20 BxP BxB 21
RxB R-Q 2 22 Q-B3 N-Q 1 in order to
be able to play 23 R- KB6 ! R-K 1 2 4
R-Q l etc .

18 0 -0 - 0
19 BxP BxB
20 RxB R-Q 2
21 P-BS

Plann ing P-B6 and a grip on the

KB-file. The game is even after 21 Q­
B3 N-Q 1 22 R-KS Q-B3 .

21 N-Q 1 ! 23 B-B 1 ! Q -K8ch

Driving his opponent' s rook from Black h ad no good defence against

its com m an d outpost on the 6th the threat 28 B- B4ch . If 27 . . . N - K4 ,
ran k . 28 B-B4 R-K 1 29 Q - NS wins

22 R-K3 Q -BS! 28 R-B1 QxP

23 R-B3 Q -KS 29 B-B4ch K-N2
24 P-RS! 30 Q - NS ! Resigns

91
 GAME 24 Botvinnik , the great expert on the
French Defence, prefers castling long
White: Bannik in this variation .
Black: Tal
14 B-R3 R-B2
25th USSR Championship , 1 958 15 B-Q6 Q-Q 1
16 B-B1 N-B4
Notes by Bannik 17 B-R3 pxp
18 NxP NxN
1 P-K4 P-K3 19 RxN BxP
2 P-Q4 P-Q4 20 RxKP Q-Q 2
3 N-QB3 B-N5 21 R-K5 B-B3
4 P-K5 P-QB4
5 P-Q R3 BxNch By exchanging the KP for the RP
6 P><B N .. K2 Tal thought that he would gain the
7 N-B3 Q-B2 advantage by means of . . . N(KB4)­
8 P-Q R4 P-QN3 Q3-N4 . However, he under­
9 B-QN5ch B-Q2 estimated White's next move .
10 B-Q3 QN-83
11 0-0 P-B5 22 Q-R5!

Now 22 . . . N-Q3 is followed by the

unpleasant tactical blow 23 RxQP !
and White wins m aterial . For
example , 23 . . . BxR 24 QxB R-Q l 25
Q x N QxQ 26 BXQ RxB 27 BxP
followed by 28 Bx R .
White now has the open K-file, the
square KS and two active bishops . In
addition Black has a lot of weak­
nesses . The QP is weak and the
s qu ares K3 , K2 and K l need to be
defe nded . Tal correctly decides to
exch ange rooks, getting rid of the
immediate threats . After that he can
12 B-K2 P-83 think about advancing his Q-side
13 R-K l 0-0 pawns .

Black has failed to annihilate the 22 P-KN3

point K4, and so brings his king to 23 Q-N5 Q-Q1
safety in the hope of getting play on 24 Q-N4 Q-Q2
the open KB-file. 25 P-KN3

92
 He h as to prevent the thre atened It is interesting that four of
. . . N( KB4)-Q3-N4 . Nov.- if 25 . . . N-03 White's pieces : a knight , both rooks
then White can play 26 QXQ RxQ 27 and the quee n , have alre ady been on
B - R3 and if 27 . . . R-Q l , 28 R - K 6 . the key square - KS , an d now it is
the turn o f White's b ishop to aim
25 R-K l there. With his last move Black
26 Q R -K l RxR creates a refuge for his king an d at
27 RxR N-Q3 the same time p revents the further
28 Q- R4 N - B4 advance of White's K R P .

The knight cannot m ake the 33 Q -B6 Q-K3

bishop on R3 leave its guarding post. 34 Q-B8ch K-R2
On 2 8 . . . N- N4 Whi te can pene trate 35 Q - Q N8 Q-Q2
decisively : 29 B-R3 Q- B2 30 R - K 7 36 B-Q6 P-R4?
Rx R 3 1 BxR a n d Bl ack is defenceless
ag ain st the threat Q- B6 follo\\'ed Black , in time trouble , has the un ­
shortly by m ate . fortun ate idea of advancing his Q­
side p awns . By playing 36 . . . N - K l 37
29 Q - N5 N - N2 B- KS Q-QN2 38 Q-Q8 Q-Q2 39 Q­
30 P-R4 NS he could h ave ousted the queen
from the back ran k and defe nded
Black has defended the weak points him self.
on the K - fi le , so White has to call up
the reserves . 37 B-K5 N-K l

30 R - B4 This is forced . I f the Q R P 1s

31 Q-K3 RxR advanced further then White
32 QxR P-KR4 continues with a conclus ive attack :
r
3 7 . . . P - RS 38 Q - K B8 P-R6 39 B-R3
Q- N2 40 B - K6 with mate .

38 QXP P-R5
39 Q-B5

i 11 w��
�
;
39 B- R3 Q -QN2 40 Q-BS P-R6 4 1
Q- KB8 N - N2 4 2 B - K 6 would have
/-% /

�
- {>
'/E, //&'
,
'//
� been more energetic , leading to un ­
/_ // �

�; 11
avoidable mate (42 . . . P-N4 43 B- B7) .
E
I

· � �-- � J
�
�· -; 39 K-N l
� , Y.
..... � '?f. {,
/- - -0 / �. y /,,
, , /.

40 B-R3 QxB

93
 41 QxB K-82
42 Q-N7ch

This was the sealed· move; White

takes the QP and the BP after which
he advances his own QP and QBP
and so decides the game.

42 . . . K-B1
43 QXP Q-81
44 Q-NS Q.-Rl
45 Q-BSch K-82
46 QxPch K-81
47 P-QS P-R6
15 Q-B4 P-84
48 Q-BSch K-82
49
16 pxp e.p. RxP
P-QB4 P-R7
17 QxQ RxQ
so B-R1 Q-R3
18 PXP!
51 Q-Q4 N-83
52 P-Q6 Resigns
White gets rid of one weak
pawn. After 18 N -KS P><P! 19 P><P
GAME25 N(K2)-B3, Black would have the
initiative thanks to his pressure along
White: Karpov the QB-file. But now he cann ot keep
Black: Markland this pressure with 18 ...RxP? because
of 19 B-R3.
Hastings 1971/72
18 pxp
1 P-K4 P-K3 19 N-KS B-Bl
2 P-Q4 P-Q4 20 P-Q84!?
3 N-QB3 8-NS
4 P-KS P-QB4 The alternative idea was 20 P-N3,
5 P-QR3 B><Nch planning B -KB4.
6 pxo Q-82
7 N-B3 N-K2 20 N(R4)-B3
8 P-QR4 P-QN3 21 8-Nl N-NS
9 8-QNSch B-Q2 22 P-QRS R-81
10 8-Q3 QN-83 23 8-R3 pxp
11 0-0 P-KR3 24 NXP R-BS
12 R-Kl N-R4 25 N-Q6!
13 Q-Ql R-Q81
14 P-R4 0-0 N ot 25 P-N3? RxN 26 BxR NxP.

94
Also , 25 R - K4 NxB 26 pxN Rx R 27 39 . . . N-K4 40 R-N7 BxR 41 pxa N­
P><R N -B 3 cannot be bad for Bl ack . Q2 (if 4l . . . N- B3 42 B -N3) 42 P-Q4
puts up much less resi st ance.
25
26 P><N 40 R-Q8
27 N-K4
Not now 40 R-N7 ? b ecause of
Weaker was 27 Q R - B l R- RS 28 .. . RxP !
BxP B-Q2!
40 R-B2
27 R-R4 41 R-Q7
28 KR-QB1 B-N2
29 NxP B-Q4 Now Black' s QRP will fall and the
30 P-B3 R-B4 result of the ending is decided.
31 P-R6
41 RxR
31 N- K4! ? ts less dangerous for 42 NxR B-B3
Black . 43 N-N8 B-N4
44 BxP N-K2
31 R-B2 45 B-N6
32 N-K4 N-B4
More precise than 45 B-B S ? N-Q4
Threatening . . . N-QS . followed by . . . N-B2.

33 B-B5 R-QB1 45 N-B1

34 B-B2 R(B2)-B2 46 B-B5 K-N3?
35 RxR RxR
36 R-N1 N-K2 White would have more technical
37 R-N8ch K-R2 problems after 46 . . . BxQP 47 P-R7
38 K-R2 N-N3 NxP 48 B xN B-N4 49 P- 84 .

On 38 . .. N-Bl, 39 N-BS and R-N7 47 P-R7 NxP

would follow . 48 BxN P-K4
49 P-Q4 pxp
39 N-B5 50 BxP K-B2
51 P-B4 P-N4
Bl ack has serious worries \\ith his 52 pxp pxp
weak QR-pa\\·n . The threat is R-N7. 53 K-N3 K-N3
54 K-B3 K-B4
39 ... R-B3 55 P-N3

95
 A grave mistake would be SS P­ the advantage h ad he pl ayed 17 Q­
N4ch?? K -N 3 and White cannot win N3.
because his king is tied to the defence However , as becatne clear l ate r,
of the only remaining (wea k) pawn the sacrifice on K R3 ts not
.
on the light squ ares ( the colour of d angerous . The g ame Sutton ­
Black's bishop ) . Moles , Skopje O lympia d 1972 , went
as follows : 1 3 BxP pxB 14 Q - Q2
55 ... Resigns (ag ainst 14 N -N5 Moles pointed out
the followi ng defence : 14 . .. PxN 15
GAME26 Q -N4 K-N2 [ or 15 . . . P - B4] 16 QxNP
eh N-N3 17 Q- B6ch K- N 1 1 8 B xN Q­
White: Hartston Q 1 ! or 1S Q- R5 P-B4 1 6 pxp e .p .
Black: Porti sch RxP 1 7 QxPch K- B 2 1 8 Q- R5ch K­
B 1 19 Q-R 8ch N -N 1 20 B-R7 N - K2
Nice Olympi ad 1974 2 1 R- K5 B- K 1 22 R-NS B-B2 23 BxN
N x B 24 RxNch BxR 25 QxRch Q- B 2)
Notes by Krogi us 1 4 .. .K-N2 1 S Q -B4 N - KN 1 ! (this is
much stronger than 15 .. .N -B4) 16 R­
1 P-K4 P-K3 K3 QN- K 2 17 N - R4 N -N 3 1 8 R-N 3
2 N-QB3 P-Q4 B- K l 1 9 R- K 1 P- B5! 20 B xN PxB 2 1
3 P- Q4 8-NS Q -N4 N - K2 22 QxKP Q-Q 2 and
4 P-KS P-QB4 Blac k soon won .
5 P-QR3 BxNch We should al so no te the gatne
6 PxB N-K2 Williams - Moles ( O xfo rd , 197 1 ) : 13
7 N-B3 B-Q2 P-N4! ? P - B5 14 B- B l P - B3 15 PxP
8 P-QR4 QN-83 RxP 16 P- N5 pxp 17 BxN P Q R - K B 1 !
9 B-K2 Q-82 and Bl ack got e xcellent pl ay in retur n
10 0-0 P-QN3 for the e xchange .
11 B-Q3 P-KR3
12 R-K 1 0- 0

This move is the hub of the c hosen

system. Black gets c ount e rp lay b y ..
means of ...P- K B3 or ...P- K B4 . Un­
fortunately , in n1y game against
Gufeld in the 19 67 USSR Spar-
ta kia d I feared a sacrifice on KR3
,

and played the wea ker continuation

1 2.. .N -R4 . After 1 3 N -Q 2! 0-0 1 4
Q-N4 P- B4 1 5 PxPe . p . RxP 16 N - B3
QR -KB 1 White could have gained

96
 13 B-R3 N-R4 It see m s that the only acceptable
possibi l ity is 18 . . . O- K2 . A nd nO\\' if
I t is no\v cl ear \vhy cas tl ing on the 19 N - B 3 . then 1 9 . . . B - K 1 20 0- N 3 N-
t\\·el th n1ove \Vas stronger: the B5 21 8- B1 K - R 2 and Black is al l
pl acing of White's knigh t on 02 right . But Whi te coul d be tnore cun ­
(n ece ssary in or der for the queen to n ing and pl ay 1 9 8 - B 1 a nd after
reach the K-side) forces the OB to 1 9 . . . B- K 1 . 20 0- N 3 N - B 3 21 N- N 3
t a ke up a posi tion on OR 3 . \vhich is \\'ith the unpleasant threat of 22 8 -
far frotn being an ideal pi ace for it . R3 . S t i11. 2 1 . . . P-B 5 2 2 8- R 3 Q -N 4 2 3
QxQ PxQ 24 BxR P><N 25 B - R3 P>< P
14 Px P Px P 2 6 B - B 1 P-N 5 is p os sib I e . \Vi t h s uf ­
15 N-Q2 N-N3 fic ient com pe nsat ion for the ex ­
ch a nge . True , White c an al so pl ay 1 7
Quite right . Black shoul d not 0- N4. b ut then 17 . . . B- Q2 l eads to
h urry \\'ith th� advance . .. P- B 3 . Afte r t he position \\'hi ch aro se in the gan1 e
15 . . . P- B 3 16 px p RxP 1 7 P - Q B4 a m ove later .
Bl ac k is in difficul t ies . It is not goo d These n un1 erous v ari ati ons shO\\'
to pl ay 15 . . . 8x P because of 16 0-N4 tha t in the sharp po si t ion \Vhi ch arose
B -02 17 N - B3 ! (but not 17 P-084 in the g ame the outcom e can depe n d
px p 18 NxP NxN 19 QxN KR-Q B1 on a s ingl e m ove . The first rnistake
\Vith equal ch ances) and Whi te h as a can al so prove to be the l ast !
strong att ack because of the threa t 18
8 -0B1. 17 Q-K2

16 Q-RS 8-Kl I f 1 7 N - 8 3 P - 8 4 1 8 PxP e . p. RxP .

then W h ite's queen is badl y pl aced.
TI1 is is the safest . After 16 . . . N -
K B5 17 0-N4 Nx B 18 Px N Whi t e
un question ably h as the adv ant age
b ecaus e of hi s da ngerous threa ts on
the K -side . There are son1e quite i n ­
teresting con1 pl ications aft er
16 . . . BxP 17 8xN px 8 18 OxNP,
\V h en Bl ack \ po sition is very d ifficul t
to defen d . For exarn pl e : 18 . . . 8-02 -I
1 9 N - 83 N- B5 20 8 - 81 or 18 .. . 0- B3
1 9 B- 8 1 ! ( b u t not 19 N- B 3 N- 85 20
B- B1 0- K 1 21 0- N3 Bx P 22 BxP 0-
N3). or 18 . .. 0R- K1 19 B -B 1 (in or­
der to prevent th e n1 a noeuvre L
m
.. . R(K 1 )- K2 and . . . B- K1) 19 . . . 8-02
20 N- 8 3 . 17 Bx P

97
 A risky continuation, which 20 B- QB1 B- Bl?
dem ands very precise pl ay on Bl ack's
part . 1 7 . . . P- B4 18 P><P e .p . RxP was
quite acceptable . After 19 N-B3 R­
�
QBl ( 19 . . . N- KBS is not so goo d �
because of 20 Q-KS) Bl ack 's position
is quite good . For example: 20 P- N3
P- BS 21 BxN BxB 22 N - KS B- KS 23
N -N4 R-B6 or 20 B-R6 R-N1 or 20 Q­
K3 N - Q BS .

18 Q-N4 B-Q2

18 . . . N -Q BS is not satisfactory
because of 19 NxN PxN 20 BxN , nor
1 8 . . . Q-B3 19 N - B3 B-N4 bec ause of
20 BxP! Qx B 21 RxN .
A decisive mist ake . He shoul d
19 N-B3 h ave risked 20 . . . N (N 3)xP 21 N xN
N-QBS
NxN 22 Q- N 3 P- B3 . After 23 BxP B­
K 1 ! (the only way-it is essential to
Even thi s is pl ayabl e. 19 . . . N-B3 is control the square KN3 and 23 . . . N ­
not sufficient because of 20 BxN Px B B6ch i s no good because of 24 QxN
2 1 BxP R-B2 22 B-Q6 and 23 QxNP , PxB 25 Q-RS Q- BS 26 R - K3) 24 B­
but 1 9 . . . B - B 1 gave good defensive KB4 P-BS! 25 B-KBl P-R4 and the
chances . For example: 20 B-Q B 1 N­ game is double-edged .
B3 21 Q- RS P- BS 22 Bx RP (22 B-B l
Q N- K2) 22 . . . BPxB 23 N-NS N-BS or 21 Q-RS R-Q l
2 1 BxN PxB 22 QxNP Q- B2 23
QxQch RxQ 24 B-K3 P-BS . It seems Alas ! There is no satisfactory
that in the 1 ast variation it is better to defence against the sacrifice on KR3.
play 23 Q- N 3 (instead of 23 QxQ) in
order to continue 24 B - K3 or B-R3 . 22 BxP PxB
White ' s chances are somewhat bet­ 23 Qx P N-N 7
ter , but the struggle is still to come . 24 N-NS NxB
And in c ase of 20 P-R4 N -QBS 21 25 N-R7 R esigns
B-Q B 1 N (N3)x KP 22 NxN NxN 23
Q-N3 P-B3 24 Bx P Q-B2 or 24 B­ A fighting game, and an important
KB4 Q- B2 25 BxN PxB 26 Rx KP P­ one for the theory of the French
Q R4 Black has counter-chances . Defence .

98
 Chapter 3

The Nimzovich (Winawer) Variation

with 6 . . . N-K2 and . . . Q-R4

White : Smyslov
Black: Uhlmann

M ar del Plata 1966

1 P-K4 P-K3
2 P-Q4 P-Q4
3 N-QB3 B-NS
4 P-KS P-QB4
5 P-QR3 BxNch
6 pxs N-K2
7 P-QR4 QN-B3

7 0- R4 \\'ill tra nspose to the m a i n line after 8 0-0 2 ON-B3 or to the next
. . .

note after 8 B-02 ON -B3 .

8 N-B3 Q-R4

The m ain poi n t of thi s i dea i s th at i f W hite defe n d s his OB3 pa\\'n \Vith 9 B-02
he no longe r has the possibi lity of dep loying hi s bi shop on its op tirnal di agon a l
( 0R3- K B 8). N evertheless, it i s n ot cle ar \vhether o r not 9 B - 0 2 is inferior t o 9 0-
02.

99
 9 Q-Q2
9 B-Q2 usually leads to a heavy positional struggle. 9 . . . B-Q2 10 B-K2 In the
game R.Byrne-Korchnoy, Nice Olympiad 1974, White tried the interesting move
10 B-QN5 and after 10... Q-B2 11 0 -0 0-0 12 R-K1 P-QN3 13 B-Q3 P-KR3 14
Q-B1 P-B5 15 B-K2 P-B3 16 B-B4 N-N3 17 B-N3 pxp 18 pxp N(N3)-K2 19 N­
Q4 NxN 20 pxN N-B4 21 P-QB3 B-K1 22 B-N4 B-N3 23 Q-R3 Q-B2 24 P-B3
NxB 25 PxN P-KR4 26 B-R3 B-Q6, Black had slightly the better prospects.
Black has nothing to fear either from 10 P-B4 Q-B2 11 PxQP KPxP 12 pxp 0-
0 13 B-K2 NxP! 10 P-B5 11 0 - 0 There is an interesting manoeuv;e in 11 N­
. . .

N5 P-KR3 12 N-R3 0-0 -0 13 N-B4! (if 13 0-0 P-B4 14 P-B4 K-N1, intending
to win the RP by ...N-B1-N3. Stein-Uhlmann, Stockholm Interzonal 1962)
13 ...P-KN3 14 P-R4 QR-B1 15 P-N3 p B3 with an unclear position. 1 1 P-B3
..
. . .

12 R -K 1 For the alternative 12 PxP see Planinc-Hort, Wijk aan Zee 1973
(illustrative game 27).

100
 I n this position Black has to make the difficult decision about 'Nhich si de to
cas tle . Both possibilities are pl ayable and the re is no need to castle at once:

(a ) 12... 0 - 0 -0 13 8-K81 P-84 14 N-NS QR-81 15 P-84 P-KR3 16 N-83 R (81)­

N1 17 Q-81 N-Q1 18 Q-R3 N (K2) -83 19 KR -N1 Q- B2 20 R-R2 8-K1 \vith equal
chances . K lovan -V agani an , Sebastopol 1 970.

(b) 12 ...0 - 0 13 8-K81 QR -K1 14 P-N3 P><P 15 P><P?! Better chances are offered
by 15 NxP NxN 1 6 RxN N-N3 1 7 R -K3 P-K4 1 8 pxp NxP 1 9 B - N 2 B-N5 20 P-
B3! wi th a slight advantage to White . 15 ...N-81 16 8-N2 Better is 16 Q - K2 N -
N3 1 7 KR -N 1 ! with an unclear position . 16...N-N3 17 Q-N1 N-Q1 18 N- Q4 NxP
19 P-84 K-R1 20 K- R1 P-QR3 21 Q- Q1 P-QN4 22 Q- RS Q-82 23 P-N4 A fter 23
B-QB 1 NxP 24 B -Q R 3 Q - N 3 25 BxR RxB Black's pawns shoul d wi n for hi m .
23 ... 8-81 24 R-K81 Black has the advantage after 24 R - K 3 Q - B 2 25 Q - R4 Q ­
K 2. 24 ...N-84 25 8-K3 N-KS 26 8xN P><8 27 Q-R4 N-82 Threateni ng . . . P-N4 .
28 Q-N3 K-N1 29 P-R4 R -Q1 30 P-NS R-Q4 31 P-RS? White coul d ob tain good
p l ay down the K N -file with 3 1 P- N6! e.g . 3 1 . . . P><P 32 QxP Q- K 2 33 R - B 2 with a
complex position . 31...N-Q1! 32 P-N6 P-R3 33 Q-R4 Q-Q2 34 N-K2 8-N2 35 K­
N1 N -83 36 N-N3 N-K2! 37 Q-N4 N-84 38 NxN P><N?! It was surely better to
recap ture \vith the rook . 39 Q-K2 R -Q1 40 K-82 Q -K2 41 K-N3 Q-Q2 42 K-82
K-B1 43 KR-QN1 K-K1 44 K-K1 Q-K2 45 Q -82 R ( Ql) -Q 2 46 R -Q1 P-NS! 47
RxR RxR 48 PxP N ot 48 R -Q 1 P-N6 ! 48 ...QxPch 49 K-81 Q-N7 50 R-81 P-86
and Black shoul d have \\'On . Ciocaltea- K orchnoy , H asti ngs 1 9 7 1 / 2.

(c) 12 ...P-84 A n interesting ide a from the game Pri tchett-I vkov, Caorle 1 97 2 .
13 Q-81 N-Q1 14 Q-R3 P-KR3 15 P-R4 P-KN3 16 KR -QN1 8-83 17 Q-N4 Q-82
1 7 . .. QxQ is rather dra\\·ish . 18 P-QRS N-82 19 8-Q81 R-KN1 20 8- R3 P-KN4
with good pl ay for Blac k .

( d) 1 2...PxP 13 P>< P 0-0 14 8-K81 R-84! 15 P-N3 QR-K81 16 R -K3 1 6 B - N 2

fails to 1 6 . . . N -N 3 16... R ( B4) -82 17 8-N2 Q -82 18 8-Q81 P-QS!? A sub tle
posi tional sacrifice of a pa\\' n , allo\\·i ng the black k night to reach the i de al
square Q4 . 19 PxP N-Q4 20 8-Q R3! Whi te counters \\'ith a good move . Black
woul d wi n after 20 R -K 1 RxN 21 BxR N-B6 22 Q-Q2 RxB 23 K-N2 N -N5 24
KxR B- B3ch 25 K -N4 Q - B 2 26 QxN Q- B4ch 27 K - R4 B-B6 etc . 20 . . . N (83) -K2
A fter 20 . . . NxR 21 P><N fol lowed by 22 N -N5 White is be tter. 21 8-Q6 Q-81 22
R (K3) -R3 8-83 23 Q-K2 P-86! 24 R-K81 N-KN3 25 8xR? A fter thi s n1 ove
Black's attack breaks through, where as his s acrifice is i nsufficient after 25 N - K 1
N(Q4)-B5 26 P><N NxBP 27 Q- K 3 ! etc . 25 ... Qx8 26 R (8I) - R1 N(Q4) -BS 27 PxN
Nx8P 28 Q-84 Nx8 29 N-NS I f 29 KxN RxN wi ns . 29 . . . RxP! 30 R-KBI I f 30
Qx KPch K-Rl 3 1 P-Q5 N - K 6 ! 32 PxB R- B&h follo\\·ed by mate. Or 30 NxK P

1 01
Q-B2 31 P-QS N-K6 with great advantage to Black . 30...RxRch 31 QxR QxR 32
Q-B7ch K-R1 33 K-82! N-BS! The simplest way of reaching a won ending . 34
QxN Q-K2 35 P-RS P-KR3 36 N-K4 BxN 37 QxB Q-N4 38 Q-Q3 Q-BSch 39 K­
K1 Q-RSch 40 K-B1 Q-BSch 41 K-K1 QxRP and Black won . Ciocaltea­
Vaganian , Budapest 1973.

9 • • • B-Q2

·�
�
����/,;
� �1
. . /,

I t is wrong to release the tension immedi ately, as White has the better
ending after 9... P><P 10 pxp QxQch 11 BxQ. In Smyslov-Le telier , Venice 1950,
White gave an excellent demonstration of how this type of endgame should be
handled . See illustrative game 28.
White also has the advantage after 9 . 0-0 10 B-R3 P-QN3 11 B-N5 B-R3 12
. .

0-0 pxp 13 Q-Q3.

The game Kuij pers - Korchnoy , Wijk aan Zee 1971 saw a third alternative :
9 ... P-B3! 10 B-R3 (more exact is 10 KFxP FxBP 11 FxP) 10... FxKP 11 P><KP
QxRP! 12 B-K2 P-QN3 13 P-B4 N-Q1! with an excellent game for Black .

Our main game (Smyslov -Uhlmann ) reached this position by transposition .

10 B-K2

The alternative 10 B-Q3 is also very common:

(a) 10...P-B5 11 B-K2 P-B3 12 B-R3 B lack has an excellent game after 12 KP><P
PxBP 13 0-0 N-B4 14 B-R3 0-0-0 15 KR-K1 P-R4 12 ...N-N3 I n the game

102
Stein-Vaga ni an , after 1 2 . . . 0-0-0 1 3 0-0 P- R4 1 4 K R - K 1 N - B4 15 B - KB 1 P­
R5 1 6 R - K2 Q R - K 1 1 7 Q - K 1 N -Q 1 1 8 P-N4 ! PxP e . p . 1 9 BPxP White had the
edge . 13 0 -0 0-0 -0 14 B-Q6 1 4 K R - K 1 P><P 1 5 P><P N(N3)xP 1 6 NxN NxN 1 7
Q -Q4 N -B 3 1 8 QxN P K R -N 1 wi th an unclear position . 14 ... N ( B3) -K2 1 5 N -R4
Q R- K 1 with equal chances. Fischer- U hlm a nn , Buenos Aires 1 960;

(b ) 10 ... P-B3! 1 1 0 -0 F or 1 1 KP><P see Tringov- Vaganian , Vrnj acka Banj a

197 1 (illustrative game 29) . 1 1 . . . PxKP 1 2 NxP Smyslov- Uhlm a nn. H ava na
1 964 , went 1 2 P>< K P 0-0 1 3 R- K 1 P- K R 3 14 B- R3 B- K 1 15 Q- K 3 P-0 N 3 16 N-
0 2 N -B4 17 Q- R3 QxBP 18 BxN OxN 19 O R -01 0- B5 20 Bx K Pch B - B2 21 P­
K B3 \\'ith an even game. 1 2.. . NxN 13 PxN 0-0 14 P- QB4 QxQ 1 5 BxQ B-83
\\'ith equality . F ischer-U hlma nn, Stockholm I nterzonal 1 96 2 .

Now , after 1 0 B- K 2. White \\'ill be a tempo better off (than after 1 0 B-Q3) if
Black intends the blockading . . . P- BS followed by castling 0-side . For this
reason Black does better to put im mediate pressure on White 's central p awn
s tructu re .

10 • • • R-QB1

A note\\rorthy alterna tive is 1 0 . . . P-B3 1 1 KPxP (after 1 1 B- R 3 P><QP 1 2 P><B P

N P>< P 1 3 NxP NxN 1 4 OxN ? [1 4 PxN is equal] 1 4 .. . P- K4 1 5 0 - Q 2 N -N3 1 6 8-
0 N4 0- B2 1 7 QxP N-B5 1 8 0-B3 P-O R4, Black has the advantage ) 1 1 . . . f>xBP
1 2 PxP 0-0-0! 1 3 0-0 P- K4 1 4 P-B4! P-Q5 1 5 Q- R6 ! ? (Black sta nds very well
after 1 5 QxO NxQ 1 6 N - 02 P-B4 , or here 1 6 B-02 N (R4)- B3 1 7 P- B3 B-N5 1 8 P­
R 3 B-R4 1 9 P-N4 P-06 ! ) 1 5 . . . N - N 3 (or 1 5 . . . P- K 5 ! ? 1 6 N - Q2 P-B4 1 7 N - N3 0 -
B 6 with a n u nclea r position ) 1 6 N -Q2! P- B4 1 7 N - N 3 0 - B2 1 8 P- B4 N -N5 19 B-
0 1 P-0 6 \\'ith corn plex pl ay , as in Bogda novic - Uhln1 ann, Sarajevo 1 9 65 .

11 PxP

Practically forced if White \\'i shes to avoi d a bad endi ng e . g . 1 1 B - R 3 PxP 1 2

px p OxOch 1 3 KxQ N-B4 1 4 P- B3 N - R4!; or 1 1 0-0 pxp 1 2 PxP QxQ 1 3 8xO
N - B4 and now the poi nt of . . . R - O B 1 becomes clear , because 1 4 B-B3 fails to
1 4 . . . NxKP, whereas 1 4 P-B3 N - R 4 gives Black good pl ay; or fi nally 1 1 B - 0 3? !
(losi ng a tempo ) 1 1 . . . f>xP 1 2 pxp QxQch 1 3 BxQ P-Q N3 14 R-R3 0-0 1 5 0-0
R - B2 1 6 R - N 1 P- K R 3 1 7 K - B 1 N - 8 4 1 8 B-B3 K R- B 1 19 K- K2 P- B 3 ? ! (better is
1 9 . . . N -R4) 20 P- N4? ! (White has a slight advantage in the ending after 20 pxp
PxP 2 1 BxN P><B 22 N - K 1 N - R 4 23 BxN P>< B 24 K-02 R - B5 25 P-Q B3 Rx RP 26
RxR BxR 27 R - R 1 B-N4 28 RxP P- R3 29 N -Q3 R - K 1 30 N- 84) 20 . . . N ( B4)- K 2
2 1 px p P>< P 2 2 P- R 4 (better 2 2 K-02 ! ) 22 . . . 8- K 1 23 P-N5 B - R4 24 Px8P N-84

1 03
25 BxN P><B 26 K·K3 K·B2 27 R·N5 R·Q2 28 P·R5 R-K1ch 29 N-K5ch NxN 30
PxN P-Q5ch and Black won. Timman-Korchnoy, Nice Olympiad 1974.

11 . . . .. N-N3
12 0-0

12 • • • 0-0

It seems more exact to play 12 .. . N(B3)xP 1J NxN NxN 14 Q·K3 (after 14 Q·

Q4 P-B3 15 B-R5ch P-KN3 16 P·KB4 N-B3 17 QxBP R-B1 18 BxPch P><B 19
QxNPch K-Q1 the piece sacrifice looks unsound. However, 14 Q-NS N-N3 15 P­
QB4 is worth considering, when 15... P><P? loses to 16 P·B6!) 14... N-N3 15 B-R3
B-B3 16 P-KB4 0-0 when White had great difficulty in finding play for his
pawn. Hartston-Uhlmann, Hastings 1972/3.

13 Q-K3 Q-B2
14 N-Q4!

An interesting manoeuvre aiming to �place the knight on Q6. White's threat

forces Black to exchange into an unfavourable ending.

14 . . . QxP

Again, the text is more or less forced. 14... N(N3)xP 15 N-N5 is unpleasant for
Black and so is 14... N(B3)xP 15 N-N5 BxN 16 PxB as 16... QxP fails against 17
QxQ RxQ 18 B-R3 winning the exchange. Also, White was threatening to retain
his pawn by 15 P-KB4.

104
 15 N-NS QxQ
16 BxQ

White has the be tter ga me O\ving to his h\'O b ishop s \vith their v;ide range of
activity and to his k night \\·hich \\'ill . fron1 06. lin 1it the n1 ovcn1 en t of the bl ack
pieces.

16 P-QR3

B lack has to \Veaken his Q- side to meet the threat of first 17 K R -N1. then 18
N - Q 6 . No\\r B l ack gets i n . . . R- B2 in time to defe n d his \\'eak point. QN 2. an d his
QN is freed from de fending his QRP .

17 N-Q6 R-B2
18 P-RS

White "fixes" B l ack's Q- side pa\\·ns \\'hich \vill be in constant danger in the
l a ter p art of the endgame. He h as also foreclosed at t he proper In on1ent on the
possibility of . . . N - QR4 by B lack .

18 P-K4!

B lack's m a in hope lies in his mobile pa\vn centre. and he uses hi s only
cou n ter-chance at the fi rst opportunity.

19 KR-Nl N-QI
20 R-QI B-B3
21 B-N4

Using threats on differen t poin ts. Whi te gradually posts al l his n1 i n or pieces
aggressively.

21 N-1(3

105
 22 Q R-Nl
One of the rooks does belong on QNl, but it is preferable to get 22 P-N3 in
first, allowing the king some luft.

22 . . . N-K2
23 P-N3 P-B4
24 B-R3 P-KN3?
Black errs in feeling safe, and so he misses the opportunity of building
counterplay by 24...P-KN4! (If White had played 22 P-N3 this chance wouldn't
have come up.)
The next move makes Black realize how difficult is his position.

25 P-KB4!
Uhlmann sees the threat of having -his pawn centre, upon the elasticity of
which he so counts, blockaded.

25 . . . P-QS
Black tries his last tactical possibility. He can expect nothing good of 25. P­
. .

KS as White opens the position for his active pieces by 26 B-KBl and 27 P-B4.

26 PxQP N- Q4
27 B-B2 P><QP

106
 On 27 . . . N - B6 28 B PxP B-04 29 B - N 2 , Bla ck \\'i ns the ex cha nge and loses the
game as he cannot s top the cro\\·d of conne cted Whi te pa\\'ns in the centre .

28 BxQP NxB
29 RxN R-K2
30 K-B2

N ot 30 B-N2 N - B6 \\'inning the ex cha nge .

30 . . . N-B6
31 R-Kl RxR
32 KxR N-KS
33 NxN

More exa ct tha n 33 B-N2 NxBP 34 Bx B P><B 35 R - B4 R - B 3 \\'i th equality.

33 . . . BxN
34 P-B3

White is ahead by onl y a doubled pa\\'n and still the ending is \\'On for hi n1 .
For B l ack 's p a\vns are fixed on the colou r of the \\'hite bishop and so his Q -side
is despe ra tely \Ve ak .

34 R-B3

U nfortu nately 34 . . . R-Q B 1 is ou t: it fails agai ns t 35 Rx B .

35 R-Q8·ch K-N2
36 R-Q7ch R-82

36 . . . K- N 1 37 R - QB 7 is not pro1nising for Black . ei ther .

37 RxRch KxR

Wh ite's good bi shop and his advantage i n space are e n o u g h to ensure the \\·i n.

1 07
 38 K-Q2 K-K3
39 P-B4

White must deny QS to Black:

39 • • • K-Q 2

Black is obliged to safeguard his Q-side and tries this attack on his opponent's
pawns as his last chance. '

If he leaves his king be and moves his bishop along the long diagonal, then
White may exchange bishops via KB3. Or, if Black then leaves his bishop on
QB3 and moves his king back and forth on K3 and KB3, White's bishop moves
to Q5 at the proper moment taking one vital square from Black's king. And,
with the bishops gone, the pawn ending is won. For, with kings on Q4 and QB3
for White and Black respectively, White can also gain a zugzwang position with
appropriate K-side pawn moves: e. g. 1 P-KR3 P-KR3 2 P-N4 P><P 3 pxp P-R4 4
P-B5! P-R5 5 pxp P-R6 6 P-N7 P-R7 7 P-N8(Q) P-R8(Q) 8 Q-QB8 mate; or
l ... P-KR4 2 P-KR4 K-B2 3 K-QS K-Q2 4 P-B6ch PxPch 5 K-K5 K-K2 6 P-BS
etc.

40 K-K3 K- B3
41 K - Q4 K - Q2
42 K-KS B-B6

The threat was 43 P-N4.

43 K-B6 K- B3
44 K-N7 KxP
45 KxP B- R4
46 B-Bl K-NS
47 B-N2 KxRP

After 47... KxBP White wins by 48 BxP K-N4 49 P-R3 KxP SO B-B8 followed
by 51 P-N4.

48 BxP K-N3

108
 49 B-B8! P-R4
50 B-Q7! K-B4

E qually hopeless is SO . . . K-B 2 5 1 B-N5 K- Q3 52 K-R6 and again the threat of

K-N5 followed by P -R3 and P-N4 appe ars . Moreover, Black then has no time to
play 52 . . . K- K3 in view of 53 P- B5 K-B3 54 P- B6 etc .

51 P-R3 B-B6

Else 52 P- N4 traps the bishop .

52 KxP B-B3
53 B><P P-R5
54 B-Nl P-R6
55 P-B5 B-K5
56 B-R2 B-Q6
57 P-R4 K-Q5

On 57 . . . BxQ BP 58 BxB Kx B 59 P- B6 , the ensuing queen ending is also a loss

for Black.

58 P-R5 K-K4
59 P-N4 K-B5
60 K-N7 Resigns

109
 GAME27 13 ... N-N3!?

White: Planinc A risky idea, when 13 . . 0-0-0 14

.

Black: Hort B-R5 P-K4 is possible.

Wijk aan Zee 1973 14 8-RS 0- 0 - 0

1 P-K4 P-K3 A pawn sacrifice for which there is

2 P-Q4 P-Q4 theoretically insufficient com­
3 N-QB3 B-NS pensation. After 14... R-KN1 then 15
4 P-KS P-QB4 Q-B3 is unpleasant, but 14... N-K2 is
5 P-QR3 BxNch worth a try.
6 PxB N-K2
7 P-QR4 QN-83 15 8xN P><8
8 N-83 Q-R4 16 NxP KR-N1?!
9 B-Q2 8-Q2
10 B-K2 P-85
11 0-0 P-83

16 . .. R-R2 seems better. In the

game Klovan-Vaganian, USSR 1973,
- play went 17 Q-B3 R-B2 (worse is
12
I
PxP pxp 17 ... NxP 18 QxBP Q-B2 19 P-R3!)
13 N-R4!? 18 B-B4 (there are unclear com­
plications after 18 N-K5 NxN 19 P><N
Weaker is 13 R-K1 0-0-0 14 B­ P-Q5!) 18 ...R-N1 19 N-R4 Q-Q1 20
KB1 N-B4 15 Q-B1 P-R4 16 Q-R3 Q-K2 (this move is necessary since
Q R-N1 17 QR-N1 N-Q1 18 R-N4 B­ both 20 B-N3 P-B4 and 20 Q-K3 P­
B3 with good play for Black. Suetin­ K4 21 B-N3 P-B4 22 pxp P-B5 are
Uhlmann, Berlin 1967. obviously good for Black) 20... P-K4

110
2 1 B- N3 Q- K2 (the more obvious 32 Qx QP! QxQ
21 . . . P- 84 is no good because of 22 33 Rx Q Bx P
px p P- BS 23 P- K 6) 22 Q R- Kl P-KS 34 P-86 N-Q2
and Black has an att ack for the 35 N-R5 8-Q 6
p a\vn . 36 P-N4! R-K4?

17 N-84 P-K 4 Thi s allO\\'S an im medi ate \\in but

18 N-K2 R-N5 in any case there is no defen ce to the
advance of the KN P.
Losi ng an import an t tempo , so
1 8 . . . R - N 2 \\'as better . 37 RxN RxR
38 P- 87 Rx P
19 P- 83! R -N3 39 Rx R R-Kl
20 R-82! Q R-N1 40 N-86 R - Q BI a n d
21 N -N3 K-N 1? B lack
r esigne d
Too slo\\'; 21 . . . Q- B2 offered bet ter
chances . GAME28

22 px p pxp Wh ite: Smys lov

23 P-B4! R-83 B lack: lete.Jier
24 Q-K2 P- K5
Venice 1950
Or 24 . . . B- NS 25 Q- K3! P-QS 26
PxQP PxQP 27 Qx P \vi th a great ad ­ Notes by Kotov
vantage .
I P-K4 P-K3
2 P-Q 4 P- Q4
25 P- 85 ! K-R 1
3 N-Q B3 B-r�s
26 QR-K81 N - K4
4 P-KS P-Q 84
27 Q-K3! R-82
5 P-Q R3 BxNch
6 P><B N-K2
I f 27 . . . N -N S 28 Q-04 .
7 P-Q R4! Q-R4
8 Q-Q2! Q N - 83
28 R- 84 Qx RP
9 N-83 pxp
29 Q- Q4 R-K 1
30 B- K3 Q-R4 Th is contin uation h as been tried
31 R-Ql B- R5 out in several games in the Soviet
Union . Gran dmas ter Smyslov told
After 3 1 . . . 8- 83 32 1�(4 )-Bl me that at the dawn of his chess
White's att ack dO\Vn t he Q J� -fi l e i s career he played a si n1ilar ga me \\ith
de cisive . White against the Thili si Candi date

111
M aster Shishov. The exchange of 12 B-B3 B-Q2
queens is to White's advantage 13 B-Q3 R-QB1
because it reduces Black to w �iting 14 K-Q2 0-0
tactics: he can only hope to defend 15 P-RS R-B2
against his opponent ' s active b ishops. 16 KR-Kl P-B3?

Black' s position is cramped , but

stable. By continuing 1 6 . . . P-Q R3,
1 7 . . . KR-B 1 and 1 8 . . . N - R2 and then
occupying QN4, Black would have
kept a defensible position . Perhaps it
was also worth moving the knight
from B4 to K2.
The "active" move 1 6 . . . P-B3 is a
mistake because it creates in Black's
position a significant weakness ( Q4)
which cannot easily be defended,
especially since the open K-file and
the important square KS are at
10 pxp QxQch White' s disposal .
11 BxQ!
17 BXN!
This reveals a deep understanding
of the position . It is important for A correct assessment of the
White not to allow the black knight position . White gives up the advant­
to QBS via R4 . It gradually becomes age of the two bishop s , hoping to
clear that the advantage is on make use of the weak p awn on Q4 .
White's side: he has an important file
on the Q-side and Black's pieces have 17 P><B
no good squares for develop me nt . 18 pxp RxP
19 QR-N1 P-KR3
11 ... N-B4
He already has to pre vent the
Smyslov considered this move threat 20 R-NS B-K3 21 N-NS .
wrong , since it merely forces White
to carry out the plan of development 20 R-NS B-K3
he was intending anyway . He should 21 R(K1)-QN1 R(B3)-B2
have completed his develop ment by 22 N-K1
simply playing 1 1 . . . 0-0, 12 . . . B-Q2
and then doubling rooks on the QB­ The knight is marching to Q3 and
file . from there it can go to BS or KS , at

1 12
the same time threatening to go to gains a tremendous positional
KB4, exchange the bishop and win advantage with two connected passed
the QP. pawns in the centre.

22 P-BS 27
23 P-B3 P-N4
24 N-Q3 K-R2 After 27 ...N-K2 there comes a sur­
prising attack: 28 NxP!! NxN (this
Here the king is placed too far seems to be the only possibility be­
from the "main theatre of military cause if 28 .. . BxN then 29 RxNch and
actions"; this allows Smyslov to carry if 28 ...Rx R? 29 Nx Rch) 29 RxB!
out a decisive combination. 24 ...K­ R(B1)xR 30 RxR NxR (if 30 ... RxB,
B1 would have been better. then 31 R-Q6 N-B2 32 R-Q7ch! \vins)
31 pxR N-Q2 32 K-Q3! NxPch 33 K­
25 R-K l R-B3 B4 and White wins since the black
26 R-BS R-QBI king is too far a\\'ay. This is \\'hy
24 ...K- R2 is a mistake.
This makes it easier for White. It
is difficult to defend against the
threat of 27 N-N4, nevertheless Black 28 RxB! RxR (K3 )
should have given preference to
26.. .B-B2 27 N-KS R-Q3 or 26...B­ The only move, othenvise Black
B2 27 B-N4 R-Q2. loses a piece.

I
29 RxR N-B3
ll
'i i t!r Of course not 29...N-R3 30 R-Q8,
when the QP is indefensible.
i
i j 30 P-R6! pxp
31 R-B7 ch K -N3
32 R-Q7 N-K2
33 B-N4 N-B4

Black's last chance to attack

White's K-side pa\\·ns. Othen\'ise
_j
after 33 ...K-B3 34 BxNch RxB 35
RxQP White has an easy win.
27 N-N4!

A smart combination \vhich 34 Rx QP N-K6

required deep and precise calcula­ 35 R-Q8 NxN P
tion. As a result of this move White 36 P-QS R-N3

1 13
 37 B-BS R-N2
38 R-QB8 N-RS
39 K-K2 N-B4
40 R-B6ch K-R4

Black's fate is no better even after

40 . . . K-B2 because of (for example)
4 1 K-Q3 and 42 K-K4 .

41 P-Q6 R-Q2
42 R-B7 Resigns
'

After 42 . . . R-Q l 43 P-Q7 he can­

not defend against the threat of 44
RxP and 45 B-N6 . 11 KPxP NPxP
This fine positional game was con­ 12 pxp P-K4
ducted in masterly style by Smyslov . 13 B-K2?
I t is interesting that on the eve of the
Play becomes very sharp after 13
game Smyslov did not feel well, and
P- B4 ! PxP ! 14 Bx BP 0-0-0 (better
he had to play the game with a high
is 14 . . . QxBP) 1 5 0-0 QxBP 1 6 B-N3
temperature because the tournament
B -N5 17 Q-R6 N-Q4 18 N-Q2 KR-N l
could not be prolonge d by a single
19 B-R3 Q-R4 20 N-K4 N - Q5 with a
day.
complex situation . Stein-Dorosh­
kevitch, Riga 1970 .
GAME29
13 ... 0-0-0
14 0- 0 KR-N1
White: Tringov
15 K-R1 N-N3!
Black: Vaganian
Black's lead in development and
Vrnjacka Banj a 1971
strong pawn centre allow him to
begin complications. Now 16 QxP
1 P-K4 P-K3
loses to 16... N-B5! 17 BxN B-R6!
2 P-Q4 P-Q4
3 N-QB3 B-NS 16 P-84 QxQ
4 P-KS P-QB4 17 BxQ P-KS!
5 P-QR3 BxNch 18 N-N 1 P-QS
6 pxB N-K2 19 N- R3 BxN
7 P-QR4 QN - B3 20 PxB P-84
8 N-B3 Q-R4
9 Q-Q2 B-Q2 An imposing array of central
10 B-Q3 P-83! pawns.

1 14
 21 QR-Ql N ( N3) - K4 t\\'O bishops by 25 BxN NxB 26 KR-
22 8-84 P- Q6 Kl N x P 27 B-8 7 KR-Ql 28 BxN
Rx B� although Wh it e st il l has a bad
Bl ack ·s two knight s and wel l endi ng .
pl ac ed roo ks no\\' contin uo usly
harass the two bishops . 25 R- R5
26 P-84 NxP
23 pxp px p 27 8-87 Nx 8
24 8-R5 R-QS! 28 8x R N-QNS

A us eful gai n of tempo .

29 KR -K 1 NxR
30 RxN Rx 8P
31 8x P K-Q 2
32 K-N 2 K-K3!
33 K- N3 K- K4!
34 8- N8 R-K5
35 P- R5 R-K6ch
36 K- R4 P-85
37 8-R7 K- Q5
38 K-N 4 P-B6
39 K-N3 P-87ch
40 Kx P RxP
25 B-K3 41 8-85 RxPch
42 K-N3 R-R7
I t \\'as rel atively best to give up the 43 Resigns

1 15
 Chapter4

The Nimzovich (Winawer) Variation

with 6 Q-B2 . . .

White: Tal
Black: Botvinnik

1st Match Game 1960

1 P-K4 P-K3
2 P- Q4 P- Q4
3 N- QB3 B-NS
4 P-KS P-QB4
5 P-QR3 BxNch
6 PxB Q - B2
7 Q-N4

The most aggressive continuation. White can, of course, play quietly, along
the lines of chapters 2 and 3 . If he wishes to do so he must not play 7 P-QR4??
because of 7 . P><P 8 pxp Q-B6ch 9 B-Q2 QxQP, when White has nothing to
. .

show for the pawn. The positional way to meet 6. . . Q-B2 is 7 N -B3. Now 7. . .N­
K2 8 P-QR4 transposes to the main line of chapters 2 and 3. Alternatives to the
transposition are:

(a) 7 . . . N - Q2 Intending ...N-N3-RS, blockading White's QRP. 8 P -Q R4! N -K2 9

116
B-K2 P-B3 10 K PxP Px BP 1 1 P-B4! 0-0 12 0 - 0 PxBP 13 PxP! NxP 1 4 BxP R­
Q1 15 Q - K 2 v.dth a clear advantage to Whi te . Rakic -Lengyel , Belgrade ­
Budapest Match 1 95 7 .

(b ) 7 . . . QN -B3 Now Whi te may pl ay either 8 B Q 3 transposing into variations

- ,

where Black does not h ave the exch angi ng resource . . . P-QN3 and . . B - R3 at his
.

disposal, or he can pl ay 8 P-Q R4 , which wi ll probably transpose to variations

discussed in chapters 2 and 3 u nl ess Black tries the double- edged 8 . . pxp 9 PxP
.

N- NS ! ? 1 0 R - Q N 1 !?

(c) 7 . . . B-Q2 8 P-Q R4 will also transpose to lines considered in chapters 2 and 3 .

(d ) 7 . . . P- QN3 8 P - Q R4 B- R 3 This premature offer to exchange bi shops is

exposed in Epelman- Yurchenko , Quarterfinal U S S R Cha mpionship 1973
(illus trative ga me 30) .

lfi�j_
ii�

- -

7 P-B4
transposes to vari ations di scussed in chapter 1 . pages 30-3 7 . 7 . . P­
7 . . . N- K2 .

B3 is an idea worth noting . In the game Matulovic- R . Byrne, Sousse I nterzo n al

1 967 , pl ay continued 8 N- B3 P - BS (not 8 . . . N- B3 9 Q-N3 ! ) 9 B- K 2 N - B3 1 0 0-0
Q-B2 1 1 Q - R3 KN-K2 12 P-R4 B - Q 2 13 B-R3 0-0-0 14 P-RS P - R 4 IS N-02
and no\\' Black cou ld have equalized \\'i th 1 S . . . N- B4 .

8 Q-N3
Black has no \\'Orries after 8 Q RSch Q - B2 9 QxQch KxQ 1 0 N - B3 PxP 11 P x P
-

N - K 2 with equa l i ty ; or 8 pxp e . p . Nx P 9 Q- N 3 QxQ 1 0 R Px Q N - B3 1 1 N - K 2 P­

K4 with equality .
 8 ••• N-K2

The sharpest move , which �eeps Black's options on the Q-side and closes
certain di agonals to Whi te's Q B .
If 8 ... PxP 9 PxP N - K2 10 B - Q 2 0 - 0 1 1 B-Q3 P-QN3 1 2 N- K2 B-R3 (Diez del
Corral -Petros ian , Palma 1969 went 1 2 ... R-B2 1 3 0-0 B-R3 1 4 P-KR4 BxB 15
PxB QN-B3 with a good game for Black , but White can improve with
Petrosian 's suggestion 13 P- KR4!) 1 3 N- B4 Q-Q2 14 BxB (for 14 B-N4 see H ort­
Petrosian , Kapfenberg 1970 , illustrati�e game 3 1 ) 14 . . . NxB 15 Q-Q3 N -N 116
P- KR4 with a slight pl us to White . Reshevsky-B otvinnik , World Championship
'

M atch Tournament 1948 .

Anothe r noteworthy altern ative is 8 . . . N-QB3 9 N-B3 PxP 1 0 PxP KN-K2 1 1
QxP R- KN 1 12 Q- R6 (if 1 2 QxRP NxQP !) 12 . . . B-Q 2 1 3 Q-Q2 N-R4 14 P-N3 N ­
B 5 and Black's positional advantage i s well worth the pawn . Dely-Bondarevs ky ,
Leningrad 1959.

9 QxP

C onsistent. Had Black pl ayed 8 ... P><P 9 PxP N- K2 , this capture would not be
possible because of ( 10 QxP) R- N 1 1 1 QxP Q- B6ch winning . But now that Black
h as deci ded to m aintain the tension surrounding the Q- side p awns , White is
allowed to make this capture.
Afte r 9 B-Q2 0 -0 1 0 B-Q3 P-QN3 11 N-R3 B - R3 12 N -B4 Q-Q2 13 P-KR4
BxB 14 PxB QN-B3 15 B - K3 PxP 16 PxP QR-Bl Black has better counter­
chances (Smyslov-B otvinnik , 14th Match Gam e 1 957) because White does not
have the possibility of activating hi s Q B by B-N4 as in either the Reshevsky­
B otvi nnik game mentioned above or the H ort- Petrosian game (illustrative. game
31).

9 R -Nl
10 QxP pxp
11 K-Ql

This move offers the best prospects . After 1 1 N - K2 QN -B3 1 2 B -B4 B-Q2 �3
R-Q1 PxP Black has the better game.

11 •• • B-Q2

1 18
 Botvinnik's improvement, prepared for his first match with Tal. 11 ...
QN-B3 is weaker. See Gligoric-Petrosian, Belgrade 1959 (illustrative game 32).

12 Q- RSch !

If 12 N-B3, then after 12 ... B-R5 13 B-Q3 QxBP, his position immediately
becomes critical. On 12 N-K2, Black can likewise play 12... B-R5, \\·ith the
unpleasant threat of 13 .. . P-Q6. It is easy to see how the move 11 ... B-02 kills
two birds with one stone: strategically it helps complete development and
prepare for castling long and tactically it readies the blow at (Black's) QB7. If
White does not want to come under strong attack, he must play extremely
actively. There is basis for this. With his move 7... P-KB4, Black got rid of his
pawn which was on KB2, for \\'hich the bl ack king often has to play the
unpleasant role of "Guardian". But, on the other hand, the K1-KR4 diagonal
has been weakened, and this diagonal protects the black king when the KBP is
in its original square. Moreover, it has deprived Black's pieces of any future
"material" support in the diagonal. In spite of this, the white queen can now
return to "home shores" with a tempo. - Note by Tal.

12 N-NJ

12... K-Q 1 has also been tried with the idea of avoiding the pin conceded by
.. .N-N3. White then has three possibilities:

( a) 13 B-KNS In his notes to the main game Tal con1mented that this is ho\\' he
had intended to meet 12... K-Q1, ".. . going for the attack". Presumably
Botvinnik prepared an improvement after 13 B-KN5 because he tried 12 ... K-Ql
agains t Tal in the 12th game of their return match in 1961.

(b ) 13 N -B3 This should be met by 13 ...B-R5! bu t Botvinnik played 13... QxBP.

See illustrative game 33.

(c) 13 N-K2 PxP For 13 ... B-R5 see the brilliancy prize game lvkov-Portisch.
Bled 1961 -illustrative game 34. 14 Q -B3 14 P-B4 seems suspect after 14 ... Q­
B4 15 Q-B3 P-Q5! 16 R-QN1 QN-B3 17 N-N3 N-R4 with an excellent game for
Black in Gipslis-Fuchs, Bad Liebenstein 1963. Or here 16 QxNP Q N-B3! 17
QxRch K-B2 18 QxR NxQ 19 N-N3 Q-Q4 20 R-KNl N-R4 with an attack.
14 .. . QN-B3 15 QxQ BP According to Pachman White now has a slight pl us. e. g.

119
15 . . . NxP 16 QxQ ch KxQ 17 N-Q4 N-N5 18 K- K 1 P- K4 19 P-KB3! N - KB3 20 N ­
N 3 QR-QB 1 21 B -N 2, but the American Correspondence player F . K . Lobdell
has found the improvement 19 . . . P><N 20 P><N P><P when Black can prob ably
hold the game . e . g . 21 B - KB4ch K-B3 22 R-QN l P -R3 23 P-QR4 QR- K 1 and
now 24 K-Q2 N-B4 25 P - R5 B - B 1 (not 25 . . . N -K6?? 26 R -N6ch K-B4 27 B ­
Q 6mate ) 2 6 B - Q 3 N -K6 2 7 R -N6ch K-Q2 2 8 R-K 1 N-B5ch 29 BxN RxR 30
BxQP R( K8) - K1 with equality. Fawbush-Lobdell , 1 97 1/2; or 24 K-Q 1 ? N -B4 25
P-R5 N - K6ch 26 K- B 1 N-B5 with a clear advantage to Black . Collins -Lobdell ,
1 97 1 /2 .

'

13 N-K2

White can repeat the position by 13 Q-R7 N-K2 .

[ F rom here on the notes are by Mikhail Tal . ]

O ne must unders tand that such an agreement to a draw would be a

considerable defeat . I t would mean tha t I admitted that I w as wallowing in a
mire of confusion after the first innovation by my opponent .
White ' s 1 3th move attempts to take advantage of the pin . I t threatens 1 4 N -B4
and on 14 . . . K-B2 , the quiet 15 B-Q3 could follow , or the sharper 15 P-N4. Now
Black spent more than a half an hour deliberating over this position , from which
it can be inferred that he had not covered all the subtleties of the variation in his
home l aboratory . The continuation 13 . . . QxKP 14 PxP or 1 3 . . . P><P 14 N -B4 K­
B2 15 B-Q3 (significantly stronger than 15 Q-R7ch, which w as recommended by
Vukovic ) with a number of unpleas ant threats (possible , for example , is the

120
variation: 1 S . . . QN- B 3 1 6 BxP P><B 1 7 P- K6ch BxP 1 8 Q - R 7ch R - N2 1 9 Qx Rch ! )
i s not a t all satisfactory for Black . The straightforw ard 1 3 . .. 8 - RS runs up
aga inst the rej oinder : 14 N-B4 QxBP 15 B -Q3 QxR 1 6 NxN N-B3 1 7 N -B4ch !
(stronger th an the variati on which I examined duri ng the gam e , 1 7 N- K7ch K ­
Q2! 1 8 NxR RxN, with double-edged pl ay ) . Likewise, the problem i s not solved
by 13 . . . N-B3 1 4 pxp R -Q B 1 15 R-R2.
Botvinnik chooses the best contin uati on, which, at the cost of a pav.·n, further
loosens White's king position . Now the gam e takes on a "gambit" character .

13 . . . P-Q6!

Whi te's ansv.·er is forced .

14 PxP B-RSch

H ov.·ever strange it may seem , this natural move does not seem to be qui te
correct . B l ack takes advantage of the opportunity to break the pin on the K -si de
with a tem po , b u t in so doi ng , he drives the whi te king to K 1 , where it is
cons iderably more secure .
White's p roblem v.·ould have been m uch more com plicated after the sim ple
1 4 . . . N- B3 , fol lov.·ed by castling long . The whi te king, \vhose protection on the Q­
si de v.·as quite unreliable , would h ave h ad to v.·aste a tern po to get over to the
other flank via K l . After 1 4 .. . N- B3 , I think that Black v.•oul d have had son1e
real corn pens a tion for his two sacrificed pav.·ns .

IS K-Kl QxKP

This is a fully understandable atten1pt by Black to regain some of his sacri ­

ficed material . but the text move loses a lot of tirn e . 1 5 . . . N- B3 might h ave been
more in the spi ri t of Black's pl an . Nov.·, i t is true, this n1ove is not as strong.
since White can conti n ue 1 6 P- K B4 0-0 - 0 1 7 B-Q 2, gr adually freei ng the
pieces on his K- side . Sooner or l a ter , B lack v.•ill have to sacri fice a knight on K4 .
It is difficult to anticipate future events , but in any cas e , Black n1 i ght h ave the
initiative . I t is tempti ng to look at the continua tion used by the Czech Master
Podgorny, 15 . . . B-N4, but by continuing 1 6 B - N S! BxP 17 K - 0 2 . Whi te seizes
the initi ative .

1 21
 16 B-NS!

The basic problem which now confronts White is how to keep the black king
in tpe centre . In this respect , the loss of White's KP has played into White's
hands , since new threats can be created with the opening of the K-file . White's
unusual plan is brought about by the "lateral" development of the rook .

16 ••• N-B3

The attempt to fight for the initiative via 16 . .. P-BS does not work in view of 1 7
P-Q4 Q - B4 1 8 NxP Q-B7 1 9 N -K2 .

17 P-Q4 Q-B2

After 17 . . . Q- KS 18 R-B 1 !, Black's queen finds that she does not have much
room in the centre of the board . The transition to the endgame, 17 . . . Q-R1 1 8 N ­
B 4 , likewise is not satisfactory for Black .

18 P-R4!

This was not played to begin the advance of the passed pawn (although it will
play its role), but to bring White closer to his goal of getting the KR into the
game and nearer the pressing developments in the centre . On more sluggish
continuations , Bl ack, by pl aying . . . QN- K 2 and preparing to castle long , obtains
a dynamic position . N ow there is no time for 18 . . . QN- K2 , inasmuch as White
simply exchanges on K7 (19 BxN QxB) and by continuing 20 Q-NS, carries the
g ame into extremely prosaic channels . Therefore, Black is forced to meet him
half-way , ope ning lines .

18 ••• P-K4
19 R-R3

Bringing up the reserves and incidentally countering the threat 19 . . . PxP 20

pxp NxQP .

122
 19 . . . Q -B2

Also possible here was 19. . . P-KS. In that case, Black's position would be
rather solid, but he would be threatening absolutely nothing and White could go
about realizing his extra pawn advantage without any hindrance. Bad would be
19 . . . P-BS 20 Q-N4. All of Black's efforts are being directed to the driving back
of the queen on KRS with the rook on KRl, but he is never able to achieve this.

20 pxp N(B3)xP

20 . R-Rl is not possible in vie\\' of 21 P-K6 QxP 22 R-K3 RxQ 23 RxQch K­

. .

B2 24 RxN(N6)!

21 R-K3 K-Q2

Again, 2 l . .. R-Rl 22 RxNch K Q2 23 R-K7ch QxR 24 QxN does not work.

-

22 R-N1

With this unusual manoeuvre, White brings his QR into the game; at the
same time, Black's QNP is attacked.

22 . . . P-N3

It is difficult to imagine how, with the queen on KRS, the weakening of Q R3

can play any role, but nevertheless, it does.
White's problem would have been complicated on 22 .. B-B3. I intended to
.

sacrifice the exchange, transposing into a rather advantageous endgame with 23

N-Q4 P-BS 24 RxN! NxR 25 QxQch NxQ 26 BxP QR-Klch 27 K-Q2, but this
would have been the lesser of two evils for Black. The move 22... P-N3 has
another disadvantage: White can take advantage of the position of the bishop on
QR4, winning an important tempo for the development of the rook.

23 N- B4

White's pieces are poised like a latent mainspring. If Black nOVf' plays 23 . R-
. .

123
Rl, then after 24 NxN NxN 25 Q-K2, the threat Q-R6 (see the preceding note)
must be decisive.

23 ••• QR-Kl
24 R-N4!

Preparing White's next move.

24 ' . . . B-B3
25 Q-Ql!

"The queen has done her job - she is now dismissed." Black never played
...R-KRl. A rather picturesque position has arisen: The white king and queen,
after their long journeys, have returned to their original positions; the KB has
n ot made one move at all, and nevertheless, Black has a very difficult position
on his hands: White not only has a solid extra pawn, but he also has
extraordinarily actively placed pieces - chiefly the rooks, which are effectively
controlling the centre. The impressive mass of black pieces in this region is, in
fact, harmless.

25 •••

And after 2S . . . N-NS 26 R-K2 or 26 RxR RxRch 27 B-K2, Black is lost.

124
 26 R (N4)xN N-N3
27 R- Q4 RxR ch

On 27 . . . P-BS , 28 Q- N4ch decides the issue .

28 PxR

There is no need to withdraw the bishop from its active position on KNS. The
white KP can serve as a shiel d for the king if need be .
However , Black does not succeed in creating any threats whatsoever .

28 . . . K- B2
29 P-B4

This leads to a forced materi al advantage for White . O n 29 . . . N - K 2 , White

continues 30 pxp BxP (or 30 . . NxP 3 1 B-Q B4) 3 1 BxN QxB 32 Q - B 1 ch , giving
.

B lack abs olute ly no chance .

29 • • • pxp
30 BxP Q -N2
31 BxR

N ot a bad course of events for the bishop , w hich had just made its firs t
e ntrance into the game .

31 QxB
32 P- RS

F inally , the passed paw n has its say . B lack r es ign ed.

125
 GAME 30 0 - 0 N-Q2?! 12 P-RS! with the better
game for White.
Wh ite: Epelman
Black: Yurchenk o 9 BxB
10 PxB P-QR4 ?!
Quarterfinal USSR Championship
19 73 I t is naturally tempting to turn a
backward pawn into an outside
Notes by Epelman passed pawn, but the ending is still a
long way off.
1 P- Q4 P-K3 '

2 P-K4 P-Q4 11 P- 84! PxBP .

3 N-QB3 B-N5 12 N-N5 PxP?
4 P-K5 P-QB4
5 P- QR3 BxNch Black should def initely not just
6 P>< B Q- 82 keep on taking everything - ever y
7 N-83 P- QN3 ten1po is pre cious for him now. For
8 P-QR4 B-R3 example, after 12 ...Q-N2 (hindering
the moves Q-B3 and N-K4) 13 P-KB3
N-K2 14 N-K4 0 - 0 15 B-R3 N-Q2 16
N-Q6 Q-B2 17 NxQBP N-Q4 he
could complete his development and
put up a defence.

13 0- 0 N -K 2
14 Q-83 N-Q4
15 B-R3!

So White gets compensation for

his two pawns in the shape of two
diagonals, QR3-KB8 and KR1-QR8.

9 B-QN5ch !? 15 R -R2
16 B-Q6 Q-Q1
White essays one o f the sharpest 17 N-K4 P-84
variations. In his boo k "Spanisch bis
Franzosisch" K eres gives the line 9 Or 1 7... R-Q2 18 B-R3 N-NS 19 N­
BxB NxB 10 Q-K2 N-N1 11 P-RS, Q6ch K-B1 20 P-B3 pxp 21 QxQBP
with complex play. And the game RxN 22 BxN pxB 23 QxNP etc.
Suetin-Donner, Havana 19 68 con­
tinued 9 BxB NxB 10 Q-Q3 N-N1 11 18 P x Pe p
. . P><P

126
 19 KR -K 1 ! R -KB2 ..,

20 N -N 5! N -K2

The threat was QxN.

21 BxN

Accuracy is needed to the very end.

After 21 RxKP?! P><N 22 Q-Q5 P-R3!
-23 QR-K1 KR-R2 Black can defend
himself.

21 Qx 8
22 NxKP ! Q-R2
23 Q-Q5 N -Q2
24 Nx Pch K- 8 1 14 8-N4 R-82!
25 Q-Q6ch K- N 2
26 N -B5ch Res igns The continuation in the game
Spassky-Fuchs, Varna 1958, was
GAME 31 weaker: 14...BxB? 15 N-R5 N-N3 16
BxR B-R3 17 BxP Q-N4 18 0-0 -0
White: Hort N-B3 19 Q-R3 K-B2 20 P-N4! with
Black: Petrosian advantage to White.

European Team Championship 15 P-KR4

Kapfenberg 1 970
Black can defend against 1 5 N-R5
Notes by Nei by 15... K- R1.

1 P K4
- P -K3 15 Bx 8
2 P-Q4 P - Q4 16 Qx8 Q N -83
3 N-Q83 8-N5 17 R -R3 R -Q8I!
4 P- K5 P-Q84
5 P-QR3 8xNch Black's QR is bo und for QB5.
6 P>< 8 Q-82
7 Q- N4 P - 84 18 R-N3 N -Q 1
8 Q-N3 pxp 19 P-R5 R-85
9 pxp N -K2 20 P-R6 N ( K2 ) - 83
10 8-Q2 0 -0 21 N -R5?
11 8-Q3 P-QN3
12 N -K2 8-R3 According to Uhlrnann , 21 P-QB3
13 N-84 Q-Q2 is correct.

127
 21 ... P -N3! �� R -Q3 Q-B4
36 R -Q 81 P -K4
The ex-World C h� rnpion has :> I Q -K 3 P -QS
probably no equal in the pl aying o f 38 Q -K2 NxP(B3)
this type o f position . He do es not fear
the loss of the ex change , for in the Black restores formal equality .
resulting position his cavalry will be White is helpless .
poi sed for acti on . It should, in­
cidentally, be observed that 39 R (Q3) -Q l N -Q4
21 . . . RxQP? fai ls to 22 RxPch RxR 40 Q-Q 2 P -KS
23 N-B 6ch .
'
41 Q -N S N -82
42 R -Q2 N -K3
22 N-86ch RxN 43 Q-R4 P -R4
23 PxR N -82
The seal ed move . On resumption

The natural move 23 . . . NxP was Black speedily reali zed hi s ad­
also strong . vantage .

44 R(81 ) -Q l RxP
24 Q -Q2 45 RxR QxR
46 R -QB I Qx8
Against 24 P-QB3 Petrosian in- 47 RxN P -Q6
tended to play 24 . . . P-K4 \\Tith more 48 R -R6 Q -Q 5
than enoug h compensation for the 49 Resigns
exchange .

GA ME 32
24 Rx QP
25 R -Q 3 R-R5 White: Gligoric
26 R -R3 R -N5 Black: Petrosian
27 K -B l N -Q 3
28 R -Kl K-82 Belgrade 195 9
29 8 -83 N -K5
30 Q -Q 3 N -84 1 P -K4 P -K3
31 Q -Ql R -QB5 2 P -Q4 P -Q4
32 8-N2 P-QN4 3 N-Q83 8-NS
33 Q -K2 Q -Q 3 4 P-K5 P-QB4
34 K-N l N -K5 5 P-QR3 8xNch
6 P><8 Q -82
White 's scattered pi eces are totally 7 Q-N4 P -84
unable to co-operate, and Black 8 Q -N3 N -K2
unhurri edl y strengthens his position . 9 QxP R -N l

128
 10 QxP px p Black h as no time for 1 6 . . . Rx P 1 7
11 K-Q 1 Q N -83 K - K 2! and after 1 8 Q R - KN 1 White ' s
pieces penetrate decisively o n the K ­
side .

17 Q- R 5ch N-N 3
18 N -K5 0 - 0 -0
19 NxN

1 9 N - B 7 Q- B5 20 Nx R QxQ P is
un clear .

19 B-K 1
20 Q-K2

20 Bx P P>< B 2 1 QxPch B- 02
would be a gross blunder.
12 N - 83! NxP
20 8x N
21 P-N3 R-R 1
Whi te 's next move is al so stron g
22 K - Q2 R -R6
agai n s t the altern atives 1 2 . . . P>< P an d
23 Q-K5 QxQ
1 2 . . . B-Q 2 .
24 Px Q Q R -R 1
25 K-K3 Rx RP
13 8- KN5 N (4 ) - N 3
26 Rx R Rx R
27 P- K83
1 3 . . . N - B 2 fai l s to 1 4 BxN R - R 1 1 5
Q - N 7 Qx B 1 6 N - K5 !
Better is 27 P-N4! P - B 5ch 28 KxP
14 8xN Bx B 29 K - N 3 ! or here 27 . . . P-Q5ch
28 K - B4 ! RxPch 29 K- N S B- R 2 JO R ­
A strong al tern ative is 1 4 B- B6! R ­ R l . or 27 . . . R - 1�5 28 P- K B 3 B- 1� 2 29
B 1 (i f 1 4 . . . B- Q2 1 5 N - R4 ! ) 1 5 B-N 7 ! K - B 4 Px P 30 px p Bx B 3 1 Px B \v i t h a
fol lo\ved by P - K R4-5 . good roo k en di ng fo r W h i t e .

14 Nx B 27 B- 1( 1
15 px p B-Q 2 28 P- N 4
16 8-Q3!
Bet t er is 2 8 R- K N 1 !
Not 1 6 N - K 5 ? Q- B 6 !
28 px p
16 ... Q-Q3 29 Px P 1( - Q 1

1 29
 30 R-QN1 P-N3
31 R -N4?! R -R8!
32 R-KB4 R -K8ch
33 K-Q4 R -KN8
34 B-K2 K-K2
35 R -86 R-QR8
36 R -B3 B-N3
37 R-83 K-Q1
38 R -86 B-82
39 R-83 B-N3
40 R -86 8-82
41 R-83 Drawn

12 . . . K-Q1
13 N-B3 QxBP
14 R-R2!

This ugly move is prac tically

forced . If 14 R-QN 1 then 14 . . . B - R5
threatens 1 5 . . P-Q6 and White
.

GAME 33 would have to retreat his knight to

K 1 . Even though Black would have
White: Tal had some difficulty in defending his
Black: Botvinnik p awns on K3 and N2 in this line, I
was not thrilled b y the prospect .
1 2 th Match Game , 1961
14 . . . QN-B3
Notes by Tal
14 B - R5 would not h ave had the
. . .

1 P-K4 P-K3 desired effect now because the square

2 P -Q4 P�Q4 QB2 is defended and White could
3 N -QB3 8-NS immediately chase the black queen
4 P -KS P-QB4 ,. away by 15 B-Q 2 .

5 P-QR3 BxN ch
6 P><B Q-82 15 R-N2
7 Q-N4 P -84
8 Q-N3 N -K2 Now that the threat of . . . B-RS has
9 QxP R -N1 been dealt with the rook occupies the
10 QXP px p open QN-file.
11 K -Q1 B-Q2
12 Q-RS ch 15 . . . K-B2

1 30
 16 R -NS! based on his passed p awn , whic h
usually p lays a maj or part in thi s
vari ation.
All of a sudden it be comes obvious
that the black queen has nowhere to
retreat and White is threatening to
p lay 17 B-N2. Black has only two
possibi liti es : the move play ed and
16 .. .Q-R8. To the las t move White
would have replied 17 R- N2 and the
b lack queen is under arrest. After
17 . . .R-R1 18 Q-NS R (QR1)-K N1 19
Q-Q2 the black queen has diffi culty
in g aining freedom, even though it is
not di rectly threatened.

16 R -R1
17 QxR RxQ
18 B-N2 QxNch 19 N-N3?

Blac k evidently under-estimated

After 18 ... P-R3 19 BxQ PxR 20 Whi te' s respons e . He should have
BxQP or 20 NxP Black would only stop ped the advanc e of the Whi te
have lost a p awn but his bad pawn KRP by p laying 19 .. . R-RS , and if 20
formation together with the opposing B-Bl , then 20 ... P-BS after w hi ch it i s
p assed pawn on the KR- fi le would hard for Whi te to bring his bis hops
have left hi m without muc h c hanc e of into play. After 20 P-KB4 R xBP 21
d efence. The exchange sac ri fice was P-KR4 NxP 22 R-N3 Blac k \\'ould
undoubtedly the best soluti on in the have had a hard struggle ag ainst
circumstanc es . White' s passed paw n .

19 pxQ 20 P-KR4! N (NJ)xKP

An interesting posi ti on has arisen . In the variation 20 . ..RxP 2 1 RxR

Whi te' s p i eces are not parti cularly NxR 22 P-KB4 White 'W'ould
well posi tioned . and moreover his gradually have realized his material
p awn confi guration is compromi sed . advantage.
T he KP is indefensi ble and if Blac k
manag es to win it fairly quic k ly and 21 P- RS N-82
then advance his own KP then his
pawn cen tre wi ll become a s ertous Black did not have the courage to
force. White' s hop es are mainly take t he KBP . After 2l .. . Nx P 22 P-

131
R6 followed by R(NS )-QN3-KN3 he forced to lose the KP and any further
woul d have had to solve some very resistance is useless .
difficult problems .
33 R-R8 N-Q2
22 P-KB4! 34 R-KN8 B-B2
35 R-N7 B-K1
Now Black's central pawns are 36 R-K7 K-Q1
blocked and White brings his pieces 37 RxP B-B2
into play . 38 R-KR6 K-K2
39 B-Q3 B-K3
22 N-Q3 40 R-R5 N-B3
23 R-N3 N-�5
In this position the game was
Black cannot keep his knight on adj ourned and I sealed the move 4 1
this excellent central square since R-NS . Convinced of the hopelessness
White can chase it away by P-KB3 if of his position , Botvinnik resigned
necessary . First of all White gets ri d without resuming play .
of the pawn on Q4.

24 K-K1 R-R3 GAME 34

25 B-K2 B-K1
26 R-Q3 N-B3 White: Ivkov
Black : Portisch
The fate of White's KRP is sealed ,
but by sacrificing it White m anages Bled 1961
to get behind his opponent's front
line . Notes by Keres

27 BxP NxB 1 P-K4 P-K3

28 RxN BxP 2 P-Q4 P-Q4
29 R-Q3 R-R2 3 N-QB3 B-N5
4 P-K5 P -QB4
29 . . . BxB 30 RxR BxR 3 1 PxB N- 5 P-QR3 BxNch
Q2 32 RxP N-B4 33 R-K3 would not 6 pxB Q-B2
have helped either. 7 Q-N4 P -B4
8 Q-N3 N-K2
30 R(Q3) -R3 B-N3 9 QxP R-N 1
31 RxRch NxR 10 QxP pxp
32 R-R6 N-B1 11 K- Q1! B-Q 2
12 Q-R5ch K-Ql
It becomes clear that Black IS 13 N -K 2

132
 In the twelfth game of the Tal· A fter 14 . . . QxBP 15 R - R 2 Black
Botvin nik duel in 1 96 1 . Tal con · can not reply 15 . . . Q- B 3 because of
tin ued \Vi th 1 3 N·B3 , to whi ch Black 1 6 Q·B7 K-Q2 1 7 N - R5 etc . , so he
could have responded well wi th would be forced to play 15 . . . B-Q 2 ,
1 3 . . . B· R5 ! The move in thi s game is which , after 1 6 B-Q 3, Yloul d lead
l vkov's im provement . When him i nto a dreadful situa ti on . The
necessary , the kni ght on K2 can take move actually pl ayed is nothi ng more
up the strong square KB4 . than an act of des peration . Clearly a
ca tas trophe on K3 must soon come
abou t .

15 Q-87

M ore si mpl y, 1 5 B -0 3 woul d be

very strong .

15 8- Q 2
16 8- Q3 Q-Q3

Black 's pos ition is utterly broken .

W hite stan ds so well that with the
s imple 1 7 PxP he could be satisfied
13 8 -R5? \\' ith one m ore p awn a nd a secure
position . But quite j us tifi ably he
What \\'Oul d have been of good ef­ \\'ants m ore than that and plays for
fect after 1 3 N -B 3 is \\'rang here . the attack . Here or even on the
Black shoul d have discovered son1e following move Black co ul d try
other pl an , perhaps 1 3 . . . PxP or . . . QN -B3 .
1 3 . . . P-Q6 14 PxP B- R5ch an d
1 5 . . . Qx K P . 17 R-K l P- K4
18 P -QR4!
14 N -84!
He threa tens the fatal 1 8 B- R 3 .
A fter thi s move , the concept of
Black ' s gan1 e can be said to have 18 8-K1
been sn1 as hed . Bl ack has no real 19 Q -K6
defence for the a ttacked pa\\'n on K3
unless he opts for the ti me·\\·asting Correctly, White does not fight shy
move 1 4 . . B- Q2.
. of exchangi ng queens . In so doi ng he
des troys hi s oppone nt's pawn centre
14 Q x KP and \\'ith uni mpai red strength in-

1 33
volves the b lack king in the attack. mate onl y by 24 . . . NxB 25 RxB ch N­
The gam e is essentially al ready Ql.
decided .
25 NxPch ·K-B2
19 QxQ
20 N x Q ch K-Q2
21 N-BSch K-Bl
22 RxP QN-B3
23 R-K2 RxP

Black coul d continue his resistance

by 23... PxP , but after 24 B -K B4! he
would certainly not escape defeat.
H owever, the move actually mad e
enables his opp onent to ex ecute a
br ill iant and conclusive attack,
m ak ing this game rank as one of the
finest at the Bled tournam ent.
26 B-B4ch ! N-K4
� After 26 . . .KxN we have another
�
m ate variation: 27 R-Nl ch K-R3 28
B-Q3ch K-R4 29 B- B 7ch KxP 30 R­
Rl mate.

27 RxN NxB

In this way perhaps Black hop es to

save his k ing, but som ething else
mater ial izes.

28 R-K7 dbl eh K-B3

29 R -QB7ch K-N3
30 R -N 1ch K-R3
24 BxPch ! K-Ql R-B6ch!
31

The first fine mate variation ap ­ Y et another probl em move, to

pears after 24...K - B2 25 B-B4 ch K­ vacate the square QB 7 for the
N3 26 R-N l ch KxN 27 R-NS ch K-BS bishop. A third mate var iation,
28 B-Q 3ch KxP 29 B-Q2 mate. B lack 31 . . . BxR 32 N-BS ch K -R4 33 B-B 7
could extricate himself from a direct mate, for ces Black to resign .

134
 Part Two

Other Systems with 3 N-QB3

1 P-K4 P-K3
2 P-Q4 P-Q4
3 N-QB3

3 ... N-KB3
3 ... N-QB3
and 3 ... pxp

135
 Chapter S

The Classical Variation

White: Shabanov
Black: Osnos

U S S R 196 1

1 P-K4 P-K3
2 P- Q4 P- Q 4
3 N-QB3 N-KB3

The oldest method of play in the French Defence has been somew hat
neglected of late. Perhaps the reason for this is that Black cannot avo id concrete
variations whi ch tend to favour White, as practi cal results have shown . The
move is less s harp than 3 . . . B- NS a nd therefore it offers l ess counterplay .

136
 4 B-KNS

The m ost popular conti nuation and the logi cal \\'a y to increase the tensi on.
S tei ni tz used to fa vour 4 P-K5 but after 4... KN-Q2 the fixed pawn centre gives
Bla ck suffi ci ent counterplay by m eans of . .. P-QB4 a nd . . . P- KB3. e . g.:

(a) 5 QN-K2 P-QB4 6 P-Q83 N-Q83 7 P- K84 P-84 7.. P-B3 i s also perfectly .

pla yable . 8 N-83 8-K2 and White ca nnot transpose to a favourable form of the
Leni ngrad Variation (see later) , as the k ni g ht on K 2 is blocking the KB . T he
g a m e Enevoldsen-Gilfer, H elsi nki Olympi ad 195 2 . conti nued : 9 N-N3 pxp 10
pxp 0-0 1 1 8-K2 Q-N3 1 2 0 -0 P-KN4! 13 PxP N (83)xKP with an excellent
game for Black .

(b) 5 P- 84 T he m ost natural m ov e w hi ch S tei nitz him self preferred . 5 ...P-QB4 6

pxp I f White tri es to defend his Q4 squa re, s ha rp variati o ns arise e. g . 6 N-B3 N­
QB3 7 B -K 3 Q-N3 (there are wild compli cations a fter Korchnoy' s sugg ested
7 .. PxP 8 KNxP Q-N 3) 8 N-QR4 Q-R4ch 9 P-B3 px p 1 0 P-QN4 NxNP 1 1 PxN
.

BxPch 12 B-Q2 BxB ch 13 NxB P- QN3! 14 R-QN 1 B-R 3 15 Q-N3 R-QB 1 with
chances to bot h sides. T he game Bronstein-Portisch, Am sterd am 19 64,
continued 16 P-QR3 BxB 17 RxB R-B5 18 N-N2 R-B6 19 Q-N4 QxP. 6...N- QB3
7 N - 83 Better than 7 P-QR3 B xP 8 Q-N4 0-0 9 N-B3 N-Q5 10 B-Q3 P-B4 11 Q­
R3 P-QR 3 12 B-Q2 P-QN4 13 0-0-0 NxN 14 QxN B-N2 15 N- K 2 Q-B2 and
Bla ck ha d good pla y in T a rrasch-Ma rshall, 1905 . 7 ... 8xP 8 8 - Q3 P-83! I t is
essenti al to atta ck t he centre at once . 9 pxp NxP 10 Q-K2 0-0 1 1 8-Q2 N- Q5
Or 1 1 ... B-Q2 12 0-0-0 K-R 1 13 QR- K 1 P-QN4 , Tri ngov-Fuchs, Sofi a 1958,
leading to complex but rewarding (for Bla ck ) pla y . 1 2 NxN BxN wit h even
chances .

4 . . . B-K2

For 4. .. PxP see chapter 8 a nd for 4. .. B-N5 see chapter 7 .

Now Bla ck threatens 5 .. . NxP a nd so White m ust soli dify t he centre.

5 P-KS

A nderss en ' s i d ea , 5 8xN 8><8, reduces Black ' s p ressure on White's centre but

137
only at the cost of conceding the two bishops . With careful defence Black can
parry White's attack . e . g . :

(a) 6 N-B3 P-B4! N ot 6 . . . 0-0 ? ! 7 B - Q3 P- B4 8 P- K5 B- K2 9 P- KR4 ! P - B4 (not

9 . . . PxP 10 BXPch KxB 1 1 N-NSch K- R3 1 2 Q-Q3 P- KN3 13 P-R5 ! BxN 1 4
P><Pch B- R5 15 Q-N3 pxp 1 6 RxBch K-N2 1 7 R-N4 with a strong attack . ) 10
pxp e . p . PxBP 1 1 N - KN5 ! with a good attack . 7 PxQP Black has a comfortable
game after 7 P- K5 B- K2 8 B - Q3 pxp 9 KNxP N- QB3 . 7 . . . KPxP 8 B-NSch N-B3
9 Q-K2ch Black has good play after both 9 0-0 0-0 10 pxp Q-R4 ! 1 1 B- Q3 B ­
K 3 and 9 pxp 0-0 ! 9 . . . B-K3 1 0 NxP After 10 N- K5 0 - 0 1 1 BxN pxp Black has
the advantage . 10 . . . QxN 11 P-B4 Q-Q1 12 P-QS Q-R4ch! 13 K-Bl 0 - 0 14 PxB
PxP 1 5 BxN PxB with excellent chances for Black . Karaklaic-Glig oric ,
Yugoslavia 1949 .

(b) 6 P-KS B-K2 7 Q-N4 0-0 7 . . . K-B 1 8 B- Q3 is a little better for White . 8 B- Q3
White can also play 8 0-0-0 which usually transposes . 8 . . . P- QB4 9 pxp
Weaker is 9 Q -R3 P- KN3 10 pxp N-B3 1 1 P- B4 BxP 1 2 N - B3 P- B3 1 3 Q - R6 R­
B2 . Charousek-Maroczy , 1897 . 9 . . . N-B3 10 P-B4 Black has the advantage after
10 N- B3 P- B4 1 1 Q - R3 BxP 12 0-0 B- Q2 13 P- KN4 N-N5 14 P-NS P- Q5 15 N­
K2 NxB 1 6 PxN P-B5 . Richter- Stahlberg , M unich 1936. 10 . . . P-B4 1 1 Q-R3 P­
QN3 Or 1 1 . . . Q-R4 12 0-0-0 P-Q5 13 N-N1 N-N5 ! 14 B- B4 NxRPch (or
14 . . . QxBP) with a clear advantage to Black . 12 0-0-0 pxp and Black ' s strong
centre guarantees him the better chances.

5 ••• KN- Q2
The natural retreat. Tartakower' s move 5 . . . N- K5 leaves Black with a weak
paw n at K5 after Bx B QxB (even worse is 6 . . . NxN 7 Q -N4 QxB 8 QxN P Q-N5
9 QxRch K- Q2 10 B-Q 3 QxNP 1 1 R-Q 1 NxR 12 KxN QxQP 1 3 QxP , ,vhen

138
White has an import ant lead in development ) 7 NxN P><N 8 0- K2 P-ON3 (or
8 . . . N -Q2 9 0-0-0 P- K B4 1 0 P><P e . p . NxP 1 1 P- B3 ! pxp 1 2 NxP with pressu re
on Black 's KP) 9 0-0-0 B-N2 1 0 P - K N 3 P-0 B4 1 1 B-N 2 N - B3 1 2 P><P 0-N4ch
1 3 K-N 1 Ox K P 14 Bx P QxBP 1 5 N-B3 and White is somewhat better.
An even more peculiar idea is Nimzovic. h 's S N-N l which has been seen in
. . .

som e of Heidenfel d ' s ga mes .

The mos t effective ans\\·er seem s to be the retreat 6 B- K3 , stressing the

ret arded developme n t of Bl ack's K-side by leaving Bl ack ' s KN and K B on
a\\'k\\·ard squares . 6 BxB NxB is harmless . m erely helping Black ' s KN to reach a
good s quare (even 6 . . . OxB is pl ayable . intending to develop the k night via K R3
to K B4 as in M arco-Albin , Carlsb ad 1 90 1 ) . Also , the imitation of the
Albin / Ch a ta rd/ Alekhine A ttack does not work well here : 6 P- K R4 Bx B 7 pxB
OxP 8 N - R3 0 - K2 9 N - B4 (or 9 Q-N4 P- KB4 , Dennehy-Heidenfeld . Dublin
1 964 ; an d Krai ko-Heiden feld , Berne 1 968) 9 . . . P- KN3 and Wh ite has
i n sufficien t compensation for the pawn . Bl ack' s KN is better placed on KN 1
th an on 0 2 because his 0 -side pieces can be developed more quickly and his
king will soon reach safety . Black' s QN goes to K B l vi a Q2 and after . . . B- Q2
Black is ready to castle .
Let us now ex amine the possibilities after 6 B-K3: 6 P-QN 3 7 P· KR4 ! The
. . .

threat is 8 P - RS an d so Black must \Vea ken his K -side in order to p revent this
advance. But if White pl ays 7 Q-N4 P- KN3 and then 8 P- KR4 , Black's reply
8 . . . P- K R4 s ho\vs that White ' s queen is mispl aced and it is easier for the second
pl ayer to e qualize . I n the game U nzicker- Heidenfel d . Dublin 1 967 , Whi te
played 7 Q -N4 P- KN3 and then 8 N- B3 . After 8 . . . B- R3 9 0- 0-0 Bx B 1 0 K RxB
P- K J{4 1 1 Q-N3 0 - 02 1 2 B-NS N- 0B3 13 0- B4 Bx B 14 Nx B N- 0 1 15 P- KR3 P­
Q B3 1 6 P-KN4 0- K2 1 7 Q-Q2 N - R3 18 R - R 1 N -N 2 . Black castled 0 -side an d
then equ a lized by attacking White ' s cen tre with . . . P- KB3 . Yet a nother
possibili ty is the pla n of sin1 ple developn1 ent with 7 N- B3 B-R3 8 Bx B Nx B 9 Q-

139
K2 N-N 1 10 0-0 Q-Q2 as in Letelier-Heidenfeld , H avana Olympiad 1 966, when
White was unable to develop a significant initiative because of his obstructed
QBP. 7 P-KR4 8 B-K2 P-N3 8 . . . BxP 9 P- KN3 B - K2 10 RxP RxR 1 1 BxR
. . .

favours White . 9 N-B3 B-R3 10 Q-Q2 BxB 11 NxB White has the advantage
because he is ahead in development and ready for the thematic break P-QB4 .
The game Mikenas- Vistaneckis, Lithuania 1 947 , continued : 1 1 . . . P- QB4 ?
( Black should not open the position while he is behind in development) 1 2 P-B4 !
PxQP 1 3 N(B3)xP P><P 1 4 Q - B2 Q-Q4 15 N-B4 ! QxKP? 1 6 0-0-0 R-R3 1 7
N( B4)x KP! P><N 1 8 BxR NxB 1 9 QxNPch N- B2 20 Q-N8ch B- B 1 2 1 NxP ! and
W hite crashed through .

6 IJxB

For 6 P- KR4 see the next chapter .

6 •••

This i s the standard position of the CHtssical Variation . White has a space
advantage and he usually has the better bishop in an ending . Perhaps this is why
Black's set-up has gone out of fashion .

7 P-B4!

Probably the strong�st continuation , supporting the KP in preparation for

meeting . . . P-QB4 with PxP.

140
 The principal alternative is 7 Q- Q2 0-0 8 P-B4 Even now this is the strongest
move . 8 P- QB4 9 N-B3 N- QB3 10 PxP! Bl ack has good cou nterpl ay after 10 0-
. . .

0-0 P- B5 ! 10 . . . NxBP 10 . . . P- 84 1 1 pxp e . p . Qx K B P 12 P- KN3 NxP 13 0-0-0

transposes . 1 1 0- 0-0 A fter 1 1 B - Q3 P- B3 12 pxp QxP 13 P- KN 3 NxBch 14
QxN ( 1 4 PxN P- K4 ! ) 14 . . . B - Q2 15 0-0 QR- 81 1 6 QR- K 1 B- K1 Black ob tained
equality in Bhend-Christoffel , Zurich 1 9 6 1 . 11 P-B3· A fter 1 1 . . . P-QR3 12 B­
. . .

Q3 P- QN4 1 3 N- K2 B-N2 14 N( B3) - Q4 NxN 1 5 NxN White had a positional

advantage in Gligoric-Stahlberg , 7th M atch Game 1 949, in view of his
beauti fully centralized knight . 12 PxP QxP 13 P-KN3 R-Q1 14 N- Q4 N-KS 15
Q-K3 and White 's position is to be preferred .
Weaker possibil ities for White are :
(a) 7 N -N5 N -N3 8 P-0 B3 P-QR3 9 N -Q R 3 P-Q B4 10 P- K B4 N - B3 1 1 N - B 2 N ­
B 5 1 2 R- N 1 P- QN4 w ith e qual chances . Lasker-Lilienthal , Moscow 1 936 ;
(b ) 7 B - Q3 0-0 8 QN- K 2 P- QB4 9 P-QB3 P-B3 10 KP><P QxP 1 1 N- B3 N - B3
1 2 0 - 0 P- K4 with equality ;
(c) 7 N - B3 0-0 8 B - Q3 P- OB4 9 pxp N-QB3 and White has insufficient control
over his K5 square ;
( d ) 7 Q-N4 0-0 8 N B3 P- QB4 9 B- Q3 (threatening 1 0 BxPch KxB 1 1 N- KN5ch
-

K-N 1 1 2 Q-R5) 9 . . P- B4 10 pxp e .p . RxP 1 1 Q-R4 N - B 1 1 2 PxP QxP 13 0-0 N­

.

B3 14 QR - K 1 B-Q2 w ith a good ga me for Bl ack . Bernstein- Lasker , Zurich 1 93 4 .

7 • • • 0-0

The exchange sacrifice 7 . . . P-Q B4 8 N -N5 0 - 0 hardly seems good enough

after 9 N - B7 pxp 1 0 NxR P- B3 1 1 N -B3 (or 1 1 N - B7 pxp 1 2 N - N5 P-0R3 1 3
NxP PxN 1 4 QxP ! ) 1 1 . . . PxP 1 2 pxp N - Q B3 1 3 B-Q3 N(Q2)xP 1 4 0-0 N- KN5
1 5 N-Q2! \vith advant age to White . Levenfish-Fahrni , Carl sbad 19 1 1 .
We must also mention 7 . . P-QR3 8 N-B3 P- Q B4 9 pxp N-QB3 10 Q - Q 2 QxP
.

1 1 P- QR3 P- QN4 1 2 0 - B2 B - N 2 13 QxQ NxQ 1 4 0-0-0 \vith a positional plus

to Whi te , as he can play B - Q3 , K R- K 1 and N - K 2- Q4 .

8 N-83 P-·Q B4
9 pxp

Also possible is 9 B- Q3 P-84 The threat was 1 0 BxPch etc . 10 Px P e .p . RxP

After 1 0 . . . QxP White has chances with Bronstein ' s suggested 1 1 N- KN5 , e.g .
1 1 . . . OxB P (if 1 1 . . . P- KN 3 1 2 Q-N4 ! ) 1 2 BxPch K - R 1 1 3 Q-02 OxOP (he should
have tried 13 . . . QxOch 14 KxO R- B7ch) 14 QxO PxO 1 5 N-N5 N- R3 1 6 NxOP
N - 83 1 7 B- 03 \Vith the better ending for White . Ravins ky-Orlov , M oscow 1 964 .

141
11 Q-Q2 N-83 12 pxp NxP 13 0-0 NxB 14 PxN Q-KB2 No better is 14 . . . B- Q2
15 QR-K1 Q-NS 1 6 P-KN3 B - K 1 1 7 P-QR3 Q-N3ch 1 8 K-N2 with advantage to
White . Gligoric-Yanofsky , Dallas 1957 . 15 N .. K2 B- Q2 16 Q-K3 QR- KB1 (so
far as in Bronstein -Yanofsky , S altsj obaden 1948) 17 QxRP! P- QN3 18 Q-R3
_
with advantage to White .

9 • • • P-B4

9 . . . P-B3 10 PxP is the same thing .

10 PxP e .p . QxKBP
11 P-KN3 NxP
12 B-Q3 N-B3
13 0-0

It is worth delaying Q-Q2 in order to restrict Black' s central activity .

13 • • • B-Q2
14 Q-Q2 B-K1

The bad bishop tries to improve its position , but this involves a loss of time.

15 QR-Kl NxB
16 PxN B-R4
17 N-KS!

Once Black' s knight is exchanged, White will have domination of the black
squares .

17 NxN
18 RxN B-NS
19 Q-K3 Q-Ql
20 Q-Q4 Q-N3

The exchange of queens only helps White .

142
 21 QxQ PxQ
22 P-QR3 QR -Bl
23 N-NS B-R6
24 R ( B l ) -Kl R-B7
25 R ( KS) -K2 RxR
26 RxR P-N4

I i
i i
t2J i i
fl
fl fl fl j_ l
fl !1 fl
�

This tactic fails because of a counter-tactic .

27 K-B2! B-NS

Not of cou rse 27 . . . PxP 28 pxp RxPch ? 29 K-N3 winning a piece .

28 R-KS P-R3
29 K-K3 PxPch
30 pxp K-B2
31 N-Q4 R-KN I
32 P-BS ! BxP
33 N xB PxN
34 RxBPch K-K3

Black has managed to exchange minor pieces but the rook ending is los t .

1 43
 35 R-R5 R-N3
36 K-Q4 R-N5ch
37 K-B3 R-N 3
38 K-N4 K-Q3
39 K-N5 K-B2
40 P-N4!

After 40 RxQP Black could pl ay 40 . . R-N7 .

.

'

40 ... R-Q3
41 R-B5 K-Nl

Black is in zugzwang .

42 P-Q4! K-Rl
43 P-KR4! K-Nl
44 P-R5 K-Rl
45 R-B8ch K-R2
46 P-R4

The zugzwang position is perfect , but this very fact allows a stalem ate
attempt .

46 ... R-Ql
47 R-B6 R-KBl
48 RxNP R-B5
49 K-BS Resigns

1 44
 Chapter 6

The Albin/Chatard/ Alekhine Attacl{

White: Gligoric
Black : Yanofsky

S altsj ob aden In terzon al 1 948

1 P-K4 P-K3
2 P - Q4 P- Q4
3 N-QB3 N-KB3
4 B-KNS B-K2
5 P - KS KN -Q2
6 P-KR4! ?

1 45
 This move leads to great complications about which no final judgement has
yet been made . White offers a pawn for the sake of a lead in develop ment an d
attacking chances on the K-side . In particular White hopes to take advantage of
the half-open K R-file ( if Black accepts the gambit) or j ust to obtain a space
.
advantage on the K-side and to interfere with Black' s norm al development while
at the s ame time m aintaining the tension between the dark squared bishops .

6 ••• P-QB4

The sharpest reply , allowJng the wild complications arising from N-N5 , but
fighting for control of White 's Q4 square .
Most of the alternative moves have disappeared from tournament play :

(a) 6 . . . P- QR3 A move suggested by M aroczy , preparing . . . P- QB4 without being

worried by N- QN5 . 7 Q-N4 P-KB4 Or here 7 . . . K-B1 8 Q-B4 P- QB4 9 pxp N­
QB3 10 N- B3 with the better game . 8 Q-RSch P-N3 9 Q-R6 BxB 10 PxB K-82 1 1
KN-K2 P-84 12 N-B4 N-B1 Not 1 2 . . . PxP 1 3 NxNP ! etc . 1 3 PxP N-83 14 P-KN4
NxP 15 B-K2 Q-B2 16 PxP N-B6ch 17 BxN QxN 18 P-B6! with a winning attack .
Unzicker-Czerniak , Amsterdam Olympiad 1954 .

(b) 6 . . . P-KB3 7 Q-RSch K-81 White has the advantage after 7 . . . P-N3 8 pxp
NxP 9 Q-K2 P-B4 10 PxP N - B3 1 1 0-0-0 0-0 1 2 N-R3 . Sanguinetti-Benko ,
1 954 . 8 PxP NxP 9 Q-83 P-84 10 PxP P-QN3 A pawn sacrifice recommended by
Stahlberg . Acceptance gives Black . good play . 1 1 P-RS ! P-KR3 Black has no
time for 1 1 . . . PxP 1 2 P - R6 P-N3 1 3 0- 0-0 QN-Q2 (or 1 3 . . . N-B3 1 4 N- K4 K -B2
15 N- R3 N- Q5 16 RxN PxR 1 7 BxN etc . ) 14 R- K 1 with a clear plus to White .
Unzicker- Stahlberg , Stockholm 1960 . 12 BxN Bx8 13 N-R3! and White is
better.

(c) 6 . . . P-KR3?! 7 BxB QxB 8 P-B4 P- QR3 9 Q -N4 P-KB4 10 pxp e .p . NxP 1 1
Q-N6ch Q-82 1 2 8- Q3 QxQ 1 3 8xQch K-K2 1 4 i'� -83 R- Q1 1 5 0- 0 - 0 with a
big advantage in the endgame . Velimirovic-Lontoc , Nice Olympiad 1974 .

(d) I t is not clear, however, that Black cannot afford to accept the gambit pawn :
6 . . . Bx8 7 PxB QxP This continuation has , perhaps wrongly , disappeared from
tournament practice . 8 N-R3 Q -K2 After 8 . . . Q-R3 9 N- QN5 ! N - R3 10 P- KB4 it
is difficult for Black to find a good plan . 9 N-84 P- QR3 After 9 . . . N- B 1 10 Q-N4
P- KB4 1 1 pxp e . p . P><P 1 2 0-0-0 P- B3 1 3 R- K 1 White had good play in
Alekhine-Fahrni , M annheim 1 91 4 . Ho\vever, in the game Westman ­
Westerinen , Helsinki 1961 , Black succeeded with 9 . . . P- KN3 ! 10 Q-N4 N- QB3 ,

146
followed by . . . N-N3 , . . . B -Q 2 , . . . 0-0-0 an d a l ater Q-side attack . For a more
detailed discussion of the possibilities for both sides see illustr ative ga me 35 . 10
Q -N4 P- KN3 11 0-0-0 N-N3 12 B- Q3 N (N1 ) - Q2 13 R-R6 N- 81 and White ' s
advantage i s not easy to demonstrate .

7 BxB!

The best way to retain some positional advantage . The a lternatives are :

(a) 7 Q-N4 BxB After 7 . . . N-QB3 8 B x B KxB 9 Q -N5ch K-B 1 1 0 QxQch NxQ 1 1
P- B4 White has the better ending . White also has the advantage after 7 . . . P-B4 8
Q-R5ch P- KN3 9 Q - R6 B- B1 1 0 BxQ BxQ 1 1 B- KN5 . If 7 . . . K-B 1 8 N- B3 N­
QB3 9 Q - B4 PxP 1 0 N-N5 P - Q R3 11 N(N5)xP N- B4 with unclear play . 8 QxB I f
8 PxB P>< P ! 8 . . . QxQ 9 PxQ N- QB3 10 pxp After 10 N-N5 K- K2 ! i s good for
Black . 10 . . . N ( B3)xP 1 1 P-QN4 P-QR4 12 N-NS K-K2 13 P- QB3 P- QN3 with
good play for Black .

(b) 7 N-NS P- 83! 8 B- Q3 A fter 8 P>< KB P NxP 9 B- KB4 0 - 0 ! 10 N- B7 ? N- K 1 !

White is los t . 8 . . . P- QR3 9 Q-RSch K-81 10 R-R3 White is committed to the
attack . 10 N- K R3 fails to 10 . . . PxQ P 1 1 N - B4 NxP 1 2 N(N5)xP Q-N3 13 0-0-0
QxN 14 B-N5 QxRch 15 KxQ R P>< B . R agozin-Yanofsky , 1948. 10 . . . PxN 11 B­
R6! Q-R4ch 12 8- Q2 Q-82 13 R-N3 PxQP 14 N - 83 NxP There i s no better
defence to be found . 15 RxP! P-R3! Not 15 . . . NxNch 1 6 K-Q 1 ! or 15 . . . KxR 16 B­
R6ch w inning . The text move sets a devilish trap , as now 16 BxR P loses to
1 6 . . . RxB 1 7 QxR B- N5ch and 1 8 . . . QxR . 16 B-R7 ! KxR 17 QxPch K-82 18 Q ­
RSch drawn by perpetu al chec k . Rossetto-Stahlberg , Vina del Mar 1947 .

147
 7 • • • KxB

According to the latest analysis , the sacrifice by 7 . . . QxB is insufficient : 8 N­

NS 0-0· 9 N-B7 PxP 10 NxR P-B3 If 10 . . . N- QB3 1 1 N- B3 P-B3 12 NxP P><P 1 3
NxP QxN 14 N- B7 followed by 15 QxP with advantage . O r 10 . . . NxP 1 1 QxP
QN-B3 1 2 Q -Q2 P-QN3 1 3 B- K2 B -N2 1 4 N - B3 followed by 15 0-0-0 as in
Riumin-Lilienthal , Moscow 1935 . Or finally 10 . . . Q-N5ch 1 1 Q-Q2 QxP 12 R­
Q 1 N- QB3 1 3 N- B3 N-B4 ( 1 3 . . . N (Q2)xP 14 NxN NxN 15 QxP ! ) 14 B - Q3 B - Q2
15 N- B7 R-B1 1 6 N(B7)xP PxN 1 7 0-0 w ith good play for White . Christoffel­
Guim ard , Groningen 1 946 . 1 1 QxP N-B3 12 Q-Q2 PxP 13 0-0-0 N-B3 14 P-B3
Q- Q3 15 N-K2 B-Q2 16 N- B3 RxN 17 N-K4! with some advantage to White .
'
Bronstein- Stahlberg , 1 950 .

8 P-84 Q-N3

Still the best move , as after 8 . . . PxP 9 QxP N-QB3 10 Q-Q2 Black has a
permanent weakness on the dark squares .

9 N-B3

Another. good idea is 9 N-R4 Q -R4ch 10 P- B3 P><P 1 1 P-QN4 , or here 9 . . . Q­

B3 10 NxP NxN 1 1 PxN QxP 12 Q-Q2 with a positional plus .

9 • • • N-QB3

After this White obtain s the better. game , but 9 . . . QxNP seems dubious after
1 0 N- QN5 N-R3 1 1 P-QR3 threatening the powerful R- QN1 followed by Q-B 1 .

10 N-QR4! Q-R4ch
11 P-B3 pxp

White has the advantage after 1 1 . . . P- QN4 1 2 NxP NxN 1 3 PxN P-N5 1 4 N­
Q4! etc .

12 P-QN4 Q-B2

148
 A fter 1 2 . . . NxNP 1 3 PxN QxPch 14 K - B2 P- QN4 15 BxP QxB 16 NxP Q-R3 1 7
Q-N3 White has a strong attack for the paw n .

13 NxP P- Q R3
14 R-R3 N-N3
15 N-B5 B-Q2
16 P-R4 QR- QN 1
17 P-QR5 N-Bl
18 R - K3!

Preventing Black ' s sole counterplay o f . . . P� B3 .

18 N (B l ) -R2
19 N-B3 P-KN3
20 Q-Q2 B-B1
21 Q - KB2 P-R4
22 Q-N3 K-K1
23 K-B2 N-K2
24 B-Q3 B-Q2
25 K-N1

1 49
 White can take time to prepare the final break-through as Black' s weakness
on the dark squares will sooner or later be fatal .

25 • • • B-N4
26 BxB NxB
27 R-Q3 N-R2
28 QR-Ql N(R2) -B3
29 Q-B2 K-Bl
30 N-N5 Q-Bl
31 P-B4! K-N2

White has a decisive attack after both 3 1 . . . NxNP 3 2 R- QN3 and 3 l . . . PxP 3 2
R - Q7 etc .

32 pxp NxQP
33 P-B5! NPxP
34 RxN!

An elegant final attack.

34 ... PxR
35 P-K6 P-B3

Or 3S . . . PxP 36 N(BS)xKPch followed by 3 7 RxP winning .

36 N-B7 N-K2
37 Q-Q4 N-B3
38 QxQP R-Ql
39 N-Q7! K-N3
40 R-KBl N-K2
41 Q-Q4 Resigns

150
 GA ME 35 11 0 - 0-0 N - N3

White: Westman Considerably less active is 1 1 . . .

Black: Westerinen N - B 1 1 2 Q -N 3 Q -NS 1 3 B - NS ! with
the possibility of a kn ight s acrifice on
Student Olympiad QS. B alashov-Pismeni , Moscow
H elsin ki 1961 Championship 1974 .

I P- K4 P- K3 12 R- R6 B- Q2
2 P- Q4 P- Q4 13 B-Q3?
3 N - QB3 N - KB3
4 B- KN5 B- K2 A serious strategic error . Wh ite's
5 P- KS KN- Q2 bishop plays no useful part in the
6 P- KR4 BxB att ack on Bl ack' s K-side, \\7hereas
7 pxo QxP Bl ack' s B3 knight is useful and
8 N- R3 Q - K2 should be exch anged . A fter Keres '
9 N- 84 P- KN3! suggestion 1 3 B- NS , followed by
BxN , Wh ite can build up on Bl ack 's
WJ I KRP without worrying about a Q­
§I side counterattack .

13 0 -0-0
14 QR- Rl Q -N5 !
15 N ( B4 ) - K2 NxKP

Already White is lost .

16 Q -N3 N ( K4 ) - 85
17 BxN N xB
18 P-N3 Q -R6ch
19 K-QI N-Q3
Depriving W hite of the use of his 20 Rxpp RxR
K RS square . 21 RXP

10 Q -N4 N - Q B3 Although White h as reg ained one

of the pawn s , Black still has an easy
By om itting . . P-QR3 , Black h as win th an ks to his strong Q-s ide
saved a tetn po for the development of attack .
his Q -side . The disadvant age of this
p l an is th at White is given the oppor­ 21 P- QN4
tunity to pl ay B- NS . 22 N - 81 P- N5

15 1
 23 N(B3 ) .. K2 B-N4 30 N- R3 N -B4
24 Q-KS Q-N7 31 QxNP N-K6ch
25 N-B4 Q-B6 32 K- Q2 N-B5ch !
26 Q -K3 33 K-Ql N-K6ch

The best ch ance . If Black Both players were short of tim e.

exchanges queens White can
manoeuvre a knight to KS with good 34 K-Q2 QxBPch
counterplay . 35 KxN QxNch
36 K-B2 Q-N7ch
26 . . . Q-N7 37 K-N3 Q-K4ch
27 P- KB3 N-B4 38 K-B2 B-Kl
28 Q-Q2 NxP
29 RxP R- Rl White lost on time.

152
 Chapter 7

The MacCutcheon Variation

White : U mi
Black : Chistiakov

M oscow 1956

1 P-K4 P-K3
2 P-Q4 P- Q4
3 N-QB3 N -KB3
4 B-KNS B-NS

This is a more aggressive contin u ation than 4 . B- K 2 but one that allows
. .

White to make better use of his in iti ative . Although B l ack can soon get rid of the
dangerou s pin on his KN he does so only at the cost of conceding the bishop
p a1r .

153
 5 P-K5

The continuation 5 P><P QxP 6 BxN P><B 7 N- K2 ! ? w as given a new lease of

life in Vila-Mondragon , Siegen Olympiad 1 970 (illustrative game 36 ), but Black
can meet 5 PxP with 5 . . . PxP , transposing to a satisfactory line of the Exchange
Variation .

5 • • • P-KR3
6 B-Q2!

The move which introduces the richest variations and which has given White
good play in practice . Black ' s only active reply is to keep his KN in the centre ,
but in order to do so he must first part with his KB which could have been useful
in the defence of his K-side . Before we continue with the m ain line let us have a
quick look at White 's alternative sixth moves :

(a) 6 PxN PxB 7 PxP R-N 1 8 P-KR4 P><P 9 Q-RS Or 9 Q-N4 Q-B3 1 0 RxP QxNP
1 1 QxQ RxQ 12 R-R8ch B-B 1 ( 1 2 . . . K-Q2 is possible) 13 0 -0 -0 P-QB3 and
Black should equalize by . . . N-Q2, . . . P - N3 , . . . B-N2 and . . . 0-0-0 9 . . . Q-B3 10
QxRP QxNP 11 N-B3 N-83 12 Q-84 B-Q3 13 Q-K3 N-K2 with equality .

(b) 6 BxN P><B 7 Q-N4 PxP 8 Q-N7 K-K2! 9 PxP Q-Nl with good pl ay for Black .

(c) 6 B-K3 N-K5 7 Q-N4 Or 7 N- K2 P-QB4 8 P- QR3 B- R4 9 P- QN4 NxN 10 NxN

PxNP 1 1 N- N5 with an attack for the pawn . Soller- Keres , 1934 . 7 . . . K-B1 8 P­
QR3 BxNch 9 PxB NxQBP 10 B- Q3 with some initiative for the pawn .

(d) 6 B-R4 P-KN4 7 B-N3 N-K5 8 N-K2 P- QB4 9 P- QR3 BxNch 10 NxB Q-R4
1 1 Q-Q3 N- QB3 12 PxP B- Q2 13 0-0-0 NxN 14 QxN QxQ 15 PxQ R- QBl with
an even game . Bernstein -Swiderski , Coburg 1904 .

6 • • • BxN
7 PxB

If 7 BxB N- K5 8 B-N4 (or 8 B-R5 ? ! 0- 0 9 B - Q3 N- QB3 10 B- B3 NxB 1 1 PxN

P- B3 1 2 P- KB4 PxP 13 BP><P N- K2 14 N- B3 P- B4 1 5 0-0 Q- R4 1 6 Q - K1 B-Q2
with a good g ame for Black . Fischer-Petrosian , Curacao Candidates '

154
Tournament 1 962) 8 . . . P- QB4 ! 9 BxP (9 P><P? Nx K BP ! ) 9 . . . NxB 1 0 PxN N - Q2
1 1 Q - Q4 Q - B2 1 2 N - B3 NxB P with the better game for Black . Spiel m ann ­
Nimzovich , Goteborg 1 920 .

7 . . . N-KS
8 Q-N4 !

The disappearance of Black ' s m inor p ieces from the vicinity of his K-side
makes th ings rather sen sitive for him on that wing . The text move takes
immediate advantage of Black ' s vulnerability and at the same time it helps
White to complete his development .

8 P- KN3

S . . . K-81 is a lso considered to be good for White : 9 P- KR4 An alte rnative is 9

B - B 1 P- Q B4 (9 . . NxQ B P 1 0 B - Q3 P- Q B4 transposes to the same positio n ) 1 0 B­
.

Q3 NxQ B P 1 1 pxp Q - R4 1 2 B-Q2 Q - R5 13 P- K R3 N- K5 14 N- K2 N - QB 3 1 5

BxN NxP 1 6 Q- R4 N - B3 1 7 N - B3 Q - B5 1 8 0-0-0 P- B4 with unclear play .
Vasyukov-Goldenov , Kiev 1 964 . 9 P- QB4 I t is worth noting Dr. Euwe' s
. . .

recom men dation 9 . P- KB4 e .g . 1 0 pxp e .p . QxP 1 1 N - B3 N- 83 1 2 Q - B4

. .

( Possibly stronger is 1 2 P- R5 a nd if 1 2 . . . P- K4 1 3 Q - R4 K - B2 [ if Black

excha nges queens White contin ues N- R4 -N6] 1 4 B- QN5 PxP 1 5 pxp R- K 1 1 6 N ­
K5ch K-N 1 1 7 B- K3 N - N4 1 8 P- K B4 N - B 2 as in Lilienthal-Sliwa , 1 960, when 1 9
P- N4 ! gives White good attacking prospects . ) 1 2 . . . Nx B 1 3 QxN P- K4 when

1 55
White should continue 14 0-0-0 pxp 1 5 pxp B -N5 1 6 N- K5 ! a s in Tringov­
Sliwa, Vama Olympiad 1 962 . 10 R-R3 Q-R4 1 1 B-Q3 NxB 12 R-N3 ! P-KN3 13
KxN P><P 1 4 QxQP �-B3 15 Q-KB4 P- QS 16 N-B3 QxBPch 17 K-K2 and now if
• I

1 7 . . . QxR White h as a strong attack by 1 8 Q - B6 R- KN1 f 9 P-R5 etc .

9 B-Q3

The D uras move 9 B- B 1 is also played here . After 9 . . . P- QB4 10 B - Q3 NxQ BP

1 1 PxP Q- R4 1 2 B-Q2 Q-R5 1 3 P- KR3 P- KR4! Black h as at least equ alized .

9 • • • NxB
10 KxN P-QB4
11 Q-B4 N-B3

Not 1 1 . . . Q-N4 1 2 QxQ P><Q 1 3 P-N4! and Black 's KNP falls after 1 4 N-B 3 .

12 N-B3 B-Q2

Most other moves have led to no greater s uccess for Black . e . g . :

(a) 12 . . . Q-K2 13 pxp QxP 14 N -Q4! P-R3 15 QR -QN 1 N -Q 1 16 P-KR4 with a

clear advantage for White. Yudovi ch-Chi stiakov , U S S R C hampionship 1939 .

(b ) 12 . . . P-B5 13 B-K2 Q -K2 14 Q-B6 QxQ 15 PxQ N-N 1 16 N-K5 with much the
better endg ame prospects . Panov-Zagori ansky , Moscow 1944 .

(c) The m anoeuvre 1 2 . . . P><P 13 pxp B-Q2 also leaves Whi te with an edge : 1 4
QR-QN 1 N -R4 1 5 P-KR4 R -QB1 1 6 P-R5 P-KN4 17 Q-B6 QxQ 18 PxQ . Thi s
position was reached i n the game Sp assky-Panno , A msterdam Candidates '
_
Tournament 195 6 , and Whi te was unable to realize his advant age : 18 . . . P-N3 19
P-B3 N -B3 20 B-N5 N -N 1 21 B-Q3 If White exchanges on Q7 his K B 6 p awn will
fall . 21 . . . N -B3 22 B-R6? Thi s move shows that Spassky h ad not found a good
plan . After 22 Q R - K 1 ! 0-0 or m aybe 22 . . . K - Q 1 ! ? 23 R- K 3 R - K 1 24 KR - K 1 ,
the m anoeuvre N-R2-N4 would be a devast ating positional threat . The move
24 . . . P-N5 would no longer be satisfactory and Blac k h as no good counterpl ay .
22 . . . R-B2 23 KR-K 1 P -N5 24 N -K5 NxN 25 RxN R-N1 and Black had little
difficulty in hol ding the game .

156
 13 QR - QN 1 P-BS
14 B-K2 P-N3
15 P-KR4 Q-K2
16 P-RS pxp

Black admits to his positional defeat due to his dark squared weaknesses .
After 1 6 . . . P- K N4 1 7 Q-B6 ! Black would have a difficult en dgame (compare
Spassky-Panno above) .

17 RxRP 0-0 -0
18 QR -KR 1 QR -Nl
19 P-N3 Q-R6

A vain attempt at creating counterpl ay .

20 RxP

White is not tempted by 20 Qx B P R- B l when Black has threats in connectio n

with . . . P- N4 -NS or . . . RxN an d . . . NxQ P .

20 RxR
21 RxR N-Ql

157
 Black is tied to the defence of his KBP and has no time for . . . Qx RP.

22 N-NS B-Kl
23 B-RS Q-K2

23 . . . QxRP 24 BxP R- Bl 25 R-B6 is hopeless for Black .

24 N-R7

Black is a pawn down with a completely lost game . The rest is just desperate
resistance .

24 • • • B-RS
25 Q-B6 Q-R6

The only rem aining chance .

26 BxP QxRP
27 BxPch NxB

Else , 28 B- BS would follow .

28 QxNch K-N2

Not 28 . . . K -B2 29 Q-B7ch !

29 QxQPch K-R3
30 Q-K4 R-NS
31 Q-BS! RxQPch

Nothing else is left to Black if he wants to get closer to his opponent's king ­
the only chance for an eventual perpetual check .

158
 32 P><R Q-N7
33 R-R l P-B6ch

Or 33 . . . QxQPch 34 K- K2 P- B6 35 Q-Q3ch B-N4 36 R - R l ch wins .

34 K-K3 BxP
35 Q-QB8ch K-R4
36 N-86 B-N3
37 N-K4 BxN
38 KxB Q-K7ch
39 K-Q5 Q-B6ch

White can afford that too .

40 K-Q6 QxR
41 QxPch K·N4
42 Q-N3ch K-R3
43 P-K6 Q-KRl
44 Q-R4ch K-N2
45 Q-B6ch K-R3
46 P-Q5 Q-Q lch
47 Q-Q7 Q-KBlch
48 P-K7 Resigns

159
 GAME 3 6 is tied down . After 9 RxQ Black
could improve wi th 9 . . . N - Q2! but 1 0
White: Vila P-QR3 BxBP 1 1 N -NS 0 - 0 ? ! 1 2
Black : �ondragon N ( K 2)-B3 P- QR3 13 N -Q6 leaves
White wi th the better ending because
Siegen Olymp i ad 1970 of his Q-si de m ajority and better
placed king .
Notes by Levy If 7 . . . N -B3 8 Q-Q2 ! BxN 9 NxB
QxQP 10 QxQ NxQ 11 0-0-0 P­
1 P-K4 P-K3 Q B4 12 N - K4 ! with an excellent
2 P-Q4 P-Q4 game .
3 N-QB3 N -KB3
4 B-KN 5 B-N5 8 P-QR3 BxNch
5 pxp QxP 9 NxB Q-Q R4
6 BxN FxB 10 Q-B3 P-B3
7 N -K2!?
Before Black can develop his
T'h is idea turns out well , and in ­ bi shop he must contort himself to
deed it is difficult to fi nd a satisfac­ avoid leaving any pawn s en pri se .
tory reply . V sual is 7 Q-Q2 Q-Q R4 8 There is al so the point that after
KN- K2 N -Q2 9 P-QR3 N -N 3 10 R­ 1 0 . . . Q- N3 (say ) 1 1 0-0-0 , White
Q1 B-K2 which equalizes . would be threateni ng 12 P-QS! P - K4
13 N -K4 !

11 0-0-0 Q-KN 4ch

12 K-N 1 P-KB4
13 P -KR4 Q -N5

1 3 . . . Q -B3 14 P-QS ! i s no better .

14 Q-K3 P-N3
15 P-Q5 P-B5
16 Q-K 1 B-N 2
17 PxKP pxp
18 P-B3 Q-N 1
19 B-B4 0 -0 -0
20 BXP Q-N 2
21 Q -K4 P-B4
7 ... N-Q2 22 QxBP B-B3
23 R-Q6 K-N2
7 . . . P-Q B 4? is bad : 8 PxP ! QxQ ch 24 KR-Q1 KR-K 1
( 8 . . . QxBP 9 P-Q R3 ! ) 9 RxQ BxP 10 25 Rx B! N -K4
N - NS N - R3 1 1 N ( K2) -B 3 and Black 26 R(B6) -Q6 Resigns

1 60
 Chapter 8

The Rubinstein and Burn Variations

White: Gligoric
Black: Balashov

S kopj e 1 9 70

I P-K4 P- K3
2 P- Q4 P- Q4
3 N-QB3 pxp

3 . . . N - QB3 is rarely seen and with good rea son . By blocking his Q B P Black
deprives hin1self of the tradition al freeing move . . . P-Q B4 and he is normally
s addled with a lifeless position . (The position after 3 . . . N-QB3 can also arise via
the move order 1 P- K4 N-QB3 2 P-Q4 P-Q4 3 N - Q B 3 P- K3 . ) For t\\10 exam pl es
of thi s move see Gligori c- Ben ko , Bel gr ade 1 964 , and Fi scher -Petrosi an , 3rd
M atch Game 1 97 1 (i llustrative games 37 and 38) .

The text move relaxes the centr al tension too soon and gives White a good
com man d of the centre . White has the better developmen t , a pawn m ajority on
the Q -side an d he can frequently l aunch a s trong attack on the K-side . Bl ack 's
set-up is passive , his m ain probl em being the developm ent of his QB. It is not
surprising , therefore , that 3 . . . PxP is r arely seen in modern n1 aster chess .

A del ayed form of this exch a nge is 3 . . . N - KB3 4 8- KNS PxP \\rhich is kno\\r n as
the Burn Variation .

161
 White still has a space advantage , but it is not easy to m aintain this slight
edge , and Black often succeeds in equalizing . S NxP Better than 5 BxN PxB 6
NxP P- KB4 7 N- QB3 B-N2 8 N- B3 P- B4 9 B-NSch (or 9 PxP Q-R4 10 Q- Q2
QxBP 1 1 0-0-0 N-B3) 9 . . . B-Q2 and Black has an excellent game . S . . . B-K2
Also possible is 5 . . . QN- Q2 6 N- KB3 (for 6 NxNch see T al-Portisch , 4th Match
Game 1965 - illustrative game 39 . ) 6 . . . B- K2 7 NxNch BxN 8 Q-Q2 (better
seems 8 P-KR4 transposing to the Gligoric-Balashov game of the m ain line .
White also stood better in Spassky-Porath , Lugano Olympiad 1968 , after 8 BxB
QxB 9 B- B4 P-B4 10 Q-K2 0- 0 1 1 O-O- O ' P-QR3 12 Q- K3 PxP? but Black
could have equalized by 12 . . . P- QN4) 8 . . . BxB 9 NxB N- B3 ! 10 B - K2 ( 10 0-0-0
seems to offer more pro spects) 10 . . 0-0 1 1 R-Q l Q-Q3 12 0-0 B -Q2 1 3 N - B3
.

KR- Q 1 with equality (Fischer- Petrosian, Curacao Candidates' Tournament

1 962) . 6 BxN Now , however , this exchange is the only way to give Black any
problem s . 6 . . . BxB Again 6 . . . PxB comes into consideration . See Liberzon­
Botvinnik , USSR Team Championship 1966 (illustrative game 40) . 7 N-KB3 N­
Q2 For 7 . . . B-Q2 see Spass ky-Petrosian 23rd Match Game 1966 (illustrative
game 4 1 ) . 8 Q·Q2 Also good is 8 B- B4 0- 0 9 Q- K2! See Spassky-Czerniak ,
Goteborg 1 9 7 1 (illustrative game 42) . 8 . . P-QN3 9 B-NS B-N2 10 NxBch PxN 1 1
.

Q-B3 Q-K2 1 2 QxP Q-NSch 1 3 P-B3 QxB 1 4 QxB QxP 1 5 0-0 R-Q1 16 P-B4 Q­
R6 17 KR-Kl with a slight plus to White . L. Steiner-Stahlberg , Stockholm
1 948 .

4 NxP N-Q2

Other possibilities are :

162
(a) 4 . . . N- K83 5 NxNch pxN White is clearly better after 5 . . . 0xN 6 N- B3 . See
for ex ample , Gufeld- Alburt, U SS R Team Championship 1 974 - illustrative
game 43 . 6 N-83 P-N3 7 B-K84 8-QN2 8 P-83 B-Q3 9 8-N3 and White has the
more comfort able posi tion .

( b ) 4 . . . 8- Q2 5 N- K83 8- 83 6 8- Q3 8xN 7 8x8 P- Q83 8 0 - 0 N- 83 9 8-Q3 QN­

Q2 10 P- B4 8- Q3 1 1 P- QN3 0- 0 12 8-N2 and White stands better, Spass ky­
O ' Kelly , San Juan 1 9 69 .

( c ) 4 . . . 8-K 2 5 N -K83 N -KB3 6 NxNch Perh aps even more accurat e is 6 B - 03

ON- 02 7 0- K2! when 7 . . . NxN 8 BxN N -B3 fails to 9 BxN P BxB 1 0 0 - N5ch .
6 . . . 8xN 7 8-Q3 N- 83 For 7 . . . N - Q2 see the m ain variation . 8 P- 83 P- K4 9 PxP
NxP 10 NxN B><N 1 1 0 - 0 8- 83 1 1 . . . 0-0 ? 1 2 BxR Pch ! KxR 13 0- R5ch win s . 1 2
Q- R4ch with a lead in development .

5 N-KB3

Botvinni k ' s i dea of 5 P- KN3 is worth noting . e . g . 5 . . . KN- B3 6 NxNch NxN 7

B-N2 P- B4 (if 7 . . . P- K4 8 N- B3 pxp 9 NxP with the better develop ment) 8 N - K2
0-N3 9 0-0 B - 02 1 0 P- 0B4 PxP 1 1 NxP R- 0 1 1 2 B - K3 B - B4 13 P-ON4 ! OxP
1 4 R- N 1 0- B6 1 5 RxP 0- 0 1 6 0- K2 ! with advantage to White in Botvinnik­
Guim ard , 1 94 6 .

5 . . . KN-B3
6 B-KN5

After th is developin g move Black is un able to free his g ame straight away with
6 . . . P- OB4 ? ! because of 7 PxP ! (compare vari ation 2 in the next note ) .
The al tern ative 6 NxNch NxN also keeps the initi ative . 7 N -K 5 Capab l anca 's
idea . Alternatives are :

( 1 ) 7 B-03 B - K 2 (after 7 . . . P-QN3 8 0 -K 2 B - N 2 9 B- KN5 B - K 2 1 0 0-0 0-0 1 1

Q R -0 1 Black \\'as very cramped in Tarrasch -Mieses , 1 9 1 6 . Or 7 . . . P- B4 8 P><P
Bx P 9 B- KN5 B- K2 10 0 - K2 0-0 1 1 0-0-0 with the better game for White in
Spiel m ann -Petrov , M argate 1 93 8) 8 Q - K2 0-0 9 0-0 ! (i f 9 B- KNS P-B4 10 pxp
Q- R4ch 1 1 P- B3 QxP (B4)) · 9 . . . P-O N 3 1 0 P-B4 B-N 2 1 1 R-0 1 and Whi te stands
bet ter. Najdorf- Stahlberg , 1 950 .

1 63
(2) 7 B-KNS P-B4 8 B-NSch (sh arp play arises after 8 B-QB4 which transposes
to the Tal -Portisch game mentioned above - illustrative game 39) 8 B -Q2 9 . . .

BxBch QxB 10 BxN ( 1 0 Q - K2 is Sim agin ' s suggestion) 1 0 . . . Px B 1 1 P-B3 pxp 1 2

NxP B-B4 1 3 Q-B3 with a slight edge to White . Spassky-Petrosian , Moscow
.
1 9 67 .

7 . . . Q-Q4 After 7 . . . B- K2 8 B-Q3 0-0 9 0- 0 P - B4 10 B- K3 Q-B2 1 1 R- K 1 P­

QN3 12 Q -B3 B -N2 13 Q-R3 PxP 14 BxQ P , Whi te is better in view of the
threat 1 5 N-N4. Or 7 . . . B -Q3 8 Q-B3 P-B4 (if 8 . . P-B3 9 P-B3 0-0 1 0 B- KNS B­
.

K2 1 1 B-Q3 with advantage to White . Capabl anca-Blanco , Havana 1 9 13) 9 B­

Q NSch K - B 1 10 0-0 pxp 1 1 B- KB4 BxN 1 2 BxB Q-Q4 1 3 QxQ NxQ 14 KR- Q 1
and White has the better endgame . Poulsen-Planas , Helsinki Olympiad 1 95 2 . 8
B-K2! P-B4 It is very ris ky to accept the pawn . After 8 . . . QxNP 9 B - B3 Q -R6 10
Q - Q3 ! the double threat of B- B6ch and Q -NSch win s material for White . 9 B-K3
pxp 10 QxP B-Q3 1 1 N-B4 and White ' s position is to be preferred .

6 • • • B-K2
7 NxNch BxN

7 . . . NxN 8 B- Q3 P - B4 9 0-0 pxp 10 NxP , Portisch-Petrosian , 6th Match

Game 1974 ; and 7 . . . PxN 8 B - R4 P- QB4 ? 9 P- QS ! are both better for White .

8 P-KR4!
Gaining sp ace on the K -side and allowing the K N to m aintain control of the
centre . After 8 Q - Q2 Petrosian has shown that 8 . . BxB 9 Nx B N-B3 ! stresses the
.

awkward position of White' s KN which has gone astray from the centre , and
therefore Black e qualizes easily .

1 64
 8 . . . P-B4
9 Q- Q2 !

Developing and guarding against . . . Q - R4ch . 9 P - Q5 is weaker .

9 . . . P-KR3

The presence of White 's Q B is u npleasant and Black is com mitted to this
weakening and the loss of a tempo e Another justification of Whi te ' s 8th move!

10 BxB QxB

1 0 . . . NxB costs Black his QBP.

11 0-0-0 0-0

White has a clearly better game , being ahead i n development and having a Q ­
side pawn m aj ority for the endgame.

12 B- K2

This gives away the best p art of White ' s advantage . Stronger was 1 2 B-N5 !
forcing 1 2 . . . PxP 1 3 QxQ P QxQ 1 4 RxQ N - B3 15 N- KS , when White has the
superior ending .

12 . . . P-K4!
13 PxKP

I f 1 3 P- Q5 P- K5 .

13 . . . NxP
14 NxN

In case of 14 Q- B3 N - N5 1 5 QxP P- QN3 1 6 Q - Q4 QxQ 1 7 RxQ NxP , Black

has an even game .

1 65
 14 • • • QxN
15 P-KB4 Q-K2

Now White has only a slight initiative .

16 B-B3 B-B4?

Better was 1 6 . . . B- K3 . ,

17 QR-K1! Q-B3
18 R-KS

White ' s pressure has increased and there are multiple threats to Black' s Q­
side pawns .

18 . . . KR-Kl

Black tries to defend actively , since a pawn is lost in any case .

19 P-KN4! B-R2
20 BxP QR- Q1
21 RxRch

Capturing the pawn with gain of tempo .

21 • • • RxR
22 P-NS Q-K3
23 B- QS Q-NS
24 B-B4

166
 Now Bl ack is tied to the defence of his first rank and there is no thre at of . . . R ­
K 7 any more . In addition , White is threatening 25 P- RS and 26 P-N 6 .

24 ... P-KR4
25 P-N3 B-B4
26 K-N2 B-K3
27 R-K1 R-KB1

Not 27 . . . QxRP? 28 P- BS B-Q2 29 QxB !

28 BxB P><B
29 Q-Q6 QxRP

Or 29 . . . QxBP 30 Qx KPch K- R1 31 R-K4 .

30 QxKPch K-R1
31 R- K4!

Black is lost now . He cannot pl ay 31 . . . RxP because of 3 2 P-N 6 !

31 . . . Q -N5
32 · Q-KN6! P-R5
33 R-K7 R-KN1
34 Q-B7 ! Q-Q8

There is no time for 34 . . . P-R6 because of 35 P-N 6 threatening 36 QxR !

35 R- Q7

Preventing 35 . . . Q-QSch .

35 . . . Resigns

1 67
 GAM E 37 7 PxN B-K2
8 P-KR4! P-KR3
White: Gligoric 9 N-R2 P-QN3
Black : Benko

Belgrade 1 964 After the risky 9 . . . BxP 10 Q-N4 K­

B 1 1 1 N -B l ! B - K2 12 R - R 3 White
1 P-K4 P-K3 h as a strong attack .
2 P-Q4 P-Q4
3 N -QB3 N-QB3
4 N-B3 N -B3 10 Q-N 4 B-B l
5 P-K5 '
11 N -B 1 P -KR4
12 Q-N3 N -K2
For 5 pxp see Fischer-Petrosian , 13 B-KN5! Q-Q2
game 38 . 14 N-K3 B-N 2
15 Q-B3!

Black 's weak KBP and the

dominating position of t he bishop on
KNS promi se White a lasting
initiative .

15 N -83
16 R-R3 B-K2
17 R-N3 P-N3
18 B-B6 R-KN l
19 K- 8 1 0 -0 -0
20 K-N l N -R4
21 Q-B4 Bx B
5 N -K5 22 QxB R -R l
6 B-Q3 N xN
Passive defence only helps White .
A possibl e alternative is 6 . . . B-NS 7 22 . . . P-B4 was requi red .
B -Q2 NxB 8 QxN P-B3 with unclear
play . The pawn sacri fice 7 0-0 NxN
23 R-Q l QR-Bl
8 PxN BxP 9 R -N 1 P - K R3 (9 . . . B­
N S ! ? ) 10 B -R3 P - KN 4 1 1 B-NS B -Q2 24 P-QB4
12 P-R3 P-QR 4 1 3 Q-Q3 B-NS led to
unclear complicati ons in Nezh­ Opening up the centre at the right
metdinov-Lein , U S S R 1 967 . moment .

168
 There i s no defence

41 Q - N 3ch K- 8 1
42 Q - 8 2ch K- NI
43 Q- QI B-N 4
� i fl i' 44
45
N -N 3
Qx P
Q-83

fl fl fl
.��� 4j g
. .
The si mplest way to \vin .

fl fl fl �I 45 QxQP
m- �
//
_j
� 46 Q - R 8ch K- 82
47 QxP Q-Q8ch
48 K-R 2 Q -Q 3ch
24 Px P
49 K- R 3 B-Q2
25 NxP N -83
50 Q-83ch K-QI
51 N - 85 8-8 1
A fter 25 . . . QxP 26 NxN PxN 27 B­
52 N -Q 3 P-85
K2 follo\ved by 28 B-83 White 's
53 Q- KB6ch K -82
heavy pieces can l aunch a \\'i nni ng at ­
54 N -K5! Q-Q5
t ack on the Q -si de .
55 P-83 P-R4
56 P-R 5 Resigns
26 P-QB3 Q-QI
27 Q-84 N -K 2
28 N -K3 N -84
29 BxN NPx B GAM E 38
30 P-Q5! Q-K2
31 P-84 Q R -NI White: Fischer
32 P-Q6 PxP Black : Petrosian
33 PxP Q-Q2
34 P-85 9th M atch Game 1 97 1

The ope n i ng of the O B - fi le settles N otes by Sham kovi ch

m atters .
I P-K4 P-K3
34 px p 2 P-Q4 P-Q4
35 R- Q 8I RxR 3 N -Q B3 N - QB3?!
36 R xPch K-NI
37 QxR R -Q B I Pl ayed after three minutes
38 Rx Rch Bx R thought . so cl early deci ded upon in
39 N - 84 8-R 3 advance . Thi s ex travagant move of
40 N - R5 P-83 Ni m zovi ch ' s is h ard to fi nd in the

1 69
openings books and is supposed to be QxNP 1 1 NxP with advantage to
b ad , since it blocks the QBP. White as in Keres -Lein , B aku 196 1 .
However , I'm not so certain that it is However, 8 . . NxN 9 P><N 0-0 10
.

bad . In any event there are a number 0-0 N-R4 would give Black a decent
of French systems in which one game .
defers advanci ng the QBP e . g . Olaf­
s son -Petrosian , Bled 1 96 1 , which 5 • . .
px p
went 3 N -QB3 B-N5 4 P-K5 Q-Q 2 5
Q-N4 P-KB4 6 Q-N3 P -QN 3 7 P ­ Against A ntoshi n I once h ad this
KR4 B-N2 8 B-Q3 N -QB3 9 N - K2 0 - position and replied 5 . . . KNxP
0-0. Nimzovich played the moves in without getting complete equality .
the sequence 1 P-K4 N -QB3 2 P-Q4 Petrosian prefers sym metry which , at
P-Q4 3 N-QB3 P-K3 and after 4 P ­ first sight , loo ks to ensure early
K 5 KN - K2 ! 5 N -B 3 P-QN3 6 N - K 2 ? equality .
B-R3 7 P-B3 Q-Q2 8 N - N 3 BxB 9
NxB P-K R4 1 0 B - N5 N - R4 had 6 B-QNS
good play on the w hite s quares .
B ri nckmann-Ni mzovich, Kecskemet S howing that the position is not all
1 927 . that simple . Thus , m ai ntai ning sym ­
m etry b y 6 . . . B -QN5 i s met b y 7 0 - 0
4 N-B3 N -B3 not 7 N -K5 0-0 ! 8 NxN Q- K l ch , or
5 PxP! 8 BxN PxB 9 N xQBP Q-K 1ch 10 N ­
K5 B- R 3 ! with active play . 7 . . 0 -0 8
.

� B-N5 B-N5? 9 B (KN5)xN and 8 . . B­ .

� K 3 9 N-K5 both favour White .

Black should probably pl ay 6 B­ . . .

K2 7 N - K5 B - Q 2 while after 7 0 -0
0 -0 8 N -K5 N -N l ! he would be well
on the way to equal izing .

6 B-KN S
7 P-KR3

Forcing an exchange that gives

White the two bishops and t he better
development .
Fischer finds the weak link in the
chain . The books give 5 P-K5 N -K5 6 7 ...
B-Q3 B-N5 7 B -Q2 NxB or 5 B -KN5
B-K2 6 P-K5 N -K5 7 BxB QxB 8 B­ I t is clearly not nice to allow 7 . . . B­
Q3 Q-N5! ? 9 BxN PxB 10 P-Q R3 ! R4 8 P-KN4 B-N 3 9 N-K5 .

1 70
 8 Qx 8 8-K2 The m ai n dra\vback to Black 's
9 8-N S P-Q R3 posi ti on is the \\'e ak , spl it n ature of
his 0-side pa\\·ns . Having taken con ­
NO\\' the OP i s in danger , an d it is trol of the K-fi le , Fisc her nO\\' starts
n ot easy to guard it \Vi thout com ­ to attack these p a\vns , tho ugh
pron1 i si ng the po sition . Yet after Bl ack 's next m ove does yield some
co unterp l ay .
9 . . 0 -0 1 0 0 - 0 -0 Bl ack h ad t\\lO
.

'Nays to try an d keep it level , one

17 N -K S
quieC one very sharp .
The first is 10 . . . N -0 2 1 1 Bx B ( I f 18 8x 8 QRx8!
1 1 B - K 3 N - N 3 ! 1 2 BxN PxB wi th 19 Q- B4
coun terp l ay by . . . N -B5) 1 1 . . . Nx B 1 2
0 R - K 1 N - K B3 1 3 P - K N 4 P-B3 1 4 B ­ Why not the m ore n atural 1 9 0-
Q 3 0-03 b u t after 1 5 P - N 5 N -0 2 1 6 03 . ? Possibly Fisc her didn ' t want to
P - K R 4 and White h as a da ngerous allo\v the sl ightest cou nter -chance
in iti ative . and feared 1 9 . . . K R - K 1 20 P - K B3 N ­
Better ch ances for Bl ack are to be N 6 when Bl ack gets counter-chances
fou n d i n the secon d al tern ative after the exchange of both rooks , but
1 0 . . . N - K5 ! ? 1 1 BxB OxB 1 2 NxP 0- 21 R - K5 ! \\'Ould keep the advant age
N 4ch 13 N -B4 (or 13 N - K 3 NxBP ! 1 4 e . g . 21 . . . P-B3 22 N - B5 0-B2 23 R ­
BxN NxR) 1 3 . . . 0xB ! (NO\\' K 6 ! RxR 2 4 RxR R - K 1 25 0- K 3 RxR
1 3 . . . NxBP fai l s to 1 4 BxN N x R 1 5 B­ 26 Ox R oxo 27 NxO \\i th a won en ­
R 4 \\'i nni ng ma teri al ) 14 OxN N -N5 ding .
1 5 K-N 1 0- R5 1 6 P - Q R 3 K R - K 1 The text does give Bl ack a chance ,
\\'t nntng the pa\vn back wi th a fi ne n a mely 1 9 . . . P-N4, an d if 20 Q-N4 O­
gan1e . Q3 cran1 pi ng the queen . After six
tni n utes tho ught Petrosi an offers the
exchange of quee ns , and thus goes
10 8xNch px 8 i nto a poor endi ng \\'hich Fisc her , as
11 0-0 0 -0
usual , pl ays con fi de ntly an d \\'el l .
12 K R -K 1 !
19 Q- Q3?
'The start of a\\'k\vard press u re on 20 QxQ Px Q?
the K - fi l e .
The natural \vay to recapture ,
12 P-K R 3 keepi ng out the kni ght fron1 O B 4 .
13 B- R4 Q-Q2 But 2 0 . . . NxO \\'as a n1 ore stubborn
14 R-K2 P-Q R4 defe nce \vi th t he i de a 2 1 R - K 7 K R ­
15 QR-K 1 8-Q 1 K 1 22 K - B 1 (22 Rx Rch NxR )
16 P-QN 3 R - QN 1 22 . . . f{xR 23 Rx R N -N 4 24 P-Q B3 K­
17 N -R4 B 1 e tc . H O\\'ever . after 21 K - B 1 !

171
Black is sttll in trouble . One can say in all confidence that
Petrosian has never before sacrificed
21 P-QB4! N-B3 such a lot of p awns .
22 R-QB 1
32 R(1 )-K8
33 N-B3 N-B5
34 K-N4 N-K3
35 R-K5 P -B4ch
36 K-N3 P-B5ch
37 K-R4 K-R 2
38 N-K4 P-N4ch
39 K-N4 N .. N2
40 NxPch !

Finally dispelling Black 's ill us ions .

The piece sacri fice decides at once .

40 PxN
22 R-N 1 41 RxR RxR
23 pxp pxp 42 KxP N-K3ch
24 P-B3 N-R4 43 K-B5 R -K7
44 RxR NxPch
Holmov feels that Black has better 45 K-K5 NxR
chances by 24 . . . KR-B l , activating 46 P-QR4 Resigns
the other rook . Then if 25 R(2)-QB2
RxR 26 RxR R-NS 27 R- B8ch K-R2
28 R- QR8 RxQP 29 RxP R-Q7 and
why is Black any the worse off? GAME 39
Possibly White must try 27 R-Q2
followed by pl aying his king to K 3 , White : Tal
b u t this is not clear . Now , however , Black : Portisch
White's rook is very active .
4th M atch Game 1965
25 R-B6 N-BS
26 R-Q2 KR-Kl Notes by Tal
27 RxP R-K8ch
28 K-B2 R -KR8 1 P-K4 P-K3
29 K-N3 N-R4ch 2 P- Q 4 P- Q 4
30 K-R4 P-N3 3 N-QB3 N-KB3
31 RxQP R-K 1 4 B-KN5 pxp
32 RXP ;-
...; NxP QN -Q2

1 72
 U p till 1962 this vari ation was not 6 NxN
especially popul ar , and was adopted 7 N -83 P-84
only rarely - in those cases when 8 8-Q84
Bl ack very much wanted a draw . In
the Can di dates ' Tourn ament at I think that it is in thi s \\'ay ,
Curacao , Petrosi an pl ayed thi s wi thout tryi ng to refu te Bl ack 's
variation against me in round eight , opening , that White reaches the most
as did Benko two rou n ds later . I n the p romisi ng posi tion . A ttemp ts to
game with Petrosi an I pl ayed 6 force matters by 8 N - KS or 8 B-NSch
NxNch NxN 7 N -B3 P-B4, and after do not achieve any thi ng against
an hour 's thought chose the ab ­ accura te defence .
sol utely uni que pl an of 8 Q-Q 3 B- K 2
9 BxN B x B 1 0 Q-NSch . White 8 px p
naturally l ost very quickly . The g ame 9 0-0 8-K2
\\·i th Ben ko developed more nor­ 10 Q- K2 P- KR3
m ally , but duri ng t he game wi th Por­
ti sch I coul d not recal l the exact or­ Blac k 's desire to rid hi mself of the
der of m oves (up till no\\r I have fairly bi shop on N 5 is un derstan dab le . But
successfully endeavoured to forget all in the future the p awn on K R 3 will
the games \\'hich I pl ayed at dra\\7 the attention of the w hite pieces
Curacao ) . directed agai nst Black 's K-si de . K R 6
i s a very convenient s quare on which
6 NxNch to sacri fice . 10 . . . 0 -0 1 1 Q R -Q 1 N ­
Q4 1 2 BxB NxB was more in the
spirit of the vari ati on , w hen Bl ack 's
knight can follow hi s white op ­
ponent . A gai nst N - KS there can
follow . . . N -N 3 , \vhi le with the \\'hi te
k ni ght on Q4 Bl ac k can pl ay . . . N - B3 .
I n position s of thi s type the exchange
of knights is to the advantage of the
defendi ng si de .

11 8-84 0 -0
12 Q R -Q l 8-Q2
13 RxP

Probabl y the most accura te . A fter White thought for about half an
6 N - K B3 B- K2 Bl ack succeeds in hour over this m ove . I t w as diffic ult
si n1plifying the position � since on 7 to decide \vhich "'aS stronger - the
NxNch . 7 . BxN is possibl e .
. . openly aggressi ve move in t he gan1 e ,

1 73
or the more reserved 1 3 NxP , after PxB 16 QxP QxR ! 1 7 NxQ RxB 1 8 R­
which White coul d pl ay his rook Q 1 with dangerous threats , and if
along the third rank without loss of this proved insufficient I had in
time . In nearly all variations White 's reserve the unpretentious retreat 15
attack woul d develop absolutely B -Q N3 , keeping an attractive
unhindered . But what didn 't m uch position . Now White 's reply is prac ­
appeal to me was the fact that Black tically forced , otherwise the move 14
could reply 13 . . . N -Q4 14 B - K5 B ­ Q-Q2 is simply a waste of time .
KB3 15 BxN PxB 1 6 BxB QxB , and
although White h as an undisputed
positional advantage , it may prove
i nsufficient to win . White 'can easily
obtain three quarters of a point , but
after a defeat one wants more .

13 Q-N3
14 Q-Q2!

It was with this continuation in

mind that White decided on his
previous move to capture the pawn
with his rook . I did not consi der any
other moves . Therefore I was most 15 BxRP N -KS
astoni shed when after the game Por­
ti sch tol d me that only here had we The only move . In the case of
diverged from the path of the Tal - 15 . . . PxB White continues his attack
Benko game , where White had t ; 16 QxP, and now on 16 . . . BxN
chosen the ridiculous , in my decisive is 17 Q-N5ch K-R1 18 R ­
(present ) opinion , continuation 14 R­ R4ch N-R2 (or 18 . . . B- R4 19 B-Q3
Q3. It is not surpri sing that here , with the irresistible threat of 20
having come up against an in ­ RxBch ) 19 QxB , when 19 . . . R-KN 1
novation , Porti sch thought for about fails to 20 Q-B6ch . 1 6 . . . N -KS is an ­
forty minutes . swered very strongly by 1 7 B -Q 3 . If
Bl ack changes the m ove order by
14 ... B-B3 playing 15 . . . BxN , then White can ,
if he wishes, transpose into the
Black could al so defend his " "I � ation already consi dered by 1 6
bishop , and meet t he comi ng bishop BxNP. Besides this , the simpl e 1 6
sacrifice , by 14 . . . KR -B 1 . Against PxB PxB 1 7 K-R 1 is also not bad .
this I was intending to check once
again the sharp variation 15 BxRP 16 Q-B4 PxB

1 74
 17 RxN 18 Q R -Q 1 !
19 P -Q N 3
Thi s gives the gatne rather a di f­
ferent di recti on . In return for the Th e prospect of re -establ ishi ng
sacrificed exchange Whi te counts on material equality by 1 9 8-Q3 Rx8
keepi ng a persi stent-i niti ative . The and 20 . . . QxNP di d not appear good
attempt to force matters by 1 7 Qx RP enough .
achieves its goal after 1 7 . . 8- 84 1 8
.

N - NS! . or 1 7 . . . KR -Q 1 1 8 BxP ! . or
1 7 . . . Q - B4 1 8 8 -Q3 , but after the 19 8-84
only move 1 7 . QR -Q 1 ! . keepi ng the
. .

KB2 square defended . Whi te h as No\\' the i dea behi n d Bl ack 's
nothi ng better th an to force a dra\v defence is revealed . Fi rst of all , he for
by perpe tual check : 1 8 BxP RxR 1 9 the moment restricts White's roo k by
8 - 85 N - 8 3 . attacki ng the poi nt K B 7 . He pl ans
for the bl ac k bi shop to take part in
the defence via the s quare QS . The
17 8xR
follo\\·i ng manoeuvre by Whi te is
18 Qx8
ai m ed at further \\reakeni ng Bl ack 's
K-side . It involves the calcul ation of
Here Porti sch once again tho ught for a l ong variation , a calcul ation \\'hich ,
a consi derable time . He has on his unfortunately , i s inaccurate . Mean ­
si de a n1i nimal advant age in materi al while , by continui ng sim ply P-8 3 ,
- the exchange for a p a\\'n . But the White coul d have mai ntai ned all the
exposed position of his king and (once advantages of his positi on , and the
again ) the prese nce of opposi te­ defence wou l d have involved gre at
coloure d bishops calls on hi m to be difficulties . Whi te 's oversi ght ts ,
ex tra -careful . Thus 1 8 . . . QxNP loses however , rather an1usi ng .
al mos t im mediately to 1 9 N - KS ! ,
\\'he n it is i mpossible to defe nd 20 Q- 84 K-N2
aga i ns t the va ri ous sacri fi ces on K6 21 Q- KSch
and K B7 ( 1 9 . 8 - 83 20 8 - Q 3 ) . I
. .

th ought that the bes t defensive re ­ This forces the adva nce of the
source \\' as 1 8 . . . B - 8 3 1 9 B-03 K R - p awn , si nee it is hopel ess to al lO\\' the
0 1 20 Q - R 7ch K- 8 1 21 Qx R Pch K­ queen in on 8 6 .
K 2 (weaker i s 2l . . . B-N 2 22 Q-84 or
Q- RS) 22 P-Q N3 . but here Whi te has 21 P-83
already two pa\\·ns for the exchange , 22 Q- N 3ch
\\'hi le hi s i ni ti ative shO\\'S no si gns of
dim i nishi ng . Portisch attempts to in­ Whi te natural ly di d not even con ­
clude hi s rook i n the defe nce . sider capturi ng on K6 .

1 75
 22 K-R2 Black is forced to move either hi s
23 R-K l R-KN l queen or his rook . But then White
captures one of the pawns - on K6
23 . . . R-Q 3 would lose to 24 N - R4 or KB6 - with decisive effect . For
R- KN l 25 B -Q3ch P-B4 26 BxPch ! example : 26 . . . R-B3 27 QxBP BxBP­
This w as White 's i dea - to "free " ch 28 K-B l RxB 29 RxP , or 26 . . . P­
the square K7. But here Black had at B 4 27 P-QN4 pxp 28 RPxP R -N 5 29
his disposal a very interesti ng de fen­ Q - K7ch R-N 2 30 PxB QxP 3 1 Q-B8!
sive possibility - 23 . . . B-N5. I had R -N l 32 Q - B 7ch R-N2 33 N-N5ch !
t aken this into account , and had PxN 34 Q - R5ch K- N l 35 RxP . For­
prepared a winning variation , or so I tunately , White 's omission does not
thought : 24 BxP BxR 25 B'-B5ch K­ alter the overall assessment of the
R l 26 Q-N6 BxPch (if 26 . . . QxBPch , position . It is extremely difficult for
then 27 K-Rl Q -B8ch 28 N -N l ) 27 Black to defend against the
K-B l R-Q8ch 28 K - K2 Q-K6ch 29 n U L1 erous threats , especi ally when in
KxR. But while Portisch was severe time trouble .
thinking over his move , White , to his
horror, ascertained that by playing 25 P-B4
28 . . . R-K8ch, Black would be the 26 P-KR3
first to tnate . White would probably
h ave had to move his rook , or else Preparing for the KNP to come in ­
force a draw by 24 P-B3 BxP 25 N -R4 to pl ay in the role of a " battering ­
BxR 26 Q-N6ch . After the mistake ram " .
committed by Bl ack, White 's attack
gains in strength with every move . 26 R-N3

24 Q-R4 R -Q3 Perhaps 26 . . . Q- B3 , which pre ­

25 K- Bl vents White's nex t move , would have
held out longer . Even the n , by con­
I do not want to attach an ex ­ tinui ng 27 Q-B6, White would keep
clam ation m ark to this move . It ap ­ all the advantages of his position .
pears completely logical . White frees
his queen from the defence of his 27 P-KN4!
K BP , since nothing is gained by cap ­
turing it without chec k . But here he This destroys , once and for all , the
ha d at his disposal a fine opportunity bL.h. k king ' s shelter . Bl ack gains
to gain a decisive advantage , by nothing by 27 . . . PxP 28 pxp Q-B3
playing 25 P -B3 P -Q R4 26 P -QR3! ! b ecause of the simple 29 N - KS , whe n
(Koblentz pointed out this possibility he does not have a singl e check . Here
straight away after the game ) . Now , the best defence was perhaps the im -
in view of the threat of 27 P -QN4 , 1
mediate 27 . . . Q- B3 28 PxP QxN 29

1 76
PxRch KxP , bu t Whi te is nO\\.
- jl
/

m a teri al up wi th an acti ve posi ti on . ' I

The n1ove made by Portisch loses inl ­

m e di ately .
�1
R -0 2

�l f1 f1 � � �.,� �
I t \\·as sti l l possibl e to fal l into a
,

t rap : 28 BxP? BxP ! , an d Black suc ­

cee ds i n si m pli fyi ng t he posi tion .
No\\. i t is al l over .

28 R - 0 8ch 7 N -K 8 3 P-K84
29 K-N2 RxR 8 N-83 8- 83
30 8xR px p
31 OxNP R-0 1 I n hi s boo k "The French Defence"
32 N-KS Res igns Keres con si ders 8 . . . P-0 B3 9 0 -0 2
N -02 1 0 0 -0-0 R -N 1 1 1 P- K N 3 P ­
N 3 1 2 B - N 2 B -N 2 wi th sonl e\\�hat bet ­
ter pl ay for Whi te . Bel avenet s ­
K asparyan , M osco\v 1 93 7 . 8 . . . 8 - 8 3
G A M E 40 i s con si dered t o give Whi te t h e ad ­
v an t age after 9 0 - 0 2 N - 83 1 0 B - N S
White : Li herzon B -0 2 1 1 0-0-0 .
Black : 8ot ,·i nn i k
9 0- 02 P - 84!
U S S R Team Chan1pion shi p 1 966
Th i s is a n1 uch more active n1ove
Notes by B ara nov a nd M oiseyev than 9 . . N -8 3 . No\\r 10 P - QS can be
.

n1et by 1 0 . . . P- K 4 , \Vhere as after 1 0

I P- K4 P -K 3 p x p N -0 2 1 1 B - N S 0 - 0 Black 's
2 P- 0 4 P-04 posi tion is quite pron1 i si ng ( 1 2 P - 8 6
3 N- 0 83 N -K83 px p 1 3 B x P R-N 1 \vith a strong at­
4 8- K N S px p tack).
5 NxP B-K2
6 BxN Px 8 10 0 - 0 -0 pxp
11 NxP N - 83
l'he usu al 1n o v e 1 s 6 . . . Bx B . l'he
rn ove pl ayed leads to grea t con1 - Or 1 1 . . . Bx N 1 2 Ox B OxO 1 3 I� xO
pl ication s . B -02 a n d Whi te h as only a n1i n i n1 al

1 77
advantage . 19 NxR R -Q 1
20 N -B3
12 B-N 5 B- Q2
He cannot pl ay 20 R- K l because of
Pl ay suddenly becomes sharp . The 20 . . . Q-Q7 nor 20 N -K3 because of
quiet continuation 1 2 . . . BxN 1 3 QxB 20 . . . QxN 21 QxQ R -Q8ch 22 Q - B l
QxQ 14 RxQ B-Q2 gives White a RxQ ch 23 KxR Nx R .
minimal advantage .
20 ... QxP
13 NxBP PxN 21 R-K 1 K-N l
14 Q- Q6! 22 BxN QxB
'
�3 Q-K5ch
14 KR - K 1 ch B-K3 is not
dangerous for Bl ack . After the text 23 QxQ PxQ 24 N -K 2 , to weaken
move 14 . . . B- K3 is bad on account of
Black's pawns , is slightly better for
15 BxNch PxB 16 QxPch B-Q2 1 7
White .
R x B etc . and 1 4 . . . B - K 2 i s n o good
because of 15 KR - K 1 with the threat 23 Q-B2
of 1 6 N -Q5 . 24 Q'x Qch KxQ
25 N-K2 R-KN 1
14 B-K4! 26 R-N 1 R-N S
15 KR-K 1 Q-N4ch �7 P-KB3 R x Rch
16 K-N 1 28 Nx R K-Q3
29 P-N 3 K-K4
16 R-Q2 would also be met by 30 K- 81 B-Q4
1 6 . . . 0 -0-0 , which leads to an ad­
31 K-Q2 P -N4
vantage for Black after 1 7 RxB B­
32 P-QR3 P -BS
K3 .
33 K- Q3 Drawn

16 0 -0-0
17 RxB B-K 3!
GAME 41
Of course , 1 7 . . . NxR is impossible
because of 18 N-Q5 ! ! \Vhite: Spassky
Black : Petrosian
18 Q-B5
23rd M atch Game 1966
The only move . White is obliged to 1

pin the knight on B6 which is at ­ Notes by Tal

tac king his roo k on K5 .
1 P-K4 P -K3
18 ... R x Rc h 2 P-Q4 P-Q4

178
 3 N-Q83 N -K83 8 Q-Q2 8 -83
4 8-KNS pxp 9 Nx8ch QxN
5 NxP 8-K 2
6 BXN 8x8
I t was worth thin king about
7 N-K83 8-Q2
9 . . . PxN , though it seems to me th at
White ' s position is slightly preferable
after 10 Q-84.

10 N -KS 0 -0
11 0 -0 -0 N-Q2

Petrosian allows his pawns to be

weakened in the interests of corn ­
p leting his development . I t is in ­
teresti ng that after thi s Bl ack slips
almost autom atical ly into a lost
position . The cruci al point is that the
counterpl ay down the open QN -file ,
on \\'hich Petrosian was counting ,
turns out to be too slow .
I t woul d be interesting to know
M any com mentaries on this game
what Spassky would have pl ayed if
recommend , in pl ace of the text
Petrosi an h ad repeated the pl an he
m ove , l l . . . R- Q 1 , to be followed by
used in the 2 1 st game - 7 . . . N -Q 2
. . . B- K l an d then either . . . N - 8 3 or
with a subsequent . . . P-K 4 .
. . . P-QB4 according to cir-
The Germ an m aster Teschner of­
cumstances . I believe that ag ainst
ten pl ays the vari ation in which the
this contin uation White could have
QB is devel oped via Q 2 to Q B 3 . In
p reserved all the advantages of his
Soviet competition s it was once used
by Keres against Pol ugayevsky . It position (including the possibility of
happened in the l ast roun d of the an attack on the king) by playing 1 2
29th Soviet Cham pionship , when B-Q3 or, as in the game , 1 2 P- KR4 .
Pol ugayevsky had to win to catch up Another possibility after 1 1 . . . R ­
with the leader (who happened to be Q 1 is 1 2 Q- K 3 B- K 1 1 3 P-KN3 N-Q2
Spassky ) . After 8 B-03 B-B 3 9 P-B3 1 4 B-N2 P-B3 15 P- KB4 Q-K2 16 P­
N -Q2 10 Q- K 2 B- K2 1 1 0-0 (the KR4 with the better game for White .
energetic move 1 1 P - K R4 deserved Spassky -Donner . Leiden 1 970 .
consi deration ) 1 1 . . 0 -0 1 2 Q R -Q l
.

N - 8 3 , Keres obt ai ned a thoroughly 12 Nx8 PxN

satisfactory position . 13 P-KR4!

1 79
 This aggressive-loo king move is far A tactical resource (1 5 . . . QxBP is
from being the begi nning of a pawn ­ impossibl e because of 16 R-KB3 Q­
storm . Spassky will oppose the attack N8 17 B-N5) serving purel y
down the QN-file by the manoeuvre positional ends . After the exchange
R-R3-QN3. I t turns out thaf this of queens Black 's Q-side weaknesses
m anoeuvre serves not only to defend, will tel l .
but also to attack Black's weakened
Q-side . At the sam e time White 15 pxp
creates the positional threat of 16 QxQ NxQ
playing Q-N5 and ex changing into a 17 RxP
favourabl e ending .
Now we can take stock . Black 's
13 QR-N 1 QRP and QBP are w eak and White 's
14 R -R3 P-B4 bishop is signifi cantl y stronger than
his opponent's knight . The only
Played from a natural desire to get b lack piece showing any signs of ac­
rid of the doubled pawns an d tivity - the rook at QNl - will
som ehow l iven up play on the Q-side . disappear from the board after
White 's task would have been White ' s R-QN3, and after that
somewhat harder after 14 .. . R-N3 15 B lack 's position will be not onl y dif ­
Q-N5 KR-N1 . Stil l, even then, after fi cult, but even hopel ess .
1 6 B-B 4 (or the preliminary 1 6 QxQ,
followed by B-B4) White would
17 R-N 2
retain a clear advantage . (White's
18 R-QN3 RxR
QNP cannot be taken because of 17
19 RPxR R-R 1
B-N3) .
20 R-QB4!

There are m any alluring con­

tinuations for Whi te - 20 P-N3, 20
B-K2 or 20 R -QN4, but Spassky 's
choice is the simpl est and m ost
preci se .

20 ... N -K 1

After 20 . . . N-Q4 , 21 R-B5 is un ­

pl easant for Black .

21 R-R4 N -Q3
15 Q-NS! 22 P-N3

1 80
 The outcome of the game is now
pl ai nly vi sible to the n aked eye .
22 . . . P-QR4 loses a pawn to 23 P­
QN4.

22 K-B l
23 8-N 2 R -8 1
24 RxP K-K2
25 K - Q2 P -R J
26 P-QB4 P-N4
27 pxp pxp
28 K- 83 K -Q2
29 P-QN4 R -K R 1
30 P- N S R-R7
8 8- 8 4 0 -0
31 B- B6ch K- Q 1
9 Q-K2! N -N J
10 B- N 3 8-Q2
Here Petrosian resigned without
11 0 -0 B-83
waiting for his opponent 's m ove . I
12 Nx8ch P><N
shoul d point out that the \vinning
move is not the obvious 32 P- N 6 ,
which only compl icates White' s task Perh aps over -optimistic ; he shoul d
after 32 . . . PxP 33 R-Q7ch K- B 1 34 pl ay 1 2 . . . QxN 1 3 N - KS B- K l .
RxN K - B 2, but 32 P-BS!
13 QR-Q 1 K-R l
14 P- 84! Q-K l
IS K R -K 1 R - KN 1
16 P -QS! 8 -Q2

GA M E 42 I t \Vas surely better to simpl ify by

1 6 . . . PxP .
White: Spassky
Black : Czerniak 17 Q -K4! Q-K8 1

Goteborg 1 97 1 Now there is no time for 1 7 . pxp. .

in view of 1 8 Q-B4.
1 P-K4 P -K3
2 P-Q4 P -Q4 18 Q- R 4 R -N 3
3 N -QB3 N -K83 19 B-82 R -R 3
4 8- K N S pxp 20 Q-K4 P-K4
s NxP B-K2 21 N -Q2 N -8 1
6 BxN Bx 8 22 Q-K3 N -Q 3
7 N-K83 N -Q2 23 P-85 N -84

181
 24 BxN BxB GAME 43
25 N-B l R-RS
26 N-N3 B-Q2 White: Gufeld
27 P-Q6 P-B3 Black : Alburt
28 Q-N3 R -N l
29 R-K4 RxR USSR Team Championship 19 74
30 Nx R Q-R3?
Notes by Alburt
30 . . . Q-N2 was essenti al .
tl P·K4 P-K3
31 QxBP B-N 5 12 P-Q4 P-Q4
32 P--B3 R-KB l 3 N-Q2 pxp
4 NxP N-KB3
5 NxNch QxN
6 N-B3

Thi s position is rightly considered

to be to White's advant age . The
threat of 7 B - KN5 is distinctly un ­
pleasant; for example 6 . . . B-Q2 7 B­
KN5 Q-N3 8 B -Q3 P- KB4 9 P - K R4 !
N-B3 1 0 Q- K2 P- KR3 1 1 B-KB4 is
good for White (Tarrasch -Las ker,
m atch 1908) .

6 P-KR3
7 B-Q3 N-B3
33 QxRch
Or 7 . . . B-Q3 8 0-0 0-0 9 Q - K2
This pretty queen sacrifice forces a with advantage to White .
rapid win .
8 0-0 B- Q3
33 QxQ 9 P-B3 0-0
34 PxB Q-Q l 10 N-Q2!
35 P-Q7 K-N l
While I was prepan ng for the
If 35 . . . K-N 2 36 N -Q6 ! match the Odessa master Lerner
showed me the vari ation 1 0 Q-K2 P­
36 NxPch K-B2 K4! 1 1 Q- K4 P-KN3 1 2 BxP B-KB4
37 N-K4 K-K2 1 3 Q - K3 pxp 14 pxp KR-K 1 15 Q­
38 N-Q6 Resigns Q2 NxP 16 NxN BxB 1 7 QxB Q- RS

1 82
and Black regains the pawn advan ­ ing ) , and now Bl ack has two con­
tageously. The move played is un ­ tin uations , neither of which suffices
doubtedly stronge r . for equal ity .
1 ) 1 4 . . . Q- R5 15 Nx B Qx B 1 6 Nx B,
and after either 16 . . . QRx N 1 7 PxP
Q - N 2 18 B- R6 Px B 19 QxN Qx P or
1 6 . . . pxp 17 pxp Q RxN 18 B - K4
White has an ext ra paw n ;
2) 1 4 . . . BxPch 1 5 K- R 1 Q- R5 1 6 B­
KN5 Q- R 1 1 7 N - B 6ch K -N 2 1 8 N ­
R5ch ! QxN 1 9 B- B6ch K- N 1 20 QxQ
Px Q 2 1 Kx B . Black stands worse ,
despite his extra p awn , because o f
the exposed position of hi s king . Of
course , these two vari ations do not
exhaust the possibilities of the
position .
IO P- K4 ?!
I4 Qx RP B- KB4
Here and on the nex t move the IS P-KB4
transfer of the queen to R5 deserved
con sideration . Bl ack underestim ates After 1 5 N- B6ch QxN 1 6 QxQ Bx B
the force of 1 2 Q- R5. 1 7 K R- K 1 ! ( 17 Q-N5ch is al so goo d )
Black hardly has time to take on B3 ,
1I N-K4 Q-Q I so White will h ave queen an d two
12 Q- R S! pawns against three minor pieces . In
view of the precario us position of
White's energetic opening pl ay has Black 's ki ng thi s shoul d be enough to
given him a great advant age . The wtn .
threat of 1 3 Bx P cannot be parried .
IS R-KI
I2 px p
I3 BxP px o?! The i dea is to defend agai nst the
threatened R- B3-N 3 by means o f
After thi nking for hal f an ho ur I . . . R-K3-N3 . A fter 1 6 N - B6ch QxN
succum bed to the t em ptation to try 1 7 QxQ Bx B 18 R - B3 there coul d
the fortunes of three pieces against follow 18 . . . R-K6.
queen and p awn . An obj ectively
stronger continuation was 1 3 . . . P­ I6 Nx B?!
K N3 14 Q - B3 ( 14 Q- K N5 QxQ 15
NxQ also gives Whi te the better end - A n interesting conception , but one

1 83
b ased on an oversight In a m a1n Gufeld did not see this move when
variation . he pl ayed 16 NxB . M aterial will be
e qual (two minor pieces for a roo k
[White could have won by pl �ying and two pawns) but Bl ack gains a
16 R-B3 R - K3 17 R-N3ch R-N3 18 B­ strong passed pawn on Q6 .
B4 BxN (or 18 . . . RxR 19 N - B6ch
QxN 20 QxQ) 19 RxRch BxR 20 21 BxRch Nx8
QxBch K- R 1 21 Q- RSch K- N2 22 22 P-85
QxPch K-R 1 23 Q- RSch K- N 2 24 R­
K1 PxP 25 Q- B7ch K- R 1 26 R - K3 . White shouldn 't have been in such
- Averbakh] a hurry to sacrifice the exchange .
'

16 R-K3! 22
17 Q-R5 23 RXB

Here White might have con ­ Possible is 23 KxB ! ?

templ ated a queen sacrifice by 17
NxBP . 23 ... N-Q1!

17 8-N3
This second retreat of the knight to
18 Nx8P 8xQ
Q l is the way to win . White offered a
draw at thi s point , but in view of hi s
After 18 . . . BXN White has two
m ateri al advant age Black pl ayed on
pawns and an attack for the piece .
in the hope of more .

19 Nx Q NxN
24 pxp N -83
20 8-84
25 P-KN4!

White' s passed pawns are

decidedly dangerous . Black resolved
to polish off White' s Q-side and try
to reach a won rook ending after
giving up his knight on the K - side .

25 R-Q 1
26 K- N2 RxP
27 K-N3 R-Q7
28 P-N5 RxNP
29 P-KR4 RxP
20 ... 8-K7 ! 30 R-QN1

1 84
 I ngenious , but insufficient to save 36 P-R3
the game . 37 K-K4 K-K3
38 P-R6 R-R5cb
30 N -Q5 39 K-83 K-84
31 RxP Nx Pch 40 R-N8 R-R6cb
32 K-N4 N -K6ch 41 K-82 R-R6
Possible was 32 . N -N 2! ?
. .
42 R-N8 N-85
43 R-N7 N-K3
33 K- 83 44 K-N2 R-R4

Better was 33 K- B4 to be followed

by 34 K- KS . Black can also win by means of
44 . . . NxR 45 PxN R-R4 .
33 N-Q4
34 K-K4 R-R4
45 R-N8 RxNPch
35 P-R5 K-82
46 K-Rl RxR
36 K- Q4
47 P-R7 R-KRl
36 K- KS deserved consideration . 48 Resigns

185
Part Three

The Tarrasch Variation

1 P-K4 P-K3
2 P-Q4 P-Q4
3 N-Q2

186
 Chapter 9

The Tarrasch Variation

with 3 . . . N- K B3

White: Geller
Black : Uhlmann

S kopje 1 968

1 P-K4 P-K3
2 P-Q4 P-Q4
3 N-Q2

H ere \\'e have one of the main modern l ines of the French Defence . I ts
advantage lies in the prevention of the pin . 8 - NS and the possibility of
. .

supporting the cen tre by P-0 83 . In com p arison with the Advance Variation , 3
P- KS . the tex t move develops a piece and supports the K P . I ts disadva nta ge is

1 87
that it blocks the Q B . All i n all the Tarrasch is a less aggressive continuation
that is more likely to appeal to positional players.
Black has three methods of defence :
3 . . . N- KB3 , 3 . . . P-QB4 a nd 3 . . . N - QB3 .
The first of these is the mosfcomplex . For years it was considered adequate ,
but the l atest results favour White .

3 • • • N-KB3
4 P-KS KN-Q2
5 B-Q3

This w as the mos t popular m ove for tn any years , b u t more recently 5 P-KB4
h as come into vogue . White opts for a fixed centre with an advantage in space .
Black must play energetically if he is to ob tain counterplay against this set-up .
S P- Q B4 S . . . P-QN3 is too slow e . g . 6 QN- B3 B- R3 7 N - K2 N - Q B3 8 P- KN4 !
. . .

Q- K2 9 P- B3 0-0-0 10 P- KR4 P- KR4 1 1 pxp K-N2 1 2 N -N3 BxB 1 3 KxB P- B3

14 Q -K2 Q-B2 15 B -Q2 and White m an aged to press home his advantage , as
Black had no counterplay . Gipslis-Taimanov . Leningrad 1 972 . 6 P-B3 N- QB3 7
QN-B3 ! Black has a com fortable game after the inexact 7 KN-B3 PxP 8 pxp Q­
N3 9 N -N3 P-QR4 10 R-Q N 1 P-RS 1 1 N - R 1 B-NSch 1 2 K -B2 P-B3 , N ahlik­
Berthold .

This is the basic position of the modern system .

7 PxP Transposing into the Leningrad Syste m . This is the most popular
. . .

move at this point but Black has tried a plethora of alternatives :

(a) 7 . . . P-B4 8 B-Q3 Q - R4 (or 8 . . B-K2 9 N - K2 0-0 1 0 P-K R3 P-BS 1 1 B -B2 P­

.

QN4 1 2 N - NS N-N3 1 3 P- KN4 a nd White ' s attacking chances on the K-side \vere

188
the more d angero us . Korchnoy- Larsen , Belgrade 1 964 . ) 9 K - B 2 B - K 2 1 0 N - K 2
P-0N4 1 1 8 - 02 Q - N 3 1 2 P- K R 3 P- N5 1 3 P- N4 P - N 3 1 4 B- K3 B - R 3 1 5 R - KN 1
\Vith sorn e space a dva nta ge . Penrose- Uhln1 a nn . H asti ngs 1 9 66/67 .

( b ) 7 . . . P - B5 ( an idea th at h as received the s upport o f Botvinnik) 8 P- KN4 ( i f 8

P - O N 3 P- 0N4) 8 . . . P- K R4 (or 8 . . . P - 0 N4 9 N - K 2 N - N3 [possibly better is 9 . . . P­
K R4] 1 0 B - R3 ? [ 1 0 N - N3 ! is clearly better for White] 1 0 . . . P- K R4 \\'ith a n even
ga m e . Ostoj ic - Botvi n n i k , Wij k aa n Zee 1 969) 9 pxp N - N 3 1 0 N- K2 RxP 1 1 N ­
N 3 R - R 1 1 2 B - N 2 8 - K2 1 3 0-0 K -0 2 (or 1 3 . . . P -N3 1 4 N - N5 \v ith a clear
adv a nt a ge) 1 4 N - N5 0 - N 1 1 5 P - B5 w ith a strong K -side a ttack . Parm a - Pietzsch ,
Havana 1 965 .

( c ) 7 . . . 0 - N3 8 P- K N 3 ! ( the most accurate tre at m e n t . For 8 N - K 2 see H am an n ­

Uhhn ann , H alle 1 963 - ill ustr ative g a m e 44) . 8 . . . PxP . W e have tr a nsposed to
p age 1 90 , note to B l ack ' s 8th move .

(d ) 7 . . . B - K 2 8 B -03 0 - R4 9 K - B 1 ( Keres recon1 mends 9 B -0 2 0 - N 3 1 0 N - K 2

offering a pron1 ising pa\\rn s acrifice . I f 9 K - 8 2 then 9 . . . O - N 3 is a n a\vkward
tnove to meet . See Kostro - Uh l m an n Pol a n d - Eas t Germ any M atch 1 974 -
.

illus tra tive g a tne 45 . ) 9 . . . PxP (better is 9 . . . P - O N 4 1 0 pxp P-N5 \Vith even
pros pects . ) 1 0 pxp P- 0N3 1 1 B- 02 B- N5 1 2 B- K3 B- R 3 1 3 N - K2 B- K2 1 4 P­
Q R 3 BxB 1 5 Ox B P- 0 N4 1 6 K- 82 P- 84 1 7 P- R3 P - N 3 1 8 P- KN4 \vith the bette r
g a n1e for Whi te . Bo tvin n i k - Uh l m ann . V a rn a Olymp i a d 1 9 62 .

(e ) 7 . . . 0 - R4 ! ? ( a rnove \\'hich conj ures up great co n1 p l ic atio n s ) 8 K - B2

( i n teresti n g is 8 B- K3 PxP 9 NxP NxN 1 0 BxN N - N 1 1 1 N - B3 B - 02 1 2 B - 03 B­
N 4 . S ah aro\' - Oorosh kevich . U S S R 1 973 . 8 N - K 2 is not so good e . g . 8 . . . P - O N4 !
9 B - 0 2 P - N5 1 0 P - N4 Px B P 1 1 N Px P N - N3 ! 1 2 B - R3 N- 85 1 3 0-0 P - R4 ! 1 4 B -
8 1 ! PxN P 1 5 BxP P - N 3 1 6 N -N5 N - K2 \Vith adva ntage to Bl ack . S . Ga rcia ­
Korchnoy . S kopje Olym piad 1 97 2 . Perh aps White ' s bes t ch ance o n the 0 -side .
a fter 7 . . . 0 - R4 , is 8 px p QxP ( 84) [other\\rise P- ON4 ca n be pl ayed] 9 8 - 03 B - K 2
1 0 N- K2 0 - N 3 1 1 N( K 2) - 04 ! NxN 1 2 NxN B- B4 1 3 B- B2 N - N 1 ! 1 4 N - N 3 B- K 2
1 5 0 - K 2 B - 0 2 1 6 B- K3 O - B 2 1 7 0 - 0 \Vith son1 e adva ntage t o White . M in ic­
Udovcic . Z a g re b 1 9 70 . ) 8 . . . P- 0N4 9 B - 03 P-N5 10 N- K 2 N - N3 ! (White has the
better g a n1 e a fter 1 0 . . . 8 - R 3 1 1 P - 85 ! see Lutikov- Kapeng u t U S S R Cup 1 9 70 -
,

illu strative ga 1ne 46; or 1 0 . . . P- N3 1 1 P- N4 P- R4 1 2 P- K R 3 B - 0 R 3 f\\'eaker is

1 2 . . . Px BP 13 N Px B P P><O P 14 P><O P N - N5 15 B - N 1 pxp 1 6 pxp RxR 1 7 OxR]
13 R - KN 1 BxB 14 OxB P>< N P 1 5 R Px P P>< B P 1 6 N Px P px p 1 7 pxp N - N 5 18 0 -
0 1 0 - R 3 1 9 N - K 1 R- R 7ch 20 R - N 2 Rx Rch 2 1 KxR \vith u nclear p l ay . ) 1 1 B ­
Q 2 ? ! (a sharpe r l i n e i s 1 1 P- N4 P- N 3 [ Portisch recon1 n1 en ds 1 1 . . . Px BP 1 2 N Px P
N - R5] 1 2 P- KR4 Px B P 1 3 N Px P P><P 1 4 pxp N - N 5 1 5 B - N 1 0 - R5 1 6 OxO NxO

1 89
1 7 P-R3 N-B3 1 8 P - R5 ! with advantage . Portisch -Hug , Skopje Olympiad 1 972 .
For 1 1 K-N3 see S avon-Portisch , Petropolis 1973 - illustrative game 47 . )
1 1 . . . B-R3 1 2 PxNP PxNP 1 3 Q - QN 1 N- B5 1 4 B- B 1 B- K2 1 5 P- QN3 N-R6 1 6
BxN P><B 1 7 R- Q B 1 N - NS 18 N- K 1 K-Q2! and Black had a minim al advantage .
M atulovic- Korchnoy , Ohrid 1 972 .

Now let us examine the position after 7 . . . PxP.

8 px p P-KR4 More exact than 8 . . . N-N3 9 P- KN4 ! P-KR4 1 0 pxp RxP 1 1 N - K2

P-N3 1 2 N-N3 R - R 1 1 3 P- KR4 ! B- K2 1 4 P-RS pxp 1 5 NxP with the better
prospects for White .
Black can also try 8 . . . Q -N3 9 P-KN3 ! B -N5ch ( it is not advisab le to play the
im mediate 9 . . . P- B3 e .g . 10 B - R3 ! P><P 1 1 BP><P B -N5ch 1 2 K -B 1 ! [preventing
. . . NxKP] 1 2 . . . N - B 1 13 N- K2 N -N3 14 K -N2 0-0 15 B -N4 B-Q2 1 6 P- KR4 'vith
advantage to White . Portisch -Tal , Oberhausen 1 96 1 ) 1 0 K-B2! P-B4 (once
again , after 10 . . . P- B3 1 1 K-N2 PxP , the opening of lines only favours White . ) 1 1
K -N2 (or 1 1 N- K2 Q -B2 1 2 P- KR3 N-N3 1 3 P-N4 P-N3 14 R- KN 1 B - Q2 1 5 pxp
NPxP 1 6 P-R3 B - K2 1 7 N- B3 P- QR3 18 B- K3 0-0-0 with equal chances . H aag­
Uhlm ann , Zinnowitz 1 965 . ) 1 l . . . Q -Q 1 (also possible is 1 1 . . . N(Q2)-N 1 1 2 N -R3
B-Q2 1 3 N-B2 P-QR4 and Black has good play , but not the weaker 13 . . . N- R3 1 4
R - QN 1 N - B2 15 N-Q3 with advantage to White . Suetin -U hl mann , Saraj evo 1965
- illustrative game 48 . ) 1 2 B-Q3 N -N3 1 3 N -K2 B-Q2 14 P- KR3 B - K2 15 P- KN4
P-N3 1 6 N - B3 and White has the initiative . Liberzon-Uhlm ann , Leipzig 1965 .
9 B- Q3 N-N3 10 N-R3! The best move , threatening in many variations to go to
KN5 with possible s acrifices on KB7 or K 6 . 1 0 N- K 2 B- Q 2 h as also been tried ,
and now :

190
( 1 ) 1 1 P-QR3 P-R4 1 2 0 - 0 P-0R5 1 3 Q- K 1 N - R4 ? ( Black should try 1 3 . . . P-N3
with unclear play) 14 P- B5 ! pxp 15 P- K6! ! px p 1 6 Q-N3 K-B2 1 7 N- B4 with a
\\'inning attack . Wade- Uhlm ann , Skopj e 1 968 .

(2) 1 1 0-0 B - K2 (or 1 1 . . . P- R4 1 2 N - B3 P-N3 1 3 P -QR4 N - N5 1 4 B-K2 B - K 2 1 5

B- K3 R- Q B 1 1 6 P- KN3 K-B 1 with equality . M ata novic - Pietzsch , Mosco\\'
1 963 . ) 1 2 p-QR3 P- R4 (too s lov�· is 1 2 . . . P-R3 1 3 B-Q2 P-N3 1 4 Q -N 1 ! K- B 1 1 5
N - N5 ! 0- K 1 1 6 R - 83 ! K - N2 1 7 R- N3 R- KR3 1 8 N- KB3 R- KR2 1 9 P- B5 with a
c lear advantage to White . Estrin -Pietzsc h , 1 969 ) 1 3 B-Q2 P-QR5 1 4 R-B 1 P­
N3 1 5 0 - K 1 K - B 1 1 6 R- 0 B2 N- R2 ! 1 7 B- N4 B- QN4 \vith equality . M a ta novic ­
U hlm ann , Skopje 1 9 68 .

1 0 . . . 8-Q2 1 1 0 - 0 P-N3 1 2 P - R3 Weaker is 1 2 B-02 N - B5 ! 1 3 BxN ?xB 1 4

N ( R3 )-N5 N - K2 ! 1 5 Q - K2 0-N3 ! 1 6 P-QR4 R - 8 1 1 7 K R -B l N-04 with the
better ga me for Black . Matulovic - Uhlm ann , Skopje 1 9 68 . But a plausible
alternative to t he tex t is the im mediate 1 2 N ( R3)-N5 . 1 2 . . . P - R4 13 Q - K2 8- K2
1 4 N ( R3 ) -N5 P-QR5 1 5 Q-K82 N - R4 1 6 8-Q2 N -N6 1 7 QR-Q 1 N -85 18 8-83 R­
Q81 19 Q-N3 R - KN 1 20 Q- K 1 and after successfully b lockading the 0-side ,
White obtained the initiative with P -KR3 an d P- KN4. M aric- Uhlm an n , Skopje
1 968 .

Now let us return to the n1 ain line contin uation 5 B-03 .

NO\\' th at the \vhite K 8 has been developed , the K N is free to go to its most
natural squ are K2 \Vhile the ON aim s at K B3 . All White ' s m inor pieces are thus
directed tO\\'ards the K-side \vhere Black has a disadvantage in space. On the
other hand. this develop n1en t of White ' s KB does not con tribute to the

191
p rotection of his exposed pawn chain on Q4 and K5 and therefore the move 5 B­
Q3 does less to give White a lasting advantage in space than the alternative 5 P­
K B4 .

5 P-QB4

So far S . . . P-QN3 has been little tested . Both 6 P- KB4 and 6 N- K 2 a re good
continuations for White .

6 P -QB3

The pawn sacrifice 6 KN� B3 PxP ! is insufficient after 7 0 - 0 N- QB3 8 R - K l B­

NS ! 9 R- K2 Q - B2 10 Q - K 1 Q-N 1 , threatening . . . B - R4 -B2 .

6 ••• N-QB3

The normal move , p utting pressure on the QP. Here a re some examples of the
alternative 6 P -QN3 :
. . .

( 1) 7 P-KB4 N-QB3 8 QN- B3 P-N3 9 N- K2 B-QN2 1 0 0-0 Q-B2 1 1 B-Q2

B-N2 12 P-QN3 0-0-0 with an unclear position . Fridstein-Goldberg , USSR
1949 .

(2) 7 Q - K 2 pxp 8 pxp N- QB3 9 QN- B3 N-N5 ! 1 0 B- KN5 B- K2 1 1 BxB NxBch

1 2 QxN QxB with good play for Black as he can take control of his Q R3 -K B8
diagonal . Maric-U grinovic , Belgrade 1959 .

(3) 7 N- R3 B - R3 8 BxB NxB 9 0-0 B- K2 (better is 9 . . . N - B2 1 0 Q-N4 P-BS ! ) 1 0

Q-N4 ! P-N3 1 1 N-B3 P-R3 1 2 N- B4 N - B 1 1 3 P- QN3 with advantage to White .

(4) 7 Q -N4 B-R3 8 BxB NxB 9 N- K2 N-B2 10 0-0 P-B5 1 1 P-QN3 P-QN4 1 2
pxp NPxP 1 3 P- Q R4 P-N3 1 4 N - B3 P- KR4 15 Q-N3 N-N 1 1 6 B- N5 'vith the
better game for White . R avinsky-Golovk{) , Moscow 1 959 .

(5) 7 KN-B3 B- R3 8 BxB NxB 9 Q - K2 N - B2 10 0-0 B- K 2 1 1 R- K l P- KR3 1 2 N­

B 1 Q - B 1 13 N-N3 Q - R3 14 Q- K3 P-N3 1 5 P-N3 P- B5 16 pxp pxp 17 P-QR4 N­
Q4 1 8 Q - Q2 P- QN4 with uncle ar play . Browne-Petrosia n . Zagreb 1 970 .

(6) 7 N- K2 B- R3 8 BxB NxB 9 0-0 N-B2 1 0 N- KB4 and White has the
initiative . See Keres-Dvoretsky , Triangular Team Tournatnent , Mosco\v 1 973
- illustrative game 49 .

192
 No\v b a c k t o the n1 a i n l i n e .

7 N-K2

W h i te c a n t ry a p ro m is i n g p a \v n sacri fice by 7 K N - B 3 Q - N 3 8 0-0 Px P 9 Px P

Nx Q P 1 0 Nx N Qx N 1 1 N - B 3 Q - N3 1 2 Q - R 4 ! The i d e a i s t o S\vi tch Wh i te ' s q u een
t o t h e K - si de and t o h i n der t he deve l o p m e n t of Bl ack ' s p i ece s . A fter 1 2 . . . Q - NS !
( i t i s r i s ky to p l ay 1 2 . . . B - K 2 1 3 Q - K N4 P - N 3 1 4 B - K R 6 "'hen W h i t e h as th e
i n i t i a t ive ) 1 3 Q - B 2 Q - 84 ( B l a c k ach i eves e q u a l i ty by r e tu r n i n g the p a \\· n . I f
i n s t e a d 1 3 . . . P- K R 3 1 4 B - 0 2 Q - N 3 I S Q R - B 1 B - K 2 1 6 Q - R 4 , W h i t e h a s t h e
a d v a n t age . K orch n oy - U d ovci c , Len i n g r a d 1 9 67 ) 1 4 BxP P- Q N3 1 5 B - B4 ( o r 1 5
Q- N l B- R 3 1 6 B - K 3 Q - NS ! \\' i t h good p l ay ) 1 5 . . . B- R 3 1 6 K R - B 1 QxQ 1 7 BxQ
N - B4 1 8 N - 04 B - K 2 \v i t h e q u a li ty . F u r n1 a n - U h l n1 a nn , Po l a n i c a Zd r oj 1 9 67 .
A ft e r 7 K N - B 3 . i f B l ack t r ies t o a t t ac k b o th the head a n d t a i l of W h i te ' s p a\\rn
c h a i n . he h a s severe p r ob l e n1 s a lo n g t h e K 1 - K R4 di a gon a l . A n a m u si n g ex hi b i ­
t i o n g a n1e o f T a r s ( La tv i a 1 9 70 ) \\'en t : 7 . . . Px P 8 px p P- B 3 ? 9 N - NS ! ! PxN 1 0 Q ­
RSc h P- N 3 1 1 BxPch P>< B 1 2 QxP ( N 6 )c h K - K 2 1 3 N - B4 ! B - R 3 1 4 BxPch BxB 1 5
Q - N 7c h K - K 1 1 6 N - Q 6 n1 a te .

r-�
g
i1
I

I
I

7 Q -N 3

The l o g i c a l co n t i n u a t i o n . p u t ti n g p res s u re o n the Q P \v h i ch forces N - B3 , t h u s

p r ev e n t i n g P - K B4 s tr e n g the n i n g W h i te ' s c e n t re . I n s te a d Bl ack h a s t\\'O o t h e r
n1 ov e s t h a t a re \\' or t hy o f seri o u s co n s i d e r a t i on :

1 93
(a) 7 P- 83 8 N-KB4 White finds it hard to castle after 8 P- K84 PxQ P 9
. . .

P><QP px p 10 QPx P ( 10 BP><P? NxQP 1 1 NxN Q - R5ch) l O . . . B-84 . Ho\\l·ever, 8

KP><P is a solid continuation ensuring White a s mall position al plus after
8 . . . QxP 9 N- B3 pxp 10 pxp B-N5ch 1 1 B - Q2 ! (not 1 1 K-B 1 0-0 12 N- B4 B - Q3
1 3 N- R5 Q -82 1 4 N-N3 P- K4 with good play for Black) 1 1 . . . BxBch 1 2 QxB 0-0
(or 12 . . . P- K4 1 3 pxp N(Q2)xP 14 NxN QxN 15 0-0 0-0 16 QR- K 1 Q -83 17 8-
82 8-K3 18 N-83 Q R -Q 1 19 8-N3 N -Q5? 20 RxB ! NxR 2 1 NxP Q-Q5 22 Q-K2
N-84 23 N -86 dbl eh K -R 1 24 NxP! with a clear advantage . Gorjanov-Ovetchkin )
1 3 0-0 . Now , after . . . P- K4, we have variations similar to those in the above note .
Perhaps Black' s best after 8 KPxP is 8 . . . Nx8P 9 N-83 8-Q3 transposing into
the main line . 8 Q-K2 9 KPxP Again the best c hance . After 9 Q -R5ch Q -B2
. . .

1 0 B- N6 ? pxB 1 1 QxR pxQ P 12 pxQp NxQP 1 3 0-0 NxP Black has a mighty
centre . Nor does 9 N - B3 seem s atisfactory , e .g . 9 . . . PxQP (not 9 . . . P>< K P 10 N-N6
PxN 1 1 BxPch K-Q 1 1 2 B -N5 N -83 1 3 PxKP with a strong central attack) 1 0
PxQP P><P 1 1 N-N6 PxN 12 8xPch K - Q 1 13 B-N5 N - B3 1 4 pxp Q-N5ch 1 5 K - B 1
8- K2 1 6 PxN P>< P 1 7 B- K3 and Black h as an excellent game . Euwe- Kramer ,
1 940. 9 QxP If 9 . . . NxBP 1 0 N- B3 P- K4 1 1 Px KP NxP 1 2 0-0 NxNch 1 3 QxN
. . .

B -N5 14 B-N5ch B-Q2 15 8xBch QxB 1 6 R- Q 1 0-0-0 1 7 NxP ! NxN 18 P- B4

winning a pawn , or here 15 NxP NxN 1 6 QxN BxB 1 7 8-N5 ! B-83 1 8 Q-85 B- K5
1 9 Q -B4 Q - K3 20 KR- K 1 winning . 10 N-B3 PxP White stands better after
10 . . . 8 - Q3 1 1 N- R5 Q- K2 1 2 Q-B2! (or 12 0-0 P- KN3 13 PxP BxB P 14 N - B4
and the K -file spells trouble for Black) 1 2 . . . P-KN3 1 3 pxp BxB P 1 4 B-KN5 Q-
82 15 N-84 N(Q2) - K4 16 NxN NxN 17 0 -0-0 . Stoljar-Shagalovich , USSR
1 955 . 1 1 0-0! Not 1 1 pxp B-N5ch 1 2 K-81 ( 1 2 B - Q2 ? ? QxN) 12 . . . B-Q3 1 3 N­
R5 Q- K2 with good play dow n the KB-file . 11 . . . N ( Q2 ) - K4 Black has no tim e
for 1 1 . . . B - Q3 because of 1 2 NxKP. 1 1 . . . PxP also fails t o 1 2 NxKP pxp 13 BxNP
QxB 14 R- K 1 . Finally 1 1 . . . N-84 1 2 R- K1 is better for White . 12 NxN NxN 13 B­
NSch N-B3 If 13 . . . B-Q2 14 BxBch KxB ( 1 4 . . . NxB 15 R- K 1 ! ) 15 R - K 1 R- K 1
(not 1 5 . . . PxP 1 6 NxQP pxN 1 7 QxPch B-Q3 1 8 QxPch K- K3 1 9 P- B4 ! with
great advantage) 1 6 P- B4 ! ! B-N5 1 7 RxN ! QxR (or 1 7 . . . B-Q3 18 Q-R4ch K-B l
1 9 R - K 1 BxN 20 BxB QxB 2 1 PxP \vins ) 1 8 N- Q3 ! winning the bishop . 14 R-Kl
B- K2 15 PxP 0-0 1 6 B-K3 and Black ' s b ackward KP gives White a positional
plus .

(b) 7 . . . PxP 8 px p N-N3 A system worked out by m asters from Lening rad .
Black intends to counter White' s K-side action by . . . P-KN3 and possibly . . . P­
KR4 , and build up Q-side play on his QN5 and QB5 s quares . I t is clearly a posi­
tional set-up in which Black dare not n1ake the slightest mistake . Instead of
8 . . . N-N3 he could of course still play 8 . . . P- B3 or 8 . . . Q - N3 , transposing to (a)
above or to the main line , respectively . 9 0-0 B- Q2

1 94
10 P - 84 The most aggressive contin uation , intending an eventual P- B5 . In
addition to the tex t \Vhi te has two other natu ral developin g moves :

( 1 ) 1 0 P-0 R 3 P-Q R4 ! 1 1 P-QN 3 P - R5 1 2 P-ON4 R - B 1 ? ! (better is 1 2 . . . B - K 2 1 3

B- N2 P- B4 ! \v ith equal chances b u t White ca n also improve \vith 1 3 P- B4 P- B4
1 4 pxp e . p . Bx BP 1 5 N- KB3 0-0 1 6 0 - B 2 P- KN3 1 7 BxP ! Px B 1 8 OxPch B-N2
19 N-NS R- B3 20 0 - R7ch K-B 1 21 P- BS ! threatening N- B4 . lvkovic-Hecht ,
Vrsac 1 973) 1 3 B-N2 B- K2 1 4 N - KN 3 P-N3 1 5 R - B 1 and White has more space .
Or here 1 0 . . . R- B 1 1 1 P-0N4 P- 0R3 1 2 N - QN3 N- BS 1 3 N- B4 P- ON3 1 4 0 - N4
N - K 2 1 5 N - K RS B - RS 1 6 N- 02 N - N3 1 7 N -B3 0 - 0 2 1 8 B-NS Q-B3 1 9 KR-B 1
an d White sta nds better. Neikirch -Fuchs . East Germ any 1 957 .

(2) 1 0 N- KB3 B- K2 1 1 N - B4 (other attempts are : 1 1 B- Q2 N - N5 1 2 BxN [ better

is 1 2 B- N 1 ] 1 2 . . . Bx B 13 P- 0R3 B- K2 14 R- B 1 0-0 15 Q - B2 P-N3 1 6 0 -0 2 K ­
N 2 \\'ith equality . O r 1 1 P-QN3 P - 0 R4 1 2 P-QR4 N-N5 1 3 N-B3 N -B 1 1 4 B - K 2
N - R 2 and Black controls the Q-side , with the b reak . . . P- QN4 i n the air) 1 1 . . . P­
O R4 ( more exact is 1 1 . . . P - N 3 ; or first 1 1 . . . R-0B 1 1 2 P- KR3 N-N5 ( 1 2 . . . P-N3
also equalizes ] 13 B- N 1 0-B2 14 N- R5 P - N3 15 N- B6ch BxN 1 6 PxB B-N4 1 7 R­
K 1 N - B7 \\'ith equality) 1 2 N- R5 ! P-N3 (not 1 2 . . . 0 - 0 1 3 0 - 0 2 ! threatening NxP
follo\ved by 0 - KR6) 1 3 N- B6ch BxN 1 4 Px B OxP 1 5 B- KN5 Q-N2 1 6 0 -N3 (or
1 6 0 -0 2 \\'ith good ch ances) 1 6 . . . N -N5 1 7 B-N 1 P-R3 1 8 B - B4 B - R5 1 9 Q- K3 N­
B5 20 0- B3 . \\'ith advantage to White .

I O . . . P- KN3
I f 1 0 . . . N-N5 1 1 B-N 1 P- QR4 1 2 P- OR3 N - B3 1 3 P- B5 pxp 1 4
Bx P Bx B 1 5 Rx B P- N 3 1 6 R- B 1 B- N 2 1 7 N - KB3 0- 0 1 8 B-N5 P- B3 1 9 pxp BxP
20 Bx B Ox B 2 1 N - B3 P- R5 22 0 - 03 with a n1i n in1 al advan tage to Whi te . 1 1 N ­
K B3 Weaker alte rna tives a re :

1 95
( 1 ) 1 1 R-B3 P-KR4 ! 1 2 P-QR3 R -B 1 1 3 P-QN4 N- K2 and Black can post his
minor pieces on the light s quares.

(2) 1 1 P-QR3 P-QR4 1 2 P -Q N3 (or 1 2 N- KB3 P-R4 13 N -B3 P-QR5 1 4 Q-B2 R­

KN1 1S Q -B2 N-R4 1 6 Q-N3 N(R4)-B5 ? [better 16 . . . R-B 1 ] 17 P- BS ! with advantage
to White. Szabo-Troianescu , 1 950) 1 2 . . . P- R4 13 N-K B3 (better 1 3 B -N2)
13 . . . P- QR5 ! 14 pxp (if 14 P-QN4 N-R2) 14 . . . NxRP 15 R-N 1 N - R4 16 N-N5 N­
N3 1 7 N-QB3 R-B 1 1 8 Q-B2 R- KN 1 with an unclear position .

ll . . . P-KR4

'm
�

This position has been reache d several times in master g ames . Although no
definite assessment can yet be given we should state that the practical results
tend to favour White . Here are some examp les :

( 1 ) 1 2 B-Q2 N -N5 1 3 B -N 1 N-B5? ! (better is 1 3 . . . P -R4 1 4 P-QR3 N-B3 15 P­

QR4 N-N5 with equal chances) 1 4 B- B1 P-R4 15 P- QN3 N-N3 1 6 P -QR3 N- B3
1 7 P-QR4 with a positional plus .

(2) 1 2 N -B3 P-R4 1 3 P-QR4 N-N5 1 4 B - K2 B-K2 1 5 B - K3 R-QB 1 1 6 P- KN3 K ­

B 1 1 7 P- R3 K-N2 1 8 K -N2 N-B5 1 9 B - B 1 Q-B2 20 N- K 1 P- B4 ! 2 1 pxp e .p . ch
BxP 22 N - B3 Q-N3 23 N- K5 B- K 1 24 P-N4 N-Q3 with complications and
chances for both sides. Matanovic-Pietzsch , 1963 .

(3) 1 2 P -Q R3 P-Q R4 1 3 Q - K 1 (in the game Hennings-Rittner , Black clearly

stood b etter after 1 3 Q-B2 R- KN1 14 B- K3 P-QR5 15 N-B3 N- R4 16 B -B2 B - K2

196
1 7 N - K N5 R -0 B 1 1 8 P - R4 N - N6 1 9 O R - 0 1 N - B5) 1 3 . . . N - K 2 ? ( the correct n1ove
i s fi rs t 1 3 . . . P- 0 R5 1 4 Q - N 3 a nrl then 1 4 . . . N - K2 a nd 1 5 . . . N - B4) 1 4 P- R3 ! P­
Q J{5 1 5 N - N5 N- B5 1 6 P- KN4 px p 1 7 px p P- N4 1 8 K - N 2 0 - R4 1 9 0 - 0 1 B - N2
20 R- R 1 ! \\'ith a position a l a dvantage . Udovcic- l vkov , Yugosl avia 1 952 .

(4 ) 1 2 K- R 1 N - N5 1 3 B -N 1 B- N4 1 4 R -N 1 BxN 1 5 QxB 0 - B 2 1 6 P - 0 R 3 N- B 3 17
B- 03 N- B 1 1 8 B - K3 N( B 1 ) - K2 1 9 N- R4 N- B4 20 NxN N Px N 2 1 P- QN4 ! \\'ith a
space a dv a ntage on the 0 -side . M ata novic- Wade , S tock holm Interzonal 1 952 .

Wt '
g

8 N -B3 pxp

M ak i n g Whi te 's QP susceptible to a direct attack a nd ob tain i n g the s qua re

QN5 for the use of Black ' s p i eces .

9 pxp P-B3 !

Th is i1n n1cd i a te a t tack o n the cen t re h as proved to b e bes t . 9 . . Q - N5ch 1 0 B-

.

0 2 OxN P is dubious a fter 1 1 R - 0N 1 0 - R 6 12 R - N3 0 - K 2 1 3 0-0 0 - 0 1 14 N- B4

B - K2 1 5 N - R5 0-0 1 6 Q- K 2 \vith a dvantage to White . Zhuravlev- Prutovich ; Or
9 . . 8 - N5ch 1 0 B-02 Bx Bch 1 1 Qx B Q - N5 1 2 R - 0 B 1 OxQch 1 3 KxO ! N - N 3 1 4
.

P -Q NJ ! K - K 2 1 5 P- K R4 8 - 0 2 1 6 R - R3 with the better e n d i ng . Keres- Flores .

Buenos A ires 1 93 9 . I n reply to 9 . . . B-N5ch White can a lso play 1 0 K - B 1 \vith
con1 pl ica tions \\'hich fa\'Our hi n1 a fter 1 0 . . . P- B3 ( 1 0 . . . 0- 0 ? 1 1 BxPch ! ) 1 1 N ­
B 4 ! px p 1 2 N( B4 ) x K P N- B3 ( i f 1 2 . . . P - K5 1 3 B - K B4 ! PxN 1 4 B- B7 N - 83 1 5 BxO
[ not 15 Nx Pch K - 82 1 6 BxQ B - N5 ! 1 7 P - KN3 B - K R6ch 1 8 K - N 1 KxN 1 9 B - B7
K R - K 1 \\'i th a n excellen t ga 1ne for Black . S piel n1 a nn - S toltz . 1 930] 1 5 . . . Bx N 1 6
B - Q B5 B - NS 1 7 Q - 1�4 P><Pch 1 8 Kx P \\'ith a cle a r adva n ta ge to Whi te . Berner-

1 97
Wiese , 1954) 1 3 NxN Pch K - B 1 ( 13 . . . K - B2 1 4 N - R5 ! NxN 1 5 N-N5ch and 1 6
QxN) 1 4 B - K R6 K - N 1 (there is no defence ; i f 1 4 . . . N - N5 1 5 Q -B 1 ! and if 1 4 . . . P­
KS 15 N - R5ch K- K2 16 NxN KxN 17 Q - B 1 ! PxB 1 8 Q-N5ch K - K3 1 9 Q-N4ch !)
15 Q-B 1 ! P- K5 ( 1 5 . . . N -N5 16 N - B5) 16 Q-NS K - B2 1 7 N -R5 NxN 18 QxNch K ­
K 2 19 B- KN5ch K-B 1 20 N- KS ! NxN 2 1 B- KR6ch K - K2 2 2 QxNch winning .
Rotaru-Diaconescu , Romania 1961 .

10 pxp

In this poisi tion 10 N- B4 is not so effective . e . g . 10 . . . PxP 1 1 pxp (not 1 1

N(B4)xK P P- K5 1 2 B- KB4 N(Q2) - K4 ! ! 1 3 PxN BxN 1 4 N - N5 B- KB4 1 5 B- K2 B ­
QN5ch 1 6 K-B1 Q -Q 1 with adv antage t o Black. Barden-Wade , England 1 959)
1 1 . . . B-N5ch 12 K-B 1 N(Q2)xP 13 NxN NxN 14 Q-R5ch N - B2 15 BxP . Black
now has two good possibilities. Either 15 . . . B - Q2! 1 6 N - N6 B-N4ch 1 7 K - N 1 B­
B4 w ith excel lent attacking chances for the exchange . Or 15 . . . Q-Q5 ! ? 16 B - K3
QxP 1 7 R- B 1 Q-K4 1 8 Q-Q 1 RxB 19 Q-R4ch B-Q2 20 QxB(N4) R- B 1 2 1 RxRch
BxR 22 N-N6 Q-B3 with advantage to Black. Menke-Wil de , 1957 .

10 . . . NxBP
11 0-0 B -Q3

Black has no time for 1 1 . . . B-Q2 1 2 R- K 1 B - Q3 1 3 B - KB4 BxB 1 4 NxB when

Black' s weak KP is exposed .

White now has a wealth of moves at his dispos al and it is difficult to say w hich
is the best .

198
 12 N-B3

Perhaps the mos t positionally consistent con tinuation . Before \\'e exan1ine this
move in detail \\'e m us t first consider eight( ! ) alterna tive tries :

(a ) 1 2 N-N3 Or 1 2 R - K l 0 - 0 1 3 N-N3 1 2 . . . 0-0 13 R-K 1 K -R 1 ! and White 's

Q P is just as \\'eak as Black' s KP .

(b) 1 2 P- QR3 0-0 13 P- QN4? P- K4! 1 4 pxp NxKP 1 5 N ( B3) - Q4 Or 1 5 NxN

BxN 1 6 B - K3 Q- B2 \\'ith advantage to Black . Stoltz- Schm id , Helsinki Olympiad
1 952 . 1S . . . N ( 83) -NS! I 6 P-84? If 1 6 P- R3 N x B ! 16 . . . Nx8 17 QxN 8- KB4 with
advantage . Kol arov- Pietzsch , 1 965 .

(c ) I 2 P- QN3 0-0 1 2 . . . P- K4 is shO\\'n to be premature after 1 3 pxp NxP 1 4

N( K2)-Q4 0- 0 1 5 B - K3 with a positional pl us . 13 B-N2 Not 1 3 B - KB4 NxP ! 14
N ( B3 )xN P- K4 \\'ith a good game . I 3 . . . 8 - Q 2 I 4 N-N3 K - R I I S 8- N I P- QR4 1 6
P- QR3 Q R - 8 I I 7 R- K I N - K2 I 8 N-KS 8- K I 19 R - K3 8xN ! 20 Px8 N - Q2 2 1 B ­
Q 4 Q - Q I 2 2 8- Q3 8 -N3 with equality . Florian-Uhlm ann , Balatonfured 1959 .

(d) 1 2 R-N 1 . For a long time this move was held to be an improvement on
White ' s play u ntil Uhlmann came up with a satisfactory a ns\\'er : 12 . . . 0-0 1 3 B­
KB4 NxP ! This is Uhlm ann 's idea . Not 1 3 . . . BxB 14 NxB Q - B2 15 P- KN3 P- K4
1 6 pxp NxP 1 7 NxN QxN 1 8 Q - N3 with the better ga me . 14 N ( B3)xN P-K4 Also
possible is 14 . . . BxB 15 NxB P- K4 16 NxQP QxN \\'ith equality . 15 B- K3 PxN 16
8x QP I f 16 NxQ P ? BxPch ! 16 . . . Q-82 1 7 P-KR3 8- Q2 with even chances .

(e) I 2 8- Q2 0 - 0 Not 1 2 . . . QxNP 1 3 R - N l Q-R6 1 4 R -N3 Q - RS 15 B- QNS QxR P

1 6 N- B l \\'inning . If 1 2 . . . P- K4 1 3 pxp NxP 1 4 N x N BxN 1 5 B - B 3 and White has
a lead in developm ent . 1 3 8-83 8- Q 2 . The cha nces are about even . See Zinn ­
Uhlm ann , East Germany 1 964 (illustrative g ame SO) , and Weinitsch ke­
Trescher, East Germ an Correspon dence game 1 9 70-74 (illustrative game 5 1 ) .

(f) I 2 Q - Q2?! 0-0 I 3 Q-NS 8- Q2 I 4 Q - R4 N-QNS I S 8-N I 8-N4 1 6 R- K 1 N­

Q 6 \\'ith advantage to Bl ack . Milic- Udovcic , Yugoslavia 1 957 .

(g) 1 2 8- K84 Bx8 1 3 Nx8 QxNP! The only move to equalize e. g . 1 3 . . . 0 - 0 14

R- N l ! Q- B2 15 P- KN3 P- K4 16 px p NxP 17 NxN QxN 18 R- K l and Black ' s
isol ated Q P is a per1n ane n t weakness . Aron in - Kotkov, U S SR 1 960. I f here
1 4 . . . K-R l White can in1 n1edi ately pl unge in to favourable tactics by 15 N - NS
Nx P 1 6 Nx R P ! NxN 1 7 N -N6ch K- N l 18 N- K7ch K - B2 (or 1 8 . . . K- R l ? 19 BxN

1 99
winning) 19 NxB QRxN 20 Q · RSch with advantage . 1 4 R-K1 White can
force a draw im mediately by 14 R-N 1 QxRP (not 14 . . . Q ·R6 15 N-NS Q-Q3 ? 16
N(B4)x KP! BxN 17 NxB QxN 18 R· K 1 N- KS 19 BxN P><B 20 P-QS Q · K4 21 PxN
pxp 22 Q-N3 ! Q- Q4 23 Q-N4 wi�h a clear advantage to White . Minev·Uhl m ann ,
Berlin 1 962 . 15 . . . 0·0 is better . ) 15 N ·NS 0 ·0 1 6 R·R 1 Q-N7 1 7 R ·N l with a
draw by repetition . 14 . . . 0-0 15 NxKP The zwischenzug 15 R· K2 has no
importance after 1 S . . . Q - R6 1 6 NxKP BxN 1 7 RxB Q R· K1 1 8 RxR RxR 19 B-NS
with equality . Estrin -Filzer , 195 7 . 15 . . . BxN 1 6 RxB QR-K1 17 RxR RxR 18 Q­
QBl! 18 R-Nl QxRP 1 9 RxP N· KS ! is unclear. 1 8 . . . QxQch Or 1 8 . . . Q ·N3 19 R·
N l Q-R4 20 P· KR3 P-QR3 2 1 RxP NxP 22 Q-NS NxNch 23 PxN Q· K8ch 24 K ·
N 2 R- K2 25 R·N8ch R- K1 Draw n . Fuchs · Uhlmann . 19 RxQ R- QB1 with equal
chances . Platz-Uhlmann , East Germ any 1962 .

(h) 12 N-B4 0- 0 13 R-K1 B- Q2! This pawn sacrifice guarantees Black

adequate resources . If instead 13 . . . BxN 14 BxB QxNP? 15 B· Q6 R- K 1 1 6 B- KS
Q · R6 1 7 BxN pxs 1 8 N· R4 ! R· K2 19 R- K3 then White has a winning attack .
Ciric· Smederevac , Yugoslavia 1 95 7 . White also has the advantage after 1 3 . . . N·
KS 14 P· KN3 BxN 15 BxB QxNP 1 6 R · K2 . 1 4 NxKP KR-K1 The chances are
even . See Georgadze-Doroshkevich , Tbilisi 197 1 (illustrative game 52) .

12 . . . 0-0
13 B-K3

This prevents the freeing move . . . P·K4 and White prep ares to build up calmly
on the Q·side .

13 • • • B-Q2

200
 14 P- QR3 !

1 4 N - K5 i s proved t o be premature after 1 4 . . . BxN 1 5 PxB OxP 1 6 PxN QxN

1 7 pxp oxp with an extra pa\\'n for Black . Ho\\·ever , a good altern ative is 1 4 R­
B1 Q R - B 1 15 N - K5 B- K 1 16 Q - 0 2 N - K 2 1 7 P-B3 0 -0 1 1 8 B - K B 2 P-0R3 19 N­
K2 Rx R 20 Rx R Q - N 1 21 R- K 1 N- B3 22 P- B4 N- K2 23 N- B3 Dra\vn .
Trifunovic- Uhlm ann , H alle 1 963 . A nother poss ibil ity occurred in Barden­
Uhlmann , Hasti ngs 1 958/ 9 , \\'hich went 14 R - K 1 K - R 1 15 P- K R 3 P - O R3 1 6 R­
O B l N- K2 1 7 N - 0R4 ? ! BxN 18 Ox B N - B4 19 B- KN5 ( 1 9 N- K5 \\ras essential)
19 . . . B-N5 ! 20 Q-N3 N - 02 21 R- K2 NxP 22 NxN OxN 23 B- K3 0 -RS 24 R - B7 (if
24 P- N3 Ox R P 25 OxB N- K4 wins ; Or 24 P- R3 B- Q3 25 OxN P N- K4 \\·ith
advantage) 24 . . . N- K4 25 RxO N P P- QR4 26 P- R3 P- Q5 ! with a clear adva ntage
for Black .

14 Q-Q 1 !

H aving done her duty on the Q -side the queen now heads for the other \\'ing ,
at the same ti me preven ting the possibility of N- K5 . Other moves \\'hich have
been played are :

(a) 1 4 . . . Q R- K 1 1 5 P- QN4 P- QR3 1 6 R-B1 Stronger i s 1 6 N- K5 ! 1 6 . . . K - R 1 1 7

B-N l R- K2 1 8 B-NS B- K 1 1 9 P- R3 B-N 1 20 N -K2 P- QR4 2 1 pxp QxR P 2 2 Q-N3
B-Q3 23 R-B3 R (K2) - KB2 24 B- R4 Q-R3 �with equal chances . Palm asson ­
Uhlm ann , Prague / Mari anske Lazne 1 954 .

(b) 1 4 . . . P-QR3 I S P-QN4 Q- Q 1 ! 1 6 R - K 1 Q- K 1 1 7 P- R3 R-B1 1 8 R- QB1 K- R 1

1 9 B-N 1 Q-R4 \vith equality . Dr . Szily-Uhl m ann , 1 959 .

15 P-R3 R-81
16 R-K1 K-R1
17 R - Q81 Q-K1

White h a s the bet ter ga n1e after 1 7 . . . P- K4 1 8 pxp Nx P 1 9 NxN BxN 20

BxO R P BxN 2 1 I�x B f{x R 22 Px R 0- R4 23 8 - 04 OxR P 24 0 -N l .

18 R- 82 P- QR3
19 R ( B2) -K2 R- Q82

This m ove can be criticized . 19 . . . O- R4 \Vould give e qual cha nces .

20 1
 20 B-Bl P-QN4
21 B-Nl N- Q1
22 Q-Q3 Q-B2
23 N-K5· Q-Nl
24 B-B4

The space advantage and Black's weak KP give White the better position .

24 ... B-Kl
25 Q-Q2 N-N2
26 N:Q3 B-N3
27 RxP BxB
28 NxB B><B
29 RxB N-KR4?!
30 N(B4 ) xQP!

The most clear-cut solution .

30 ... RxN
31 R-K5! R(B6 ) -B1
32 RxN Q-B2
33 R-KS N- Q3
34 N-K3! Q-N3
35 R-KB1 P-R3
36 P-Q5 N-B5
37 NxN RxN
38 R-K2 R-Ql
39 R-Q1 R- Q3
40 Q-K1 ! R-B4
41 R-KS K-R2 and Black
Resigned

202
 GA M E 44 N x P(6) ? P- KS ! 1 2 NxB P>< N , or here
1 2 N(3) -Q4 N - 8 3 \\'i th the better
White : Ham ann game for Bl ack . So White must pl ay
Black : Uhl mann 1 1 pxp B-B4! 1 2 B -0 3 ! (if 1 2 Nx P
N(2)x P 1 3 NxPch K - 8 1 \vi th unclear
Halle 1 9 63 pl ay) 12 . . . P-N3! 13 Nx P B-B 7ch "With
compl ications .
1 P-K4 P-K3
2 P- Q4 P-Q4 10 B-N5ch
3 N-Q2 N-KB3 11 B- Q2 ?
4 P- K5 KN-Q2
5 P K B4
- P - Q B4 Correct is 1 1 N - B3 0 - 0 1 2 px p
6 P- 83 N - Q B3 (not 1 2 8 - R3 P>< P 1 3 8xPch K- R 1 ,
7 QN -83 Q - N3 nor 12 8- N2 pxp 1 3 BPxP RxN ! 14
8 N-K2 8x R NxO P \\rith advantage to Black )
1 2 . . . Nx BP with equ al chances .

11 PXP!
12 BPXP 0-0
13 B- N2 N( 2) x P ! !

8 P-83 !
9 P- KN3 PxQP
10 Px QP

I n the gan1e 8arczay-F arago .

White pl ayed 1 0 N(2)x P N x N ? 1 1 A fi ne pi ece sacri fice giving Black
PxN px p (or 1 1 . . . 8-NSch 1 2 8 - 02 a deci si ve advant age .
0 -0 1 3 8X 8 Ox 8ch 1 4 0-02 with the
be tter endi ng for White) 1 2 BPxP B­ 14 Px N NxP
NSch 13 K - B 2 0 -0 14 K-N 2 ! vdth 15 N (2) -Q4
advant age . Ho\\'ever , Bl ack coul d
pl ay instead 1 0 . . . px p and i f 1 1 I f 15 N - 84 0- K 6ch 1 6 K - B l 8x B

203
17 NxN (17 NxB P- KN4!)
17.. . QxN ( K4) 18 QxB P-K N4 19 R­
K1 Q-Q3 and Black wins.

15 N-Q6ch
16 K-K2 NxP
17 Q-N3 Q-R3ch!
18 K-B2 B><B
19 QxN Q-Q6!
20 QR-Ql Q-K6ch
21 K-Bl P-QN3
....

The entry of Black's QB into the

game forces the win.
In my (Uhlmann) g ame ag ainst
Botvinnik at the V arna Olympi ad
22 QxB B-R3ch
1962, White played 9 K-B1 and after
23 N-K2 RxNch
9 . . .PxP 10 pxp P-QN4 gained the
24 Bx R QxBch
advant age . However, the correct play
25 K-Nl BxN
for Black is 9.. . P-QN4 10 PxP P-NS
26 R-K1 B-Q6!
with equal chances. The pawn sacri­
27 Resigns
fice 9 B-Q2 Q-N3 10 N-K2 QxP is
unclear .

9 Q-N3!
10 N-K2 P-B3
GAME 45
We now see the difference between
White: Kostro this line and the main variation in
Black: Uhlmann which White h as usually played P­
KN3 giving his king a safe square on
Pol and-E ast Germany Match 1974 KN2. Black no\v threatens to win a
pawn by 11 . . . PxQP 12 P><QP P><P 13
1 P-K4 P-K3 pxp N (2)xP.
2 P-Q4 P-Q4
3 N-Q2 N-KB3 11 Q-N3
4 P-K5 KN-Q2
5 P-KB4 P-QB4 White clearly did not relish this
6 P-B3 N-Q B3 move but there seems to be nothing
7 QN-83 B-K2 better . Adorjan tried 11 K-N3 in his
8 B-Q3 Q-R4!? g ame with Vag anian at Teesside
9 K-B2?! 1974 , but after 1 1 . . . P-N4 Whi te was

204
t n trouble : 12 R- K l PxQP 13 B l eb 34 Resigns ( After 34 K - N4
N ( K2)xP ( I f 1 3 PxQ P P>< BPch 1 4 QxPch 35 Kx B Q- B7ch , m ate is
NxP P><P 1 5 pxp N - B4, Bl ack has a i nevitab le . )
good g a me . ) 1 3 . . . P>< BPch 14 BxP
pxp 15 NxP( K5) N (Q2)xN 16 RxN 11 QXQ
( I f 1 6 BxN, the n 16 . . . Nx B 17 RxN B­ 12 pxQ PxQP
Q2 [ 17 . . . B-Q3 is bad because of 1 8 13 PxQP 0-0
Q-R5ch K- Q 1 1 9 Q - N5ch ] fol lo\\·ed 14 B-Q2 P-KN4!
by cas tling . By sac ri fi cing the
�
exc hange Wh ite gets a s tron g posi ­ Wt
t ion , the on ly disadvantage of v.rhich g
is his unsettled ki ng . ) 16 . . . NxR 17 i i
BxN R- K N 1 ch 18 K- R3 R-N4 19 B ­
N5ch ! ( Adorjan pl ays with i m agi n ­
ation. 1 9 N - B 3 loses because of i
1 9 . . . Q- K6 and 19 Q- K2 B -Q2 20 N­
B3 R-R4ch 21 K- N4 0-0-0 22 Kx R
R - N l is al so i nsufficient . ) 19 . . . K-Q 1
( I f 1 9 . . . B-Q2� the n 20 Bx Bch Kx B 2 1
0- R4ch K-Q 1 2 2 R- K 1 wi th a stron g
attack . ) 20 0- K 2 B - 0 2 ( No\\' this
m ove is pos si ble because the queen
cannot c heck from R4 . ) 21 B -Q3 K ­ Th is move sm ashes Wh ite's
B 1 ! (This pre pares 2 2 . . . B- 03 and at i m posing paw n centre an d activates
the sa me tin1 e threatens 22 . . . Rx B 23 Bl ack 's piece s . An alternative idea is
QxR B- K B3 ! 24 Qx B P - K 4c h , a piece sacri fi ce by 14 . . . P><P 15 BPxP
\\'i n n i ng the queen . ) 2 2 N - B3 R - KN l N ( Q2)XP ! ? 1 6 PxN NxP with active
23 P- B4 ! K-0 1 ! (23 . . . B-Q3 24 R ­ p l ay .
K B 1 BxB 25 Nx B P-05 26 P -B5 gives
White a dangero us i niti ative.) 24 15 P><BP
BxP R- K B l 25 Q- 02 R-Q B l 26 P­
QN3 R-QB4! (The roo k comes into 15 P- N3 loses a p awn afte r 1 5 . . .P­
play "'i th great effect . 27 . . . px p is N5 16 pxp BXP.
thre atened . ) 27 R-Q l K-B1!
( V aga ni an manoeuvres ski l fully i n 15 BXP
the face o f strong e nemy press ure . ) 16 pxp B-N2!
28 B - Q3 pxp 29 BxP Q- B 3 30 B - K 2
( W h i te defen ds ag ai nst the thre at of The poi nt. Not 1 6 . . . Bx OPc h 1 7
30 . . . Rx N. but instead succun1bs to a N x 8 Nx N 1 8 B - N4 ! R - B 2 1 9 P- N6
diffe re nt blo\v . ) 30 . . . Rx B ! 3 1 Nx R R­ pxp 20 BxP R- B3 2 1 B- 8 3 with some
R 1 ch 3 2 K - N3 B-R5ch 33 K- 84 R- adva ntage to White .

205
 17 B-B3 P-K4! 32 R-R2
18 pxp N (Q2)xP
19 KR-Q 1 B-NS Or 32 R-N l B-R6 ! followed by
20 N-N1? 33 . . . RxB 34 RxR B-NSch .

Better is 20 BxN NxB 21 N-N1 32 B-K4

when Black has only a slight edge . 33 R-KB2 B-B5ch
34 Resigns
20 P-Q5!
21 B-K 1 NxBch GAME46
22 RxN N-K4
White: Lutikov
23 R-Q2 R-B4'
Black: Kapengut
Now Black regains his pawn with
USSR Cup 1970
the better game .
Notes by Chapl insky
24 P-R3 BxN
25 NxB P-QR3!
1 P-K4 P-K3
2 P- Q4 P- Q4
A neat zwischenzug .
3 N-Q2 N KB3
-

4 P-K5 KN -Q2
26 K-K2
5 P-KB4 P-QB4
6 P-B3 N-QB3
Or 26 K-N3 NxN 27 P><N RxNPch
7 QN -B3 Q-R4
with advantage to Black .
8 K-B2 P- Q N 4
9 B-Q3 P - NS
26 NxN
10 N-K 2 B-R3?
27 pxN R-K1ch
11 P-BS!
28 K-Q1

If 28 K-B2 R - K6 and the pawn

harvest is gathered in .

28 RxBP
29 P-R4 P-Q6!
30 R-KR2

O r 30 R-KB2 RxR 3 1 BxR R-K7

winning both Q-side pawns .

30 R-B8
31 K-Q2 BxP

206
 11 N Px P 28 Q -Q3 Q- N 7 29 R- K Nl px p 30 Q­
12 8Px P Px KP R 6 . I n both cases Whi te tnus t \\ri n .
13 NPx P px p
14 pxp N-NS 28 R-K R4 Rx RP
29 Rx R Px R
I t \voul d h ave been be tter to ex ­ 30 N -Q2!
change bi shop s. After 1 4 . . . Bx B 1 5
Qx B B - K 2 1 6 N- B4 ( 1 6 B - NS 0-0) The tnore obvi ous 30 N - NS Rx N P ­
1 6. . . N -Q 1 followed by castl i ng , ch ! 3 1 Qx R QxQP gi ves Bl ack chan­
Bl ack can defend hi msel f . Now , ces of sal vat ion.
though , White h as a clear advant age.
30 Rx KP
IS 8- N l 8 XN 31 P><R Qx KPch
16 Qx 8 8-K 2 32 Q - K B4 P - RS ch
17 P- K R4 Q- R3 33 K-N4 Res igns
18 Q-Q1 R-Q B l
19 8-NS? Q- BS?

After 19 . . . Q-R6 ! 20 Bx B Kx B
Bl ack 's ch ances are no \\'Orse because
of the threat of . . . Q- N 7ch or . . . Q- 86 .
I nstead of 1 9 B -N S Whi te shoul d
G A M E 47
h ave pl ayed 1 9 P - R 3 ! , keepi ng a
posi tion al advant age .
White: Sa\'OD
Black: Porti sch
20 Bx 8 Kx8
21 P-R3 Q-B6
Petropol i s I nterzon al 197 3

I f 2 1 . . . N -Q B3, then 22 Q-Q2 wi th N ot es by Bihovsky

strong threats .
1 P- K4 P- K3
22 8x P Q-N7ch 2 P-Q4 P-Q4
23 K-N3 Rx B 3 N-Q2 N - K 83
24 P><N R-87 4 P- KS KN -Q2
25 Q- K 8 1 R-R3 5 P- K B4 P-Q84
26 P- RS P-N3 6 P- 83 N-Q B3
27 Rx P R -K7 7 QN - 83 Q-R4
8 K 82
- P- Q N4
Bl ack's posi tion is in defensibl e: for 9 8- Q3 P-NS
exan1 plc. 27 . . . H.x RP 28 Rx R Px R 29 10 N-K2 N-N3
Q - NS! Rx Pch 30 K-R3 or 27 . . . Qx NP 11 K -N 3

207
 ''wedge'' on R6.

18 P-R6 P-N3
19 P>< KP PxKP
20 R-Q N l 0-0
21 N-B4 N-Q1

B lack m ust separa te his rooks ,

since 2 1 . . . K-B2 i s met by the un­
pleasant reply 22 R - N 7 thre a tening
,

N -NSch .

22 N-R3
11 PxBP
12 NPxP B-R3 Ain1ing to con quer the i m portant
point KNS .
1 2 . . . N - RS was worth consi dering .
22 R-B1
13 P-KR4 23 R-Kl

An interesting i de a; he intends to If 23 B-NS BxB 24 N( R3)x B N- K6.

a dvance t he KRP further . Blac k Black m an ages to get h i s kni ght to
s hould prevent thi s by playing 1 3 . . . P­ KB4 .
R 4, which would oblige W hite to play
14 P- BS (since otherwi se 14 . . . P-N3 23 pxp
blocks the position), and after 24 pxp N-R6
1 4 . . . P><BP 15 BxP BxN 1 6 QxB 25 R-N3 N-87
QxBP the complications favour 26 R-Q 1
Black , since bot h 17 B -N 2 and 1 7 P­
K6 can be met by 17 . . . NxQP . Thi s concludes preparations for B­
NS .
13 B-K2
14 P-R5 BxB - 26 R-QB5
15 QxB Q-R5 27 B-N5 N-B3
16 P-BS Q-85 28 R-N7 R-B2
17 Qx Q NxQ 29 R(Q1) - QN 1 ! R-N5

Although the exchange of queens It becomes clear that the p awn on

shows up a num ber of wea knesses in Q4 is im mune: 29 . . . N(B7)xP? 30
White' s position he sti ll has the bet ­ NxN NxN 3 1 Bx B N - B4ch 32 K-R2
ter chances , than ks chiefly to the NxB 33 RxN Rx R 34 R-N8ch K- B 2

208
35 N-N5 n1ate. The stu bbornest 39 N-R4 NxP
defence \vas 29 ... 8-81 . After the ex­ 40 NxNPch K-Kl
change of bishops Black's position is 41 Drawn
difficult.

GAME48
30 BxB RxR(N2)
31 RxR NxB
White: Suetin
Black: Uhlmann

Sarajevo 1965
i
i� Notes by Suetin

I P-K4 P-K3
2 P-Q4 P-Q4
3 N-Q2 N-KB3
4 P-K5 KN-Q2
5 P-KB4 P-QB4
6 P-83 N-QB3
7 QN-83 Q -N3
8 P-KN3 PxP
32 R-N8ch 9 pxp B-N5ch
10 K-82 P-84
A regrettable oversight in titne­ 11 K-N2 N(Q2)-N I
trouble. He could have \\'On by 32 R­ 12 N-R3!
N2! N-B4ch (or 32... N-K6 33 N(R3)­
NS) 33 K-R2 N(87)xP 3 4 NxN NxN 12 N- K2 is the u sual tnove here,
35 N-N5 R-B 4 36 R-N8ch R-Bl 37 R­ striving for active p lay on the K-side:
N7. Black should therefore have P-KR3. P-KN4. N-KN3 and so on.
played 3l ... RxB (instead of In this gan1e White chases a different
31 ... NxB). though even then his plan: he plays N-KR3 -KB2-Q3.
position is difficult after 32 I�-N2 N­ aitning at the in1portant squ ares on
K6 33 N( 1�3)-N5. the 0-side. \Vhere the tnain strategic
battle takes place.
32 R-81
33 RxRch KxR 12 B-Q2
34 N( R3)-N5 N-B4ch 13 N-82 N-R3
35 K-84 K-K2 14 R-QN1
36 NxRP NxRP
37 P-N4 N-82 In line \\'ith his plan White
38 N( 1�7)-N5 N-Q1 prepares P-Q N4.

209
 14 N-82 18 BxN
15 N-Q3 19 BxB N-8 3
20 P-NS!

Continuing with a detern1ined at­

tack . 20 . . . N-R4 2 1 Q-R4 0-0 22 B­
K l N-BS 23 BxN P><B 2 4 B- RS leads
to the loss of Bl ack's q ueen . The
following moves are forced for Black .

20 N-N1
21 Q-R4!

15 B-K2

This natural move is an almost iln­

perceptible, but nevertheless serio us,
m istake . Black should not have been
afraid of exchanging his bi shop on
NS and shoul d have pl ayed 1S . . . P­
QR4! in order to frustrate White's in­
tention - a Q- side attack . If 16 NxB
PxN !, then Black has active coun­
terpl ay on the R-file and he exerts This queen thrust, which threatens
pressure on QS and QBS . the m anoeuvre B-K 1-RS, pl aces
Black in a critical position .
16 B-K3 N-R4
17 8- 82 8-Q N4 21 0-0
18 P-QN4 22 KR- Q8 1

Black obviously underestimated Not immedi ately 22 B-K 1 P-QR4!

this long-prepared move . Now he is 23 PxPe . p . Q- R2 because Black's
in very serious difficulties, for if defence is then q uite stable .
1 8 . . . N-BS 19 P-QR4! B-Q2 20 N-BS
then the threat of 2 1 BxN P><B 22 22 N-K1
NxB KxN 23 P-QS ! immedi ately 23 R-88
decides the game . So the following
exchange is really forced . The only way ! Now the threat of B-

210
K 1 is strong again . 23 B - K 1 im ­ 31 N-8 1
medi ately is refuted by 23 . . . Q- Q 1. 32 B-Q N 6 Q-N 1
33 B- Q3 Q-Bl
23 N-82 34 R-Q B I Qx Q
24 RxRch 35 Rx Q N -R6
36 R- 87 K-Kl
I t is true that the tempt ing 24 B­ 37 Rx Bch !
K l Rx R 25 B- RS N - Q 2 26 Bx Q Px B
gi ves White a queen for a roo k and a One more bl ow, and thi s tim e . the
minor pi ece , but B l ack can then l ast one.
bui l d up a fi rm stronghol d .
37 Kx R
24 38 B-Q BSch R es i gns
25 B- Kl

At l ast the leitm o t if sou nds !

GA M E 49
25 P-QR4
26 Px Pe.p. Q- R2 Whit e: Keres
Black: Dvoret sky
If 26 . . . Rx P , 27 Q- B2 ! Q- B3 28
QxQ RxQ 29 Rx P and White has an
USSR Team Tou rn am en t
eas i ly won e n d i ng .
M oscow 1 9 73

27 Q-N3 Not es by D vore tsky an d Rosenberg

Th i s is the si mpl es t winn i ng line . I P-K4 P-K3

2 P-Q4 P- Q4
27 pxp 3 N-Q2 N -KB3
28 Q-N7! N -Q 2 4 B- Q3 P - 84
29 B- R5 N -N4 s P-K5 K N-Q 2
6 P- QB3 P-QN3
In orde r to sharpe n up the gan1 e a 7 N-K2 B - R3
l it tle . 8 Bx B Nx B
9 0-0 N-82
30 Q-86 K-82 10 N -K B4!
31 Bx P!
A gai nst 10 P - K B4 B l ack ge ts a
The decisive tactical bl o\v . After good g a n1 e by pl ayi ng 1 0 . . . P-K B4!
3l. . Px B 3 2 P- K 6ch K- 8 1 33 Px N
. N ov;. though . 1 0 . . . P- K B4 ? is ba d
Black is corn pl etely dest royed . because of 1 1 Q- RSch .

211
 Q-N4 .

13 N-N3

Against 1 3 Q-N4 Black. was in­

tending to play 13 . . . P- B4 14 PxPe . p.
NxP 15 Q-R3 B -Q3!, when White
achieves nothing by 16 PxP pxp 17
NxKP because of 1 7 . . . R-K 1 18 NxN
( 1 8 B-84? RxN!) 18 . . . Rx R 19 NxR
QxN with sufficient com pensa tion
for the pawn. 13 Q- B3! is quite inter­
esting (ins tead of 13 Q -N4) and if
1 3 . . . P-B4, then 1 4 P- B4! (less clear is
10 B-K2
14 NxKP NxN 15 QxQP K- B2) .
11 R-Kl
13 P-B4
The line recomended in "64" is not
14 P-B4!
da ngerous for Black : after 1 1 P B4
·

PxQP 12 pxp NxKP 13 R-K 1 Black

The same could have followed af­
has the simple move 13 . . . N-N 3 . The
ter 13 . . P- B3 . A continuation lea ding
piece sacrifice 14 pxp NxN 15 P><Pc h
.

K -B 1 is of dubious value . to roughly level play (after 1 3 . . . P-B3)

is 14 KPxP NxP 15 N-Q3 (15 Q -K 2
11 0-0 B- Q3! 16 NxKP R-K 1) 15 . . . B- Q3 16
B- B4 BxB 17 NxB Q-Q 2 18 N-Q3 Q­
In Keres 's book on the French Q3 .
Defence which was publi shed in East
Germa ny , this position is assessed as 14 P-K N4
favourable for White .
Perhaps the only continuation, as
12 N-Bl otherwise Black has to give up the
square Q4 . For exa mple, 14 . .. px BP ?
This move is g iven in the boo k, but � 15 P-QS P><P 16 NxQP NxN 1 7
12 Q -N4 and 1 2 N-B3 deserve at­ QxNch K-Rl 18 P-K6 with a clear
tention . These moves make it harder advantage . Or 14 . . . P><QP? 15 pxp
for Black to advance the K BP to B4 . P><P 16 QxP B- B4 1 7 Q-Q3 winning a
pawn.
12 ... Q -8 1
15 NxKP!
The immediate 12 . . . P- B3 is
weaker because of 13 Kpxp RxP 14 Neither 15 N( B4)-R5 PxQP nor 15

212
N-R3 Q - Q 1 1 6 Q - RS P- BS are 1 9 .. . P- K B S 20 Q-N4 are b ad ,
dangerous for Black, whereas the allowi ng W hi te to s trengthen his at­
piece sacrifice sets h i m a di fficult tack deci sively .
tas k . At this point t he Grandm asters in
the press - room thought that B l ack's
15 NxN positi on w as about to col l apse . In
16 Px QP Nx QP p a rticul ar , 20 P- K R4 was suggested .
17 P-Q6 B·Ql I f then 20 . . . QxQ P 2 1 PxN Qx P t hen
18 P-K6 B- 83 22 Bx P ! Bx B 23 P><B and White wins .
K eres , however , rejected 20 P- K R4 ,
/'
�11
g ·� m �Ji� /I
correctly consi dering th at Black
wo uld get dangerous co unter pl ay by
i � i m eans of 20 . . . P>< P ! . and if 2 1 B- R 6 ,

'i t t_t then 2 1 . . . P- R6! 2 2 P- B3 N-K4 .

i i i 20 Px N QxP (Q3)
21 Nx Bch
1',

Here . ho\\'ever . 2 1 P- KR4 deserves

careful study . After 21 . . . P- K R3 22
Px P P><P 23 Nx Bch Qx N 24 Q·RS P­
KBS 25 R- K 8 R- Q 1 26 B- Q 2 RxP 27
Q R- K 1 White retains the ini ti ative .

21 Qx N
Whi te has hvo methods of con­ 22 B·K3 QR-Ql
tinui ng the attack besi des thi s move: 23 Q - R4! Q·Q3
a) 1 9 P- K 7 R - B 2 (if 19 . R- K 1
. . 24 Bx P Rx P
then 20 Nx P Nx N 2 1 Q- QSch K·N2
22 QxN and B lack's pi eces are bott- The pos i tion h a s si mpl ified . Bl ack
led up) 20 P·K8=Qch Qx Q 2 1 h as returned t he extra p a\vn and \\'ar­
Rx Qch RxR . I n our opinion Black de d off the immedi ate threats . Never­
can hol d thi s posi tion . thel ess , White could sti ll h ave tried
b) 19 Nx P Nx N 20 Q-QS K-R 1 2 1 for an advant age by means of 25 B­
Qx N B-Q S 2 2 Px N Q- B 3 ! and B lack B4! Q-Q B3 26 Q- B4ch Q-Q4 27
can even \\·in ! QxQch Rx Q 28 R- K 3 . With the nex t
n1 ove K eres accep ts a tr ansi tion into
19 Q·B3! an equal fo ur-roo k ending .

The al terna tives 19 . .. P- NS 20 B- 25 B·K3 P-KBS

1�6. 19 . P- KR3 20 P- KR4 an d
. . 26 Bx N Qx B

213
 27 QxQ RxQ Better is 1 4 N-N3 QR-Kl 15 N- KS
28 R-K2 p B6
.. R- K2 16 K- R l ! B- K 1 17 P-B4 K-Rl
29 pxp RxP with roughly eq ual chances .
30 QR-K1 K-N2
31 Drawn 14 QR-Kl!
15 QR-K1 R-K2

GAME SO For lS . . . N -KNS see Weinitschke­

Trescher , game 5 1 .
White: Zinn
Black: Uhlmann 16 N-N3 N-KNS!
17 P-KR3
East Germany 1964
After 17 Q- NS N- R3 1 8 R- K2
1 P-K4 RxN! ? 19 Px R NxP 20 BxN QxB 2 1
P-K3
2 R- Ql Q- N3 22 Q- K3 B- B4 Black had
P-Q4 P-Q4
an excellent game in Westerinen­
3 N-Q2 N-KB3
Uhlmann , Halle 1964 .
4 P-KS KN-Q2
5 B-Q3 P-QB4
17 N-R3
6 P-QB3 N-QB3
7 N-K2 p xp 18 B-N 1 B-BS!
8 px p Q .. NJ
9 N-KB3 P-B3 In the game Hennings-Uhlmann ,
10 pxp NxBP East Germ any 1 963 , White had a
11 0-0 B-Q3 c lear advantage after 1 8 . . . BxN 19
12 B-Q2 0-0 PxB P-K4 20 Q-NS N -B2 ? (better
13 B-B3 B-Q2 20 . . . P><P) 2 1 Q-RS P- KS 22 QxQP .

19 Q .. B2 P-N3
20 N-K2 B-N 1!
21 Q-Q2 N -B4
22 N-B1 N-Q3
23 N-R4? N-BS!
24 Q-R6? ?

The quickest way to lose , but even

after 24 Q- B2 Black wins by 24 . . . R­
BS 25 N-B3 RxN ! 2 6 P><R Q- B2 2 7 P­
B4 QxP 28 P-B3 N- K6 etc .

24 ... B-B5
14 Q-Q2?! 25 Resigns

214
 GA M E St I saw thi s move for the first time in
t he game Essegern- Kahn, 1968, \Vi th
White: Weinitschke both QR's still on QRl .
Black: Trescher
16 P-K4
East Germ an Correspondence 17 px p RxN!?
Tournament 1 9 70/ 74
This double-edged exchange sacri­
fice is based upon the exposed
Notes by Weinitschke
posi tion of White's queen . It would
of cour se be safer to capture the KP,
but then Bl ack would have an isol a­
1 P-K4 P - K3 ted QP, as so often happens in this
2 P-Q4 P -Q4 vari ation . In the post mor tem
3 N-Q2 N - K83 analysis Bl ack suggested that he
4 P-K5 KN-Q2 should have sacrificed on the
5 8- Q3 P -QB4 previous move, a possi bility which is
6 P-Q B3 N -Q 83 \\'Orth a try e . g . 16 . . . RxN 1 7 Px R
7 N - K2 Q-N3 Nx RP 1 8 Q- RS P-N3 19 BxP Px B 20
8 N-83 px p QxN Pch K-Bl 2 1 K-N2 or White can
9 P><P P- 83 take a dr aw by perpetual check .
10 pxp Nx 8P
11 0-0 8-Q 3 18 P-K6!
12 B-Q2 0-0
13 8-83 8-Q2 Doubtles s the strongest move,
14 Q-Q2 QR- K 1 threateni ng m ate as well as to win
15 QR- K 1 N -KNS back the piece .
16 Q-N5
18 N (N5)-K4
19 Px8 R(K l)- K 8 1
20 Bx Pch KxB
21 Q-R5ch K- N1
22 P><R

The game now seems over, as

White is t he exchange a nd two pawn s
up and 22 . . . Nx BPch 23 K- Rl NxR
fails to 2 4 QxPch K-Rl( ? ) 25 Qx B
RxP ? 26 Q-R6ch!; or here 24 . . . K- R2
25 QxB RxP 26 R-Nl wi ns . However,
Black finds a resource .

215
 22 P-QS! plan . He creates a passed pawn on
23 P-B4 PxB the K-side then switches hi s king to
24 PxN NxP the Q -side to attack the QRP and
25 NxP N-B6ch QNP .
26 QxN!
37 P-B4 pxp
This leads to an ending with an 38 KxP P-N4
extra pawn , whereas 26 K-R l is 39 K-KS P-R4
unclear and risky . 40 K-QS P-RS
41 N-B3 B-B3
26 ... RxQ , 42 N-Q l P-NS
27 R-K8ch R-Bl 43 K-84 B-K2
28 P-Q8=Q QxQ 44 K-NS P-R6
29 RxQ RxR 45 P-N3 K- B4
30 R-Ql B-B2
31 RxRch B><R White simply threatens to mop up
32 K-N2 P-KN4? the blockaded pawns , so Black's last
chance is to march his king to QN8 .
This r ash pawn move makes
White' s task easier. Black should 46 N-B2 K-BS
centralize his king. 47 N-Q3ch K-K6
48 NxP K-Q7
33 K-B3 K-N2 49 N-Q5 B-Q3
34 K-N4 K-N3 50 N-N6 K-B7
35 N-K4 P-N3 51 N-B4 B-K2
36 P-KR3 B-K2 52 K-R4 K-N8
53 NxPch KxP
54 N-B4 I K-NB

There are some endings in which

the bishop can draw against knight
and two pawns , but this is in1possible
here , as the pa,vns are too far apart .

55 N-K3 K-B8
56 P-N4 K-Q7
57 N-N2! Resigns

If the bl ack king attacks the

knight , White can allow it to be cap­
tured, as the bishop cannot stop both
White now has a simple winning the pawns .

216
 GA M E 52 IS ... B - NS!

White: Georgadze Probabl y the best reply, though

Black: Dorosh kevich 1 5 . . . N -Q R4 al so seems pl ayable. 1 6
B - N5 BxN 1 7 Bx Bch ( or 1 7 Rx B
Georgia- RSF S R M atch , Tbi lisi 197 1 BxPch 1 8 N x B Rx R 19 B x Rch QxB
20 BxN QxB D rawn . Gligoric­
1 P- K4 P - K3 Sch m i d , Dubl in 195 7 ) 17 . . . Rx B 18
2 P-Q4 P -Q4 Rx R BxPch 19 KxB Qx R 20 BxN
3 N-Q2 N .. KB3 Qx B 21 Q- K 2 N - B 3 22 R - K 1 R-K B 1
4 P-KS K N -Q2 with equ al cha nces .
5 B-Q3 P-QB4 I f Black pl ays less actively , how­
6 P-QB3 N-QB3 ever , he ru ns into trouble, e. g .:
7 N- K2 pxp 1 ) 15 . . . N - K 2 ! ? 1 6 B -R 3 N - N 3 1 7
8 pxp Q-N3 N ( K6)-NS N-N5 1 8 B - K3 ! ? QxNP 19
9 N - KB3 P -B3 Q - Q3 Q-R6! 20 Q-N 1 Q-N5 21 N - K5
10 pxp Nx BP QxQ 22 Q Rx Q N ( N3)xN 23 P><N BxP
11 0-0 B-Q 3 \Vith even chances . White c an ,
12 N - B4 0-0 h o\\·ever , pl ay better v.ri th 1 8 BxN
13 R-K 1 B-Q2! BxB 19 Rx Rch RxR 20 P-K R3! B­
14 NxKP KR -Kl KB4 21 N - K5! with some advant age .

2 ) 15 . . . R - K 2? 1 6 B - N5! Q R - K 1 1 7
NxP ! KxN ( if 1 7 . . . Rx Rch 1 8 Nx R
KxN 19 BxNch Kx B 20 Bx B; or
1 7 . . . RxN 18 Bx B Rx Rch 19 QxR
NxB 20 Q - K 6c h K - R 1 2 1 B - R6! [ not
2 1 QxB NxP ] 2 1 ... R-N3 22 QxN Rx B
23 R - K 1 N - K 2 [ 23 . . . R-B3 24 R - K 8c h
B - B 1 25 N - N 5 wins ] 24 R x N Bx R 25
Q- K8ch K-N 2 26 QxBch with a clear
plus to W h ite . K ar ker-Jarkovs ky ,
1 95 6 ) 1 8 Bx Nch KxB 19 Bx B Rx Rch
20 Nx R winni ng .

15 B- BS 16 R-K2

Not 15 N - BS Nx P 1 6 NxB It is not clear \vhi ch move is best in

N( Q5)xNch 1 7 Px N NxN 18 B-B5 N­ t his position . I f 16 R- K 3 N - Q R4 1 7
B3 19 B- N5 Bx Pch 20 K-N2 P-Q R3 B- K B 1 1 8 B -Q2 (in the gatne
B - K4 and B l ac k stan ds better . Ciric-Jovcic. Bl ack h ad a \V on g an1e

217
after 18 Q-K 1 N-N6 19 R-N 1 QR- B1 with 17 .. . B><N ! ? 18 BxBch Nx B 19
20 N(B3)-NS RxB 21 RxR NxR 22 Px B QxNP, or he can pl ay for
QxN P-K R3 23 B-N6 PxN 24 BxR eq uality with 17 . . . B- B1 18 NxB BxB
BxN) 18 . . . N -BS 19 R-N3 Q - B3 ? 20 19 RxR NxR 20 N-R4 Q-KB3 21 Q­
N- KS! NxN 21 P><N and White is bet­ RS P-KN3 22 Qx RPch KxN 23 B­
ter . Thurner-Vosta , 1966. But Black R6ch N-N 2 24 P- KN4 B- KS 25 P- NS
coul d eq ualize with 19 . . . B- RS 20 QxQP 26 NxPch BxN 27 QxB .
RxQ BxQ 2 1 RxB Px R 22 N-B7 NxP .
Another improvement i s possibly 1 6 18 N (B3) -N5 P-KR3
R-K3 N-Q 1 . 19 NxN RxR
Probably stronger than ,Jhe text,
however , is 16 B-Q2! BxB 17 Qx B N ­ Not 19 . .. B>< B? 20 RxRch NxR 21
K2! ( a move first played by Q- B3 wi nni ng .
Heemsoth . The obvious 17 . . . N -KS
fails to the pretty combination 18 20 BxB R-K2
BxN P><B 19 N(K6)-NS! ! PxN 20 Q­ 21 B-1{6ch K-B1
Q3! P-N3 21 Q-B4ch K-N2 22 Q­ 22 B- R3!
B7ch K- R3 23 P-KR4 winning) 18
NxP! (the best chance , as 18 B - R3 Not 22 N( Q8)-B7 PxN 23 NxP B­
fails to 1 8 . . . N-KS, and Black h as the B2!
advantage after 18 P-KN4 NxB 19
PxN N-K S 20 Q -K3 BxN 21 Px B 22 RxN
RxP. Riedmuller-Heemsoth , Corre­ 23 N -K 6ch RxN
spondence game 1957) 18 . . . KxN 19 24 BxR BxKRPch
Q-NSch N-N 3 20 BxB ( not 20 BxN ?! 25 KxB QxB
P>< B 21 N -KS B- B4 22 P-KN4 B-KS 26 B-B4 Q-B4
23 Q R-Q1 N -R2 with advantage to 27 Q-B3 K-B2
Black) 20 . . . NxB 21 P-KR4! P-K R3
22 QxQP N- B3 (or 22 . . . Q-QB3) 23 Weaker is 27 . . . N -KS 28 BxP!
Q-KBS and White is no worse in view
of his three pawns for the piece and 28 R-QB1 R -QB l
Black's weakened K-side . 29 RxR QxR
30 B-KS Q-NS
16 N -Q 1! 31 Q-Q N3 Q-Q2
17 P-QR3 B-Q 3?! 32 Q- KB3 Q-NS
33 Q-QN3 Q .. Q2
Black could obtain the advantage 34 Q-KB3 Drawn

218
 Chapter 10

The Tarrasch V.ariation

with 3 ...N-QB3

White: Estevez
Black: Huhner

Leningrad In terzonal 1973

1 P-K4 P-K3
2 P-Q4 P-Q4
3 N-Q2 N- QB3

A move which at first sight seems anti- position al , as the knigh t blocks the
Q B P Ylhich constitu tes Bl ack's m ain offensive weapon in the French. The i de a
of the tex t- move is to attack the centre by a l ater . . . P - K B 3 , then ai m for ...P - K 4 ,
bu t as White c a n neutr alize this m a noeuvre , th is m ethod o f defence h as lost its
pop ul arity .

219
 4 KN-B3 N-B3
Black deliberately provokes Whi te's advance, hoping that White's K P has
insufficient pawn support . Bla� k plans to free his. game by undermining White's
centre, but the idea takes time and Black must also sacrifice some sp ace so the
plan can never be quite successfu l .

5 P-KS N-Q2

Not S . . . N- K5 when White has a good game after both 6 B-Q3 and 6 P-B3 . See
Vaganian-Murei, Moscow 19 72/3 (illustrative game 53) .

6 N-N3!
The best method of refuting Black's set-up .
Black' s main difficulties lie in the cramped nature of his position and in his
passive QB. White's natu ral text-move will help to complete his development
and strengthens hi s control over certain central sq uares . O ther attempts are:

(a) 6 P-KN3 B-K2 7 B-R3 Possible is 7 P- KR4! ? 7 ... P-KR4 8 B-N2 If 8 0-0?!
P- KN4 ! 8 ...P-RS 9 0-0 with eq ual chances .

(b) 6 P-QN3 P-B3 7 8-N2 8-K2 8 P-QR3 0-0 9 B-N5 P-QR3 10 BxN PxB 1 1
PxP Bx8P 1 2 0-0 P-84 1 3 R-K1 Q-K2 with an even game . Mednis- R . Byrne
USA 1964 .

(c) 6 P-B4 pxp 7 NxP N-N3 8 NxN RPxN 9 B-Q3 N-NS 10 8-K4 8-Q2 1 1 8xNP
RxP with eq uality .

(d) 6 8-NS P-QR4 O r 6 . . . P- QR3 7 BxN pxB 8 N- N3 P-QB4 9 B-N5 B- K2 10 N­

R5 N- N 1 1 1 BxB Qx B 12 P- B3 0 -0 13 0-0 B- Q2 14 Q- Q2 and White stands a
little better. Kuprejanov- Marovic , Belgrade 1964 . 7 0-0 N-R2 8 B-Q3 P-Q84 9
P-83 P-85 10 B- B2 P-QN4 with unclear play .

(e ) 6 8-K2 P-83 7 pxp QxP Or 7 .. . NxBP 8 0-0 B- Q3 9 P- B4 0-0 10 R-Kl B­

Q2 1 1 P-B5 B-B5 12 N-B 1 N-K5 1 3 B-NS P-K4 with unclear complications.
Liberzon-Gusev, 1957 . 8 N-81 8- Q3 For 8 . . . P- K4 see Makarichev-Vaganian,
Tbilisi 1973 - illustrative game 54 . 9 N-K3 0-0 10 0-0 Q-N3 1 1 P-B4 N-83 12
P-KN3 with a slight plus for White .

(f) 6 P-83 P-B3! The key move in all lines . If White now tries for tactical
complications they only favour Black: e.g . 7 N- R4 Q - K2 8 B-Q3 pxp 9 Q- R5ch
Q- B2 10 B - N6 PxB 1 1 QxR P- K5 12 N - N 3 N- B3 13 P- B3 B-Q2; or 7 B-Q3 pxp 8

220
NxP N(Q2)xN 9 PxN NxP 1 0 Q -RSch N- B2 1 1 BxP , with the better ch a nces for
Black in both cases . 7 8- NS p x p 7 . . . P- QR3! 8 PxP P- QR3 9 BxN P><B 10 0-0 P -
84 and Bl ac k stands \veil.

6 B-K2

It seems th at the on ly way to j ustify 3 . . N -Q B 3 is to att ack the centre at once

.

\vith 6 P - 83 7 8- QNS B- K2 Not 7 . PxP 8 pxp N -B4 9 N - NS B- Q 2 ? 1 0 BxN

. . . . .

px B 1 1 Q - RSch P- N3 1 2 Q - B3 Resigns . Tal-V aganian , D ubn a 1973 . 8 B- KB4

Best seem s 8 pxp BxP 9 0-0 0-0 10 R - K 1 \vith l asting p ressure on the \\'ea k
K P 8 0-0 9 PxP PxP 10 0-0 N -N3 10 P- QR3 i s a n improvemen t , but White
. . . . . . .

sta nds better afte r 1 1 BxN pxB 1 2 R - K 1 N - N3 13 N - RS . 11 R - K1 B- Q3 1 2 B-N3

P - QR 3 1 3 B - Q3 N-RS 1 4 R -N1 with position al pressure . Botvinni k - Bol esl avsky,
U S S R 1944 .

7 B-QNS

Or 7 P - B 3 0-0 8 B - 03 P - B 3 9 Q- K2 Q - K 1 10 0-0 pxp 1 1 pxp Q - R4 1 2 R- K 1

N - B4 1 3 Nx N BxN , a n d now both 14 B- K3 a nd 1 4 P - QN4 give White some
p ositional a dvantage .

7 P-QR3

Th e two other possibilities are 7 . . 0-0 8 0-0 N - N3 9 R - K 1 B -Q 2 1 0 B -Q 3 N ­

.

NS 1 1 B - Bl N- RS 1 2 P- B3 N - R3 1 3 N - R S ! w i th advantage t o Wh i te ; a nd
7 N ( B3) - N 1 8 0-0 0-0 9 B - KB4 P - QN3 1 0 R - B 1 B - R3 1 1 BxB NxB 1 2 Q - K2
. . .

N(R3) - N 1 13 P-B4 \vhen White is be tter developed and has a space a dv antage .

221
 8 8xN P><B
9 N-RS N-Nl

Better is 9 . . . B-N5ch 10 B - Q2 BxN 1 1 BxB P-QB4 .

10 0-0 P- Q84
11 P-84!

This opening up of the centre is the correct way to exploit White's lead in
development .

11 • • • 0-0

After 1 1 . . . PxBP 1 2 B- K3 pxp 1 3 NxQP Black stands b adly .

12 Px8P
W hite also has som e advantage after 12 B - K3 PxQP 1 3 NxP B- Q2 14 P- B5!
Minic-Espig , Berlin 1968 .

12 ... 8xP
13 B-NS! Q-Q2

If 13 . . . B - K2 14 BxB QxB 15 pxp R-Q 1 1 6 R-B 1 RxP 17 Q-K 1, or the dubious

13 . . . P- KB3 14 PxBP NPxP 15 B- R6 R-B2 16 pxp when Black's pawn position is
ruined .

14 N-N3 B-R2
15 R-B1! B-N2?

After this move the loss is inevitable . It was essential to pl ay 15 . . . PxP

although White still stands better.

16 P-BS ! P-KB3
17 B-84! N-B3
18 R-K1 QR-K1
19 N(N3) - Q4 N- Q l
20 P-QN4 P-B3
21 P-QR4 B-N 1
22 B-N3 P-R3
23 P-R4!

222
Preventi ng any e xpansion by . . . P-84 and . . . P-N4.

23 ... Q-KB2
24 Q-Q2 Q-R4
25 P-N5!

Increasi ng his adva ntage .

25 ... R-B2
26 R-Nl B-B2
27 Q-Q3 RPxP
28 P><NP P><NP
29 QxP R(Kl)-Bl
30 P-B6 B-Bl
31 R-Rl! px p
32 BxP BxB
33 RxB Q-N3
34 R-R8 R-B2
35 Q-N6 Q-B2
36 R-K2!

There is no w no defe nce to 37 N- KS etc.

36 ... Q-B5
37 P-N3! RxP

White wi ns a pie ce a fte r 37 . . . Q-B8ch 38 R- Kl RxP 39 RxQ .

38 QxR QxN(B6)
39 QxB Q-Q6
40 Q-B5 Resigns

223
 GAME 53 Q B P. Sh am kovich-Lein, U S SR
19 65 , went as follows: 6 . . . NxN 7 Bx N
White: Vaganian P - B3 8 B -Q N5 B-Q2 9 Q - K2 Q - K2 10
Black: Murei pxp pxp 11 B - K B4 0-0-0 12 0-0
R-K1 13 P - B 4 with advantage to
Training tournamen t , Moscow White . I n ret urn for the weakness of
1972 / 73 K4 and of his p awn on K3 Bl ack h as
quite good pl ay for his pieces.
N otes by Murei
6 NxN
1 P-Q4 P-K3 7 BxN N-NS !
2 P-K4 P-Q4
3 N-Q2 N -QB3 Now Whi te has either to allow the
4 KN -B3 N-B3 exch an ge of one of his bishops or
5 P-KS N-KS!? was te time in retreating the b i s hop
on Q3, a n d consequently allow . . . P­
� QB4.
�
8 BxN BxBch
9 P-B3 B-K2
10 P-KR4 !

White keeps an advantage in space

and al so b ri ngs his rook i nto pl ay to
attack on the K- side . 10 P-QN4 P­
QB3 11 P-QR4 P-QR4 12 Q- N3 P>< P
13 PxP Q-N3 14 R -Q N 1 Q - R 2 is
weaker .

5 . . . N -Q 2 is the usual move . The 10 B-Q2

poi nt of Bl ack's m ove is to exch ange 11 R-R3 P-QB4
off hi s knight , and thereby reduce the 12 PxP
congl omeration of pieces which c an
be so unpl eas ant for Bl ack in view of
his opponent 's adv ant age in space . A deb atable solution. White did
not want to allo\v the Q-si de to be
6 B-Q3 closed by . . . P- BS . It i s al so possibl e
that he w as n o t satisfi ed with his
6 P - B3 is more effective . It woul d prospects after . . pxp.
.

h ave constrained the bl ac k k ni ght on

B3 , which stands in the w ay o f the 12 Q -B2

224
 Black is pre pari ng to castle 0- side . 17 P-83
12 . . . Bx Q B P is da ngerous , because of
13 N - N 5. It is es sential to hurry because 1 8
N - Q4 and then P- K B4 is threate ned .
13 Q-K2 18 N -Q4 \voul d com e eve n after
1 7 . . . Q-N 3 . For exa m pl e, 1 8 . . . Bx N
1 9 P><B Qx Q P 20 Bx P .
N o\\' 1 3 N - N5 is not po ssible be­
cause of 13 . . . Bx N 14 Px B Qx K Pch
18 Px NP PxNP
and 1S . . . Qx N P . 1 3 P - Q N 4 P-QN 3 1 4
px p Qx BPch 1 5 K - B 1 px p i s to r
Bl ack's advant age .

13 B x BP
14 R - N3
i i i
14 N - NS P- K R3 1 5 Nx BP KxN 1 6 _i i E

4?JI-
Q - R5ch K - K 2 1 7 R - 83 Q R - K B 1 /

gives W hite no thi ng . �

E -"

n 1J\/Lt n n
In �
.
14 P-KN3
IS P-RS 0-0-0
16 0-0-0
/
m 0 ,,

A fter 1 6 N-N5 I \\'as go i ng to play 19 RxP?

1 6 . . 8- K 1 t hreat e n i ng to co un t er­
.

attack by m eans o f 1 7 . . . P- K R3 and lbi s gi ves up the adv ant age .

.. . P-KN4 Whi te ach i eves li ttle by 19 Px P Rx P
20 Rx P Rx R 2 1 Bx R because of
16 ... Q R-81 21 . . . R -N 1 22 N - K5 B - Q 3 23 N x B
Rx B 24 Q-R5 Rx P 25 N- 86 Q- K 2 26
After th e gan1e Vaganian sai d that Q- R8ch Q - 0 1 27 Qx Q ch Kx Q 28 R­
he e x pe cte d 16 . . . P- 05 and that he K 1 K - K 2 29 NxPch K-B 2 and then
\vas go ing to pl ay 1 7 P><Q P Bx Pch 18 30 . . . Rx P .
K - N 1. I rej ecte d 1 6 . . . P- 05 because But Wh ite had a stronger co n ­
o f 17 P- 84! t i n uat i on i n 1 9 R - K B 1 ! I \Vas goi ng to
ans\ver thi s move by 1 9 . . . PxP 20 N x P
Rx P 21 Rx R Bx R 2 2 Rx P (22 R - 83
R - R 8ch 23 K - 8 2 B - B4 24 R - 8 7 B ­
Essential pro phylaxi s. Fur- f{5 ch 25 P- Q N3 Q - R 4! or 25 K - 0 2
thcrn1ore White i nten ds to tnakc use Q - N 3) 22 . .. B - Q R5 . Ho\vever. \vhcn
o f the OB-file. \VC looked at th i s variation after t he

225
game Vaganian showed me the move draw: 27 Q-K5ch QxQ 28 NxQ B- K 1
23 K- R 1 ! , after which the difference 29 N-B7ch. However , I was already
in material and the unsafe positi on of short of time , and Vaganian decided
.
the bl ack king make themselves felt. to take advantage of the fact .
For example , 23 . . . B-Q5 24 N-B3 ( 24
Px B Q-B 8ch 25 B- N 1 QxBch 26 KxQ 27 P-N4 B-N3
R- R8ch) 24 . . . BxP 25 QxPch B-Q2 28 P-B4 PxP
( or 25 . . . Q-Q2) 26 R-N8ch , an d
White wins . While writing thi s com­
mentary I found the intermediate
move 22 . . . B- K1 . Now 23 R><P is met
by 23 . . . R- R8ch 24 K - B2 B-QR5ch 25
P-QN3 B-Q5 26 B-B4! (26 P- B4 Q­
R4 27 Q- Q 2 BxPch ! ) 26 . . . BxN 27
PxB Qx B ( 27 . .. P><B 28 R- K8ch K - Q2
29 RxB) 28 QxQch PxQ 29 RxB R­
R8 30 K -N2 R-KN8 3 1 R-KN5 P-R4!
and the rook ending is drawn .

19 PxP
20 R-N7
29 B-K4
He should have reconciled himself
to a draw: 20 QxP QxQ 21 Nx Q RxP White overlooks an effective reply.
22 Nx B KxN 23 B-N5ch K- K2 24 R­ Against 29 BxP, 29 . . . Q-B4ch 30 B­
K1 R-B3 25 R- N7ch R-B2. Q3 B-N4 ! wins . After the game I
could not decide whether the dia­
20 P-KS! grammed position was won for
21 BxP R(R1)-N1 Black . Analysis showed , however,
22 RxR RxR that White coul d draw by pl aying 29
23 B-Q3 RxP Q-Q l ! Here are the key variations:
24 R-R 1 Q -BS a) 29 PxB 30 QxPch B-Q5 31
. . .

25 R-R8ch K-B2 NxB R-N8ch 32 K-N2 Q- B8ch 33 K­

26 R-R7 N3 Q -Q8( N8)ch 34 QxQ RxQ 35 K­
B3;
If 26 Q-K5ch then 26 . . . B-Q3 ! re­ b) 29 . . . B-B3 30 B-B5ch! B-Q4 3 1
taining an advantage . R-Q7ch ! KxR 3 2 QxBch K -B 2 33
QxKP BxP 34 Q- K7ch K-N3 35 Q ­
26 ... K-Q3 B6ch K - B 2 (35 . . . K-N4 36 B-Q7ch);
c) 29 . . . K-B2 30 RxBch KxR 3 1
Here White could achieve the B- B 1ch;

226
 d) 29 . . . B- B3 30 B- B 1 ch B - Q4 3 1 Notes by M atsukevich
BxR Q - B 4ch 3 2 Q - B 2 B - KS 3 3 R­
Q7ch ! KxR 34 N - KSch QxN 35 QxB . 1 P-K4 P -K3
Or 3 2 . . . QxQ ch 3 3 KxQ B- K5ch 34 2 P -Q4 P -Q 4
K- B 3 Bx R 35 N -Q4 K- K4 36 N -B 3ch 3 N-Q2 N -Q83
K - B5 37 N -Q4 P - K4 38 N - K2ch . Nor 4 KN -83 N -83
does 35 . . . BxNch 3 6 Kx B P-N4 3 7 P­ 5 P -K5 N -Q2
B4 change matters. 6 8-K2 P -B3
7 pxp QxP
29 ... 8-Q5! 8 N-8 1 P-K4!

A tactical devi ce based on decoy

a nd double protection . White was
cou nti ng on 29 .. . P- K4 30 Rx Bch
Kx R 31 NxPch QxN 32 B - B 6ch K - Q 3
3 3 QxQch KxQ 34 BxR wi th a draw .

30 R-R4 Q xR!
31 N xQ R-N8ch
32 K-B2 B-R5ch
33 K-Q2 P-86ch
34 K-Q3 8-N4ch
35 Kx8 8xQ
36 KxP R -N5
37 8-83 RxN Courageous and wel l timed . After
38 8x8 R-R 7 8 . . . B-Q3 9 N -K 3 0-0 10 0-0 B l ack
39 8-Q I RxP \\'Ould have to put up with the sad
fact of a bac kward p awn on K3 ( . . . P­
Here the curtai n can be drawn : K4 becomes imposs ible because of
White resi gned a fe\\' moves later . the weakness of Q4) .

9 pxp

GAME 54
An i mportant moment . The
logical 9 N - K3 is consi dered to be
White : Makarich ev
s tronge r . In that case 9 . . . PxP 1 0
Black: Vaganian
NxP(Q5) Q -Q3 1 1 B-Q B4 N (Q 2)- K 4
( or 1 1 . . . N - N 3 1 2 Q- K 2ch and 1 3 B­
4 1 st USS R Champ i on s hip
B4) 12 NxN QxN ( K4)ch 13 K - 8 1 !
( Firs t league ) l eads to White's advan tage . Korch­
Tb i l isi 1973 m ar - K h u dosh in, Saratov, 1 948 .

227
Or 9 ... P-KS 10 NxP Q-Q3 (if 1 0...B­ that White has been too ambitious in
N5ch 11 P-B3! Q-Q3 12 NxB pxN 13 taking the central pawn. He has dif­
BxP NxN 14 PxN and Black loses a ficulties with his development and
pawn) 11 P-B4. With this move Black's attacking prospects are star­
White supports the centralized ting to be felt.
knight, intending after 11 ... PxN 12 .
13 QxN
B-B4 to make his opponent p ay
14 P-QB3 B- QNS!
heavily for the piece. In the well­
15 Px B B-BS
known twenty-five-year-old game
Korchmar-Aratovsky, Saratov, 1948, ' Is this effective? It is, but "Man
12... pxB (the combination 12 ...PxP h as already trodden here". In
13 R-KN1 QxB is refuted by the in-
' the game A . Petrosian-Panchenko,
termediate move 14 B-R5ch) 13 Odessa, 1973, White tried to save
QxPch N(Q2)-K4 14 PxN Q-Q1 15 himself by 16 N-N3 but lost after
0-0-0 gave White a decisive attack. 16... B-N4! 17 Q-R3 R-Q6 18 B-B4
This variation is not entirely clear, Q-K3 19 P-N3 RxN 20 0-0 Rx KNP­
however; instead of 14 ...Q-Q1 one ch! 21 KxR BxB. The present at­
might try, for example, 14...Q-N3 15 tempt is not succesful either.
0-0-0 N-N5! 16 NxPch K-B2 with
abundant complications. 16 N-K3 BxB
17 KxB N-Q5ch
9 N(Q2)xP 18 K-K1
10 QxP?
After 18 K-B1 KR-B1 there is no
A risky business. Correct is 10 N­
satisfactory way of defending KB2.
K3 NxNch 11 BxN P-QS 12 N-Q5.
18 ... KR -K1
10 B-K3
11 Q-NS P-QR3 Now 19... Q- K5 is threatened with
12 Q-R4
a two-fold attack on KN7 and QB7.

19 B-Q2 Q-KS
Not 12 QxNP because of 12 . . . R­ 20 K-Ql Q-Q6
R2. 21 R-Kl N-N6
22 R-K2 NxR
12 0-0-0
23 K-K1 RxN
13 NXN
24 P><R N-B7ch
25 K- Q 1 NxKPch
After 13 N-K3 there follows 26 K-K1 Q -N8ch
13 . B-QN5ch 14 P-B3 BxBPch 15
. . 27 K-B2 N-N5ch
PxB NxNch. It becomes apparent 28 Resigns

228
 Chapter 11

The Tarrasch Variation

with 3 . . . P-QB4

White: Karpov
Black: Korchnoy

8th Match Game 1974

1 P -K4 P-K3
2 P-Q4 P-Q4
3 N-Q2 P-QB4

An i m me d iate attempt to rele ase the tension in the centre . I n practice th is l in e

i s the most popul ar , allowing Black free pl ay for h i s pieces. The m ain dis­
advantage lies i n the isol ated Q P \vhich often beco m es a fixed \\'eakness .

4 PxQP

229
 The most popular continuation by far, leading quickly to positions in which
Black's QP is isol ated. Black has no difficulties after 4 PxBP BxP 5 N-N3 (Or 5
B-Q3 N-KB3 6 P-KS KN-Q2 7 KN-B3 N-QB3 8 Q-K2 Q-B2 9 N-N3 B-N3 10 B­
KB4 P-B3 with advantage) 5... B-N3 6 pxp P><P 7 N-B3 N-QB3 8 B-QNS N-K2 9
0-0 0-0 10 KN-Q4 P-QR3 1 1 B"-K2 N-K4 with an even g ame. Haag-Korchnoy,
Gyula 1965. The main alternative is 4 KN-B3 which aims at preserving the
centr al tension for as long as possible. 4 N -Q B3 Also played is 4...N-KB3
. . .

when 5 PxQP gives White some positional advantage (but not necessarily 5 P-KS
KN-Q2 6 P-B4 [after 6 P-B3 N-QB3 7 B-Q3 Q-N3 White can try the promising
pawn sacrifice we mention on page 193] 6...PxBP [6... N-QB3 seems more
'
accur ate] 7 NxP P><P 8 QxP with some space advantage for White) e.g. s ...NxP
6 N-N3 pxp 7 QNxP B-K2 8'B-Q3 (also strong is 8 P-KN3 0-0 9 B-N2 B-B3 [or
9...B-Q2 10 0-0 N-QB3 11 NxN BxN 12 N-KS Q-B2 13 NxB QxN 14 Q- K2 P­
QN4 15 B-K3 B-B3 16 QR-Q 1 with a small plus to White. Jansa-Korchnoy, Nice
Olympiad 1974] 10 0-0 N-B3 1 1 P-B3 Q-N3 12 N-N3 with the better. game for
White. Keres-Stahlberg, Bud apest 1952) 8...B-B3 9 0-0 0-0. 10 P-B4 N-NS 11
B- K4 Q-K2 12 Q-K2 N(N 1)-B3 13 B-K3 B-Q2 14 KR-Ql NxN 15 Drawn. Torre­
Korchnoy, Nice Olympiad 1974.
There is another possibility in 4...P-QR3, preventing a later B-QNS. but the
loss of time has its dangers: e.g. 5 PxBP! (5 PxQP is also possible, but not 5 B­
Q3 P-BS) S ... BxP 6 B-Q3 N-QB3 7 0-0 (or 7 P-QR3 KN- K2 [not 7 ... N-B3 8 0-
0 Q-B2 9 P-QN4 B-K2 10 Q-K2 0-0 1 1 P-B4 with advantage to White. Ciric­
Marovic, Yugoslavia 1969] 8 0-0 0-0 9 P-QN4 B-R2 10 B-N2 N-N3 11 N-N3
with a position al plus for White. Matanovic-Kupper, Op atija 1953) 7 ... KN-K2
8 N-N3 B-Q3 9 Q-K2 Q-B2 10 B-KNS! pxp 1 1 BxKP P-B3 12 B-K3 P- K4 13 QR­
Q 1 B-KB4 14 N-BS BxN 15 B(K3)xB BxB 16 QxB 0-0 17 B-Q6 Q-B1 18 N-Q2
with advantage to White. Parma-Uhlmann, Sarajevo 1968. 5 B-NS This move
leads to sharp positions. ( Instead White can reach the main line with 5 PxQP.)

230
 In this position Black must decide how he intends to deal with the tension in
the centre.
S PxKP This is just one \vay to solve the problem - destroy White 's pawn
. . .

centre . Five other moves deserve consideration:

( 1 ) 5.. . B-03 6 P- K5 B-N 1 7 pxp N- K2 8 0-0 0-0 9 R - K 1 N - N3 10 BxN px B 1 1

P-0N4 (it see m s safer to pl ay 1 1 P - Q N 3 0- R4 1 2 B-N2 Qx B P 1 3 P- B4 P-B3 1 4
R -0 B 1 0- K 2 15 Px B P NPxP 1 6 N-B 1 N- B5 with a n u nclear position. Gufel d - F.
Portisch , Tbilisi 1 97 1. 1 1 N - N3 seems ris ky , as Blac k o btains a mobile pawn
centre after 1 1 . .. P- B3) 1 1 . . . P- B 3 (or 1 1 . . . P - Q R 4 1 2 P>< P RxP and Bl ack has
good p lay for the pawn in view of White's weak Q -side pawns and the possib ility
of the break . . . P-B3) 1 2 B - N2 pxp 1 3 NxP NxN 1 4 BxN BxB 1 5 RxB Q - R5 1 6 P­
Q B3 \vi th a possible plu s to White (Westerinen-F . Portisch , Vilnus 1 969)
although Black shou l d hol d the b alance by 1 6... QxB Pch 1 7 K-R 1 P - Q R4! 18 P­
Q R3 pxp 19 B P><P Q - Q5 20 Q - K 1 Q- N 7 2 1 R- K3 P - K4!

(2) 5... P-Q R3 6 P>< Q P ( in S ueti n-Petrosian , Moscow 1 967 , Black equ a lized
after 6 Bx Nch Px B 7 0-0 P><Q P 8 NxP P-QB4 9 N - B6 Q - B2 1 0 pxp P><P 1 1 R ­
K 1 ch B- K3 1 2 N- K5 B - Q3 1 3 N (Q2) - B3 N- K2 1 4 P - B4 0-0 1 5 pxp NxP)
6 ... P>< B 7 PxN P>< B P 8 pxp BxP 9 0-0 N-B3 1 0 N-N3 (after 10 Q - K2 B - K2 1 1 R­
Q 1 Q-N3 12 P-B4 0-0 Bl ack h ad no difficulties in Radulov - R . Byrne ,
Leningrad I nterzon al 1973) 1 0 ...0xQ 1 1 RxQ B- K2 (or 1 1 . . . B - N 3 1 2 B - K3 ! ) 1 2
N-K5 B-N 2 1 3 B- K3 N-Q4 1 4 B-B5 with a position al advantage to White .
Tseitlin - S teinberg , U S S R 197 1 .

(3) 5. . . N-B3 6 PxQ P Qx P ( 6... K P>< P is not to be recom mended e.g . 7 0-0 B-K2
(not 7 ... P-B5 8 P-ON3 pxp 9 N- K5 with a dvantage ; nor 7 ... B- K3 8 R- K1 B-Q3 9
pxp Bx B P 1 0 N-N 3 and W hite is bette r . Euwe-Broadbent , Lon don 1 948] 8 pxp
0-0 [ if 8... Bx P 9 R- Klch B- K2 1 0 Q-K2 with a dvantage ] 9 N - N 3 N - K5 10 B - K3
B-N5 11 BxN PxB 1 2 P-B3 R- K 1 1 3 Q -04 and White retains his extra pawn .
Pachm an-Opocensky , B rno 1 944) 7 P- B4 Q-Q 1 8 0-0 pxp 9 N- N3 and White
has m ore space . If ins tead of 9 N-N3 White plays 9 N - K5 B-Q2 10 NxB QxN 1 1
N- B3 , Bl ack equalizes by 1 1 ... R - Q 1 1 2 N - K5 Q-B2 1 3 B- KB4 B - Q3 1 4 QxP
0-0. Westerinen-Andersson, Berlin 19 7 1 .

(4) 5 ... Q-N 3 (a move without·much practical testing) 6 Q - K2 Px K P 7 NxP pxp

8 0-0 B-02 9 B - K B4 P - QR3 1 0 B - R4 N- B3!? with chances for both sides .

(5) 5.. . Px Q P 6 NxP B - Q 2 7 NxN P><N ( after 7... BxN 8 Bx Bch Px B 9 P- QB4! P ­
Q 5 1 0 0-0 P-O B4 1 1 P-B4 White h as t h e better prospects) 8 B-Q 3 Q -B2 9 Q-K2
N - K2 10 N-B3 N-N 3 1 1 P-K5 R-QN 1 1 2 0-0 B-K 2 1 3 R- K 1 P-Q B4 14 P-B4

231
0-0 with equal chances. T al-Korchnoy, Moscow 197 1.

6 NxP 8-Q2 7 8-N5! "First and foremost development. The open nature of
the position makes every tempo prescious. '' - T al. The text w as played by Tal
against Uhlmann in a sensational game at Moscow 1971. A few rounds later
Stein played 7 B-K3 against Uhlmann but was unable to achieve anything in the
opening (see illustrative,game SS). 7 ... Q-R4ch On 7 ... Q-N3 Tal was planning 8
Q-K2 PxP 9 0-0-0. 8 N-83 pxp In view of the threat of P-QS, Tal thought this
exchange to be practically forced. 9 NxP B-N5? Correct is 9 ...B-K2 10 Q-Q2 (or
10 B-K3 Q-B2 with equality) 10 ...N-B3 (not, of course, 10.. .BxB 11 QxB NxN
12 BxBch) 1 1 0-0-0 with chances for both sides in the lively struggle ahead. 10
0-0 BxN 11 PxB Qx8P? Better is 1 1 .. .P-QR3 though after 12 BxN BxB 13 NxB
QxB 14 Q-Q6 N-K2 1S KR-Q1! NxN 16 Q-Q7ch K-B1 17 QxNP W hite still has
the advantage. 12 N-85! PxN 13 R-K1ch 8-K3 14 Q-Q6 Now White threatens to
transfer his bishop to the QR3-KB8 diagonal. There is also the possibility of 15
QR-Ql. 14 ...P-QR3 15 B-Q2 QxP 1 6 B-N4 PxB 17 Q-88ch K-Q2 18 KR-Q1ch
K-82 19 QxR Resigns Since 19 ...N-B3 20 QxR N-KS is met by 2 1 B-K1. Tal­
Uhlmann, Moscow 197 1.

Let us now return to the main line, 4 PxQP

4 • • • KPxP

Black can avoid the problems of the isolated QP with 4... QxP, but that move
gives White an important tempo and it still leaves Black's QB as a problem
child: 5 KN-83 More exact than S PxP BxP 6 KN-B3 N-KB3 7 B-B4 Q-Q1 8 0-
0 0-0 9 Q-K2 N-B3 10 P-B3 Q-B2 11 N- K4 B-K2 12 B-KNS N-Q4 with

232
e qual i ty . Pirc-Eliskases, Noordwijk 1 938, alt hough Whi te coul d have t ried 10 N­
N 3 an d 1 1 B- K B 4 . S . PxP If 5 ... N-K B3 6 B - B4 e . g . 6 . . O - B3 7 P-Q R4 Q - B 2 8
. . .

0-0 px p 9 Nx P B - Q2 1 0 0 - K 2 N - B3 1 1 N ( 0 2)-B3 P-0 R3 1 2 P-R3 N x N 1 3 N x N

B- K 2 1 4 P - O N 3 \Vith some positional advantage . An dersson - Petrosian , Wijk
aan Zee 1 97 1 ; or 6 . . . 0-03 7 0-0 N - B3 8 N - N3 px p 9 N (N 3)x P P-0 R3 1 0 N x N
OxN 1 1 N- K5 0 - B 4 ( i f 1 1 . . . 0 - B 2 1 2 B - B 4 B- 03 1 3 0 - K 2 follo\\·ed by 1 4 O R-0 1 )
1 2 Q- K 2 B- K 2 1 3 P-O R4! 0-0 1 4 R - R3 \Vith advantage t o White . Jan sa­
Augus ti n , Czechosl ovaki a 1 9 74 . 6 B- 84

6 . . . Q-QI The alternative is 6 . . . 0-03 7 0-0 N - K B 3 (after 7 . . . N -QB3 8 N-K4

Q-0 1 9 B-B4 N-B3 1 0 0 - K 2 B - K 2 1 1 O R-01 th e posit ion is unclear: or 8 R -K 1
P- Q R3? [ 8 . . . N - B3] 9 P-Q R 4 0 - B2 1 0 N - K4 B - 0 2 1 1 N x P B-K2 1 2 N - K BS! wi t h
a clear advan tage t o White . Ofstad- Uh lman n , Halle 1 963. Again the most soli d
con tinuation is 8 N - N3 N - B3 t ransposing to the main line , since 8 . . . P- K4 9 N -N5
N - R3 10 P-B4! gives White a strong attack ) 8 N-N3 N -B3 an d:

( 1 ) 9 R- K 1 P- 0 R3 (if 9. . . B-0 2 1 0 N( N3)xP P- 0 R3 1 1 B- K NS Q- B4 1 2 B - N3 0-

0-0 1 3 P-B3 \vit h advantage to White . Liebert - Uhln1 ann , East Gern1 any 1 9 63)
10 P- 0 R4 B - K2 1 1 N ( B3)x P N x N 1 2 OxN B-0 2 1 3 B - B4 OxO 1 4 NxO R - 0 B 1 1 5
B- O N3 an d White h as the better en din g . Avcrbach - Stahlb erg. Zurich 1 953 .

( 2) 9 N ( N3)xP The simplest way of ob taining a slig ht posit ion al plus . 9 . . . N x N

1 0 N x N (even t h e e n d i n g afte r 1 0 Ox N OxO 1 1 NxQ i s not easy for Black e . g .
1 1 . .. P-0 R3 1 2 B - B4 B - K 2 [ 1 2 . . . B - B4 1 3 N - N3 B - K 2 1 4 B- K 2! an d Black h as
difficul ties on the 0 - side] 1 3 K R- K 1 wi th pressure) 1 0 ... P - O R3 (or 1 0 . . . B - K 2 1 1
P-0 N3 0-0 12 B - N 2 P- K4 1 3 N - NS QxQ 1 4 K RxO B - K B4 1 5 Q R -B 1 \vith an
en dgame advantage for Wh ite . Tal- Uh ln1ann , Moscov.,· 1 967) 1 1 B-N3 (other

233
good moves are P-QN3, P-QR4, P-Q83, R- K1 and 8- K3) 11...Qu82 12 Q-83 8-
Q3 13 P- KR3 0-0 14 B-N5 with the more comfortable game.

7O-O N-QB3 8 N-N3 B-K2 If 8...N-B3 9 Q-K2B-K2(or 9...P-QR3 10 R-Q1 P-QN4

11 N(N3)xP NxN 12 RxN Q-N3 13 8-Q3 B-N2 (if 13 . ..B-B4 14 R- KR4 8-N2 15
P-QN4 with good chances] 14 P-QR4! B-B4 15 R- KR4 P-N5 16 P-R5! and
White stands well. Andersson-Sax, Hilversum 1973) 10 R-Q1 0-0 11 N(N3)xP
Q-B212 NxN P><N 13 B-KN5 8-N2 14 Q- K5 QxQ 15 NxQ KR-Q1 16 N-Q7 P-B4
17 NxNch 8xN 18 8xB with the better endgame for White. Keres-Eliskases,
Noordwijk 1938. 9 Q-K2 or 9 N(N3)xP NxN 10 NxN P-QR3 11 B-K3 B-B3 12 P­
Q83 N-K2 13 Q-R5 0-0 14 QR-Q1 with the better game for White. Smyslov­
Stahlberg, Helsinki Olympiad 1952. 9 B-B3 10 R Q1 P- QR3 Or 10 KN- K2
. . . - . . .

11 N(83)xP BxN 12 8-K3 N-B4 13 NxB N(B3)xN 14 BxN NxB 15 Q- K3 with a

lead in development. 1 1 N(N3)x P B><N 12 B-K3 KN-K2 13 BxB NxB 14 RxN Q-
82 15 QR-Q1 0-0 16 Q-KS with advantage. Averbach- Stahlberg, Stockholm
Interzonal 1952.

5 KN-B3

This has recently become the most popular move thanks largely to the games
of World Champion Karpov...Instead, White may play n1ore actively with 5 B­
NSch in an attempt to provoke complications, and now:

(a) 5 . .. B-Q2 6 Q-K2ch White achieves very little with 6 BxBch NxB 7 N- K2 (if 7
KN-83 Q-K2ch) 7 .. 8-Q3 8 0-0 KN-B3 (more exact than 8 . N- K2 9 N- KB3 P­
. . .

B5 10 8-B4 Q-82 11 Q-Q2 0-0 12 KR- K 1 KR-K 1 13 BxB QxB 14 N-N3 with
some initiative. Larsen-Uhlmann, 3rd tnatch game 1971) 9 N-KB3 0-0 10

234
PxP Nx P 1 1 B - K3 R - K 1 with equality . Larsen -Uh l m a nn , Sth match game 19 7 1 .
6 8- K2 ! White has a n endgame adva ntage after 6 . . . Q - K2 7 Bx Bch Nx B 8 px p
. . .

NxP 9 N - N3 (or 9 Q N - B3 QxQch 1 0 NxQ N - B3 1 1 B - K3 N ( B4)- KS 1 2 0-0-0 B ­

B 4 13 Bx B Nx B 1 4 N - B4 'N i t h the bette r endi ng . Averbach - Szabo , Sczawno
Zdroj 1950) 9 . . . QxQch (or 9 . . . N - RS 10 N - 04 P - Q R3 1 1 B - K3 NxP 1 2 N - BS Q ­
NSch 1 3 B - Q 2 Q - KS 1 4 R-N 1 N - BS 1 5 B - B3 threateni ng RxP a n d NxP) 1 0 NxQ
N- RS ( if 10 . . . NxN 1 1 RPxN B- B4 1 2 N- B3 N- B3 13 N - R4 ! follo\ved by B- K3
\\'ith the better position . Even worse here is 12 . . . 0-0-0 1 3 R - RS ! lvkov -Hort,
W ijk aan Zee 1 970) 1 1 N ( N3)- Q4 and the i solated Q P puts Black at a dis­
advantage . Parm a -Vagania n , Yugosl avi a - U S S R m a tch 1 97 1 . 7 PxP N - K83 8 N­
N3 ! The n atural m ove , m aking it difficult for Bl ack to achieve full eq uali ty .
Weaker is 8 KN - B3 0-0 9 0-0 BxP 10 N - N3 R- K 1 1 1 Q - Q3 B-N3 (or 1 1 . . . P ­
Q R3 1 2 BxB Q N x B 1 3 B-NS B - R 2 with eq uality . Botvi nn i k - Bronstein , 3rd
m a tch g a me 1 95 1 ) 1 2 B - NS (or 1 2 BxB QNxB 13 B-Q2 N- B 1 1 4 B- B3 N - K3 1 5
B - KS N - KS 1 6 Q R -0 1 N ( K3)-N4 with equality . Ben i - Korch noy , Luh acovi ce
1 969 ) 12 . . . BxB (or 1 2 . . . N- B3 13 P - B3 N - K4 14 NxN RxN 15 BxB Rx B 1 6 B - R3
Q - Q3 \Vi th equality . Padevs ky -A ntosh i n , Zagreb , 1965) 13 Qx B Q N -Q2 14 P­
Q R4 P- Q R3 15 Q-Q3 R - KS wi th an even g a me . Fu derer- Petrosia n , Goteborg
I nterzonal 19SS . Or here 1 4 N ( N3)-Q4 Q - B2 1 5 P - B3 P- QR3 1 6 Q-Q3 N - KS with
equ ality . Pol ugayevsky - Khol m ov , U S S R 1956 . 8 0-0 9 8-K3 R - K l 10 N-83 !
. . .

Pl ay i s unclear after 10 0-0-0 P - QR4 1 1 P- QR4 N - R3 1 2 BxB QxB 1 3 Q-NS

QxQ 1 4 PxQ N - B 2 15 P- B6 P><P 1 6 pxp P - RS 17 N - Q4 P - R 6 ! 1 8 pxp N - KS !
Bohn isch - F uchs , East Gern1 any 1966 . Or 10 0-0-0 P- Q R3 1 1 Bx B ( 1 1 B - Q3 P­
Q R4! ) 1 1 . . . QNx B 12 N- R3 NxP 13 BxN Bx B 14 Q - B3 B-R2 15 N- B4 \Vith
equ ali ty . Kuzm i n - Korchnoy , US S R 19 73 . 10 P-QR3 Well worthy of
. . .

consideration is 1 0 . . . BxP 1 1 B ( NS )x B QNx B 12 NxB NxN 13 Q - NS ! (after 13 0-

0 N - NS Bl ack equalizes , b ut 13 . . . P - QS is risky in view of 14 KR- Q 1 Q - N3 15
NxP QxP 16 N - NS Q- K4 1 7 Q- B4 \Vi t h advantage ) 13 . . . R - QB 1 (\\'e aker is
13 . . . N ( B4 )- KS 1 4 0-0 Q - B2 1 5 P- B3 \\·' ith a positional plus . Castaldi- Porath ,
Hilversum 194 7 . Wh ite also sta nds better after 13 . . . N - K3 14 0-0 Q-B2 1 5 P - B3
P-Q R3 16 Q - N6 . Keres- Bon darevsky , U S S R 1948) 1 4 0-0 P-QR3 (Whi te h as
t he better ending after 1 4 . . . Q - Q2 1 5 QxQ N (B 4)xQ 16 P- B3) 15 Q - N4 R- KS 1 6
Q - Q 2 P-R3 1 7 Q R -Q 1 R - K 1 18 P-B3 N ( B4)- KS 19 Q-Q3 Q - B 2 \v ith a m i n i m al
a dvant age to Whi te . B ro\\'nc- Uhhn a nn , H asti ngs 19 72/3. 1 1 8x8 Not 1 1 B -Q3
B- RS ! 1 l . . . QNx B 1 2 0-0 NxP 1 3 N ( 83) -Q4 \vith a slight pcsitional plus to
Wh ite . For 13 K R - K l ? ! sec Parma- Korchnoy , Moscow 197 1 ( illustrative g ame
5 6) .

( b ) s . . . N - 83

23 5
 �
�

This move avoids the complications of 5 .. . B-Q2 . 6 Q-K2ch B-K2 Once again
6...Q-K2 is better for White after 7 P><P QxQch 8 NxQ BxP 9 N-QN3 B-N3 10 P­
QR4 N-K2 1 1 P-RS B -B2 12 B-KB4! Szabo-Barcza, Stockholm Interzonal 1952 ;
or here 10 B-Q2 B-Q2 (10 . ..N-K2 11 B -N4! Euwe-Botvinnik, World
Championship Match Tournament 1948) 11 B-B3 P-B3 12 0-0 KN-K2 13 B-Q4
with a positional advantage . 7 PxP N-B3 8 N-N3 0-0 9 B- K3 After 9 N-B3
Black can also equalize with accurate play : 9... N-KS 10 B-K3 R-K1 11 0-0-0
(or 1 1 0-0 NxQBP 12 Q-Q1 N -KS 13 N (B3)-Q4 Q-B2 with equ al chances.
Gerstenfeld-Boleslavsky, USSR 1940) 11 ...NxQBP 12 B-QB4 NxNch 13 BxN B­
K3 with equal chances . Florian-Katetov, Prague 1943. Weaker, however, is (9
N-B3) R-K1 10 B-K3 (10 0-0 BxP 11 Q-Q3 B-N3 12 B-NS also offers White a
slight advantage according to Keres) 10. ..P-QR3 11 B -Q3 (11 BxN P><B 12 0-0
P-QR4 13 R-K1 Q-B2 is unclear . Poljak-Khasin, USSR 1949) 11...B-NS 12 0-
0-0 with advantage to White . Smyslov- Uhlmann, Cienfuegos 1973 (illustr ative
game 57) . 9 R- Kl Here or the next move the complic ations arising after ...P­
. . .

QR3 have not yet been exhausted e.g . 9 ...P-QR3 (White has the advantage after
both 9 ... B-NS 10 P-KB3 B-Q2 11 0-0-0 P-QR3 12 B-R4. Ribli-Enklaar, Wijk
aan Zee 1972; and 9 ...N-KNS 10 0-0-0 NxB 11 QxN R-K1 12 N -B3 B -B3 13 Q­
Q2 . Poljak-Sokolsky, USSR 1951) 10 B-R4 ! (if 10 B-Q3 P-QS 11 B-KNS P-QR4
12 P-QR4 B-K3 13 N-B3 BxN 14 P><B BxP with good play for Black. Hiibner­
Uhlmann, Palma Interzonal 1970) 10 ...R-K1 11 0 -0-0 N-KNS (if 11 . . . N-KS 12
Q-Bl B-B4 13 N-K2 R-QB1 14 P-QR3 with the advantage . Ribli-Farago ,
Hungarian Championship 1971) 12 N-B3 ( If instead 12 Q-B3 NxB 13 PxN B-N4
Black has a strong attack for the pawn.) This is the critical position which needs
further examination. O ne example is 12...B-B3 13 KR-K1 (after 13 P-B4 the
play becomes wildly complicated. Black can play 13 . . . B-K3 or the sharp 13 . . . P­
QS) 13...NxB 14 PxN R-KS! with the better game for Black. Kupreichik-Gulko,

23 6
U SS R 1973. 1 0 0-0-0 P - QR4 1 1 P-QR4 8- Q2 1 2 N - 83 N -R2 1 3 N (83 ) - Q2 N­
K 5 ! \vi t h ch a nces for both sides , b ut not 1 3 . . . N - NS 1 4 K - Nl NxB 15 P>< N B-N4
1 6 0- B3 ! \\'ith a clear advan tage for White. Parm a -V aganian , Yugosl avi a - U S S R
M atch 1 97 2 .

5 N-QB3

(a ) 5 . . . N- K83 The disadvantage of this move is that in n1 any vari ation s t he

k night is needed on K2 e. g .: 6 8-N5ch 8- Q2 Not 6 . . . N - B3 \\'h ich transposes to
note (3) on page 23 1 ) . 7 8x 8ch QNx8 8 0 - 0 8- K2 9 PxP NxP 1 0 N - Q4 Also
good for White is 10 N -N3 N ( B4 ) - KS 1 1 N ( B3)-04 0-02 1 2 0-B3 0-0 1 3 N­
K BS KR- K 1 1 4 NxBch RxN 15 B - K3 . Keres - l vkov , B amberg 1968. 10 . . 0-0 If .

1 0. . . 0-02 1 1 N(02 ) - B3 0-0 1 2 N - KS 0 - B 1 13 B -NS R - Kl 1 4 N -03 \\rith some

posi tion a l advantage. Botvinnik - Bronstei n , 1 5th m atch game 195 1 . 1 1 N - 85 R ­
K 1 1 2 N - QN3 N - K3 A fter 12 . . . R -0B 1 13 B- K3 B - Bl 1 4 B -04 N - K3 15 P-0B3
Nx8 1 6 OxN , as in K h asin - Sokolsky, U S SR 1957 ; or 1 2 . . . N ( 84)- KS 1 3 Nx 8ch
OxN 14 8 - K3 0 - 8 2 15 B -04 N -02 16 0-03 as i n Parm a- Donner, Bus un1 1 968 ,
White h a s sotn e advantage in the en di ng . 1 3 8 - K3 Q - 82 1 4 P - Q83 Q R - Q 1 1 5 Q-
8 3 \vi t h s trong pressure . Geller- Sta hlberg , Zu rich Candi dates ' Tour n a tnen t
1 953.

(b ) 5 . . . P - Q R3 No\\' th a t White h a s e x ch a nged pav,:ns this move seem s

pl ayable . si nce 6 P - 84 N - KB3 7 B - K2 N - 83 8 PxO P KNx P 9 0-0 Px P 1 0 N - N3
B - K 2 1 1 N ( B3)xP 0-0 1 2 8 - 8 3 8 - 83 1 3 N - 8 2 N ( Q 4) - K 2 g i\'es W h i te no thi ng .

23 7
Szily-Botvinnik , Budapest 1952. 6 PxP After 6 B- K2 P-BS 7 0-0 B-Q3 8 R- K1
N-K2 9 N-81 QN-B3 10 B-NS 0-0 11 P-83 P-B3 12 B-Q2 P-QN4 the position is
unclear . Gipslis- Korchnoy, Tallinn 1967. 6 . . . BxP 7 N-N3 B-R2 8 B-Q3 If 8 B­
KNS N-KB3 9 N(B3)-Q4 0-0 · 10 B- K2 Q-Q3 11 0-0 N-KS 12 B- K3 with
equality. Keres-Botvinnik , World Championship Match Tournament 1948; or 8
B-K2 N-KB3 9 0-0 N-B3 10 B-KNS 0-0 11 P-B3 R-K1 12 N(N3)-Q4 Q-Q3 with
equality. Estevez- Korchnoy , Leningr ad Interzon al 1973. 8 . . . Q-K2ch 9 B-K2 If 9
Q-K2 N-QB3 10 0-0 B-NS 11 P- KR3 B-R4 12 B- KB4 QxQ with equal chances.
9 . . . N-KB3 10 0-0 0-0 1 1 N(B3)-Q4 Better is 11 B- KNS! 1 1 ...N-B3 12 R-K1 N­
KS 13 B-K3 N-K4 14 N-Q2 P-B4. Ciric- Korchnoy , Yugoslavia-USSR match
1967.

(c) 5 . . . P-B5 Bronstein's move , designed to leave White's Q4 occupied by the QP

so that White will not h ave the use of this s quare for a knight. 6 P-QN3 pxp Not
6...P-QN4 7 P-QR4 Q-R4 8 N- KS! with a clear advantage for White. 7 B-N5ch
For 7 RPxP see Bebchuk-Bronstein , Moscow Team Championship 1974-
illustrative game 58. 7 . . . B-Q2 8 Q-K2ch with advantage to White because of his
lead in development and (after RPxP) the h alf-open QR-file.

'LW
�

6 B-NS

There is nothing in 6 PxP BxP 7 N-N3 (not the blunder 7 B-NS?? BxPch 8 KxB
Q-N3ch winning a p awn) 7...B-N3 8 B-Q3 N-83 9 0-0 0-0 10 B-KNS Q-Q3
with equal chances.

6 • • • B-Q3

6. .. P-BS is not to be recommended. \Vhite has both 7 Q- K2ch Q- K2 8 P-QN3

238
with the better en ding (comp are note (c) on S. ..P-BS above) and 7 0-0 B-Q3 8
P-QN3 pxp 9 P-B4 N- K2 10 J>xQP NxP 11 QxP 0-0 12 N- K4 N-R4 13 Q-N2 B­
K2 14 B-Q2 with advantage . Keres- Stahlberg, Marianske Lazne 1965.
E qually dubious is the attempt to solve Bl ack's problems by 6. ..P-QR3, see
Gligoric- Stahlberg , 3rd match game 1949 (il lustrative game 59) .
One fin al alternative to the main line is 6 .. . Q- K2ch 7 B- K2 pxp 8 0-0 Q-Q1
(or 8...Q-B2 9 N-N3 N-B3 10 N (N3)xP B- K2 11 P-B3 when White has the edge .)
9 N-N3 B-Q3 10 N (N3)xP KN- K2 11 P-QN3 0-0 12 B-N2 N-N3 13 P-B4 N(B3)­
K2 14 R-B1 N-BS 15 P-BS B-N1 16 R- K1 NxBch 17 QxN with the better game
for White. Tal-Hol m, Kapfenberg 1970.

7 pxp

At the present time this sequence of moves is the most com mon. After 7 0-0
PxP 8 N -N3 Not 8 NxP at once because of 8 . BxPch 9 Kx B Q-RSch 10 K- N1
. .

QxN equalizing immediately . Geller- Ivkov, USSR-Yugosl avia match 1969 .

8 . . . N-K2 9 N (N3)xP 0-0, we reach a position identical to that after move 10 in
the main line (in the main line White has used an ex tra tempo on 7 PxP whereas
Bl ack has used two extra tempi with his bishop [7 .. . BxBP and 8...B-Q3) but
saved one by omitting 7 . . . P><P). The difference in move order is significant
inasmuch as in the main line White has the option, at move 10, of pl aying
something other th an 10 N (N3)-Q4. We shoul d point out that in the main line
Bl ack has the option, at move 9, of retreating his bishop to QN3 rather th an Q3 ,
but this shoul d not be considered a disadvantage for White since 9. ..B-N3 is
inferior.

7 . . . BxBP

239
 Here too Black gains nothing by 7... Q- K2ch 8 Q- K2 BxBP 9 N- K5 (for 9 N­
N3 see Balashov-Vaganian, U S SR Championship 1973 - illustr ative game 60 .)
9 ...B-Q2 10 NxB KxN 1 1 N-N3 QxQch 12 KxQ R- Klch 13 K-B3 B-Q3 14 B - K3
P-QR3 15 BxNch PxB 16 P-B4 with an attack down the centre.

8 0-0 N-K2
9 N-N3

The interesting attempt to set up a blockading position with 9 P-B4 proved

dubious in the game Mestel,-Uhlmann, Hasting s 1973, when Black obtained a
strong attack on the K-side after 9 ...0-0 10 N-N3 B-Q3 1 1 BxN P><B 12 P-B5 B­
Nl! 13 B-N5 Q-B2! 14 N(N3)-Q4 N-N3 15 Q-R4 B-Q2 16 Q-R6 P-B3 17 B-Q2 N­
K4! 18 P- KN3 B-B1 19 Q-R4 Q-Q2 with the better chances.

9 • • • B-Q3!

The retreat 9 B-N3 has the disadvantage that White wins a tempo after
. . .

R- K1 and B- K3, as the black bishop can be exchanged at an appropriate moment ,

giving White the better ending . e .g .: 10 R-Kl More exact than the immediate 10
B-K3 BxB 11 P><B (or 11 BxNch P><B 12 P><B B-N5 ! fir st pl ayed in Matanovic-
Gligoric, Sousse Interzonal 1967, 13 Q-Q4 BxN! 14 RxB 0-0 15 QR- KB l N-N3
16 N-B5 Q-K2 17 P-QR4 QR- K1 18 P-QN3 N- K4 with equality. Geller-lvkov,
Sousse I nterzonal 1967) 11... 0-0 12 Q-Q2 Q-N3 13 P-QR4 B-B4 14 N(B3)-Q4
NxN 15 PxN Q-N3 with equality . Or 10 B-N5 0-0 11 R- K1 Q-Q3 12 Q-Q2 B -N5
13 BxN(B6) NxB 14 B-B4 Q- Q2 15 N- K5 NxN 16 BxN QR- K1 17 B-Q4 BxB 18
NxB P-QR3 with only a slight edge for White. Radulov-Schmid, Nice Olympiad
1974 . 10 0-0 White had the advantage after 10.. .B-N5 11 B-N5 P-B3 12 B- K3
. .. .

BxB 13 RxB in Geller-Matulovic, Skopje 1968. 1 1 B-K3 In the game Karpov­

Vaganian, USSR 1973, after 1 1 B-N5 P-KR3 12 B- KR4 P-N4?! 13 B-N3 N-B4
14 Q-Q2 White had the better game, but Black should play 12... P-B3 13 B-N3
N-B4 with an unclear position according to Karpov. 1 1 . . . B-KB4 White stands
better after 11 ...B-N5 12 BxB QxB 13 Bx�. K arpov- Krogius, USSR 1970. 12 P­
B3 B-KS 13 N (N3)-Q4 Q-Q3 14 B-KB1 Q-B3 15 Q-R4 P-KR3 16 QR-Q1 with a
more comfortable game for White. Ghizdavu-Botez , Rom ania 1972.

With 9 .. .B-Q3! we reach a position that must be considered critical for the
Tarrasch Variation, and hence for the theory of the French Defence in general.
Whether or not White can take advantage of his opponent 's isolated QP will
determine the assessment of the whole variation . Karpov reached this position
no less than seven times during his Candidates' Match with Korchnoy at the end
of 1974, and it is therefore with particular pleasure that R.H.M. welcomes the

240
follO\\·' ing con tribu tion by World Ch a mpion Karpov . K arpov ' s analysis of thi s
critical v a riat ion exten ds t o t h e e n d of the m a in ga me . a nd his contribution was
\\Titten speci ally for this vol u me .

The most pop u l ar position in the Tarrasch V ariation . Its most i mport an t
features are the p resence of the isol ated pawn and the fact that each si de
controls di fferent squares in the cen tre . The open king file is also im portant .
W h a t general con siderations do modern p l ayer s h ave in mi n d \\'hen dealing with
t hi s posi t ion ?
Nimzovich stressed that the i m port ant po int in such position s is not so m uch
the isol ated pa\vn i t self (the \\'ea kness of \\'hich is mo re often th an not ill usory ) as
the bloc kading � ·�� tare i n fron t of it. For this reason White attempts to get an un ­
sh akeable g rip on h i .; () 4 squ a re , \vhile Bl ack di sposes h i s forces in such a way as
to try and ch allenge this g!"!p. In s hort . Whi te strives to m a ke Q4 a base for h is
pieces an d Bl ack hope s to expel then1 from that s q u a re .
A t the s t art o f this b attle White a dopts a firn1 s t ance \vhereas Bl ack h a s a
n1ore n1 ob ile set -up . The extent of the zone s of activity of each side is norn1 ally
clearl y m a rked out . Wh ite solidifies his position in the centre and eyes t he \\'eak­
nesses t h a t a rise on the Q-side . H is i deal is to \\'in the Q P . Black cou n ters in the
cen t re and tries to cre ate threat s on the K-s ide . H is ideal i s to ach ieve the
advance . . . P- QS . We therefore have a case of statics versus dyn amics !
Let us nO\\' consider con crete l ines \Vhich give rich food for t hough t .

10 N ( N3 ) -Q4

'Th e cla ssical line wh ich h as he ld the s t age fo r m any years . The s an1e position

24 1
can be reached but in one move less by adopting the move order 1 P-K4 P-K3 2
P-Q4 P-Q4 3 N- Q2 P-QB4 4 KP><P KP><P 5 KN-83 N-Q83 6 8-NS B-Q3 7 0-0
P><P 8 N-N3 N-K2 9 N (N3)xP. For simplicity of exposition and to avoid any con­
fusion over move order we are going to assume that the position has been
reached by the more normal move order , i.e . in ten moves. Generally speaking
the move 7...PxP has independent significance only in cases of definite devia­
tions from recognised theory , e.g. 8 R- K l ch N-K2 9 NxP 0-0 10 N-B l , but
there are no known examples of this continuation ; or 8 NxP which is mentioned
on p age 239.
The text is by f ar from being the only move played at this juncture. Six other
moves also come into serious consider ation :

(a) 10 B-NS Until recently this was the most common line. One of the ways of
playing against the isolated QP is to carry out appropriate m inor piece ex­
changes so as to gain various positional advantages. This tendency is most
clearly seen after the text move . 10 . . 0-0
.

Originally the v arious plans here were considered to be of e qual strength :

(a1) 1 1 R-K1 Black equalised easily in Pogats-Portisch , Hungary 1958, which

went 1 1 Q-Q2 Q-B2 12 P- KR3 P- KR3 13 B- K3 B-KB4. 1 1 ... Q-82 This is more
elastic than ll... B- KN5 12 P- KR3 (not so convincing is 12 B- K2 Q-B2 13 P­
.KR3 B- K3 14 N(N3)-Q4 which led to near equality in Kan-Khasin , Moscow
1949) 12 . . .B-R4 , since in this case Black has to reckon with the possibility of 13
BxQN FxB 14 N(N3)-Q4 R-B l ( 14 .. .Q-Q2 is bad because of 15 BxN BxB 16 N­
K5 , while 14... Q-B2 15 BxN BxB 16 NxP QxN 17 RxB Q-B3 18 R-N7 QR-N1 19
R-N3 RxR 20 RPxR BxN 2 1 QxB QxNP 22 RxP QxBP 23 R-Q7 leaves Black a
pawn down in the ending) 15 P-B4 P- KR3 ( 15 ...PxP ? 16 N-B5) 16 BxN BxB 17
Q-R4 and White has the initi ative. The direct attempt to get rid of the pin by
11. . .P-KR3 favours White since , as we shall see , it helps his subse quent
m anoeuvre B-KR4- KN3. Admittedly, in Larsen-Andersson , Siegen Olympiad
1970, White even got a slight advantage after 12 B- K3 B-KN5 13 P- KR3 B-R4
14 B-K2 R-K1 15 N(N3)-Q4 P-R3 16 Q-Q2 B-N3 17 QR-Q l Q -B2 18 B-Q3 N-K4
19 NxN BxN 20 BxB NxB 21 P-QB3 , but the main reason for this was Black's
play which can be strengthened by 15 ... Q-Q2 , 16. .. Q-B2 and 18 ... QR-Q1.

The idea 10 B-N5 0-0 1 1 R-K l Q-B2 was treated in a fresh manner in the
18th game of my match with Korchnoy : 12 P-83! 12 P-KR3 wastes time: 12.. .P­
KR3 13 B-Q2 B-KB4 14 N (N3)-Q4 B- K5 15 B-B3 QR-Q1 16 B-Q3 with com­
plicated play and approxim ate e quality , e.g. 16 . . .Q-N3 (16. .. B-QB4 is not so
good - 17 BxB P><B 18 RxP N-B4 19 NxN(B5) ! with an attack) 17 BxB P><B 18
RxP and now not 18.. .B-B4 19 Q-K l! NxN 20 NxN BxN 21 RxN (Toran­
Kramer , Beverwijk 1957) , but simply 18. ..N-Q4. 12 ... B-KN5 13 P-KR3 B-R4

242
I4 B-K2! P-KR3 I S B><N! NxB I6 N( B3) - Q4! B>< B 16 . . . B - N3 ma kes no di ffer­
enc e be cause of 1 7 B - Q 3 and now Black also has to reckon \\'i th N - NS I7 Qx B P­
R3 I 8 Q -B3 QR-QI I9 QR-QI R - Q2 20 N- KBS NxN 21 QxN KR- QI 22 R-K3
and Whi te has a sli ght bu t defi ni te advant age . However , in the sequel Korchn oy
m a naged to save the half poi nt by inventive pl ay .

(a2) I I B- KR4

Th is move was first tried some years ago an d it g ave the line 10 B -NS a new
impetu s . It was played in B ron stein -Furm an , 14th U S S R Championship 1946 ,
b u t thi s game was then com pletely forgotten , and only twenty-five years later
was it resurrected . I l . . . Q -N3 The most modern approach , b u t 1 1 .. . Q-B2 and
11 . . . B - KNS have also been pl ayed :

( I ) I I . . . Q-B2 I2 B-N3 BxB I3 RPxB B-NS I4 R-KI QR- Q I I S P-B3 Q -N3 I 6

B-Q3 Threaten ing 1 7 BxPch and 1 8 N- NSch . I 6 . . . N-N3 I 7 Q -B2 BxN 1 8 PxB R­
Q3 Probably he should p re fer 1 8 . . . P - QS although even then . after 1 9 P- KB4
Px P 20 PxP , Black' s k night cannot get into play and White has a definite advan­
tage . I9 P- KB4 KR- Q I 20 P-R3! White has a defin ite advantage , and what is
probably m ore im porta nt a cle ar plan of action . Karpov- Kuzm in , Leningrad
I n terzon a l 1 973 (illustrative ga me 6 1 ) .

(2) A step for\vard for Black was m ade in a fe\\' g a mes where he tried l i . . B­ .

KNS , starting an im medi ate fig ht for the central squ a re s . I2 B- K2 O ther m oves
are :

(i) 1 2 R- K 1 R- B l (or 1 2 . . R - K l 1 3 B - N 3 Bx B 1 4 R Px B Q - N 3 1 5 B - Q3 with the

.

better g ame for Wh i te . Balashov- Uhlm ann , Moscow 1 971) 1 3 P-B3 N- K4? ! 1 4

243
B-K2 N-B5 ? 15 N(B3)-Q4 , a nd in view of the f act that the pawn cannot be taken
(15 . ..NxP ? 16 Q -B2 BxB 17 QxB) Black h as to retreat by 15 . . .B -Q2 when his
difficulties are just as great after 16 BxN PxB 17 N-Q2 R-K1 18 N- K4 B-N1 19
Q-B3. Browne-S. Garci a, M adrid 1973 .
(ii) 12 B-N3 (this is r ather premature) 12 . . . BxB 13 RPxB Q-N3 14 B -Q3 (with
the threat of 15 BxPch) 14 . . .N-B4 (if 14 . . .N-K4 15 R-K1 N(2)-B3 16 B - K2 BxN,
and now, by 17 PxB, White could keep the initiative , Iv anovic-Farago, Prstin a
1973) 15 BxN BxB, although here too White still has slightly the better of it after
16 P-B3.

12 ...B-R4 The point of this retreat is to meet 13 N(B3)-Q4 by 13 . .. B -N3

'

avoiding the exchange of bishops. In addition to this far from stereotyped plan
there is also 12.. . Q-N3 13 BxN! NxB (the pawn sacrifice 13 . ..BxB 14 QxP QR­
Q1 15 Q-B4 is inade quate) 14 Q-04! QxQ 15 N (B3)xQ B-Q2 (1S ...BxB 16 NxB
QR-B1 seems more stubborn) 16 QR-Q l KR-Q1 17 KR-K1 K -B1 18 P -QB3,
when the endgame favours White. Kuzmin-Uhlmann , Leningrad Interzonal
1973 (illustr ative game 63). Uhlm ann improved the defence against R Byrne in
their g ame from the same event by 12.. . R-K1! 13 R -K1 when a draw was agreed!
This improvement was more clearly shown in Vogt-Uhlmann, Potsdam 1974 :
12 ... R - K1 13 R- K1 Q -N3 14 N(B3) -Q4 (or 14 BxN RxB! 15 QxP QR-Q1 with
active piece play for the pawn) 14 . . .N-N3! (after 14.. .BxB 15 RxB B-K4! White
missed the following tactical turn in Schmid-Portisch, Nice Olympiad 1974: 16
N-B3 BxP 17 R-N1 B -B6 18 R-K3 with chances for both sides) 15 NxN (not 15
BxB RxRch 16 QxR NxN winning) 15 . . . RxB! 16 RxR (if 16 N(B6) -Q4 R-K5 17
,

P-KB3 BxBP! with a clear advantage) 16. . . PxN 17 B-N3 and Black h as no
problems. This Vog t-U hlmann encounter is given in full as illustrative game 64 .
13 R-K1 Q-N3 14 N(B3)-Q4 B-N3 15 P-QB3 Gaining a slight but persistent
advantage by his strangehold on Q4. 15 . . KR-K1 16 B-B1 B-K5 17 B-N3 BxB 18
.

RPxB P-QR4 Wrongly weakening his QN4 square. 18 ... QR-Q1 was called for:
19 P-QR4 NxN 20 NxN A n unpleasant surprise for Black. 20 PxN B-N3 is level,
whereas now if 20 . . .QxP, 21 N-N5 wins material. 20 ...N-B3 21 B-N5 ! KR-Ql 22
P-KN4! Preparing for the ending by cutting off the bishop from the useful KB4-
QB1 diagonal. 22 ...NxN 23 QxN QxQ 2� P><Q QR-Bl 25 P-B3 B-N3 26 R-K7 P­
N3 27 QR-Kl and Black had a very difficult position. K arpov -Uhln1ann,
M adrid 1973 (illustrative game 62).

244
 Let us n ow return to the position after 11 . . . Q-N3 .

- -

The yea r 1 9 74 \\' as cruci a l for this v a ri ation . In a n u n1 ber of ga mes the
MosCO\\' Cha n1pio n Boris Gulko succeeded in sho\ving th at after 1 2 B- Q3 P­
QR4 ! Bl ack has fu ll equality , e . g.

( 1 ) 1 3 P- R4 N - B4 1 4 Bx N B x B 1 5 B - N 3 ( 1 5 Qx P Bx B P 1 6 QxB BxN i s equal)

1 5 . . . Bx B 1 6 P>< B B - K5 'Nith adva ntage to Black . Balashov-Gulko , Moscow
Cha mpio ns hip 1 9 74 .
( 2 ) 1 3 P - R 4 N - B4 1 4 B - N3 ? Bx B 1 5 Px B Nx P 1 6 R - K 1 N - R4 1 7 Q - 0 2 B - N 5
\\'i th a sound ex t ra pa\\·· n . Belyavsky -Gul ko . Daugavpils 1 9 74 .
( 3 ) 1 3 P- 83 P- R5 1 4 N ( N 3 ) - Q4 N - N 3 1 5 N - QN 5 B- B5 1 6 B - N 3 Bx B 1 7 Px B B ­
N5 1 8 R - N l N - K4 \\'ith excellent p l ay . Zhidkov-Gulko , Daugavp ils 1 9 74 .

The line h a s also \\'Orked out \\'ell in a n u n1ber of other g an1es . Th us Wittnl an ­
Vag a n i an, ·reesside 1 9 74 \\'en t 1 3 P- B4 P- R5 1 4 pxp N - N 5 1 5 N ( N 3 ) - Q4 Nx B 1 6
QxN R - 1�4 ! 1 7 N- KN5 (if 1 7 Bx N Bx B 1 8 N - B5 B - B3 \\'ith a clea r adva nta ge to
Bl a ck ) 1 7 . . . N - N 3 1 8 N - B5 Bx N 1 9 Qx B Q - 0 1 and the threa ts of . . . RxP and . . . P ­
R 3 n1a ke W hite ' s p os ition unple asa nt .
N or co uld W h ite hope for m uc h fro m Timoschen ko- Farago , R i m avsk a
Subota 1 9 74 , \\r hich \\'en t 1 3 P- R4 N - B4 1 4 B- QN5 N x B 1 5 N x N B - K 4 1 6 P - B 3 ,
a n d nO\\' , by means of 1 6 . . . R -Q 1 1 7 N - B 3 B - N 5 . Bl ack could h ave equ al ized

245
quickly. He actu ally got the worse of it after 16... P-Q5 17 N-B3 B-KN5 18 BxN!
P><B 19 N(N3)xQP Qxp 20 Q-Q3!
In answer to l1 ... Q -N3 one can mention 1 2 P-QR4 and 1 2 B -K2, but neither
is d angerous for Black. In Janosevic-Raicevic Black soon got the better game
after 12 P-QR4 B-KN5 13 BxN(B6) P><B 14 P-R5 Q-B2 15 B -N3 P-QB4 16 R-K1
QR-N 1. In Pinter-Farago , Hungary 1974 , Black gradualy got the upper hand
after 1 2 B-K2 N-B4! 13 QxP ( 13 P-B3 is sounder) 13...N-N5 14 Q-Q2 NxB 15
NxN R-Q1 16 B-Q3 ( 16 Q-N5! ?) 16...B-K4 17 QR-Q 1 B-N5 18 R-N 1 NxB 19
P><N Q-Q3 20 Q -N5 B-K7 21 KR-K 1 BxPch.

(b) Now the move 10 N(B3)-Q4 is worth mentioning. By playing in this way
W hite avoids the pinning of this knight, a pin th at often causes him a lot of
trouble. However , the move conflicts somewhat with the other positional con­
siderations which we mentioned earlier. In particular , White 's K-side could well
become a firing range for the enemy pieces. Nevertheless , the variation is not
without bite. 10 . .. 0-0 11 8-N5 Or 11 Q -R5 N-K4 12 P-KR3 P-QR3 13 B-Q3
NxB 14 P><N P-R4 with equality. Aronin-Portisch , 1959. 1 1 ...N- K4 12 R- K1 P-
83?! 13 8-KR4 N(2)-N3 14 8-N3 P-84 15 N-K2 . White stands better but this is
a consequence of 1 2. .. P-B3. 12 . ..Q-B2 would seem to leave the position level.

(c) 10 8xNch is once again gaining in popularity. Now lO... NxB 1 1 R-K1ch B­
K2 1 2 N(B3)-Q4 0-0 13 NxN P><N 14 B -K3 allows White to start playing on the
enemy's weak dark s quares. The m ain line is 10 ...PxB 1 1 Q-Q4 Black has no
difficulties after 1 1 B-K3 0-0 1 2 B-B5 B-NS 13 Q-Q3 P-QR4 14 P-QR4 BxB 15
NxB Q-Q3. Ingerslev-Bronstein , Moscow 1956. 1 1 . ..0-0 12 B-84 N-84
12... P-QR4 is weaker : 13 BxB QxB 14 KR-K1 N-N3 15 P-QR4 R-N 1 16 Q -B3
R -N5 17 NxP P-QB4 18 N-N3 R-B5 19 Q-Q2 and White has every justification
for hoping t ? realize his extra pawn. Adorj an-Maric , Novi Sad 1973. In this line
it is also quite possible for White to consider the natural-looking move 15 N-KS.
13 Q-Q2 Q-N3 Black failed to equalize after 13... R-N 1 14 KR- K 1 R-N5 15 BxB
QxB 16 P-B3 R-NS 18 QR-Ql. Hulak-Raicevic , Yugoslavia 1974. 14 8x8 Not 14
N -R4 ? B-QNS 15 P -B3 BxP 16 QxB NxN , while after 14 N(B3)-Q4 BxB 15 QxB
NxN 16 NxN P-QB4 or 16 QxN QxQ 17 NxQ P-QB4 White cannot hope t<' get
any advantage. Still it may be better to play 14 KR-K 1 hoping to get the better
development. 14 . . .Nx8 15 P- QR4 N- K5 16 Q - Q4 8-K3 ! 17 P-R5 Q-N4 18 Q-Q3
Q-N5 when Black (unlike his opponent) has nothing to grumble about.
Velimirovic-Vaganian , Kragujevac 1974.

(d) 10 B-K3 is now adays played very rarely. Then comes 10 . . . 0-0 1 1 Q-Q2
White gets nowhere from 1 1 B-B5 BxB 12 NxB Q-N3 13 BxN QxN 14 B-R4 B­
N5. 11 ...8-KN5 12 8-K2 BxN 13 8x8 N-K4 and Black gets full equality from

246
his threat to exch ange one of the enemy bishops. Gligoric- Petrosian , Stockholm
In terzonal 1952.

(e) 1 0 8- Q2 0-0 1 1 8-83 should be met by 1 1 . . . Q-B2 1 2 R-Kl 8- KB4 13 QN­

Q2 8-N3 , but not 13. . . B- K5 14 B-Q3 !

(f) 10 P- 83 0-0 1 1 N(N3 ) - Q4 transposes to the text , and that, in fact , was the
order of moves adopted in the m ain game.

Now let us return to the main line , after 10 N(N3 ) - Q4 .

10 0-0
11 P-B3

Once again White has a wide choice of al ternatives :

(a) 1 1 8- K3 8- KNS The straightforward 1 1 .. . NxN 12 NxN N-B4 13 NxN BxN

1 4 P-QB3! P-QR3 15 B-R4 Q-B2 16 P- KN3 B- K3 1 7 R- K 1 QR-Q 1 18 Q -B3 left
Black with an unpromising position in Matulovic-Maric , Yugoslavia 1974 . 1 2
Q - Q2 The problem of the pin on the knight has been resolved in a number of
\\'ays. J anosevic-Bronstein , Sarajevo 197 1 went 12 P- KR3 B-R4 13 B-Q3 ? NxN !
1 4 BxN N-B3 15 P-B3 ( 15 B-B3 P-Q5 16 B-Q2 B-B2 is good for Black who has
the simple plan of playing for m ate). 15 ... NxB 16 PxN Q-B3 1 7 P- KN4 B-N3 18
R- K 1 Q-B5 ! 19 BxB BP><B 20 R- K3 P- KR4 ! with a decisive attack. Ano ther

24 7
game went 12 B - K2 R-K1 13 Q-Q2 Q -Q2 14 KR-K1 (14 N-QN5 is better)
14 ...QR-Q1 15 QR-Q1 B-N1 16 B- KB4 BxB 17 QxB N-N3 18 Q-Q2 R- KS! 19
NxN P><N and again Black had the initiative . Theory recommends the move
order 12 P- KR3 B -R4 13 Q-Q2 , which norm ally is a harmless transposition.
There is the difference , however , that Black can then play 13. ..R-B1 hoping for
14 B-K2 B-N l lS P-B3 Q -B2 16 P -KN3 Q-Q2 when he stands no worse. Hence
the reason for the text whereby White refrains from weakening pawn moves for
the time being . 12 . . . Q-B2 13 P-KR3 B-R4 Exchanging bishop for knight leaves
White with the preferable position : 13 . .. BxN 14 NxB QR -Q l 15 P-B3 N -K4 16
NxN BxN 17 KR- K1. Larsen-M atulovic , Belgr ade 1964. 14 N-R4 U ntil quite
recently the impression created by the game Matanovic -Jansa , Tel-Aviv 1964,
was that Black should not allow this move : 14 . . .NxN 15 BxN B -B5 16 B - K3 BxB
with the better game for White. But Black can improve with 14 ... B-N3! 15 NxB
RPxN 16 BxN PxB 17 P-QB4 Q-Q2! Not 17 . ..PxP 18 QR-B1 QR-Q1 19 RxP P­
QB4 20 N -N5 B-R7ch 21 K-R l RxQ 22 NxQ BxN 23 BxR with a technically \von
game. 18 N -N3?! PxP 19 N-BS Q-B2 20 QR-Bl and the game soon ended in a
draw . Matulovic-Suetin, Belgrade 1974.

(b ) A special position is occupied by the hybrid line 1 1 B-NS Due to the efforts
of Grandm aster Uhlmann the following continuation has become well known:
1 1 . .. P-B3 An alternative is 11 ... Q-B2 12 P-KR3 (or 12 R-K1 NxN 13 QxN B - K3
14 B -Q3 with the better game for White. Sigurjousson-U hlmann , Raach 1969 )
12 . . .P-B3 (12 ... B-Q2 13 B-Q3 P-QR3 14 P-B3 KR- K l is also possible. Krogius­
Uusi , U S SR 1959) 13 B - K3 N - K 4 14 P-QN3 (or 14 R- K1 P-QR3 15 B- KB1 with
play for both sides) 1 4... P-QR3 15 B-K2 B-Q2 16 Q-Q2 P-QN4 17 QR-Q1 K -R1
18 N -K1 N(4) -N3 19 N-Q3 P -B4 20 B -N5 P -B5 and Black gradually outpl ayed
his opponent by exploiting the attack on the K -side. Neikirch -Uhlmann , Pots­
dam 1974 (illustrative game 65). 12 B-K3! After 12 BxN NPxB 13 NxP BxPch
14 NxB NxN White has lost all of his opening initiative. Or 12 B-KR4 B -KN5 13
Q-Q2 Q -N3 14 BxN PxB 15 B -N3 P -QB4 and White has come to a strategical
dead end . 12 . . . N-K4! 13 R-K1 P-QR3 14 B-KB1 K-R 1 15 P-KR3 B-Q2 16 P-B3
R-B1 17 P-QR4 R-K1 18 NxN PxN 19 N-B3 P-R3. This position occurred in
the game Geller-Uhlmann , Amsterdam 1970. The position is sharp and com ­
plicated as can be seen from the variatiorr 20 Q-Q2 B -KB4 21 BxKRP!? P-KS!
22 N-Q4 PxB 23 QxPch K -N1 24 P-QB4! (But not 24 P-KN4 Q -N3 , nor 24 Q ­
N5ch B -N3 25 N -K6 Q -Q2 26 Q-B6 B-K4! ) 24. . .Q -N3 25 NxB NxN 26 Q-N5ch !
N -N2 27 QxPch.

(c ) On the basis of existing games in the line 1 1 P-KR3 the pl an introduced by

this precautionary move has little force. E .g. 11 ... NxN 12 QxN B- KB4 13 P-B3
B - K5 14 N -N5 N-B4 15 Q-Q1 Q-B3 16 R-K1 B -B4! 17 NxB P><N 18 RxP BxPch

248
a n d B l ac k ha d the i ni ti a ti ve i n Tuk n1 akov - U hl m a n n . H asti ngs 1 9 7 2 / 73 : or
1 1 . . . 0 - 8 2 1 2 B - R4 NxN (after 1 2 . . . P- O R 3 Whi te hard ly has a ny thi ng ) 1 3 N x N
N - B4 ? 1 4 NxN BxN 1 5 Q x P with an ex tra p a\\· n and the be tter pos i tion for
Whi te . Tuk m ak ov - Pe t kevich . U S S R 1 9 7 2 .

(d ) A fte r 1 1 B - Q3 N -N3 1 2 B - KNS B -K 2 1 3 Bx B Qx B 1 4 R - K 1 Q - 83 the

posi tion is l evel . J ans a - M atanov i c , Y a rn a O lyn1 pi ad 1 9 6 2 .

(c ) A fter 1 1 P - QN3 8-KNS \\'e get tenser pos i tion s . Note tha t 1 1 . . . N xN 1 2
Nx N B- K4 o r 1 2 OxN N - B 3 i s si n1 p l er . O ne can a l so re con1 mend 1 1 . . . P- Q R 3 1 2
N x N Px N 1 3 B - 0 3 N - N 3 1 4 BxN R Px B 1 5 B - N 2 P-0 B4 1 6 0 - 0 2 B - N 2 1 7 B - K 5
P-05 1 8 0 - B4 BxB 1 9 Nx B as i n S ha m kov i ch-S n1 ede revac , Pol an i ca Zdroj 1 9 70 .
A n o the r log i cal l i ne i s 1 1 . . . O- R4 1 2 B - N 2 B - 0 R 6 1 3 Bx B Ox O B 1 4 R - K 1 B - N5
1 5 BxN N x B 1 6 0 - 0 2 \\ri th eq u a l i ty . K ara k l aj ic- Petros i a n . Bel gra de 1 95 6 . A fter
1 2 B -N2 Q -N3 g a m e B on da revsky -A lator tsev , K iev 1 940 . \\'ent 13 NxN Nor
a

does B l ac k h ave p roblem s after 1 3 B - K 2 Q R - 0 1 1 4 P - K R 3 B - R 4 15 0-02 K R ­

K 1 . G ip sl i s- K orchn oy . 38 th U S S R Cha m p i on s hi p 1 9 7 0 . The l i nes 1 3 P - O R 4
O R- 0 1 1 4 0 - 02 . K r n ic- Lekovic . Y u gosl avi a 1 9 63 , a nd 1 3 P- 0 R 4 B - K4 1 4 N x N
N x N 1 5 Bx B Nx B 1 6 B - K 2 NxN c h . K rni c - U hhnann , V rsac 1 9 7 3 , also ten d to
lead to eq u a l ity . 1 3 . . . PxN 1 4 B-Q3 . Whi te has a sou nd pos i tion \\' hile B l ack has
active pi eces . The cha nces a re e q u a l .

N O\\· l et u s re turn to the 8th g a tn e of the K arpov- K orchnoy m a tch . 1 974 .

�
g
i i

249
 The plan behind 11 P-B3 was developed to a considerable degree during my
match with Korchnoy. The idea had already occurred in Matanovic-Portisch,
Yugoslavia-Hungary Match 1959. Black did not defend very accurately in that
game and after 11 .. . B-KN5 12 Q-R4 NxN? 13 NxN N-N3 14 P-KB4 P-QR3 15
B-Q3 he stood worse. At the time it was suggested that Black could keep things
level by 12 . . . Q-Q2.

11 • • • B-KNS

Korchnoy pl ayed 1 1 ... Q-Q 2, the move recommended by theory, only in the
16th game, and after 12 B-K3 P-QR3 13 B-K2 NxN 14 QxN N-B3 15 Q -Q2 KR­
K1 16 QR-Q 1 QR-Q 1 17 B-N6 B-B2 18 BxB QxB 19 KR-Kl P-R3 20 P-KR3
White had only a minute advantage .

12 Q-R4

This position h as certain speci al features. In principle Bl ack h as two fine

bishops which harrass White, and the exchange of either pair of bishops gives
White 's pieces the chance to find new and firmer footholds. On the other hand
Bl ack's knights are more static, being restricted to certain squares. The course
of the match did not resolve the problem of the isolated pawn which stands in
the midst of all these developing events. Is it a strength or a weakness?
The side with the isol ated pawn alw ays has the problem of where to put his
queen. It can hardly stay in the centre since there are no handy squares there in
view of the pl ay on the open files. Hence it has to be put somewhere further
afield, but on the best possible square. White's QR4 is a reason able citadel for
the most powerful piece.

I preferred the modest 12 B-K2 only in the 4th game of my match with
Korchnoy. There followed 12 ...R-K1 13 R-K1 P-QR3 14 B-KN5 P-KR3 15 B­
R4 Q-N3 16 Q-N3 B-QB4 17 Qx Q BxQ 18 B-Q3 K-Bl when the ending is still
somewhat in White's favour.

12 • • • B -R4
13 R-Kl

Naturally not 13 BxN PxB 14 NxP NxN 15 QxN BxN which can hardly appeal
to White.

Two other moves were tried during the K arpov-Korchnoy match :

250
(a ) 1 3 8-K3 , as in the 1 2th game , fin ally produced a dra\\' after a hard fight :
1 3 . . . Q-B2 1 4 P-KR3 N -R4! 1 5 8-Q3 Or 1 5 QR-Q l P-QR3 16 B-Q3 N-B5 17 B­
B 1 ; or 15 ... N-B5 16 BxN QxB 17 QxQ P><Q 1 8 N-QN5 BxN 19 PxB B-N l 20 R­
Q7 \Vhen Black prob ably stands no \\'Orse. 15 . . . N -85 1 6 N -N5 Q- Q2! 17 8xN
Px8 18 KR-Q 1 N -84! 1 8... P-QR3 is \veake r : 19 RxB QxN 20 QxQ P><Q 21 N­
Q4. 19 Qx8P 8xN 20 Px8 Nx8 21 PxN QxP etc.

(b ) 13 B-Q3 P-KR3 Naturally not 13... B-N3 14 BxB RPxB 15 N- KNS when the
threatened Q-R4 will give White a powerful attack. However, 13.. . B-B4! ? as in
the 14th m atch game is quite feasible: 14 R- K 1 P-KR3 15 B - K3 B -QN3 16 P­
KR3 Q -Q3 17 B- K 2 KR- K 1 1 8 QR-Q 1 Q-B3 and Black h as solved his opening
problems satisfactorily. 14 8-K3 P-QR3 15 K R-K 1 There is also the interesting
15 QR- K l R- K l (more accurate than 15...Q-B 2 16 P- KR3 N-R4 17 Q-B2 N-B5
1 8 B-QBl when White has some advantage ). 16 P- KR3 R-B l 17 Q-B 2 B-N1!
and Black has achieved full equality , Matulovic- Vaganian, K ragujevac 1974.
1 5 . . . Q-82 16 P-KR3 N -R4! a frequently seen move by means of which Black
tries to drive the ene my pieces from their strong pos ts. ·17 N-R4 Black also ge ts
full equality af ter 17 QR-Q l N-BS 1 8 B-QB t P-QN4 19 Q-B 2 B-B4. 17 . . N-85.

18 Q -82 After 18 N (Q4)-BS NxP 19 Q-Q 4 'NxN 20 NxN B- K4 Black retains the
ex tra pawn. 18 . . NxB and Bl ack has an easy game as in the l Oth game of the
.

ma tch.

13 . . . Q-B2
14 P-KR3 B-N3

25 1
 15 B-NS P-QR3

Deciding to force some clarification of the position. Black has to keep nagging
at the enemy bishops, since otherwise he cannot develop his major pieces. More­
over, White must always keep an eye on exchanges which might prove unfavour­
able to him.

16 B-KB l P-R3
17 BxN NxB
18 QR- Q l

By keeping a firm blockade on Q4 White maintains the better position.

18 • • • N-B3
19 B-Q3 B-R4!

The straightforward 19 ...NxN 20 QxN B-QB4 21 Q- KN4 (not 21 QxQP ? Q R-Q 1

winning ) ; or 20 NxN BxB 21 RxB Q-BS 22 Q-B2, would leave White with the
advantage, whereas now Black stands no worse.

20 P-KN4 B-N3
21 Q-B2!

Naturally 21 BxB PxB 22 N-K 6 Q-B2 23 NxR QxN(B6) w as considered by

both pl ayers and assessed as being in Black's favour in view of the threats of
... RxN and ...QxRP. On the other hand the advance 2 1 N-BS would be met by
21 ... BxN 22 BxB QR-Q 1 or 22... B-B4 when the bishop at KBS may well prove to
have no great role to pl ay.

21 • • • BxB
22 QxB QR-Ql
23 R-K2 KR-Kl

Black cannot abandon the K-file, e.g. 23 ...B-B4 24 QR- K 1 R-Q3 25 R- K8

and B lack's defence is difficult.

24 N-BS

After 24 RxRch RxR 25 NxN pxN 26 QxRP P- KB4, or 26 .. . B-B4 27 N-Q4 (27

25 2
K - N2 P- B4 ) 27 . . . R- K3 Black m ight well seize the i ni t i ative on the K - si de .

24 ... RxR
25 QxR B -B5
26 R-Kl P-KN3

26 . . . K- B l al so looks sati sfac tory , avoi ding si mpl i fica tion .

27 N-K7ch NxN
28 QxN Q - N3
29 K-N2 K-N2
30 R-Ql B- Q3

Not 30 . . . R-Q3 3 1 R-Q4 whe n 32 R-Q N4 will \vi n a paw n .

31 Q -K2 B-B2
32 R-Q3 Q-K3
33 Q-Ql B-N3
34 R -Q2 Q-K 5
35 P-N3

This threatens P- 84 and i n vi tes Bl ack to play 35 . . . R- Q B l ? 36 R- K2 Q- KBS

37 QxP RxP 38 QxN P . \vhile 3S . . . B- R4 36 R�Q4 Q- K2 37 P-N4 i s equally bad
for Black .

253
 35 • • • R-Q3

After 3S . . . P- KN4 36 R-K2 (36 P- B4 is risky because of 36 . . . P-KR4 ! when

both 37 pxp P-NS 38 pxp QxPch and 37 RxP pxp 38 RxPch K-B3 are cata -
strophic for White) 36 . . . Q-KBS 37 R-KS P-QS 38 Q -Q3 , the weakness of
Black's KB4 shows up .

36 P-B4 P-KR4

36 . . . P-QS is dangerous because of 37 P-N4. Now, however , after 37 P-NS P­

QS 38 P- N4 B-Q 1 , Black is all right .
'

37 RxP RxR
38 QxR QxQ
39 PxQ PxP
40 PxP K -B3
41 K-Bl

The endgame is drawish. There fol lowed

41 • • • K-K2
42 N-Q2 B-B2
43 N-K4 P- B4
44 PxP PxP
45 N-BS K-Q3
46 NxPch KxP
47 P-N4 K-B,S
48 N-BS B-N3
49 NxP K-N4
50 N-B5 KxP
51 N-N3 K-R6
52 Drawn

Su mming up: The moves 10 B-NS, 10 N( N3)-Q4 , 10 BxN and in particular 10

P- B3 , lead, in modern practice , to a compl icated manoeuvring game with a lot
of pieces on the board . Hundreds of games have been pl ayed \vith these moves
and the majority of them have revolved around one and the same subject - The
fate of the isolated QP.

2 54
 GAM E SS 15 P-QB4 QR -Q 1
16 Q-N4
White : Stein
Black : Uhlmann Provoking Blac k 's next move , but
1 6 Q - K 2 \\' as safer , with equal ch an­
M os cow 19 7 1 ces .

1 P -K4 P-K3 16 P -84!

2 P -Q4 P -Q4 17 Q -K2 P -85!
3 N-Q2 P -QB4
4 KN -83 N -QB3 A far -sighted pawn sacri fi ce .
5 B-N5 PXKP
6 NxP B-Q2 18 B-Q2 Q-KN4
7 B-K3 19 QxPch K- R 1
20 Q-R3!

The bes t defence . Not 20 P - Q5

NxP 21 PxN RxP ! \\'i th deadly
threats .

20 ... P-KR3

Not 20 . . . N -N3 21 BxN Qx B 22 P­

Q5 B - Q 2 23 Q - R4 and White is
clearly be tter .

21 8-83

7 Q-R4ch Agai n 21 P-Q 5 fails to 21 . . . NxP 22

8 N-83 pxp PxN RxP 23 R-N3 K R -Q 1 , \\'i n n i ng
9 Nx P B-N5 back the piece with advantage .
10 0-0 BXN
11 PxB KN -K2 21 B-Q2!
12 R -QN 1 0-0 22 Q -83 B-N5!
13 B-Q3 NxN 23 Q-K4

A good al ternative is 13 . . . P - K4 1 4 Not 23 QxNP N -Q4 ! ! 24 PxN B - B 6

N-NS B- K3 1 5 N - Q 6 P-Q N 3 \vi th 25 P-N3 P><P 26 BPx P Q - K 6ch 2 7 R -
corn pi ica tions . 8 2 Bx P 2 8 Q - N 2 Qx B followed by
pl aci ng the queen on the l ong , light ­
14 PxN 8-83 sq u ared di agonal .

255
 23 B-84 There is no defence to the double
24 Q-K2 QR-K 1!? threat of ... RxB and ...NxBPch .

More accurate is 24... BxB 25 QxB 32 ... R-Q6

P-B6 26 P-N3 N-N3 ! 27 K-R l Q-NS
28 KR-K 1 N-BS! when White can Even simpler is 32... NxBPch 33
choose between 29 Q-K4 Q-R6 30 RXN RXR 34 P-Q7 Q-N8ch 35 Q-K 1
QxBP N-Q4! ! wi nning , or 29 Q-B 1 QxQch 36 BxQ R-Q 6 winning.
N-K7 30 B-R 1 Q-B 1 ! winning back.
the pawn with the better game. If 33 Q-K2
White defends by 28 R-KN 1 then
28... R-B4! 29 RXP R-K R4 30 Q-B1 33 Q-QB2 is the best chance.
(if 30 R-NS N-K4! 3 1 Q-B 1 RxRPch!
32 KxR Q-R4ch 33 Q-R3 N-NSch 33 RxB
followed by mate) 30.. . R-R6 3 1 R-NS 34 P-Q7 Q-N3ch??
R-K1 and White is cotnpletely tied
up , since both P-BS and P-QS fail to A gross time-trouble blunder
.. .Q -R4, whi le if 32 Q-N 1 N-BS 33 which loses a well-played game.
PxN RxPch 34 KxR Q-RS mate , or 34...R-Q6 35 Q-K8ch K-R2 36 P-N4
32 Q-B 1 R-K7 33 B-K l QxQP wi th a PxPe.p. 37 P-KR3 P-N7 would have
great advantage for Black. won easily .

25 Q-Q 2?! 35 P-85! ! Resigns

White chooses no t to pl ay 25 BxB The QP cannot be stopped.

NxB 26 Q-B3 N-RS 27 Q-R3 P-B6 28
P-N3 N- N7 with unclear compl ica­
tions.
GAtv1E 56
25 N-N3
White: Parma
26 R-N5 N-R5
Black: Korchnoy
27 P-83 P-R3
28 R-Q5 R-K6
Moscow 197 1
29 BxB R(B 1)xB
30 RxR Qx R
1 P-K4 P-K3
31 P-Q5?
2 P-Q4 P-Q4
3 N-Q2 P-QB4
3 1 B-R 1 was essential. 4 PxQP KPxQP
5 B-NSch B-Q2
31 Q-N3! 6 Q-K2ch B-K2
32 P-Q6 7 pxp N-KB3

256
 8 N-N3! 0 -0 posted bi shop on Q4 .
9 8-K3 R-K l
10 N-83! P -Q R3 21 PxQ
11 8x B QNx 8 22 R-8 1 N -K 1
12 0-0 Nx P n R -84!
13 KR -K 1 ? !
Again the best move . as 23 . . . P ­
QN4 \vould b e dubious bec au se o f 24
R -B 8 N -Q 3 25 R - R 8 with a strong at­
tac k .

23 N -N3!
24 BxN Rx B
25 RxP

White 's active defence has all owed

him to win b ack his pa\\'n , but no
more .

25 N -Q3
13 Q-82 26 R-Q4 P -N3
14 KN -Q4 N -R5 27 K -8 1 R -83
15 N- K85! 8- B 1 ! 28 R-Q2 P -84
29 N -Q4 R -88ch
15 . . . Nx P ? fai l s to 1 6 N x P KxN 1 7 30 R-Q 1 Rx Rch
B - Q4 N -BS 18 Q -N4ch followed by 1 9 31 Nx R 8-N2
Q - N S with great advantage . 32 N -82

16 Q-83 Qx8P 32 N -K6 is better .

17 B-Q4 RxRch
18 Rx R R -K 1 32 K-82
33 K- K2 K-K3
A fi ne defe ns ive n1ove giving White 34 P-84 N -K5
no ti me for N - R 6ch . 35 N ( 82) -K3 P -KR4
36 P-KN3 8-83
19 R-KB1 R -K3 37 K-Q3 P-QN4
20 N -K3 Q-K5 38 P-QN4 P-RS
21 Qx Q 39 P-N4! 8-K2
40 PxPch px p
Thi s offers the bes t dra\vi ng chan- 41 N-Q82 8-Q3
ces in vi ew of the Q B -fi le a nd well 42 N -Q4ch K-83

257
 43 N-K3 BxBP As expected, Black will win back
44 N(K3)xP Drawn the pawn, but Smyslov has a subtle
plan in mind.

GA ME 57 16 P-QB4! px p

White: Smyslov Parrying the threat of 1 7 pxp

Black: Uhlmann NxQP 18 BxKRPch . Black might
have tried 16 NxP 1 7 pxp (not 1 7
. . .

Cienfuegos 1973 NxN BxN 1 8 pxp BxB 19 px a Q-K4

20 P-K4 NxQP) 17. . NxN in the hope
.

1 P-K4 P-K3 of exploiting the various p awn

2 P-Q4 P-Q4 weaknesses, but the white position
3 N-Q2 P-QB4 contains dynamic possibilities .
4 PxQP KPxQP
5 B-NSch N-B3 17 BxBP NxP
6 Q-K2ch B-K2
7 KN-83 N-B3 Uhlmann had been aiming for this
8 px p 0-0 position but failed to notice the
9 N-N3 R-K1 following ' 'petite corn binaison'' .
10 B-K3 P-QR3
11 B-Q3 B-N5
12 0-0-0

1£?
�

18 BxBPch

Strangely enough, this is the third

12 N-K4 time that Smyslov has surprised
13 P-KR3 BxN Uhlmann with a sacrifice on the KB2
14 PxB Q-82 square (Moscow 1956 and Moscow
15 K-Nl N(K4)-Q2 197 1 were the two previous oc-

258
cas io n s ) . 30 Q-K3 K-B 2
31 P -R3 R-Q6?
18 KxB
19 BxN P-QN4 Of co urse 3 l . . . R -Q 8 ? ? fai l s to 3 2
Q -N3ch bu t 3 l . . . P- R 5 ! \vo ul d s t i l l
N o t 1 9 . . . BX B 20 Q - B 4c h K - B 1 2 1 give B l ack a ch ance t o se t up a s tiff
N x B a n d B lack i s in gre a t tro ub l e . res i st ance .

20 BxB RxB 32 NxN PxN

21 Q-Q 3 R-Q2 33 Q- R6 Q-84
22 Q-85 Q R -Q I 34 K-R l R -Q 2
35 R-KN 1 P -R 5
B l ack need no t avo id si mp l ifica­ 36 Q-N 7ch K-1{ 3
tio n , in vi e\\' of W hite ' s do ubled 37 Q -N 8ch K-Q3
p a'"'·ns , so it was be tter to pl ay a t o nce 38 R-Q l ch K-B2
22 . . . Rx Rch 23 R x R R - K 1 \\i th goo d 39 R -Q B 1ch K-N2
defe n sive ch ances .
O r 3 9 . . . K-Q3 40 Q - K B 8ch K - K 4
23 R -Q B I ! Q-N3 4 1 Q - B5ch R - Q4 42 R - K l ch K - BS 43
24 KR-Kl R-Q4 Q - K 3 mate . Or 39 . . . K - N 3 40 Q­
N 8ch R - N 2 4 1 Q - Q6ch K - R 2 42 R­
Aft er 24 .. . Qx P Whit e h a s 2 5 Q­ B6 etc .
K6ch and 26 QxRP .
40 Q-QB8ch I{-R 2
25 Q-82 Q -Q 3 41 R-B7ch Resigns
26 N -85 R -K l

The t hreat of 27 N - N 7 co ul d n ot be G A M E 58
preven ted by 26 . . . R - Q B 1 or 26 . . . R ­
Q7 . White: Bebchuk
Bl ac k: Bronstein

27 Rx R Kx R Mosco\v Teaxn C h a tn p i o n s h i p 19 74
28 N-K4 Q-Q2
29 Q -N3 P-Q R4 Notes by Bro n stein

If 2 9 . . . Q- B4 S n1yslov gives 3 0 K - I P-K4 P -1(3

R l Nx N 3 1 R - K l K - B l 32 Px N Qx B P 2 P-Q4 P-Q4
33 Q-N4 ch Q - B4 34 R - K B 1 ch 3 N-Q 2 P-Q B4
fo l lo \l.'e d by 35 Q - N 3 \Vi th a deci sive 4 PxQ P K P><P
att ack . 5 KN-B3 P- B 5

259
 P-K R4 29 P-BS PxB 30 P><N Q-N4 31
P-B4 QxNP 32 QxQ PxQ 33 RxP
RxR 34 BxR R-Q1 35 B-RS R-Q 6 36
P -N4 R-Q5 37 P-QB5 RxBP 38 P-N5
R-K5 39 P-B6 K -B2 40 B -B7 R-QB5
4 1 P-N6 pxp 42 BXP RxP 43 B-B2 K­
K3 44 Resigns .
The reader may well ask whether it
was really necessary to play ...B-QN5
since the bishop had to retreat to Q3
anyway. What can I say? White
changed his plan and Bl ack had to
change as well. Such is chess. The
person whose mind is more flexible
So far Black has a perfectly wins.
normal position but who knows what
striking plan they'll dream up next? 8 B-NSch
By playing 5 . ..P-B5 Black deprives
White's knight of the square Q4 and The natural 8 B -Q3 is simpler and
sets his opponent some unusual better.
problems.
8 B-Q2
6 P-QN3 px p 9 Q-K2ch
7 RPxP B-QNS
This is altogether useless. Now
The move 7 ...B-QN5 had not been Black not only finishes his develop ­
played before. Why did I play this ment successfully but also he is able
way? I had in mi nd my game against to harass the white queen \vith his
Lebedev from the Moscow Cham­ rook from K1.
pionship 1953. In that game I pl ayed
7 ...B-Q3 , but in view of the threat of 9 N-K2
P-QB4 and then P-QN4-QN5 I had 10 0-0
to waste a tempo by playing B-QN5.
Here is the g ame: 8 B-Q3 N-K2 9 In all prob ability my opponent
0-0 0-0 10 R-K1 QN-B3 11 P-B4 wanted to play 10 BxBch QXB 11 N­
B-QN5 12 Q-B2 N-N3 13 B-N2 B -K3 K5 but then realized that after 11 .. .
14 QR-Q1 Q-B3 15 R-K3 B-Q3 16 Q­ Q-K3 12 Q-N5ch QN·B3 13 QxNP
B3 N-B5 17 N-K5 B-KB4 18 P-N3 0-0 Black has too dangerous an
BxN 19 PxB Q-R3 20 BxB P-QS 21 Q­ attack for his pawn.
B2 PxR 22 PxN PxN 23 Q-K4 QR-Q1
24 B-B3 Q-R4 25 P-B3 N-K2 26 B­ 10 0-0
KN4 Q-R5 27 QxNP N-N3 28 Q-K4 11 B-R3

260
 N o vari ations can prove the clai m h ave taken the risk and pi ayed 1 5 P­
th at it would h ave been be ttc:- to N 3 im tnediately . Bl ac k coul d have
exch ange white-squared bishop s , p l ayed 1 5 . . . P- Q R3 1 6 B- R4 Q - K 2 1 7
b ut intui tion and experience show K R- R 1 Q R- B 1 , keepi ng the tension
that this is so . My opponent did not up but \\'ithout any clear break ­
expect the bi shop on Q2 to refuse through to the king .
exchange , since according to the After a long pause White c ame to a
u sual reckoning that bi shop is bad differe nt decision : to re lieve the paw n
whereas the bishop on QNS is good . tension in the cen tre . The drawb ack
However, the excellent working of thi s pl an is in his spoiled paw n
d i agon al QB 1 - K R 6 and the h alf open formation .
character of the whol e position
j ustifies the exception al asse rtion 15 pxp N -NS
th at the b ishop on Q 2 is good while
th at on Q NS is bad . These are j ust A fter lS . . . N - BS 16 PxN NxQ 1 7
minor details which do not usually PxB R - K2 Black i s left with n o minor
.
influence the outcome of the ga me . pteces .

11 8(NS)x8 16 Q-84
12 Rx8 QN-83
13 P- 84

This is a committ al move . If White

wanted to pl ay for a dra\\' he coul d
h ave p l ayed 1 3 P - B3 an d preven ted
the in trusion of the knight on KBS by
P- K N3 ; if Bl ack ' s bi shop h ad t urned
u p on K R6 then he nee dn 't h ave been
ash amed of exch anging it by p l aying
B- B 1 . An earl y draw woul d have
been the m ost l i ke ly result .

13 R-K I
14 Q-Q3 N-N3 16 P-Q R4

All of a su dde n White is faced with It i s hard to believe tha t this si n1p l e
cert ai n d i ffi cul ties . It is a pity to take p a \\'n move at the ve ry leas t assures
the kni ght on Q B6 \vith the b ishop : Bla ck ' s stra tegi c victory and n1 ay
he may h ave to pl ay P- K N 3 and then eve n win the g ame al toge ther . I t
the absence of a \vhite-squ ared th reatens to trap the queen , nor does
bishop could be cos tly . He should there see tn to be an adeq u ate de fence

26 1
against the intrusion of the black
WJ
knight on N3 , which is preparing to �
fork the queen and the rook from
QB6 . ( 1 7 R-Q 1 N-BS 18 Q- KB1 BXB
1 9 QxB N-K7ch 20 K- R l N -B6) . At
this critical moment, instead of
defending passively ( 1 7 BxB QxB 1 8
R-Q1 N-BS 19 Q- KB l P-QN4) ,
White allows a smart finish.

17 R-Q 1 N -B5
"'

18 BXB QxB
19 N-K5 RXN!
20 P><R Q-N5
7 B>< Nch PxB
21 Q-KBl N-R6ch
8 0-0 B-Q3
22 K-R l QxR
23 QXQ NxBPch
24 K-N 1 NxQ
White h as the advantage also after
both 8 . . . B·K3 9 R-K1 N-B3 10 N-NS
pxp 1 1 QN-B3! Lilie nthal-Trupan ,
White m ade another move , 26 P­
U SSR 1949 ; and 8 . . . P><P 9 R-Klch
Q6, out of sheer inertia , but then
B -K2 10 N-N3 K- B 1 1 1 QxP B-Q2 12
resigned .
B-Q2 R- N1 13 B- RS Q-B1 14 B-N6 .
Keres-Koberl , Sczawno Zdroj 1950 .

9 pxp BxBP
10 N-N3 B-Q3

A fter 10 . . . B-N3 1 1 B - K 3 BxB 12

GAME 59 R - K 1 N-K2 13 R x B White stood
better in Boleslavsky- Rossetto ,
White: Gligoric Helsinki Olympiad 1 95 2 .
Blacl<: Stahlberg
11 Q-Q4! P-B3
3rd Match Game 1949
If 1 1 . . . N-B3 both 1 2 B-NS and 1 2
1 P-K4 P-K3 R -K l ch are good for White .
2 P-Q4 P-Q4
3 N-Q2 P-QB4 12 B-84 N-K2
4 P>< QP KP><P 13 KR-Kl 0-0
5 KN-83 N-QB3 14 B><B QxB
6 8-N5 P-Q R3 ?! 15 Q -85! Q'X Q

262
 16 NxQ R - R2 F ixing the Q RP a n d the Q B !
17 P-Q N4
26 N-85
1 7 N - Q4 N - B4 would only e ase 27 R-K l N -K4
B l ac k ' s defenc e . 28 P-N3 R -K2
29 R-K2 R-B2
17 N-84 30 P-K B4 pxp
18 N -N3 R-Q82 31 px p N-N3
19 P-83 K-82 32 K-N3 N-K2
20 N ( 83) -Q4 N-Q3 33 R-K 1 R-R2
34 K-82
No w the exch ange o f kni ght s
b rings Black no relief : after 20 . . . NxN
If 34 K-R4 N - N3ch .
21 NxN P- QB4 22 N - N3 , Blac k ' s QP
is weak .
34 ... R -R l ?
21 N-Q 85 R-K 1
He should pl ay 34 . . . K - N 3 .
22 RxR Kx R
23 P-83!
35 N-R4 B- R6
A fte r the i m medi ate 23 P-Q R4 36 R-K3 B- Q2
Bl ack can sac ri fice a pa"'· n by 23 . . . N ­ 37 N-N6 R -R2
K S 2 4 R- K l K- B 2 25 N x N PxN 26 38 R-K l
RxP P- Q B4 \\'ith cou nterpl ay .
Not 38 RxNch KxR 39 N - B8ch
23 K-82 BxN 40 NxPch K-Q3 41 NxR B-Q2
24 K-82 P-N4 trapping the knight .
25 P-Q R4 P-KR4
26 P-R5 38 N-84
39 NxN

Bl ack would h ave ac tive pl ay after

'/'
� 39 NxB NxN 40 N - N 8 N - B4 41 NxBP
·0
� / / R- B2 .

�i
��
39 BxN
40 N - R4 8-Q6
41 N-85 8-N4

A fter 41 . . . B - B4 42 P- R4 the \vh i tc

k ing wou l d l ater go to Q4 \\' i n n ing .

42 P- 85 R-Rl

263
 If 42 . . . R- B2 43 N-K6 and 44 R­ 1 P-K4 P-,K3
KN 1 . 2 P-Q4 P-Q4
3 N-Q2 P-QB4
43 N-N7! K-N2 . 4 KN-83 N-QB3
44 R-KNlch K-B2 5 PXQP KP><P
45 R-Kl K-N2 6 B-NS B-Q3
46 N-Q6 P-RS 7 pxp Q-K2ch
47 K-B3 R-Ql
48 R-K7ch K-Nl
49 R-K6 K-N2
so K-K3

The safest method, as Black has

swindling chances after 50 N-K8ch
K-B2 51 NxP P-Q5 , and 50 K-N4 ? P­
Q5 ! 5 1 P><P B-B5! is good for Black .

50 B-RS
51 K-Q4 R-KNl
52 K-BS K-R2
53 N-K8! R-N7
54 NxPch K-N2
55 N-Q7! R-KB7 8 Q-K2 BXBP
56 P-B6ch K-N3 9 N-N3 QxQch
57 N-KSch K-R4 10 KXQ! B-N3
11 B-K3 N-B3?!
On 57 . . . K-B4 , 58 K-Q6 wins .
A risky move . Black avoids
58 P-B7 P-Q5 weakening Q B4 at the cost of
59 R-K8 Resigns doubled pawns .

12 B><B PxB
13 N (B3) -Q4 B-Q2
GAME 60 14 KR-Kl 0-0-0
15 P-KB3 N-Kl
White: Balashov
Black: V aganian An interesting manoeuvre . The
knight is transferred to Q3, where it
39th USSR Championship can control the important squares
Leningrad 1971 QB5 and KB4 .
Balashov plays to exchange his
Notes by Razuvayev active knight on Q4 for the knight on

264
Q3 ; simplification favours White 24 B><N pxo
because of the \\'eaknesses in B l ack's 25 P-K R4 R-K4?
p awn forma tion .
The begin ning o f all his tro uble s .
16 B-Q3 N -Q3 The rook advances t o the fourth a n d
17 K- Q2 KR-K 1 Bl ac k tries , quite unnecess arily , t o
keep i t there for the rest of the g ame .
1 7 . . . N - BSch ts of course b ad , Vaganian probab ly over-estim ated
because o f 1 8 K - B3 an d Black is his position . He shoul d have s too d
forced to retreat . firm since White could n ot create any
real threats .
18 N-NS NxN
19 BxN K-B2 26 R-K 1 R-Q R4
20 B-Q3 K-Q3 27 P-R3 R-KR4
21 RxR RxR 28 P-KN3 P-R3
22 P-83 29 R-K2 R-Q B4

An interesting moment . After the 29 . . . P- K N4 is bad because of 30

move played V ag an i an m an ages to R- R2 px p 3 1 P - K N4 . On the next
exchange his knigh t for the bishop move this adv ance would h ave been
and at the s ame time to get rid of his b ad becau se of 3 1 B Px P . after \\'hic h
weak paw n on Q4 . 22 P- K B4 woul d Whi te h as an advanced p assed p a\\'n
h ave bee n be tter. H ere are so me on the K R -file .
con tinuations : 22 . . . P-QS 23 P-BS
( preve nting the bishop 's transfer to 30 P-84 R-Q R4
Q4) 23 . . . K-Q4 24 R - K B 1 P - B 3 25 R ­ 31 K-K3 P-R4
B4 R - K4 2 6 P-Q R 3 ! and Bl ac k is 32 R-Q2 K-K2
hard put to defend against the threat
of 27 NxP NxN 28 P-B4ch K - B4 29 P­
Q N4ch an d so on . Or 24 . . . N - K4 25
R- B4 N x B 26 RxPch K - B3 27 RxN !
and 27 . . . Bx P is not possible becau se
of 28 N -Q4ch . An d if 2 3 . . . K - K4 24
P-Q R3 K - B3 , t he n 25 R - K B l R - K4
26 R - B4 and Blac k is in diffi cul ties .
For example , 26 . . . K- N4 27 P - N3
BxP 28 P - K R4ch K- N3 29 RxB Rx R
3 0 P- N4 and White win s .

22 N-K4
23 N -Q4 N-BSch J

265
 33 N-B2! 40 P-R4 P-N3
41 R-K8 R-B2
A strong move which sets Black a
lot of problems . The knight is· going This was the sealed move.
to K3 , where it will be very active. Balashov played the endg ame so
33 . . . R-QN4 would have been best accurately that it could serve as an
now : for example , 34 N - N4 B-K3 35 instruction al text . The transfer of the
K-Q4 P-83 and Black can hold the rook to Q N5 is specially noteworthy .
position . 33 K- K4 B-B3ch 34 NxBch
FxN 35 R-Q4 P-K B4ch 36 K- K3 P­ 42 R-KS R -B3
QN4 would not h av� g ained 43 R-QN5! K-K3
anything : the game is level. 44 K-K4 K-B3
45 P-BS P-N4
33 B-K3 46 R-QS pxp
34 K-K4! B-B4ch 47 pxp K-K2
35 K-Q4 BxN 48 K-KS!

Vaganian puts his hope in a rook An excellent move . The white king
ending, but in vain . However , it's is working very h ard in this g ame .
now hard to find a good recom ­ Black is obliged to weaken his second
mendation . For example : 35 . . . B-K3 rank.
36 N - K3 R- R l 37 K- K4 and Bl ack .
has difficulty in defending against P­ 48 P-B3ch
BS. Or 36 . . . R-Q B4 37 P-85 BxP 38 49 K-Q4 R -Bl
NxP R-83 39 N-K3 B-K3 (even worse 50 R-NS R-B3
is 39 . . . R-Q3ch 40 N-QSch K-Q2 4 1 51 P-RS! px p
K-B4 and White wins) 40 P-B4 with 52 RxNPch K-B l
advantage to White . 53 K-QS! R-Bl
54 R-NS R-Kl
36 RxB R-Q B4 55 KxP R-KSch
37 R-K2ch K-B3 56 K-QS RxP
38 R-K8 57 RxP K-N2
58 P-N4 R-R8
But not 38 R - K5 ? RxR 39 PxRch 59 P-N5 P-R5
K-B4 40 KX P K-NS 4 1 K-N5 KXP 42 60 P-B4 P-R6
KxP KxP 43 KxP K-N6 44 P -84 P­ 61 R-R2 P-R7
RS 45 P-B5 P - R6 46 P-B6 P- R7 47 P­ 62 K-B5 K-B2
B7 P-R8=Qch . 63 R-K2 K-Bl
64 P-N6 K-N2
38 R-Q N4 65 R-QN2 Resigns
39 R-K2 R-QB4

266
 GA ME 6 1 pawn ai ms eithe r to gain the i ni t i ­
ative o n the K-side o r to advance the
White: Karpov i sol at�d paw n .
Black : Kuzmin Sin ce B l ack h as n o attack here he
has only one p l an : to advance the
Leni ngrad l nterzon al 1 973 QP . If he does not achieve th is Whi te
will h ave a clear advantage .
Notes by Karpov

1 P-K4 P-K3
2 P-Q4 P-Q4
3 N-Q2 P-Q B4
4 PxQP KP><P
5 KN-B3 N-QB3
6 B-N5 B-Q3 Q
7 pxp BXBP ....:;:_
8
9
0-0
N-N3
KN-K2
B-Q3
,- (� fl
10 B-N5 0-0 fl fl
11 B-K R4 Q-B2 �
A was ted tempo . H e shou l d have
st arted the b attle for the cen tral 16 N -N3
s qu ares by pl aying 1 1 . . . B- K NS . I was
goi ng to pl ay 1 2 B - N 3 BxB 1 3 R PxB 1 6 . . . P-Q5 \\'Ould . of cou rse , have
Q - N3 14 B-Q3 , thre atening 15 been fol lowed by 1 7 P-B4 .
Bx RPch Kx B 16 N - N5ch , and after
14 . . . N- B4 1 5 BXN BXB 16 P-Q B 3 17 Q- B2 BXN
White has a slight ad vantage . 18 PXB R-Q3

If 18 . . . P -05 19 P- K B4 ( 1 9 P-Q B4 ?
12 B-N3
N- N5) 1 9 . . . PxP 20 px p the n the
\vhi te pa\vn s l i m i t the action o f
It was still better to play 1 2 . . . B­ Bl ack ' s knights on both sides o f the
K N5 . board .

13 RPxB B- N5 19 P-K B4 KR-Q l

14 R-K 1 QR-Q l 20 P-R3 !
15 P-B3 Q-N3
16 B-Q3 N ow the adva nce of the Q P i s ou t
of the question . Whi te h as a clear
The p l ayer who h as the i sol ated p lan : the knigh t goes to K B3 , t he

267
rooks double on the K-file and then , N2 34 N-R4 is quite b ad , as is 3 1 . . . N­
according to circumstances , the KBP Q2 32 BxP pxa 33 QxP, with an
or the Q-side pawns m arch up . Black irresistible attack for White .
tries to create some counterplay by
advancing his KRP , but he does not 32 BxN P><B
succeed . 33 QxP K-N2
34 P-N5 N-R4
20 P-KR4 35 Q-K7 !
21 K-N2 P-R5
22 R-K2 N -Bl This forces a won ending , since
23 N-Q2 R-R3 35 . . . QxQBP is bad because of 36 R­
'

24 N-B3 K3 Q-N7 37 R-KS .

What can Black do about his 35 QXQ

KRP? H e cannot defend it , while if 36 RXQ R-Q6
he advances it , it will be encirled. 37 R-B7 N-N6
Exchanging it leads to the opening of 38 K-N4 R-KB1
lines, which is dange rous for Black . 39 R (K1) -K7 Resigns

24 pxp There is no defence against the

25 pxp N-Q2 thre atened 40 RxBPch RxR 41
26 QR-Kl K-Bl RxRch KxR 42 N KSch - .

There does not seem to be any

other way of defending the firs t rank.
GAME 62
The white pawns now march ahead
and corn pletely disorganize the inter­
White: Karpov
action of Black's pieces .
Black: Ublmann

27 P-KN4 Q-B2 Madrid 1973

28 P-N5 R-KRl
29 K-N3 N-B4 1 P-K4 P-K3
30 B-85 P-KN3 2 P-Q4 P-Q4
31 P-N4! 3 N-Q2 P-QB4
4 pxQp KP><P
Before the bishop retreats the 5 KN-B3 N-QB3
knight has to go from B4 . 6 B-NS B-Q3
7 pxp BxBP
31 ... N-K5ch 8 0-0 N-K2
9 N-N3 B-Q3
3 1 . . . pxB 32 pxN Q-Q2 33 R- R2 K- 10 B-N5 0-0

268
 11 B-KR4 B-K N5 I t was m ore exact to play . . . Q R- B l
12 B-K2 B-R4 fi rs t .

23 QxN QXQ
24 P>< Q Q R-B1

White ' s position is s tronger th an it

appears at firs t si gh t . For exa mple ,
after 24 . . . K - B l 25 R - K3 an d 26 Q R ­
K l fol lowed by P-B3 , he h as the
advantage .

25 P-B3 B- N3
26 R-K7 P-N3
27 QR-K1 P-R3
28 R-N7 R-Q3

Or 28 . . . R-B7 29 R ( K l )- K 7 K- B l
13 R-Kl Q - N3 30 R ( K7 )-Q7 ! gives White a clear
14 N ( B3) -Q4 B-N3 advantage .
15 P-Q B3 KR-K 1
16 B-B 1 B-K5 29 R (Kl ) -K7
17 B-N3 BxB
18 RPxB P-Q R4 There is now no defence ag ain st P ­
B4-BS .
1 8 . . . QR-Q l is bette r .
29 ... P-R4
19 P-R4! NxN
20 NxN! N-B3 Or 29 . . . R - B 7 30 R - N8ch K- R 2 3 1
R ( K7)- K 8 R - B8ch 3 2 K- R2 B-N8 33
R -K7 .
20 . . . QxP loses to 21 N - NS
threatening the deadly 22 R - K 2 .
30 pxp BxP
31 P-KN4 B-N3
21 B-N5 R(Kl ) -Q l 32 P-B4! R-B8ch
22 P-KN4! 33 K- B2 R-B7ch
34 K-K3 B-K5
An e xcellen t m anoeuvre , 35 RxBP R-N3
gu aranteeing some end game 36 P-N5 K- R2
advantage .
3 6 . . RxQ NP 37 R ( B7) - K 7 gt ves
.

22 ... simi l ar pl ay .

269
 37 R(B7) -K7 RXQNP 12 B-K2 Q-N3
38 B-K8 R-N6ch 13 BXN !
39 K-K2 R-N7ch
40 K-K1 R-Q3 This is what Kuzmin had in mind.
41 RxKNP ch K-R1 The simplification begun by this
42 R(KN7) -K7 Resigns surprising exchange , which reduces
Black's chances of activating his
pieces , leaves him with all his weak­
GAME 63 nesses and without any counter­
chances. It is true that this positional
White: Kuzmin advantage could prove insufficient
Black: Uhlmann for vic tory, but playing such an
ending is a pleasure for White,
Leningrad Interzonal 1 973 whereas it is torture for Black .

Notes by Taimanov 13 ...

1 P-K4 P-K3 It is curious that Uhlmann thought

2 P-Q4 P-Q4 for one hour and t\venty minutes over
3 N-Q2 P-QB4 this natural move ! It seems that
4 KN-B3 QN-B3 Kuzmin's coup achieved its aim ;
5 PxQP Kpxp Uhlmann was not keen on going into
6 B-N5 B-Q3 a n ending without prospects, but
7 pxp BxBP there was no choice. If 1 3 . . . BxB ? ! 14
8 0-0 N-K2 QxP Q R-Q 1 15 Q-B4 and Black does
9 N-N3 B-Q3 not get enough compensation for the
10 B-N5 0-0 pawn.
11 B-K R4 B-KN5
14 Q-Q4 QXQ
15 N(B3)xQ B-Q2

It was hardly worth wasting a

tempo on this retreat. After 15 . . . BxB
..
1 6 NxB QR- B 1 Black has as good a
chance of defending as in the game.

16 QR-Q 1 KR-Q1
17 KR-K1 K-B1
18 P-QB3

The position is unusual in that

despite White' s accumul ation of

270
small advantages , B l ack suffers from should have re mained where it was ,
very few s m al l disadvantages . I t i s defe nding the weakness on Q4 .
only his Q P which can cause h i m any Perh aps it wou ld h ave been worth
worry at the m om en t , and for this whil e consi de ri ng regroupi ng by
reason Uhlm ann should h ave b een means of . . . B - B4 , . . . B - K l and . . . R­
more p a tient an d should have dili­ Q3 .
gently parried threats as they Uhl m an n , however, puts all his
appeared - p articul arly as he h ad hop es in cou nterp l ay and , in parti­
quite a few useful moves of his own cul ar , in m oving hi s knight to BS .
- . . . P- KN3 , . . . Q R-B l , . . . P-Q R3 .
The German Grandm aster, ho\veve r, 21 N ( R l ) -B2 N-N3
is of a differe n t n at ure. He wil l no t 22 N-K3 B-BS
reconcil e himse lf to the role of 23 N (Q4) -B2 B-K3
"p assive s ufferer" , an d \Vith the 24 R-Q4
fol lowing moves he tri es to intervene
actively in the s trug g le , b ut , al as , he An i nstructive mom ent . These
m akes things worse for hi mse lf. support poin ts are now diving boards
for reshuffl ing . Whi te' s ma noeuvre
18 P-Q R4? unde rl ines the disadvantages of the
m arch of the bl ack R P .
Uhl m an n ' s "pse u do- ac tivity" only
leads to the creation of ne\\' weak ­ 24
nesses in his camp .
A fter th is exc hange the weaknesses
19 P-Q R3 P-RS on the b l ac k squ ares are vulnerable�
but even \vith 24 . . . B-K4 25 R-QN4
I n the same gambl ing s tyle. 19 . . . P­ R-Q3 26 N -Q4 B l ack ' s position is
QN3 woul d have been a l esser evil . pitiful .

20 N-Rl! 25 NxB N-BS

26 R (K l ) -Q I !
I t seems tha t Uhlmann has j ust
given the \\'hite knigh t a push along A n excellent move. destroying all
its inte nded rou te : R l - B 2- K3 . Bl ac k ' s ill usion s .

20 N-Bl 26 R ( Q I ) -Q BI

A l though Bl ac k ' s pos ition 1s I t seems he has to part \\'ith the

already not very good , perh ap s it pa,vn . 26 . . . NxNP is not good ,
could have been held by stub born because of 27 R ( Q l )-Q2 and if
defence . F irst of all , the kn ight 26 . . . NxN 27 PxN then the pa\\' ns on

27 1
Q4 and on R4 are easy prey for The best chance . Black intends to
White. put his rook on KB3 , defending
against the threat on the seventh .
27 NxP
34 R-N4( ! )
27 NxN P><N 28 B -B3 probably
wins without placing too heavy a The only way of keeping the advan­
demand on White's techni que , but tage . Although White's attacking
Kuzmin prefers a more forcing ch ances are bleak , he has not
method . exhausted all possible methods of
realizing his advantage .
27 BxN
34 R (R3) -QB3
28 RxB NxNP
29 R-Nl N-BS
30 RxP

White has won a pawn and kept

the initiative . The weakness of the
pawns on R3 and B3 cannot be
exploited because of the threats on
the seventh rank.

30 ... N-R4

Otherwise 31 R(Q5) -Q7 is decisive.

31 R (N7) -NS N-B5

32 R-Q7! P-N3 35 B-Q3
33 P-KB4
This manoeuvre , which was given
This move was unanimously an exclamation mark by Sakharov ,
deplored by all the com mentators . deserves in my opinion at least one
Indeed, after the natural 33 R(N5 )­ question mark . With the simple
Q7 N-K4 34 R-K7 R-Kl 35 RxRch combination 35 BxN RxB 36 R-Q8ch
RxR 36 P-KB4 N-B3 37 B-N5 , White White could h ave reduced to a won
wins straight away. However, the rook ending , but instead he gives up
move played does not do any harm . an important pawn .
Victory (in spite of opinions to the Note that 35 RxRP is no good
contrary) is still firmly in hand . because of 35 . . . N-N3 .

33 ... R-R3( ! ) 35 ... K-N2?

272
 I nexplicab le ! H aving endure d so GA M E 64
m uch Uhlm ann , as if n ot bel ievin g i n
h i s lucky star, lets a sim p le chance of White: Vogt
s alvation s lip away . After the obvious Black : Uhlmann
35 . . . NxP 3 6 RxRP (36 R (N4) - N7 R ­
B 3 ) 36 . . . N-BS 37 R( R4)- R7 R - B 3 Potsdam 1 9 74
Bl ack is a l l righ t . Now , however,
B l ack i s in trouble . 1 P-K4 P-K3
2 P-Q4 P-Q4
3-6 R (Q7) -Q4! NxP 3 N-Q2 P-Q B4
37 P-84 4 PxQP KPXP
5 KN-B3 N-Q83
This is the whole poi nt . The blac k 6 8- N5 8-Q3
knight i s trapped . 7 pxp Bx8P
8 0-0 N-K2
37 R-R3 9 N-N3 8-Q3
38 K-82 10 B-N5 0-0
11 8-K R4 B-KN5
The king in person se ts out on the 12 B-K2 R-K 1
hunt . 13 R-K1 Q-N3!
14 N ( B3) -Q4 N-N3!
38 R-R4 15 NXN Rx8
39 K-K3 R-B2
40 K-Q2 P-R4 The most precise con tinuation .
41 R-K4!
16 RxR PxN
This was the sealed move . As the
kin g cannot get near the kni ght ( 4 1
K-B3 N-N4ch) , White sends the
heavy artil lery after hi m .

41 R-Q2
42 R-K 1 R-Q B4
43 R-Q81 ! Resigns

There is no defence to 44 R-Q B3 .

17 8-N3 B-K2!

273
 Black also has good play after 35 ... QxQ
17 . . . BxB 1 8 pxB N-B l followed by 36 P><Q R-K7
19 . . . N-K3 . 37 R-KBl

18 P-KR3 :OXR A fter 37 K-Nl both 37 . . . P-R6 and

19 QxB P-QR4 37 . . . N-Q6 are good for Black.
20 P-83 P-R4!
37 ... N-Q6!
Gaining more space, as 21 QxP P­ 38 P-B4
RS 22 N -Q4 QxP is very good for
Black . Equally hopeless is 38 P-B3 N-BS
39 R-KN l R-Q7 followed by . . . N - K7 .
21 N-Q 4 P-KR5
38 ... N-B7!
22 B-R2 B-B3
23 R-Q1 P-R5!
Or 38 . . . NxB 39 QP><N R-N7 with a
24 Q-82 Q-B4
favourable rook ending .
25 Q-Q3 R-Kl
26 P-QN4! pxpe.p.
39 R-Q R1
27 pxp Q-N3
28 P-Q N4 R-K5
First 39 . . . K-N3 would h ave been
29 B-Q6
more exact .

29 P-B3 is more exact.

40 K-R3 N-K6
41 R-R6 RXP
29 BxN 42 KxP
30 P><B Q-Q1 !
Not of course 42 RxP R-N6ch 43 K­
The sudden switch o f the queen to R2 N-NSch 44 K- R l P-R6 followed
the K-side brings the white king into by . . . N-B7ch and . . . R-N7 mate.
dange r.
42 ... R-N5ch
31 B-B5 N-85 43 K-R3 RxP
32 Q-KB3 Q-N4 44 RXP P-N4
33 R-R1 K-R2
34 K-R2 R-K3! This pawn cannot be stopped
35 Q-N4 without the loss of a piece .

Passive defence by 35 R- KN l is 45 P-N5

better, as the ending is now won for
Black . Or 45 B -Q6 P-NSch 46 K-R2 (after

274
46 K-N 3 or R4 then 46 . . . R - B 3 wins a
piece ) 46 . . . R - B7ch 47 K-N 1 P-N6
48 BxP R - K N7ch wins the bi shop .

45 P-N5ch
46 K-R4

Or 46 K- R 2 R- B7ch 47 K - N3 R ­
B6ch 48 K- R4 P-B3 threatening . . . R­
R6 mate .

46 P-83!
47 B-Q6 R-B6
48 B-N3 K- N3
49 Resigns
10 . .. Q-B2

Agains t Gel1 er ( Amsterdam , 1 9 70)

I ( Uhl m ann ) played 1 0 . . . P - B 3 b ut
White can the n simplify by 1 1 NxN
GA ME 65 PxN 12 BXQBP ! BXPch ! 13 NxB
NxB .
White: Neukirch
Black : Uhlmann 11 P-KR3 P-83
12 B-K3 N -K4!
Potsdam 1 9 74
The i dea behi n d 1 1 . . . P-B3 .
1 P-K4 P-K3 Black' s s trong -poin t on K4 more
2 P-Q4 P-Q4 than compensa tes for hi s isolated Q P
3 N-Q2 P-QB4 a n d weakness on K3 .
4 P><QP KFxP
5 B-N5ch N-B3 13 P-Q N3 P-Q R3
6 KN-B3 B- Q3 14 8-K2 8- Q2
7 0-0 15 Q-Q2 P-QN4
16 QR-Q 1 K-R1
The cu rren t preference IS for 7 17 N-K 1 N (K4) -N3
PxP .
The correct recipe , prepari n g to
7 pxp advan ce the K BP an d to co un ter a
8 N-N3 N-K2 sim il ar idea by Wh i te . The l dtter's
9 N (N3) xp 0-0 pieces are not well co- ordinate d , as
10 8-N5 we shall soon see .

275
 18 N-Q3 P-B4! The BP is taboo , as White loses a
19 B-NS piece after 25 BxP Q R-Kl .

The best reply, as 19 P-K B4 gives 25 Q R-K1 !

Black a clear advantage after 19 . . . N­ 26 Q-BS
N l ! followed by N-B3-KS .
. . .

This gives Black a won ending . 26

19 ... P-BS Q-NS is the best defence .
20 B><N BxB
21 B-N4 26 QxQ
27 NXQ pxp
2 1 B-B3 is a little better. ' 28 KxP P-KR4!

21 ... B-KB3 The point , as now 29 BxP loses to

22 BxB 29 N-BSch .
. . .

Or 22 N-N4 BxB 23 PxB BxN 24 29 B-Q7 N-BSch

QxB P-B6! 25 P-N3 Q R-Q l with the 30 K-Nl R-K2
better position . 31 Resigns

22 • • . BxN There is no defence to the threats

23 B-N4 B-B6 of . . B-NS or . B-QS .
. . .

24 Q-K2

It is essential to play 24 Q -B l .

�
�

24 P-B6!
25 Q-K3

276
 Part Four

Miscellaneous Systems

1 P-K4 P-K3

2 P-Q4 P-Q4
3 P-KS

2 P-Q4 P-Q4
3 pxp

and 2 P-Q3

277
 Chapter 1 2

The Advance Variation

White: Alexander
.Black: Uhl'mann

Munich Olympiad 1 958

1 P-K4 P-K3
2 P-Q4 P-Q4
3 P-KS

This variation , also named after Nimzovich , has waned in popularity of late .
However, it is a perfectly valid method of play and could rapidly come back into
fashion . White states his strat�gic intentions at once . He aims to blockade the
black centre pawns , either by supporting his centre with P-QB3 or else by
making the temporary sacrifice of a pawn on Q4, so that he can later occupy this
square with a piece .

278
 3 . . . P-QB4

The logical counter. I f 3 . . . P- K B3 4 B-Q3 , an d if 3 . . . P-QN3 4 P-QB3 an d

Black must first pl ay 4 . . . Q-Q2 if he wants to continue \vith . . . B - R3 (4 . . . B - R 3 ? ?
5 Bx B Nx B 6 Q- R4ch winning a piece) .

4 P-QB3

Let us have a quick look a t the altern atives :

(a ) 4 Q-N4 Px P 5 N- KB3 P- 84 6 Q-N3 N- QB3 7 B- Q3 B- Q2 8 0-0 Q- 82 9 P- B3

0-0- 0 10 B- KB4 Not 1 0 Px P N- N5 ! 10 . . . KN- K2 1 1 PxP Or 1 1 N- N5 P- K R3 1 2
i�- B7 P- K N4 ! 1 3 B- B 1 P- B5 1 4 Q - R3 B - N2 with advant age to Bl ack . 1 1 . . . N-N3
12 N- 83 Nx B 13 QxN P- KR3 14 P- KR4 P- KN4 ! with good pl ay for Black .
Honfi - Porti sch , H ungary 1 964 .

(b) 4 N - KB3 N - QB3 5 B- Q3 pxp 6 0-0 P-B3 Or 6 . . . KN - K2 7 B- KB4 N-N3 8 B ­

N 3 B - K2 with complex play . 7 B- QN5 I f 7 B- KB4 ? P- KN4 ! and 8 . . . P - N5 . 7 . . . B­
Q2 8 BxN P><B 9 QxP Q-N3 10 Q-KB4 P- KB4 with un clear pl ay .

(c) 4 PxP N-QB3 5 N- KB3 BxP 6 B- Q3 P-83 7 Q- K2 p xp 8 NxP N-B3 9 B- KB4

0 - 0 10 0-0 N- K5 11 NxN P><N 12 B- K3 BxB 13 QxB N-B3 14 N-Q2 Q-N3 \\'ith
equality . Becker- M aroczy , Carls bad 1 9 29 .

4 . . . N- QB3

The pl an of exch angin g white-square d bishop s \Vas somewh at discredited by

the game I . Zaitsev- Doda , US SR 1 968 : 4 . . . Q-N3 5 N-83 B-Q2 6 B- K2 B-N4 7 P­
B4! The old conti n uation 7 0 -0 gave Black equality after 7 . . . BxB 8 Qx B Q- R3 9
Q - Q 1 N-Q2 (not 9 . . . N-QB3 1 0 pxp BxP 1 1 P- Q N4 B - K2 1 2 N - R3 Q - N 3 1 3 B - K3
Q - Q 1 1 4 N-Q N5 P- KR4 1 5 B - B5 and Black suffered from the \Veakness of his (}3
square in Cioc altea-Portisch , Ploesti 1 965 ) 1 0 R- K 1 N - K2 1 1 N - R3 , Mititel u ­
Barcza , Bud apest 1 960 . A n interesting alte rn ative i s 7 PxP BxP 8 P-QN4 B- B 1
with an unclear position . 7 . . . BxP 8 BxB Px B I f 8 . . . Q-N5ch 9 Q N -02 Px B 1 0 P­
QR3 wit h the better game . 9 P- Q5 ! PxP 10 QxP N-K2 1 1 Q- K4 N-Q2 12 0 - 0 Q­
QB3 13 QxBP N-QN3 14 Q-K2 "·ith a position al plus .

S N-B3 Q-N3

279
 The most exact move . After 5 . . . KN- K2 White can play 6 N-R3 (if 6 B-Q3 PxP
7 pxp N-B4 8 BxN P><B 9 N-B3 B- K3 10 N - K2 B-K2 11 P- KR4 P - KR3 with
equality) 6 . . . N-B4 7 N-B2 B-Q2 8 B-Q3 with advantage to White .

�
�

Er
�

6 P-QR3

A solid continuation usually leading to dour position al struggles .

Those with more aggressive tendencies would prefer the Milner- Barry Gam­
bit , 6 B- Q3 . This move involves a pawn sacrifice which theory considers insuf­
ficient but which practice has shown to be not without danger : 6 pxp 7 PxP
. . .

B- Q2 8 0-0 NxQP 9 NxN QxN 10 N- 83 The only way to obtain real attack­
ing chances . After 10 Q- K2 N- K2 1 1 N-B3 N- B3 1 2 B- K3 (not 1 2 N-N5 Qx KP
13 QxQ NxQ 14 N - B7ch K-Q1 15 NxR NxB with advantage to Black) 12 . . . Qxp
1 3 P- B4 Q-Q3 14 N-N5 Q-N1 15 P-B5 P- K4 16 Q-R5 P-QR3 1 7 P-B6 P- KN3 1 8
BxP B - K3 ! with great advantage to Black . Sturm - Schmid , 1954 . 10 P-QR3! It is
. . .

extremely risky to take the secon d pawn , as after 10 . . . QxKP 1 1 R - K1 Q-N 1 (or
1 1 . . . Q-Q3 1 2 N-N5 BxN [ if 1 2 . . . Q-N1 1 3 Q - B3 B- Q3 14 QxQP BxPch 15 K- R l
B- B3 1 6 Q-N5 with a clear advantage to White] 13 BxBch K - Q l 1 4 Q-B3 with
good play for the pawn , in view of his leatl in development and the vulnerability
of the black king) 1 2 NxP B - Q3 1 3 Q-N4 K-B 1 14 B-Q2 White has a strong
attack . 1 1 Q-K2 N-K2 12 K-R1 This move gives Black the greatest trouble .
After 1 2 R-Q1 Black h as 1 2 . . . Q-KR5 1 3 P-B4 (1 3 P-KN3 Q-R6 gives White
nothing) 1 3 . . . N-B3 14 R-B1 B-B4ch 15 K- R1 0-0 1 6 P-BS PxP 1 7 NxP Q- QS!
with advantage . Cornelis- Bouwmeester , Lugano Olympiad 1968 . An alternative is
1 2 . . . N-B3 13 BxQRP QxKP 14 BxP ! (not at once 14 QxQ NxQ 15 BxP R- R2 1 6
BxP P><B 1 7 R- K1 P-B3 and Black is better) 1 4 . . . QxQ 1 5 NxQ R - QN 1 1 6 BxN
BxB and it is not clear whether White can exploit his two Q-side passed pawns.

280
 For an examin ation of 1 2 K - R 1 see Badestein - Uh l m ann , East Germany 1 9 7 3
(ill ustra tive g a me 66 ) .
Another interesting , but som ewh at dubious m ove i s 6 8- K2 PxP There are
great com plication s afte r 6 . . . N - R3 ! ? 7 BxN QxP 8 B - Q B 1 Qx R 9 Q - B 2 px p 10
0 - 0 B -Q2 1 1 K N - Q2 P><P ! 12 N - N 3 N -N5 13 Nx Q NxQ 14 NxN P - QN4 ! and
Black h as an excellent g ame , as 1 5 NxP loses to 1 5 . . . R - B 1 and if 1 5 B - R3 P­
QR4 . For 6 . . . P - B3 see Zhuravlev- Sacharov , US S R 1 9 7 1 (illustr ative g a me 67 ) . 7
PxP N-R3 The best n1ove . White stands better after 7 . . . K N - K2 8 N - R3 ! N - B4 9
N -B 2 B - N5ch 1 0 K -B 1 B - K2 1 1 P - K N 3 B - Q2 1 2 K - N 2 P - K R4 1 3 P- KR3 .
Klaman -Chisti akov , USSR 1 949 . 8 N - 83 A fter 8 BxN QxN P 9 QN-Q2 P>< B
White h as h ardly anything for the p awn . Black i s also better after 8 P- Q N3 N - B4
9 B - N2 B-N5ch 1 0 K - B 1 P - K R4 1 1 N - B 3 BxN 1 2 Bx B B-Q2 . Khol mov ­
Petrosian , U S SR 1 949 . 8 . . . N - B4 9 N - QR4 8-N5ch 1 0 8- Q2 Not 1 0 K - B 1 Q - Q 1
1 1 B - KN5 B - K2 1 2 BxB Qx B 1 3 Q-Q2 0 -0 1 4 P- KN3 B - Q2 1 5 N - B 3 P - B 3 16 P­
KN4 N (B4)xP ! with a clear advantage to Black . Camilleri - Uhlm ann , Raach
1 969 . 10 . . . Q-R4 1 1 8-83 P-QN4 1 2 P-QR3 8x8ch 1 3 Nx8 P -N5 with even
ch ances .

6 P-BS

The bes t reply , as it prevents White' s inten ded exp an s ion on the Q - side .
Weaker are :

(a) 6 . . . 8- Q2 7 P- QN4! The poin t of 6 P-QR3 , gaining space on the Q - side

7 . . . PxQ P 8 pxp KN-K2 I f 8 . . . P - B 3 9 B - Q3 ! 9 N - 83 N -84 10 N - QR4! Less good
is 10 B - N2 N ( B4)xP 1 1 NxN QxN 1 2 QxQ NxQ 1 3 NxP N - B7ch 14 K - Q 1 R - B l .
10 . . . Q- Q 1 1 1 8-N2 N-R5 12 NxN QxN 1 3 8- Q3 P- 84 14 0 -0 8-K2 15 P- 84 0 - 0
16 N - 85 8xN 1 7 QPx8 with advantage to White . Unzicker-Gligoric , Stoc kh ol m
I nterzon al 1 95 2 .

28 1
(b) 6 P- QR4 7 B-K2 pxp After 7 . . . 8-Q2 White can pl ay 8 P-QN3 pxp 9 PxP
. . .

KN- K2 10 0-0 N-84 1 1 B- K3 8-K2 12 N -83 0-0 1 3 B-Q3 NxB 14 PxN P-B3 15
N- KN5 ! with advantage . Cortlever-Van Seters, Beverwijk 1958 . 8 pxp KN-K2 9
N-B3 N-84 10 N-QN5! and ac cording to Keres , White is better.
.
7 P-KN3

Allowing White the option of developing his KB on KN2 or KR3 . For 7 QN­
Q2 see Zinn-Hamann , Lugano Olympiad 1968 (illustrative game 68) .

7 • • • P-B3

7 . . . N-R4 is possible e . g . 8 QN -Q2 B-Q2 9 8-R3 P-B4? ! (better is 9 . . . N- K2) 10

pxp e.p. pxp 1 1 0-0 0-0-0 12 R - K1 B-N2 1 3 R-N1 R- K1 14 P-N3 pxp 15 NxP
NxN 16 RxN Q- R3 17 R-N2 with an edge for White . Prahov-Makarov , USSR
1 962. Or here 9 B-N2 0-0-0 1 0 0-0 P-KR3 1 1 R-K1 N- K2 1 2 N-B 1 N-B4 1 3 N­
K3 NxN 14 RxN B- K2 15 R - K 1 Q-N6 16 Q-K2 B- QR5 17 B - K3 K-N 1 1 8
QR-Q1 Q-B7 ! 19 R - Q 2 Q -B4 and Black stands better . Clarke-Petrosian ,
Munich Olympiad 1958 .

8 pxp NxBP
9 B-N2 B- Q3
10 0-0 0-0
11 Q-K2 K-R1 ! ?

I t is possible to play 1 1 . . . N-QR4 1 2 QN-Q2 B-Q2 and if now 1 3 N-K5 Black

has 13 . . . B- K1 ! etc .

12 N-KS BxN? !

Better is first 1 2 . . . N -QR4 1 3 N - Q2 and then 13 . . . BxN .

13 PxB N- Q2
14 B-K3 N-B4
15 N-Q2 Q -R4
16 P-B4 B-Q2
17 BxN? !

After 1 7 N -B3! White stands better .

282
 17 . . . Q x Bch
18 Q-B2 Q x Qch
19 Rx Q P- KN4!
20 N-B1 R-B2
21 N-K3 pxp
22 pxp R-KN I

Black has s ucceeded in wea kening Whi te's K B P but White c an still defend
himsel f .

23 QR-KB1 P-N4
24 P -R3 P-KR4

Preventing 25 N -N4 .

25 N-B2 B-K l
26 N-N4 N-K2

Black should keep his kn igh t for the control of the d ark sq uares v.rh i le White' s
kn ight is n ot stable on QN4 .

27 K-R2 R (N l ) - B I
28 K-N l R-N2
29 N-B2 N - B4

283
 30 K-R2 P-RS
31 N- Q4 NxN

A new idea. By exchanging knights now , Black creates a pawn majority on the
Q-side . White ' s task is to activate his bishop on the other wing .

32 PxN B-N3
33 P-B5 ! RxP
34 RxR BxR
35 R-B4?

After having found his best chance of salvation , White misses the best reply in
35 BxP . True , White will still recapture the pawn but he allows time for the
decisive advance o'f Black's dangerous Q-side p awns .

35 • • • R-KB2
36 RxPch K-N2
37 B-B3 P-R4
38 B-Q l P-NS
39 R-B4 B-N3
40 R-N4

In the bishop ending White loses a piece to the passed QBP .

40 • • • R-B7ch
41 Resigns

284
 GA M E 66 15 RxN Q-B5

White: Badestein Or 15 . . . Q- N 3 is possible .

Black : Uhlmann
16 B-K3 B-N5
E as t Germ any 1973 17 P-Q N3 Q-B2
18 R -Q Bl R-QB1 !?
1 P-K4 P-K3
2 P-Q4 P -Q4 T he pre l ude t o a queen sacri fice.
3 P-K5 P-QB4
4 P-QB3 N-QB3 19 N-R4 QxRch
5 N-B3 Q-N3
6 B-Q3 pxp The log i cal con tinuation , but both
7 pxp B-Q2 19 . . . B � B 3 and 19 . . . Q-Q l were
8 0-0 NxQ P possible .
9 NxN QxN
10 N-B3 P-QR3! 20 BXQ RxBch
11 Q-K2 N-K2 21 R-Q l RxRch
12 K-R 1 22 QxR 0-0
23 N-N6 B- B3
24 Q-Q4 B-K2
25 P-KR3 P-B3!

Openin g up the position for the

two bi shop s .

26 P-B5?

12 N-B3
13 P-B4 N-N5
14 R-Q 1 !

F ar be tter than 1 4 B- N l Q - B5!

15 Q - B 3 P-Q5 with advantage .

14 ...

285
 White overlooks a subtle Notes by Zhuravlev
manoeuvre by Black . 26 P-Q R4 is
better. 1 P-K4 P-QB4
2 P-QB3 P-K3
26 B-Q l ! 3 P-Q4 P-Q4
27 PxKP 4 P-KS

Somewhat better is 27 PxBP RxP ! Such transpositions should be well

(White has good counter-chances known to every Sicilian player if he is
after the risky 27 . . . P-K4 28 QxKP! not to be tricked into an unfamiliar
BxN 29 Q- K6ch K-R1 30 P-B7 B-B4 set-up .
3 1 P-B6 etc . ) 28 PxP B-B i! 29 P-K N3
(or 29 K-N l ) 29 . . . RxP and Black's 4 Q-N3
pieces can develop their full power. 5 N-KB3 N-QB3
6 B-K2 P-B3
27 pxp
28 Q-BS BxN!
®'
�
The simplest way to exploit his
advantage .

29 QxB(N6) R-Kl
30 P-K7 RxP
31 Q-Q8ch R-Kl
32 Q-Q6 P-K5
33 K-Nl P-K6
34 K-Bl B-N4ch !
35 K-Kl R-KBl!
36 QxQPch K-Rl
37 K-Q l P-R3
38 Q-QBS P-K7ch This is a deviation from the known
39 K-Q2 R-Qlch main line 6 . . . PxP 7 pxp KN-K2 8 N­
40 Resigns R3 N-B4 and so on . The idea of the
move in the text is quite clear: Black
undermines White's centre by
exerting pressure on it with his
GA ME 67 pieces. Naturally, White immediately
opposes this plan .
White: Zhuravlev
Black: Sakharov 7 0-0 B-Q2
8 N-R3 PxKP
US S R 197 1 9 P><KP N-R3

286
 10 R-K1 p aw n .

I n one of Lutikov' s g ames White

allowed his oppone nt dange rous
counterplay after 10 BxN P><B . Two
bishops and the open K B and K N
fi les proved to b e good compensation
for the wea knesses of the p awn
forma tion .

10 N-B2
11 B-B1

1 1 B-Q3 was more active : there is

no need to be afrai d of losing a tempo
after . . . P - Q BS .

11 B-K2 15 pxp
12 P-R4! ? 16 B-K3

A very un us u al reac tio n ! Such a It would h ave been a m istake to

weakening looks advantageous for pl ay 16 pxp b ecause of 1 6
Black , especi ally in view of the . . . N ( B2)x K P !
impe ndi ng cas tling on opposite sides .
However , it is not obvious how to 16 Q-R4
prevent the s traigh tforward advance 17 N-QN5 P-R3
. P- KN4 -NS by Blac k .
. .

This allows White to cre ate serious

12 P-K R3 threats on the b l ac k squares . I t
seems that Blac k should h ave been
1 2 P-N3 followed by . P - K R 3
. . . . .
satisfied \\'ith the v ariation 1 7 P><P
. . .

a n d then . P-KN4 i s m ore accurate .

. .
1 8 Q - N3 Q - NS! 19 NxPch NxN 20
BxN QxQ 2 1 RxQ \\rith approxi ­
13 P-R5 0-0-0 mately equal ch a nces .
14 R-N l Q R-81
15 P-QN4 18 N -R7ch NxN

In view of the fac t th at after th is

Forced bravado ! Bl ack i s ready for exchange Bl ac k can not take
action , starti ng \\'ith N - N4 , \\�ith
. . . advantage of the posi tion of the whi te
numero us threats , so White decides b is hop on Q R 2 1 8 K - N 1 looks
, . . .

to open fi re fi rst at the cost of a s afer.

287
 19 B><N N-Q1 31 Q-88ch B-Q l
32 P-K6
The best defensive chance. Not, of
course , 19 0 oP-QN3 if only because
0 Black lost on time. He can only
of 20 pxp BXP 21 RxB QxR 22 aviod mate at the cost of a piece .
BxRPch K-Q 1 23 Q-Q3 , with an
irresistab le attack.
GAME 68
20 N-Q4! QXP?
White: Zinn
By playing 20 0 o N- B3 , 2 1 NxN
0
Black: Hamann
BxN 22 pxp BxP 23 R-K3 R-BS 24
R-KB3 ! R(R1 )-B 1 25 RXR RXR Lugano Olympiad 1968
Black does not get out of his
difficulties , but has a good chance of 1 P-K4 P-K3
defending in practice. But now he 2 P-Q4 P-Q4
can hardly save the game . 3 P-K5 P-QB4
4 P-Q83 N-Q83
21 R-K2 Q-R5 5 N-83 Q-N3
22 R-B2! 6 P-QR3 P-85
7 QN-Q2
This is what the m aster from
Rostov missed. Now the threat is 23
PxPch B-Q B3 24 RxBch and so on .

22 P-N6
23 RXP N-83
24 Q-N1 NxB
25 RXP!

Winning the queen by 25 R- R2

allows Black some chances of
salvation after 25 o • O QxR 26 QxQ N ­
B3!

25 N-B3 7 B-Q2
26 RXB KxR 8 8-K2 N-R4
27 Q-N7ch K-K1 9 0-0 N-K2
28 NxN Q-R6 10 R-N1
29 8-Q3! R-84
30 B><R PxB The attempt to seize the initiative

288
on the K-side with 1 0 N - N5 failed 16 R-83 N ( K2) -83
after 10 . . . P- K R3 1 1 N - R3 0-0- 0 1 2 17 Q-N 1 P-Q N3!
N - B4 P- N 3 1 3 R-N 1 K- N l . I . Zai tsev­
Petrosi an , USSR Champion ship Not on ly opening up the QB -file ,
1 969 . but al so rele asing the power o f the
KB.
10 0 -0-0
11 P-QN4 px p e . p . 18 pxp QxNP
12 8- N2 19 8-Q 1 K-R I
20 R-K 1 8-K2
Not 1 2 P - B 4 B - R5 1 3 P-B5 Q - B 2 21 R (K 1 ) -K3 R-Q N I
1 4 B-N2 N ( K2) -B3 1 5 R - K 1 R-N 1 1 6 22 P-R3 KR-Q 8 1
B -Q3 P- K N4 ! an d Bl ac k has a K - si de 23 NXP N -85!
att ack . Lebe dev-Petrosi an , U S S R 24 R (K3) -Q3 N ( 83) -R4
1 958 .
All B l ack ' s pieces are working
12 P-KR3 toge ther at full po we r , and White h as
no defe nce .
A good prophyl actic m ove prevent­
ing N - N5 . 25 NxN QxN
26 8><8 Qx8
13 P-B4 8-R5 27 Q-Q 8 1 Rx8
14 P-85 Q-82 28 Qx R NxQ
15 R-8 1 29 RxRch K-N2
30 R ( Q3) -83 N-85
More exact is 1 5 B - B3 N ( K2) - B 3 31 R-KN8 P-N3
1 6 N - K 1 P - Q N3 1 7 N -Q3 wi th e q u al 32 R-K R8 8xP
chances . 33 RxP Q-Q8ch
34 K-R2 8- N7!
15 ... K- N 1 35 Resigns

289
 Chapter 1 3

The Exchange Variation

White : Seidman
Black : R . Byrne

USA 1962

1 P-K4 P-K3
2 P-Q4 P-Q4
3 pxp

This exchange gives up the tension in the centre and usually leads to rapid
equality . Because of this drawing tendency , the line of play has few adherents .

3 ... pxp

4 B-Q3

290
 The usual move here . A fter 4 N - Q B 3 B-QN5 Black has tr ansposed to a
line of the N im zovich (Wina\\rer ) Vari ation - see p a ge 1 4 .

4 • • • N-QB3

More ex act th an 4 . . . B - Q3 5 N - K2 (or 5 N-QB3 P-QB3 [ perhaps 5 . . . N - K2 is

more ex act ] 6 P- KR3 N - K2 7 Q - R5 Q-N3 8 K N - K 2 B- K3 . G rob - Szabo , H asti ngs
1 947 / 8 , when White can introduce pro mising complications \\'ith 9 B- K B4 )
5 . . . N- K 2 ( After 5 . . . Q- R5 6 QN -B3 P-QB3 7 B - K3 N-B3 8 Q- Q2 N - N5 9 P- KN3
Q - K2 [ or 9 . . . Q- R 6 10 N - B4 BxN 1 1 BxB with advantage] 10 B- K B4 0-0 1 1 P­
K R 3 , White is a little better . ) 6 B - K B4 B- K B4 7 Q N - B3 P-Q B 3 , and this
almost sym metrical position is equal .

5 P- QB3

A fter 5 N - K2 Black h as 5 . . . N-N5 6 0-0 NxB 7 QxN B-03 wi th equa lity .

5 B- Q 3
6 N-K2

What can happen when White tries to play more sharp ly with 6 Q - B3 can be
seen in Kovacs- Korchnoy , Saraj evo 1 9 69 (illustrative g a me 69 ) .

6 . . . Q- R5
7 N-R3

Not 7 N -Q2 B - KN5 8 Q- B 2 (or 8 Q - N3 0-0-0 9 QxQ P N - B3 follo,ved by

. . . K R- K 1 w ith a strong attack ) 8 . . . 0-0-0 9 N - B 1 P- K N 3 1 0 B - K3 KN- K 2 1 1 0-
0-0 B- KB4 1 2 N ( B 1 )- N3 BxB 13 QxB P- KR 3 and Black has the edge . Win ter­
Alekh in e , Nott ingham 1 93 6 . White can , however , play 7 P- KN3 Q - R6 8 N - 8 4 ,
o r here 7 . . . Q - R4 8 B - K B4 with equality .

7 P-QR3
8 Q-Q2 KN- K2
9 N-B2 B-KB4
10 BxB NxB
11 Q-N5 QxQ
12 BxQ Drawn

29 1
 GAME 69 8 P-KR3

White: Kovacs 8 N -K2 is better.

Black: Korchnoy
8 BxB
9 QxB 0-0
Sarajevo 1969
10 N-K2 N-N3
11 Q-R2?
1 P-K4 P-K3
2 P-Q4 P-Q4
It was essential to pl ay 1 1 Q-B 1 .
3 pxp pxp
4 B-Q3 N-QB3..... 11 ... R-K1
5 P-QB3 B-Q3 12 0-0 B-84!
6 Q-B3 13 BxB

� White misses his last chance of

�
survival by 1 3 N - B 1 . Black's rook
now penetrates to the seventh rank.

13 RxN
14 P-QN3 Q-K2
15 B-Q3 R-N7
16 Q-N3 R-K1
17 Q-NS N-KS
18 Q-81

Not 18 QxP NXKBP .

6 ... QN-K2!? 18 ... RxBP!

Also possible is 6 . . . B-K3 7 N-K2

Q-Q2 8 B-K B4 KN-K2 9 BxB QxB
10 Q-N3 QxQ 1 1 NxQ N-B 1 with
equality.

7 B-KB4

Better is 7 N-K2 P-QB3 8 B - K B4

N-B3 9 BxB QxB 10 Q-N3 with
equality . Damj anovic-Ivkov, Yugo­
sl avia 1963 .

7 ... N-KB3

292
 22 B-Bl R-K7t t
23 N-Q2 NXRPch!
24 K-R2 N-B5t
If 20 BxN NxRPch 21 P><N BP><B 25 K-N3
and White cannot prevent the entry
of Black's queen and rook into his If 25 N - B3 Q - K R3ch 26 K-N l
king's position . e . g . 22 N-Q2 Q-N4ch RxNPch! 2 7 BxR N-K7ch wins.
23 K-B2 Q - RSch winning ; or 22 N ­
R 3 Q-Q3 ! 23 Q-N2 R-K6! 24 N-NS 25 N-Q6
R-N6ch 25 K-R2 Q-BS 26 R- KN l R­ 26 Resigns
Q6ch winning .
If 26 BxR Q-BSch 27 K- R3 N-B7
20 Q-B3ch mate .
21 K-Nl N-B5

293
 Chapter 14

The King's Indian Attack

'

White : Savon
Black: Uhlmann

Skopje 1 968

I P-K4 P-K3
2 P-Q3

This move leads to a closed form of the Sicilian Defence or, more often, to the
King's Indian Attack (sometimes called the Reversed King' s I ndian) .
White's QP gives firm support to his outpost at K4 . His plan is to increase his
spatial control on the K-side and thereby to create serious threats on that flank .
The idea is suggested by Black' s very first move which does little to counter
White' s intentions. However, White' s build-up is rather slow and Black might
be able to develop counterplay on the opposite wing .

294
 Tchigorin ' s move , 2 Q-K2 , can tr anspose to the K i ng ' s I ndian A ttack (in
which White' s queen u sually plays to K 2) b u t by p laying his moves in a different
order Black can bypass the K . I . A . set -up and take a more aggressive stance .
2 . . . P-QB4 3 P- Q3 N-Q83 ! The point . White must p revent . . . N - Q5 when Black
gets a good form of the Closed Sicili a n . 4 P-Q83 N-83 5 P-KN3 P-Q4 ! 6 N-Q2 8-
K2 7 P-KB4 0-0 8 8-N2 P-QN4! wi th a good game for Black . Bellon - Uh l m a nn ,
M adrid 1 973 (illustr ative g ame 70) .

2 • • • P-Q4

After 2 . . . P-QB4 3 N -Q2 N - QB3 4 P- KN 3 P- KN3 5 B - N 2 B - N 2 6 K N - B3 K N ­

K 2 7 0-0 0-0 8 P - B3 P - Q3 9 P -Q R4 Q - B2 1 0 R- K 1 B -Q2 t h e position is sim il ar
to one arisin g from the Sicilian Defence .

3 N-Q2 N-KB3
4 KN-B3

4 P-KN3 is someti mes pl ayed firs t . e . g . : 4 . . PxP For 4 . . P-QN 3 ! ? see Sax ­
Larsen , Teesside 1 97 2 (illustrative game 7 1 ) . 5 PxP 8-84 6 8-N2 N-83 7 KN-83
P- K4! 8 Q - K2 Better is 8 0-0 0-0 9 P-B3 P - Q R4 1 0 Q -B 2 B - K3 1 1 N -N5 B - Q2
with equality . Csom - Fuch s , Berl i n 1 968 . 8 . . . 0-0 9 0-0 P-QR4 10 P- QR4?! 1 0
N - B4 Q - K2 1 1 P - B 3 i s bette r . I O . . P- QN3 1 1 P-83 8-R3 1 2 N -84 Q-Q2 and
.

Black stan ds bette r . J ansa- H ii bner , Athens 1 969 .

4 . . . P-B4

The usual move , pop ul arized by Uhl m a nn .

A lso possibl e is 4 . . . P-QN3 5 P-K5 Or 5 Q- K 2 B - K2 6 P- K N 3 P - 8 4 7 B-N 2 N ­

B 3 8 0 - 0 0-0 9 P- K5 N- K 1 1 0 R- K 1 P- B4 1 1 px p e . p . Bx P with e qu ality .
Pach ma n- Sch mid , Helsinki Olympiad 1 95 2 . 5 . . . KN- Q2 6 P-KN3 Another
pos sibility is 6 P -Q4 P-QB4 7 P - B3 P- B3 8 Px K BP Qxp 9 N - N3 B - N 2 (9 . . . B- Q3
seems more exact) 10 B - KN5 Q - B2 1 1 B-N5 B-B3 w ith even ch ances . Vasyukov­
Bagirov , U S S R Championship 1 9 67 . 6 . . . P-Q84 7 8-N2 N- Q83 8 Q-K2 Q-B2 9
0-0 8-K2 Not 9 . . . N ( Q 2)x P 1 0 NxN QxN 1 1 QxQ NxQ 1 2 R- K 1 N -Q2 1 3 Bx P
etc . 10 R - K1 8-R3 1 1 P - 83 P-KN4! 1 2 P- KR3 P-KR4 1 3 P- KN4 PxP 1 4 pxp 0-
0-0 and Blac k ' s attack is stronger than White ' s .

295
 5 P-KN3 N-B3
6 B-N2 B-K2
7 0-0 0-0
8 P-KS N- Q2
9 R-K1 P-QN4

Better than 9 . . . Q-B2 where the queen is badly placed after White' s inten ded
Q- K2 , N- B 1 , B-B4 , N-K3 with the s acrifice NxQP in the air .

10 N-B1 P-QR4
11 P-KR4 P-NS
12 B-B4

A frequently played alternative is 12 P-R5 e . g . 12 . . . B-R3 1 3 P-R6 P-N3 1 4

N(B1 )-R2 P-R5 1 5 B-B4 B-QN4 1 6 N-N4 N-Q5 with unclear play . Rubinetti­
Uhlmann , Mar del Plata 1966 .

12 • • • B-R3

Nor 12 . . . P-R5 13 P-R3 pxp 1 4 pxp B- R3 15 N - K3 N-Q5 16 P-B4 with a

clear advantage for White. Gheorghiu-U hlmann , Sofia 1967 .

13 N-K3

For 1 3 N-N5 ! ? see Browne-Uhlmann, Amsterdam 1973 (illustrative game 72) .

296
 13 . . . P-RS
14 P-B4

This opening of li nes on the Q-side only favou rs Black .

14 pxp e . p .
15 pxp P-QS!

I n order t o put pressure on White ' s Q P , Black m akes the difficult decision of
opening up the long diagon al for White's K B an d g ivin g him the use of his K4
s qu a re .

16 pxp pxp
17 N-B4 N-B4
18 N-NS N-NS!

The poi n t o f 1 S . . . P- QS . I f White now tries t o attack the kin g by 1 9 Q - RS P-R3

20 N - K4 he loses a piece after 20 . . . N (B4)xP 21 BxP P-N3 ! 22 Q-N4 BxN .

19 BxR QxB
20 Q-RS B(K2)xN

20 . . . P - R 3 was a lso possible .

21 BxB N(NS )xQP

22 B-B6 !

White ' s only salvation lies in the following com plica tion s . Black no\\r does best
to capture the bishop , as 22 . . . NxR 23 RxN N - KS 24 Q - N 4 ! is risky for h im .

22 . . . PxB
23 pxp K-R1
24 N-Q6?

I n thi s com plex position White coul d draw b y 24 R- KS ! ! N x R 25 NxN Q - K 1

26 Q - R6 R - N 1 27 Q- RS R - B l w ith a draw by repetition .

297
 24 . . . N-BS ! !

There is no defence .

After 25 PxN R- KN lch wins the queen .

25 • • • RxN
26 PxN Rx P
27 Q-KS N-Q2
28 Q x QP Q-KNlch
29 K-R2 Q-NS
30 R-K3
..

Or 30 QxN QxRPch 3 1 K-N2 Q-NSch and 32 . . . R-R3 mate .

30 • • • P-K4!
31 Resigns

298
 GA M E 70 1 2 N - K5 NxN 1 3 PxN B- KN5 1 4 B ­
B3 ( not 1 4 Q- K 3 N - 0 2 1 5 BxP B ­
White: Bellon O B4 1 6 0 - B4 Nx P \\'i n n i n g ) 1 4
B-l ack: Uhlmann . . . Bx B 1 5 Ox B N- K 1 \\'ith som e
advant age to Bl ac k .
M adri d 1 9 7 3
10 ... pxp
1 P-K4 P-K3
2 Q-K2 P-Q B4 Th is ope n s up the 0-side ,
3 P- Q3 N-QB3 providi ng good squ ares for Bl ack 's
4 P-Q B3 N-83 pteces .
5 P-KN3 P-Q4!
6 N-Q2 B-K2 11 QxP N-Q2!
7 P-KB4 0-0 12 N-N3
8 B-N2 P-Q N4
White c an h ardly t a ke the p a \vn as
Black has a devast a ting attack after
1 2 OxNP N- B4 ! ! 1 3 Q- B 1 ( \\'hat e l se ?
1 3 QxN(6) B-0 2 \vins the queen , or
1 3 P-QN4 R - N 1 1 4 0 - B 1 B- R 3 etc . )
1 3 . . . B- R3 1 4 0- N 1 N- Q6ch 1 5 K - Q 1
B- B4 etc .

12 P-N5
13 N (N3) -Q4 N-R4!
14 0- 0 pxp
15 P-N3

Whatever White p l ays , he is i n

trou bl e . I f 1 5 OxBP B- R3 a n d if 1 5
pxp N-B4 . Nor i s 1 5 P-O N4 any good
R apid p l ay on the Q-side ts the after 1 5 . . . BxP 1 6 N- KN5 P- N3 1 7
correct strategy he re . N ( N5)x K P PxN 1 8 NxP N - B 4 and the
att ack is bea ten off .
9 KN- 83 P-85!
10 P-K5 ? 15 N-84
16 Q - 82
A fter this move Whi te is already in
seri ous di ffi culties . He had to play 1 0 He h ad to c apt ure the d angero us
P-Q4 Nx K P 1 1 NxN PxN 1 2 Ox K P pa\\' n . although B l ack ' s ad vantage is
B-N2 wi t h a com fortable game for still great after 1 6 ox BP N- K5 1 7 0-
Bl ack . If 1 0 Px BP N Px P 1 1 pxp P>< P N2 B- R3 .

299
 16 N-KS 1 P-K4 P-K3
17 N-KNS NxN 2 P-Q3 P-Q4
18 P><N B-R3 3 N-Q 2 N -KB3
19 R-B4 R-B1 4 P-KN3 P-QN3! ?
20 B-KR3 N-B3!

The simplest .

21 R-R4

The piece sacri fice 21 NxP fails to

2 1 . . . Q-N3ch 22 K - R 1 N -NS with a
winning e ndgame .

21 P-N3
22 N-B3 Q-N3ch
23 K-R l N -NS
24 Q-KN2 N -Q6
25 R-Q4 NxP
26 B-K3 B-B4 5 B-N2 B-N2
27 Nx N BxR 6 P-KS
28 N-Q7 BxB!
A fter 6 KN- B 3 pxp 7 N - NS QN-Q2
The fi nal point . (or 7 . . . N-B3) 8 N (NS)xP( K4) NxN 9
NxN N - B4 the game is equal .
29 NxQ PxN Browne- Raj kovic , H as tings 1972 / 3 .
30 Q-B3 P-Q5
31 Q-KB6 6 N-N1 ! ?

and White Resigned as the pa\vns An origi nal manoeuvre , b u t the

cannot be stop ped . obvious 6 . . KN-Q2 7 P- KB4 P - Q B4
.

is probably better .

7 KN-B3 N -K2
8 0-0

GAM E 7 1 8 P-K R4 IS worthy of consi der-

ation .
White: Sax
Black: Larsen 8 P-QB4
9 R-Kl QN-B3
Teesside 1972 10 P-B3 N-B4

300
 11 P-Q R3 8-K2 The th reat \vas 25 . . Rx B 26 QxR
.

12 N-8 1 B - B4 win n i n g the quee n .

If 1 2 P-QN4 the n 1 2 . . . P-QS IS 25 Q -K3

strong . 26 B><Bch Kx8
27 Q-83ch K- R3!
28 NxP 8-84
12 ... P-K R3
29 Q-K4 P-N3
30 N-N7
Bl ack mus t be careful e . g . 1 2 . . . Q­
Q 2 13 P- K N4 N - RS 14 NxN Bx N 15 If 30 N-04 Q-NS !
P-NS and Black ' s K B has diffi cul ty
getting back i n to the gam e . 30 Rx8
31 RxR Q-N5
13 N-K3 NxN 32 K-N2 R-Q 1 ! ?
14 BxN Q-Q2
15 P-Q4 P-85 The simp lest is 3 2 . . . QxQ 33 RxQ
16 N-Q2 N -R4 P-B6 .
17 P-84 P-R4
18 P-85? ! 33 P-K6 R-Q7ch
34 K-R1 QxQch
Thi s p aw n sacri fi ce IS ove r-
35 RXQ P-86!
optim i stic . pxp
36

18 pxp
If 3 6 P-K7 Bx K P 37 Rx B P-B7
19 N-83 N-83!
Win S .
20 P-N3 pxp
21 P-84?!
36 P-N7
The philosophy of ' ' att ac k at all 37 R-K 81 P-87
costs" is not al \\ray s j ustifi ed . Black 38 R ( K4) -K 1 R-87 ! !
c an pick up th e o ffered p a\\rns , then 39 N-K6
later sacri fice a piece in com fort ,
letti ng his pa\\r n 1n as s do the rest . A pretty n1 ate occurs after 39 Rx R
P-N8= Q 40 R ( B2)-B 1 P-B8=Q 4 1
21 RxQ Q- KSch .
pxp
22 P-Q5 0 - 0-0!
23 PxN Qxp 39 RxR ch
24 Q-K2 R-Q6! 40 Rx R BXP
25 N- R4 41 Resigns

301
 GAME 72 13 Q-K1
14 Q-RS 8XN!
White: Browne 15 Qx8
Black: Uhlmann
If 15 PxB P-B4 with good play for
Amsterdam 1973 Black .

1 P-K4 P-K3 15 P-R5

2 P-Q3 P-Q4 16 N-K3 K-R1
3 N-Q2 N-KB3 17 QR-Q 1 P-R3
4 KN-83 P-B( 18 Q-RS P-84!
5 P-KN3 N-83 19 QxQ QRxQ
6 B-N2 B-K2 20 N-84
7 0-0 0-0
8 P-K5 N-Q2 This tactical method of solving the
9 R-K1 P-QN4 weakness of the KP fails to a counter­
10 N-B1 P- QR4 combination .
11 P-KR4 P-N5
12 B-84 B-R3 20 ... N-Q5!
21 N-Q6 NxBP!
22 NxR RxN!

This exchange sacrifice cripples

White 's position , whereas 22 . . . NxR
23 N-B7 NxB 24 KxN B-N2 gives
unclear play .

23 R-K2 P-N6!

By guarding the knight Black

restricts the activity of the white
rooks .

24 pxp pxp
13 N-NS! ? 25 R(K2)-Q2 8-N4
26 R-QBl R-R1
This move was played for the first 27 B-83 R-R7
time in the game Bronstein ­ 28 8-Q 1 B-R5!
Uhlmann , Moscow 197 1 , when White 29 R-Nl
won easily after 13 . . . Q - K 1 14 Q-N4
P- RS? ? 15 Nx KP. If White gives back the exchange

302
by 29 BxN P><B 30 R ( B l )xP BXR 3 1 33 N-N3
RxB the n 3 1 . . . K-N l ! gives Black an 34 B-Q 1 8XP!
advantage . 35 Rx8 N-K8ch
36 K-81 NxR
37 BxP RxP
29 K-N1
38 RxR NxR
30 P-N4 pxp
39 K-K2 P-85
31 BXNP K-82
40 B-82 P-Q5
32 K-N2 B-N4!
41 B-K4 P-Q6ch
33 B-N3
42 K-Q2 N (N3) -R5
43 K-K3 N-84!
33 B-Q l fails to 33 . . . B><P 34 RxB 44 B-83 N-N6
N-K8ch. 45 Resigns

303
 Index to Variations

Part One - The Nimzovich (Winawer ) Variation

1 P-K4 P-K3 2 P-Q4 P-Q4 3 N- QB3 B-NS ( 10- 1 34)
"

4 P-K5 (4 B- Q3 , 1 2 ; 4 PxP , 14; 4 B - Q2 , 14; 4 N- K2 , 1 6 ; 4 P- QR3 , 1 7 ; 4 Q-N4 ,

20) 4 . . . P-QB4 (4 . . . N- K2 , 2 1 ; 4 . . . P- QN3 , 22 ; 4 . . . Q -Q2 , 23 ) 5 P- QR3 (5 B- Q2 ,
'

24; 5 Q- N4 , 25) 5 . . . BxNch (5 . . . PxP , 26 ; 5 . . . B-R4 , 26) 6 PxB

6 . . . N-K2 7 Q-N4: Chapter 1 (29 -73)

6 . . . N-K2 7 Q-N4 Q-B2 (7 . . . PxP , 29 ; 7 . . . N-B4 , 30; 7 . . . 0-0 , 30) 8 QxNP (8 B­

Q3, 3 1 ) 8 . . R-N1 9 QxRP P><P 10 N-K2 (10 K - Q 1 , 32) 10 . . . QN-B3 11 P-KB4 B­
.

Q2 12 Q-Q3 ( 1 2 P- R3 , 34) 12 . . . PxP 13 N-N3 The main continuation , 36-37 . ( 13

QxBP, 34 ; 13 NxP ? ! , 34; 13 R- QN 1 , 35; 13 B- K3 ? ! , 35 ; 13 P- KR4 , 36)

6 . . . N-K2 7 P- QR4: Chapter 2 (74 -98)

6 . . . N-K2 7 P- QR4 (7 N- B3 , 75) 7 . . . Q-B2 (7 . . . QN- B3 , 77) 8 N-B3 P- QN3

(8 . . . QN- B3 norm ally transposes) 9 B- QN5ch (9 B-Q3 , 78 ; 9 P-R5 , 78) 9 . . . B- Q2
(9 . . . QN-B3 , 79) 10 B- Q3 ( 10 0-0 , 79 ) 10 . . . QN-B3 1 1 0-0 P-KR3 ( 1 1 . . 0-0, .

79 ; 1 1 . . . P-B5 , 79) 12 B-R3 The m ain continuation , 79 -82 . ( 1 2 R- K 1 , 79)

6 . . . N- K2 with . . . Q-R4: Chapter 3 (99 - 1 15)

6 . . . N-K2 7 P- QR4 QN-B3 (7 . . . Q-R4 , 99) 8 N-B3 Q-R4 9 Q-Q2 (9 B- Q2 , 1 00 )

9 . . . B-Q2 (9 . . . PxP , 102; 9 . . . 0-0, 102; 9 . . . P-B3 ! , 102) 10 B-K2 ( 10 B-Q3 , 102)
10 . . . R- QB1 ( 10 . . . P- B3 , 103) 1 1 PxP ( 1 1 B- R3 , 103 ; 1 1 0-0, 103 ; 1 1 B-Q3 ? ! ,
103) 1 1 . . . N-N3 12 0-0 0-0 The m ain 9ontinuation , 104 - 109 . ( 1 2 . . . N(B3)xP,
104)

6 . . . Q-B2: Chapter 4 ( 1 1 6- 134)

6 . . . Q-B2 7 Q-N4 (7 N-B3 , 1 1 6) 7 . . . P-B4 (7 . . . N - K2 , 1 1 7; 7 . . . P- B3 , 1 1 7) 8 Q -N3

.

(8 Q -R5ch , 1 1 7) 8 . . . N-K2 (8 . . . PxP , 1 18 ; 8 . . . N- QB 3 , 1 18) 9 QxP (9 B-Q2 , 1 18)

9 . . . R-N1 10 QxRP PxP 1 1 K-Q1 ( 1 1 N- K2 , 1 1 8) 11 . . . B- Q2 ( 1 1 . . . QN- B3 , . 1 1 9)
12 Q-R5ch ( 1 2 N-B3 , 1 19 ; 1 2 N- K2 , 1 19) 12 . . . N-N3 ( 1 2 . . . K-Q 1 , 1 19) 13 N-K2
The main continuation , 120 - 1 25 .

304
 Part Two - Other Systems with 3 N - Q B.3
1 P- K4 P- K3 2 P- Q4 P-Q4 3 N - Q B3 ( 1 3 5 - 1 85 )

The Classical Variation : Ch a pte r 5 ( 1 3 6 - 1 44 )

3 N- QB3 N- KB3 4 B - KN5 ( 4 P- K5 , 1 3 7 ) 4 . . . B- K2 5 P - K5 (5 8x N , 1 3 7 ) S . . . KN­

Q2 (5 . . . N - K5 . 1 3 8 : 5 . . . N - N 1 . 1 3 9 ) 6 Bx B Qx Q 7 P - 84 ! ( 7 Q - Q 2 , 1 4 1 : 7 N - N5 .
1 4 1 ; 7 8- 03 . 1 4 1 : 7 N - 83 . 1 4 1 ; 7 Q - N4 , 1 4 1 ) 7 . . . 0 - 0 ( 7 . . . P - Q 84 , 1 4 1 : 7 . . . P­
Q R 3 , 1 4 1 ) 8 N- B3 P- QB4 9 PxP The m ain con t in u atio n , 1 4 1 - 1 44 . (9 8 - Q3 , 1 4 1 )

The Albin/Chatard / Alekhine Att ack : Chapte r 6 ( 1 45 - 1 5 2 )

3 N - Q B3 N - KB3 4 B- KN5 B- K2 5 P-K5 KN - Q2 6 P- KR4 P- QB4 ( 6 . . . P - Q R 3 .

1 4 6 ; 6 . . . P- 83 , 1 4 6 ; 6 . . . P - K R 3 . 1 4 6 ; 6 . . . 8x 8 , 1 4 6) 7 Bx B ( 7 Q - N4 , 1 4 7 ; 7 N - N5 ,
1 4 7 ) 7 . . . KxB The m a in con t i n u a tio n , 1 4 8 - 1 50 . ( 7 . . . Qx 8 , 1 48)

The M acCutcheon Variation : Ch apter 7 ( 1 5 3 - 1 60 )

3 N- QB3 N -KB3 4 8- KN5 8-NS 5 P - K5 (5 PxP , 1 5 4 ) 5 . . . P- KR3 6 B-Q2! ( 6 PxN ,

1 54 ; 6 8xN , 1 54 ; 6 8 - K3 , 1 54 ; 6 8- R4 , 1 54 ) 6 . . . BxN 7 PxB ( 7 8x 8 . 1 54 ) 7 . . . N­
K5 8 Q - N4! P- KN3 ( 8 . . . K - 8 1 , 1 55 ) 9 B- Q3 Th e n1 a in con tin u atio n , 1 5 6- 1 59 . (9
8 - 8 1 , 1 56)

The Rubin stein and Burn Variations : Ch a pter 8 ( 1 6 1 - 1 85 )

3 N - QB3 px p ( 3 . . . N - Q 8 3 , 1 6 1 : 3 . . . N - K 83 4 8- K N5 Px P , 1 6 1 ) 4 N x P N - Q2
( 4 . . . N - K 8 3 , 1 63 ; 4 . . . 8 - 0 2 . 1 63 ; 4 . . . 8 - K 2 . 1 63 ) 5 N - K B3 (5 P- KN 3 . 1 63 )
5 . . . KN -B3 6 B- KN5 Th e m ain con tin u a ti o n , 1 63 - 1 6 7 . ( 6 N x Nch , 1 63 )

Part Three - The Ta•·•·asch Va1·iation

1 P- K4 P-K3 2 P- Q4 P- Q4 3 N - Q 2 ( 1 86- 27 6)

3 . . . N- K B3: Ch ap ter 9 ( 1 8 7 - 2 1 8 )

3 . . . N- KB3 4 P- KS KN- Q2 5 B- Q3 ( 5 P - K B4 , 1 8 8 ) S . . . P- Q B4 (5 . . . P- Q N 3 . 1 9 2) 6
P - Q B3 ( 6 K N - 83 , 1 9 2 ) 6 . . . N- Q B3 ( 6 . . . P- QN 3 . 1 9 2 ) 7 N - K2 ( 7 K N - B 3 . 1 9 3 )
7 . . . Q -N3 ( 7 . . . P- 83 , 1 94 : 7 . . . Px P , 1 94) 8 N- 83 PxP 9 Px P P- B3 ! ( 9 . . . Q - N5ch .
1 9 7 : 9 . . . 8 - N5ch . 1 9 7 ) 10 ·PxP ( 1 0 N - 84 . 1 98 ) l O . . Nx BP 1 1 0 - 0 B- Q3 ( 1 1 . . . B ­
.

Q 2 . 1 98 ) 1 2 N- 83 The n1 ain co n t in u atio n , 1 99 - 20 2 . ( 1 2 N - N 3 . 1 99 : 1 2 P- Q H. 3 .

1 99 : 1 2 P - Q N 3 . 1 99 : 1 2 R - N 1 . 1 99 : 1 2 B - Q 2 . 1 99 : 1 2 Q - 0 2 ? ! . 1 99 : 1 2 8 - K B4 .
1 9 9 ; 1 2 N - 84 . 200)

305
3 . . . N- Q83: Chapter 1 0 ( 2 1 9 - 228)

3 . . . N-Q83KN-83 N-83 5 P- K5 N-Q2 (5 . . . N- K5 , 220) 6 N-N3 ! (6 P- KN3 , 220 ;

4
6 P- QN3 , 220 ; 6 P- B4 , 220 ; 6 B-N5 , 2 20 ; 6 B- K2 , 220 ; 6 P- B3 , 220 ) 6 . . . B-K2
The m ain continuation , 22 1 - 223 0 (6 o o o P- B 3 , 22 1 )

3 . . . P- Q84: Chapter 1 1 ( 229-276)

3 . . . P- QB4 4 PxQP (4 PxB P , 230 ; 4 KN: B3 , 230) 4 . . . KPxP (4 o o . QxP, 23 2) 5 KN-

83 (5 B-N5ch , 234 ) 5 . . . N- Q83 (5 . . . N- KB3 , 23 7 ; 5 . . o P- QR3 , 23 7 ; 5. o . P- B5 , 238)
6 B-N5 (6 PxP , 238) 6 . . B- Q3 (6. 0 . P- B5 , 23 8; 6 . . . P- QR3 , 239 ; 6. 0 O Q- K2ch , 239)
.

7 pxp (7 0-0, 239 ) 7 . . . Bx8P (7 o . o Q- K2ch , 240) 8 0-0 KN-K2 9 N-N3 (9 P - B4 ,

240) 9 . . . B-Q3 ! (9 o 0 o B-N3 , 240) 10 N(N3) -Q4 ( 10 B-N5 , 242 ; 1 0 N(B3) - Q4 , 246 ;
1 0 BxNch , 246 ; 1 0 B - K3 , 246 ; 1 0 B - Q2 , 246 ; 1 0 P- B3 will transpose t o the m ain
line ) 10 . . 0-0 1 1 P-83 ( 1 1 B - K3 , 247 ; 1 1 B - N5 , 248 ; 1 1 P- KR3 , 248; 1 1 B - Q3 ,
.

249 ; 1 1 P- QN3 , 249) 1 1 . . . 8-KNS ( 1 1 . . . Q -Q2 , 250) 1 2 Q-R4 ( 1 2 B - K2 , 250)

12 . . . 8-R4 13 R-K1 The m ain continuation , 250-254 0 ( 13 BxN , 250 ; 1 3 B- K3 ,
25 1 ; 1 3 B - Q3 , 25 1 )

Part Four - Miscellaneous Systems

The Advance Variation (278 -289)
The Exchange Variation (290-293)
The King's Indian Attack (294- 303)

The Advance Variation : Chap ter 1 2 ( 278 -289)

3 P- K5 P- QB4 (3 . . . P- KB3 , 279 ; 3 . o . P- QN3 , 279) 4 P-QB3 (4 Q-N4, 279 ; 4 N­

K B3 , 279 ; 4 PxP , 279) 4 . . . N- QB3 (4 o . . Q-N3 , 279) 5 N-B3 Q-N3 (5 . . . KN- K 2 ,
280) 6 P-QR3 ( 6 B - Q3 , 280; 6 B - K2 , 28 1 ) 6 P-B5 ( 6 o 0 O B- Q2 , 28 1 ; 6 0 0 o P- QR4 ,
. . .

282) 7 P-KN3 The m ai n continu ation , 282-284 0 (7 QN-Q2 , 282 )

The Exchange Variation: Chapter 1 3 (290-29 3 )

3 pxp PxP 4 B-Q3 ( 4 N- QB3 , 29 1 ) 4 . . . N- QB3 ( 4 . . . B- Q3 , 29 1 ) 5 P- QB3 The

m ain continu ation , 29 1 0 (5 N- K2 , 29 1 )

The King's Indian Attack: Chapter 1 4 (294-303 )

2 P-Q3 (2 Q - K2 , 295) 2 . . . P- Q4 (2 . . . P-QB4 , 295) 3 N-Q2 N-KB3 4 KN-83 (4 P­

KN3 , 295 ) 4 . . . P-B4 The m ain contin uation , 295-2980 (4 . . . P- QN3 , 295)

306
 Index t o Co·m plete Games

Th is in dex in cl udes all an notate d , ill ustr ative g ames as \veil as the m ain g a me
of e ach ch apte r , but u n a nnotated ga mes given in full in the text h ave been
om itted . The n um bers refer to pages a n d \\1here a n um ber is given in bold typ·e
t he first n amed pl ayer h a d the \\r hite pieces . Where no annot ator i s n a med in the
headi n g to a g a m e , the notes to th at game are by Gligoric an d /or Uhl m ann .

A LB U RT-Gufel d 1 82 ELEY- Uhlm ann 4 1

ALEXA N D E R - Uhl m a nn 278 EPELM A N- Yurche n ko 126
AND E R S S O N -Lj ubojevic 54 ESTEVEZ- H ub ner 2 1 9

FA RA GO - Hon fi 5 2
BA DESTEI N - Uhl m ann 285
FI SCH ER - Darga 89
B A LA SH OV- Gligoric 1 6 1
- Kovacevic 46
- Vaga ni an 264
- Larsen 85
B A N N I K-Ta1 92
- Petrosian 1 69
BEBCH U K- Bron stein 259
-Ta1 63
BELLON-Uhl m ann 299
B E N K O - Gligoric 1 68
B I R N BO I M - Levy 49
G ELLE R-Uhlm ann 187
B OGDA N O V IC - Uhl m ann 72
G EO RGA DZE-Dorosh kevich 2 1 7
BOTV IN N I K -Liberzon 1 77
G LI GO R I C- Balashov 1 6 1
-Tal 1 1 6 , 130
- Ben ko 1 68
B R ONSTE IN - Beb\.. �! uk 259
- Pachm an 65
- Uhlm ann 68 - Petros ian 1 28
B R OWN E-Uhlnt :lnn 30 2
- Stahlberg 262
R . B Y RNE-Sei d m a n 290
- Yan ofsky 1 45
-Uh l m ann 70
G U FELD - Alburt 1 8 2

H A M A N N -Uhlm ann 203

C H I ST I A K O V - U usi 1 53
-Zinn 288
C IOCA LTEA - Hecht 55
H A N S E N - Wi rth 69
CZE RN I A K- Spassky 1 8 1
HA RTSTO N - Porti sch 96
H ECHT- Cioc alte a SS
H O N F I - Farago 52
D A RG A - Fischer 89 HO RT- Petrosian 1 27
DO R O S H KEV IC H - Georga dze 2 1 7 -Pl a ni n c 1 1 0
D V O R ETS KY- Keres 2 1 1 H U BNER- Estevez 2 1 9
- Vaga ni an 43 H UG -Tim n1 an 6 1

307
IVKOV-Planinc 48 MONDRAGON-Vila 1 60
-Portisch 132 MUREI- Vaganian 224
-Sofrevsky 1 1

NEU KIRCH-Uhlm ann 275

JAN SA- Korchnoy 60

KAPENGUT-Lutikov 206....
OSNOS - Shabanov 136
KARPOV- Korchnoy 229
- Kuzmin 267
-Markland 94
- Uhlmann 268 PACHMAN-Gligoric 65
KEENE-Williams 74 - Uhlm ann 58
KERES -Dvorets ky 2 1 1 PARMA- Korchnoy 256
KORCHNOY-Jansa 60 PETROSI AN -Fischer 1 69
- Karpov 229 -Gligoric 1 28
- Kovacs 292 -Hart 1 27
-Parm a 256 - Spassky 1 78
KOSTRO- Uhlm ann 204 PLANINC-Hort 1 10
KOV ACEVIC-Fischer 46 -lvkov 48
KOVACS - Korchnoy 292 PORTI SCH-Hartston 96
KUZMIN- Karpov 267 - Ivkov 132
-Uhlmann 270 -Larsen 38
- Savon 207
-Tal 172

LARSEN-Fischer 85
- Portisch 38
-Sax 300 SAKHAROV-Zhuravlev 28 6
LETELIER-Smyslov 1 1 1 SA VON-Portisch 207
LEVY- Birnboim 49 Uhlm ann 294
LI BERZON- Botvinnik 177 SAX-Larsen 300
LJUBOJEVIC-Andersson 54 SEIDMAN- R . Byrne 290
LUTI KOV- Kapengut 206 SHABANOV-Osnos 136
SMYSLOV-Letelier 1 1 1
-Uhlm ann 99 , 258
SOFREVS KY-Ivkov 1 1
MA KARICHEV-Vaganian 227 SPASS KY-Czerniak 18 1
MA RKLAND- Karpov 94 -Petrosian 178

308
S P I R I D ONO V-Tringov 57 - S uetin 209
STA H LB E RG -Gl igoric 262 - Unzic ker 66
STE I N -Uhlm ann 255 - Vogt 273
SU ETI N - Uhln1 ann 209 -Zin n 2 1 4
SZE KELY-Toth 83

T A L - B ann i k 9 2 U U S I - Chistiakov 153

- Botvinn i k 1 1 6 , 130
-Fischer 63
-Portisch 172
TI M M A N - H ug 61
TOTH - Sze kely 83 V AGAN I AN - B al ashov 264
T RESC H N E R - Weinitsch ke 2 1 5 - Dvoretsky 43
T R I NGOV-Spiridonov 57 - M ak arichev 227
- V agani an 1 1 4 - M urei 224
-Tringov 1 1 4
V I LA - Mon dragon 1 60
VOGT-Uhlm ann 273
U N ZI C K E R-Uhlm ann 66
U H LM A N N -Alex ander 278
- B adestein 285
- Bron stein 68 WE I N ITSCH K E-Treschner 215
- Bellon 299 WESTER I N EN -Westm an 1 5 1
- Bogd anovic 7 2 WESTMAN-Westerinen 1 5 1
-BTO\Vlle 30 2 W I L LI A M S- Keene 74
- R . Byrne 70 WI RTH - H ansen 69
- Eley 4 1
- Geller 1 8 7
- H am ann 203
- Ka rpov 268 Y A NO F S K Y-Gl igoric 1 4 5
- Kostro 204 YU RCH E N KO-Epelm an 1 26
- Kuzm in 270
- Neukirch 2 75
- Pachm an 58
- Savon 294 ZHU RA V LEV - S akharov 286
- S n1yslov 99 , 258 Z I NN - H an1 ann 288
- Stein 255 -Uhl m ann 2 1 4

309
 You o re ·nv·ted
to subscrtbe to
Tre RHM Survey of
CURRENT CHESS
OPENINGS
s o·m e of t h e advan tag es of o u r S u rvey : Yo u sel ect fo r p u r­
c h ase only t h e O pen i n g s se ct i o n s i n w h i c h you h ave a n
i n te rest. (List o f Openings o n next page)

E a c h sect i o n w i l l b e u p-to-t h e- m i n u te , reaso n a b l y p ri ced ,

p u b l i s h e d l o ose-l eaf sty l e i n a m ost att ract i ve p resen ta­
t i o n (b i n d e r s u p p l i e d w i th f i rst o rd e r i n a n y s e ct i o n ) a n d
w i l l i n c l u d e t h e fol l ow i n g :

� 1 00 m ost re c e n t g ran d m aste r g a m es i n e ac h of t h e O pen­

i n g s y o u c h o o se ;

• S e l ecte d fo r t h e i r i m p o rtan ce an d s i g n i f i c a n ce f ro m
many
h u n d re d s of g a m es i n t h at O p en i n g by a to p i nt e r n at i o n a l
g ran d m aste r k n own fo r h i s ex p e rt i se i n t h at a re a ;

� All g a m es a n n otated by l e ad i n g g ra n d m aste rs , i n c l u d i n g

m a n y by the p l aye rs t h e m s e l ves ;

� C u rre n t a n a l ys i s i n d e pth of � o m e of t h e m ost t h eo ret i ca l l y

s i g n i f i cant g a m es b y g ran d m aste r m e m b e rs o f o u r B o a rd
of C o n t r i b u t i n g E d i to rs , o u r B oa rd h av i n g t h e fo l l ow i n g
d i sti n g u i s h e d m e m b e rs h i p , l i sted a l p h abet i ca l l y :

Board of Co.ntributing Ed ito rs

of the R . H . M . S u rvey of C u rrent C hess O pen i n gs
Svetoza r G l i g o ri c L u b o m i r Kava l e k T i g ra n Petros i a n
V l as t i m i l H o rt V i kto r Ko rc h n o i L aj o s Po rti s c h
B o ri s l av l v kov B e n t L a rs e n B o r i s S p ass ky
A n ato l y Ka rpov

(continued on next pag e)

 L i st of O pen i n g s
( C o ve ri ng a l l I m p o r t a n t V a ri at i o n s i n e a c h O p e n i n g )

Sicil ian P i rc Dutch

K i n g 's I nd i an Alekhi ne L a rse n ' s
G r u n fe l d R u y Lo p e z Quee n ' s G a m b i t
N i m z o- l n d i a n Be n o n i King 's G am bit
Eng l ish F re n c h Quee n ' s I n d i a n
Reti C a ro- K a n n Be n ko G a m b i t
(add i t i o n s wi l l b e m ade)

A l l ' ' C h e s s O p e n i n g " t h e o ry i s i n a p e r p et u a l sta g e o f c h an g e ,

s o m e l i n es b e i n g s u c c essfu l l y c h a l l e n g e d a n d d i s c a rd e d ,
o t h e r l i n es i m p roved , n ew a n d p ro m i s i n g l i n es be i n g c o n t i n­
u a l l y d i s c ove red as t h o u s an d s of g a m es a re p l ayed i n c u rre n t
g ra n d m ast e r t o u rn a m e n t s .

N ot o n l y c a n y o u r own g a m e i n y o u r favo r i t e O pe n i n g s be
g re at l y i m p roved by s t u d y of t h e 1 00 c u r re n t g a m es i n t h e
O pe n i n g s s e c t i o n s e l e c t e d b y y o u , b u t y o u w i l l g a i n n ew an d
va l u a b l e i n s i g h ts i n to t h e m i d d l e g a m e p l ay an d e n d g a m e
p l ay f l ow i n g n at u ra l l y f ro m e a c h l i n e t h ro u g h t h e i n d i v i d u a l
g a m e a n n ot at i o n a n d a n a l ys i s- i n-d e p t h by t h e m an y wo rl d ­
f a m ed g ran d m ast e rs w h o w i l l b e s e rv i n g on o u r B oa rd of
C o n t r i b u t i n g E d i t o rs .

T h e ave rage c ost o f e ac h f u l l -s i ze s e c t i o n c o n ta i n i n g a l l w e

h ave j u st d e sc r i b e d s h o u l d be m od es t , b u t se n d n o m o n ey­
o n l y you r n a m e a n d ad d ress on a p os t c a rd-s o t h at y o u w i l l
b e en t e re d as a s u b s c ri b e r to rec e i ve a n n o u n c e m en t s a n d f u l l
d esc r i p t i o n s of eac h O p en i n gs s e c t i o n as t h ey b ec o m e re ady
fo r s h i p m e n t . T h e re is no c h a rg e fo r e n t e r i n g t h i s s u b s c ri p­
t i on , a n d i t p u ts y o u u n d e r n o o b l i g at i o n . You l at e r o rd e r o n l y
w h at y o u w i s h t o o rd e r .

B u t y o u c a n h e l p u s ( a n d yo u rs e l f) b y l i st i n g o n t h e postc a rd
t h e 5 to p c ho i ces of O pen i n g s y o u wou l d l i ke t o s e e cove red .
T h i s i n f o r m a l " st raw p o l l " w i l l g u i d e u s i n t h e o rd e r of p u b­
l i c at i on of i n d i v i d u a l O p e n i n g s s e ct i o n s .

W e a re n ow p re pa r i n g p u b l i c at i o n o f s e c t i o n s c ove ri n g s o m e
of t h e m ost po p u l a r O pe n i n g s a n d c o m m e n c i n g w o r k o n a l l
t h e rest , an d to re c e ive a n n ou n ce m e nt s of e a c h s e c t i o n as i t
b ec o m es ava i l a b l e , m e re l y s e n d y o u r f u l l n a m e an d ad d res s
o n a p o s t c a rd t o :

D e pt . 13
R . H . M . S U R V EY O F C U R R E NT C H ESS O P E N I N G S
8 4 0 W i l l i s Aven u e , A l b e rt s o n , N ew Yo rk 1' 1 50 7

I n Eu r o p e w r i t e to R • H • M P R E S S LT O . • P . O . B o x 55 L o nd o n N 1 3, E n g l a n d S B E
 8 o f the 1Q
To p-Rated Chess Grand masters
i n the wo rld
are on the Board
of Contri buti ng Ed itors
of the Chess d ivision
of R · H · M Press
i nc l ud i ng the
n ew wo r l d c h a m p i o n ,
A n ato l y K a rpov
a n d two p rev i o u s
wo r l d c h ess c h a m p i o n s ,
B o r i s S pass ky a n d T i g ra n Petros i a n .

}
;<.
,,

�
';. \�
�.,> :"
r----- R. H.M. Ch ess B o o ks -------....

Alexa nde r A l e k h i n e G l i g o r i c ' s Be st G a mes

L i fe a n d G a mes 1 945- 1 970
b y A l exa n d e r Kotov b y D a v i d Levy
cl oth b i n d i n g p a p e rb a c k
paperback

H ow F i sch e r P l ays C he s s
T h e Be n ko G a m b i t b y D av i d Levy
b y I n te r n a t i o n a l G ra n d m as t e r c l ot h b i n d i n g
P a l B e n ko
paperback
cl oth b i n d i n g
paperback
H ow T o O pe n A C h ess G a me

T h e Bat t l e of C h ess I d e a s by 7 to p wo r l d p l aye rs

by Anthony Saidy c l ot h b i n d i n g
p a p e r b ac k
cloth b i n d i n g $8.95
pap e rback $4.95

H ow to P l a y t he
T he C he ss O pe n i n g fo r Yo u
M i d d l e G a me i n C h ess
b y L a r ry Eva n s
b y J . E . L i t t l ewoo d
c l oth b i n d i n g
pap e rback
paperback

T h e U n kn o w n Ca p a b l a n ca H ow T o P l ay t h e
L i fe a n d G a mes O pe n i ng i n C h e s s

b y D av i d H o o p e r by Ray Kee n e
a n d D a l e B ra n d reth a n d D a v i d Levy

c l ot h b i n d i n g p a p e rback

paperback

A n a t o l y Ka r po v ' s
42nd U S S R Championsh i p C o l l ected G a me s
Le n i n g rad 1 9 74 b y D avi d Levy
by T h e P l ay e rs c l oth b i n d i n g
paperback p a p e r b ac k
..---- R. H. M. Chess Books --�----.

S an Anto n i o '72 W i j k aan Zee

G ra ndmaste r Tou rnament 1 975
by B e n t Lars e n
a n d D av i d Levy by Th e P l aye rs
p a p e rback c l oth b i n d i n g
p a p e rb a c k

Tigra n Petrosia n :
H is Life and G a mes
by Vi k Vas i l i e v T he World C h a m p i o nsh i p
l nterzona l s :
c l oth b i n d i n g
Len i ng rad- Pet ro pol i s 1 973
by R . G . Wad e , L. S. B l ac kstoc k
a n d A . Kotov
U n d e rsta n d i n g
t h e C h ess O p e n i n gs : c l ot h b i n d i n g

The French Defence

by Svetozar G l i g o r i c
W i t h t h e c o l l abo rati o n of
Wor l d C hess C ha m p i onsh i p
Wo l fgan g U h l rn a n n , a s pe c i a l
contri buti on b y A n ato l y Kar pov b y Svetozar G l i g o r i c
a n d a n i nt rod u ct i o n by a n d R . G . Wad e
M i kh a i l B otvi n n i k p a p e rbac k
c l ot h b i n d i n g
paperback

1 974 World C h ess O l y m p i ad

The G ri.i nfe l d Defence N ice, France
by B otvi n n i k by R ay Kee n e
a n d Est r i n .. a n d D av i d Levy
c l oth bi n d i n g c l oth b i n d i n g
p a p e rbac k p a p e rb ac k

AVA I LA B LE AT YOU R B O O KSTO R E

We a l s o i nv i te y o u to w r i te fo r o u r l atest cata l og .

R·H·M PRESS
840 W I L L I S AVE N U E • A L B E RTS ON , L. l . 1 N EW Y O R K 1 1 507

I n E u r o p e w r i te to R • H • M P R E SS L T O . • P . O . Box 55 Lo n d o n N 1 3, E n g l a n d 5 B E
 fre n c h d efenceO Og l ig
fre n chdefe nceOOg l ig

I II
fre n ch d efe n ceOOg l ig
I