Binder1ocr.pdf

ys + 1 i1 p cp Clless

Technical Editor:

IM Sergei Soloviov

Translation by:

GM Evgeny Ermenkov

Cover design by:

Rustam Taichinov

Copyright© Alexei Kornev 2 017

Printed in Bulgaria by "Chess Stars" Ltd. - Sofia ISBN13 : 978 619 7188 14-1

A PRACTICAL BIACK REPERTOIRE with d5, c6 Volumel

Alexei Kornev

The Slav and Other Defences

Chess Stars

Bibliography Books A Practical White Repertoire with 1.d4 and 2.c4, Vol. 1 by Kornev, Chess Stars 2 0 13 Beating 1.d4 Sidelines by Avrukh, Quality Chess 2012 Complete Slav: Enter a Grandmaster's Laboratory by Sakaev, Chess Evolution 2012 The Classical Slav, by Avrukh, Quality Chess 2 0 14 The Kaufman Repertoire for Black and White, New in Chess 2012 The Semi-Slav, by Schandorff, Quality Chess 2 0 15

Electronic/Periodicals Chess Informant New in chess Yearbook Bestlogic Database Chessbase online database ChessOK Correspondence Database Correspondence Database FICGS DataBase GameKnot Database ICCF Database LSS Database Mega Database

4

Contents Preface

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

7

Part 1. 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 1 2 3 4

Rare; 3.e3 lll f6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3.lll c3 lll f6 Rare; A) 4.i.g5 dxc4; B) 4.e3 e6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 3.cxd5 cxdS A) 4.i.f4 lll c 6 ; B) 4.lll c3 lll f6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 3.cxd5 cxd5 4.lll f3 lll f6 Rare; 5.lll c3 lll c 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

Part 2. 1.d4 d5 2 .c4 c6 3.lll £J c!Lif6 5 6 7 8 9

4.lll b d2 i.f5 Rare; A) 5.e3 e6; B) 5.g3 e6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 4.g3 i.g4 A) 5.lll e 5 i.f5; B) 5.ig2 e6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 4.VNc2 dxc4 Rare; A) 5.e4 b5 ; B) 5.VNxc4 i.f5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 4.e3 ig4 Rare; A) 5.lll b d2 e6; B) 5.cxdS i.xf 3 ; C ) 5.VNb3 W/b6; D) 5.lll c3 e6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 4.e3 ig4 5.h3 i.h5 A) 6.lll b d2 e6; B) 6.g4 i.g6 7.lll e5 e6 ; C) 6.cxd5 cxd5 ; D) 6.lll c3 e6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 0

Part 3. 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.c!Li£J c!Lif6 4.c!Lic3 e6 10 11 12

Rare; 5.W/b3 dxc4 6.VNxc4 b5 A) 7.VNb3 lll b d7; B) 7.VNd3 i.b7 . . . 1 3 1 5.g3 dxc4 Rare; 6.i.g2 lll b d7 A) 7.a4 i.b4; B ) 7.0-0 b 5 . . . . . . . 1 3 8 5.cxd5 exd5 Rare; A) 6.i.g5 h 6 ; B ) 6.W/c2 g 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149

Part 4. 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.c!Li£J c!Lif6 4.c!Lic3 e6 5.e3 a6 13 14 15 16 17 18

Rare; A) 6.h3 lll b d7; B) 6.id2 c5 ; C) 6.a3 lll b d7 . . . . . . . . . . 1 6 7 6.ie2 dxc4 7.a4 c5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178 6.id3 dxc4 7.ixc4 b5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187 6 .c5 lll b d7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205 6 .b3 ib4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209 6.VNc2 c5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219

5

Part 5. 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.c!LJ:f3 tll f6 4.c!ll c3 e6 5 .ig5 dxc4 •

19 20 21

22

Rare; 6.a4 ib4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.e4 b 5 7.e5 h6 8 . .ih4 g 5 A) 9.exf6 gxh4; B) 9 . .ig3 c!ll d5 . . . . . 6.e4 b5 7.e5 h6 8 .ih4 g5 9.c!ll xg5 hxg5 10.ixg5 lll b d7 ll.exf6 .ib7 Rare; 12 .g3 \Wb6 13.ig2 0-0-0 14.0-0 c5 15.dS b4 16.l3bl \Wa6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.e4 b 5 7.e5 h6 8 . .ih4 g 5 9.lll xg5 hxg5 10 . .b:g5 lll bd7 11.exf6 i.b7 12 .g3 \Wb6 13 . .ig2 0-0-0 14. 0-0 c5 15.dS b4 16.lll a4 WfbS 17.a3 c!ll b 8 18.axb4 axb4 A) 19 . .ie3 .ixdS; B) 19.\Wd4 c!ll c 6; C) 19.\Wg4 ixdS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

230 237

244

254

Part 6. 1.d4 d5 without c4 23 24 25 26

A) 2.c3 c5; B) 2.lll c3 c6; C) 2.e3 c!ll f6; D) 2. e4 de; E) 2 .igS h6 . . . 2 6 7 A) 2 .if4 c5 ; B) 2 .lll f3 lll f6 3.i.f4 c 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 280 2.lll f3 lll f6 Rare; 3 ..igS lll e4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287 2 .lll f3 lll f6 3.g3 c6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297

Index of Variations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 304

PREFACE About an year ago I wrote the two-volume work "A Practical Black Rep­ ertoire with llif6, g6, d6" in which the readers had the option to build their opening repertoire on the base of the King's Indian Defence and the Pirc Defence. Both these openings are very good when you have to play for a win irrelevant of the colour of your pieces. Still, sometimes, depending on the situation in the tournament, you have to play some not so aggressive, but more reliable systems. Therefore, I decided to write another two-volume work in which as main openings for Black, I analysed the Slav Defence and the Caro-Kann Defence. Both these openings are very solid. This does not necessarily mean that the maxi­ mum that Black dreams about is a draw. The moment that White plays imprecisely, Black can try to seize the initiative. So, now I am happy to present to my readers the two-volume work "A Practical Black Repertoire with dS, c6". In the first volume, we will concentrate mostly on the Slav Defence (Chapters 1-2 2). In fact, now­ adays the Slav Defence (1.d4 dS 2 .c4 c6) is one of the most popular closed opening in the contemporary tournament practice. In it, contrary to the Queen's Gambit Declined (2 . . . e6), Black fortifies his centre, but does not restrict his bishop on c8. Later, it can be developed to fS, or g4. Besides all that, in the first part of the book, we will analyse all the opening set-ups for White in which he refrains from the pawn-advance c2-c4, after d4-d5 (Chapters 23-26). Among these lines, we have to pay special attention to the London System (1.d4 dS 2 .i.f4, or 1.d4 dS 2 .llif3 llif6 3.i.f4) , which has become tremendously popular lately. It is also worth mentioning that the combination of the Slav Defence and the Caro-Kann Defence enables Black to facilitate his defence in the open­ ing and to avoid numerous unpleasant schemes for him. For example, after 1.c4, he can simply play 1 . . .c6, without being afraid of 2 .e4. In the above mentioned London System, after the moves 1.d4 dS 2 .i.f4 cS 3.e3,1Jlack has the resource 3 . . . cxd4 4.exd4, after which there arises by transposition a variation from the Caro-Kann Defence which is practi­ cally harmless for Black. The author would like to express his enormous gratitude to Ekate­ rina Smirnova for her invaluable assistance in the work over this book.

Alexei Kornev, city of Vyazniki, July 2 0 17 7

Part l 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6

In the first part of our book we will analyse White's not so popular alternatives on move three, when he refrains from 3. 'llf3, or

8

when he plays 3. 'llc 3, he does not develop his king's knight on his moves four and five. The exchange variation has turned into the main danger for Black (Chapters 3, 4) . Numerous fans of the Slav Defence do not spend too much time in studying it. Meanwhile, in the last several years there has been amassed plenty of theory in it and there arise rather complicated varia­ tions, so without precise knowl­ edge in the opening Black may come quickly into a bad position.

Chapter!

1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6

We will analyse as a main opening weapon for Black the Slav Defence against White's first moves d4 and c4. This opening has become very popular in the contemporary tournament prac­ tice. It is encountered in regular open tournaments, as well as in the super-tournaments and even in the matches for the World Championship. This is quite de­ servedly so, because the Slav De­ fence has a deep positional basis. Indeed, with his first move (d7dS) Black begins a fight for the centre and with his second move (c7-c6) he continues with his central strategy, fortifying his central pawn. Still, contrary to the Queen's Gambit (e7-e6), Black

does not close the h3-c8 diagonal and his bishop can be developed later to an active position on fS or g4. In addition, the move c7-c6 creates prerequisites for him to begin active actions on the queen­ side (dxc4, b7-bS) . In some varia­ tions Black can even try success­ fully to hold on to his c4-pawn. This opening has been named the Slav Defence, because many Pol­ ish, Russian, Czech and Yugosla­ vian chess masters have contrib­ uted greatly to the development of its theory.

3.e3 White protects immediately his c4-pawn, but now his bishop on cl is deprived of the possibility to be developed to f4 or gS. About 3.'!Wc2 dxc4 4.�xc4 t.llf6 - see 3.'!Wb3. 3.'!Wb3 dxc4 4.'!Wxc4 t.llf6 S.t.llf3 .ifs, or S.t.llc3 .ifs 6.t.llf3 e6 - see Chapter 7, variation B. 3.t.lld 2 t.llf6 4.t.llgf3 ifs, or 4.e3 ifs S.t.llgf3 e6 - see Chapter S. 9

Chapter 1 It is not good for White to play 3.igS, because after 3 . . . h6 4.ih4, Black can simply capture the pawn 4 . . . dxc4 and White fails to obtain sufficient compensation for it. 5.a4 (5.e4 bS 6.a4, Chepu­ kaitis - Sebag, playchess.com 2003, 6 . . . llJf6 ! ?+) 5 . . . Wfb6. Black removes with tempo his queen away from the h4-d8 diagonal and prepares e7-e5 and ib4, in order to exploit the absence of White's dark-squared bishop from the queenside. 6.'\1;Vd2 eS ! 7. dxeS ib4 8.llJc3, Chepukaitis Karjakin, Dubai 2 0 0 2 , 8 . . . gS ! ? 9.ig3 llJa6 10 .e3 ie6+ Black has given back advantageously the ex­ tra pawn, but has seized firmly the initiative. 3.g3. As a rule, this move leads by transposition to lines from the other Chapters. 3 . . . llJf6.

'\1;Vb3, Berkes - K.Szabo, Paks 2 0 0 2 . Here, the simplest for Black would be to choose 6 . . . '\1;Vb6 ! ? = , in an attempt to trade the. queens and to obtain a quite acceptable position; 5.llJf3 - see 3.llJf3 llJf6 4.g3 ig4 5.ig2) 5 . . . e6 6.f3. After this move there arise very original positions (6.llJf3 llJbd7 - see Chapter 6, variation B). 6 . . . ihS 7.llJh3, Tischbierek - Hug, Zuer­ ich 199. After llJf4, White plans to exchange his knight for the enemy bishop and to obtain the two­ bishop advantage, but leaves his c4-pawn without protection and Black can exploit this immediate­ ly. 7 . . . dxc4 ! ? 8.llJf4 ig6 9.h4 id6 10 .e4 .hf4 ll.hf4 llJhS= There has arisen a position with dynam­ ic balance. Black has an extra pawn at the moment, but White has occupied the centre with his pawns and has restricted consid­ erably the mobility of the enemy bishop on g6. 3.if4 dxc4 ! This is the only correct move for Black; otherwise, White will play e2-e3 and Black will have great difficulties to or­ ganise counterplay on the queen­ side.

About 4.llJc3 dxc4 5.llJf3 e6, or 5.ig2 e6 6.liJf3 llJbd7 - see Chap­ ter 11. 4.cxdS cxdS - see Chapter 3, 4.g3 llJf6. 4.llJf3 ig4 - see Chapter 6, 3.llJf3 llJf6 4.g3 ig4. 4.ig2 ig4 5.llJc3 (5.h3 ihS 6. 10

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.e3 lbf6 4.e4 b5 5.lbc3 lbf6 6.f3 ? ! White protects reliably his pawn on e4, but deprives his own knight of the f3-square. (6.lbf3 e6 - see Chap­ ter 10, 5. i.f4 dxc4 6.e4 bS) 6 . . . e6 7.a4, Gonzalez Diaz - Bravo Bar­ ranco, Barbera del Valles 1997, 7 . . . 'i;Yb6 ! ?+ White has no compen­ sation for the pawn. 4.e3. This move looks more re­ liable than 4.e4, but is also insuf­ ficient for equality. 4 . . . b5 5.a4 lbf6 6.lbc3 (Unfortunately for White it would not work for him to play here 6.axbS cxb5 7.b3?, in view of 7 . . . eS ! 8 .ixeS i.b4+ 9. @e2 , Mancini - Pert, France 2 0 04, 9 . . . lbd5-+) 6 . . . 'i;Yb6. This is Black's simplest move. He should better refrain from b5-b4, be­ cause this would weaken his c4pawn. 7.lbf3 e6 8.i.e2 i.b4 9.0-0 0-0 10 .'\!;l/c2 i.b7 11.gfdl lbbd7. Black has managed to complete his development and to deploy harmoniously his pieces. 12.lbeS (12.lbgS, Sulskis - Antal, Plovdiv 2 01 2 , 12 . . . a6 ! ?+) 12 . . . lbxeS 13. he5 lbd7+

3

...

4.i.d3 White wishes to impede the development of Black's bishop on c8. Still, he presents his opponent with the possibility to accomplish an advantageous break in the cen­ tre with the help of a tactical op­ eration. About 4.lbc3 e6 - see Chapter 2, variation B. 4.lbf3 ig4 - see Chapters 8-9. 4.lbd2 ifs 5.lbgf3 e6 - see Chapter 5, variation A. The move 4.'\!;l/c2 cannot create problems for Black. 4 . . . ig4 5.lbc3 (5.id3 e6 6.lbc3 dxc4 - see 5.lbc3 ; 5.lbf3 i.xf3 - see Chapter 8, 5.Wc2 ixf3) 5 . . . e6 6.id3 dxc4 7.ixc4, Gnidenko - Domnin, St Peters­ burg 2005, 7 . . . c5 ! ? 8.lbge2 cxd4 9.lbxd4 a6 10 .h3 ihS 11.0-0 lbbd7 12 .ie2 ig6 13.id3 ixd3 14.'i;Yxd3 �c8=

4

...

e5 !

�f6

This is the point. 11

Chapter 1 5.c!LJc3 White should better refrain from opening the game in the centre. Following 5.cxd5 ? ! e4 !+ and then cxd5, Black obtains the c6square for his knight, Potapov Komliakov, Salekhard 2 0 07. 5.�b3 e4+ Hoelzl - Madl, Aus­ tria 2 0 01. After 5.c!LJe2 , Black's simplest move would be 5 . . . id6, for exam­ ple 6.dxe5 he5. Here, it is essen­ tial that White has played too early the move c!LJe2 and cannot attack the enemy bishop with the move c!LJf3. 7.cxd5 �xd5+ Paw­ lowski - Strumberg, ICCF 2 014. Following 5.dxe5 dxc4, it is only White who may have prob­ lems.

It is obviously bad for White to play here 6.exf6?! cxd3 7.fxg7 hg7 8 .c!LJf3 c!LJa6 9.0-0, Zhao Girya, Khanty-Mansiysk 2 014, 9 . . .!�g8 ! ? Black begins an attack against the enemy king. 10.c!LJbd2 i.e6+, followed by �d7, 0-0-0. 12

White can hardly parry his oppo­ nent's threats on the g-file, be­ cause the powerful black pawn on the d-file squeezes his forces. The endgame is preferable for Black after 6.hc4 �xdl+ 7.
5 . . . e4 Black acquires space with tempo.

additional

1.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.e3 tlJf6 6.J.c2 J.d6

7.ttlge2 7.cxd5. This move seems im­ precise, because after 7 . . . cxd5, Black will be able to develop his knight on c6. 8.f3 0-0 9.fxe4 tlJxe4 10.tlJf3 (10.J.xe4 dxe4 11. tlJxe4 .ib4+ 12 . .id2 ges�) 10 . . . tlJxc3 ll.bxc3, Chemin - Kram­ nik, Moscow 1996. Here, Black can maintain a slight but stable edge with the line: ll . . . tlJc6 ! ? 12. 0-0 f5+, preventing e3-e4. Later, he can continue with tlJa5 and in the middle game White is unlikely to have compensation for his weak pawns on c3 and e3.

8.fxe4 tlJxe4 9.i.xe4 (Natural­ ly, White cannot play here 9.tlJxe4 dxe4 10 ..ixe4?, due to 10 ...l,1;¥h4-+) 9 . . . dxe4 10.tlJxe4 i.xc4 11.'1;¥c2 .ids 12.tlJxd6+ '1;¥xd6+, followed by tlJd7-f6, 0-0, gae8 with power­ ful initiative on the light squares. 8.cxd5 cxd5 9.fxe4 tlJxe4 10. i.xe4 dxe4 ll.tlJxe4. White has managed to win a pawn, but Black has seized firmly the initiative. ll . . . W/h4+ 12.tlJf2 l,1;¥g5 13 .g3 J.b4+. He exploits the fact that his oppo­ nent cannot interpose against the check with his bishop because of the loss of his e3-pawn, so White loses his castling rights. 14.©fl 0-0 15.tlJe2 f5 16.©g2 '1;¥d8 17.tlJf4 J.f7 18.gf1 J.d6� Firsching - Rada, ICCF 2 011.

7 . . . 0-0

7.f3. The pawn on e4 restricts considerttbly White's pieces, so his desire to exchange it as quick­ ly as possible is easily under­ standable. 7 . . . J.e6 ! This is Black's most precise move. Now, if White captures on c4, without the pre­ liminary exchange on d5, Black will manage to regain the pawn on c4. 13

Chapter 1 8 .id2 •

The move 8.0-0? allows Black to sacrifice his bishop in a typical fashion 8 . . . hh2 + 9.©xh2 lll g 4+ 10.©g3 h5 11.gh1 W/g5 1 2 .f4 Wfg6 13.fS W/g5 14.W/fl h4+ 15.gxh4 lll h 6+ 16. ©f2 W/xh4-+ Th move 8 .h3 seems a bit slow. 8 . . . lll a 6. Black prepares the trans­ fer of his knight to the c7-square, from where it will protect the im­ portant d5-square and can go even­ tually to g5 in order to join into the attack against White's mon­ arch. 9.cxd5 cxd5 10.a3 lll c7+ Por­ tisch - Beliavsky, Hungary 2 003.

8 . . �a6 9.a3 �c7 10.c5 .ie7 11.0-0 b6 .

14

Black prepares the develop­ ment of his bishop to the fl-a6 di­ agonal.

12.b4 .ia6 13.f3 exf'3 14.

gxf'3 W/d7oo Marquardt - Pu­

zanov, ICCF 2 015. White has managed to exchange the enemy e4-pawn, but Black's bishop on a6 exerts powerful pressure against his position.

Chapter 2

1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 .tLJc3 tLJf6

4.if4 dxc4

We are going to analyse White's main lines in the follow­ ing chapters of our book, while now we will deal with A) 4 . .ig5 and B) 4.e3, when after 4 . . . e6, he refrains from the most natural move S.tl:)f3. About 4.g3 dxc4 S.tl:)f3 e6, or S.ig2 e6 6.tl:)f3 tl:)bd7 - see Chap­ ter 11. 4.\!Nb3 dxc4 S.'1Nxc4 ifs 6.tl:)f3 e6 - see Chapter 7, variation B2. 4.cxdS cxdS - see Chapter 3, variation B. 4.tl:)f3 e6 - see Chapters 10-2 2 .

S.tl:)f3 e6 - see Chapter 10, S.if4 dxc4. S.e4 bS, or S.e3 bS 6.a4 \!Nb6 see Chapter 1, 3.if4. S.a4 Was 6.tl:)f3 (6.id2 eS. see 4.igS) 6 . . . tl:)bd7 7.id2 es 8.e3 exd4 9.exd4 ib4 10.i.xc4 0-0 11.0-0 tl:)b6 12 .ib3, Schef­ fknecht - S.Nikolic, Tuebingen 2 0 01,12 . . . ifS ! ? =

A) 4 .ig5 .

This is a very risky move for White, since Black can simply capture the c4-pawn and White will need plenty of efforts in order to regain it.

4 . . . dxc4 lS

Chapter 2 12 .'!Wd2 e6 13 .bxc3 llJd7+) 7 ... i.a6 8.i.xf6 exf6 9.'!Wcl (9.lDf3 i.e7=) 9 ... c3 10.bxc3 i.xfl 11.xfl cS 12. lDf3, Tartakower - Bogoljubow, Karlsbad 1929, 12 . . . llJd7 ! ? 13 .g3 l:k8=

5 . . . '!Wa5 Black creates the threat llJe4, but White should better ignore it.

5.a4 This move against b7-bS.

is

prophylactic

S ..bf6 exf6 6.e3 (6.a4 �as see S.a4) 6 . . . bS 7.a4 b4 8.lDbl i.a6 - see S.e3. S.lDf3 bS 6.e3 e6 - see Chapter 19. S.e4 bS 6.eS llJdS 7.a4 h6 8. i.d2 (8.i.h4 �d7! ?+) 8 . . . aS ! ? This is Black's most precise response. Here, after 9.axbS llJxc3 10.bxc3 cxbS+, White's queen-sortie to f3 would not win material for him, because Black's rook has numer­ ous squares on the a-file. As a re­ sult he remains with a solid extra pawn. S.e3 bS 6.a4. White must try to undermine the enemy bS-pawn as quickly as possible in order to force the pawn-advance bS-b4 and thus to weaken the protection of the pawn on c4. 6 . . . b4 7.lDbl (7.llJa2 ? ! llJe4 8 .i.h4 '!Was 9.lDf3, Penson - Van Routte, Gent 1989, 9 ... b3+ ! ? 10.llJc3 i.a6 11.i.e2 lDxc3 16

6.�t'3 6.i.xf6?! This move not only presents Black with the two-bish­ op advantage, but also enhances the development of his kingside. 6 . . . exf6 7.e3 i.b4 8 .'!Wcl i.e6 9.�f3 �d7 10 .i.e2 0-0 11.0-0 lDb6 12 .e4, Rosa Valenzuela - Salazar Jacob, Vina del Mar 1997, 12 . . . l'fad8 ! ?+ Following 6.i.d2?! eS ! , Black obtains a better position. 7.dxeS (7.llJe4? Vladimirov - Sasikiran, Kolkata 2000, 7 . . . '!WdS ! ? 8.�xf6+ gxf6+; 7.�f3? exd4 8.�xd4 �bd7 9.e3 lDeS+ Snehal - Perez Garcia, Barbera del Valles 2 016) 7 . . . �xeS 8.�f3 '!Wes+ Black has an extra

l.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.4Jc3 4Jf6 4.igS de pawn. White is incapable of exploiting his lead in development, because after the natural move 9.e4? ! , he will suddenly have problems with the protection of the f2-square : 9 ... 4Jg4 10 .Wie2, Ornstein - Kirov, Eksjo 1980, 10 ... 4Ja6 ! ?+, followed by 4Jb4 and the threats 4Jd3(c2) will be very unpleasant for White.

6

• • •

ICCF 2009, 14 . . . cS ! ? = , with ap­ proximately equal chances in the endgame.

10 Wfxb2 11.lkl .i.b4 12. Wfd2 Wfxd2+ 13.©xd2 0-0 • • •

tle4 7 .i.d2 tlxd2 •

Black has succeeded in obtain­ ing the two-bishop advantage, but lags in development.

8.tlxd2 e5 9.tlxc4 Wlb4

It would be very difficult for both sides to fight for an advan­ tage in this endgame.

14.e3

10.tlxe5 10.e4? ! exd4 11.Wfxd4 ie6 12. 0-0-0 4Jd7 13.4Jd6+ hd6 14. '!Wxd6 aS+ Mende - Borst, IECG 2003. The vulnerability of the b4square provides Black with a sta­ ble edge both in the endgame as well as in the middle game. It is also possible for White to play here 10 .e3 ie6 11.ltJxeS '!Wxb2 12Jkl ib4 13.'!Wd2 '!Wxd2+ 14. ©xd2, Giannetto - Hessenius,

14.e4 4Jd7 1s.gb1 liJxeS 16. gxb4, draw, Sorensen - Leiner, ICCF 2 011. Indeed, after 16 . . . gds 17.dS (17.©e3? ! 4Jg4+ 18.©f3 aS+) 17 . . . aS 18.gb2 cxdS 19.ltJxdS ie6 20.gbs id7 2i.gxb7 ic6 = , Black restores the material balance, but there would be just a few material left on the board.

14

• • •

tid7

Black should better either ex­ change the powerful enemy knight, or just oust it immediately away from that square.

15.tld3 It seems less reliable for White to opt here for 1s.gb1 cs 16.4Jxd7 17

Chapter 2 ix:d7. Black has completed his de­ velopment and his bishop-pair may turn into an important trump for him in the future. 17.dS a6 18.aS gfe8 19.!c4 gads 20.ghel ix:aS 21.gxb7 ic6 22.ga7 ix:dS 23.ix:dS gxdS+ 24.@c2 gfs 25. ge2 ghs 26.h3 gh6+ Varonen Laukola, ICCF 2 0 14.

15 . .iaS 16.@c2 tll f6= Hop­ man - Girl, Hilversum 2009. Black has two powerful bishops, but White's central pawns should not be underestimated at all. ..

B) 4.e3 e6

s.ec2 18

About 5.tll f3 a6 - see Chapters 13-18. 5.a3 a6 6.tll f3 tll b d7 - see Chapter 13. 5.f4. This move has been played numerous times by A.Ru­ binstein. It is not however among the best achievements of this great theoretician . . . 5 . . . cS ! ? Black wishes to develop his knight on c6 in order to exert pressure against the d4-square. The loss of a tem­ po is not so important here, be­ cause the move f2-f4 may turn out to be not so useful for White later due to the weakening of the e4square. 6.tll f3 tll c 6 7 . .ie2 (7.a3 a6 8.tll e S !e7 9.cxdS, Seirawan Chemin, Wijk aan Zee 1986, 9 . . . exdS ! ?oo) 7 . . . .ie7 8 . 0 - 0 0-0 9.b3 (9.tll e S cxd4 10.exd4 dxc4 11. tll xc6 bxc6 12 .ix:c4, Lilov - Droz­ dovskij , playchess.com 2006, 12 . . . ec7 ! ? 13.ie3 gds+ White's d4pawn would need permanent protection.) 9 . . . cxd4 10.exd4 dxc4 11.bxc4, Villeneuve - Feller, Cannes 2 0 07, 11 . . . b 6 ! ? 12 .!b2 !b7+, followed by lL!aS, gcs, ex­ erting pressure against the enemy hanging pawns. 5.!d2 a6 6.cs (6.'!Wc2 cs - see 5.'!Wc2 ; 6.lL!f3 c5 - see Chapter 13, 6 . .id2) 6 ... eS. Black exploits the fact that White has not developed his knight on f3 yet and accom­ plishes this advance without the preliminary move tll b d7. 7.dxeS (7.tll f3 e4oo Mirzoev - Handke,

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. lll c3 lllf6 4.e3 e6 Barcelona 2 011) 7 . . . lll fd7 8.f4 lll xcS 9.b4 lll e 6 lO J�bl aS+± Jus­ supow - Movsesian, Germany 1999. S.cxdS exdS. There has arisen the Carlsbad pawn-structure, which often happens in the ex­ change variation of the Queens Gambit, but here, White's bishop on cl has remained restricted in­ side his own camp and is deprived of the possibility to go to f4 or gS. 6.id3 (6.1.Mlc2 id6 7.id3 0-0 8. lll g e2 l3e8 - see 6.id3) 6 . . . id6 7. lll g e2 0-0 ·

8.h3 l3e8 9.0-0 lll b d7 10.f3. White plans to advance e3-e4, but after 10 . . . cSoo, this becomes im­ possible due to the horrible weak­ ening of the d4-square, Nouisseri - Andujar, Siegen 1970. 8 .1.Mlc2 l3e8 9.i.d2 (9.0-0 lll b d7 - see 8 . 0-0) 9 . . . b6 ! ?+, preparing c6-cS and lll c 6, Stanojevic Shabtai, Budapest 1994. 8.0-0 l3e8 9.�c2 lll b d7 10.f3 cS 11.b3, Novoa - Saint Amour, IECG 2001, 11 . . . b6 ! ?+ S.id3 a6 6.b3 (6.a4 c5 7.lll f3 dxc4 8 .ixc4 lll c 6 - see Chapter

14, 7.a4 c5 8.i.xc4 lll c 6; 6.cS lll bd7 7.lll f3 es - see Chapter 16, 7.id3 eS ; 6.lll f3 dxc4 - see Chapter lS) 6 . . . cS 7.lll f3 lll c6 8.0-0 (8.cxdS exdS 9.0-0 cxd4 10.lll xd4 lll xd4 11.exd4. White has some lead in development, but this is irrele­ vant, since Black does not have any pawn-weaknesses in his posi­ tion and he only needs several moves in order to evacuate his king away from the centre. 11... ib4 12.lll a4 0-0 13.if4 ig4 14.f3 id7= Saric - Jakovljevic, Zadar 2012) 8 . . . dxc4. Black exploits the misplacement of the enemy bish­ op on d3 and wishes simply to capture the pawn on d4. 9.bxc4 cxd4 10.exd4 (10.lll e 4? ! dxe3. White does not have full compen­ sation for the sacrificed pawn. 11. ixe3 lll b 4 12 .id4, Levin - Vy­ sochin, St Petersburg 2 0 09, 12 . . . ie7! ?+) 10 . . . lll xd4 11.lll xd4 1.Mlxd4 12 .ib2, Ivanisevic - Acs, Hunga­ ry 2 0 14 12 . . . id7! ?oo. Here, White has some compensation for the pawn, but not more than that. S.b3. Now, after an exchange on c4, White will be able to recap­ ture with his pawn. S . . . ib4. Black exploits immediately the basic de­ fect of White's previous move the weakening of the el-aS diago­ nal. 6.ib2 (6.id2 . White's bishop is not so actively placed here as on the b2-square. 6 . . . 0-0 7.lll f3 b6 ! ? This i s the simplest fo r Black. He plans to advance c6-cS. 8.id3 dxc4 9.bxc4 cS 10.0-0 lll c 6 11.lll e4 ixd2 12 .�xd2 cxd4 13.exd4 ib7= 19

Chapter 2 Rost - Tseng, ICCF 2 0 1S. White's hanging pawns have become an excellent target for an attack by Black's pieces.) 6 . . . llie4

Now, White has a choice how to protect his knight on c3 . Following 7.llige2, Black has an interesting pawn-sacrifice : 7 . . . dxc4 ! ? 8.bxc4 eS ! 9.f3 (9.dxeS 0-0iii) 9 . . ..ixc3+ 10 ..ixc3 llixc3 ll. llixc3 0-0 12 .dS, Cabello Rodri­ guez - Van Bommel, LSS 2008, 12 . . . llia6!?oo. White has much more space, but his dark squares have been seriously weakened. 7.�c2 eS. Black prepares the development of his bishop on the fS-square in an attempt to exploit the misplacement of the enemy queen on c2.

It is not good for White to play here 8 . .id3, because of 8 . . . exd4 20

9.exd4 llixc310 ..ixc3 dxc4! 11 . .ixc4 �xd4 12 .llie2 .ixc3+ 13.�xc3 �xc3+ 14.llixc3 0-0+ and he has no compensation for the pawn at all, Daenen - Booth, ICCF 2012. Following 8.cxdS, l.Sokolov Palac, Neum 2 0 0S, 8 . . . cxdS ! ? , Black has n o problems whatsoev­ er. 9 . .id3 exd4 10.exd4 .ifS 11. llige2 0-0 12.0-0 ge8 13.a3 .ixc3 14.llixc3 llic6 1S.llixe4 .ixe4 16. gfel .ixd3 17.�xd3 �d7= Later, White needs to play accurately, because in numerous variations Black's knight may turn out to be more powerful than White's "bad" bishop on b2. 8 . 0-0-0 .ifS 9 . .id3. He wish­ es to neutralise the pressure of Black's bishop on fS, but his bish­ op on d3 will come under an at­ tack with tempo. 9 . . . llixc3 10. .ixc3, Anuszkiewicz - Splosnov, Suwalki 2000, 10 . . . e4 ! ? 11 . .ie2 .ixc3 12 .�xc3 0-0+ 8.a3 .ixc3+ 9 . .ixc3 llixc3 10. �xc3. Two couples of minor piec­ es have gone off the board and it looks like the game is nearing quickly a drawish outcome. Still, just after a few moves the situa­ tion is sharpened. 10 . . . dxc4 11. dxeS cxb3 12 . .ic4 b2. Black wish­ es to deflect the enemy queen away from the el-aS diagonal. 13.�xb2 (13.gbl �gs 14.llie2 llid7 1S.f4 �xg2 16.ggl �xh2 17.gxg7 �hl+ 18.lligl gf8 = Diaz - Osorio, ICCF 2016. There has arisen a po­ sition with dynamic balance. Black has temporarily two extra pawns, but they are both weak,

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.lliC3 llif6 4.e3 e6 while his king has remained stranded at the centre of the board.) 13 . . . �aS+ 14.©e2 llid7 1S. f4 llib6 16.i.b3 'iNbS+ 17.@f2 i.e6 18.l:!bl i.fS 19 . .ic2 �xb2 20.l:!xb2 hc2 21.l:!xc2 0-0-0 2 2 .llif3 l:!d3 = Rost - Pecka, ICCF 2 01S. Black's prospects are not worse in this endgame thanks to the active position of his rook.

5

•••

since Black can win a tempo by at­ tacking it with his rook.

7.dxc5 hc5 8.cxd5 exd5

a6

9.lkl

6 .id2 •

About 6.a3 llibd7 7.llif3 .id6 see Chapter 13, variation C. 6.llif3 cS, or 6.b3 cs 7.llif3 llic6, or 7.dxcS hcS 8.llif3 dxc4 - see Chapter 18.

The move 9.llibS leads to great complications. 9 ... llibd7 10.b4 .ib6 11.llid6+ ©e7 12.llifS+ @f8 13.i.c3 g6 14.llid4 llie4 ! ? 1S.llie6+ fxe6 16.hh8 'iNe7oo Timman - Mo­ rozevich, Wijk aan Zee 2 0 0 2 . White has won the exchange, but lags horribly in development. His pawn on b4 is hanging while Black is threatening to advance e6-eS, cutting off the possible re­ treats of the enemy bishop on h8.

9 .ie6 10.�xdS. White wins a pawn but is considerably behind in development. 10 Vxd5 11. •••

••.

6.cS llibd7 7.b4 (7.llif3 b6 - see Chapter 16, 7.�c2) 7 . . . eS 8.llif3 e4 9.llid2 g6 10 ..ie2 .ig7 ll ..ib2 0-0oo Levin - Riazantsev, Sochi 2 016.

6 . . . c5 After the opening of the c-file, the placement of White's queen on c2 may tum out to be bad,

�xc5 Vxd2+ 12.©xd2 �e4+ 13.©dl llixc5 14.lhcS llid7 15. l::l a5 l::ld 8 16. ©cl l::lc 8+ 17.©bl llic5 18.f3 0-0 19.llie2 l::lfd8� Bareev - Gong, Beersheba 2 00S. It is an endgame indeed, but White's lag in development hurts him seriously. In addition, his rook on aS is misplaced. 21

Chapter 3

1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3.cxd5 cxd5

the lines in which he is not in a hurry to develop his knight to f3. The next chapter will be devoted to the variations in which he de­ velops his king's knight immedi­ ately to f3 ( 4.llJf3).

This is the basic position of the exchange variation of the Slav De­ fence. It was considered for a long time to be a prerequisite of a quick draw. White used to choose it when he did not mind a drawish outcome, or when he played against an opponent who was stronger than him. Still, there were new possibilities found for White some years ago and despite the fact that they did not promise him an advantage, Black needed to play very precisely in numer­ ous variations. In the line A) 4 ..if4 we will deal with variations in which White postpones the de­ velopment of his knight on bl to the c3-square, while in variation B) 4.�c3 we will pay attention to 22

About 4.g3 llJf6 5.i.g2 (5.lll f3 llJc6 - see Chapter 4; 5.llJc3 llJc6 - see variation B) 5 . . . llJc6 6.llJc3 (6.llJf3 .US - see Chapter 4) 6 . . . i.fS - see variation B. The move 4.i.gS does not cre­ ate any serious problems for Black. 4 . . . h6 5.i.h4 llJc6 6.llJc3 i.fS 7.e3, Puuska - Mintenko, Krakow 2 012, 7 . . . �b6 ! ? He is pre­ paring e6, .id6, lll g e7. If White captures the pawn on dS - 8 . lll xdS, then i t all ends i n a n imme­ diate draw by a perpetual check 8 . . . �xb2 9.lll c 7+ @dB 10.lll xa8 .ic2 11.�cl �c3+ 12 .@e2 �d3+ 13.@el �c3=

A) 4 . .if4 �c6 5.e3 5.llJf3 llJf6 - see Chapter 4. 5.llJc3 llJf6 - see variation B.

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.cd cd 4.ilf4 lll c6 5.e3 ilf5 5

...

.if5 ! ?

This i s the simplest move for Black.

would force White to weaken his kingside in numerous variations.

He also obtains a very good position after 5 . . . lll f6, but then af­ ter 6. ild3, White can prevent the development of Black's bishop on c8 to the fS-square.

9 . .ib5 9.ile2 g5 10 .ilg3, Nguyen Tran Quang - Switzer, Vung Tau 1999, 10 . . . hS ! ?oo

6.�b3 6.lll c3 lll f6 - see 4.lll c3.

6

.•.

The move 9.a3, Lenderman Wesley So, Las Vegas 2 014, seems a bit slow 9 . . . gS ! ? 10.ilg3 hS 11.h3 iif7 12.Ei:cl ilg6 13 .ile2 lll h 6 14. ilh2 lll fSoo

�d7 7.tlic3 e6 8.tli:f3

Following 8.Ei:cl Ei:c8 9.tlif3 f6 10 .h3 lll a5 11.�b5 �xbS 12 .ilxbS+ iif7= , there arises an approxi­ mately equal endgame on the board, Johnston - Kracht, ICCF 2 016.

8 . . . f6! White's plans include ilbS, lll e S, so Black should better take an immediate control over the eS­ square. Besides that, he can man­ age after g7-g5, h7-h5, or h7-h5, to begin an immediate chase after the enemy bishop on f4 and this

Following 9.Ei:cl, Galje - Kui­ pers, Haarlem 2 006, Black should better begin with the move 9 . . . hS ! ?oo, because the straightfor­ ward line: 9 . . . gS 10.ilg3 hS 11.h4 g4 12.lll d 2 .ig6 13 ..ibSt, would enable White to seize the initia­ tive, Melkumyan - Lampert, Bad Wiessee 2 0 14.

9

••.

h5! ? 10.h4

(diagram) The inclusion of the moves h7h5 and h2-h4 is in favour of Black, because a weak g4-square has ap­ peared in White's camp. The gS23

Chapter 3 c!Oc6 23.i;dt .ia3 24.d5 c!Oe7 25.dxe6+ @xe6= Rau - Ilonen, ICCF 2 016. This endgame seems approximately equal. In addition, if White plays imprecisely later, Black can even play for a win, uti­ lising his pawn-majority on the queenside.

B) 4.c!Oc3 c!Of6 square in Black's position is relia­ bly covered by his pawn on f6, while his weakness on g6 can be defended by his bishop on fS, his knight on e7 and his king on t7.

10 c!Oa5

• • •

�k8 11.0-0 a6 12 .ie2 •

There is no need to analyse here the move 4 . . . c!Oc6, because White can easily reach a position with a black knight on f6 chang­ ing a bit the order of the moves 3.tll c3 tll f6 4.cxdS cxdS.

Black has got rid of the pin and transfers his knight to the c4square with tempo.

13.Yedl c!Oc4 14.c!Od2

5 .if4 •

White develops his knight to an active position.

White cannot put up with the enemy knight on c4 for long, so he sacrifices temporarily a pawn. Now, the position is quickly sim­ plified. 14 . . . c!Oxb2 15.'flYb3 c!Od3

16.hd3 hd3 17.c!Oxd5 .ic2 18.c!Ob6 hb3 19.c!Oxd7 @xd7 20.c!Oxb3 b6 2U�fcl c!Oe7 22.e4 24

About S.tll f3 tll c 6, or S.e3 tll c 6 6.tll f3 .ig4, or S.g3 tll c 6 6.c!Of3 �JS, or 6 . .ig2 .ifs 7.tll f3 e6 - see Chap­ ter 4. It does not look good for White to play here S.f3. He prepares e2e4 indeed, but deprives his knight of the f3-square. S . . . Yeb6 6.e4

l.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.cd cd 4. CiJ c3 CiJf6 5. if4 CiJ c6 6.e3 if5 dxe4 7.fxe4 eS. Black begins a fight for the dark squares. 8.i.bS+ CiJc6 9.ds i.b4 10 .W/d3 a6 11.ia4 W/aS 12 .i.dl CiJd4oo Ruiz-Jarabo Botev, ICCF 2 01S. S.i.gS. White's bishop is not so well placed on this square as on f4. s . . . CiJe4 6.CiJxe4 (6.i.f4 CiJc6 7. CiJf3 f6 - see Chapter 4) 6 ... dxe4 7.a3 (The drawback of the place­ ment of the bishop on gS is em­ phasized by the fact that White cannot play 7.e3?, because of 7 . . . '1;l/aS-+ and Black wins a piece.) 7 ... W/b6 8Jkl ifs 9.W/a4 + ?! (It is more reliable for White to choose here 9.e3 CiJc6 10 .i.c4 h6 11.i.h4 eS 12 .CiJe2 id6= and at least he would not end up in an inferior position.) 9 . . . CiJd7 10.W/c2 h6 11. i.d2 es. Black seizes the initiative with an energetic play. 12.dxeS ie7 13.ie3 W/e6 14.g4 ih7 1S.CiJh3 gS !+, emphasizing the misplace­ ment of White's knight at the edge of the board, Ermakov - Ko­ zlov, ICCF 2 014.

5 . . . CiJc6 6.e3 About 6.CiJf3 ifs, or 6Jkl ifs 7.CiJf3 e6 - see Chapter 4.

6 . . . if5 (diagram)

7.W/b3 This move has become popu­ lar just recently. White exerts pressure against the b7-pawn and forces the move CiJaS and then the return of Black's bishop to d7.

Still, he loses plenty of time on maneuvers with his queen and Black obtains a good position. 7.CiJf3 e6 - see Chapter 4. 7.ie2 e6 8.g4. White begins active actions on the kingside, but weakens the position of his own king. (8.CiJf3 id6 - see Chapter 4; 8 .W/b3 ib4 9.CiJf3 0-0 - see Chap­ ter 4, variation C) 8 . . . ig6 9.h4 (9.f3 i.e7oo Nalbandian - Marce­ lin, Paris 1994) 9 . . . hS 10 .gS CiJe4=, followed by i.e7, 0-0, Del Rey Garcia Ruido, Villagarcia de Aro­ sa 199S. Black's king will be much safer than its counterpart in this middle game. 7.f3. White is trying to provoke complications. Before even com­ pleting the development of his pieces, he plans to begin a pawn­ offensive on the kingside (g2-g4, h2-h4). The shelter of his own king is weakened in the process, however . . . 7 . . . e6 8.g4 ig6 9.h4 (9 .W/b3, Bunzmann - Kapic, Ger­ many 2 003, 9 . . . i.b4 ! ? = ) 9 . . . hS 10.gS CiJd7 ll.ih2, Miladinovic 2S

Chapter 3 Ronchetti, Frascati 2 005 (11.lll h 3, Vaisser - Fressinet, Chartres 2005, ll ... lll b6! ?=) ll ... 1.Wb6! ? Black must organise active actions on the queenside in order to impede his opponent's play on the other side of the board. 12 .'l!;Yd2 gc8 13. 'iti f2 .ib4 14.lll g e2 0-0= The move 7.gcl does not promise much to White. 7 . . . gc8 8.'l!;Yb3 (8.lll f3 e6 - see Chapter 4) 8 . . . lll a5 9 . .ib5+ (9.1.Wa4+ .id7 10. 1.Wdl e6 11 . .id3, Drozdova - Girya, Khanty-Mansiysk 2014, 11...lll c4+) 9 . . . .id7 10 .'l!;Ya4 a6. This is the simplest move for Black. He forc­ es immediately the trade of his "bad" bishop. 11.hd7+ lll xd7 12. lll g e2 b5 13.'l!;Ydl e6 14.0-0 !i..e7 15.1.Wd3 0-0=, followed by lll c4 and doubling of his major pieces on the c-file, Muzychuk - Girya, Khanty-Mansiysk 2 014. The move 7 ..id3 is absolutely harmless for Black. 7 . . . hd3 8 . 'l!;Yxd3 e 6 9.lll ge2 . This develop­ ment of the knight is not good for White (9.lll f3 .ie7 - see Chapter 4, variation A). 9 ...ie7 10.0-0 0-0 ll.h3 (11.gacl gc8 12 .h3 - see 11. h3) ll . . . gc8 12 .gacl 'l!;Yd7 13.gfdl b6. It is useful for Black to deprive his opponent of the active possi­ bility lll a4-c5. 14 . .ih2 (14 . .ig5 h6 15.!i..xf 6 !i..xf 6 16.a3 lll a S= Arnold Le, Belfort 2 0 05) 14 . . . gfd8 15. 1.Wbl 1.Wb7 16.lll f4 h6 17.lll d3 lll a5= Eperjesi - Le, Budapest 2 0 05. 7 . .ib5 e6 8.1.Wa4. White in26

creases his pressure on the a4-e8 diagonal, but this activity is pre­ mature and Black seizes the initi­ ative thanks to a nice tactical trick. (It would be better for White to have played here 8.lll f3 lll d 7, or 8.gcl !i..e 7 9.lll f3 lll d7 - see Chap­ ter 4, variation D.) 8 . . . 'l!;Yb6 9.lll f3 .ie7 10.lll e5 0-0 11 . .ixc6 gfc8 !

This is the point! It turns out Black is not forced to capture the bishop. 12 .e4 dxe4 13.!i..b 5 a6 14 . .ic4 1.Wxb2+ Illingworth - Bjelobrk, Nadi 2013. 12 .hb7 'l!;Yxb7 13 .0-0 1.Wxb2 14.lll c 6 .if8+ Nebolsina - Zhuko­ va, Dagomys 2008. Black's two powerful bishops provide him with a stable advantage. 12 . .ib5 a6 13 .0-0 axb5 14. 'l!;Yxb5 'l!;Yxb5 15.lll xb5 gc2 . He has powerful initiative for the sacri­ ficed pawn. 16.mbl, Vera Gonza­ lez Quevedo - Hector, Istanbul 2000, 16 . . . h6 ! ? Black can improve patiently his position, since White has no active counterplay. 17.lll c3 lll e4 18.f3 lll d 6. Black prepares the transfer of his knight to the c4-square. 19.a4 f6 2 0 .lll g4 lll c4 21.lll f2 lll a 5. Now, his knight will

3.cd cd 4. liJ c3 liJf6 5.if4 liJ c6 6.e3 ij5 7. 'i!! b3 liJ a5 8. 'i!! a4+ id7 go to b3. 22.l:!dl gS 23.ig3 liJb3 24.l:!abl ig6+ 12.0-0 bxc6 13.l:!fcl, Moro­ zevich - Grischuk, Moscow 2007 (13.'i!!b 3 cS+). Here, Black can simply capture the pawn : 13 . . . �xb2 ! ? 14.liJxc6 ia3 15.�a6 id3 ! The position is simplified now and Black maintains a stable ad­ vantage. 16.�xd3 l:!xc6 17.l:!abl 'i!!x cl+ 18.l:!xcl ixcl 19.h3 h6+. White's queen can hardly defend successfully against Black's two rooks.

7

•••

�a5

8.Yfa4+

9.�c2 e6 10.id3 l:!c8 - see variation B2. 9.�dl e6 10.id3 liJc4 - see 8. �a4+ id7 9.'i!!d l e6 10 .id3 liJc4. 9.ixd7+ �xd7 10.'i!!b5 liJc4 11. liJf3 e6 12.liJeS liJxeS 13.ixeS (fol­ lowing 13.dxeS liJhS+t, it would be only White who might have prob­ lems, Seirawan - Khalifman, Moscow 1990) 13 . . . ie7 14.ixf6 ixf6 15.@d2 l:!c8 16.�xd7+ @xd7=, the draw is imminent, Margve­ lashvili - Dreev, Philadelphia 2 015.

8

•••

id7

We will analyse

now Bl)

9.ib5 and B2) 9.Yfc2. 8.ibS+ id7

9.'i!!a4 e6 - see variation Bl.

9.�dl e6 10.liJf3 (10 . .id3 liJc4 11.'i!!e 2 l:!c8 12.liJf3 ib4 - see 10. liJf3) 10 . . .l:!c8 11.id3 liJc4. Black's active knight guarantees a good play for him in all the variations. (diagram) 12 .ixc4, Bai - Van Foreest, Basel 2 0 17, 12 . . . dxc4 ! ?oo 12.l:!bl bS 13.0-0 ie7 14.liJeS 0-0 15.liJxd7 �xd7 16.igS a6= S. Belov - Zhak, ICCF 2013. 27

Chapter 3 10.tlit'3 About 10.l3cl a6 11.hd7+ llixd7 12 .tlif3 tlic6 - see 10 .tlif3.

12.1!Ne2 J.b4 13.l:k l tlie4. Black's piece-activity is sufficient for him to maintain the balance. 14.he4 dxe4 15.tlig5 e5 ! He sacrifices a pawn and seizes the initiative. 16.dxe5 i.g4 ! 17.f3 exf3 18.tlixf3 0-0 19.0-0 1!Na5 2 0 .a3. Black's pieces are so active that White should better give back the extra pawn. 20 . . . 1xf3 21.gxf3 hc3 2 2 . l3xc3 tlixe5= Ellis - Hartl, ICCF 2 016.

10.hd7+ tlixd7 11.e4 (11.tlif3 a6 - see 10.tlif3). This pawn­ break in the centre is not danger­ ous for Black, since he can simply reply with 11 . . . tlic6 and White cannot win the d5-pawn. 12.exd5 tlib6 13.�b3 exd5 14.tlige2 i.e7 15.0-0 0-0= Grishchenko T. Petrosian, Yerevan 2 014. After the active move 10 .J.g5, Black can centralise effortlessly his knight 10 . . . tlic6.

Bl) 9.J.b5 This move seems less logical than 9.�c2 . Indeed, at first White forces the enemy bishop to retreat to d7, where it is not so active than on f5, but now he exchanges it deliberately.

9 . . . e6

28

ll.i.xf6. This deliberate ex­ change of the bishop for the knight is very bad for White. 11 . . . 1!Nxf6 12 .tlif3 i.d6 13.0-0 0-0+ Kiselev - V.Ivanov, Moscow 1995. Black's two-bishop advantage may prove to be an important trump for him in the future. White would not obtain much with 11.�dl, Agdestein - Razni­ kov, Warsaw 2 0 14, in view of 11 . . . i.b4 ! ? 12 .l3cl 1!Na5. Black's threat 1!Nxb5 forces White to trade his bishop. 13.hc6 hc6 14.i.xf6 gxf6 15.a3 i.d6oo

3.cd cd 4. t:/Jc3 t:/Jf6 5.iJ..f4 t:/Jc6 6.e3 ii.JS 7. Wfb3 CiJaS 8. W!a4+ i.d.7 11.C/Jf3 a6 12 .hc6 (12 .il.e2 h6 13.il.xf6 W/xf6= Novkovic - Sko­ berne, Austria 2 012) 12 . . . hc6 13.W/b3 .id6 14.0-0 W/c7 15.ht"6 gxf6oo Zilberberg - Sasikiran, ICCF 2 014. Black's two powerful bishops compensate the minimal weakening of his kingside pawn­ structure. In addition, he can ex­ ploit in the middle game the semi­ open g-file in order to organise an attack against White's monarch.

10 . . . a6 12.0-0

11.hd7+

C/Jxd7

12 .�cl C/Jc6 13.h3 (13.W/b3 W/b6 14.W/xb6 C/Jxb6= Filguth - Gomez Baillo, Corrientes 1985) 13 . . . .ie7 14.0-0 o-o 15.C/Jel b5 16.W/dl �cs 17.C/Jd3 W/a5 18.a4 W/b6 19.axb5 axb5 2 0 .�al C/Ja5 21.�el C/Jc4= Magallanes - Pappier, ICCF 2008.

14.a4 b4 15.C/Je2 0-0 16.b3 W/b6 17.l"!cl l"!fc8= Shishkin Sieciechowicz, Poznan 2009.

-

14

•••

�kS 15.a4

White wishes to exploit the pawn-advance b7-b5 as a target to organise counterplay on the queenside. Still, Black's position remains solid enough. 15.W/e2 0-0 16.�c2 C/Jc6 17.h3 C/Jb6 18.b3 W/d7= Garcia Martinez Dominguez Perez, Las Tunas 2 0 01. -

15 . . .b4 16.C/Je2 0-0 17.W/d3 W/b6 18.b3 W/b7 19.h3 19.C/Jd2, Dunn - Taylor, Read­ ing 2 0 17, 19 . . . h6 ! ? =

1 9 . . . gxcl 20.gxcl gcs 21. gxc8+ W/xc8= Andeer - Dolgov, ICCF 2 012.

12 ... b5 Black ousts the enemy queen from its active position.

13.W/dl i.e7

B2) 9.W/c2 This is the main line for White which leads to a very sharp play.

9 . . . e6

14.�kl 29

Chapter 3 Now, Black's bishop on d7, closed inside his own camp, may turn out to be "bad". On the other hand, he can use it to organise ac­ tive counterplay on the queenside with the help of the pawn-advance b7-b5, or to exchange it after a7a6, i.d7-b5. We will analyse now: B2a)

10.lLlt'3 and B2b) 10 .id3. •

10.h3 1!c8 11.i.d3 .ib4 - see 10 . .id3.

rook cannot join in the actions on the h-file. 15.hxg3 fS. Black weak­ ens the es-square, but prevents the pawn-break in the centre e3e4. 16.i!fcl a6 17.Wfdl i.d6 18.lLla4 .ixa4 19.\&xa4+ ll:lc6 2 0 .b4 1!a8 21.bS axbS 2 2 .'l&xbS 0-0 23.Wfxb7 ll:lb4 24.i.e2 1!b8 25.Wfa7 1!a8 = White is incapable of preventing the permanent chase after his queen. 26.Wfb7, draw, Terreaux Grigoryev, ICCF 2 016.

n . f6 .

.

B2a) 10.lLlt'3 lLlh5! ? Black begins a n immediate chase after the enemy bishop.

t2.Ah4

11 . .ig5 11.i.eS f6 12 . .ig3 1!c8 13.i.d3 i.b4 14.0-0 (14 . .ixh7. It is rather risky for White to lose time to capture the enemy pawn. 14 . . . lLlc4 15 . .ig6+ cJ?f8 16.hbS lLlxb2 17. 0-0 .ixc3+ Barbot - Basso, Ziller­ tal 2 015.) 14 . . . lLlxg3. This is an im­ portant moment. Black usually captures on g3 only after White has castled kingside, so that his 30

Besides this move White has some other sharp alternatives at his disposal. 12 .h4 i.d6 13.g4 fxgS 14.hxgS ll:lg3 ! This is Black's most precise move. He loses his knight any­ way, so he gives it up at the dear­ est possible price. 15.fxg3 .ixg3+ 16.cJ?d2 \&e7 17.i!h3 i.c7 ! ? This move may seem rather risky, be­ cause the bishop is not protected on this square, but after 18.ll:lxdS exd5 19.'l&xc7, Black can make a

3.cd cd 4. tfJc3 tfJf6 5.1i.f4 tfJc6 6.e3 Ii.JS 7. Vfib3 tfJa5 8. Vf!a4+ .id7 draw almost by force. 19 . . . tfJc6 2 0 .id3 �b4+ 21.©dl l:!f8 22 . .if5 i.xf5 23.gxf5 l:!xf5 24.vt/xg7 �b5 25.l:!xh7 Vf/d3+ 12 .g4. This move was recom­ mended by A.Dreev in his book ".if4 in the Queen's Gambit and the Exchange Slav". Still, White does not achieve much with it. 12 . . . fxg5 13.gxh5 i.d6 14.l:!gl Vf/f6 15.i.e2 l:!c8 16.tfJxg5. He has won a pawn, but at a very dear price. His doubled extra pawn on the h­ file is practically useless, while Black's pieces are very active. 16 . . . h6 17.tfJf3 0-0 18.l:!g2 ie8 19. tfJd2 ©h8 2 0 . .ig4 l:!c7+ White can hardly find a safe haven for his king. It is misplaced at the middle of the board, while if he castles queenside, Black can begin imme­ diately active actions there with b7-b5.

and he should better prepare im­ mediately castling queenside. This move was recommended by A. Dreev in his book published in June 2 016. Black did not react so well in a game played three months later: 14 ... .ib4, Aronian - Girl, Moscow 2 016, 15.l:!gl ! ?;!; It is obvious that even grandmasters with a rating over 2700 should read books . . .

15 .id3 h3 16.hh7 0-0-0 17 .ig6 ©b8 18.Ve2 tbc6 19.00-0 .ib4�, followed by ix:c3, •

•

12

gS

•••

He continues the chase after the enemy bishop.

13.g4 The move 13 . .ig3 leads to a very complicated game. 13 . . . l:!cS 14.i.e2 g4 15.tfJh4 f5 16.i.e5 l:!g8 17.g3 tfJf6 18.h3 h5 19.tfJg2 tfJe4 2 0 .©fl .ib4? Perez Fernandez Dutra, ICCF 2 015.

13

tfJa5 (tfJe7). Black has very good counterplay for his minimal ma­ terial deficit.

B2b) 10 .id3 �k8 •

gxh4 14.gxhS

•••

(diagram)

14

Vf/c7!?

•••

Black's king is not reliably placed at the middle of the board 31

Chapter 3 n.ttit'3 White would not achieve much with the line: ll.h3 i.b4 (ll ...ltle4!? 12.llige2 bSoo) 12 .a3 hc3+ 13. bxc3 ltlc4 14.llie2 0-0 15.0-0 i.bSoo Boruchovsky - Dreev, Balm 2 013. ll.ltlge2. White's knight is not better placed here than on the f3square. 11 . . . bS 12.a3 ltlc4 13.0-0 (It would be rather slow for White to opt here for 13.h3 aS+ Fang Yu, China 2 014.) 13 . . . aSoo Fuentes Parra - Di Giannantonio, Santa Cruz 2 015.

11

.ib4 12.0-0

•••

12.ltleS, Kashlinskaya - V.Sve­ shnikov, Moscow 2007, 12 ... llihS!?=

12

•••

0-0

13.l:!acl ltlc4 14.Wi'e2 ltlhS 15. i.gS f6 16 ..ih4 .ie8 ! It would be useful for him to protect his knight on hS. 17.ltleS (17.a3 hc3 18.l:!xc3 gS 19.i.g3 ltlxg3 20.hxg3 llid6= Rogemont - Ruiz-Vidal, ICCF 2010) 17...ltlxeS 18.dxeS hc3 19.l:!xc3 gS 2 0 .Wi'g4 l:!xc3 21.bxc3 @h8 22 . .ig3 fS 23.Wb4 .ic6 24. i.e2 llixg3 25.hxg3 @g7 26.l:!dl Wi'c7 27.c4 g4 ! = Schon - Elent, ICCF 2 015. This is Black's most precise move. Now, White cannot play f2-f4, protecting his eS­ pawn. The vulnerability of Black's king is not important here, be­ cause there is just a few material left on the board. In addition, he has a better pawn-structure. 13.llieS a6 14.i.gS (14.l:!fcl hc3 - see 13.l:!fcl) 14 . . . h6 15.i.h4 (15.llixd7 Wxd7 16.hf6 gxf6= ). Here, Black can play 15 . . .gS, with­ out worrying about the safety of his king, because White can hard­ ly transfer effectively his pieces to the kingside. 16 . .ig3 .ibS 17.hbS axbS 18 .We2 hc3 19.bxc3 llic4 2 0 .f3 llihSoo with a complicated double-edged position.

13 a6 !? This is the simplest road to equality for Black. He plans to continue with .ibS, ex­ changing his "bad" bishop. 14. •••

13.�ffcl

ltle5 .b:c3 15.bxc3 .ib5 16. .b:b5 axb5 17 .igS Wc7 18 .ixf6 gxf6 19.ltld3 ltlc4= Weber •

After 13 . .igS h6 14 . .ih4, Wil­ liams - Cox, England 2 015, Black should better get rid immediately of the unpleasant pin of his knight: 14 . . . gS ! ? 15 ..ig3 ltlh5oo 32

•

- Zhak, ICCF 2 015. Black's king­ side pawn-structure has been weakened, but White's pawns on c3 and a2 are also weak.

Chapter 4

1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3.cxd5 cxd5 4.�f'3

S.llic3) 7 . . . �b6 8.�xb6 axb6 9. llic3 e6 10.0-0 ib4 11.id2 llie4= Hormiga Amador - Balcerak, Las Palmas 2 0 0S.

In this chapter we will continue the analysis of the exchange variation of the Slav Defence, but now we will deal only with varia­ tions in which White develops im­ mediately his knight on f3.

4

.•.

S.if4 llic6 6.e3. White can postpone the development of his knight on c3, but this cannot bring him anything positive ( 6. llic3 ifs - see S.llic3). Following 6 . . . �b6, he will already have problems with the protection of his b2-pawn.

llif6

This same position can also arise after the move-order 3.llif3 llif6 4.cxdS cxdS.

5.llic3 S.e3 llic6 6.llic3 ig4, or S.igS llie4 6.if4 llic6 7.llic3 f6 - see S.llic3. S .g3 llic6 6.ig2 (6.llic3 ifs see S.llic3) 6 . . .ifS 7.�b3 (7.llic3 e6, or 7. 0-0 e6 8.llic3 ie7 - see

7.llic3 ? ! This pawn-sacrifice is not good. 7 . . . �xb2 8.�cl (8 .llibS? eS ! 9.a3 llib4 ! - + Lyrberg - Ne­ vanlinna, Jyvaskyla 1994) 8 . . . ifS 9.ibS e6 10.0-0 ia3 ll.�a4 0-0+ J ovicic - Pavlovic, Belgrade 2006. 7.�cl llihS ! ? Black attacks im­ mediately his opponent's power33

Chapter 4 ful bishop. 8.ig3 ig4 9 . .!lic3 e6 10 .Wd2 ie7 ll.id3 ixf3 12.gxf3 0-0 13 . .!lia4 Wd8= 7.YUb3 . Now, there arises a transfer into an endgame at once. 7 . . . Wxb3 8.axb3 i.d7 9 . .!lic3 e6 10 .h3. White should better save his powerful bishop from an ex­ change. (10.i.e2 .!lihS+; 10 . .!lieS .!lihS= Gheorghiu - Bronstein, Moscow 1971) 10 . . . ib4 ll . .!lid2 (11.i.d3 .!Lias 12 . .!lid2 gcs 13.gcl 0-0= Kunzel - Price, ICCF 2 014) 11 . . . 0-0 12 .i.d3 gfc8= Stefanova - I.Sokolov, Wijk aan Zee 2 0 0 2 . White's weak isolated pawns on the b-file provide Black with at least equal prospects.

5

•••

6 . .!lieS. White plans after .!lixc6 to create a weakness for Black on c6. Still, this plan takes too much time. 6 . . . e6

.!lic6

6.Af4 This is White's most logical and consequent move. Before playing e2-e3, he develops his bishop to an active position. 6.Wb3. This queen-sortie seems a bit premature. 6 . . . e6 7.i.f4 .!lie4 8.e3 gS ! After this energetic move Black obtains the two-bishop ad34

vantage and a better position. 9. .!lixe4 gxf4 10 . .!lied2 i.d6 11.id3 fxe3 12 .fxe3 fS+, fixing the weak enemy pawn on e3, McClain Bucsa, ICCF 2 01S.

7.g3 .!lixeS 8.dxeS .!lid7 9.i.f4, Adorjan - Huebner, Frankfurt 1998, 9 . . . gS ! ? Black prepares the development of his bishop on g7 with tempo. 10.ie3 i.g7+ Following 7.i.f4 Wb6 8 . .!lixc6 bxc6 9.gbl, Black can advance immediately c6-cS, getting rid of his weak pawn : 9 . . . cS 10.dxcS i.xc5 11.e3 0-0oo Lagno - Gapo­ nenko, Moscow 2010. 7.e3 .!lixeS 8.dxeS .!lid7 9.f4 Ae7 10.id3 .!lies 11.ic2 as 12.0-0 0-0 13.gf3 g6 ! oo After this precise move (Black has defended against the threats ixh7, gh3, YUhS.), Black's chances are not inferior thanks to his better pawn-struc­ ture, Lanin - Roubaud, ICCF 2010. 7.YUa4 id7 8 . .!lixd7. Here, White obtains the two-bishop ad­ vantage, but loses too much time

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.cd cd 4. liJ.f3 liJf6 5. liJ c3 liJc6 on manoeuvres with his pieces. 8 . . . Wfxd7 9 .e3 .id6= Popov - Hop­ man, Wijk aan Zee 2001. 7.liJxc6 bxc6 8 .g3 i.d6 9 .i.g2 0-0 10.0-0 c5 11.dxc5 h:c5. Black has got rid of his weak pawn. 12.liJa4 i.d6 13.i.e3 Wfe7 14.l''k l i.d7 15.liJcS, Coret Fras­ quet - Asensio Soto, Mislata 1997, 15 . . . .te8 ! ? 16.Wfd2 h6. He is pre­ paring liJg4. 17.liJd3 .ib5oo Black's light-squared bishop is better placed than its counterpart on the a6-fl diagonal, since White's bishop is restricted by the pawn on d5. 6.g3. White prepares the fian­ chetto of his light-squared bishop. Still, it would not be placed so well on the long diagonal, as on the fl-a6 diagonal, because the d5-pawn would restrict consider­ ably its sphere of actions. 6 . . . .if5 7 . .ig2 e6

hxg6 1 2 . 0-0, Kotov - Tokarev, Kazan 2 0 07, 12 . . . .id6 ! ? = 8 . 0 - 0 .ie7 9 . .if4 (9.liJh4 .ig4 10 .h3 i.h5 11.g4 i.g6 12.liJxg6 hxg6 13.e3 gc8 14.f4 liJa5 15.1l;l/d3 liJc4 16.b3 liJd6+t Braga - Ham­ douchi, Malaga 2000. The weak­ ness of the e4-square may hurt White in the future.) 9 . . . 0-0 10. h3 (10.gcl h6= ; 10.liJh4 i.g4 11.h3 i.h5 12 .g4 .ig6 13.liJxg6 hxg6 14. e3 gc8= Gutierrez - Krylov, Mos­ cow 1994) 10 . . . liJe4 (10 . . . 1l;l/b6 ! ?+) 11.gc1 gc8 12 .g4 .tg6 13.liJxe4 h:e4 14.liJe5. The exchanges of pieces do not facilitate White's defence, because Black will soon seize the initiative on the queen­ side. 14 . . . liJxe5 15.he5 h:g2 16. Wxg2 1l;l/a5 17.Wfb3 b5 ! + This is a typical resource for similar posi­ tions. Black is preparing gc4. 18. gxc8 gxc8 19.a3 gc4 2 0 .gd1 Wfb6 21.gd2 Wfc6+ The c-file is com­ pletely in Black's hands. 2 2 .e3 a5 23 . .tg3 gel 24.f3 f6 25.i.f2 1l;l/c4 26.1l;l/d3 a4-+ , fixing the pawn on b2. 27.e4 Wfxd3 28.gxd3 b4 29. axb4 hb4 30.exd5 exd5 31.ge3 gc2 0-1 Tarnowski - Botvinnik, Leipzig 1960. 6.i.g5 liJe4

8 . .tf4 1l;l/b6 9.liJa4 i.b4+ Ohnes­ org - Klundt, Frankfurt 2009. After 8.liJh4, Black should play 8 . . . .ig4, after which the chase af­ ter the enemy bishop would lead to a weakening of White's king­ side. 9.h3 .th5 10 .g4 i.g6 11.liJxg6 35

Chapter 4 It is not good for White to play here 7.ih4?! in view of 7 . . . 1/;!faS ! . After the removal o f White's dark­ squared bishop from the queen­ side the vulnerability of the el-aS diagonal hurts him severely. 8.1/;!fb3 eS 9.e3 (9.1/;!fxdS ib4 10.\WxaS i.xaS 11.0-0-0 hc3 12 .bxc3 llixc3+) 9 . . . i.b4+ Fink Schwicker, Germany 199S. Following 7.if4, Black can play 7 .. .f6 ! ? , preparing not only e7-eS, but much rather g7-gS. 8 . a 3 (8.e3? ! g S 9 .ig3 hS 10.h3 llixg3 11.fxg3 1/;!fc7+ Puzanov - Nemec, LSS 2012. He has the two-bishop advantage, while White's kingside pawn-structure has been compro­ mised.) 8 . . . e6 9 .h3 \Was 10.id2 llixd2 ll.1l;!/xd2 bS 12 .gcl b4= Kirkov - Davidov, ICCF 2016.

ing following 10.dxeS llixeS, a very good version of a standard posi­ tion with an isolated queen's pawn. ll.1/;!fe2 ib4 12 .id2 0-0= Pepe - Cucchi, ICCF 1998. In the variation 7.\Wb3 gb8 8. llieS i.d7, there arise simplifica­ tions after 9 .llixdS \Was+ 10.llic3 llixeS 11.dxeS \WxeS 12 .id2 e6= Dragun - Czarnota, Poland 2 0 13 . 7.ie2 e6 8 . 0 - 0 (8.\Wb3. White does not achieve much by attack­ ing the b7-pawn, since Black can easily protect it. 8 . . . gb8 9.0-0 i.d6 10.h3 .ihS 11.i.d2 0-0= Rother - Stoeger, Germany 1997.) 8 ... .id6 9 .h3 .ihS 10.a3 0-0 11.b4 gc8 12 .ib2 ib8 13.llid2 ig6= Fa­ qiry - Karjakin, Mainz 2010.

6

if5

•••

6.e3. This move is somewhat passive. White complies deliber­ ately with the fact that his bishop on cl will remain restricted inside his own camp. 6 . . .ig4

7.e3 7.llieS e6 8 .e3 llixeS - see vari­ ation B. 7.ibS gc8 8.h3 ixf3 9.1/;!fxf3 a6= Rodriguez - Zirians, IECC 2000. After 7.h3 ixf3 8.\Wxf3 a 6 9 . .id3, Black can try 9 . . . eS, obtain36

7.1/;!fb3 lliaS 8 .\Wa4+ id7 9 .1/;!fdl e6 10.e3 gc8, or 9 .\Wc2 e6 10.e3 llihS - see Chapter 3 , variation

B.

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.cd cd 4. liJ.f3 liJf6 5. liJ c3 liJ c6 6. if4 if5 7.e3 e6 After 7.l'kl e6 8.'l!:!fb3 (8.e3 gcs - see 7.e3), Black does not need to lose time to protect his b7-pawn. 8 . . . id6 9.W/xb7 (White should better refrain here from accepting the gift: 9.i.xd6 '\!:!/xd6=) 9 . . . 0 - 0 ! 10.W/xc6 i.xf4 11.e3 i.d6 12.a3 ( 1 2 . ibS gbs 13.W/a6, Barcenilla Dao, Tagaytay City 2 013, 13 . . . liJe4 ! ? 14.liJa4 i.b4+ lS.iifl ig4+ Black maintains powerful initia­ tive for the sacrificed pawn.) 12 . . . gbs 13.liJdl (13.b4 ? ! aS+ Voiska Ortega, Campobasso 2 006) 13 . . . gb6 14.W/a4 Wfb8�. White i s faced with a difficult defence, because he lags in development, while Black's pieces are very active.

7 . . . e6

We will analyse now: A) 8 . .ld3, B) 8.l0e5, C) 8.M>3 and D) 8 . .lb5 . 8.'\!:!/a4 liJd7 9 . .lbS gcs - see variation D2. 8 .a3. This is not White's most active move, because a2-a3 may turn out to be a loss of a tempo in

some variations. 8 . . . .ld6 9.hd6 W/xd6 10.id3 hd3 11.W/xd3 0-0 12.0-0 gfcs 13.gacl (Following 13.b4 aS 14.liJa4 liJd7 lS.bS liJe7 16.gfcl, Aleksandrov - Maletin, Bhubaneswar 2010, 16 ... gc7! ?+, Black seizes the initiative.) 13 . . . liJ a S 14.liJd2 (l4.gc2 W/d8 lS.gfcl, Maiorov - Stambulian, Anapa 2012, lS . . . liJb3 ! ?=) 14 . . . liJc4 lS. liJxc4 gxc4 16.liJe2 gac8= Vasiu­ kov - Furman, Tbilisi 1973 . a.gel gcs 9.W/b3 (9.liJeS liJxeS 10.heS a6= Chirila - Ostrovskiy, Montreal 2013; 9.id3 hd3 10. '\!:!/xd3 !ie7 11.0-0 0-0 12 .h3 'l!:!fb6 13.W/e2 liJe4= Kazmierczuk - Ma­ lyshev, ICCF 2 0 14) 9 . . . ib4 10. ibS (10.ie2 0-0 11.0-0, Zhang - Volokitin, Kallithea 2008, 11 . . . liJhS! ?=) 10 . . .hc3+

ll.bxc3. White must comply with the weakening of his pawn­ structure (After 11.Wfxc3 a6 12. i.e2 liJe4+ Black can begin an ad­ vantageous chase after the enemy bishop on f4 with the moves g7gS, h7-hS, Delchev - Andersen, Spain 2 0 14.) 11 . . . 0-0 12 .hc6 (12.0-0 liJe4t Tregubov - Sebag, Montpellier 2 01S) 12 . . . gxc6 13. 37

Chapter 4 \Wxb7 \Wc8 14.\Wxc8 gfxc8 15.llieS gxc3 16.gxc3 gxc3+ Carlsen Anand, Dubai 2 0 14. Black has re­ stored the material balance and his prospects seem preferable thanks to his active rook. White cannot achieve much with the rather careful line: 8.ie2 id6 9.ixd6 (9.llieS, V.Georgiev Dominguez Perez, Merida 2 0 0 2 , 9 . . . \Wb6 ! ? = ) 9 . . . §'xd6 1 0 . 0 - 0 0 - 0 11.gc1 (11.llih4 .ie4 12 .f3 .ig6 13. llixg6 hxg6 14.Wid2 gac8= Khus­ nutdinov - Sajedi, Rasht 1998) ll . . . h6 12 .a3 gfc8 13.b4, Mihali­ chenko - Kovalev, Mukachevo 2 0 13, 13 . . . aS ! ? =

opponents who are playing straightforwardly for a draw.

10.0-0 10 .h3 0-0 11.0-0 gc8 - see 10.0-0. 10 .WibS. Black parries easily the threat of capturing on b7. 10 . . . §'d7 11.0-0 0 - 0 12 .llieS (12.gfcl a6= Azmaiparashvili - Topalov, Benidorm 2 0 03) 12 . . . llixeS 13. hes WixbS 14.llixbS a6 15.hf6 gxf6 16.llic3 gac8= Sumets - Sta­ rostits, Calvi 2009. The position has been simplified considerably.

10 . . . 0-0 A) 8.id3 White usually chooses this move when he would not mind a draw.

8 . . . .h:d3 9.ti'xd3

11.h3 This is a useful move. It is a leeway for the king, as well as a square for the retreat of the bish­ op if Black plays llihS.

9 . . . J.e7! ? Black equalises with 9 . . . .id6, but the move 9 . . . .ie7 leaves him with more possibilities against 38

11.\WbS §'d7 - see 10.WibS. After 11.igS gc8 12.gfcl, Ghaem Maghami - Bu, Macau 2 0 07, Black can reply 12 . . . llie8 ! ? ,

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.cd cd 4. 0.j3 0.f6 5. 0. c3 0. c6 6. i.f4 i.j5 7.e3 e6 preparing the transfer of his knight to c4 via the d6-square. 13 . .be7 W!xe7 14.a3 0.d6= Following ll.a3, Black can try to seize the initiative with the line : 11 ... 0.hS 12.i.eS f6 13.i.g3 0.xg3 14. hxg3 (14.fxg3 ? ! Vasile - Ferreira, ICCF 2 0 03, 14 . . .fS ! ?+) 14 . . .fS=

c4. 12 ... 0.d7!? 13.a3 (13.i!fdl? ! 0.b6 14.0.eS 0.xeS 15.heS 0.c4+ Segal - Gomez Baillo, Mar del Plata 1989. Black's prospects are already preferable thanks to the powerful placement of his knight on c4.) 13 ... 0.b6 14.l:!c2 0.c4 15.l:!fcl a6= Markelova - Girya, Sochi 2016.

12

•.•

0.d7

The position is simplified con­ siderably after 11.0.eS 0.xeS 12. hes 0.d7 13.i.g3 0.b6 14.W!bs i!c8= , followed by i!c4, i!b4, oust­ ing White's queen from its active position, Breier - Andersen, Ger­ many 2 016. 11.i!fcl 0.hS ! ? 12 .i.eS (12.0.e2 i!c8 13.a3 a6= Doye - Rhodes, ICCF 2 011) 12 .. .f6 13 .i.g3, Medu­ na - Gdanski, Novy Smokovec 1992, 13 . . . W!d7 ! ? = After 11.i!acl, i t seems very good for Black to continue with 11 . . . Wlb6 ! ? . He wishes to place his king's rook on the c-file and not his queen's rook. 12.0.a4 (12 .Wi'bS, Khenkin - Ivanchuk, Antalya 2 0 13, 12 . . . W/xbS ! ? 13.0.xbS 0.e4 = ; 12 .Wie2 :gfc8 13.i.gS h 6 1 4 . .bf6 hf6 15.a3 0.aS 16.0.a4 W/d6= Veremechik - Tiulin, USSR 1988) 12 ... Wlb4 13.Wi'c2 0.e4 14.a3 W!bS= Dragun - Artemiev, Moscow 2014.

11

•••

:!k8 12.l:!fcl

Following 12.i!acl, Black, just like in the main variation, pre­ pares the transfer of his knight to

He is trying to seize the initia­ tive. Now, White must play pre­ cisely in order not to end up in an inferior position.

13.0.d2 White is covering in advance the c4-square against the pene­ tration of the enemy knight. 13.W!bS Wlb6 14.0.el a6= Pla­ chetka - Malakhatko, Cappelle la Grande 2005. 13.a3 0.b6 14.b3 a6 15.Wlbl (15. i.g3 i!e8 =) 15 ... i.d6= Piesina Dorfman, Vilnius 1978.

13

•••

0.b6 14.a3 0.aS

Black is threatening again to follow with 0.c4. 39

Chapter 4 White wishes to trade the knights. It is understandable that he cannot fight for an advantage in the opening in this way.

8 . . . �xe5 9 . .be5

15.b3 This is White's most reliable move. 15.WfbS? lll bc4 16.lll xc4 !!xc4 17.lll a4 a6-+ Mirzoev - Domin­ guez Perez, Saint Vincent 2 0 0 2 .

15 a6 16.Wbl Wd7= Ando­ nov - Tukmakov, Sochi 1987. Lat­ er Black can even try to maintain an edge, because White's a3-pawn is under an attack by Black's bish­ op and it impedes White's major pieces to fight effectively for the c-file. The pawn-advance b3-b4 would lead to the weakening of the c-file, while the move a3-a4 would weaken the b4-square. •••

After 9.dxeS �d7, White forces his opponent to lose a tempo for the retreat of his knight indeed, but he ends up with doubled pawns on the e-file. 10.e4. He is trying to get rid of his doubled pawns, but he will have difficul­ ties to regain the sacrificed pawns. 10 . . . dxe4 11 . .Ab5, Mozny - Cerny, Tatranske Zruby 2006, 11 . . . .AcS ! ? 12.0-0 a6. Black wishes to elimi­ nate the pin of his knight and to castle. 13 .i.a4 bS 14.i.c2 e3. Black will lose his e4-pawn anyway, so he gives it up deliberately in order to double again his opponent's pawns. White must play very ac­ curately in the middle game, be­ cause his pawn-structure has been compromised.

9

•••

�d7

B) 8.�e5

10 .Ag3 •

40

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.cd cd 4. 0ij3 0if6 5. 0i c3 0i c6 6. i.f4 if5 7.e3 e6 It is bad for White to play here 10 . .ib5, because after 10 . . . a6 11. i.xd7+ §'xd7, Black obtains two powerful bishops. 12.0-0 f6 13. i.g3 l:k8 14.l:kl i.e7 15.1l«b3 (15. §'a4 ik4 16.§'b3 0-0 17.a3 gfc8+ Anastasian - Ivanchuk, Yerevan 1989) 15 . . . b5 16.f3 o-o 17.a3 gc4+, followed by gfc8. Black maintains a considerable advan­ tage, Shimanov - Svidler, Olginka 2011. 10 .§'b3. White is trying to sharpen the game, but this at­ tempt backfires. 10 . . . 0ixe5 11. dxe5 i.e7! Black is afraid neither of the loss of his b7-pawn, nor of the check on b5. 12 .ib5+ (It would be too risky for White to play here 12 .§'xb7? ! 0-0 13 . .ib5 a6 14.i.e2 gb8 15.§'xa6, Lumley ­ Harding, England 1986. He has two extra pawns at the moment, but after 15 . . . d4 ! his position is beginning to crumble. 16.exd4 §'xd4 17. 0-0 gxb2 18.0ia4 gxe2 19.§'xe2 §'xa4-+) 12 . . . ©f8. Black would not mind the loss of his castling rights, because later, he can castle artificially after g7-g5, ©g7, or with h7-h5, ©g8-h7. 13.0-0 (13 .i.e2 §'c7 14.f4, De Mauro - Harding, ICCF 1997, 14 . . . g5 ! ?+) 13 . . . V«b8. Black wishes to force the move f2-f4, which would weaken the gl-a7 diagonal. (Following 13 . . . g5, White still maintains the balance with the line: 14.gadl! V«b6 15 . .id3 V«xb3 16.axb3 i.xd3 17.gxd3 =) 14.ie2, Berthelot - Froilan Sulit, ICCF

2016 (14.f4 a6 15.ie2 §'a7! 16.llJdl .ic5+ Westerman - De Groot, Netherlands 1990) 14 . . . h5 ! ?+. Black has two powerful bishops, while White has problems with the protection of his e5-pawn, since the pawn-advance f2-f4 would weaken the gl-a7 diagonal. 10 .i.d3. White continues to simplify the position. 10 . . . .ixd3 11.§'xd3 0ixe5 12.dxe5 ie7 13. §'b5+ V«d7 14.gcl gc8 15.§'xd7+ ©xd7 16. ©e2 gc4= Andersson Beliavsky, Brussels 1988. White must play precisely, because in actions on both sides of the board Black's bishop may turn out to be more powerful than White's knight.

10

. . .

a6

11 .ie2 .

After ll.§'b3 §'b6 12 .ie2, Ri­ cardi - Chemin, Buenos Aires 1992 , Black can simply exploit the defects of his opponent's queen­ side pawn-structure 12 . . . V«xb3 ! ? 13.axb3 ib4+ 41

Chapter 4 White cannot harm his oppo­ nent with 11.i.d3 i.xd3 12 .W/xd3 i.e7 13.0-0 0-0

14.gacl gcs 1s.gc2 (1S.llie2 \Was 16.a3 bS. With this move Black prepares an outpost for his rook on the c4-square. 17.h3 gc4= Benidze - Ni Hua, Shenzhen 2 011.) lS . . . Wi'aS 16.gfcl gc6 17.f3. White intends to play e3-e4, as well as to transfer his bishop to el (17.©fl gfc8+ Seel - Vovk, Berlin 2 0 1S). 17 . . .gfc8 18.i.el (White should better refrain from the pawn-advance 18.e4, Leitao Dominguez Perez, Havana 2003, 18 ... i.b4 ! ?+) 18 ... .id6 19.e4, Rem­ linger - Akobian, Orange 2011, 19 . . . W/c7 ! ? 2 0 .eS .ib4= White has occupied space, but his bishop is restricted by the pawns on d4 and eS, has no mobility and may turn out to be "bad". 14.gfcl WfaS 1s.gc2 gfc8. Both sides plan to double their rooks on the c-file. 16.gacl gc6 17.llidl gac8 18.gxc6 gxc6 19.gxc6 bxc6. Black is not afraid of the appear­ ance of a weak pawn on c6, be­ cause White will be incapable of preventing the pawn-advance c6cS. 20.llic3 cS= Ki.Georgiev 42

Bruzon Batista, Moscow 2001.

11

.ie7 12.0-0 0-0

. . •

13.lkl 13 . .id3. White's straightfor­ ward desire to exchange pieces may lead him to an inferior posi­ tion. 13 . . . .ixd3 14. W/xd3 W/aS lS.a3 gfcs 16.b4 Wfd8 17.llia4 gc4+ Ma­ tamoros Franco - Svetushkin, Is­ tanbul 2000. 13.W/b3 W/b6 14.W/xb6 (14.gfcl gac8= Andersson - Babula, Ger­ many 2002) 14 . . . llixb6 1S . .ic7 llid7 16,gfcl, Epishin - Chemin, Reggio Emilia 1994 (16.g4 .ig6= ) 1 6 . . . gfc8=

13

. ••

lkS 14.a3

After White's alternatives he may even fail to equalise. For ex­ ample: 14.W/b3 W/b6 1S . .if3, M. Makarov - Aleshin, Pardubice 200S, 1S . . . W/xb3 ! ? 16.axb3 llib6+ 1S.h3, or 1S . . .W/xb3 16.axb3 gc6+ Bacrot - Fressinet, Ajaccio 2 0 07. In both variations Black's superi-

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.cd cd 4. t:/Jj3 t:/Jf6 5. t:/J c3 t:/Jc6 6. if4 ij5 7.e3 e6 or pawn-structure provides him with a slight but stable advantage. 14.id3 .b:d3 15.\Wxd3 \Was 16. l'l:c2 (White ends up with a weak isolated pawn after 16.e4 dxe4 17.\Wxe4 \Wb4+ Verduga Zavala Vilela de Acuna, Camaguey 1987.) 16 . . . l'l:c6 17.l'l:fcl l'l:fc8 18.f3 ib4+ Vallejo Pons - Andreikin, Tallinn 2 0 16. Black's pressure on the c­ file provides him with a stable ad­ vantage.

9 . .ib5 This is White's most active move. It is obviously more modest for him to choose the develop­ ment of his bishop to e2 : 9.ie2 0-0 10.0-0 \We7 11.l'l:fcl, Wang Ding, Huaian 2016, 11 . . . CiJhS ! ?oo 9.t:/Je5 .b:c3+ 10.bxc3 (White would not achieve much if he opts for the other capture 10.\Wxc3, be­ cause later Black will win a tempo by attacking the enemy queen ei­ ther with his knight on c4, or with his rook on c8. 10 . . . t:/JxeS 11 . .b:eS 0-0 12.'?t/b4 l'l:c8 13.ie2 l'l:c2 14. idl l'l:c4 15.'?t/a3, Martinovic - Er­ dos, Sibenik 2011, 15 . . . a6 ! ? = ) 10 . . . t:/Jxe5 11 . .b:eS 0-0

14 . . .b5. Now, White cannot play t:/Ja4, b2-b4, t:/Jc5. 15.�a2, Carlsen - Aronian, Moscow 2 009, 15 . . . �b6! ?oo, followed by t:/Jc4. C) 8. \Wb3 .ib4 Following 12.\Wxb7 l'l:c8=, White leads considerably in develop­ ment and therefore cannot cap­ ture the pawn 13.\Wxa7? ! , since after 13 . . . t:/Je4 14.a4, Milchev Lindgren, Vaxjo 2015, 14 . . . \Wh4 ! ? 15.g3 \Wh6+, h e must consider t:/Jxc3, or l'l:xc3, as well the trap­ ping of his bishop with f7-f6, g7g5, while after ie5-c7, Black has the resource l'l:f8-f7. 43

Chapter 4 1 2 .f3 tt:ld7 13.i.g3 l:k8= El­ linger - Hacker, ICCF 2 0 15. 12 .:gc1 :gcs 13.ie2 V!Je7 14.hf6 V!Jxf6 15.0-0 Y!!e 7. White must get rid of his backward pawn on c3 as quickly as possible; otherwise, he might end up in an inferior posi­ tion. 16.c4 dxc4 17.:gxc4 i.e4= Bar - Homont, ICCF 2 016. 12 .i.e2 :gcs. Black is eyeing the enemy weakness on c3. 13.0-0 tt:le4 14.Y!!xb7 (If White begins de­ fending with 14.:gfcl, things are not going to end up well for him. 14 . . . Y!!h4 15.i.g3 Y!!e 7 16.c4 tll d 2 17.V!Ja4, Polak - Ragger, Austria 2 013, 17 . . . dxc4 ! ? 18.hc4 h5t) 14 .. .f6

20.:gxcl V!Jb6 21.:gcs+ ©t7 2 2 . V!Jxb7+ V!Jxb7 23.gc7+ Y!!xc7 24. hc7 id3 = Akobian - Bu Xiang­ zhi, Istanbul 2 0 1 2 .

9

•••

0-0

We will analyse now: Cl)

10 . .ixc6 and C2) 10.0-0.

Cl) 10 .ixc6 .ixc3+ 11.'f!Yxc3 •

15.i.g3 (15.i.f4 g5 16.ig3, Richter - Hermann, Germany 2 015, 16 . . . Y!!b 6 ! ? The transfer into an endgame is Black's simplest road to equality. 17.V!Jxb6 axb6 18.:gfcl :gxc3 19.gxc3 tt:lxc3. His knight on c3 is very powerful. This compensates White's two­ bishop advantage. 2 0 .i.fl gc8= ) 15 . . .g f7 16.V!Ja6 tt:lxc3 17.:gfcl tt:lxe2+ 18.Y!!xe2 . This position with bishops of opposite colours and major pieces seems rather drawish. 18 . . . gb7 19.V!Ja6 gxcl+ 44

11.bxc3 ? ! bxc6 12.0-0 tt:le4 13. h3, Pakleza - Erdos, Sitges 2008. White defends against g5, h5. 13 ... h5 ! ? 14.Y/!b2 c5+ Black has man­ aged to advance his weak pawn, while White must work hard in order to protect his weakness on c3. u . . . �k8 12.�e5 bxc6! ?

This i s a n interesting possibil­ ity after which Black preserves chances of seizing the initiative if White reacts inaccurately. Black can equalise easily with the line: 12 . . . �g4 13.�xg4 hg4 14.Y!!b 4 gxc6 15.Y!!xb7 Y!!c 8 16.

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.cd cd 4. l:LJ.f3 lLJf6 5. lLJ c3 lLJ c6 6. i.f4 i.j5 7.e3 e6 ti'xc8 gfxc8 17.0-0 aS 18.f3 i.fS= Kramnik - Anand, Bonn 2008. White has no chances of realising his extra pawn in this position with rooks and bishops of oppo­ site colours.

White has won a pawn, but his knight has been unpleasantly pinned.

16 ...ti'd7 17.Vc5 gfe8

18.0-0 13.ti'a3 After 13.gcl cs, White must play precisely in order to avoid ending up worse. 14.dxc5 lLJe4 1S. ti'a3 f6. Black wishes to restrict his opponent's minor pieces. 16. lLJf3 eS 17.i.g3 ti'e7= Here, White should better give up his cS-pawn, since his attempt to protect it with 18.b4? ! and 18 . . . aS ! 19.ti'xaS gas 2 0 .ti'bS gfbs 2 1.ti'e2 gxb4+, would lead to a difficult position for him. The straightforward move 2 2 .c6? even loses for White 2 2 . . . lLJc3 ! 23.ti'd2 gxa2 24.ti'xc3, Andersson - Blomqvist, Borlange 2 0 14, 24 . . . d4-+

13 . . . lLJhS Now, White's bishop on f4 cannot avoid being exchanged.

14.Jkl 16.�xc6

lLJxf4

15.exf4

f6

The move 18. d2 has its draw­ backs too. There are still too many pieces on the board and White's king may come under an attack in the centre. 18 . . . hS. Black de­ fends against the threat lLJe7. 19. b4 a6 20.ghel h6 21.a4 i.bl ! White i s preparing the transfer of his bishop to the c4-square. 2 2 . e3 i.a2 23 .bS i.c4 24.f3 axbS 2S.axbS gc7 26.f2 i.xbS 27.'\1;lfxbS gec8= Soltau - Bokar, ICCF 2 0 13. White cannot save his knight, so the position is balanced.

18 . . . e5. Black plays in the centre in an attempt to deflect White's pieces from the defence of his knight on c6. 19.b4. White wishes to protect his knight with his pawn on bS as quickly as pos­ sible in order to free his queen from its protection. In the mean­ time, Black manages to advance 4S

Chapter 4 further his pawn. 19 exd4 20. b5 d3 2Ukdl (It is just bad for •••

White to play here 2 1.Wfd4, be­ cause of 21 . . . ge2 22.gcS gees 23. :i!xdS Wfe6 24.h3 d2+; 24.gd6 'i;Vxa2 2s.gds i.g6 26.lllb4 'i;VaS 27.:i!xeS+ gxe8 28.lll xd3 'i;VxbS 29.lll cS aS+ Ponomarev - Leupold, ICCF 2008. The tactical complications have ended. The outside passed a­ pawn and the dominance of his bishop over the enemy knight in actions on both sides of the board provide Black with a great advan­ tage.) 21 a6 22.a4 h5oo

- Miles, Chania 1997) 12 . . . i.xal 13.gxal (13.i.xaS Wfxa8 14.gxal lll e4= ) 13 . . . lll e4 14.gcl Wfb6 lS. i.xa8 gxa8 16.h3 f6 17.g4 .ig6 18. gc7 'i;Vxb3 19.axb3 as 2 0.©g2 .ie8 2 1.gS a4 2 2 .bxa4 gxa4= Voetter Leupold, ICCF 2008.

11

•••

lll e4

Black attacks his opponent's queen and wins a tempo for the pawn-advance g7-gS.

12.'i;Va3 g5! ? 13.i.g3 f6

•••

C2) 10.0-0

It is useful for him to take the es-square under control, so that White's knight cannot go there later. White hopes that the extra tempo (Wfb3) in this symmetrical position would enable him to fight for the opening advantage. Still, Black's position remains quite solid.

10

.txc3 11.'i;Vxc3

•••

There arise great simplifica­ tions after 11.i.xc6 i.xb2 12 .i.xb7 (12 .'i;Vxb2 bxc6 13.lll e S 'i;Vb6 14. 'i;Vxb6 axb6 1S.lll xc6 i.d3 16.gfcl ga4 17.i.d6 gfas 18.a3 lll e 8= Graf 46

14.!Ucl About 14.i.xc6 bxc6 1s.gac1 'i;Vb6 - see 14.gacl. 14.gacl Wfb6 1S.i.xc6 bxc6 16.gfdl as 17.lll d 2 lll xg3 18.hxg3 a4 19.lll b l gfbs . Black squeezes his opponent's pieces with the protection of the b2-pawn. 2 0 . Wfe 7 'i;Vd8 2 1.'i;VxdS+ gxd8 2 2 . gxc6 gab8= White is incapable of hold­ ing on to his material advantage.

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.cd cd 4. l:iJfJ t:fJf6 5. t:fJ c3 t:fJc6 6. il..f4 il..f5 7.e3 e6 14

• • •

�k8 15.J.xc6 bxc6

16.ti'xa7 He wins a pawn, but presents the initiative to Black. It is obviously bad for White to play here 16.t:fJel? ! , because after 16 . . . hS 17.f3 t:fJxg3 1S.hxg3 ti'c7 19.©f2 h4 2 0.g4 i.g6+, the mate­ rial on the board is equal indeed, but his king is seriously endan­ gered, Bakre - Thakur, San Se­ bastian 2 0 1 2 . There arises a complicated position following 16.gdl gf7 17. t:fJd2 t:fJxg3 1S.hxg3 hS? Sykora Hybl, ICCF 2010. Black has weak pawns on a7 and c6, but if he manages to open the h-file after gh7, h5-h4, his attack against the enemy king may become very powerful.

16

• • •

h5 17.h4 g4 18.l:iJh2

Or lS.t:fJel t:fJxg3 19 .fxg3 Wfd6 2 0 .gc3 ! ? White defends precisely. (After 2 0 . ©h2? ! gas 2 1.ti'cS ti'xcS 2 2 . gxcS gfbs 23.gxc6, Taboas

Rodriguez - Ramirez Garcia, Tres Cantos 2010, 23 . . . ga4 ! ?+, it is es­ sential for Black not to allow a2a4, while the b2-pawn is not run­ ning away. Meanwhile, White's knight is misplaced on el and is severely restricted by the pawn on e4 and the bishop on fS. White has two extra pawns indeed, but Black has a great advantage.) 20 . . . .ie4 21.©h2 gas 2 2 .Wfb7 gfbs 23. ti'xc6 ti'xc6 24.gxc6. Now, con­ trary to the previous variation, Black's bishop is on e4 and does not protect the pawn on e6. This circumstance enables White to equalise. 24 . . . gxb2 25.a4 @f7 26. a5 ©e7=

18

. • •

�xg3 19.fxg3 ti'd6

20.ti'a6! ? Now again, White must defend very accurately. The natural move 2 0 .t:fJfl? los­ es. 20 . . . gas 21.ti'cS WfxcS 22.gxcS gfbs 23.e4 (23.gxc6 gxb2-+, fol­ lowed by .ie4 and White cannot hold on to the g2-square, Rusev - Ni Hua, Villarrobledo 2009) 47

Chapter 4 23 . . . he4 24.ti)d2 .ifs 25.b3 i!b4 26. i!xc6 i!xd4-+ Lechtynsky Haba, Czech Republic 2 005.

20 '9xg3 21.�fl ti'xh4 22. fucc6 �ke8 23.a4 ti'g5oo There

Black's pawn-advance c6-c5. 10. ti)eS (10.0-0 .ie7 - see 9. 0-0) 10 ... ti)xeS 11.heS f6 12 . .ig3 cS= Weiss - Orsolic, Germany 2009.

••.

arises a very sharp play in this middle game. White will advance his queenside pawns, while Black will push forward his g and h­ pawns with the idea to attack the enemy king.

D) 8 .ib5 �d7 •

9 .ti'b3 .ie7 10.i!cl (It is better for White to play here 10.0-0 gS - see variation Dl.) 10 . . . a6 11. hc6 bxc6 12.ti)eS? ! Espig - Ba­ reev, Novi Sad 1990, 12 . . . i!bS ! ? 13.Wa4 li)xe5 14.heS i!b6+ Black has the two-bishop advantage and his rook on b6 protects the pawns on c6 and a6 attacking at the same time the enemy pawn on b2.

Black parries the threat ti)eS.

Dl) 9.0-0 White is not in a hurry to in­ crease the pressure against the enemy knight on c6 with the move Wa4 and simply removes his king away from the centre. Strangely enough, after castling in numer­ ous variations his king may come under attack after .ie7, g7-g5, h7h5. White must be constantly on the alert about this possibility. We will analyse now: Dl)

9

.ie7

•••

9.0-0 and D2) 9.'9a4. 9.i!cl !i.e7 10.0-0 (10.'frb3 a6 - see 9.'9b3). 10 . . . i!c8 - see varia­ tion Dl. 9.ti)eS ti)cxeS 10 .heS a6 11 . .b:d7+ Wxd7 - see variation B. White can create a weakness on c6 - 9 .hc6 bxc6, but this is not much of an achievement, since he cannot prevent later 48

10.�kl

J.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.cd cd 4. l?Jj3 l?Jf6 5. l?Jc3 l?J c6 6. i.f4 i.j5 7.e3 e6 10.l?JeS l?JcxeS 11.i.xeS 0-0 12. i.g3 :Sc8 13.�d3. White's plan is not impressive at all . Now, just like in variation A, he exchanges the light-squared bishops, but loses a tempo for the move 8 .i.bS. 13 . . . .bd3 14.�xd3 �b6 15.:Sabl, An­ dersson - Hansen, Thessaloniki 1988, 15 . . . :Sc4+, followed by :Sfc8. 10.�e2 0-0 11.:Sfcl :Sc8 1 2 . l?J e l , Jobava - Rapport, Austria 2012, 12 . . . l?Jf6 ! ? = 10.id3 i.xd3 ll.�xd3 0 - 0 1 2 . :Sfcl :Sc8 13.�b5 l?Jb6= Urkedal Rapport, Athens 2012. 10.h3 l'k8 11.:Scl a6= Anders­ son - Dominguez Perez, Havana 2 0 03. The line: 10 .hc6 bxc6 does not promise much to White. Black's bishops are very powerful. He is also threatening g7-g5, h7h5, so White cannot concentrate on his attack against the c6-pawn.

ll.l?Ja4, Henley - Torre, Indo­ nesia 1983, 11 . . . hS ! ? t 11.:Scl :Sc8 12.l?Ja4 gS ! Black begins an attack with this move.

13.ig3 hS. He is threatening to trap the enemy bishop and forces White to play 14.h3. After 14 . . . g4 1 5 . hxg4 hxg4, Black opens the h-file. 16.l?JeS l?JxeS 17.heS f6 18.ig3 'itif7-+ His attack is im­ possible to parry now. 19.:Sel :Sh5 2 0 .�d2 ie4 21. 'itifl �f3 ! 0-1 Sei­ rawan - Beliavsky, Brussels 1988. 11.l?JeS. This is a reliable move for White and he is at least not worse after it. 11 . . . l?JxeS 12 .heS 0-0 13.l?Ja4 (13.:Scl �as 14.�b3 :Sfc8 15.l?Ja4, Barbero - Meduna, Biel 1986, 15 . . . �bS ! ?) 13 . . . �aS 14. �b3 (14.:Scl :Sfc8 15.a3 �bS 16. :Sc3 f6 17.ig3 c5= Guerra Costa Schinis, Ciro 1998) 14 . . . �bS 15. :Sfcl :Sfc8 16.�dl f6 17 ..ig3 c5. Black gets rid of his backward pawn and equalises completely. 18.dxcS .bcS 19.l?JxcS :Sxc5 20. :Sxc5 �xc5 2 1.:Scl �b5= Barlov Mednis, Graz 1987. After 10 .�a4 �b6, White's queenside initiative reaches its dead end.

11.:Sfcl a6 12 .hc6 bxc6= An­ derton - Akstinat, Germany 2011. White cannot break in the cen­ tre with ll.e4, because after 11... 49

Chapter 4 dxe4 12 .dS .!Des 13.dxc6 0-0! 14.Wdl exf3+, Black manages to complete his development, Cos­ ma - Gilbert, Bucharest 1993. 11.'{gb3 a6 12 .hc6 bxc6 13 . .!Des (13.:gfcl Wxb3 14.axb3 f6= Hansen - Salov, Wijk aan Zee 1991) 13 . . ,'{gxb3 14.axb3, Illescas Cordoba - Teske, Germany 1997, 14 . . . gS ! ? 1S.i.g3 c!DxeS 16.heS f6 17.i.g3 h5t Both sides have pawn­ weaknesses, but Black's prospects seem slightly preferable thanks to his bishop-pair.

to retreat 12 . .ig3. After Black has castled, White does not need to be afraid of the opening of files on the kingside. 12 . . . a6 13.hc6 (13. i.e2 Wb6 14.'{gxb6 c!Dxb6+ Jordan - Canizares Cuadra, IECG 2 006) 13 . . . bxc6oo

10 . . . !k8

10.Wb3 gS ! ? This plan is very unpleasant for White.

11.c!Da4 11.h3 a6 12 . .ie2 0-0= Sasiki­ ran - Fedorov, playchess.com 2006. 11.i.g3. This natural move is not precise. 11 . . . hS 12 .h3 g4 13. hxg4 hxg4 14.c!Dd2 @f8 ! Black is preparing @g7, in order to con­ nect his major pieces. It would be difficult for White to parry his en­ emy threats on the h-file. lS.:gfcl @g7 16.c!De2 :gc8 17.hc6 bxc6 18. '{gb7 :gh7 19 . .if4, Rakhmanov Jakovenko, Plovdiv 2012 (19. :gxc6? :gxc6 2 0 ,'{gxc6 Wh8-+) 19 . . . i.d3 ! ? 2 0 .c!Dg3 c 5 2i.:gc3 c4+ White must continue here with 11 . .ieS ! ? and only after 11 . . . 0-0 (11 . . .f6 12 .i.g3 hS 13.h4 ! ) so

11.c!DeS c!DdxeS 12 .heS 0-0 13 . .ig3 c!DaS= Bleul - Mueller, Germany 199 2 . After 11.'{gb3, Black can also advance his kingside pawns. 1 1 . . . g S 12 .i.eS, Zeller - Rausis, Ger­ many 1999, 12 . . . 0-0 ! ? 13 . .ig3 hSt

11 . . . gS 12 . .ig3 12 . .ieS :gg8oo Nisman - Lalic, Belgrade 1989.

12 . . . hS 13.c!Llc5

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.cd cd 4. &iJj3 &iJf6 5. &iJ c3 &iJ c6 6. i.f4 i.j5 7.e3 e6 With his active actions on the queenside Black wishes to deflect his opponent of his attack on the kingside. It would be worse for White to play here 13.h3 g4 14.&iJeS &iJdxeS 15.heS f6=i= Kropff - Cubas, Asun­ cion 2006.

13 c!LJxcS 14.dxcS h4 15. .id6 .ixd6 16.cxd6 Yfxd6 17. c!LJxgS, I.Sokolov - Danin, Koge 2 013, 17 eb4! ? 18 .ixc6+ gxc6 19.h3 ggs 20.YfhS .ig6 21.Yfe2 .if5= Now, White has •••

•••

•

nothing better than to repeat the position.

D2) 9.Yfa4 White begins immediate ac­ tive actions on the queenside.

9

•••

gcs

Black is not afraid of the pos­ sible loss of his a7-pawn.

the moment, because after 10. hc6 i!xc6 ll.�xa7 .id3 ! , Black seizes firmly the initiative. 12. 9a4. White wishes to return his queen into his own camp as quickly as possible (12 .�xb7 i!b6+ 13.9c7? ! i!xb2 14.'\l!!!x dB+ @xd8 15.a3 i!c2+ Petrovic - Zivkovic, Belgrade 2 0 07). 12 . . . .ie7 13.�dl .ia6. Black has two powerful bish­ ops for the sacrificed pawn and what is most important his bishop on a6 impedes White's castling kingside. 14.a3, Simanowski Stewart, ICCF 2007 (White must, irrelevant of the time lost, trans­ fer his knight to e2 and castle kingside. 14.c!ll g l ! ? �as 15.c!ll g e2 .b:e2 16.l!?xe2 .ib4 17.i!el 0-0+) 14 . . . �aS ! ?+ Black has very power­ ful initiative for his minimal ma­ terial deficit.

10 a6 11 .ixc6 gxc6 12. gfcl .ie7 •••

•

13.c!ll e 2

10.0-0 White should better refrain from obtaining material gains at

White used to follow the plan with the move 13.&iJdl at the end of the 80ies of the past century, 51

Chapter 4 but its popularity diminished quickly. 13 . . .bS 14.eb3 ec8 15.e4. White sacrifices a pawn and brings his bishop to control the cl-square. Still, his dominance over the c-file does not compen­ sate fully his material deficit. (15. 13xc6 exc6 16.ec3 Wfxc3 17.tLixc3 f6+ Hernando Garcia - Lopez Gracia, Aragon 2 0 14) 15 . . . he4 16.13xc6 exc6 17.i!cl ea8 18.a4 hf3 . It is useful for Black to com­ promise his opponent's pawn­ structure. 19.gxf3, Shabalov Khalifman, Tashkent 1987, 19 . . . gS ! ? 20 . .ic7 Wfb7 2 1..ig3 .id8+

13

promise much to White. 16 ... exb2 17.13c8+ .id8 18.tLicl .ibS 19. eb3 Wfxb3 2 0 .tLixb3 0-0 2 1 ..id6 !i.e7. Black has succeeded in get­ ting rid of the pin of his bishop and after the exchanges, there arises an equal endgame with mi­ nor pieces on the board. 22.13xf8+ ©xf8 23.!i.xe7+ ©xe7 24.tLifd2 ©d6= Plaskett - Jussupow, Graz 1981. Black's king is more active. White must play precisely in or­ der to maintain the equality.

16

.ig6

•••

Wfb6 14.�c6 bxc6

•••

11.,;1c3

White has managed to weaken Black's pawn-structure, but his two powerful bishops provide him with counterplay sufficient to maintain the balance.

15.�kl 15.Wfb3? ! f6 16.tLic3 @m Vais­ ser - Fressinet, Val d'Isere 2 0 04.

1s

.t.d3 16. ed1

•••

16.13xc6. The exchange of the pawns on b2 and c6 does not

52

The position is repeated after 17.Wfa4 !i.d3= 17.tLieS tLixeS 18 .heS 0-0. Black has the two-bishop advan­ tage and can always get rid of his weak pawn by advancing c6-c5. 19.Wfd2 , Pakhomov - Tuma, Par­ dubice 2006, 19 . . . 13c8 20.tLic3 eb4 2 i.ee2 WfaS 2 2 .edl f6 23 . .if4 cs+

11 . . . 0-0 1s.Bb3 �1cs 19. ti'xb6 tLixb6 20.tLleS c5 21. tLixg6 hxg6 22.dxcS �c5= Dzenis - Garnier, ICCF 2 0 14.

Part 2 1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . �fJ �f6

In the second part of our book we will analyse lines in which af-

ter 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.�:f3 �f6, White refrains from the most popular move 4.�c3. The fifth chapter of the book will be devot­ ed to the move 4.�bd2 , while in Chapters 6-7 we will deal with 4.g3 and 4.\Wc2 , while in the two final chapters of the second part (8 and 9), we will analyse 4.e3. It is also worth mentioning that the rather popular move 4.\Wb3, after 4 . . . dxc4 5.\Wxc4, transposes to po­ sitions from chapter seven.

53

Chapter s

1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . tll f3 tll f6

(7 . .ixf6? ! exf6 8 .lll b d2 .ib4+ Cherniaev - Hochstrasser, Saas Almagell 2005. Black has an extra pawn and the two-bishop advan­ tage.) 7 . . . e6+ Bratanov - Yorda­ nov, Plovdiv 2 0 1 2 .

4 ... .if5

4.t£ibd2 Indeed, White's knight is not so active here than on the c3square, but one of the pluses of this move is that now, he does not need to worry about the protec­ tion of his pawn on c4.

White does not exert sufficient pressure against the dS-pawn, so before playing e7-e6, Black can exploit this developing his light­ squared bishop outside of his pawn-chain without being afraid of the queen-sortie '\Wb3 .

About 4.'\Wa4 dxc4 5.'\Wxc4 .ifs, or 4.'1Wb3 dxc4 5.'.Wxc4 .ifS - see Chapter 7. It is obviously bad for White to choose here 4 . .igS, because Black can simply capture the pawn 4 . . . dxc4 and White's compensation for it is insufficient. 5.'\Wc2 (5. lll b d2 bS 6.a4, Kiriakov - S.Vol­ kov, playchess.com 2 0 04, 6 . . . h6 ! ? 7 . .ixf6 exf6+) 5 . . . bs 6.e4 h6 7 . .ie3 54

Now, White must make a choice on which diagonal to de­ velop his light-squared bishop: A) 5.e3, or B) 5.g3.

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. lllj3 lllf6 4. lll bd2 Ii.JS 5.§'b3. This move is not dan­ gerous for Black with a white knight on d2. 5 . . . \!;llb 6

6.\!;llc3 e6 7.c5 §'c7 8.b4 a5= McMurray/Allies - Capablanca, New York 1936. The exchange of the queens is not promising for White, because after 6.\!;llxb6 axb6, Black's rook will operate on the semi-open a­ file. 7.cxd5 cxd5 8.e3 lll c 6 9.i.b5 e6 10.lll e5 !!c8= Melkumjanz Jugelt, Essen 2 0 0 0 . 6.lll h 4 §'xb3. This i s a n inter­ esting idea. 7.axb3 ic2 . It is amazing, but Black's bishop is perfectly placed inside his oppo­ nent's camp. It attacks the b3pawn and White's pieces can hardly counter it. 8.e3, Rogo­ zenco - Pacher, Czech Republic 2 0 13 , 8 . . . lll a6 ! ?oo Black is pre­ paring the transfer of his knight to the b4-square. White should better not accept the pawn-sac­ rifice, since following 9 .cxd5 cxd5 10 .i.xa6 bxa6 11.!!xa6 i.d3 12 .!!al e6 13.lll hf3 ib4 14.lll e5 ib5+, Black's bishops would be­ come very active, while White's doubled extra pawn would be im­ material.

There arises a complicated po­ sitional battle after 5.lll h4 fi.e6. In general, it is not good to place bishops in front of the central pawns, since this may lead to the delay of the development of the pieces. Still, this is an exceptional case, because Black can easily de­ velop his bishop on f8 to g7. 6.e3 (It seems less consistent for White to play here 6.\!;llb3 §'b6 7.e3 \!;llxb3 8.axb3 lll a 6 9.ie2 g6 10.0-0 fi.g7. Black develops his pieces in the spirit of the Gruenfeld Defence. 11.lll b l 0-0 12.lll c3 c5= Rivas Ma­ ceda - Walter, ICCF 2 0 15. White must lose time here in order to centralise his knight.) 6 . . . g5 ! ? This interesting move leads to po­ sitions which are not so well ana­ lysed. Black exploits the misplace­ ment of the enemy knight on h4 and advances with tempo his kingside pawns. 7.lll hf3 g4 8.lll e5 h5 ! ?

Now, if White castles kingside, his king may come under a pawn­ offensive. After 9.b3, Black must try to exchange his opponent's central­ ised knight as quickly as possible. 9 . . . lll bd7 10.§'c2 lll xe5 11.dxe5 55

Chapter s ll:ld7 12 .i.b2 i.g7 13.cxdS cxdS 14. f4. This move weakens White's pawn-structure, but he has no other way of protecting his eSpawn. It is good for Black to have a pawn on g4, since it deprives White's knight of the f3-square. 14 . . . gxf3 1S.lLlxf3 Was+ 16.'!Wd2 Wxd2+ 17.©xd2 lLlcS= White must play accurately in this endgame; otherwise, the vulnerability of his pawn-structure might hurt him. 9.cxdS WxdS 10.ll:ld3 i.h6 11. lLlcS ll:lbd7 1 2 . ll:lxe6 '!Wxe6

to develop his pieces and to evac­ uate his king away from the centre.

A) 5.e3 e6

6.!;..e 2

White has obtained the two­ bishop advantage, but has lost too much time on the manoeuvre of his knight and lags considerably in development. 13.'!Wb3 lLldS ! ? Black sacrifices a pawn and avoids the trade of the queens. 14.Wxb7 gbs 1S.'!Wa6 ll:lb4 16.Wa4 Wg6 17. ©dl. White defends against lLlc2 , but now, his king remains strand­ ed at the centre of the board for a long time. 17 ... eS 18.a3 lLldS 19.dxe5 lLlxeS� followed by 0-0, Enricci Glatthaar, ICCF 201S. Black has more than sufficient compensa­ tion for his minimal material defi­ cit. His pieces are very active, while White will need a lot of time S6

6.a3. The immediate occupa­ tion of space on the queenside would not bring anything to White. 6 . . . ll:lbd7 7.b4 ie7 8 .i.b2 0-0 9.i.e2, Lehr - Boettcher, Bad Segeberg 199S, 9 . . . aS ! ? 10.cS b6= 6.'!Wb3 Wb6 7.cs (Or 7 . .ie2 '!Wxb3 8 .ll:lxb3, Keese - Pedrosa, ICCF 2009, 8 . . . aS ! ? = , preparing aS-a4 and preventing White's knight-sortie lLlaS.) 7 . . .'!Wc7 8.Wc3 ll:lbd7 9.b4 !;.,e7 10 .i.b2 0-0 11. .ie2 , Piazzini - Grau, Buenos Aires 193S. Here, Black can pre­ pare his standard pawn-break in the centre e6-eS, or can apply some prophylactic on the queen­ side : 11 . . . aS ! ? 12 .a3 b6=, after which White will hardly manage to advance b4-bS, because then, his pawn on cS would not be suf­ ficiently protected.

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. llij3 llif6 4. lli bd2 i.j5 After 6.llih4, Black should bet­ ter play 6 . . . .ie4.

7.§'b3 1l;!/b6 8 .i.e2 (8.c5 §'c7 9 . f3 i.g6oo M.Gurevich - Hauchard, Gibraltar 2 009) 8 . . . h6. Black pre­ pares the retreat of his bishop to h7. 9 .llixe4 dxe4oo. This is the es­ sence of the idea behind Black's move six. Now, his pawn on e4 will deprive White's knight on h4 of the f3-square, Carlsen - Fressi­ net, Dubai 2 0 14. 7 ..ie2 llibd7 8.0-0 i.d6 9 .c5. White occupies space on the queenside, but now, Black can be­ gin active actions on the kingside (g7-g5), without worrying about his position in the centre. (9. llihf3. White admits that the ma­ noeuvre llih4 was a failure. 9 . . . i.g6 1 0.b3, Zubov - Ravi, Mumbai 2 0 15, 10 . . . llie4 ! ? = ; 9.g3, Girl Fressinet, Beijing 2012, 9 . . . h5 ! ?oo) 9 . . . i.c7 10.b4 g5 11.f3 gxh4 12 .fxe4 llixe4 13.llixe4 dxe4 14.§'c2 llif6 15 . .ib2 13g8 = Ilyushchenko - Ya­ maliev, ICCF 2 0 15. Black has an extra pawn and good attacking prospects on the g-file, but his pawn-structure has been com­ promised. White has a bishop­ pair, however.

6

h6 ! ?

•••

This i s the simplest fo r Black. Now, he should not be afraid of llih4.

7.0-0 White would not achieve much if he postpones castling. 7.b3 llibd7 8 .i.b2 i.d6 9.llie5 (9.0-0 0-0 - see 7.0-0) 9 ... llie4 10.llixe4 i.xe4= Kholmov - Shcherbakov, Perm 1997.

7

•••

llibd7 8 .b3

White prepares the develop­ ment of his bishop to b2.

8

i.d6 9.i.b2 0-0

•••

10.llie5 57

Chapter s 10.a3 aS 11.llJeS 'fie7= Zallio Macedo, Natal 2013.

10

• • •

ti'e7 11.f4

White fortifies reliably his knight on eS, but weakens the e4square. White would not obtain much after his alternatives. For exam­ ple: 11.a3 �fd8= Mastrovasilis Darmarakis, Kallithea 2008, or 11.llJdf3 �fd8= Sabaev - Skatch­ kov, Bor 2000, or 11.'!Wcl llJe4. Black wishes to trade the knights. The simplification is his most di­ rect road to equality. 1 2 .llJxe4 ixe4 13.llJxd7 '\Wxd7 14.ia3, Gran­ da Zuniga - De la Riva, Linares 2008, 14 . . . ixa3 ! ? 1S.'f!xa3 aS=

11 llJe4 12.llJxd7 W!xd7 13. �xe4 he4 14.c5 J.c7= Yere­ • • •

menko - Lucchini, ICCF 1999. White has slightly more space, but the vulnerability of the e4square does not enable him to fight for the advantage.

We will analyse similar posi­ tions in the next chapter, but there, Black's bishop would be on the g4-square.

6.J.g2 It seems premature for White to choose 6.�h4, since following 6 ...dxc4 7.�xf5 exf5 8.�xc4, Black has the move 8 . . . '!WdS with a dou­ ble attack against the enemy rook and knight. White does not lose material, because he can defend with 9 .'!Wb3, Martinovsky - Feld­ man, New York 1992, attacking the pawn on b7 at the same time, but after 9 ... �a6 ! ? 10.�gl ib4+ 11. id2 bS 12.ixb4 bxc4 13.Wi'e3+ lbe4 14.id2 0-0+, the tactical compli­ cations end in Black's favour, since he leads in development and his knight is very powerful at the centre of the board. White's king is unsafe both in the centre and on the queenside as well.

6

• • •

h6

B) 5.g3 e6

This is a practical decision. Black takes care immediately against the move llJh4. S8

1.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3. tLif3 tLij6 4. t0 bd2 .ij5 7.0-0 About 7.a3 as 8.0-0 tLibd7, or 7.b3 .ie7 8 .!i.b2 tLibd7 9.0-0 - see 7. 0-0. 7.tLieS tLibd7 8 .tLixd7 �xd7= Krasenkow - Cramling, Stock­ holm 2 0 14.

7

•••

knight (lLixeS), without being afraid of the pawn-fork dxeS.

9.J.b2 9,ge1 0-0 10 .ib2 aS - see 9. ib2 .

9

•••

0-0

t0bd7

10.t0e5

White prepares the fianchetto of his second bishop.

This is a logical continuation of White's opening strategy. After the development of the bishop to b2, he deploys his knight at the middle of the board.

8 .a3 as 9.b3 !i.e7 10 .!i.b2 0-0 - see 8.b3.

About 10 .gcl aS ll.a3 !i.h7, or 10 .ge1 aS 11.a3 t0e4 - see 10.a3.

Following 8.gel !i.e7 9.Wi'b3 (9.b3 0-0 - see 8 .b3) 9 . . . �b6 10. cs Wfc7 11.Wi'c3, Black can prevent his opponent's pawn-advance b2b4 with the move 11...aS+ Mat­ nadze - Korneev, Linares 2013.

10 .�cl gcs 11.!i.c3 aS= Borroni - Balabaev, ICCF 2 0 0 2 .

8.b3

8 . . . !i.e7 This placement of the bishop has the advantage, in comparison to 8 . . . .id6, that after !i.b2 and tLieS, Black can capture White's

10.h3. This i s not the most useful move for White. 10 . . . aS 11. a3 Wfc7 12 .gcl t0e4 13.e3 t0xd2 14. t0xd2 t0f6= Alfaro de Hombre Tassone, ICCF 201S. 10.e3. He is preparing �e2 . 10 . . . aS. This typical advance of the rook pawn in similar positions S9

Chapter s provides Black with a good game. ll.§'e2 a4 12 .i.c3, Arkell - Berry, London 2012 (12 . Rfcl, Hort - Il­ lescas Cordoba, Tilburg 1992 , 12 . . . §'c7! ?oo; 12 .lLieS i.b4oo Bashkirov - Khusainov, Kazan 2008) 12 . . . §'b6 ! ? = , increasing the pressure against the pawn on b3. Black does not need to be in a hurry to exchange on b3, since he can open the a-file later at the most appro­ priate moment for him.

15.e4. After this pawn-break in the centre, White suddenly ends up in an inferior position. 15 . . . dxe4 16.lLixe4, Cedriano - Braca­ li, Bratto 2 0 05, 16 . . . lLib6 ! ? . Black exerts pressure against the c4pawn and is also threatening a5a4, so he forces the move 17.cS lLidS+. The powerful placement of the knight at the middle of the board and White's "bad" bishop on b2 make Black's prospects preferable.

10.a3 as

10 . . . as This pawn-advance is very useful. Black wishes to continue with a5-a4, seizing the initiative on the queenside.

11.lLieS lLixeS - see 10.lLieS. 11.lLiel. This transfer of the knight to the d3-square seems too slow. 11 . . . §'b6 12.lLid3 lLie4+ lUkl i.h7 12.lLiel, Kirana Haslinger, Leiden 2011, 12 . . . lLie4 ! ?oo 11.�el lLie4 1 2 .lLixe4 (12 .e3 bS 13.cxdS cxd5 14.lLixe4 he4 15.i.fl §'b6= , followed by the doubling of the rooks on the c-file, Sulskis Hasangatin, Koszalin 1996. In the middle game, the bishop on b2 may tum out to be "bad", since it is severely restricted by his own pawns on d4, e3 and a3.) 12 . . . i.xe4 13.lLid2 (13 .i.h3 i.h7= ; 13. i.fl i.h7=) 13 ... hg2 14.@xg2 bS 60

11.a3 White plans to counter a5-a4 with b3-b4. After his alternatives, he might even fail to equalise. For example: 11.�cl a4 12.lLixd7 §'xd7+ Do Barbosa, Ho Chi Minh City 2012, or 11.ge1 a4 12.lLixd7 §'xd7 13.i.c3 bS 14.cS lLie4 15.lLixe4 dxe4 16.b4 §'dS+ Jorgensen - Tseitlin, Bad

1.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3. llij3 llif6 4. lli bd2 i.j5 Zwischenahn 2008. Black's queen is very powerful at the middle of the board. 11.llixd7 Bxd7 12.f3. White is preparing e2-e4, but after 12 . . . gfd8 13.e4, Lewtak - Carlsson, Prague 2 016, 13 . . . dxe4 ! ? 14.fxe4 i.g4 1S.Bc2 , Black has the power­ ful resource 1S . . . .ia3 ! ? , for exam­ ple: 16.i.c3 eS 17.dS (17.dxeS? ! Bd3 18.Bxd3 gxd3 19.exf6 gxc3+ His bishops are very powerful in this endgame. White's minor pieces are restricted at the mo­ ment by his own pawn on e4.) 17 . . . ges+. Black has provoked the pawn-advance d4-dS and has managed to weaken the dark squares in his opponent's camp.

White gets rid of his doubled pawn. After 13. Bel Bb6+, Black is eyeing the weak b3-pawn, Efimov - Kadimova, Formia 199S. Following 13.gcl, Roos - Is­ tratescu, Vaujany 2011, Black can simply retreat his bishop 13 . . . .ig6 ! ?+, s o that later White cannot advance with tempo e2-e4. 13.cxdS exdS 14.e4 dxe4 1S.llixe4 llicS+ Nilssen - Bang, Koge 1997. Black's pieces are more active, while White's fianchettoed bishops are severely restricted by his own pawn on es and the enemy pawn on c6.

13

• • •

dxe4 14.llixe4 llic5

ll.a4. White solves radically the problem with the pawn-ad­ vance aS-a4, but weakens the b4-square in the process. 11 . . . Bc7 1 2 .llixd7 Bxd7 13.gcl i.b4= Romm - Dolgov, ICCF 2 0 13.

11

• • •

IOxeS 12.dxeS /Od7 Here, you can see the advan­ tage for Black of the inclusion of the moves a7-aS and a2-a3. White has a weak pawn on b3. 15.Be2. He sacrifices a pawn with the idea to follow with gadl and llid6. Still, even the powerful placement of his knight on d6 cannot com­ pensate fully his material deficit.

15 c!Oxb3 16.1:iadl Bb6 17.c!Lid6 .ih7 18.i.e4 he4 19.Wixe4 a4 20.1:id3 Bc7+ Zarnescu - Solo­ • • •

13.e4

vyev, ICCF 2 0 1S. 61

Chapter 6

1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . tD:f3 tLlf6 4.g3

A) 5.tlie5 .if5 This is Black's most precise move. He must increase his con­ trol over the e4-square. After the routine move 5 . . . .ih5, White can seize the initiative with the line: 6.cxd5 ! ? cxd5 7.tlic3 e6 8.�a4+ lll b d7 9.e4t Ris - An­ dersen, Germany 2 0 15. This move is becoming very popular lately. White avoids the theoretical disputes in the main variations of the Slav Defence and wishes to focus on the middle game for the basic fight. He devel­ ops his pieces in the spirit of the Catalan Opening.

4 . . . .ig4! ? Black should better refrain from capturing the pawn on c4, because he can hardly hold on to it later. His opening strategy is very simple - to develop his pieces and to preserve his pawn on d5 in or­ der to restrict considerably the enemy bishop on g2. We will analyse now A) 5.tlie5 and B) 5 . .ig2 . 62

6 . .ig2 6.�b3 �b6 7.cxd5 4Jxd5 8.i.g2 �xb3 9.axb3. Black has not only doubled his opponent's pawns on the b-file, but has also obtained the excellent b4-square for his minor pieces. 9 . . . 4Jb4 10.lll a3 f6 11.lll ec4 lll 8 a6 12.0-0 0-0-0oo

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. 0ij3 0if6 4.g3 .tg4 5. 0ie5 ij5 Pashikian - Hovhannisyan, Yere­ van 2 0 16. White would not obtain much with the move 6.0ic3, because af­ ter 6 . . . e6 7.'!Wb3 (7.i.g2 0ibd7 see 6 .ig2) 7 . . . '!Wb6 8.cS '!Wxb3 9 . axb3 0ibd7 10.0ixd7 0ixd7, Black succeeds in advancing e6-eS be­ fore White pushes b3-b4-bS. 11. b4 eS 12.dxeS 0ixeS= Wirig Favarel, Pau 2012. Now, it would be difficult for White to advance b4-bS, because his pawn on cS would be hanging after that. There arises a very sharp posi­ tion after 6.cxdS cxdS 7.0ic3 0ic6 8.f3, preparing g3-g4. (It seems less consistent for White to opt here for 8.ig2 e6 9.0-0 ie7 10. i.f4 0-0 11.0ixc6 bxc6. He has created a weak pawn on c6 for his opponent, but this does not pro­ vide him with an edge. In the mid­ dle game his bishop with be re­ stricted considerably by the ene­ my pawn on dS and he can hardly prevent Black's pawn-advance c6-cS. 12 .!kl gc8 13.0ia4 0id7 14 . .te3, Ledger - Medvegy, Catalan Bay 2 003, 14 . . . '!WaS ! ? 1S.i.d2 '!WbSoo) 8 . . . gc8 9.g4 (White can push this pawn a move later: 9 . i.g2 '!Wb6 10 .g4 id7 ll.e3 e6oo Rodshtein - Rublevsky, Sochi 2 016.) 9 . . . .td7 10 . .tf4 (It would not be logical for White to con­ tinue here with 1 0 .0ixd7 0ixd7+ Hracek - Banusz, Jerusalem 2 0 1S, because he trades his pow­ erful knight for the "bad" enemy

bishop. Now, White cannot play 11.0ixdS?, because after ll . . . e6, the weakening of the el-h4 diago­ nal becomes horrible for him. 12. 0ic3 '!Wh4+ 13. ©d2 0ixd4-+ White cannot survive for long with his king stranded in the centre of the board.) 10 . . . e6 11.e3 0ixeS 12. hes, Markoja - Vogel, Celje 2016, 12 . . . ib4 ! ? = , followed by '!Was. Black's task here is to play actively on the queenside and thus to squeeze his opponent's pieces, preventing them from or­ ganising an attack on the opposite side of the board.

6 . . . e6

7.0-0 7.0ic3 0ibd7

63

Chapter 6 8.0-0 .ie7 - see 7. 0-0. 8 .\Wb3 \Wb6 9.i!Lixd7 i!Lixd7 10. 0-0 (10.cS \Wxb3 11.axb3 eS+ Bo­ zic - Markovic, Valjevo 2 0 16) 10 ... \Wxb3. Black creates a weak pawn on b3 in his opponent's camp. 11.axb3 .ic2 12.cxdS exdS 13.e4 dxe4 14.he4 he4 1S.i!Lixe4, Rrhioua - Maleki, Bois Colombes 2 0 0S, 1S . . . i!Lib6 ! ?+ White has man­ aged to maintain the material bal­ ance, but his pawn-structure has been seriously compromised. It seems premature for him to opt for 8 .i!Lixd7. As a rule, White exchanges there only after the in­ clusion of the moves 'i;Ydl-b3 \Wd8-b6, in order to deprive his opponent of the possibility to cap­ ture with his queen. Here, after 8 ... 'i;Yxd7 9.'i;Yb3 �d8, Black is threat­ ening to win a pawn with dxc4 and \Wxd4. 10.cxdS, Schulze Wiedenkeller, Badenweiler 1988, 1 0 . . . exdS l l . .if4 .ie7 1 2 . 0 - 0 0-0=

7

•••

8.i!Lic3 Or 8.b3 i!LixeS 9.dxeS, Eade Nakamura, Hawaii 1994, 9 . . . i!Lie4 ! ?oo 8 .'i;Yb3. This queen-sortie will not bring anything to White. 8 . . . 'i;Yb6 9.i!Lixd7 (9.i!Lic3 ? ! Atalik Nechaeva, Izmir 2 016, 9 . . . i!LixeS ! ? 10.dxeS i!Lid?+ Black's pawn-struc­ ture is more elastic.) 9 . . . i!Lixd7 10. i!Lid2 (10.i!Lic3 .ie7 - see 7.i!Lic3) 10 ... 'i;Yxb3 ll.i!Lixb3, Siebrecht Roeder, Bad Woerishofen 1997, 11 . . . 0-0-0 ! ?oo Black protects reli­ ably his b7-pawn against the threat i!LiaS and obtains a very good position. 8 .i!Lixd7 'i;Yxd7 9.i!Lid2. White is preparing the transfer of his knight to f3 and protects at the same time his c4-pawn. (9.i!Lic3 ie7 10.\Wb3 0-0 11..if4 �ac8= Lomer - Homuth, Gluecksburg 1988) 9 . . . .id6

i!Libd7

Black takes an immediate con­ trol over the powerful enemy knight on es.

10.'i;Yb3 0-0 ll.i!Lif3 (It seems premature for White to play here 11.cS ie7 12 .i!Lif3, Gutman - Sie­ brecht, Werther 2006, because Black can play 12 . . . b6! ?+, under64

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. liJj3 liJf6 4.g3 i.g4 5. f1Je5 if5 mining the pawn on cS, while White's queen on b3 makes the move b2-b4 impossible.) 11 . . . h6= Tappyrov - Derbenev, Kostroma 2011. 10.'1Jf3 0-0 11.b3 h6. There has arisen a position in which nei­ ther side can begin any active ac­ tions. 12 .ib2 i:!fd8 13.i:!cl W/e7 14. '1JeS '1Jd7. Black ousts the enemy knight away from the centre of the board. 1S.'1Jd3 ia3 16.ha3 Wfxa3= Novak - Andersson, ICCF 2 01S. Black's queen will exert powerful pressure from here against the enemy a2-pawn.

8

. •.

.ie7

10 .h3. White is preparing g3g4. 10 . . . h6. Black saves his bishop from an exchange. ll.g4 ih7oo Ha­ ves - Forchert, Germany 2009. White's king is a bit weakened and this may hurt him in this middle game, since pawns cannot go back, as it is well known ... 10 .Wfb3 . This queen-sortie is typical for similar positions, but it is not appropriate here. 10 . . . '1JxeS 11.heS (11.dxeS '1Jd7+ Kuznetsov - Nemchenko, ICCF 2011 and White cannot play 12 .Wfxb7? liJcS 13.Wfb4 as 14.Wfa3 a4-+) 11 . . . Wfb6 12.Wfxb6 axb6 13.cxdS exdS+ Na­ sybullin - Spitz, ICCF 2 0 07. This endgame seems to be in favour of Black, because he has a clear cut plan for the improvement of his position on the queenside : b6-bS, '1Jd7-b6-c4. There arises a complicated double-edged position after 10. cxdS 10 . . . exdS ll.h3 h6 12 .g4 ih7 13.a3 i:!e8 14.ig3 Wfb6 1S.b4 aSoo Aleshnia - Bubir, ICCF 2009.

9

Wfb6 10.c!Oxd7

•••

9.Wib3 9.if4 0-0

White wishes to deflect the en6S

Chapter 6 emy knight from the control over the centre and to advance e2-e4.

tive.

10 �xd7 11.e4 dxe4 12. �xe4

change and what is most impor­ tant his pieces exert powerful pressure against the f2-square.

•••

15.'\1;l/xd4 .ixcS 16.ti'c3 llJg4t He has a pawn for the ex­

12 .�e3 '\1;l/xb3 13.axb3 �f6+ Adly - Yildiz, Chania 2 0 14.

B) 5 . .ig2 e6 12

•••

�f6 13.�c5

It is possible that here White should try to advance d4-d5. He will not be worse after that to say the least. 13.llJc3 0-0 14.dS '\1;l/xb3 15.axb3 cxd5 16.cxdS llJxdS 17. llJxdS exd5 18.hdS �e6 19.he6 fxe6= Gutman - Fiebig, Dort­ mund 2008. Both sides have pawn-weaknesses in their camps and they balance each other somehow. There is just a few ma­ terial left on the board as well. . .

6.0-0 6.llJeS .tfS - see variation A. 6.llJbd2 llJbd7 7.h3 (7.0-0 .te7 see 6.0-0) 7 . . .ifS 8.llJh4 ie4 9. llJxe4 dxe4oo Wang Hao - Ni Hua, China 2 016. White has a bishop­ pair, but his knight is horribly mis­ placed at the edge of the board.

This position was reached in the game Gutman - Porper, Kor­ bach 2007. Black had an interest­ ing plan here : 13 0-0-0 ! ? He protects the b7-pawn and attacks the d4-square at the same time. 14.'\1;l/c3 gxd4! Black sacrifices the exchange and seizes the initia-

After 6.llJc3 llJbd7 7.h3 (7. 0-0 dxc4 - see 0-0; 7.ti'b3 ti'b6 - see 6.ti'b3), Black does not need to waste time for the retreat of his bishop: 7 . . . hf3 ! ? 8.hf3 dxc4oo Trumic - Rogic, Neum 2008.

•••

66

6,'!Wb3 '\1;l/b6 (diagram) About 7. 0-0 llJbd7 - see varia­ tion Bl.

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. 11Jf3 l1Jf6 4.g3 :ig4 5. :ig2 e6 6. 0 - 0 11J bd7 !!cl, Ljubojevic - L'Ami, Amster­ dam 2008, 9 . . . !!c8 ! ?oo) 9 . . . h6! ?oo

7.l?Jc3 l?Jbd7 8.cS (8.0-0 ie7 - see variation Bl) 8 . . . �a6 - see7. cs. 7.cS �a6 8.h3 (8.l?Jc3 l?Jbd7 9.0-0 ie7 - see 6.0-0) 8 . . . i.xf3 9.exf3, Ovsiannikov - Tropin, Saratov 2 0 07, 9 . . . b6 ! ?oo

6 . . . t0bd7

After 7.h3, Black can transfer his bishop to the bl-h7 diagonal in order to increase his control over the e4-square. 7 . . . 11..fS 8 .l?Jc3 h6 9.�b3 (The position is simpli­ fied after 9.l?Jd2 :ie7 10.e4 dxe4 11.l?Jdxe4 l?Jxe4 12.l?Jxe4 l?Jf6= Theodorou - Moshkov, Herak­ lion 2016.) 9 . . . �b6 10 .cS �a6 11.l?Jd2 b6= Shimanov - Motylev, Moscow 2 0 1S. It is not good for White to play here 7.l?Jc3, because then Black can simply grab a pawn and it would be very difficult for White to regain it. 7 . . . dxc4 ! ? 8.h3 (8.e4 eS+; 8.a4. He prevents b7-bS, but weakens seriously the b4-square. 8 . . . aS 9.e4, Matnadze - Dzag­ nidze, Istanbul 2012, 9 . . . eS ! ?+) 8 . . . i.xf3 9.ixf3, Derjabin - Itkis, Alushta 2 0 04, 9 . . . ib4 ! ?oo The exchange of pawns 7.cxdS exdS only presents to Black the semi-open e-file.

White has two basic plans in this position: Bl) 7.Wb3 and B2)

7.b3. 7.l?JeS .ifs - see variation A. 7.1fc2 . Now, just like after 7. �b3, White protects his pawn, but does not force Black to lose a tem­ po fpr the protection of his b7-pawn. 7 . . . ie7 8 .if4 0-0 9.!!dl, Kurajica - Schneider, Rethymno 2 0 03 (9.

8.\Wb3 �b6 9.\We3+ :ie7. The transfer of the queen to the e367

Chapter 6 square seems rather awkward. 10.lll c3 (It is preferable for White to choose here 10 .b3, although even then after 10 . . . lll e4 ll.lll bd2 , Gutman - Neuer, Senden 2 014, ll ... lll x d2 ! ? 12 .hd2 !e6 13 .i.c3 Wfd8 14.lll eS 0-0=, Black has no problems whatsoever.) 10 . . . h6 11. gd1 !e6 12 .'!Wd3 o-o I3.lll h4 gfes. Black prepares a square for the retreat of his bishop. 14.lll fS i.f8+ Zelovic - Ingersol, ICCF 2011. His pieces have been more harmoni­ ously deployed. 8.lll c3 i.d6 9.h3 (9.lll e l 0-0 10.f3, Leblanc - Sullivan, Langley 2006, 10 . . . !hS ! ? = ) 9 . . . hf3 . Black presents his opponent with the two-bishop advantage, but White can hardly exploit this effectively, because the position remains rather closed. 10 .hf3 0-0 ll.!J.g2 (11.'it>g2 '\We7 12 .Wfc2 gae8= Zhid­ kov - Butnorius, Daugavpils 1978 ; 11.ge1 ges 12 .'!Wd3 h6 13. 'it>g2 i.b4= Fritz - Green, Germa­ ny 2013) 11 . . . ges 12 .e3 (12 .'!Wd3 Wfe7= Stefanova - Krush, Huaian 2016) 12 . . . lll b 6 13 .b3 '\We7 14.lll e 2, Kasimdzhanov - Prie, France 2010, 14 . . . aS ! ?oo, preparing a5-a4.

8.b3 0-0 - see variation B2. 8.Wfb3 Wfb6 9.cxdS exdS 10. '!We3 !e6 11.h3, Kasparov - Comp Fritz 5.32, Hannover 1999, 11... h6 ! ?+ a.gel. White intends to con­ tinue with e2-e4. Still, this pawn­ advance leads only to the simplifi­ cation of the position. 8 . . . 0-0 9. e4 dxe4 10.lll xe4 lll xe4 u.gxe4. White has a bit freer game, but Black's position remains quite solid. In addition, he can create counterplay by exerting pressure against the d4-pawn, or can sim­ plify the position, preparing the pawn-advance c6-c5. ll . . . lll f6 12. gel (12.ge2 h6=) 12 . . . Wfb6. The queen frees a square for the rook. 13.!e3 gad8 14.'!Wc2, Shyam Swapnil, Chennai 2013, 14 . . . !J.fS ! ? 15.'\We2 c5= 8.'!Wc2 0-0 9.e4 (After 9.Wfc3, Bu Xiangzhi - Lu Shanglei, Shen­ zhen 2 0 16, the simplest move for Black would be 9 . . . !hS ! ? = , re­ moving in advance the bishop against the possible attack lll e S.)

7.lll b d2 !J.e7

9 ... aS ! ? Black does not need to be in a hurry to exchange on e4, because White's knight on d2 im­ pedes the development of his 68

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. liJfJ li:Jf6 4.g3 ig4 5. ig2 e6 6. 0 - 0 li:J bd7 queenside. 10.liJeS, S.Braun - Lo­ bron, Gran Canaria 1996. Here, Black can sacrifice advantageous­ ly a pawn : 10 . . . liJxeS ! ? 11.dxeS liJd7 12.cxdS cxdS 13.exdS exdS 14.ixd5 liJxe5 15.ixb7 �fa7 16.ig2 �k7 17.'\1;Ve4 if6 18.Wi'e3 liJd3;; He has sufficient compensation for his minimal material deficit. Black's pieces are very active, while White's queenside has not been developed yet.

Bl) 7.'\1;Vb3 ti'b6

pawn on cS. 9 . . . b6 10.cxb6 axb6 11.liJc3, Teterev - S.Zhigalko, Minsk 2 0 14, 11 . . . bS ! ? = ) 9 . . . ifS 10. if4 b6 ll.cxb6 axb6 12 .l:!cl l:!c8 13.liJc3 h6. Black not only pre­ pares a square for the retreat of his bishop, but also intends to con­ tinue with g7-g5, in order to pre­ pare with tempo the development of his dark-squared bishop to the g7-square. 14.liJeS gS ! ? 15.liJxd7 liJxd7 16.id.2 liJf6 17.f3. White wishes to advance e2-e4 as quickly as possible, but the pawn-advance f2-f3 compromises the position of his king. In addition, his pawn­ centre does not seem to be so reli­ able. 17 . . . ig6 18 .e4 ig7oo Trubet­ skoi - Ponomarjov, ICCF 2 0 14.

8 . . . ie7

Black would not mind the trade of the queens, because he would obtain a very good endgame. He is also ready to counter White's pawn-advance c4-c5, after which he would prepare the undermin­ ing moves e6-e5, or b7-b6.

8.c!Oc3 8.cS Wi'a6. This is a very good square for the queen, because White fails to transfer his bishop to fl. 9.h3 (9.liJc3 ie7 - see 8. liJc3. After 9.if4, Black can un­ dermine immediately the enemy

9.if4 White completes the develop­ ment of his pieces without deter­ mining yet the pawn-structure in the centre. Besides that, he has also tried in practice : 9.l:!dl ihS 10.if4 h6 11.l:!acl 0-0= Ribli - Larsen, Tilburg 1980. 69

Chapter 6 After 9.h3, Black can transfer his bishop to the bl-h7 diagonal in order to increase his control over the important e4-square. 9 . . . ifs 10.c5 (If White continues to chase the enemy bishop with the move 10 .g4, his pawn-structure might be seriously weakened. 10 . . . ig6 11.lLieS? ! lLixe5 12.dxe5 lLid7 13.cxd5 \1;!/xb3 14.axb3 exd5+ Andreikin - Morozevich, Astana 2012.) 10 . . . \1;!/xb3. This is the sim­ plest for Black. He does not lose time for the retreat of his queen, but enters an approximately equal endgame. 11.axb3 lLie4 12 .b4 a6 13.l':�el 0-0. Black has prevented reliably White's pawn-advance b4-b5. He will be incapable of breaking Black's defence in the centre and on the kingside. 14.g4 !g6 15.!f4 h6 16.e3 f5= Olofs son - Raijmaekers, ICCF 2 0 14. 9 .gel. White frees in advance the fl-square for his bishop, which might be very useful after c4-c5 and \1;!/b6-a6. 9 . . . 0-0

Torquay 1998. It is not easy to un­ derstand why he has played gel at the first place. Black has a clear cut plan for the improvement of his po­ sition on the queenside: b6-b5, lLib6. 10.e4 dxe4 11.lLixe4 lLixe4 12. gxe4 .if5 13.ge3, Marangunic Mikac, Austria 1994, 13 . . . gfd8 ! ? = 10.c5 \1;!/xb3. Now, the retreat of the queen to the a6-square seems less reliable, because White can attack it with ifl and e2-e4. In addition, the transfer into an endgame provides Black with an excellent game, because he can undermine his opponent's pawns on the queenside with b7-b6 and a7-a5. ll.axb3 b6 ! ? 12 .b4 .ixf3 13.!xf3 a5 14.b5. White cannot even equalise with this pawn-sac­ rifice. 14 . . .cxb5 15.cxb6. His b­ pawn is too far away from the rest of his forces and will soon perish. 15 . . .b4 16.lLia4 id8 17.b7 gb8 18. lLic5 lLixc5 19.dxc5 gxb7 2 0 .if4 ga7+ Slyusar - Onoprichuk, ICCF 2016. White has the two-bishop advantage and a passed c-pawn, but this does not compensate ful­ ly his material deficit. White has also tried in practice here the immediate line: 9.c5 '!Wa6 !?

About 10.if4 !xf3 - see 9.if4. It does not seem logical for White to choose here 10.\1;!/xb6 axb6 11.cxd5 exd5+ Speelman - Short, 70

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. l'iJ.f3 l'iJf6 4.g3 !i.g4 5. !i.g2 e6 6. 0 - 0 l'iJ bd7 10.if4 b6. The undermining of the c5-pawn, cramping Black's position, is his simplest road to equality. 11.cxb6 axb6 12 .h3 (12. e4 0 - 0 ! ? = Teterev - S.Zhigalko, Minsk 2 014; 12 J''ffe l 0-0 13.e4 gfc8= Persson - Rublevsky, Novi Sad 2 0 16) 12 . . . .ih5 13.g4 .ig6 14. l'iJh4, Rakhmanov - Debashis, Doha 2 0 14, 14 . . . b5 ! ?oo, followed by the transfer of the knight to the c4-square (l'iJb6, l'iJc4) . 10.ge1, preparing e2-e4. 10 . . . b 6 ll.cxb6 axb6.

deprived of his two-bishop advan­ tage. 21.gaxcl l'iJd5= Emrich Evstigneev, ICCF 2012. 12 .e4 0-0 ! ? Black should not be in a hurry to capture on e4, be­ cause he should not be afraid of the pawn-advance e4-e5. 13.exd5 (13 . .if4 dxe4 14.l'iJxe4 l'iJd5= Te­ terev - Kochetkova, Minsk 2 015; 13.h3 hf3 14.hf.3 dxe4 15.l'iJxe4 l'iJd5 - see 12 .h3) 13 . . . l'iJxd5 14.ifl §'a7 15.l'iJxd5 cxd5 16 . .ib5. White's bishop will be very active on this square, but this is still insufficient for him to maintain an edge. (16. @g2 gfc8= Theodorou - Miton, Achaea 2 0 16) 16 ... .if6 ! ? = , eyeing the enemy weakness on d4.

9 . . . 0-0

After 12 .h3, Black does not need to waste time for the retreat of his bishop and can exchange it for the enemy knight. 12 . . . hf.3 13.hf.3. White's two-bishop ad­ vantage is not important here, be­ cause the position remains closed. It would be very difficult for him to activate his light-squared bish­ op, since it is severely restricted by the enemy pawn on d5. 13 . . . 0-0 14.e4. White i s trying t o open the position, but his d4-pawn will remain isolated. 14 . . . dxe4 15. l'iJxe4 l'iJd5 16.l'iJc3 l'iJ7f6. Black in­ creases his control over the d5square. 17.a4 §'d3 18.\Wdl l'iJb4 19. \Wxd3 l'iJxd3 20 .gd1 l'iJxcl. White is

10.c5 It is not good for White to play here 10 .gfel? ! , because his f2pawn is not sufficiently protected and this enables Black to obtain an advantage in a tactical fashion. 10 . . .hf3 11.hf.3 \Wxd4 12 .\Wxb7 (12 .cxd5. If White's rook had been on fl, his position would have 71

Chapter 6 been in order. Now, after 12 . . . tll c5+ Zlotnikov - Becerra Rivero, Philadelphia 2008, he cannot play 13 .\!Na3?, because Black can counter that with 13 . . . tll d3 ! 14. \!Nxe7 \!Nxf2 + 15.@hl tll xel-+) 12 . . . \!Nxc4 13.l'facl \!Nb4 14.\!Nxc6 \!Nxb2+, with a solid extra pawn for Black, Skatchkov - Al Sayed, Khanty-Mansiysk 2 013.

White would not achieve much if he enters an endgame : 11.\!Na4 1M/xa4 12.tll x a4, Stupak - Maiorov, Minsk 2009, 12 . . . h6 ! ? = 11.i!fcl b 6 12.cxb6 axb6= Yegiazarian - Lputian, Yerevan 1994.

11 . . . .thS

10 .h3 .�.f5!? 11.c5 1M/xb3 12. axb3 h6= Morovic Fernandez Solomon, Istanbul 2012. Following 10.tll d 2, Cvitan Jakovljevic, Pula 2 0 03, Black can simply capture a pawn 10 . . . \!Nxd4 ! ? ll.h3 i.h5 12 .i.e3 \!Ne5 13.1Mi'xb7 \!Nd6 = The exchange of a central pawn for a flank pawn may turn out to be in favour of Black in this middle game. After 10.i!fdl i.f5 11.c5 1Mi'xb3 12.axb3 , Black must continue with the solid move 12 . . . h6= Con­ die - Orr, London 1986, because if he tries to capture the enemy pawn on b3, he may face serious problems : 12 . . . i.c2 13.i!dcl hb3 14.tll d 2 i.c4 15.tll xc4 dxc4, Kam­ sky - Kramnik, Nice 2009, 16. tll d l ! ?;l;

10 . . . 1Mi'a6 11.h3 ll.1Mi'c2 . This move enables Black to increase his control over the e4-square with tempo. 11 . . . i.f5 12 .\!Nd2 b6? Kovalev - A.Zhi­ galko, Minsk 2012. 72

12.lUcl There arises a complicated po­ sitional battle after 12.g4 .ig6 13. tll h4 b6 14.tll xg6 hxg6 15.cxb6 axb6. White has obtained the two-bishop advantage indeed, but Black's pawn-structure is more elastic. 16.a4 i!fd8 17.i!fdl \!Na7 18 .e4. White's desire to open the position is understandable, but he weakens his d4-pawn and pre­ sents Black's knight with the won­ derful d5-square. 18 . . . dxe4 19. tll xe4 tll d5 2 0 .i.g3 g5. Black pre­ vents his opponent's pawn-ad­ vance h3-h4. Later, he plans the transfer of his knight tll f8-g6, in order to exploit the vulnerability of the f4-square. 2 1.1Mi'c2 i!ac8 2 2 .

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. liJ.f3 liJf6 4.g3 !ig4 5. !ig2 e6 6. 0 - 0 liJ bd7 W/d2 W/aS 23.liJd6 �xd2 24J"�xd2 hd6 2S.hd6 liJf8 ! 2 6.fi.g3 liJg6oo

12

b6 13.g4 .tg6 14 .td6,

•••

•

Burmakin - Rublevsky, Tomsk 2001, 14 .ixd6 ! ? 15.cxd6 gfd8oo White's d6-pawn is too far away from the rest of his forces and would be a cause of worries for him in the future. •••

B2) 7.b3

White prepares the fianchetto of his second bishop. Still, later he will have problems activating his bishops, because one of them will be restricted by the enemy pawn on dS, while his other bishop's mobility will be diminished by his own pawn on d4.

8

•••

0-0 9.liJbd2

After 9.liJc3, Black can simply follow with 9 . . . h6 ! ? , not only pre­ paring a leeway for his king in ad­ vance, but also ensuring a square for his bishop to retreat against a chase after it. 10 .:!'!el. White can hardly find an active plan for ac­ tions, because after his standard plan for similar positions, con­ nected with the preparation of the pawn-advance e2-e4, there would only arise simplifications. (10.h3 i.fS 11.liJd2 �b6 12.e4 dxe4 13.liJdxe4 liJxe4 14.liJxe4 :i!fd8 lS. W/e2 as. Black wishes to play a4, in order to exert pressure against the b3-square. 16.�e3 a4= An­ tonenko - Versili, ICCF 2012.) 10 . . . i.fS 11.liJd2 .th7 12 .e4 (12 .a3 aS= Ribli - Nogueiras Santiago, Clermont Ferrand 1989) 12 . . . dxe4 13.liJdxe4 liJxe4 14.i.xe4 i.xe4 1S.liJxe4 liJf6= Vukic - Saric, Sa­ rajevo 2 007.

9

•••

a5

Black plans to advance aS-a4.

7 .te7 8 .tb2 •••

•

About 8.liJbd2 0-0 9.i.b2 aS, or 8.liJc3 0-0 9.i.b2 h6 - see 8. i.b2 . 8.i.a3 0 - 0 9.W/cl :i!e8 10.W/b2 h6= Koneru - Cao, Budapest 2001. Black's position is very solid.

10.a3 73

Chapter 6 Now, the positional threat aSa4 is not dangerous for White, since he can counter it simply with b3-b4. The move 10.a3 however, weakens a bit the b3-square. With the move 10 .a4, Badea lordachescu, Bucharest 1998, White solves radically the prob­ lem with Black's threat a5-a4, but weakens the b4-square in the pro­ cess. 10 . . . h6 ! ? = 10.tll eS tll xeS 11.dxeS tll d7 1 2 . h3. White wishes t o oust the ene­ my bishop away from the dl-hS diagonal and to advance e2-e4, but this seemingly logical plan suddenly leads to difficulties for him. 12 . . . !hS 13.g4 !g6 14.e4 dxe4 15.tll xe4. White is perfectly prepared to penetrate with his knight to the d6-square, but after 15 . . . tll cS it turns out that Black will penetrate with his knight to the d3-square. From there it can go eventually to the weakened f4square and will be very effective. 16.tll d 6, Andersson - Smyslov, Hastings 1972 (There arises a dif­ ficult endgame for White after 16.1/Nxd8 i:!fxd8 17.!a3 he4 18. he4, Lago - Geller, Palma de Mallorca 1989, 18 . . . a4 ! ?+) 16 . . . f6 ! ? Black undermines the pawn­ base of the knight on d6. 17.ia3 tll d3 18.tll xb7 1/Nd7 19 .he7 1/Nxe7 2 0 .tll d 6 fxeS+ White's opening strategy has failed completely. He must remove his knight from d6 and the vulnerability of his king will be the decisive factor in this 74

middle game. Black's attack will develop effortlessly: i:!ad8, tll f4, 1/Nh4 and eventually i:!d3. White cannot defend the h3-square. 10 .h3 !hS ll.g4. White weak­ ens his king's shelter, but wishes to obtain the two-bishop advan­ tage. (ll.a3 tll e4 12.tll xe4 dxe4 13.tll eS fS= Stojanovic - Medic, Zadar 2 0 04) 11 . . . !g6 12.tll h4 a4 13.tll xg6 hxg6 14.!c3 (14.1/Nc2 ib4 15.i:!fdl 1/Ne7= Donchenko - Zheli­ andinov, USSR 1977) 14 . . . �c7. Black's position is very solid and White is unlikely to break it. His attempt to occupy space on the queenside with the move 15.cS enables Black to accomplish the standard pawn-break in the cen­ tre : 15 . . . eS 16.dxeS tll xeS= Stad­ chenko - Waerstad, ICCF 2 0 14.

10

. . .

h6

It is now difficult for both sides to develop any active actions, so they should be happy with the possibility to play moves which improve a bit their positions.

lU�el

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. &i:Jj3 &i:Jf6 4.g3 fi.g4 5. fi.g2 e6 6. 0 - 0 &i:J bd7 About lUkl fi.f5 12 .E:el l!;VbS see 11.E:el. 11.fi.c3 fi.f5 12 .c5, Ruck - Portisch, Hungary 2 005, 12 . . . b6 ! ?oo

W/bS 13.e3 E:dS 14.l!;Ve2 b5. Black begins active actions on the queenside. 15.&i:Je5 &i:Jxe5 16.dxe5 &i:Je4 17.&i:Jxe4 he4=

11.&i:Jh4 fi.h5= Bu Xiangzhi Matlakov, Helsingor 2 0 14.

11

.tfS

•••

This move impedes White's pawn-advance e2-e4. You can see now the idea behind Black's previous move. After &i:Jh4 he can simply retreat his bishop to h7.

12.c!beS The position is quickly simpli­ fied after this move. White has another plan, con­ nected with the preparation of the transfer of his queen to e2, but it does not promise much to him ei­ ther: 12 .e3 l!;Vb6, Black is eyeing the weak enemy pawn on b3. 13 .W/e2 E:feS 14.E:ecl &i:Je4= Jianu - Bonte, Arad 2 0 15, or 12.E:cl

12 c!bxeS 13.dxeS c!be4 14. c!bxe4 dxe4 15.e3, Vijayalak­ •••

shmi - Zubarev, Borup 2012 (15. fi.d4, Wilder - Novikov, Mendoza 1985, 15 . . . b5 ! ? 16.cxb5 cxb5 17.e3 l!;Vd5= Black's centralised queen is very powerful and his prospects are not worse thanks to that.)

15

l!;Vxdl! ? 16,gexdl gfd8 = ,

•••

followed by the further exchange of the major pieces on the d-file. The draw seems imminent.

75

Chapter 7

1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . tll t'3 tll f6 4.tfc2

seems rather artificial. 5 . . . b5 6.b3 cxb3 7.lll xb3, Davies - Khenkin, Porto San Giorgio 1998, 7 . . . a5 ! ?+ His piece-control over the c5square does not compensate fully the sacrificed pawn.

White protects his c4-pawn with the queen and plans to fol­ low with .if4 and then e2-e3 .

4 . . . dxc4 This is Black's simplest deci­ sion. He provokes the enemy queen to occupy an unstable posi­ tion. No doubt, White's most natu­ ral move here is B) 5.Wxc4. There are some players however who would like to sacrifice a pawn here - A) 5.e4. Besides the move 5.e4, White has sacrificed a pawn in some other ways too. As a rule, they are worse than 5.e4. For example : 5.lll b d2 . This pawn-sacrifice 76

5 . .ig5 b5 6.e4 h6 7 . .ie3 (7 . .ixf6?! exf6+ Cherniaev - Hoch­ strasser, Saas Almagell 2005. White not only presents his oppo­ nent with the two-bishop advan­ tage, but also opens the diagonal for the enemy bishop on f8.) 7 . . . e6 8 . .ie2 , Bratanov - Yordanov, Plovdiv 2012, 8 . . . .ib7! ?+ White's compensation for the pawn is in­ sufficient. 5.e3 b5 6.b3 (6.a4 a6 7.lll b d2 , Andres Gonzalez - Vishnu, San Sebastian 2012, 7 . . . Wa5 ! ?oo) 6 . . . cxb3 7.axb3. White has n o direct threats and Black has an extra pawn. Still, the position remains approximately equal, because it would be necessary for Black to advance c6-c5 in order to obtain any real chances of an advantage. It would be however very difficult for him to accomplish that. 7 . . . e6

1.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3. tl:ij3 l:i:if6 4. Wlc2 dc 5.e4 b5 8.ie2 ib7 9.0-0 l?ibd7 10.l?ieS a6 ll.l:i:id3. White increases his con­ trol over the cS-square. ll . . . W!c7 12 .l?id2 id6oo

A) 5.e4 b5

material. 10 . . . a6 ll.l?ic3 !i.e7 12. id3 h6 13 .i.d2 0-0 14.eS l:i:idS lS.l:i:ixdS cxdS 16.iaS W!b8 17.l:!dcl l:!c8 18.ic7 Vf/a7 19.Vf/d2 . White's pieces are very active, while Black's bishop on b7 is severely restricted. In fact, he should bet­ ter try to exchange it even at the price of a pawn. 19 . . . ic6 ! 20.l:!xc6 l:!xc7 21.l:!axa6, draw, Yurov Zhak, ICCF 2 0 1S. Indeed, after 2 1 . . . l:!xc6 2 2 . l:!xc6 Vf/a3 = , the posi­ tion becomes completely equal.

6 . . . cxb3 7.axb3 e6 8 .id2 •

About 8.!i.d3 .ib79 . .id2 aS, or 9.0-0 .ie7 10 . .id2 aS - see 8 . .id2 .

6.b3 Black's pawn on c4 cramps considerably White's actions on the queenside, so he should better exchange it.

8

•••

a5

Black does not allow his queenside pawns to be blocked af­ ter .iaS, followed by b3-b4.

9 .id3 J.b7 10.0-0 .ie7 •

6.igS h6 - see S. igS. 6.a4. Black should not be afraid of the attack against the bS­ square. 6 . . . e6 7.i.e2 (7.l?ibd2? ! Yegiazarian - Asrian, Yerevan 2008, 7 . . . l?ia6! ?+) 7 . . . ib7 8.0-0, Canelli - Bianco, Asti 199S, 8 ... i.e7 ! ?+ 6.ie2 ! ? This move has not been analysed extensively, but it is not bad at all. 6 . . . e6 7.0-0 ib7 8 .b3 cxb3 9.axb3 l?ibd7 10.l:!dl (10 .l:i:ic3 a6 11.l:!dl ie7 - see 10. l:!dl). White has a pawn-centre and a freer game for the sacrificed

lU'kl This is White's most precise move. After his alternatives he may even fail to equalise. For example 77

Chapter 7 it is bad for him to play 11.lll c3, because after 11 . . . lll a 6 12.lll e 2 lll b 4, in addition to his extra pawn, Black obtains also the two­ bishop advantage. 13.i.xb4 i.xb4 14.lll f4 h6 15.h4, Gausel - Astrup, Norway 2 011, 15 . . . 0-0 ! ?+ 11.i!el h6 ! ? 12 .W/cl, Stocek Zakhartsov, Pardubice 2 004. White is preparing to sacrifice his bishop on h6. Black does not need to castle immediately and can play 12 . . . b4+, restricting consider­ ably the enemy knight on bl. It is also bad for White to choose here 11.i.c3. He prepares in this fashion the development of his knight to d2, but weakens his control over the cS-square and thus facilitates Black's thematic pawn-advance c6-c5. 11 . . . h6. He cannot continue the game with­ out this move; otherwise, after e4-e5 and hh7, White will regain his pawn. 12.lll b d2 lll b d7 13.1!a2 0-0 14.i!fal b4 15.i.b2 c5 ! 16.lll c4 a4. Black gives back his extra pawn and seizes completely the initiative. 17.1!xa4 1!xa4 18.1!xa4 cxd4 19.ixd4 ic5+ Nakamura C.Hansen, Malmo/Copenhagen 2 005. Black's pieces are obviously much better coordinated. 11.i!dl '1;l/b6= Semcesen - Hec­ tor, Uppsala 2 016.

11

78

• . •

b4 12.if4

There arises a much calmer position after the line: 12 .i.e3 lll bd7 13.h3 cS. Black has succeed­ ed in advancing c6-c5 indeed, but after 14.lll b d2 1!c8 15.W/a2 , he will be forced to part with his a5pawn. 15 . . . 0-0 16.W/xa5 '1;l/xa5 17. 1!xa5 cxd4 18.1!xc8 1!xc8 19.hd4 lll c5 20.1!a7 lll xd3 21.i!xb7 @f8 = Neto - Stalmach, ICCF 2 0 14. The position has been considerably simplified and there has arisen an approximately equal endgame on the board.

12 lll bd7 13.lll b d2 c5 14. �c4 0-0 15 .td6 • • •

•

White's piece-activity com­ pensates the sacrificed pawn, but not more than that.

15 a4 16.gxa4 gxa4 17. bxa4 cxd4 18.Wlbl �c5 19. he7 '1;l/xe7 20.ti'xb4 ges 21. .tfl lll fxe4 22.lll aS .tds 23. lll xd4 ti'f6 24.gc2 h6co Refalo • • •

Kozlowski, ICCF 2016. Black's centralised pieces compensate the presence of an outside passed pawn for his opponent.

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. l:i:ij3 l:i:if6 4. �c2 de 5. �xc4 i.j5 B) 5.�xc4

c3-square. The other variations with be dealt with in the line B2. 6.&i:ibd2 e6 7.g3 (7.e3 h6 - see 6.e3) 7... l:i:ibd7 8.ig2 J.e7 - see 6.g3.

5 . . J.f5 .

This is a reliable move for Black. He develops his bishop to an active position and it will con­ trol the important central e4square from there. Black's other popular theoreti­ cal move 5 . . . i.g4 leads to more complicated positions. For exam­ ple : 6.&i:ic3 &i:ibd7 7.e4 J.xf3 8 .gxf3 e5 9.dxe5 &i:ixe5 10 .�e2 icS 11. id2 &i:ihS 12.f4. Now, Black is forced to sacrifice his queen. 12 ... �xd2 + ! ? 13.@xd2 l:i:ixf4 14.�dl 0-0-0+ 15.&i:idS cxd5� He has sufficient compensation for the sacrificed queen, but this way of playing might not be to every­ body's liking. After 5 . . . ifS, White has a choice between numerous possi­ bilities and they often lead to transposition of moves. In order to systematise all this in Bl) 6.g3, we will analyse the variations in which White is not in a hurry to develop his queen's knight to the

6.i.gS. This move seems a bit premature, because after 6 . . . �b6, White has problems with the pro­ tection of his b2-pawn. 7.b3, Plas­ kett - Cooper, Port Erin 2000 (7.�b3, Doettling - Kindermann, Germany 2003, 7 . . . &i:ia6 ! ? 8.�xb6 axb6+) 7 . . . &i:ibd7 ! ? Black wishes to advance e7-e5 as quickly as pos­ sible. 8.&i:ibd2 e5 ! 9.dxe5 ie6 10. Wfcl &i:ig4 ll.e3 &i:igxe5 12.&i:ixeS &i:ixe5+ Black has restored the ma­ terial balance and his position seems preferable thanks to his more actively deployed pieces. After 6.if4, just like following 6.igS, Black can attack bravely his opponent's b2-pawn. 6 . . . �b6 7.Wfcl e6 8.&i:ibd2, Schulte - Jaco­ by, Hamburg 1986, 8 . . . &i:ibd7!?. This is Black's simplest road to equality. He simply completes his development and accomplishes the freeing pawn-break c6-c5. 9. a3 i.e7 10 .e3 0-0 ll.l:i:ic4 Wfd8 12. i.e2 c5= 6.e3. This is a solid move for White. He does not plan to fian­ chetto his light-squared bishop. 6 . . . e6. (diagram) 7.l:i:ih4, Korchnoi - Fressinet, Villandry 2 0 07. White's attempt to obtain the two-bishop advan79

Chapter 7 c6. It will be much more active on this square than on d7. 9.0-0 (9. llJc3 llJc6= Epishin - Krivoboro­ dov, Schwaebisch Gmuend 2 0 13) 9 . . . llJc6 10.lDc3 !e7= Oinonen Pettersson, ICCF 2012.

Bl) 6.g3 tage will cost him several tempi. 7 . . . llJbd7 ! ? 8.llJxf5 exf5oo 7.!e2 lDbd7 8.0-0 !d6 (It also seems good for Black to opt here for 8 . . . h6 9.llJbd2 !e7 - see 7. llJbd2 .) 9.llJbd2 0-0= Van de Griendt - Lalic, West Bromwich 2 005. Black is perfectly prepared for the freeing pawn-breaks c6-c5 and e6-e5. 7.llJbd2 h6. This is the sim­ plest. Black saves his bishop in advance from the possible chase after it with the move llJh4. 8.!e2 llJbd7 9.0-0 !e7 10.�b3 (The move 10.a4 leads to the weaken­ ing of the b4-square. 10 . . . a5 11. �dl 0-0= Epishin - Hilverda, Werther 2 013.) 10 . . . Wfb6 11.�dl. White avoids the exchange of the queens, but this is still insufficient for him to maintain an advantage. (There arises an equal endgame after ll.llJc4 �xb3 12.axb3 0-0 13.!d2 c5= Epishin - Gonzalez Perez, Oeiras 2015.) 11 . . . 0-0 12. b3 �ac8 = , followed by c6-c5, ei­ ther immediately, or after the pre­ liminary move �fd8, Voloshin Sodoma, Mlada Boleslav 2 0 07. Following 7.!d3 hd3 8.�xd3, Black can play 8 . . . c5, preparing the development of his knight to 80

White plans at first to com­ plete the development of his piec­ es on the kingside and to castle there.

6

••.

e6 7 .tg2 .

7.llJc3 llJbd7 - see 6.llJc3.

7

•••

llJbd7 8.0-0

8.lDc3 !e7 - see variation B2. 8.llJbd2 !e7 9.0-0 0-0 - see 8.0-0. 8.e3 !e7 9.llJc3 (9.0-0 0-0 see variation Bla) 9 . . . 0-0 - see variation B2.

8

.te7

•••

9.e3 White prepares the retreat of his queen to e2 where it would be

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. tiJj3 tiJf6 4. Wlc2 de 5. Wlxc4 .ij5 much safer and would support the pawn-advance e3-e4. About 9.tiJc3 0-0, or 9.a4 0-0 10.tiJc3 a5 - see variation B2. 9 . .id2 . White is preparing b2b4, but this plan seems to be rath­ er slow. Black manages to occupy the central d5 and e4-squares and to seize the initiative. 9 . . . 0-0 10. b4 (10.!�dl h6 - see 9. gdl) 10 ... tiJe4 11 . .iel, Cramling - Liu, Chi­ na 2008, ll . . . tiJb6 ! ? 12 .Wb3 Wd5+ 9 . .ig5. This plan is also not so good for White, since after h7-h6 he will have to exchange on f6, af­ ter which Black will have the two­ bishop advantage. 9 . . . 0-0 10.e3 (10.tiJc3 h6 - see variation B2; 10 .tiJbd2 h6 ll.hf6 hf6 12 .Wb3, Sjodahl - Hultin, Sweden 2009, 12 ... cS ! ?i) 10 ... h6 11.hf6 .ixf6oo, followed by e6-e5, or gc8, c6-c5, Schussler - Dominguez Perez, Havana 1999. White will hardly manage to prevent the opening of the position and so Black's two­ bishop advantage will enable him to seize the initiative. 9.tiJbd2 0-0 10 .Wb3 (10 .e3 gc8 - see 9.e3) 10 . . . tiJb6 and here 11.e3 a5 12 .a4, Urban - Dziuba, Katowice 2010, 12 . . . tiJfd7 ! ? = , or ll.a4 a5 12 .gd1 tiJfd7 13.e4 i.g6= Eljanov - Motylev, Shamkir 2 0 14. In both variations Black's posi­ tion remains very solid, while the vulnerability of the b4-square in White's camp may hurt him later.

9.Wb3. He wishes to force the move Wb6, with the idea to play later tiJd2-c4, attacking the enemy queen. 9 . . . Wb6 10.tiJbd2 W/xb3 ! ? This i s Black's simplest decision. (Following, 10 . . . 0-0 11.tiJc4 Wa6 12 .i.f4 = , there arises again an ap­ proximately equal position, but the penetration of White's minor pieces to the d6-square would be very unpleasant for Black, so he must defend very precisely. After the trade of the queens, the end­ game will be approximately equal.)

ll.axb3 . White opens a file for his rook, but later the weakness of his doubled b-pawns may hurt him. ll . . . .ic2 . This is an energetic move. Black exerts pressure against the pawn on b3 and wishes to im­ pede the harmonious develop­ ment of his opponent's pieces. 12.tiJel i.dl ! ? 13.i.f3. This move not only protects the pawn, but also prepares tiJg2 . 13 . . . 0-0 14. tiJg2 (14.!iJc4?! i.xb3 15.tiJd2 i.dl 16.b3 i.b4 17.tiJd3 i.xd2 18.i.xd2 i.c2+ White's compensation for the sacrificed pawn is insuffi­ cient.) 14 . . . i.c2 15.tiJe3 i.g6= V. Georgiev - Gasthofer, Germany 2008. 81

Chapter ? 11.llixb3. Capturing with the knight seems to be more reliable, but cannot provide White with an advantage either. 11 . . . ie4 12.gdl h6 13.lliel hg2 14.©xg2 0-0-0. This is Black's most precise reaction. He not only connects his rooks, but also parries the possible threat llia5. 15.id2 id6 16.f3 ic7= Babic - Johnson, ICCF 2016. 9 .gdl 0-0

tersburg 2009 (After 12.llic3 gac8 13.a4, the b4-square is weakened 13 . . . aS+ Epishin - Skembris, Neustadt an der Weinstrasse 2009.) 12 ... gac8 ! ? 13.a4 V!!c 7= Black's position is solid. He can organise counterplay, connected with the preparation of the pawn­ advance c6-c5 either immediate­ ly, or after the preliminary move gfd8 and White should not underestimate that.

9 ... 0-0

10.llic3? ic2 - see variation

B2. 10.e3 V!!c7 - see 9.e3. It seems premature for White to play 10 .llih4. He begins a chase after the enemy bishop, but the absence of a control over the e4square makes this plan ineffec­ tive. 10 . . . ie4 ll . .be4 llixe4= Lju­ bojevic - Anand, Belgrade 1997. Following 10 .if4, Black can win a tempo for the preparation of the move c6-c5, by attacking the pawn on b2 . 10 . . . Wi'b6 11.V!!c l c5= Vladimirov - Magem Badals, Istanbul 2000. 10.id2 h6. Black prepares a square for the retreat of his bish­ op. 11.Vf!cl (11.iel Wi'b6=) ll . . . Wi'b6 12 .iel, Epishin - Dreev, St Pe82

10.gd1 10.llic3 b5 - see variation

B2a. 10 .b3 a5= Wojtkiewicz - Mi­ nasian, Yerevan 1996. 10.llibd2 gcs 11.llih4. White begins a chase after the enemy bishop. He weakens however the shelter of his king in the process. 11 . . .ig4 12 .h3 ihS 13.g4 Milchev - Manea, Condom 2 0 13 (The move 13.V!!b 3 looks less conse­ quent here. 13 . . . ie2 . Black trans-

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. l'iJ.fJ l'iJf6 4. WI c2 de 5. W!xc4 ii.JS fers his bishop to the queenside and does not allow his opponent to obtain the two-bishop advan­ tage. 14.l:�el ia6+ and later c6-cS, Fedoseev - Bajarani, Kocaeli 2011.) 13 . . . l'iJdS ! ? 14.gxhS i.xh4oo 10 .Wle2 Wlc7. Black's pieces are harmoniously deployed. He is perfectly prepared to undermine the enemy d4-pawn with the moves e6-eS, or c6-cS. 11.l'iJc3 (11. l3dl es - see 10 .l3dl; ll.h3 cS= Chuchelov - Sandipan, Germany 2010; 11.l'iJbd2 h6= Bu Xiangzhi - Eljanov, Tsaghkadzor 2 0 1S) 11 . . . es

12 .l3dl e4 - see 10.l3dl. 12.dxeS l'iJxeS 13.l'iJxeS WlxeS see 12.l'iJxeS. 1 2 .l'iJxeS. White clarifies im­ mediately the situation in the cen­ tre. His later plan is connected with the pawn-advances e3-e4, f2-f4. Still, Black's pieces are ac­ tive and this enables him to main­ tain the balance. 12 . . . l'iJxeS 13. dxeS W!xeS 14.e4 il.e6 1S.h3. Be­ fore advancing f2-f4, it would be useful for White to take the g4square under control, as well as the gl-a7 diagonal. (1S.l3dl l3ad8=

Papaioannou - Esen, Aix les Bains 2011; 1S.f4 Wc5+ 16.i.e3 W!b4 17.a3 Wb3= Sargissian - Salgado Lopez, Villafranca 2010) lS . . . l3ad8 16 . .ie3 WlaS 17.f4 icS. Black must try to exchange pieces, in or­ der to neutralise White's piece­ activity. 18.l3adl (18.l3fdl, Ju Wenjun - Girya, Teheran 2017, 18 . . . l'iJd7 ! ? = ) 18 . . . l'iJd7. Black's knight is severely restricted by the pawns on h3 and e4 and should leave the kingside in order to find a better sphere of actions. 19.eS Wlb6 2 0.if2 .bf2 + 2 1.Wfxf2 l'iJcS 2 2 . ©h2 l3fe8 23.l3d6 l3xd6 24. exd6. White's passed d6-pawn may turn out to be a liability later. 24 . . . l'iJd7. There is no pawn on the e4-square anymore, so Black's knight can come back. 2S.Wfd2 l'iJf6. From this square Black's knight can go to dS, cutting the enemy major pieces from the pro­ tection of the pawn on d6 and can also take part in an attack after l3d8, l'iJe8. 26.g4 l3d8 27.fS ids 28.gS l'iJe8 29.l'iJxdS cxdS 30.WlxdS l'iJxd6 31.b3 g6 32 .fxg6 hxg6= Cruzado Duecas - Roubaud, ICCF 2 0 14. The position has been con­ siderably simplified. There is just a few material left on the board. Black's knight protects reliably the pawns on f7 and d7, moreover that the position of White's king seems seriously weakened. 12 .h3 l3fe8. Black does not de­ termine yet the position in the centre. Later, depending on White's actions, he can exchange on d4, or can occupy additional 83

Chapter ? space with the move e5-e4. 13.e4. White prevents e5-e4. (13.l'!dl e4 ! ? 14.tll d 2 i.f8+ Taras - Robert, ICCF 2012) 13 . . . exd4 14.tll xd4 .tg6

pawns on b3 and e5 is sufficient for equality. 25.e6 l'!xe6 26.l'!a7 g5 27 . .te3 hb3 28. l'!xb7 tll e 5 29. l'!xb6 hc4. Black has managed to capture all his opponent's pawns on the queenside. 30 . .td4 f5 31. hes l'!xe5 32 .l'!xc6 l'!el+ 33.Wh2 i.e6= Stephan - Persson, ICCF 2012.

10

15 . .tf4 (15.g4 .tcS 16.l'!dl, Grig­ oryan - Svetushkin, Roquetas de Mar 2016, 16 . . . l'!ad8 ! ?+) 15 . . . 1M/b6 16.l'!fdl (It would be worse for White to play here 16 . .te3? ! , be­ cause after 16 . . . .tcS 17.tll a4 1M/c7 18.tll xcS tll xc5, he can protect his e4-pawn only at the price of his g3-pawn : 19.f3 Wfxg3+ Ivanchuk Karjakin, Beijing 2011.) 16 . . . .tb4. Black's pieces exert rather un­ pleasant pressure against the en­ emy centre. 17.eS. White crosses the demarcation line, but com­ plies with having a weakness on c3. (There arises a quieter ma­ noeuvring game after the line: 17.tll a4 1M/d8 18.Wfc4 .tf8 19.tll c3 Wfc8 2 0 .f3 tll h5 21.tll c e2 tll xf4 2 2 . tll xf4 Wfc7= Hollands - Peschke, ICCF 2012.) 17 . . . hc3 18.bxc3 h6 19.c4 tll c5 20.1M/e3 tll fd7 21.tll b 3. White continues to seek simplifi­ cations. 2 1 . . .tll xb3 2 2 .Wfxb6 axb6 23.axb3 l'!xal 24.l'!xal .tc2 . He has the two-bishop advantage, but Black's counterplay against the 84

Wfc7

•••

This is a very flexible move. Black is waiting for the moves tll c3 and 1M/e2 , in order to prevent the pawn-advance e3-e4 with the move tll e 4.

11.tll c3 11.h3 l'!ad8= Pogonina - Go­ ryachkina, Nizhnij Novgorod 2 013. Following 11.Wfe2 e5, White must consider the possibility e5e4. This would be particularly ef­ fective with a rook on dl, because after the removal of the knight from the f3-square and Black's move .tg4, White will have to weaken the position of his king

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. li:JfJ li:Jf6 4. W!c2 de 5. W!xc4 fi.f5 with the move f2-f3 in order not to lose the exchange. 12.li:Jc3 (12 . h3. White defends against i.g4, but his play seems to be too slow. 12 . . . e4 13.li:Jfd2 l:!fe8 14.li:Jc3 fi.f8oo 15.b3 ? ! li:Jb6 16.li:Jc4 li:Jbd5 17.i.b2 b5 18.li:Jxd5 li:Jxd5 19.li:Jd2 Wid'l+ Taras - Robert, ICCF 2012.) 12 . . . e 4 13.li:Jh4 i.g4 14.f3 exf3 15.i.xf3 i.xf3 16.�xf3 c5 17.li:JfS. White's knight will be very powerful on this square, but he cannot sup­ port its activity with anything, since his queenside pieces are not developed yet. 17 . . . l:!fe8 18.g4 cxd4 19.exd4 �c6. The trade of the queens is Black's simplest way of neutralising White's imitative. 2 0 .Wixc6 bxc6 2 1.g5 li:Jd5 2 2 .li:Jxd5 cxd5= Matlakov - Jakovenko, 01ginka 2011.

der to attack the enemy weakness on c3. 16.Wie2 li:Ja4 17.li:Jc4 fi.g6 18.id2 f6 19.e4 b5 2 0.li:Je3 e5oo Jenkinson - Jones, ICCF 2016.

12 . . . li:Je4 13.�el This is White's most princi­ pled move. He wishes to force the exchange on c3 in order to fortify his centre. White's plan, connected with the advance of the a-pawn, leads to quick simplifications. 13.a4 i.g6 14.a5 i.b4 15.li:Jxe4 ixe4 16. i.d2 ixd2 17.li:Jxd2 i.xg2= Neb Vinchev, ICCF 2016.

13 ... �xc3 14.bxc3 es

11 . . J�ad8

Black not only attacks the en­ emy centre, but also prepares the e6-square for his bishop.

15.e4 .ie6 12.We2 Black can counter 12 .h3 with 12 . . . li:Je4, without waiting for the move Wie2 . 13.li:Jd2 li:Jxc3 14.bxc3 i.c2 15.l:!el li:Jb6. He prepares the transfer of his knight to a4 in or-

This bishop will be much more active on the a2-g8 diagonal than on the g6-square.

16.�f3 f6 17.�h4 17.fi.e3, Miron - S.Volkov, Plovdiv 2012, 17 . . . li:Jb6 ! ? = 85

Chapter 7 17.Wfc2 tlib6 18 . .ifl .if7 19.tlih4 �fe8. Black prepares a square for the retreat of his bishop on e7. 2 0 .tlifS .�.f8= Mikheev - Poli, ICCF 2012.

17

•••

tlib6

B2) 6.c!lic3 This is a logical move, but is a bit too straightforward. White in­ creases immediately his control over the central e4-square, but later his knight may come under attack after b7-b5-b4.

6

Black prepares the transfer of his knight to c4, from where White will hardly manage to out it easily. 18.a4 gfe8 19.a5 tlic4

20.d5 cxd5 21.exd5 .if7 22. c!lif5 .if8. Black's pieces are much more harmoniously deployed.23. ga4 b5 24.axb6. After this move the position is simplified, but White has nothing better anyway. Black's knight on c4 is so power­ ful that White may even end up in an inferior position. 24 c!lixb6 •••

25.gas Wfxc3 26.�a7 Wfc4 27. Wfxc4 c!lixc4= Andersen - Weber, ICCF 2 0 13. Black is completely safe in this endgame. On the con­ trary, White must play precisely. He must watch carefully about the possibility that Black may en­ circle and capture the isolated dS­ pawn.

86

•••

e6

7.g3 White prepares the fianchetto of his light-squared bishop. 7.h3. He wishes to play g2-g4. After this however, his kingside would be slightly weakened. 7 . . . tlibd7 8.g4 .ig6 9.ig2 ie7oo Kor­ chnoi - Raznikov, Caleta 2012. Following 7.Wfb3 1Mfb6, White must consider Black's threats Wfxb3 and ic2 . If White exchang­ es the queens 8.Wfxb6 axb6, then he will not have the possibility 9.tlih4, because of 9 . . . .ic2 !+ and after 10.�d2 .ib3+ Walseth Pavlidis, Porto Carras 2008. Black exploits the pin of the a2pawn, saves his bishop and ob­ tains an advantage.

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. liJ.f3 liJf6 4. Wfc2 de 5. Wfxc4 i.j5 7 . .igS Wfb6 8.0-0-0. White's plan, connected with castling queenside, seems rather risky, because his king will be unsafe on the queenside. 8 ... liJbd7 9.liJh4 i.b4 10.liJxfS exf5 11.f3 0-0oo M.Horvath - Videki, Balatonbereny 1993.

7

•••

c!LJbd7 8 .tg2 .te7 •

vantage, but at a very dear price. His kingside has been weakened and his king is still stranded in the centre. 9.Wib3 �b6 10.liJd2. White is preparing liJc4, but weakens his control over the central e5-square and Black exploits this immedi­ ately. 10 . . . eS 11.dS (11.dxeS liJxeS 12.�a4 �b4= Korchnoi - Sandi­ pan, Caleta 2 011) 11 . . . cxdS. The simplifications are unavoidable. 12.liJxdS liJxdS 13.hdS Wfxb3 14. liJxb3 .ib4+ 15 . .id2 hd2 + 16. liJxd2 ©e7 17 . .ixb7 gab8 18 . .if3 gxb2= Mirzoev - Firat, Cappelle­ la-Grande 2012.

9

••.

0-0

9.0-0 White's delay with castling cannot be good for him at all. 9.e3 0-0 10 .liJh4 (10.0-0 bS - see variation B2a) 10 . . . liJb6 11. Wifl. White's play seems a bit awk­ ward. 11 . . . .ig4 12 .h3 .ihS 13 .g4 liJfdS 14.gxhS (14.liJf3 .ig6 15.liJe5, Andersen - Gysi, Argentina 2001, 15 . . . liJxc3 ! ? 16.bxc3 .ic2 . Black has managed to avoid the trade of his light-squared bishop. Now, his plan includes its transfer to the b5-square from where it would exert powerful pressure against White's position. 17.Wie2 .ia4 18.0-0 .ibS 19.liJd3 Wfc7!=.) 14 ... .ixh4+ Bareev - Anand, Til­ burg 1991. White has succeeded in obtaining the two-bishop ad-

Now, White has two main lines: B2a) 10.e3 and B2b)

to.gel. It would be a blunder for him to choose the routine move 10 . gdl?, since following 10 . . . .ic2 ! - + , Black's threat t o trap the enemy queen liJ b6 would force White to part with an exchange. 87

Chapter 7 White cannot harm his oppo­ nent with 10 . .ie3, T.Petrosian Bagirov, Moscow 1983, 10 . . . h6 ! ? = 10 .h3 h 6 lU�el lll e 4= Janko­ vic - Antal, Hungary 2016. 10.a3. White is preparing a square for the retreat of his queen, but the move a3 seems rather slow. 10 . . . lll e4 11.l�dl lll b 6 12 .'1Ba2 lll d 5= Itkis - Matulovic, Cetinje 1993. Black's knights have joined very effectively in the fight for the central squares. It seems premature for White to opt here for 10.lll h 4? ! , because Black can simply capture the cen­ tral pawn. 10 . . . lll b 6 ll.'1Bb3 '\!;Vxd4 12.lll xf5 exf5 13 . .if4, Rogers Bacrot, Batumi 2001, 13 . . J''ffe 8 ! ?+ White's two-bishop advantage does not compensate fully his ma­ terial deficit.

pawn-advance 13.e4? ! , because after 13 . . . .ib3 14.'\!;Vd3 l:3fd8+, Black's threat lll e5 would be very unpleasant, Jeremie - Blagojevic, Budva 2003. After 10 .i.g5 h6 ll . .ixf6 .ixf6, Black has the two-bishop advan­ tage and a solid position. 12.l:3fdl (12 .h3, Ibarra Jerez - Salgado Lopez, Madrid 2 0 15, 12 . . . .ig6 ! ? = ; 12 .e3 '1Bb6= Dragomarezkij - Ga­ garin, Moscow 1998; 12 .e4 .ig6 13.l:3adl '\1Ba5oo Knol - Sivic, ICCF 2009) 12 . . . i.c2 ! ? Before playing lll b 6, Black deprives his oppo­ nent of the b3-square. 13.l:3d2 (13. l:3dcl lll b 6 14.'1Bc5 i.f5 = Roman­ ishin - Kalinitschew, Germany 1992.) 13 . . . lll b 6 14.'!1Bc5 i.g6= Brunner - Hochstrasser, Switzer­ land 2005. 10.'\!;Vb3 '\!;Vb6

After 10 . .if4 .ig6 lUffel, Black obtains a very good game with the plan, connected with a pawn-of­ fensive on the queenside. ll .. J'k8 12 .'\!;Vb3 b5= , followed by a7-a5a4, Hauchard - Brunner, Evry 2008. 10.a4. White solves radically the problem with Black's pawn­ advance b7-b5, but weakens the b4-square in the process. 10 . . . a5 ll.e3 '1Bb6 12.lll h 4 (12 .We2 '\!;Va6= Kharlov - Ki.Georgiev, Istanbul 2 0 03) 12 . . . .ic2 = Now, White should better refrain from the 88

There arises an approximately equal endgame after 11 . .if4 '1Bxb3 12.axb3 lll d 5= Sahu - Rajesh, Bhubaneswar 2016. The move ll.l:3el is not timely here for White, since following ll . . . '1Bxb3 1 2.axb3, Black can be­ gin an attack against the pawn on

J.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. &Dj3 &Df6 4. Vff c2 dc 5. Wlxc4 !i.j5 b3. 12 . . . .ic2 13 . .igS h6 14 . .ixf6 0ixf6 15.gecl .ih'l+ Bates - Lalic, Hastings 2 016. Black's threats against the pawn on b3 have forced White to exchange his powerful bishop for the enemy knight on f6. His compensation for the vulnerability of his dou­ bled b-pawns and his opponent's two-bishop advantage is insuffi­ cient. After 11.Vffxb6 axb6 12.0ih4, Black can avoid the exchange of his powerful bishop for the enemy knight with 12 . . . .ic2 ! 13 .i.d2 h6+. There might follow 14.gacl .ih7. It is much easier to play this posi­ tion with Black, since he has a clear cut plan : b6-b5, 0ib6-c4. 1s.gfe1 b5 16.a3 0ib6 17.e4 0ic4+ Ovetchkin - Skorchenko, No­ vokuznetsk 2008. 11.0id2. White is preparing 0ic4, but weakens his control over the central d4 and es-squares. 11 . . . eS. This timely counter strike in the centre is Black's simplest way of equalising. 12.dS (12 .e4, Dzagnidze - Zhu, Doha 2011, 12 . . . .ig6 ! ?oo) 12 . . . cxdS 13.&iJxdS 0ixd5 14.W/xdS Vffa 6. He exchanges his b7-pawn for the enemy e2-pawn. 15.W/xb7 Vffx e2 16.b3 !a.cS. Black's pieces are very active, so White is forced to trade the light-squared bishops. 17 . .if3 W/d3 18 . .ie4 .ixe4 19.W/xe4 Vfic3 2 0 .gb1 .id4 = , fol­ lowed by &iJcS , Opitz - Lundberg, ICCF 2010. White's pawn-majori­ ty on the queenside is not impor­ tant at all.

B2a) 10.e3 White prepares Vffe 2, but Black can obtain a very good position in a tactical fashion.

10

b5 ! ?

•••

This i s the point. I t turns out that Black is not afraid of the cap­ turing on c6 and so he seizes the initiative on the queenside. Now, White must play very precisely; otherwise, he might end up in an inferior position.

11.Vfie2 It seems less adequate for White to choose the other retreat of his queen ll.W/b3 b4 1 2 .0ia4 .ie4 13 . .id2 , Portisch - Galliamo­ va, Marbella 1999, 13 . . . aS ! ?+. 11.Vffxc6 b4 12 .&Dbl .id3 13.gel W/a5 14.0ifd2 gac8 15.Vfff3 b3t I. Balog - To Nhat Minh, Balaton­ lelle 2009. Black's pieces are very active. He has more than suffi­ cient compensation for his mini­ mal material deficit.

11

b4

•••

89

Chapter 7

12.tll a4 12 .tlibl. This move is too passive 12 . . . c5 13.tlibd2 gcs

14.e4 i.g6 15.gdl h6 16.d5 exd5 17.exd5 i.c2 18.gel ges 19. tlic4 i.f5 2 0.§'dl i.f8 2 1.a3 tlib6. Black trades the strong enemy knight. 22.gxeB §'xe8 23.tlixb6 axb6 24.axb4 gds 25.bxcS i.xc5 26.i.d2 tlixd5+ Defore} - Yakov­ lev, ICCF 2 015. Black has man­ aged to restore the material bal­ ance. His pieces are tremendously active and his bishop on c5 is particularly powerful, exerting rather unpleasant pressure against the f2-square, as well as his centralised knight. White must work very hard to neutralise the pres­ sure.

12 . . . §'aS Black improves the placement of his queen with tempo.

13.b3 §'b5

14.a3 b3 ! ? 15.e4 i.g6 16.tlixb3 i.xe4 17.dxc5 i.d5 18.c6 hb3 19. cxd7 §'xd7+, followed by gc2 , De­ fore} - Bartsch, ICCF 2 0 15. White can hardly complete the develop­ ment of his queenside without material losses. Following 14.b3, there appears a weak c3-square in White's camp and Black's knight is immediately headed there. 14 ... tlid5 15.i.b2 tlic3 16.i.xc3 bxc3 17.tlic4 tlib6 18. gacl tlixc4 19.bxc4, Bancevich Jones, LSS 2 007, 19 . . . §'a5 ! ?t Black's bishops are very powerful and his pawn o n c3 can hardly be captured easily by White. 90

14.gel 14.Wfdl gac8 15.i.b2 gfd8 16. gel, D .Gurevich - Bruzon Batis­ ta, Buenos Aires 2 003, 16 . . . i.g6 ! ? =

14 . . . gac8 15.i.b2

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. liJ.f3 liJf6 4. "ff c2 dc 5. "ffxc4 if5 15.a3, Istratescu - Itkis, Bu­ charest 2000, 15 . . . aS=

15

.id3

•••

21. Yfg4 g6. Before advancing c6c5, Black must take care about his opponent's threats against the g7square. 22.gc2 c5 23.gfcl cxd4. There begin forced actions which lead to almost complete simpli­ fications. 24.gxc8 gxc8 25.

gxc8+ 'i;Yxc8 26.Yfxd4 if6 27. Yfxa7 Yfc2 28.Yfxd7 ixb2 29. liJxb2 Yfxd2 30. Yfe8+ ©g7 31. liJc4 Yfxa2. The draw has become imminent, for example: 32.liJd6 Yfa7 33."f!dS liJxe3 !? Black sac­ rifices a piece and forces a perpet­ ual check. 34.fxe3 "ffxe3+ 35.

©g2 "ffe 2= Black plans to continue with 'i;Ya6 and .ibS in order to empha­ size the misplacement of the ene­ my knight on a4.

16.'i;Ydl gfd8 17.gcl Yfa6 18.liJd2 ib5 19.ifl hf1 20. gxfl

B2b) 10.gel This is an energetic move. White is threatening e2-e4 and wishes at first to force the move liJe4 and to follow this with liJh4. Still, the complications beginning after this are not dangerous for Black if he plays correctly.

10

This position was reached in the game Deepan Chakkravarthy - Alarcon Casellas, Barcelona 2012. White managed to neutral­ ise the threat ha4, but he had no advantage. 20 liJd5 ! ? This is Black's simplest road to equality. •••

•••

liJe4

11.Yfb3 White must play this prepara­ tory move, because after the im91

Chapter ? mediate try ll.llJh4? ! , Black can exploit the exposed placement of the enemy queen with ll . . . llJd6 12.Wfb3 .bh4 13.gxh4 Wfxh4+ Ca­ ceres Vasquez - Marin Munoz, Santiago de Chile 2009. White has the two-bishop advantage in­ deed, but this does not compen­ sate fully the sacrificed pawn. It is bad for White to play here 11.e3, since then it becomes un­ clear why he had played gel at the first place. 11 . . . cS ! ? Black un­ dermines his opponent's centre and this is his simplest way of equalising. 12 .llJd2 llJxc3 13.bxc3 cxd4 14.exd4 gc8 1S.'\!;Yb3 llJf6 16. ib2 '\!;Yc7 17.c4 b6 18.gacl gfd8= Rost - Romanov, ICCF 2 013. Black's pieces exert powerful pressure against his opponent's hanging pawns. There arises a calm position after 11.if4 llJxc3 12.bxc3 ie4. This is a standard resource in similar positions. Black prevents mechanically the enemy pawn­ advance e2-e4. After the removal of the knight from f3, Black would like to trade the light-squared bishops.

92

It seems rather slow for White to opt here for 13.ifl . Before playing llJd2, he avoids the ex­ change of his bishop. Still, this plan takes too much time. 13 . . . cS 14.llJd2 llJb6 1s.'l!;Yb3 ids 16.Wfd1, Portisch - Lengyel, Budapest 196S, 16 . . . cxd4 ! ? 17.cxd4 i.b4+ Black's minor pieces have become very active. 13.Wfb3 c5. He has a very com­ fortable position.

The position is simplified after 14.llJeS i.xg2 1S.©xg2 llJxeS 16. hes Wfd7 17.e4 bS= Brunello Kobalia, Plovdiv 2 0 1 2 , or 14.llJd2 hg2 1S.©xg2 , Horvath - Sav­ chenko, Pula 1994, 1S . . . '\!;Yb6 ! ? = 14.gadl, Barber - Kleiser, ICCF 2009, 14 . . . cxd4 ! ? 1S.cxd4 '\!;Yb6= 14.gedl Wfc8. Black prepares the transfer of his queen to the long diagonal. lS.llJel (There aris­ es a more complicated battle after lS.gacl c4oo Efimov - Knezevic, Prague 198S. Naturally, it is not good for Black to open the c-file with a white rook on cl.) 1S . . . .bg2 16.llJxg2 gd8 17.e4 b6 18.WfbS llJf6 19.f3. White has managed to ob­ tain a pawn-centre. Still, he had to weaken his king in order to do

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. l?Jf.3 l?Jf6 4. 'flc2 de 5. 'flxc4 i.j5 that. In addition, his knight on g2 seems a bit misplaced. 19 . . . �b7. Black's plans include the advance of his queenside pawns a7-a6, b6b5, but he must protect at first his pawn on b6. 2 0 . a4 a6 2 1.�b2 bS 2 2 .i.e3 �c6 23.axbS axb5= Tucci - Borroni, ICCF 2012.

ll . . . Vb6

l?Je3 l?Jb6+ White's chase after the enemy bishop with his pawns and a knight has failed completely. His weak pawns on c3 and a3 pro­ vide Black with a stable advan­ tage.) 13 . . . i.xe4 14.l?JeS l?Jxe5 15. i.xe4 l?Jc4 16 ..id3 b5= Portisch Unzicker, Santa Monica 1966. White's two-bishop advantage is practically immaterial. He has no pawn-weaknesses in his position and his pieces are active.

12 . . . hb4

12.l?Jh4 White weakens his pawn­ structure, but wishes to obtain the two-bishop advantage and what is even more important - to bring his bishop on g2 into the fight for the e4-square.

This is a logical continuation of White's plan.

The transfer into an endgame 12 .�xb6 axb6 does not promise White more than equality. 13. l?Jxe4 (It would be worse for him to choose here 13.l?Jh4, because after 13 . . ..ib4 14 . .ixe4, Moehring - Golz, Zinnowitz 1964, Black can create at first a weakness for his opponent on c3 14 . . . .ixc3 ! ? 15. bxc3 .ixe4 and then fix it with the moves b6-b5 and l?Jb6. 16.f3 ids 17.a3 f6 18.e4 ic4 19.l?Jg2 b5 2 0 .

The exchange of the queens 13.�xb6 axb6 is in favour of Black, because his rook on a8 is activated. 14.l?Jxe4 (14.gxh4 l?Jxc3 15.bxc3 b5 16.e4, Shinkevich Odnorozhenko, Perm 2 0 09, 16 . . . .ig6+ Black has a superior pawn­ structure, so he can try to play for a win without any risk at all.) 14 . . . ie7 15.if4, Serov - Butuc, St Pe­ tersburg 2 0 07, 15 . . . i.xe4 ! ? 16. i.xe4 b5= , followed by l?Jb6-c4.

13.gxh4

93

Chapter 7 13.tt:lxe4 iJ.e7 14.iJ.f4 (It is worse for White to try here 14.tt:lc3? ! , since following 14 . . .V9xb3 15.axb3 iJ.c2+, he will fail to save his b3pawn, Roy - Yagupov, Olomouc 2016.) 14 . . . he4 15.he4, Leutwy­ ler - Kharitonov, Paleochora 2 011, 15 . . . V9xb3 ! ? 16.axb3 tt:lf6 17. iJ.f3 iJ.b4 18.E!:edl tt:ld5= White has the two-bishop advantage, but his queenside pawn-structure has been compromised.

White would not achieve much with 14.�xe4 he4 15.V9xb6 axb6 16.f3, because Black's bishop can easily avoid the pawn-chase after it. 16 . . . iJ.dS 17.a3 iJ.c4 18.e4 (The trade of the b-pawns is evidently in favour of Black: 18.b3 hb3 19.E!:bl iJ.c4 20.E!:xb6 Ela?+ Landa - Gasanov, Dagomys 2010. He has got rid of his doubled pawns, while White must worry about his weakness on a3.) 18 . . . �h5

13 . . . �df6 Black is reluctant to give up the e4-square without a fight.

14.:f3 White wins the fight for the e4-square, but t}\!s is still insuffi­ cient for him to rrra intain an ad­ vantage. He can also play f2-f3 after the preliminary exchange of the queens. 14.V9xb6 axb6 15.f3 (15. tt:lxe4 he4 - see 14.�e4) . Still, af­ ter 15 . . . �xc3 16.bxc3 iJ.c2 17.iJ.b2, Tiggelman - Roorda, Vlissingen 2012, 17 . . . E!:a5 ! ?oo, followed by E!:fa8, Black's prospects are not worse. 94

19.iJ.h3 b5 2 0.iJ.g4 �f6, draw, Eger - Bleker, ICCF 2012. Indeed, after 2 1.iJ.h3 �h5 = , White has nothing better than to repeat the moves. 19.b3. Now, just like on the previous move, the exchange of the b-pawns is not dangerous for Black. 19 . . . hb3 2 0.E!:bl iJ.c4 21. E!:xb6 E!:tb8 22.E!:e3 �f6= Dimitrov - Robert, ICCF 2 01 1 . His supe­ rior pawn-structure compensates White's two-bishop advantage. 19.f4 f5. Black must try to keep the centre closed, because of White's bishop-pair. 2 0 .e5 g6 21. iJ.f3 E!:fd8 2 2 .iJ.e3 �g7 23.@f2 .id5 24.iJ.e2 @f7= Fortune - Krzyza­ nowski, ICCF 2011. Black's bishop is very powerful at the centre of

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. l:i:ij3 l:i:if6 4. Vflc2 de 5. Vflxc4 .ij5 the board. White can break nei­ ther on the kingside, nor on the queenside.

14 . . . l:i:ixc3 15.bxc3 e5 ! ?

nates - Borges Matos, Madrid 2 0 07.) 18 . . . �d8 19 . .ig5 Vflc7+ Sta­ bolewski - Zherebukh, Dresden 2010. The vulnerability of White's king will be a cause of worries for him in this middle game. 17.Vfib2 gfd8 1s .gd1 Vfixb2 19. hb2 l:i:id7= Rodolfo Masera Burg, ICCF 2 0 15. There has arisen a position with dynamic balance. Black has a superior pawn-struc­ ture, while White has a bishop-pair.

16 . . . axb6 18.f4

17.dxe5

�d7

He protects reliably his pawn. This i s not the most popular move for Black, but is possibly his simplest way of equalising. He frees the e6-square for his bishop.

16.Wxb6 White would not achieve much with 16.e4 .te6. Here, Black's bishop would be much more ac­ tive than on the g6-square.

Following 18 .e4 .ie6, White's pawns on e5 and a2 are hanging. Therefore, Black restores the ma­ terial balance. 19.f4, Wojtaszek Zherebukh, Warsaw 2009, 19 . . . ha2 ! ? =

18 . . . �c5 White has an extra pawn, but Black's pieces are very active, while White's pawns on a2, c3 and h4 are weak.

19.e4 After 19 . .ie3 ga3 2 0 . .id4, Vo­ robiov - Poetsch, Pardubice 2 0 14, 2 0 ... gfaS= , White cannot avoid the loss of his a2-pawn.

17. �a4 l:i:ih5 18 . .ie3 (The pawn-sacrifice 18.f4?! would lead to difficulties for White. 18 . . . l:i:ixf4 19.hf4 exf4+ Hernandez Carme-

19 . . . .te6 20 . .ie3 .ixa2= The material balance has been restored. Naturally, White has the two-bishop advantage, but his pawn-structure is inferior, so he cannot play for a win. 95

Chapter s

1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . tll f'3 tll f6 4.e3

Now, White has a choice be­ tween numerous possibilities. In this chapter we will analyse only these in which he refrains in his first moves from the pawn-ad­ vance h2-h3. The possible attacks against the enemy bishop will be dealt with in the next chapter.

This move may seem rather modest, but it gains popularity in the last several years. White wish­ es to avoid the long forced lines, typical for the Botvinnik varia­ tion, or the Meran system and wishes to focus on the fight in the middle game. He would not mind his opponent to develop his bish­ op on g4, or f5. His later plans in­ clude the development of the queen to b3 in order to attack the b7-pawn, or the chase after the enemy bishop with ll:ih4, or h3, g4, ll:ie5, with the idea to obtain the two-bishop advantage.

4 . . . .tg4 Black exploits the possibility to develop his bishop to an active position before playing e7-e6. 96

We will analyse now A) 5.c!LJbd2, B) 5.cxdS, C) 5.Yfb3 and D) 5.c!LJc3 . 5.Yfc2 . White removes his queen from the pin, but allows his pawns to be doubled. 5 . . . hf3 6. gxf3 e6 7.ll:ic3 ll:ibd7= Just Minte, Binz 2012. 5.b3 e6 6.i.e2 (6.ll:ibd2 ll:ibd7

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. lt.Jj3 lt.Jf6 4.e3 .tg4 - see 5.lt.Jbd2) 6 . . . .tb4 - see 5. .te2 . 5 . .td3 e 6 6.W/b3 (6.lt.Jc3 lt.Jbd7 - see 5.lt.Jc3 ; 6.lt.Jbd2 lt.Jbd7, or 6.0-0 lt.Jbd7 7.lt.Jbd2 .td6 - see 5.lt.Jbd2) 6 . . . dxc4 ! ? This is Black's most precise road to equality. 7. hc4 (The chase after the enemy rook on a8 leads to a loss for White: 7.W/xb7? cxd3 8.1Mfxa8 hf3 9.gxf3 W/c7-+ , with the threat lt.Jd7-b6.) 7 . . . .txf3 8.gxf3 1Mfc7 9. lt.Jc3 .te7. Black is not in a hurry to play lt.Jbd7, preserving the possibility to develop his knight to c6 after c6-c5. 10 .i.d2 0-0 11. h4 a6oo Rakhmanov - Grachev, Moscow 2011. 5.i.e2 . This is not White's most active move. 5 . . . e6 6.0-0 (Follow­ ing 6.b3, Black can prevent the development of the enemy bishop on b2 with 6 . . . .ib4+ ! ? 7 . .id2 .id6 8.lt.Jc3 lt.Jbd7= Kock - Zichichi, Saint Vincent 2002; 6.lt.Jbd2 lt.Jbd7 - see 5.lt.Jbd2 ; 6.lt.Jc3 lt.Jbd7 - see 5.lt.Jc3) 6 . . . lt.Jbd7 7.b3 (7.lt.Jbd2 .id6 - see 5. lt.Jbd2 ; 7.lt.Jc3 .id6 see 5.lt.Jc3) 7 . . . .id6 8 .i.b2 (8.lt.Jbd2 0-0 - see 5.lt.Jbd2) 8 . . . 0-0 9.lt.Je5 (9.h3, Stein - Vaganian, Lenin­ grad 1971, 9 . . . i.f5 ! ? = ; 9.lt.Jbd2 a5 - see 5.lt.Jbd2 ; 9.lt.Jc3 1Mfe7 - see 5.lt.Jc3) 9 . . . he2 10.1Mfxe2 W/c7 11.f4. White preserves his knight at the centre of the board, but weakens the e4-square. (ll.lt.Jxd7 W/xd7= Maze - Balcerak, Germa­ ny 2 0 11) 11 . . . lt.Je4 12 .lt.Jd2 lt.Jxd2 13.W/xd2 lt.Jf6 14.W/e2 lt.Je4 15.lt.Jd3,

Durst - Enneper, Germany 1997, 15 . . . aS ! ? = Black's prospects are not worse, because White's bish­ op is severely restricted by his own pawn on d4.

A) 5.tll b d2 This is not White's most prin­ cipled move. He does not attack the b7-pawn and does not oust the enemy bishop from the g4square. Therefore, Black com­ pletes effortlessly his develop­ ment and obtains a wonderful position.

5 . . . e6

6 . .id3 About 6.h3 .th5, or 6.W/b3 W/c7 7.h3 .th5 - see Chapter 9, varia­ tion A. After 6.b3 tll b d7 7 . .ib2 , Black can deploy immediately his knight at the centre of the board, exploit­ ing the delay of White's move .td3. (7.W/c2 '<Mias - see 6.'<Mfc2 ; 7.i.d3 .td6 - see 6.i.d3 ; 7 . .te2 .tb4 - see 6 . .ie2) 7 . . . tll e4 8 . .te2 97

Chapter B .ib4 9.0-0, Budnikov - Tregubov, St Petersburg 1993. 9 . . . 0-0 ! ? 10. lll xe4. White can hardly continue the game without the exchange of the centralised enemy knight, but now, after 10 . . . dxe4 he will have to lose a tempo for the retreat of his knight. 11.lll e l he2 12.'1Nxe2 fSoo Following 6.IM'c2 lll b d7 7.b3 (7 . .id3 .id6 - see 6 . .id3), Black has a very active plan: 7 . . . V:VaS ! ? 8 . .id3 .hf3 9.gxf3 cS. White has a pair of bishops, but his pawn­ structure has been compromised. 10.b4 ! ? This pawn-sacrifice is in­ teresting, but still insufficient for White to maintain an advantage. 10 . . . ""1'xb4 11.l'!bl Was 12.l'!xb7 cxd4 13.exd4 dxc4 14.V:Vxc4. He has managed to activate his piec­ es, but his pawn-structure has been weakened even more. 14 . . . .ie7 1S.""1'bS ""1'd8 16.lll e4 0-0oo 6 . .ie2 . White's bishop is not so active on this square as on d3 . 6 . . . lll b d7 7. 0-0 (7.h3 .ihS - see Chapter 9, variation A; 7.b3 .ib4 8.a3 .ic3 9.l'!a2 lll e4 10.0-0, Tre­ gubov - Sebag, France 2010, 10 . . . 0-0 ! ? = ) 7 . . . .id6

8.h3 .ihS - see Chapter 9, var­ iation A. 8 .cS. White occupies space on the queenside, but reduces the tension in the centre and sets Black's hands free to pre­ p a re the pawn-break e 6 - e S . 8 . . . .ic7 9.b4 0 - 0 10 .bS eSoo Kishkin - Mannanov, ICCF 2 0 1S . 8.b3 0-0 9 . .ib2 aS. Black is ready to seize the initiative on the queenside at an opportune mo­ ment with the move aS-a4.

10.lll eS he2 ll.""1'xe2 a4= Pa­ ranichev - Shabanov, Krasnodar 1983. The position is simplified considerably after 1 0 . a3 lll e 4 1 1 . lll xe4 dxe4 12.lll d 2 .ixe2 13. ""1'xe2 fS= Rice - Houska, Sutton 1999. Black's bishop seems more active than its white counter­ part. 10 .h3 .ifs 11.lll h 4 lll e4 12.lll xfs exfS 13.cxdS cxdS 14.l'!cl V:Ve7oo Karpov - Carlsen, Moscow 2008. White has obtained the two­ bishop advantage indeed, but his bishop on b2 is very passive.

6 98

. . .

�bd7

l.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3. ttJj3 ttJf6 4.e3 i.g4

7.0-0 About 7.h3 .ihS - see Chapter 9, variation A.

9.i.b2 .ixf3 ! ? Without this move, after White plays ttJeS, this bishop may turn out to be out of the ac­ tions. 10.ttJxf3 '!Was + . Black ex­ ploits the fact that White has not castled yet and succeeds in ex­ changing the dark-squared bish­ ops. 11.i.c3 (11.ltJd2 .ia3 12 ..ic3 i.b4=) ll ...ib4= Pheby - Benejam, ICCF 200S. After the exchange, the chances would be approxi­ mately balanced, since neither side has any pawn-weaknesses.

7 .id6 •••

7.'!Wb3 dxc4 ! ? 8 .hc4, Lammi - Eklof, Helsinki 1993, 8 . . . '!Wc7 ! ? = 7.b3 i.d6 8.i.b2 ( 8 . 0 - 0 0-0 see 7. 0 - 0 ; 8.Wc2 0-0 - see 7. Wc2) 8 . . . 0-0 9.'!Wc2 (9.0-0 eS see 7.0-0) 9 . . . .hf.3 - see 7.Wc2 . 7.'!Wc2 .id6 8 .b3 (After 8.c5 i.c7 9.b4 0-0 10 . .ib2 , Dumpor Cabarkapa, Subotica 2010, there arises a very complicated posi­ tion. In the middle game White will prepare active actions on the queenside with a2-a4 and b4-bS, while Black will try to accomplish the freeing pawn-break in the centre e6-eS. 10 . . . We7 ! ? 11.0-0 hf3 . This is the simplest deci­ sion. Before playing e6-eS, Black exchanges his bishop, since it may become "bad" later. 12.ttJxf3 eS 13. dxeS ttJxeS 14.ttJxeS heS= White cannot avoid the trade of his dark­ squared bishop, so he loses his two-bishop advantage.) 8 . . . 0-0

8.b3 8.h3 i.hS see Chapter 9, varia­ tion A. Following 8 .Wc2 0-0 9.b3, Black manages to advance e6-eS before White has played i.b2 . 9 . . . e S 10.dxeS ttJxeS 11.ttJxeS hes 12 .�bl, Matjushin - Rudak, Alushta 2 0 0S, 12 . . . '!We7 ! ? = 8.'!Wb3. This queen-sortie seems premature, because Black can simply protect his b7-pawn with 99

Chapter B his rook. 8 . . . l'!b8 9.cxdS (9.h3 .ihS 10.l'!el 0-0 11.e4 dxe4 12.llJxe4 llJxe4 13.he4 llJf6= Reinstadler - Kleiser, ICCF 2012) 9 . . . cxdS 10. \!;l/a4. White is threatening llJeS, but Black can simply sacrifice his a7-pawn. 10 ... 0-0 ! ? ll.\!;l/xa7 bS� Pecot - Polaczek, Email 1999. White has lost too much time winning a pawn. Black has seized completely the initiative. In addi­ tion, White will have problems to bring back his queen on a7 into his own camp.

8

•••

0-0 9 .ib2 e5 10.cxd5, •

Dahl Pedersen - Christiansen, Denmark 2 0 0 2 ,

B) 5.cxd5

This move seems anti-posi­ tional, because after the exchange of the pawns, Black's knight ob­ tains access to the c6-square. It has however a tactical justifica­ tion.

5 . . . .txrJ Black is forced to exchange his bishop.

10 .txfJ ! ? Black forces the enemy queen to occupy an unfa­ vourable position. 11. 'f!Yxt'3. White must capture with his queen, be­ cause taking with the pawn would weaken the shelter of his king, while capturing with the knight would lose a piece after e5-e4. •••

11 cxd5 12.dxe5 .ixe5 13. .ixe5 llJxe5. White fails to block •••

his opponent's isolated pawn.

14.'f!Ye2 d4= 100

Following 5 . . . cxdS 6.llJc3 e6 7.'f!Ya4+ llJbd7 8.llJeS a6 9.llJxg4, White will obtain the two-bishop advantage anyway. This does not mean however that his position is better. 9 . . . llJxg4 10.f3 llJ gf6 11. 'f!Yb3 bS 12 .i.d3 i.d6 13.0-0oo Vo­ robiov - Shirov, Czech Republic 2 016.

6.'f!Yxt'3 6.gxf3. Capturing with the pawn seems less reliable for White. 6 . . .cxdS 7.'f!Yb3 (7.llJc3 llJc6 8 .'f!Yb3 'f!Yd7 - see 7.'f!Yb3) 7 . . . 'f!Yd7 8.llJc3 (8.i.d2 llJc6 9.llJc3 e6 - see 8.llJc3) 8 . . . llJc6 9 . .id2 (White would not achieve much with the

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. liJ.f3 liJf6 4.e3 i.g4 move 9.i.bS. The knight on f2 has been exchanged, so White cannot increase the pressure against the c6-square. 9 . . . e6 10.i:!gl i:!c8+ Istratescu - Graf, Deizisau 2012.) 9 . . . e6 10.i:!cl (10.liJa4 .id6 11.i:!cl 0-0, or 11.ibS 0-0 12 .i:!cl i:!ac8 see 10.i:!cl) 10 . . . .id6

New Delhi/Teheran 2000, lS ... liJhS ! ? 16.Wfd3 eS 17.dxeS WfxeS+, creating the threat liJf4.

6 ... cxd5

7,ljj c3 White's two-bishop advantage is practically irrelevant here, since his kingside pawn-structure has been weakened and his king has remained for too long stranded at the centre of the board. If Black manages later to advance e6-eS, he will seize firmly the initiative. 11.liJa4. The transfer of White's knight to c5 would take too much time. (He should possibly choose here 11.i.bS, although even then after 11 . . . 0-0 12.liJe2 i:!fe8 13.�a4 i:!ac8 14.i.xc6 bxc6 1S.i.b4, Ein­ gorn - Dolmatov, Tashkent 1 9 8 0 , lS . . . eS ! ?+, the vulnerability of White's king compensates with an interest the defects of Black's queenside pawn-structure.) 11 . . . 0-0 12 .i.bS (12.liJcS hcS 13.i:!xcS eS+ Nikolic - Sakolov, Reykjavik 2 0 03) 12 . . . i:!ac8 13.@e2 �e7 14.i.xc6 bxc6 1S.i:!c2 , Nogueiras Santiago - Ehlvest,

7 . .ibS+ liJc6 8.liJc3 e6 - see 7.liJc3. 7 ..id3 liJc6 8.0-0 (8.ljj c3 e6 see 7.ljj c 3) 8 . . . e6 9.a3. White does not lose a tempo for the move liJc3. This attempt is interesting, but still insufficient to obtain an advantage. (9.liJc3 .ie7 - see 7. liJc3) 9 . . . .id6 10 .b4 eS 11.dxeS i.xeS 12 .i:!a2 0-0 13.�h3 i:!e8 14. liJd2 d4. This pawn-advance is Black's simplest way of equalising 1S.e4 .if4 = , followed by liJeS, Bog­ danovich - Wirthensohn, Liech­ tenstein 1994.

7. . ,ljj c6 Black has nothing to complain about, despite White's two­ bishop advantage. He has neither bad pieces, nor pawn-weakness­ es. 101

Chapter s

8.J.d3 8 .g4 e6 9.gS (9 . .id3 a6 - see 8.i.d3) 9 . . . llid7 10 .h4 !k8 11.i.d2 a6= Bauer - Dautov, France 2003. It seems less convincing for White to play here 8 . .ibS . In fact, he cannot increase his pres­ sure against the c6-square. The exchange J.xc6 would only lose for him the two-bishop advan­ tage. 8 . . . e6 9 . 0 - 0 i:!c8 10 . .id2 .id6 11.i:!fcl (11.e4 dxe4 12.llixe4 llixe4 13.W/xe4 0-0= Knotek Roubalik, Stare Mesto 2010. The vulnerability of the isolated d4-pawn precludes White from exploiting the power of his bish­ ops.) 11... 0-0 12 . .id3 i:!e8= Bur­ makin - Krivoshey, Oberwart 2001. 8 . .id2 . This is a flexible move. White conceals for the moment his further plans. 8 . . . e6. (diagram) 9 . .id3 ie7 - see 8 . .id3 . 9.g4 i:!c8 10.gS llid7 11.h4 a6 see 8.g4. 102

9.W/g3 . White impedes his op­ ponent's castling kingside. Still, Black can simply reply with 9 . . . g6 10 . .id3 J.e7 11.0-0 0-0 12 .i:!acl i:!c8= Polak - Videki, Paks 2 004. 9.i:!cl .ie7 10.g4. White begins active actions on the kingside, but can hardly create any meaningful threats against the enemy king. It is well known that pawns cannot come back, so the weakening of his kingside may hurt him later. (10 .i.d3 0-0 11.0-0 i:!c8 - see 8. .id3) 10 . . . i:!c8 11.W/g2 llid7 12 . .ie2, L.Hansen - Heller, Germany 2 0 0 2 , 12 . . . lliaS ! ? Black prepares the transfer of his knight to the c4-square and this promises him an excellent position. 13.0-0 llic4=

8 . . . e6

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. ttJj3 ttJf6 4.e3 i.g4 9.0-0 About 9.1l;!/e2 !i..e 7 10.0-0 0-0, or 9.!i..d 2 !i..e7 10.0-0 0-0, or 10. gel 0-0 11.0-0 - see 9.0-0.

The development of Black's bishop on e7 has the advantage that after 0-0, he can transfer his knight to the queenside at an op­ portune moment: ttJf6-e8-d6-c4.

10.i.d2 The move 9.g4 leads to a dou­ ble-edged fight. 9 . . . a6 10.gS ttJd7 11.'!Wg2 ttJb6oo Miron - Dobre, Targu Mures 2 0 14. 9.'!Wg3, Burmakin - Fominyh, Ekaterinburg 2002, 9 ...i.d6! ? Black would not mind the exchange of the g-pawns. 10.'!Wxg7 ggs ll.'!Wh6 gxg2 12 .i.d2 ttJb4 13.i.bS+ ©e7 14.1l;!/h3 1l;!/g8 15.a3 ltJc2 + 16.©fl ttJxal 17.'!Wxg2 1l;!/xg2+ 18.©xg2 ggs+ 19.©f3 ttJb3= The tactical complications are over and there has arisen an approximately equal endgame on the board.

9 . . . i.e7

White connects his rooks. About 10.1l;!/e2 0-0 11.!i..d 2 gcs or 10.'!Wh3 0-0 ll.!i..d 2 g6 - see 10.i.d2. Following 10.gd1 0-0 11.i.fl, the simplest for Black would be to prepare the transfer of his knight to the c4-square from where it would exert rather unpleasant pressure against the b2-square. (11.!i..d 2 gcs - see 10.!i..d 2) 11.. .gcs 12 . .id2 ttJaS 13.!i..e l ttJc4 14.'!We2, Jussupow - Rogozenco, Germany 2011 (14.gabl 1l;!id7 15.'!We2 gc7=, followed by the doubling of the rooks on the c-file, Vorobiov - Nik­ cevic, Cappelle-la-Grande 2012) 14 . . . gc6 ! ?oo Black will play later '!Wc7, gcs, tripling his major pieces on the only open file. White's bish­ ops are very passive at the moment and it is rather difficult to see how they can be activated later.

10 . . . 0-0

This move looks more precise than the development of the bish­ op to d6. In this variation White can simply remove his queen from f3 and play later f2-f4, preventing Black's pawn-break e6-e5. 103

Chapter s lU�acl 11.gfdl gc8 12 . .iel, Polugaev­ sky - Hort, Petropolis 1973 (12. gacl Wfd7 - see 11.gacl) 12 . . . a6 ! ? = 11.Wfg3 . White i s preparing the advance of his f-pawn. 11 . . . gc8 12.f4, Koneru - Karavade, Calicut 2 003. Here, Black can simply play 12 . . . lDe8 ! ? with the idea to trans­ fer the knight to d6, without being afraid of the move 13 .fS, since he can counter that with the line : 13 . . . eS! 14.dxeS ih4 15.Wff4 .igS, with a permanent chase after the enemy queen. 16.Wfg3 .ih4= ll.Wfe2 gc8 12 .f4 (12 .gacl a6 see 11.gacl; 12 .gfc1 a6= Medvegy Hajnal, Hungary 2016) 12 . . . g6. Black impedes his enemy pawn­ advance f4-f5. 13.gacl tlJd7 14 . .iel fS. Now, White will hardly man­ age to open the position. 15.g4 tlJf6 16.gxfS gxfS 17.
terplay; otherwise, he may end up in a bad position. 14 . .ie2 tlJe8 15.fS tlJd6 16.fxe6 fxe6 17.gxfs+ .ixf8 18.:Bfl ig7= Black's bishop on g7 cements reliably his posi­ tion on the kingside.

11 . . Jfo8 12.'!Wh3 The alternatives for White do not provide him with any advan­ tage. For example: 12 .Wfe2 a6 13. tlJa4, Ghaem Maghami - Gatter­ er, Oberwart 2 0 07, 13 . . . tlJe4 ! ? = , o r 12.:Bfdl '!Wd7 13.tlJe2 :Bc7 14.a3 E:fc8= Curtis - Smallbone, Sun­ ningdale 2008.

12 ... g6 13.f4 13.:Bfdl, Danner - Meduna, Passau 2000, 13 . . . a6 ! ? =

13 . . . tlJaS 14.lk2 tlJc4 15 . .iel h5. Black has deployed almost all his pawns according to the rules - on squares opposite of the col­ our of his bishop. 16.'!Wf'3, Jus­ supow - Fridman, Arnhem 2006, preparing h2-h3 and g2-g4. Still, Black can take care about this

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. l:iJfJ f1Jf6 4.e3 i.g4 threat by transferring prudently his rook to the h-file. 16 . . . @g7!?

f1Jbd7, or 7 . .id3 hd3 8.f1Jxd3 e6 9.f1Jc3 f1Jbd7 - see 5.f1Jc3.

17.h3 gh8=

C) 5.1fb3 White attacks immediately the enemy b7-pawn.

5 . . . 'eb6

6.t:fJeS About 6.f1Jc3 e6, or 6 ..id3 f1Jbd7 7.f1Jc3 e6 8 . .id2 .ie7 - see 5.f1Jc3.

7.1l;l/xb6. White avoids the weakening of his pawn-structure, but activates his opponent's rook. 7 . . . axb6 8.cxd5 f1Jxd5. This move seems more reliable for Black, than capturing with the pawn, since it would lead for him to the appearance of two doubled pawns on the b-file. 9 . .id3 hd3 10.f1Jxd3 e6. Black has a solid po­ sition. 11 . .id2 (11.i>e2 f1Ja6 12 .i.d2 f1Jab4 - see ll.i.d2) ll . . . f1Ja6. Black prepares the penetration of his knight to the b4-square, which would lead to further sim­ plifications. 12.©e2 f1Jab4 13.f1Jxb4 f1Jxb4 14. f1Jc3 .ie7 15.a3 f1Jd5= Zagorskis - Nyback, Warsaw 2 013.

7. . . Wffxb3 8.axb3 �xd5

6.c5 Wic7 7.f1Je5 .if5, or 6.Wixb6 axb6 7.f1Je5 .if5, or 6.cxd5 'exb3 7. axb3 f1Jxd5 8.f1Je5 .if5 - see 6.f1Je5. 6 . f1Jbd2 . White's knight will be less active here than on the c3-square. 6 . . . Wixb3 ! ? 7.f1Jxb3 e6 8 . .id2 , Fassmann - Lichtblau, Magdeburg 2 0 15, 8 . . . f1Jbd7 ! ? =

6 . . . i.t'5 7 .cxd5 White complies with having doubled pawns on the b-file. About 7.f1Jc3 e6, or 7.c5 Wic7 8.f1Jc3 e6, or 7 . .ie2 e6 8.f1Jc3

White will hardly manage to advance his centre in this end­ game (f2-f3, e3-e4). In addition, he must consider his enemy's possibility f1Jb4-c2 .

9.�a3 105

Chapter s White parries immediately the threat tlJb4-c2 . Still, the edge of the board is not the best place for his knight. 9.�c4 e6= 9.i.e2 tlJd7 10.tlJxd7 ©xd7= Girl - Smeets, Amstelveen 2 015. 9.tlJc3. This move seems pre­ mature, because after 9 . . . ttJb4, White cannot protect the c2square with the move tlJa3. 10. !la4. He removes his rook away from the fork. Its placement on the a4-square seems rather awk­ ward, though . . . 10 . . . e6 11.e4 .!g6 12 . .!e3 ttJd7 13.ttJxd7 ©xd7 14. ©d2 �e7+ Shalimov - Borisiuk, Kiev 2 009.

White would not obtain much with 10.tll ec4 b5 11.tll a5 e5= Vaga­ nian - Jussupow, Germany 2 0 07, or 10 .�d3 e6 11.hfS exf5 12.tlJd3 ttJa6= Bars - Walther, Germany 2 013. In most of the cases the ac­ tivity of Black's pieces compen­ sates the slight defects of his pawn-structure, moreover that White should not forget about the weakness of his doubled b­ pawns.

10

•••

tll d 7 11.f':J

9.tlJd2. This move has the same defect as 9.tlJc3. 9 . . . ttJb4 10. !la4 e6 ll.e4 i.g6 12. ©dl tlJd7+ Sko­ morokhin - Ponkratov, Izhevsk 2013.

n . . . .ixd3 12 .ixd3 e5 13. dxe5 tll xe5 •

9.i.d3 . This is a reliable move with which White would not mind simplifications. He will not be worse by playing in this way, but cannot fight for the advantage ei­ ther. 9 . . . hd3 10.tlJxd3 e6 ll . .!d2 tlJa6 12 .©e2 ttJab4 13.ttJxb4 hb4 14.hb4 ttJxb4= Narciso Dublan - C.Balogh, Barcelona 2 013.

Black presents his opponent with the two-bishop advantage, but has advanced e7-e5 quite comfortably. His knights are very active at the centre of the board.

14.J.e4 J.c5 15.©e2 0-0-0 16.J.d2 ©b8= I.Sokolov - Dreev, Shanghai 2001.

9 . . . f6 Black ousts immediately his opponent's knight away from the centre.

10.tll d3 106

D) 5.tll c3 This is the natural develop­ ment of White's knight.

5

•••

e6

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. tl\j3 tl\f6 4.e3 ig4

6.ti'b3 As a rule, after his alternatives there arise positions from the next chapter by transposition of moves. 6.cxdS exdS 7.i.e2 tll bd7 8.0-0 i.d6 9.h3 �5 10 .b3 0-0 ll.i.b2 ge8 12 .gcl V!!e 7 13.tll e l ig6+ Capi­ telli - Ernst, Dublin 2012. 6.h3 i.hS, or 6.i.e2 tll b d7 7.h3 i.hS, or 7. 0-0 id6 8.b3 0-0 9. i.b2 Wffe 7 10.h3 i.hS - see Chapter 9, variation D. 6.id2 tll bd7 7.cxdS (7.h3 i.hS 8.cxdS exdS - see 7.cxdS) 7 . . . exdS 8 .h3 ihS 9.g4 i.g6 10.tll h4 ib4 11.tll xg6 hxg6 - see Chapter 9, variation D2.

exdS 9.e4 dxe4 10.tll xe4 tll xe4 11.he4 0-0 12.Wffc 2, Tarrasch Chigorin, Ostend 1907, 12 . . . h6 ! ? = ) 8 . . . dxe4 9.tll xe4 tll xe4 1 0 . ixe4 tll f6 ll.ic2 ic7. H e i s pre­ paring V!!d 6. 12 .ie3 Wffd 6. Black is threatening the h2-square and thus provokes a weakening of the light squares in the enemy camp. 13.g3, Chiang - Goryach­ kina, Caldas Novas 2011, 13 . . . 0-0- 0 ! ?+

6 . . . V!!b 6 7.�e5 About 7.cs Wffc7 8.tll eS ifs see 7.tll e S. 7.h3 i.hS, or 7.tll h4 ihS 8.h3 i.e7 - see Chapter 9, variation Dl. There arises a calm position after 7.i.d2 tll bd7 8.i.d3 (8.cxdS Wffxb3 9.axb3 exd5= Ehlvest Wojtkiewicz, New York 2 0 04) 8 . . . i.e7 9.V!!c 2 dxc4 10.hc4 0-0 11.ie2 gac8oo, followed by c6-c5, Romanishin - Peralta, Athens 2006.

7. . . if5

6.id3 tll b d7 7. 0-0 (7.h3 i.hS - see Chapter 9, variation D; 7.i.d2 i.d6 8 .h3 ihS 9.Wffb3 dxc4 10 .hc4 bS 11.i.e2 0-0= Adly Smeets, Hoogeveen 2 008) 7 . . . id6 8.e4. This pawn-break i n the centre seems rather premature. (It would be better 8.h3 i.hS - see Chapter 9, variation D; 8.cxdS 107

Chapter B 8.c5 White occupies space on the queenside. Now however, Black has a clear cut plan for his further actions - he must prepare e6-e5, or the undermining of the c5pawn with the move b7-b6. 8.�dl. This retreat of White's queen to its initial position cannot be good for him. 8 . . . tlJbd7 9.tlJxd7 tlJxd7 10 .�d3 hd3 11.�xd3 '\Wa6 ! Black increases his pressure against the c4-pawn. 12 .b3 tlJb6. White cannot hold on to the pawn and after 13.�e2 dxc4+, his com­ pensation for the material loss would be insufficient, Villamayor - Sorokin, Kolkata 2001.

8

1Yc7 9 .te2

•••

•

After 9.f3, Black's simplest re­ action would be 9 . . . h6= , avoiding in advance White's pawn-attacks against his bishop (g2-g4, h2-h4), Chiburdanidze - Paehtz, Ekater­ inburg 2 0 07. 9.f4 ? ! White fortifies the stra­ tegically important es-square, but Black can inflict a strike on the other side of the board: 9 . . . b6 ! ?+ Yordanova - Nikolova, Kozloduy 2 0 14.

About 8.�d2 tlJbd7 9.tlJxd7 tlJxd7 10.�e2 �e7 - see 8. �e2 . 8.�e2 tlJbd7 9.tlJxd7 tlJxd7 1 0 . �d2 i.e7 11.0-0 (lUkl 0 - 0 1 2 . 0-0 l:!fe8 - see 11.0-0) 11 . . . 0 - 0 12 .l:!acl l:!fe8 = Milov - Predojevic, Philadelphia 2 0 07. There has arisen an approximately equal position in which neither side can organise active actions. 8.i.d3. The exchange of the bishops cannot create any prob­ lems for Black. 8 . . . i.xd3 9.tlJxd3 tlJbd7 10.cxd5, Ye - Antonio, Bei­ jing 1992 (10.0-0 '\Wa6 ! ?oo) 10 . . . '\Wxb3 ! ? 11.axb3 tlJxdSoo White must play very carefully in this endgame, because the vulnerabil­ ity of his doubled d-pawns may hurt him in the future. 108

9

. ••

h5! ?

This prophylactic i s necessary. Black prevents immediately his opponent's idea, connected with the pawn-advance g2-g4. In addi­ tion, the move will be very useful for the organisation of his coun­ terplay on the kingside with h5h4.

10.0-0 10.i.d2 tlJbd7 11.f4 h4oo Mahl­ ing - Efendiyev, ICCF 2011.

10

•••

c!Llbd7

ll.c!Llxd7

c!Llxd7

J.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. l:i:ij3 l:i:if6 4.e3 i.g4 12.'fra4 J.e7 13.b4 h4 14.'frdl b6 This is the simplest for Black. Now, White will hardly manage to create active counterplay on the queenside, because the move b4b5 would be impossible. (diagram) 15.a4. This advance of the rook pawn seems a bit slow, but White has nothing better anyway.

15 0-0 16.a5 bxc5 17.bxc5 e5oo Ilyushchenko - Tleptsok, •••

ICCF 2 013. There has arisen a very complicated position with mutual chances. Black has creat-

ed promising counterplay in the centre and on the kingside, while it would be very difficult for White to exploit the weakness of the c6pawn.

109

Chapter 9

1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . �f3 �f6 4.e3 i.g4 5.h3 .ih5

White's most natural move in this position is D) 6.� c3, but before that we will analyse A) 6.�bd2, B) 6.g4 and C) 6.cxd5. About 6 . .id3 e6 7.0-0 (7.�c3 �bd7 - see 6.�c3; 7.�bd2 �bd7 - see 6.�bd2) 7 . . . �bd7 8.�c3 .id6 - see 6.�c3 (8.�bd2 .id6 see 6.�bd2). 6.�b3. As a rule, this leads to transposition of moves. 6 . . . �b6

About 7.�c3 e6, or 7.�h4 e6 8 .g4 .ig6 9.llJxg6 hxg6, or 7.llJeS e6 8.�c3 .ie7, or 8.g4 .ig6 9.�xg6 hxg6 10 . .ig2 .ie7 ll.lbc3 gS - see variation Dl. 7.cxdS �xb3 8.axb3, Belous Raznikov, Kenner 2 016, 8 . . . llJxdS ! ? = Following 7.g4 .ig6 8.gS, Kem­ pinski - Krejci, Czech Republic 2 0 15, Black can simply enter an approximately equal endgame 8 . . . �xb3 ! ? 9.axb3 llJe4=

A) 6.�bd2 This is a passive move after which White has no chances of obtaining an advantage in the opening. His knight is not so ac­ tive on this square as on c3.

6 . . . e6 Black's plan is quite simple: llJbd7, .id6, 0-0. In general, if in the variation with 4.e3 White re­ frains at the beginning from an attack against the enemy b7-pawn (�b3), or from a chase after the bishop on hS, Black obtains ef­ fortlessly a very comfortable game.

110

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. tfJj3 tfJf6 4.e3 i.g4 5.h3 ih5

7. .id3 7.'!Wb3 Wic7 8 .g4 ig6 9.tfJe5 tfJbd7 10.tfJxg6 hxg6 11.g5, Bolo­ gan - Vitiugov, Dubai 2 0 14 (11. ig2 0-0-0oo Michalik - Navara, Czech Republic 2 017) ll . . . dxc4 ! ? 12 .hc4 tfJd5= 7.g4 ig6 8.tfJe5 tfJbd7 - see 6.g4.

9.b4 0-0 10 .ib2 tfJe4 11.tfJxe4 dxe4 12 .tfJd2 he2 13.'!Wxe2 f5oo Bischoff - l.Sokolov, Germany 2002. 8.0-0 id6 9.b3 0-0 10 .ib2 Wie7. Black's queen is very well placed here, supporting at an op­ portune moment the pawn-break e6-e5. 11.tfJe5 he2 12 .Wxe2 :gfd8 13.c5. White occupies space on the queenside. (13.:gfdl, Goh Torre, Hangzhou 1981, 13 . . . a5 ! ?=) 13 ... ic7 14.b4 tfJxe5 15.dxe5 tfJd7 16.tfJf3, Eldridge - Ponomarjov, ICCF 2012, 16 . . . a5= White has oc­ cupied slightly more space, but his central pawns have been de­ ployed on squares with the same colour as his bishop and the vul­ nerability of the light squares in his camp may hurt him in the future.

7.ie2. White would not obtain much with this development of the bishop. 7 . . . tfJbd7

7

8 .b3 id6 9 . .ib2 0-0 10.0-0 '\We7 - see 8.0-0. There arises a sharp position if White chooses a plan, connected with an immediate pawn-offen­ sive on the queenside. 8 .a3 id6

8.0-0

•••

tjj bd7

White should better postpone the move b2-b3 until his oppo­ nent plays id6, because after the immediate move 8.b3, Black has 111

Chapter 9 the resource 8 . . . .ib4= and White cannot play 9.i.b2 ? ! , because of 9 . . . lll e4+ Following 8 .'/Nc2 , Black has a very interesting idea - 8 . . . dxc4 ! ? . H e exchanges his central pawn and will try later to advance his queenside pawns. 9.'/Nxc4 cS 10. 0-0 a6. White's defence is not easy at all, because he must lose time for the retreat of his queen. 11.dxcS (11.lll eS bS 12.'/Nc2 :i!c8 13.lll xd7 Y;lrxd7+ Xu Jun - Zhang Pengxiang, Yongchuan 2 0 03) 11... lll xcS 12 .i.bl fJ.e7 13 .b3 :i!c8+ Sek­ retaryov - Romm, ICCF 2009.

8 ... fJ.d6

equality. 14.g4 fJ.g6 lS.fJ.xg6 hxg6 16.dxcS .ixcS 17.Y;lrxd8 :i!fxd8 18. i.gS. White will hardly manage to advance his queenside pawns in this endgame, because Black can play 18 . . . aS 19.'it>g2 a4 2 0 .:i!acl @f8 = Fremmegaard - Stojanovic, ICCF 2 016. He should not forget to centralise his king in the end­ game.

9 . . . 0-0 10.fJ.b2 After 10.'/Nc2 , Black can exploit the delay of the development of White's bishop on cl and advance 10 . . . eS immediately, for example: 11.dxeS lll xeS 1 2 .lll xeS .ixeS 13. :!:!bl, Puranen - Lako, Finland 1993, 13 . . . Y;lre7 ! ? 14.b4 :i!ad8=

10 .. ,ges Black is preparing e6-eS.

11.Y;lfc2 e5 12.cxd5 12.dxeS lll xeS 13.lll xeS .ixeS 14.fJ.xeS :i!xeS lS.:i!ael i.g6 16 . .b:g6 hxg6= Dizdarevic - Movse­ sian, Sarajevo 2 0 04.

9.b3 White's plan, connected with the pawn-advance e3-e4, would lead to simplifications. 9.e4 dxe4 10.lll xe4 lll xe4 11 . .b:e4 0-0 12 .:i!el lll f6 - see 9.:i!el. Or 9.:i!el 0-0 10.e4 dxe4 11. lll xe4 lll xe4 12 ..b:e4 lll f6 13 . .ic2 cS. The undermining of the pawn on d4 is Black's simplest road to 112

12 . . . .ixf3

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. liJ.f3 t:fJf6 4.e3 i.g4 5.h3 i.h5 This is Black's most precise move. He exploits the fact that White cannot capture with his knight due to the loss of a piece, while capturing with the pawn would weaken the position of White's king. So, Black thus forc­ es the intermediate exchange on e5 after which the position is quickly simplified. 13.dxe5 he5

14.c!Oxf'3 hb2 15.§'xb2 c!Oxd5 16.gfdl (16.gadl 'fffe 7 17.i.c4 c!LJ7f6 18 .a3 a5= Stushkin - Selin, ICCF 2 0 15) 16 §'f6 17.'f!c2 g6

on c3. So, White will be able to de­ velop his bishop on g2 without being afraid of the safety of his c4pawn. 7.cxd5 cxd5 - see variation C. 7.liJc3 e6 - see variation D2. 7.c!Oh4 e6 8.liJxg6 hxg6 - see 7.c!Oe5.

7

•.•

e6

•••

18 .tc4 c!LJ5b6 19.gacl gad8 20 .te2 §'e7= Ponomarenko •

•

Naumenko, ICCF 2 013.

B) 6.g4 .tg6

8.c!Od2 8 .c!Oc3 liJbd7 - see variation

D2. 8.i.g2 liJbd7 9.c!Oxg6 hxg6 see 8.liJxg6.

7.c!Oe5 This is an interesting plan which is used in the last several years by numerous grandmasters. White begins a chase after the en­ emy bishop on h5 before he has developed his knight on c3. Later, he plans to develop this knight on d2, where it would defend his c4pawn, contrary to its placement

8.t:fJxg6 hxg6 9.i.g2 (9.c!Od2 c!Obd7 - see 8.liJd2 ; 9.c!Oc3 c!Obd7 see variation D2) 9 . . . t:fJbd7 (diagram) 10.liJd2 g5 - see 8.liJd2. 10.liJc3 dxc4 - see variation

D2. It would be imprecise here for White to play 10.0-0, Grischuk 113

Chapter 9

Mamedyarov, Sochi 2 0 14, be­ cause Black can exploit the de­ fencelessness of the e4-square and play 10 . . . tll e 4! ?+, followed by f7-f5. Then, in the middle game, the weakening of the shelter of White's king, because of the moves h3 and g4, may hurt him. 10.Wd3, Lysyj - Korchmar, Moscow 2 0 15. This is another in­ teresting idea for White. He pro­ tects his c4-pawn with his queen and not with his knight. 10 . . . i.d6 ! ? 11.tlJc3 dxc4. Without this exchange, Black cannot advance e6-e5. 12 .'!Wxc4 e5 13.'!Wb3 exd4 14.exd4. The position is opened, but White's pawn-weaknesses prevent him from exploiting the power of his bishops. 14 . . . tll b 6 15.igS Wc7 16.0-0 0-0 17.a4 l:!ab8=, followed by i.f4 either im­ mediately, or after the prelimi­ nary move ih2 .

8

•••

�bd7 9.ttJxg6

After 9.h4, Black cannot ad­ vance his rook pawn, since this would weaken horribly his king­ side after the exchange on g6. He can play however: 9 . . .dxc4 10. 114

.!Llxg6 hxg6 11.gS tlJd5 12.tlJxc4 i.b4+ . This is an important check. Black wishes to deprive his oppo­ nent of his two-bishop advantage. 13 .id2 '!We7 14.a3 i.xd2+ 15.'!Wxd2 ttJ7b6 16.tlJeS tll d 7= Anton Gui­ jarro - Dvirnyy, Reykjavik 2 015. He has obtained a very solid posi­ tion and White will hardly man­ age to break it.

9

hxg6 10.J.g2

•••

About 10 .gS tll e4 11.tlJxe4 dxe4 - see variation D2.

10

gS

•••

This is an important move. Black not only fixes the enemy pawn on h3, but also frees the g6square for his knight.

11.0-0 11.l:!bl. White is preparing b2b4, but Black has very good chances of organising counter­ play on the kingside. 11 . . . i.d6 12 .b4 a6 13.a4, Vitiugov - Geske, Bilbao 2 0 14, 13 . . . tll fS ! ?oo, fol­ lowed by tlJg6, tll h 4.

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. liJj3 liJf6 4.e3 i.g4 5.h3 ih5 ll.e4. This pawn-break in the centre seems premature, since following ll . . . dxe4 12.liJxe4 0.xe4 13.he4 �as+ 14.id2 ib4, White cannot save his dark-squared bishop from an exchange. After he loses his two-bishop advan­ tage, he would have no compen­ sation for the vulnerability of his h3-pawn. In addition, after Black doubles his rooks on the d-file, White's d4-pawn would need per­ manent protection. 15.a3 hd2 + 16. �xd2 �xd2+ 17.©xd2 0-0-0+ Shengelia - Kojima, Tromsoe 2014.

11 id6 12.ge1 tLif8 ! ? •••

13

Y«b6! ?

•••

I t seems less precise fo r Black to choose here 13 . . . gb8 14.e4 dxe4 15.tLlxe4 tLixe4 16.ixe4;!; Topalov - Caruana, Saint Louis 2016. White's bishops are very power­ ful.

14.�c2 With a black queen on b6 White cannot follow the plan, we have mentioned in our previous comments, connected with the move 14.e4, because at the end of this variation, after �xb3, he will simply lose his h3-pawn.

14

.ie7

•••

Black defends against c4-c5.

15.tLit'"J tLle4 16.gdl tLlg6

Black transfers his knight to the g6-square.

13.Y«b3 There arises a complicated po­ sitional battle after the line : 13. cxdS tLixdS 14.liJc4 0.g6 15.�b3 gbs 16.tLlxd6+ �xd6= Javakhish­ vili - M.Muzychuk, Batumi 2016. White can hardly advance his e­ pawn, since this would weaken the f4-square and Black's knight would occupy it immediately.

It is rather difficult for White to obtain here even a minimal ad­ vantage. In addition, even a single mistake may lead to an inferior position for him, because his kingside has been seriously com­ promised. 17.tLle5 tLixe5 18. dxe5 tLlc5 19.b3 dxc4. Black is opening the d-file. 20.�xc4 tLld7 21 .ib2 '9c7. He protects his •

115

Chapter 9 knight and squeezes his oppo­ nent's pieces with the protection of the e5-pawn at the same time. Black is perfectly prepared to cas­ tle kingside, since his king would not be so safe on the queenside.

22.tfc3 a5 23.a3 0-0 24 .ie4 gfd8 25Jfacl �cs 26 . .ic2 gds. •

He begins a fight for the d-file. 27.c,!lg2 gad8 = Fraczek - Pere­ verzev, ICCF 2 0 14.

C) 6.cxd5 cxd5! ? Now, contrary t o the variation 5.cxd5 from the previous chapter, Black does not need to play 6 . . . hf3 7.tfxf3 cxd5= , although even then his position would look quite reliable.

White cannot obtain the two­ bishop advantage with the move llixg4. 8 . . . a6 ! This is necessary prophylactic against the move .ib5. 9.llic3 b5 10.�b3 llixe5 ! ? Af­ ter this interesting pawn-sacrifice Black obtains a lead in develop­ ment. ll.dxe5 llid7 12.�xd5 e6 13. �d4 .icS. He develops his bishop with tempo. 14.tff4 l'k8 15.g4 g5 16.�g3 .ig6 17 . .ig2 .id3. Black prevents his opponent's castling kingside. 18.e4 llib6iii Pawlowski - Klochan, ICCF 2 016.

7 e6 • • •

8.g4

7.�c3 About 7.�b3 tfc7 8.�c3 e6, or 7.g4 .ig6 8.llic3 e6, or 8.llie5 e6 9.llic3 llifd7 - see 7.llic3. Following 7.�a4+ llibd7 8. llie5, it becomes obvious that the inclusion of the moves h3 and .ih5 is in favour of Black, because 116

White cannot achieve much with 8.tfa4+ llibd7 9.llie5, be­ cause Black can simply reply with 9 . . . .id6= and after 10 . .ib5 ? ! a6, obtaining the two-bishop advan­ tage. ll . .ixd7+ llixd7 12 .tfxd7+ tfxd7 13.llixd7 c,!lxd7+ Koneru Muzychuk, Monaco 2 0 15. 8.�b3. Black parries easily the attack against his b7-pawn. 8 . . . tfc7 9.llie5 llic6 (It seems less reli-

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. liJj3 liJf6 4.e3 i.g4 5.h3 .ih5 able for him to opt here for 9 . . . liJfd7 10.liJxd7 Wfxd7, Yang - Dre­ ev, Las Vegas 2 0 15, ll.e41' and White opens advantageously the game in the centre.) 10.i.d2 i.e7 lU'kl 0-0 12 .g4 i.g6 13.liJxg6 (There arises a much more com­ plicated game after the move 13.f4. White fortifies his knight on es, but weakens the e4-square. 13 . . J'3ac8oo Altrichter - Terekhov, ICCF 2010.) 13 . . . hxg6oo Pert Anand, London 2 014. White has the two-bishop advantage indeed, but Black has good counterplay on the c-file. Later, he will man­ age to exploit the misplacement of the enemy queen on b3 winning a tempo ( liJaS) for the transfer of his knight to the c4-square.

8

J.g6 9.tll e 5

•••

9 .Wi'b3 Wfc7 10.tll eS tll c 6= Pert - Anand, London 2 0 14.

9

.••

tll fd7

Black should better exchange immediately the powerful enemy knight.

10.tll xg6 hxg6 11 .ig2 •

After 11.Wi'b3, Khismatullin Ponkratov, Dagomys 2008, it seems good for Black to continue with 11 . . . �b6 ! ? = , while the pawn­ sacrifice 11.e4 dxe4 12 .dS, Ma­ karov - Kotanjian, Samara 2 0 0 2 , leads only t o equality after 12 . . . tll c5 ! ? =

n . . tll c 6 .

12.e4 White has the two-bishop ad­ vantage and he must strive to open the game. After that he would remain with an isolated pawn in d4, though . . . Following 1 2 . 0-0 f5, White cannot advance e3-e4. 13.tll e 2, Tregubov - Anand, Bastia 2 0 14, preparing the transfer of the knight to the f4-square. 13 . . . fxg4 ! ? This i s Black's simplest road to equality. 14.liJf4 gxh3 15. �g4 Wff6 16.h:h3 i.d6 17.Wfxe6+ �xe6 18.h:e6. Naturally, White cannot capture with his knight due to the loss of a piece. Now however, Black manages to com­ promise his opponent's pawn­ structure and equalises complete­ ly. 18 . . . i.xf4 19.exf4 liJf6 20.�el ©d8 =

12

•••

dxe4 13.tll xe4

After 13.he4, Black's main task is to fight against the pawn­ break d4-d5. 13 . . . liJb6 14 . .ie3 .ib4 15.�cl �d7 16.!g2 �cs 17. 0-0 .bc3 18.�xc3 liJdS 19.�cl f6 20. 117

Chapter 9 W/d3 @fl 21.i.d2 lll ce7+ He has a slight edge thanks to his control over the d5-square.

Wd3 28. Wxd3 �d3 29.gedl gxdl + 30. gxdl @:f8 3U�d6 t0a5 32.ga6 gxc5 33.gxa7 t0b3 34.a4 g5 35 .ifl gci, draw. •

White's outside passed pawn can be stopped easily with the move l:fal, while the pawn on e6 pre­ vents reliably Black of any prob­ lems connected with the attack against the fl-square.

D) 6.t0c3 e6

13

•••

t0b6!?

This i s Black's most reliable move. Following 13 . . . i.b4+ 14.lll c3 lll b 6 15.0-0 0-0 16.dS exd5 17. lll xd5 i.c5 18.lll c 3;!;, the position is opened and White preserves good winning chances thanks to his bishop-pair, Carlsen - Nakamu­ ra, London 2 0 15.

14.0-0 .id6 15 .i.e3 �k8 16. lll c5. White's knight on c5 is very •

powerful, but he has no concrete threats.16 W/e7 17.!kl 0-0 18.a3. He is preparing b2-b4. 18 !Ud8 19.b4 .b:c5. Black ex­ changes the powerful enemy knight. 20.bxc5 t0d5 21.Wfd2 b6 22. ti'b2 Wid7 23.!Uel gb8 = The position seems approximately equal and after 24.Wc2 in the game Perez Lopez - Gonzalez Sanchez, ICCF 2016, Black began to simplify. 24 bxc5 25.dxc5

We will analyse as main lines for White here Dl) 7.Wb3 and

D2) 7.g4. 7.cxd5 cxd5 - see variation C.

•••

•••

•••

t0xe3 26.gxe3 gbc8 27.geel 118

White would not achieve much with 7.i.d3 lll b d7 8.0-0 (8.Wi'b3 gb8 ! ? = ) 8 . . . i.d6. We have already analysed a similar position earlier (Chapter 8, variation D), but without the inclusion of the moves h3 - i.h5. This circumstance can­ not change the evaluation of the position as approximately equal. 9.b3 (9.e4 dxe4 10.lll xe4 lll xe4 11.he4 0-0 - see variation A)

l.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3. liJf3 liJf6 4.e3 i.g4 5.h3 i.h5 6. liJc3 e6 9 . . . 0-0 10 .i.b2 ge8 = Zilberman - Huzman, Tel Aviv 1994. 7.i.e2 liJbd7 8.0-0 (8.\Wb3 gb8= ) 8 . . . i.d6 9.b3 0-0. Black has completed effortlessly his de­ velopment and castled. 10 .i.b2 \We7

Alekseev - Lintchevski, St Peters­ burg 2 016. 11.liJeS he2 12.liJxe2 gac8 13. gel. White has a slightly freer game, but his bishop on b2 is more passive than its counter­ part. 13 . . . i.c7. Black is preparing liJxeS. 14.liJf4 gfd8 15.�c2 liJe4 16.gfdl \Wg5 17.liJfd3 h5=

Dl) 7.�b3 \Wb6

He connects his rooks and pre­ pares the pawn-advance e6-e5 at an opportune moment. After 11.ge1, Black does not need to be in a hurry to play e6-e5 and can follow instead with 11 . . . gad8= Ftacnik - Barbero, Debre­ cen 1989. ll.liJd2 i.g6. It would be suffi­ cient for Black to exchange here on e2 in order to equalise, but he can also try to obtain an advan­ tage. 12.cS. This occupation of space on the queenside seems to be premature for White. 12 . . . i.c7 13.f4. He defends against e6-e5, but weakens the e4-square. 13 . . . b6 14.b4, Frare - Dianda, Sao Paulo 2 0 0 2 , 14 . . . gab8 ! ?+ Later, Black can exchange on c5 at the right moment and begin active ac­ tions on the queenside. There arises a calmer position after 11.gc1 gac8 12 .liJd2 i.g6=

8.liJh4 White has removed his queen from the pin and begins a chase after the enemy light-squared bishop. His purpose is to obtain the two-bishop advantage. About 8 .g4 i.g6, or 8.�xb6 axb6 9.g4 i.g6 - see variation D2. As a rule 8.liJeS leads to trans­ position of moves. 8 . . . i.e7 9.g4 i.g6 10.liJxg6 (10 .�dl, Lupulescu - Ragger, Istanbul 2012, 10 . . . i.b4 ! ?oo) 10 . . . hxg6 - see 8.liJh4.

8 . . .i.e7 Black should not be in a hurry 119

Chapter 9 to play ltJbd7, because in some variations his knight on b8 can go to a6 and from there either to c7, or to b4.

9.g4 After 9.i.d2 ltJfd7, in order to obtain the two-bishop advantage White must comply with the weakening of his pawn-structure. 10 .g4 .b:h4 11.gxhS, Perez Ponsa - Peralta, Argentina 2 0 13, 11... ltJf6 ! ? =

9 . . . .lg6 10.ltJxg6 hxg6

11 . .ig2 White defends against ltJg4. He could have protected his pawn with the move 11.ggl, but this seems less active than i.g2 , since i t does not contribute t o the development of his pieces. 11 . . . gS 12 .i.d2 ltJbd7 13.0-0-0, Topalov - Steingrimsson, Warsaw 2 013, 13 ... clxc4 ! ? 14.1l«xc4 ltJdS 15.'it>bl ltJxc3+ 16 ..b:c3 ltJf6= White has the two-bishop advantage, but his pawn on b3 is backward and his king is protected on the kingside 120

by only two pawns, so this might hurt him in the middle game. After 11.gS ltJe4 12.ltJxe4 clxe4, White will have problems with the protection of his gS-pawn. 13. 'cl«c2 (13.i.g2 , Ki.Georgiev - Michalik, Dubai 2 0 14, 13 . . . gh4 ! ?+) 13 . . . gh4 14.cS Wfd8oo Vareille - Boudre, France 2009.

11 . . . gs Black fixes the enemy weak­ ness on h3 and prepares the ma­ noeuvre ltJb8-d7-f8-g6.

12 . .id2 White queenside.

prepares

castling

About 12 .e4 ltJxe4 13.Wfxb6 axb6 14.ltJxe4 clxe4 15.he4 ltJa6 - see 12.1l«xb6. There arises an approximately equal endgame after 12 .Wfxb6 axb6 13.e4 ltJxe4 14.ltJxe4 clxe4 15 . .b:e4. White has the two-bish­ op advantage, but Black's position looks very solid. He must be only on the alert about the possible

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. liJ.f3 liJf6 4.e3 i.g4 5.h3 i.h5 6. liJc3 e6 pawn-break in the centre d4-d5. 15 . . . liJa6. This is the simplest for him - to transfer the knight to the c7-square. 16 . .ie3 liJc7= B.Socko - Michalik, Germany 2 0 14. 12 .c5. White occupies space on the queenside. Now, the position becomes closed and he will hardly manage to prove the power of his bishops. 12 . . . �xb3 13.axb3 liJa6 ! ? This i s why Black was not i n a hurry to play liJd7. 14.i.d2 (The move 14.f4 cannot even equalise for White. 14 . . . gxf4 15.exf4, Miro­ shnichenko - Predojevic, Kragu­ jevac 2009, 15 . . . liJb4 ! ? 16.d2 d7+ Black's knight on b4 causes disharmony in White's position.) 14 ... liJc7. Black plans to play a7-a6 and 0-0-0, after which White will be incapable of breaking on the queenside. 15.f4 (15.b4 liJd7 16.e4. Without this move Black will advance e6-e5. 16 . . . dxe4 17. liJxe4 f6 18.liJc3 a6 19.0-0-0 0-0-0 2 0.f4 gxf4 2 1 . .bf4 e5 22. dxe5 liJxe5 = , followed by liJe6. White's bishops cannot be acti­ vated at all.) 15 . . . gxf4 16.exf4, Wang - Aronian, Linares 2009, 16 . . . liJe4 ! ? This temporary pawn­ sacrifice is Black's simplest way of equalising. 17.liJxe4 dxe4 18.i.xe4 i.f6. He simply increases the pres­ sure against the enemy d4-pawn and White's defensive moves are exhausted quickly. 19.i.e3 liJb5 2 0 . 0-0-0 0-0-0= 1 2 . 0-0 liJbd7 13.i:!dl (The ex­ change 13. �xb6 only helps Black

to activate his rook on a8. 13 . . . axb6 14.cxd5 liJxd5= Wang Inarkiev, Elista 2008; 13.i:!el, Dreev - Inarkiev, Sochi 2012, 13 . . . �xb3 14.axb3 a6=) 1 3 . . . �xb3 14. axb3 a6

Black deploys his pawns ac­ cording to the rules - on squares opposite of the colour of his bish­ op. The only exception is the move g6-g5, but that was necessary for him to ensure the g6-square for his knight. After 15.cxd5, Galliamova Girya, Sochi 2 016, Black can sim­ ply capture with his knight and to follow this with liJb4. 15 . . . liJxd5 ! ? = After 1 5 . .id2 0-0-0 16.f3, Black can begin the standard transfer for similar positions of his knight to the g6-square. 16 . . . liJf8 17.liJe2 liJg6oo Batsiashvili Girya, Germany 2 016. 15.f3 i:!d8 16.i.d2 liJf8 17.@f2 (17.liJe2 liJg6 18.f2 liJh4= Gallia­ mova - Girya, Novosibirsk 2016) 17 . . . liJg6 18.liJa4 liJd7. Black pre­ vents his opponent's knight to go to b6, or c5. 19.cxd5 exd5 20 .b4. White is preparing liJc5. 20 . . . i:!bB. Black has in mind in advance to counter the penetration of the en121

Chapter 9 emy knight. 21.llicS llib6. Natu­ rally, he refrains from llixc5, since this would improve White's queen­ side pawn-structure. 2 2 .ifl id6= Joppich - Szczepanski, ICCF 2016. White can hardly find a way of improving his position, be­ cause after the pawn-advance e3e4, Black's pieces will gain access to the f4-square.

12 . . . �bd7

If 13.W/a4, Black has the pow­ erful resource 13 . . . W/c7, threaten­ ing to win a pawn with the move llib6. 14.cxdS exd5 15.W/c2 0-0-0 16.�cl llib6. Black defends against llixd5. 17.WffS+ W/d7 18 .W/xd7+ ©xd7. There has arisen a transfer into an approximately equal end­ game. 19.b3. White prevents the manoeuvre of the enemy knight to the c4-square. 19 . . . llieS. Black intends to deploy his knight on e6, so that his pressure against the d4-square would impede White's break in the centre after f2-f3 and e3-e4. 2 0 . 0-0 ©cs 21. llie2 llic7= Novak - Szczepanski, ICCF 2016.

13 . . . ti'xb3 14.axb3 0-0-0

13.0-0-0 After 13.W/c2, Kuraszkiewicz Boehnisch, Germany 2012, Black can simply capture the pawn and White will have to waste too much time in order to regain it. 13 . . . dxc4 ! ? =

15.©c2 Following 13.0-0, Wang Hao - Movsesian, Huai'an 2016, Black can accomplish his standard ma­ noeuvre 13 . . . llifS ! ? = After 13.�cl W/xb3 14.axb3, Kobo - Tate, Caleta 2017, 14 . . . a6 ! ? = , Black's position remains very solid. 122

White will hardly manage to prove the power of his bishops in this endgame. After the immediate opening of the centre with 15.e4, the posi­ tion will be simplified even more. 15 . . . llixe4 16.llixe4 dxe4 17.he4 f6= Kogler - Emelyanov, ICCF 2014.

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. l:iJ.f.3 11Jf6 4.e3 i.g4 5.h3 i.h5 6. 11Jc3 e6 After his alternatives Black also obtains a good game by transferring his knight to the g6square: 15J'�hfl, Bachmann Negi, Graz 2 0 14, 15 . . . 11Jf8 ! ? = , or 15.cS 11Jf8 16.b4 a6 17.f3 11Jg6oo Movsesian - Najer, Khanty-Man­ siysk 2 0 13, or 15.f3 11Jf8 16.i.fl 11Jg6= Sargissian - Jakovenko, Yerevan 2 0 14.

15

•••

D2) 7.g4 This is White's most princi­ pled move.

7 .ig6 •••

lll f'B 16.:f3

There arises a sharper position after 16.l%al Wb8 17.e4 11Jxe4 18. 11Jxe4 dxe4 19 .l%a5, but even then, Black holds his defence success­ fully. 19 .. .f6 20 . .ic3 11Jg6 2 1.he4 11Jf4= Jorgensen - Andersen, ICCF 2009. His pressure against the h3-pawn provides him with counterplay sufficient to maintain the equality.

8.lll e 5 White wishes to realise the main idea of the variation with 4.e3 - the exchange of the knight on f3 for the enemy light-squared bishop. 8.cxd5 cxd5 - see variation C. 8.'r9b3 'r9b6 9.'r9xb6 (9.11Je5 11Jbd7 10.11Jxg6 hxg6 - see 8. 11Je5) 9 . . . axb6. The transfer into an end­ game leads to a complicated fight. 10.t:fJeS 11Jbd7 ll.11Jxg6 hxg6 12. cxd5 exd5 13.gS 11Jg8oo, followed by b6-b5, 11Jb6, or 11Je7-f5, Milos - Vitiugov, Khanty-Mansiysk 2009.

16 11Jg6 17 .iel lll h4 18. .ixh4 gxb4= Dreev - Najer, •••

.

Moscow 2013. Black has forced the exchange of the enemy bishop for his knight and has a quite ac­ ceptable position.

8.11Jh4. This chase after the en­ emy bishop seems less precise for White here, because after 8 . . . !e4, the placement of his knight at the edge of the board does not beau­ tify his position. 9.f3 11Jfd7 10.

123

Chapter 9 lll g 2. This is his most reasonable decision. (After 10 .fxe4 �xh4+ 11.@d2 , there are still too many pieces left on the board and White's king might be endangered in the middle game. 11... dxc4 12 .hc4, Lysyj - Najer, Zvenigorod 2008, 12 . . . �d8 ! ?+) 10 . . . i.g6. Black has managed to save his light-squared bishop from an exchange. 11.W/b3 ll'la6

Valli, ICCF 2 015. Black should not be afraid of the capturing on cS and the appearance of an isolated pawn in his position, because in that case White's pawn on e3 will also become a target for an attack.

8

•••

tllb d7

9.tll xg6 12.cxdS (After 12 .a3 �b6= , the juxtaposition of the queens will be in favour of Black, because after the removal of White's pawn from the a2-square, his queen will re­ main defenceless.) 12 . . . exdS 13.f4 fS 14. i.d2 i.e7. Black is threaten­ ing to deprive his opponent of his castling rights after i.h4. 15.gS. After this move, the position is closed. 15 . . . 0-0 16.ll'lh4 i.hS 17. i.e2 he2 18.lll xe2 . White has more space, but his bishop may turn out to be "bad". 18 . . . �b6 19. �xb6 lll xb6 2 0 .lll g3 g6. Almost all Black's pawns are deployed ac­ cording to the rules, i.e. on squares opposite of the colour of his bishop, which cannot be said about their white counterparts. 2 1.ll'lf3 gfes 2 2 .b3 c5= Vecek 124

Capturing with the queen 9. W/b3? will be a mistake, because after 9 . . . lll xeS 10.dxe5 lll d 7, Black can sacrifice advantageously his pawns on b7 and c6, obtaining very powerful initiative for them. ll.�xb7 (11.cxdS, D.Gurevich Dautov, Moscow 2001, 11... exdS ! ?+) 11 . . . gbs 12 .�xc6 i.b4 13. i.d2 0-0 14.0-0-0 lll xeS 15.�a4, Stefansson - Dreev, Berlin 2 0 15, 15 . . . �b6 ! ?- + , Black's attack is impossible to parry . . O r 9.cxdS lll xeS 10.dxe6 fxe6 11.dxeS, B.Socko - Dreev, War­ saw 2 013, 11 . . . lll d 7! ?oo White can hardly hold on to his extra pawn, because he lags horribly in devel­ opment.

l.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3. 11:,fJ 0,f6 4.e3 !g4 5.h3 i.h5 6. 0, c3 e6 After 9.h4, Black must play very precisely. 9 . . . dxc4 !

This is his only move ! The pawn-advance h7-h6, after the exchange 0,xg6, would lead to a horrible weakening of his king­ side pawn-structure. Therefore, he must save his bishop on g6 in a tactical fashion. Following 10.hS 0,xeS ll.hxg6 0,xg6 12 .hc4 i.b4+, White does not have sufficient compensation for the pawn, Pira - Postny, Le Port Marly 2009. 10.0,xc4. Now, White's knight is not threatening to capture on g6, so Black can play simply 10 . . . h6, for example: ll.!g2 , Fominyh Abdulla, Dhaka 2 0 0 2 , ll . . Jk8 ! ? = 10.0,xg6 hxg6

Schenk - Bieluszewski, Koge 2010) 13 . . . i.b4 14.i.d2 Y!!e 7 15.a3 0,xc3 16.bxc3. White has the two bishop advantage, but he can hardly find a safe haven for his king. 16 . . . !a5 17.f4 0-0-0 18 .V!ic2 ©b8 19.i!bl 0,c8 2 0.i.f3 ©as 21. ©f2 0,d6oo, followed by 0,fS with powerful pressure against the pawn on h4, Fischer - Saidashev, ICCF 2 0 14. 11.hc4 0,dS 12 .hS (12.gS 0,7b6 - see 11.gS) 12 . . . gxhS 13. gxhS 0,7f6= Benson - Maatman, Groningen 2 0 14. White has a bishop-pair, but his kingside pawn-structure has been compro­ mised.

9 . . . hxg6

There has arisen a position whose evaluation is critical for the fate of the variation 4.e3 i.g4. White has the two-bishop advan­ tage, but Black's position is rather difficult to break.

10.J.d2 11.gS 0,dS 12 .hc4 0,7b6 13. !e2 (13 .!fl !b4 14.i.d2 V!ie7=

10.i.d3 i.b4 11.!d2 dxc4 - see 10 .i.d2. 125

Chapter 9 After 10.'\1;Vf3, Black can play in the spirit of the Nimzo-Indian : 10 . . . i.b4 ll.i.d3, Golod - Petro­ syan, Yerevan 2 0 14 (ll.i.d2 !xc3 - see 10 . .id2) 11 . . . cS ! ?oo There arises a very complicat­ ed position after 10 .'\1;Vb3 tll xg4 11. .ig2 tll h 6oo and here, it would be bad for White to choose 12 .e4?! in view of 12 . . . dxe4 13.'\1;Vxb7, Heb­ den - Jaunooby, Wakefield 2016, 13 . . . lll fS ! ?+ 10 . .ig2 . This pawn-sacrifice seems rather dubious. 10 . . . dxc4 11.'\1;Ve2 tll b 6 12.0-0 V/!c7 13.e4 es+ Hebden - Melkumyan, London 2012. 10.cxdS. White clarifies the pawn-structure in the centre with this move. 10 . . . exdS

ll.a3 i.d6= Arutinian - Hov­ hannisyan, Gyumri 2009. 11 . .id2 .ib4 or 11 . .id3 .ib4 1 2 . .id2 '\1;Ve7 - see 10 . .id2 . 11.gS tll h 7 12.f4 .id6 13 . .id3 V!!e 7. Black wishes to evacuate his king to the queenside, since if he castles kingside, White will devel­ op a crushing attack with the 126

move h4-h5. 14.V/!f3 0-0-0 15. i.d2 @b8 16.0-0-0 tll hf8 17.h4, Batsiashvili - Asan, Kocaeli 2 0 14, 17 . . . tll b 6 ! ? = 10.a3. White prevents .ib4, but the move a2-a3 may turn out to be not so useful for him. 10 . . . gS

ll.i.g2 , Kozul - Haba, Austria 2 0 14, ll . . . dxc4 ! ?+ 11.cxdS, Kozul - Ribli, Slove­ nia 2013, 11 . . . exdS ! ? = After 11.cS, Black can accom­ plish the standard plan for similar positions with the transfer of his knight to the g6-square. ll . . . i.e7 12 .b4, Spoelman - Girl, Am­ stelveen 2 0 15, 12 . . . lll fS ! ?oo ll.V!!f3 .id6 12 .i.d2 V/!e7 - see 11 . .id2 . 11 . .id2 i.d6 12 .'\1;Vf3 V/!e7 13.00-0 0-0-0. Black's king will be much safer on the queenside than on the kingside. 14.@bl (14 . .id3 @b8 15.@bl, Levin - Zhurikhin, St Petersburg 2 013, 15 . . . .ic7 ! ? = ) 14 . . . @b8 15.:gcl (15 . .id3 i.c7 - see 14 . .id3 ; 15.V!!g 2 .ic7= Cheparinov - Potkin, Khanty-Mansiysk 2 0 13 ; 15.e4. This pawn-advance i n the centre leads to the simplification of the position. 15 . . . dxe4 16.tll xe4

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3 . li::ij3 li::if6 4.e3 1i.. g 4 5.h3 1i.. h5 6. li::i c3 e6 li::i xe4 17.'\Wxe4, Inarkiev - Mame­ dyarov, Sochi 2014, 17 . . . eS ! ? = ) 1 S . . . i.c7 l6.gc2, Ivanchuk - Pot­ kin, Havana 2012, 16 . . . li::i fS ! ??, followed by li::i g 6.

12 .h4 i.b4+ . Black exploits White's lag in development and deprives him of his two-bishop advantage. 13 .i.d2 Was 14.a3 hd2+ 1S.'1Nxd2 '\Wxd2+ 16.xd2 f5

After 10 .gS, Black can deploy his knight at the centre of the board without being afraid of the doubling of his pawns. 10 . . . li::i e4 ll.li::i xe4 dxe4

There arises an approximate­ ly equal endgame after 12 .'1Ng4 '\Was+ 13.e2 i.e7 14.i.g2 '\WxgS lS.VNxgS hgS= Lysyj - Potkin, Taganrog 2011. White has the two-bishop advantage, but his kingside pawn-structure has been compromised. 12.'1Nb3 VNb6 13.h4 (13.Wfxb6 axb6= Le Quang Liem - Khairul­ lin, Khanty-Mansiysk 2013; 13. i.g2 gh4oo Bologan - Rogozenco, Kishinev 2 0 14) 13 . . .fS. Black pro­ tects reliably his e4-pawn. 14.i.d2 eS 1S.i.e2 i.e7 16.0-0-0 VNxb3 17.axb3 exd4 18.exd4 cS. Black wishes to block the position. 19 .dS li::i e S. His centralised knight is not weaker than any of White's bish­ ops. 2 0 . c2 d7 21.i.c3 i.d6= Rubinas - Jacot, ICCF 2 013.

17.i.g2, Blomqvist - Smith, Uppsala 2016, 17 . . . 0-0-0= 17.gxf6 gxf6 18.i.e2 e7 19. gagl gag8 20 .b4 fS 21.a4 eS 22 .cS exd4 23.exd4 li::i f6= , taking the dS-square under a reliable con­ trol, Efremov - Emelyanov, ICCF 2 01S. Black is not worse at all thanks to his superior pawn­ structure. 17.cS. White prepares the de­ velopment of his bishop to the c4square. 17 . . . eS 18.i.c4 e7 19.b4 gad8= Ljubicic - Cornejo, ICCF 2 0 1S. It is inconceivable how White can break his opponent's position.

10

. . .

.ib4

Black develops his bishop to an active position. (diagram)

11.cxdS White clarifies the pawn­ structure in the centre. 11.gc1, Bareev - Najer, Phila­ delphia 2 009, 11 . . . gS ! ? = 127

Chapter 9

Following 11.Wf3 , Black can simplify considerably the position with ll ... .ixc3 12 . .ixc3 lll e4 13,:gcl lll xc3 14,:gxc3 lll b 6= Walther Hinz, Germany 2 0 13.

'\1;lff6, Black's threat to capture on f2 would force White to part with an exchange. 15.hxg4 :gxhH Ste­ fansson - Solak, Baku 2 016.) 13 . . . lll h 6 14.'\1;l/xb7 lll f5 15.c5. White fixes the enemy weakness on c6. (15.'\1;l/xc6 :gc8 16.'\1;l/a4 :gxc4 17. '\1;l/xa7 0-0 18 . .ifl :gc7 19.'\1;l/a5 lll f6 2 0 . .id3 Wlb8 2 1.Wa4 tll h4� Zalcik - Hauser, ICCF 2 0 1 2 . The activity of Black's pieces compensates with an interest his minimal ma­ terial deficit.) 15 .. ,:gc8 16.0-0-0, Levin - Yevseev, St Petersburg 2012, 16 . . . lll f6 ! ? 17.'\1;l/xa7 lll h4� u . . . exd5

11.f3. White takes the impor­ tant e4-square under control, but weakens the el-h4 diagonal. 11. . . dxc4 12 . .ixc4 tll d 5 13.'\1;l/b3 a5 = Ivanchuk - Topalov, Tromsoe 2 0 14. It seems too straightforward for White to choose here 11 . .id3, because he loses a tempo after 11 . . . dxc4 12 .hc4 hc3 13 .hc3 lll e4 14.Wic2 lll xc3 15.Wxc3 lll b 6 16.i.fl '\1;l/d5 17.:ggl, Miton - Prie, Elgoibar 2 0 07, 17 . . . g5 ! ?oo There arises a very complicat­ ed position after 11.'\1;l/b3. White wishes to trade his g4-pawn for the enemy b7-pawn after which his kingside and Black's queen­ side will be considerably weak­ ened. ll . . . .ixc3 12 . .ixc3 lll xg4 13. .ig2 (It would be premature for White to opt here for 13.Wixb7? ! , because after 13 . . .:gb8 14.'\1;l/xc6 128

�. �

12.Wb3 12 . .ig2 '\1;l/e7 13.'\1;l/c2 (It seems premature for White to play here 13.0-0, Kozul - Perisic, Bizovac 2 005, 13 . . . ix:c3 ! ? 14.hc3 lll e 4+; 13.a3 hc3 14.ix:c3 lll e4 15.'\1;l/c2 lll xc3 = Bareev - Nepomniachtchi, Moscow 2010.) 13 ... lll b 6 14.b3 a5+:t Werner - Mannanov, ICCF 2 0 13 . 12 . .id3 '\1;l/e7 13.'\1;l/e2 (13.'\1;l/b3 0-0-0 - see 12 .Wib3) . Here, Black

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. !iJ.f3 !iJf6 4.e3 fi.g4 5.h3 fi.h5 6. !iJ c3 e6 can simplify advantageously the position with the line: 13 . . . !iJe4 14.!iJxe4 dxe4= Svetushkin - Prie, Gap 2008.

12

• • •

�e7 13.f3

13.fi.d3 0-0-0 14.0-0-0 hc3 (or 14 . . . ©b8= Kovalyov - Adams, Tromsoe 2014) 15.hc3 �h7. Black is preparing the doubling of his rooks on the h-file in order to or­ ganise an attack against the pawn on h3. 16 . .tb4 �e6 17.gS !iJe4 18. he4. His pieces are very active and White is forced to part with his two-bishop advantage. 18 . . . �xe4 19 . .id6 b 6 2 0 .h4 ©b7 2 1 . .ig3 !iJf8 = Bars - Stromberg, ICCF 2 0 14.

14.h4 c5 Black follows the classical principles. He inflicts a counter strike in the centre against his op­ ponent's flank attack.

15.©f2 gfe8 16.h5 g5

Black prevents the opening of files on the kingside.

17.gel �e6 18 .td3 !iJb6 •

He is preparing the transfer of his knight to the c4-square.

19.�c2 �c4 20.hc4 Black's knight is very active and White is forced to exchange it.

20 dxc4 21.a3 hc3 22. hc3 gad8 • • •

13

• • •

0-0

Now, contrary to the varia­ tions, we have already analysed, Black can castle kingside, since White fails to organise an attack against the enemy king.

Black's pieces have been very harmoniously deployed, while the position of White's king is not re­ liable at all. Therefore, he has no chances of maintaining an advan­ tage in the middle game, but the transfer into an endgame cannot provide him with much either.

23.�fS �xfS 24.gxfS �d5= Neto - Vassia, ICCF 2015.

129

Part 3 1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . lLJ:f3 lLJf6 4.lLJc3 e6

�:f3 �f6 4.�c3 e6, besides 5.e3

In this part of the book we will analyse all the possibilities for White after 1.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.

130

(Part 4) and 5.�g5 (part 5). The tenth chapter of the book will be devoted to White's early queen­ sortie (5.�b3). In Chapter 11 we will deal with the interesting hy­ brid between the Slav Defence and the Catalan Opening - 5.g3, while in Chapter 12 we will ana­ lyse 5.cxd5 exd5, after which there arises by transposition a line from the exchange variation of the Queen's Gambit, but not in the best version for White.

Chapter 10

1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . �f3 �f6 4.�c3 e6

Nottingham 1946.

5.%!fb3 White protects his c4-pawn, but his queen enters the actions too early. Later, Black will man­ age to win a tempo for the devel­ opment of his queenside by play­ ing b7-b5 after the preliminary exchange on c4. About 5.YHd3 dxc4 6.�xc4 bS - see 5.YHb3.

It seems rather dubious for White to opt here for 5.YHc2 , since following 5 . . . dxc4, he will have problems to prove that his pawn­ centre and lead in development are sufficient to compensate the sacrificed pawn. 6.e4 (White should possibly prefer here the more modest move 6.a4, prevent­ ing b7-b5. 6 . . . c5 7.e3 lll c 6. Black exploits the drawbacks of the move 5.YHc2 . White will have dif­ ficulties to protect his pawn on d4. 8.i.xc4 cxd4 9.exd4 lll xd4 10. lll xd4 W/xd4 11.ibS+ id7 12 .ie3 Wies 13.0-0 icSoo Ooms - Vul, Cappelle-la-Grande 1995. If Black succeeds in completing his devel­ opment, White will not have com­ pensation for his material deficit.) 6 . . . bS

White has tried in more than a hundred games the move 5.a3? ! , but after dxc4+, he has no com­ pensation for the pawn at all. White obtainsa difficult posi­ tion after 5.if4 dxc4 6.e3 (6.e4?! bS 7.�c2 ib7 - see 5.YHc2) 6 . . . bS 7.a4 ib4+ Golombek - Wade, 131

Chapter 1 0 7.i.gS h 6 - see Chapter 2 0 . 7.i.f4 i.b7 8 ..ie2 llJbd7 9.0-0 !e7 10.l:fadl 0-0 lU:ffe l , Fornal - Bashkov, Katowice 1993, 11. . . h6+ 7.g3 i.b7 8.i.g2 llJbd7 9.0-0 i.e7 10 .h3 a6+ Spassky - Bagirov, Leningrad 1960. After 7.a4, White cannot ob­ tain compensation for the pawn. 7 . . . a6 8.axbS (8 . .ie2 .ib7 9.i.gS h6 ! + Lukasova - Kuhl, ICCF 2 0 14) 8 . . .cxbS 9.eS llJdS 10.llJxbS axbS ! Black sacrifices the ex­ change and seizes completely the initiative. 11.�xa8 .ib7 12 .�a7 llJb4 13.lYdl !e4+ Gelfand Bacrot, Albert 2 0 0 2 . 7 . .ie2 .ib7 8.0-0 .ie7 9.es. White's pawn frees a square for the knight, but now Black's knight also gains access to a very good square at the centre of the board. (9 . .igS h6 10 . .ih4 llJbd7 11.b3, Rausis - Goloshchapov, Cairo 2000, 11 . . . gS ! ? 12 . .ig3 b4 13.llJa4 c3+) 9 . . . llJdS 10.llJe4

d6-square after the trade of the dark-squared bishops. 11.b3 cxb3 12.axb3 llJa6. Black prepares the transfer of his knight to b4. 13 .i.b2 llJab4 14.Wd2 0-0 lS.�fcl aS 16. llJcS Wc7 17.lYdl �fd8+ Babychuk - Tkachenko, ICCF 2 0 16. He has managed to complete the devel­ opment of his pieces. White is dominant over the cS-square, but this does not compensate fully his sacrificed pawn.

5

•••

dxc4 6.lYxc4 b5

Now, White must make up his mind where to retreat with his queen: A) 7.Wb3, or B) 7.Wd3.

A) 7.Wb3 White's queen is not so active here as on the d3-square, since it does not control the important central e4-square and does not protect the d4-pawn.

7

•••

10 . . . h6. This is important prophylactic; otherwise, White will play i.gS and will penetrate to the 132

llJbd7

This is a very elastic move for Black. Later, depending on circumstances, he can advance c6-c5 after bS-b4, c6-cS, as well as fol­ lowing a7-a6, c6-cS.

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. CiJj3 CiJf6 4. CiJ c3 e6 5. Wb3 de 6. Wxc4 b5 8 .lg5 •

The pawn-sacrifice 8 .e4 seems too risky for White. 8 . . . b4 9.CiJa4 CiJxe4 10 . .id3 CiJef6 11 . .lgS, Vaga­ nian - Chekhov, Vilnius 1980, 11 ... i.d6 ! ?+, followed by 0-0. Black's queenside is a bit weak, but this does not compensate ful­ ly White's material deficit. 8.g3. White's plan to fian­ chetto his light-squared bishop takes too much time. 8 . . . b4 9.CiJa4 cS 10 . .ig2 .ib7 11.CiJxcS (11.0-0 .ids 12 .ygd1 gc8 13.dxcS CiJxcS= Mihajlovskij - Matlakov, St Pe­ tersburg 2 008) 11 . . . CiJxcS 12.dxcS .ixcS. He must play very precise­ ly in order to neutralise the ac­ tivity of Black's pieces. 13 .i.e3 i.xe3 14.ygxe3, Marsalek - Dufek, Czech Republic 199S, 14 . . . ygb6 ! ? 1S.Wf4 0 - 0 16.0-0 h 6 17.gfcl gac8=

8 . . . a6

9.e3. This move is too passive. 9 . . . cS 10 . .ie2 .ib7 11.0-0, Piaset­ ski - Grandelius, Gibraltar 2016, ll ... .ld6 ! ? 12.gfdl c4 13.Wc2 h6 14 . .ih4 Wc7+ 9.l:!dl Wc7 10.g3 c5 11.i.xf6 CiJxf6 12 .i.g2 .lb7 13.0-0, Timoscenko Rogozenco, Berlin 1994, 13 ... l:!c8! ?+ The move 9 . a4 leads to a complicated position. 9 . . . WaS 10. .ixf6, Bachmann - Santiago, Neu­ quen 201S, 10 ...CiJxf6oo Black's two­ bishop advantage may be a seri­ ous trump for him in the future.

9 c5 10.d5 c4 11.ygc2, Kor­ chnoi - Novikov, Pamplona 1990, ll .le7!?oo Black has succeeded in occupying space on the queen­ side. He is not afraid of the ex­ change on c6, because he would easily protect this pawn. •••

•••

B) 7.ygd3 White's queen is more actively placed here than on the b3square.

7 .lb7 ..•

Black is perfectly prepared for the pawn-advance c6-cS.

9.e4 133

Chapter 1 0 8.e4 This is his most active move. He occupies immediately the cen­ tre with his pawns. The move 8.a3 looks too pas­ sive. 8 . . . a6. Black is quite ready to advance c6-cS. 9.e4 (9.e3 cs 10.dxcS hcS 11.Wfxd8+ ©xd8 12. id2 ©e7= Karpov - Kasparov, Las Palmas 1996) 9 . . . cS 10.eS. This move seems too ambitious, because now Black can occupy with tempo additional space on the queenside. (White had better think already about equality: 10. dxcS �xd3 11.ixd3 ixcS= Stoja­ novic - Dgebuadze, Basel 2010.) 10 . . . c4 11.Wfc2 llidS 12 .ie2 i.e7 13.0-0 0-0+ Dimov - Petkov, ICCF 2009. The dominance over the dS-square provides Black with better prospects. White cannot achieve much with 8.g3, because Black can counter that with the energetic re­ sponse 8 . . . cS ! = and it would be bad for White to play 9.WfxbS+? ! , because of 9 . . .i.c6 10 .�c4 cxd4 11.llibl, Tunik - Lintchevski, Ka­ zan 2014, 11 . . . llibd7! ?+. Black ex­ ploits the defencelessness of the enemy bishop on cl and com­ pletes quickly the development of his queenside pieces. 12 .Wfxc6? gc8-+ 8.i.gS. This pin is harmless for Black. 8 . . . llibd7 (diagram) 9.e4 b4 10.llia4 �as - see 8.e4. 134

9.g3. This move does not com­ bine well with 8.igS. Here, after h7-h6, White's bishop cannot re­ treat to the h4-square. 9 . . . a6 10. ig2 (10.gd1, Bartel - Werle, Novi Sad 2 009, 10 . . . cS ! ? 11.dxcS ixcS 12 .i.g2 �b6 13.0-0 0-0+ Black's pieces are more actively de­ ployed.) 10 . . . cs 11.0-0 h6 12.i.xf6 llixf6 13.gfdl �b6 14.a4 c4 1S.�c2 i.b4+ Norowitz - Naroditsky, Reykjavik 2 0 1S. Black has two powerful bishops. 9.a3 h6 10.i.f4, Portisch - No­ gueiras Santiago, Brussels 1988, 10 ... a6 ! ? ll.e3 i.e7 12 .i.e2 cS 13. 0-0 0-0= 9.e3 a6. If Black manages to advance c6-cS, he will not be worse at all.

10.i.e2 (10.a4 i.e7 11.i.e2 0-0 12.0-0 h6 13.i.xf6 llixf6= Mat­ senko - Potkin, St Petersburg

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. 11Jf3 11Jf6 4. 11J c3 e6 5. Vf!b3 de 6. Vf!xc4 b5 2 0 14. White has succeeded in im­ peding the pawn-advance c6-cS, but Black has the two-bishop ad­ vantage and a solid position.) 10 . . . cS 11.0-0 fi.e7 12 .l�ffd l (12.dxcS 11JxcS 13.Vfixd8+ i:!xd8 14.l:!acl 0-0 1S.11Jd4 l:!c8+ Andersson - Belia­ vsky, Parnu 1997) 12 . . . 0-0 13. dxcS l:iJxcS 14.Vf!d4 Vf!xd4 1S.i:!xd4, Karpov - Timman, Netherlands 1993. The queens have been ex­ changed early in the game, but Black can still seize the initiative: 1S . . . h6 ! ? 16.fi.h4 l:!fd8+ White must play very accurately; other­ wise, Black's edge will increase.

8 . . . b4 Black ousts immediately the enemy knight to the edge of the board.

9.11Ja4 c!i.)bd7

10.e5 The move 10 .fi.e2 leads to a complicated fight. 10 . . . Vf!aS 11.b3 cS 12 .eS l:iJdS 13.0-0 i.e7 14 . .id2 0-0 lS.l:!fcl cxd4 16.Vf!xd4 l:!fc8 17.a3 l:!xcl+ 18.l:!xcl l:!d8oo Knoll - Mignon, ICCF 2011. Black can

hope to equalise thanks to his powerful knight at the centre of the board. 10 . .ie3. White wishes to im­ pede Black's freeing pawn-break c6-cS. 10 . . . fi.e7 11.11Jd2 0-0

Following 12 .11Jb3 , Black can continue with 12 . . . aS, preparing the transfer of his bishop to the bS-square. 13.f3 fi.a6 14.Wfc2 fi.bS lS.l:iJbcS l:iJxcS 16.l:iJxcS 11Jd7 17. 11Jxd7 Vf!xd7= Dreev - Van Wely, Khanty-Mansiysk 2 0 0S. The posi­ tion has been simplified after the exchange of the knights. The slight weakness of the c6-pawn is compensated by Black's lead in development. 12 .f3. White protects reliably his e4-pawn. 12 . . . WfaS 13.Vfic2 l:!ac8 14.l:iJcS. Without this move Black will advance c6-cS. Now however, after 14 . . . l:iJxcS lS.dxcS 11Jd7, White's pawn on cS would need protection. 16.11Jb3 Vf!a4 17. 0-0-0 l:!fd8 18.©bl .ia6 19.l:!d4 .ixfl 2 0 .l:!xfl Vf!bS 21.l:!fdl. White's pieces are more actively deployed, but his initiative gradually reach­ es its dead end. 21...11Jf8. Black continues to simplify the position. 13S

Chapter I O 22. :!:!xdS :!:!xdS 23.:!:!xdS hdS 24. tlJcl fi.e7 2S.Wd3 Wb7 26.f4 as 27. Wc4 eS 2S.fS ttJd7. Black's posi­ tion is impossible to break. 29. tlJd3 Was 30.@c2 h6 31.g3 .tgS 32 .fi.f2 Wa7 33.h3 fi.e7 34.b3 %\las 3S.tlJb2 @fs 36.tlJa4 Wb7 37.@d3 Was, draw, Vinchev - Busenberg, ICCF 2 0 1S. After 10.fi.gS, it seems good for Black to play 10 ... WaS, running away with his queen from the pin with tempo. 11.b3 cS

There arises a very complicat­ ed position after 12 .dS exdS 13. exdS fi.d6oo Bu Xiangzhi - Gasa­ nov, Moscow 2010. 12 .hf6. White weakens his opponent's pawn-structure on the kingside, but presents Black with the two-bishop advantage. 12 . . . gxf6 13.fi.e2 (13.dxcS ? ! fi.c6+ Dzag­ nidze - Cramling, Monaco 201S; 13.dS ? ! l:!gS 14.We3 0-0-0 lS. 0-0-0 tlJb6 16.ttJxb6+ axb6+ Ki­ rienko - Bogatov, ICCF 2011. White's king is not so safe as its counterpart.) 13 . . . cxd4 14. 0-0 (14.%\'xd4 fi.e7+ Black's two-bish­ op advantage provides him with a stable advantage in this open po136

sition.) 14 . . . tlJcS lS.WbS+. White must continue to simplify the po­ sition; otherwise, he might even fail to equalise. lS ...%\fxbS 16.hbS+ @dS 17.tlJxd4 ttJxa4 1S.bxa4 a6 19.fi.c6. White deprives his oppo­ nent of his bishop-pair and the position becomes balanced. 19 . . . hc6 2 0 .ttJxc6+ @d7= Bennett Rivas Maceda, ICCF 2 01S.

10

. . .

tlJdS

11 .id2 .

11.i.e2 %\fas 12 .b3 ttJ7b6 13. ttJxb6, Blagojevic - Marjanovic, Kragujevac 2 0 13 , 13 . . . axb6 ! ?+ White is unlikely to manage to equalise due to the vulnerability of his backward a2-pawn. It would be too active for him to choose 11.tlJgS, because the passive placement of his other knight at the edge of the board would preclude him form seizing the initiative. 11 . . . i.e7 12 .tlJe4 (12. Wg3 ? ! %\fas 13.b3 cS+ Gonzalez Zamora - Quesada Perez, Merida 2 0 1s) 12 . . . Was 13 .b3 tlJSb6+ Stu-

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. li:Jj3 li:Jf6 4. li:Jc3 e6 5. V!! b3 de 6. V!!xc4 b5 pak - Duda, Lublin 2 0 13. The edge of the board is not the best place for a knight indeed, but the knight on a4 prevents Black's pawn-break c6-c5. Therefore, his desire to exchange it is easily un­ derstandable. 11.li:Jd2. White is preparing the transfer of his knight on b3 to the e4-square. 11 . . . .ie7 12.li:Jb3 0.Sb6 13.li:Jxb6 axb6 14.V!!g 3. White can­ not prevent Black's pawn-advance c6-c5, but can deprive his oppo­ nent of his castling rights with ac­ tive actions on the kingside. 14 . . . ciif8 15.!e3 V!!c7 16.!c4 cS= Ste­ phan - Noble, ICCF 2 0 13. u . . . �5b6! ? 12.V!!c 2

12.li:Jxb6, Tregubov - Yako­ vich, Paris 2 0 05, 12 . . . axb6 ! ? =

12

•••

�xa4 13.'efxa4 a5

(diagram) Black's plan is quite simple: !e7, 0-0, c6-c5 and White can

hardly manage to counter it effec­ tively.

14.lkl After White's alternatives, Black seizes the initiative. For ex­ ample: 14.!e2 !e7 15.13cl 0-0 16. 0-0 cS+ Banshchikov - Sutkalen­ ko, ICCF 2 013, or 14.!gS .ie7 15. he7 V!!xe7 16 ..id3 cS+ Williams Wells, Edinburgh 2003. 14 .te7oo Black's prospects are not worse at all. Later, in the game Tregubov - Yakovich, Ka­ zan 2 0 05, White played carelessly 15 . .id3? and after 15 . . . liJcS 16. 13xc5 hc5-+, he suffered materi­ al losses. •••

137

Chapter ll

1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . �f3 �f6 4.�c3 e6 5.g3

ens the b4-square. In addition, the move a2-a4 does not contrib­ ute to the development of his pieces. 6 . . . cS ! ? Black inflicts an energetic strike against the enemy centre and is trying to seize the initiative.

This is something like a hybrid between the Slav Defence and the Catalan Opening. White wishes to develop his king's bishop to the g2-square ignoring the fate of his pawn on c4.

5 . . . dxc4! This is Black's most principled move. He captures his opponent's defenceless pawn. Later however, he must play very precisely, since he lags in development and his light-squared bishop is severely restricted by his own pawns.

6.Ag2 6.igS bS - see Chapter 19. 6.a4. With this move White impedes b7-b5 indeed, but weak138

7.igS, Akobian - Shen, Gi­ braltar 2008, 7 . . . ttJc6 ! ?+ 7.ie3 . White's bishop is unsta­ ble on this square. 7 . . . ttJg4oo Kha­ der - Mohammad, Dubai 2011. 7.dxcS. After this straightfor­ ward transfer into an endgame White cannot even equalise. 7 . . . Wfxdl + 8.ttJxdl ttJa6. This i s Black's most precise move. He wishes to capture on c5 with his knight and not with his bishop. 9.ig2 ttJxcS+ Stupak - Reshetnikov, Moscow 2011. White's queenside has been

l.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3. l?Jj3 l?Jf6 4. l?J c3 e6 5.g3 de 6 . !g2 l?J bd7 weakened by the pawn-advance a2-a4 and regaining the pawn on c4 would take too much time for him. 7.!g2 l?Jc6 8.dxc5 (8.e3 cxd4 9.l?Jxd4, Tukmakov - Drozdovs­ kij , Odessa 2006, 9 . . . l?JaS+) 8 . . . \Wxdl+ 9.l?Jxdl, Lalith - Kohlwey­ er, Gibraltar 2 016, 9 . . . l?Ja5 ! ?+ In both these variations Black's knight will be perfectly placed at the edge of the board, because from the a5-square it not only protects reliably the pawn on c4, but can also go to the b3-square. After 6.l?Je5, Black's simplest response would be 6 . . . l?Jbd7 ! ? , giving back the extra pawn, but planning to develop his bishop on c8 . 7.l?Jxc4 b5

has made too many moves at the beginning of this game. 8 . . . !b7 9. !g2 \Wb6 10.l?Jde4 (The position is simplified after 10. 0-0 c5 11.dxc5 l?Jxc5 12 .hb7 \Wxb7 13.l?Jb3 l:!d8 14.Wfc2 l:!c8 15.l?JxcS hc5=, fol­ lowed by 0-0, Romanishin - Ki. Georgiev, Belgrade 2000.) 10 . . . !e7 1 1 . 0 - 0 0-0 12 .!gS (After 1 2 . !e3, Black can play 12 . . . l?JdSoo, at­ tacking the enemy bishop, Troff - Le, Saint Louis 2 0 15.) 12 . . . l:!fdB. Black's pieces have been harmo­ niously deployed and White will be incapable of preventing the pawn-advance c6-c5. 13.e3. He is trying to fortify his position in the centre. 13 . . . cS 14.!xf6 l?Jxf6 15. dxc5. Now, White must simplify the position; otherwise, he may end up in an inferior position. 15 . . . l:!xdl 16.l?Jxf6+ !xf6 17.cxb6 l:!xfl+ 18.@xfl hg2+ 19.@xg2 axb6 2 0 .l?JxbS, Hernandez - Rabler, ICCF 2 0 15, 20 . . . hb2 =

6

. . .

�bd7! ?

Black impedes his opponent's knight-sortie in the centre (l?JeS).

8.l?Je3 !e7 9.!g2 Wfb6 10.0-0 !b7 11.b3 0-0. Black has com­ pleted his development and has no problems at all. 12 .!b2 l:!fd8 13 .\Wd3 (13.Wfc2 l:!ac8 14.l:!acl l?Jd5= Petkov - Andersen, Can Picafort 2 0 13) 13 . . . aS 14.l:!fdl l:!ac8 15.l:!acl h6= Tsygankov Serazeev, ICCF 2 0 14. 8.l?Jd2. White plans to follow with l?Jde4, but his king's knight

Here, White can play either A) 139

Chapter 11 7.a4, preventing b7-b5, or B) 7.0-0.

the b4-square) would not allow him to fight for the advantage.

7 . . . .ib4 About 7 . .igS bS 8.llieS (8.0-0 W/b6 - see 7.0-0) 8 . . . llixeS 9 . .hf6 gxf6 10.dxeS .ib7= Tregubov Sakaev, St Petersburg 1993.

Black occupies immediately the weak square.

8.0-0 8.W/c2 0-0 9.0-0 - see 8.0-0.

Following 7.e4 bS 8.es (8.0-0 !b7- see variation B) 8 . . . llidS, White would not achieve much with the knight-sortie 9.llig5 !e7 10.W/hS g6 11.�h6 .if8 12 .�h3, Olszewski - Dreev, Warsaw 2009. Here, Black could have played 12 . . . h6! ?oo, without being afraid of the piece-sacrifice 13.llixe6? ! , be­ cause he would have the powerful tactical counter strike 13 . . . llixeS ! +

A) 7.a4

8 . . . 0-0 9.�c2 It seems less precise for White to play 9.llid2, because this move weakens his control over the cen­ tre. Black can exploit this imme­ diately: 9 . . . eS ! 10.llixc4 exd4 11. W/xd4. After the disappearance of White's d4-pawn off the board, Black's knight gains access to the wonderful c5-square from where it can go to b3. 11.. .llicS+ Loginov - Beshukov, St Petersburg 1997.

9 . . . a5 Black increases his control over the b4-square.

This is a reliable move for White. He is reluctant to play with material sacrifices and deprives the enemy c4-pawn of the possi­ ble support of his b-pawn. Later, he hopes to restore the material balance, but the drawback of the move 7.a4 (the vulnerability of 140

10.�Ml The move 10 .llieS, Dziuba Olafsson, Reykjavik 2 0 15, leads to

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. l'iJ.f3 l'fJf6 4. l'iJ c3 e6 5.g3 de 6. ig2 l'fJ bd7 the appearance of doubled e­ pawns in White's camp. 10 . . . l'fJxeS ! ? 11.dxeS l'fJdS+ 10.l'fJa2 id6. Black is reluctant to trade his powerful bishop for the enemy knight placed at the edge of the board. ll.'t!/xc4 es 12. 't!/c2 , Gleizerov - Thomassen, San Sebastian 2010. This is White's most precise move. (Following 12. l'fJc3 exd4 13.�xd4, his queen will be misplaced at the centre of the board, since it can be attacked by the enemy pieces. 13 ... l'fJcS+ Miton - Dreev, Moscow 2002) 12 ... exd4! ? 13.l'fJxd4 ge8oo There can b e expect­ ed a complicated battle with mu­ tual chances in this middle game. The move 10.e4 leads to an in­ teresting position. 10 . . . eS ! ? Black prevents e4-eS. 11.dxeS l'iJg4 12. e6. White does not hold on to his eS-pawn and gives it back weak­ ening his opponent's pawn-struc­ ture. 12 . . . fxe6 13 .�e2 l'fJdeS 14. l'fJxeS l'fJxeS. Black's pawn-struc­ ture has been compromised but still, one of his pawns is extra af­ ter all . . . 1S.f4 l'fJd3 16.eS gb8. He is preparing b7-bS. 17.ie3 bS 18.l'iJe4 ie7 19.'t!/c2 't!/c7oo Martin Sanchez - Romm, ICCF 2 0 1S. White's positional pluses com­ pensate the sacrificed pawn, but not more than that.

10

ti'e7

•••

Black removes his queen from the X-ray juxtaposition with the enemy rook.

11.c!LJa2 It seems bad for White to play here 11.igS, because after ll . . . h6 12.ixf6 �xf6, Black obtains the two-bishop advantage. 13.l'fJe4 WfS 14.gacl, Zhou - Wen, Xinghua 2 016, 14 . . . eS ! ?+ 11.l'fJeS. White is not afraid of the appearance of doubled d­ pawns in his position. He is fight­ ing for the d6-square. 11 . . . l'fJxeS 12.dxeS l'fJd7 13.if4 fS ! ? Black is forced to weaken his pawn-struc­ ture; otherwise, White will play l'iJe4, followed by l'fJd6, or l'fJgS, seizing completely the initiative. 14.exf6 l'fJxf6 1S.l'iJe4 es 16.i.e3 .te6. Black has solved the prob­ lem with his bishop on c8 and preserved his extra pawn, but White still has the initiative. 17. l'fJgS idS 18.gxdS. This exchange­ sacrifice is interesting, but still insufficient for White to maintain an advantage. 18 . . . cxdS 19 . .txdS+ 'ktih8 2 0 . .txc4. White has a pawn for the exchange and his pieces are active. 20 . . . gac8. Black pins the enemy bishop. 2i.gd1 h6. He 141

Chapter 11 ousts White's knight, but weakens the g6-square. 2 2 .lilf3 e4 23.lilh4 @h7 24 . .id4 lilg4. Black begins counterplay against the f2-square. 25.h3 lilxf2 . Now, there arises an equal endgame by force. 26.hf2 gxf2 27.@xf2 Wies+ 28 .@fl Wi'xc4 29.Wi'xc4 gxc4= Pheby - Burger, ICCF 2 015.

11

. • •

15.b4 axb4 16.lilxb4. White has activated his knight, but now, his a4-pawn has become isolated and this might hurt him later. 16 . . . lilce4 17.lild3 gds 18 . .ib2 .ic7 19 . .ia3 Wies 2 0 .e3 hSoo, followed by h5-h4, Borstnik - Serban, ICCF 2015. White must watch carefully for Black's kingside ini­ tiative not to become threatening.

.id6 12.Wi'xc4 e5

13.Wi'c2 exd4 14.c!LJxd4 c!LJc5

Following 15.lilc3 ges 16.f3, Black should play 16 . . . lildS ! ? , without waiting fo r the move e2e4, since after that his knight on f6 would be restricted by the ene­ my pawns on f3 and e4. 17.lilxdS cxdS. White cannot exploit the weakness of the dS-pawn, because his kingside has been weakened by the move f2-f3. 18.lilbS lila6. Black sends his knight to the b4square. 19.lilxd6 Wfxd6 2 0 .e4 Wi'b6+ 21.Wi'f2 Wi'xf2 + 2 2 .@xf2 dxe4 23 . .ie3 exf3 24 . .ixf3 lilb4= Di­ mitrov - Hitzegrad, ICCF 2 014. White's two-bishop advantage compensates the sacrificed pawn, but not more than that.

15 .ie3

15.b3. White prepares the fian­ chetto of his queen's bishop. 15 . . . gds 16.ib2 ( H e should better not enter the complications aris­ ing after 16.hc6 bxc6 17.lilxc6 Wfd7 18.lilxdS '.Wh3+ and White loses after 19.gxd6?? lilg4-+) 16 . . . lilce4. Black's knight i s very pow­ erful at the middle of the board. From there it can go to gS creating threats against the enemy king. 17.e3 .icS 18.gel lilgS 19.gadl .ib6

Black's plans include the ex­ change of the e-pawn for the en­ emy d-pawn after which his knight will gain access to the cS­ square.

•

142

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. lt:Jj3 lt:Jf6 4. lt:J c3 e6 5.g3 de 6. ig2 lt:J bd7 2 0 .lt:JfS ixfS 2 1.Y;YxfS lt:Jge4 2 2 . id4 ixd4 23.exd4 Y;Ya3 24.ixe4 W/xa2 = Schneider - Amann, ICCF 2 0 15. The position has been con­ siderably simplified. Later, it would be White who must play accurately in order not to remain without compensation for his weak pawns on d4 and b3.

15

•••

weakened on both sides of the board.

B) 7.0-0 White complies with playing without a pawn.

7 b5 •.•

lt:Jg4

Black ousts the enemy bishop from its active position.

16 .id2 •

16.lt:Jxc6 bxc6 17. E:xd6 lt:Jxe3 18.WfxcS lt:Jxg2 19.©xg2 Y;Yxe2 =

16 J'.!le8 17 .iel h5 .•

•

8.e4 He wishes to play e4-e5, oust­ ing the enemy knight from the f6square and to follow this with lt:JgS.

The majority of White's pieces are on the queenside, so Black's plan, connected with the pawn­ advance h5-h4, would be rather unpleasant for his opponent. 18.

lt:Jc3 �f6 19.e4 h4 20.:f3 hxg3 21.hxg3 .id7 22 .if2 gad8 23. gd2 �a6oo Sommerbauer - Pan­ •

itevsky, ICCF 2016. Black's play is much simple in this middle game, because White's position has been

8 .b3 ? ! b4 9.lt:Ja4 c3 10.a3 as+ - Hofer - Nowakowski, ICCF 2010. White's knight has been ousted to the edge of the board and Black has obtained a protect­ ed passed pawn. White only loses time for the move 8.a4? ! , because after 8 . . . b4, his knight will be forced to retreat to the edge of the board. 9.lt:Jbl. Black has a very active position and an extra pawn. His further plan is quite simple - to advance c6-c5 and after the exchange on d4 to liquidate his doubled c143

Chapter 11 pawns. 9 . . . .ia6 10 .!i.gS gc8 11. llJbd2 (ll.'1Wc2 cS+) 11 . . . cS 12 .gc1 cxd4 13.llJxd4 �b6 14.llJbS hbS 15.axbS �xbS 16 ..hf6 gxf6+ Tre­ gubov - Grischuk, Mainz 2010. Black lags in development indeed, but still has two extra pawns. 8.llJd2 '\Wb6 9.a4 .ib7oo Vakhi­ dov - Khoroshev, Tashkent 2 016.

change. 16.llJd7 '\Wa6 17.llJxf8 .hf8oo Mende - Babushkin, ICCF 2 0 14. Black's passed pawns, sup­ ported by his bishop-pair, can create great problems for White. 8.llJgS. White is threatening to capture on c6 and bS, but Black can parry easily both these threat. 8 . . . '\Wb6

Following 8.llJeS, there arises a transfer to a very complicated endgame. 8 . . . llJxeS 9.dxeS '\Wxdl 10.gxdl llJdS ll.a4 b4 12 .llJe4 aS 13 . .ie3, Zhao - Brunello, Wijk aan Zee 2 014, 13 . . . !i.a6 ! oo 8 .'\Wc2 !i.b7 9.gdl ( 9 . .igS '\Wb6oo Lenderman - Stopa, Mesa 2010; 9.e4 .ie7 - see 8.e4) 9 . . . !i.e7 10. llJeS llJdS. Black wishes to dimin­ ish the pressure of the enemy bishop on g2 on the long diago­ nal. 11.llJxd7 '\Wxd7 12.llJe4. White impedes the enemy pawn-ad­ vance c6-c5. 12 . . . llJb4 13.�d2 gd8oo Ladva - Fridman, Tallinn 2 016. 8.!i.gS �b6 9.b3 .ib4 10.hf6 llJxf6 11.gcl llJdS 12.llJxdS exdS. There has arisen an interesting position. Black has an extra pawn and the two-bishop advantage. Still, after 13.bxc4 dxc4 14.llJeS 0-0 15.a4, White's pieces are very active. He is threatening axbS, after which Black's queenside pawn-structure will be compro­ mised. Therefore, he must play 15 . . . !i.b7 ! ? , sacrificing the ex144

There arises a complicated po­ sition after 9.a4 b4 10.aS '\Wa6 11.llJce4, Gupta - Robson, Wijk aan Zee 2010, 11 . . . !i.e7! ?oo 9.e4 h6 10.llJxe6. This piece­ sacrifice is rather dubious (after 10.es hxg5 ll.exf6 gxf6 12 .!i.e3 .ib7+, White does not have suffi­ cient compensation for the two missing pawns, Harikrishna Amanov, Philadelphia 2 0 11) 10 . . . fxe6 11.eS llJdS 12 .'\Wg4, Dubov Ter Sahakyan, Moscow 2 0 15, 12 . . . llJb8 ! ?+ White's compensation for the sacrificed piece is not good enough. It is possible he must choose 9.b3 h6 10.llJge4 cxb3 11.llJxf6+ (ll.'\Wxb3, Shinkevich - Kozionov, Togliatti 2011, 11 . . . llJdS ! ? = ) 11. . . llJxf6 1 2 .'\Wxb3 !i.b7 13.a4 a 6 = Tay­ lor - Visigalli, ICCF 2 0 16. White

1.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3. l:i:if3 l:i:if6 4. l:i:i c3 e6 5.g3 de 6. i.g2 l:i:i bd7 leads in development and exerts pressure on the queenside and this compensates his minimal material deficit, but not more than that.

12 .Wh5, Vinchev - Goncharenko, ICCF 2 0 14, 12 . . . ©fS ! ?+; or 11.Wh5 g6 12 .Wi'h3 i.e7 13.l:i:ige4 ©fS+ Al­ varez Pedraza - Ibarra Jerez, La Roda 2 016.

fxe6 12.�h5+ ©e7

8 . . ..lb7

11

9.e5

13.c!LJe4

White must play energetically not to end up in an inferior posi­ tion. It is bad for him to play here 9.i.g5? ! , because after 9 . . . h6 10. i.xf6 l:i:ixf6, Black exchanges his opponent's powerful bishop. 11. '\Wc2 i.e7-F Baburin - Bhat, San Francisco 1997. It would be too slow for White to opt here for 9 .'\Wc2 .le7 10.�Ml 0-0+ He does not have full com­ pensation for the pawn.

9

•••

c!LJd5 10.c!LJgS h6 11.c!LJxe6

The idea of this piece-sacrifice was behind White's previous play.

•••

White obtains a bad position after 13.i.g5 + ? ! hxg5 14.'\WxhS l:i:i7b6. Black's two minor pieces are stronger than his opponent's rook in this middle game. 15.l:i:ie4 ©d7 16.Wg8 (16.Wh5 ©c7 17.l:i:ixg5 '\Wd7 18 .i.h3 ges . He has fortified reliably the e6-square. Black only needs to advance c6-c5, in order to activate his bishop on b7. 19.a3 cS+ Petukhov - Odrov, ICCF 2 0 15.) 16 . . . WeS 17.Wh7 gds 18. c!LJxg5 ©c7 19.gael ©bS+ Shinke­ vich - Korobov, St Petersburg 2010. Black has managed to evac­ uate his king to the queenside where it will be quite safe.

13 WeS 14 .lgS+ hxg5 15. �xh8 •••

He cannot even equalise if he retreats his knight: 11.l:i:ige4 i.e7

•

White has obtained a rook for 145

Chapter 11 two minor pieces under much better circumstances than in our previous notes.

Black activates his bishop on b7.

18.ffh3 15 . . . ©d8 It is necessary for Black to evacuate his king away from the danger zone as quickly as possi­ ble.

16.tll xgS 16.Wg8 ? ! \!;Vg6+ Lalith - Ding Liren, Hyderabad 2 0 15.

16 . . . ©c8 !? 17.a4 17.\!;Vh3? ! lLlc7. Black parries easily the threat against his e6pawn. 18.l'Uel ©b8 19.tll e4 tll b 6+ Ciciotti - Romanov, ICCF 2 0 1 2 . There arises a complicated sit­ uation following 17.gfel tll c7 18. lLle4 c5 19.tfh4 he4 20.\!;Vxe4 gb8 21.gadl cxd4 2 2 .\!;Vxd4 lLlcSoo Lu­ kasova - Fonteneau, ICCF 2016. The position is beginning to open and White's rook can fight success­ fully against Black's minor pieces.

17. . . cs 146

White attacks the e6-pawn and wishes thus to oust Black's knight from the centre of the board. 18.axbS cxd4 19J'ffc l tll 5 b6 20.lLle4 \!;Vd8oo Ipatov - Fedoseev, Saint Louis 2 017. 18.gfdl bxa4 19.gxa4 lLl5b6 2 0 .gas hg2 21.©xg2 cxd4 2 2 . gxd4 ©b7. Now, Black must play very precisely, since the position has been opened and his king might be endangered. 23.lLle4 '!Wg6 24.ffh4 gc8 25.tll d 6+ hd6 26.exd6 eS. Black has managed to coordinate his pieces. White is forced to trade the queens on or­ der to prevent his opponent from seizing the initiative to the end of the game. 27.\!;Ve4+ ffxe4+ 28. gxe4 gf8 29.f4 exf4 30.gxf4 gxf4 31.gxf4 ©c6 32 .gxa7 ©xd6= Ru­ binas - Mendl, ICCF 2 014. In or­ der to make a draw in this end­ game, White must exchange his

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. liJ.f3 liJf6 4. liJ c3 e6 5.g3 de 6. ig2 liJ bd7 rook and three pawns for the enemy two pawns and then Black would be left with two useless knights. 18.dxc5 liJxc5 19.axb5 liJb6 2 0 . liJ f3 ©c7 2 1.W/h3 1M/xb5 2 2 .liJd4 W/d7 23.l':ffd l a5 24.hb7 ©xb7. Black has managed to consolidate his position and White must play energetically; otherwise, Black's two minor pieces might prove to be stronger than White's rook and pawns. 25.b3 c3 26.l3acl liJd5 27. 1M/g2 ©b6. Black removes his king away from the pin. 28.liJe2 liJxb3 29.l3bl a4. His passed a-pawn seem very powerful, but his king is vulnerable and he cannot main­ tain an advantage. 30.liJxc3 l3c8 31.lLJxdS+ exd5 32 .Wff3 ©c6 33. 1M/e2 l3a8. Black defends against the penetration of the enemy queen to the a6-square. 34.e6 1M/d8 35.l3d3 ic5 36.l3bdl d4oo Camp­ bell - Sherwood, ICCF 2 0 14.

18

•••

19 hdS 21.e6 •••

21

20.hdS

exd5

ie7!

•••

The activity of his pieces be­ comes greater with every move, so Black is trying to simplify the position sacrificing a piece.

22.exd7+ W/xd7

�c7 19.d5

23.WfhS White's attempt to play for a win seems to be too risky for him, because Black has too many pawns on the queenside. White should have possibly agreed to a draw by repetition of moves. 23.1M/h8+ W/d8= White continues to increase his pressure.

23

bxa4 24.�ffe l

•••

147

Chapter 11 After 24J:Udl, there might fol­ low a variation ending up with a perpetual check: 24 . . .Wff5 25.h4 13b8 26.13d2 i.f6 27.W/fl W/d7 28. W/f8+ ©b7 29.W/xc5 .bg5 30.hxg5 13h8 31.13d4 W/h3 32.13h4 13xh4 33.W/b4+ ©c8 34.gxh4 W/g4+ 35. ©fl Wfh3+ 36. ©e2 W/d3 =

24

••.

.tf6oo queen. 32.l1xd6 �d6. Here, White's queen will hardly manage to stop the enemy passed pawns, despite the fact that after 33.WeS, he can capture the enemy bishop on el thanks to the double attack.

33 l1b6 34.'ffx el a3 35.Wfal c3 !+ 36.�d7. White sacrifices a •••

piece and forces the enemy king to an unfavourable position. This does not help him, though . . 36 .

Black's bishop on f6 exerts powerful pressure against White's queenside.

25J1e2 l1b8 26.�h7 White decides to sacrifice his b2-pawn, but now, Black has too many passed pawns on the queen­ side.

26 .lxb2 27.�:f8 g6! ? •••

H e sacrifices a pawn and pro­ vokes White's queen to occupy a square on the sixth rank in order to attack it later with his rook with tempo.

28.W/xg6 l1b6 29.WhS Wd6 30.l1ael .tc3 31.l1e6 (diagram)

31

.lxel! ! This is the point!

•••

Now, Black can

148

sacrifice his

•••

©xd7 37.Wxa3 d4 38.WxcS �e6. Black has finally managed to coordinate his pieces and White's lone queen is helpless against the enemy rook, knight and passed pawns. 39.W:f5 l1c6

40.Wh7+ ©d6 41.'flrc2 a5 42.h4 ©c7. Black cannot play immedi­ ately d4-d3, because White will capture the pawn with a check.

43.Wh7+ ©b6 44.Wbl+ ©a7 45.We4 l1c7 46.Wc2 d3. Black sacrifices a pawn, but advances his passed c-pawn another square forward. The outcome of the game has become quite evident. 47.

Wxd3 c2 48.We3+ l1c5 49.'flrcl l1c3 50.©g2 �cs-+ Visloguzov - Buhme, ICCF 2 0 15.

Chapter 12

1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . lLJ:f3 lLJf6 4.lLJc3 e6 5.cxd5

We

will

analyse

now:

A)

6.J.g5 and B) 6.1!ic2.

This quiet move is usually cho­ sen by White when he wishes to avoid the long theoretical varia­ tions arising after S.e3, or S . .igS. Still, he cannot fight for the open­ ing advantage when he plays in this fashion.

5 . . . exd5 Black opens the diagonal for his light-squared bishop. There has arisen on the board the exchange variation of the Queen's Gambit, but in a favour­ able version for Black, because White has developed too early his knight on f3. Later, he cannot ac­ complish the standard set-up of his pieces in similar positions .igS, e3, .id3, because Black man­ ages to develop his bishop on fS.

6.h3. This can be hardly White's most useful move. 6 . . . .id6. Black develops his bishop to an active position and prevents .if4. 7.W/c2 0-0 8 . .igS h6 9 . .ih4 gS. This move emphasizes the de­ fects of White's move six. 10 . .ig3 .ixg3 ll.fxg3 lDhS+ Ivanisevic Kramnik, Tromsoe 2 0 14. White's pawn-structure has been serious­ ly compromised. 6.g3. The development of this bishop to the g2-square is too slow. 6 . . . .id6 7 . .ig2 0-0 8.0-0 l:!e8. Black has already a slightly freer game. 9.W/c2 (9.lDel .ifS 10. lDd3, Luzuriaga - Urrutia, Bue­ nos Aires 1998, 10 . . . 1!lb6 ! ?+) 9 . . . lDbd7 10.l:!el (10.lDh4 lD b 6 11.lDfS .ib4+ Kuznetsova - Katzkova, Zvenigorod 2 00S. The transfer of the knight to the fS-square has not improved White's position, because Black has managed to avoid the exchange of his bishop.) 10 ... h6 11.lDh4 lDb6 12 .b3 as+ Huzita - Saitou, ICCF 2011. 149

Chapter 12 6.e3. Before the development of White's bishop to f4, or gS, this move seems bad for him. 6 . . . i.d6 7.i.d3 o-o 8.0-0 ges 9.h3. He prevents the development of the enemy bishop to g4. (9.\!;l/c2 i.g4+) 9 . . . lll e4 10 .'Wc2 i.fS+ Krawiec Gaponenko, Fond du Lac 1990. Black's pieces have been more ac­ tively deployed. 6.J.f4. This bishop is not better placed here than on gS. 6 . . . .ifS. Black has managed to develop his bishop to an active position and this means that he has solved the problems in the opening. 7.e3 (7.'Wb3 'Wb6=) 7 . . . lll b d7 8 .i.d3 hd3 9.'Wxd3 i.e7

10 .h3. White saves his bishop from an exchange after lll h S. (Fol­ lowing 10.0-0, Black can sharpen the game with 10 . . . lll h S ! ? 11.J.eS 0-0 12 .h3 lll xeS 13.dxeS, Volkov - Kotanjian, Dubai 2011 and here he had to attack immediately the cramping enemy pawn on eS with the move 13 .. .f6 ! ?oo) 10 . . . 0-0 11. 0-0 ges 12.gabl (12 .'Wc2 lll b 6= Fressinet - Fridman, Trzcianka 2 015) 12 . . . aS. Black thwarts his

150

opponent's pawn-minority attack (b2-b4-b5).

13.\!;l/c2 . White prevents a5-a4. 13 . . . lll b 6 14.b3, Fressinet - Gus­ tafsson, Oberhof 2011, 14 . . . i.b4 ! ?oo The move 13.a3 allows 13 . . . a4. Black is deploying his pawns ac­ cording to the rules - on squares opposite of the colour of his bishop. 14.'Wc2 (14.i.h 2 , Pert Hawkins, London 2 0 15, 14 . . . bS ! ? , followed by lll b 6, lll c 4) 1 4 . . . 'WaS 15.gfdl MB 16.lll eS, Larsen - Spas­ sky, Montreal 1979, 16 . . . \!;l/a6 ! ? = White can hardly find a n active plan for his further actions. 13.gfcl .if8 14.lll a4 lll e4 15. lll eS lll xeS 16.i.xeS ge6= Black's prospects are not worse and after White's careless reaction 17.i.f4?! \!;l/h4 18.\!;l/e2 gae8+, Black seizes the initiative. His attack develops effortlessly. 19.lll b 6? ! gg6 2 0 .©fl \!;l/d8 2 1 .lll a4 gf6 2 2 .©gl bS 23. lll cS gxf4 24.exf4 lll xcS-+ Knaak - Geller, Novi Sad 1979.

A) 6.J.g5 h6! ? The inclusion of this move is very useful for Black.

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. li:Jj3 li:Jf6 4. li:Jc3 e6 5.cd ed 6. ig5 h6 8.e3 id6 9.id3 0-0 10.0-0 i.g4 ll.h3 .bf3 12 .Wxf3 li:Jd7 13. Wxf6 li:Jxf6= Shengelia - Ragger, Vienna 2010.

7 if5 •••

7.ih4 It is not good for White to play here 7.i.xf6 W/xf6 . Black has a bishop-pair and a solid posi­ tion.

8.e3

White must play very accu­ rately not to end up in an inferior position. 8.l3cl. Black can parry easily the threat li:Jxd5. 8 . . . li:Jd7 9.W/c2 , Shrentzel - Greenfeld, Tel Aviv 1988, 9 . . . li:Jb6 ! ?+ 8.W/b3. This is hardly White's most useful move. 8 . . . id6 9.e3 li:Jd7 10 . .id3 We7 11.0-0-0 li:Jf6+ Lilienthal - Botvinnik, Moscow 1945. He has no compensation for Black's bishop-pair, moreover that his king is not so reliably placed on the queenside.

8.W/b3. The attack against the b7-pawn leads to difficulties for White. 8 . . . g5. Before playing Wb6, Black must oust his opponent's bishop in order to avoid the com­ promising of his kingside pawn­ structure. 9.i.g3 (It is bad for White to play here 9.W/xb7?, be­ cause after 9 . . . gxh4 10.W/xa8 W/b6, his queen will have great prob­ lems to get away from the a8square. 11.0-0-0 id6 12 .li:Ja4 W/c7 13.li:JcS hes 14.dxcS 0-0 15. li:Jd4 i.d7 16.e3 l3c8. Black is per­ fectly prepared to trap the enemy queen, 0-1 Spasov - Dimitrov, ICCF 2013. 17.ie2 li:Ja6 18.Wxc8+ hc8-+ You can see now why Black has played l3c8 - his knight on a6 is protected. White does not obtain sufficient material for his queen.) 9 . . . W/b6. 151

Chapter 12

White has numerous alterna­ tives here, but neither of them equalises. 10.�xb6? ! The opening of the a-file is in favour of Black. 10 . . . axb6 11.e3 b5+, followed by llibd7-b6-c4, Banovic - Cabarka­ pa, Novi Sad 2 015. 10 .h4 �xb3 ll.axb3 g4+ Lysyj Lintchevski, Novokuznetsk 2008. The pawns on b2 and b3 are weak in White's position. 10 .llid2 . He avoids the dou­ bling of his pawns on the b-file. 10 . . . llibd7 ll.f3 (ll.e3 llih5 - see 10 .e3) ll.. .ig7 12 .h4 0-0 13.hxg5 hxg5 14.i.f2 �fe8 15. 0-0-0 i.g6+ Tosi - Krakovsky, ICCF 2011. Black's pieces are more harmo­ niously deployed and White will hardly manage to advance e2-e4. 10 .e3 llibd7. Black takes the e5-square under control. He plans to continue with llih5. (11.llid2 llih5, or 11.i.e2 llih5 12 .llid2 llixg3 - see 8 .e3, 9.Wfb3) 11 ..te2 llih5 12 .i.e5 llig7 13 .i.g3 Wfxb3 14.axb3, Janachkov - Rusev, Plovdiv 2 0 07, 14 . . . i.e7 ! ?+ Black has a su­ perior pawn-structure.

8 152

• • •

llibd7

9.i.d3 9.Wfb3 Wfb6 10.llid2 g5 11.i.g3 llih5 12.llia4 (12 .i.e2 llixg3 13.hxg3 0-0-0 14.�cl @b8 15.llia4 Wfxb3 16.llixb3, Margvelashvili - Par­ ligras, Kavala 2 0 07, 16 . . . llif6 ! ? 17. lliac5 i.d6+, with the two-bishop advantage for Black.) 12 . . .Wfxb3 13.llixb3 llixg3 14.hxg3 i.b4+ 15. @dl llif6 16.f3, Gyimesi - Pinter, Germany 1998, 16 . . . b6 ! ?+, depriv­ ing White's knights of the c5square and maintaining an ad­ vantage for Black.

9 . . . .ixd3 10.Wfxd3 Ad6 Black's bishop is more actively placed here than on e7.

11.0-0 11.0-0-0. White's king will not be so reliably deployed on the queenside. 11 . . . 0-0 12 .g4 i.b4 13. llie2 i.e7 14.i.g3 llie4 15.h4 c5. This is a double-edged position. 16.llid2 llixg3 17.llixg3 �c8 18.@bl c4 19.Wfc2 ib4 20.llie2 �c6 2 1.g5 �a5--+ followed by �a6, Rogos Kloster, ICCF 2 0 15. Black's rook is doing a lot of work. It attacks

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. li:Jj3 li:Jf6 4. li:Jc3 e6 5.cd ed 6. ig5 h6 the enemy king and protects the own monarch.

12 '3fel

11.a3 as 12 .li:Je2 0-0 13 .0-0 1'!e8= Landa - Bareev, Vienna 1996.

14.li:Jc3 1'!e8 15.i'!fel V9b6 - see 14.i'!fel.

11

•••

0-0

12.e4 White wishes to activate his pieces, but ends up with an iso­ lated pawn in his camp. 12 .i'!fel 1'!e8 13.e4 dxe4 14. li:Jxe4 ie7 - see 12.e4. White's decision not to play e3-e4 leads to an approximately equal manoeuvring game. 12.i'!abl 1'!e8 13 .b4 a6 14.a4, Ueti - Cal­ deira, Sao Bernardo do Campo 2 0 14, 14 . . . bS= This is a typical re­ source for Black in positions with the Carlsbad pawn-structure. He solves radically the problem with White's pawn-break b4-b5 and wishes eventually to transfer his knight to the c4-square (li:Jb6-c4) . From there it will cover reliably his c6-pawn against the attack of White's major pieces on the c-file.

dxe4 13.c!bxe4 ie7 14.

•••

14

•••

'3e8

15.c!bg3 15.c!bc3 Wi'b6 16.i'!adl id6 17. Wi'c2 Wi'a5= Nowak - Kolanek, ICCF 2011. 15.ixf6. The vulnerability of the isolated d4-pawn becomes more and more obvious with eve­ ry exchange of pieces. 15 . . . c!bxf6 16.li:Jxf6+ .bf6 17.1'!xe8+ Wi'xe8 18. W/b3 V9d7+ Arkell - Gordon, Torquay 2013.

15

•••

g6

Naturally, Black should not al­ low the enemy knight to occupy the fS-square. But not 15 . . . gS?, because of 16.li:JfS gxh4? 17.c!bxh6+-

16.hf6 c!bxf6 17.c!be5 mg7 18.Yfb3 153

Chapter 12 B) 6.ti'c2 White impedes the develop­ ment of the enemy bishop to the fS-square.

6

• • •

g6

Black resumes his positional threat.

It may look like White has tri­ umphed with the double attack against the fl and b7-squares, but Black has calculated precisely everything.

18 Yfd5 19.ti'xb7 .td6 20. gacl gac8 21. Yfb3 • • •

White would not achieve much with 2 1.Yfxa7 cS 2 2 .Yfa6 gas 23. \Wc4 cxd4 24.YfxdS tLixdS 2S.tlJc4 fuel+ 26.fuel hg3 27.hxg3 fua2 . There is just a few material left on the board. 28JM1 ga4 29.b3 gb4 30.gxd4. White has an extra pawn, but will be incapable of holding on to it. 30 . . . tLib6 31.g4 gxb3 32.tLixb6 gxb6=

21 ti'xb3 22.axb3 c5 23. tLit"3 gxel + 24.gxel cxd4 25. tLixd4 •••

White's doubled extra pawn is practically useless. In addi­ tion, Black's bishop will be stronger than any of White's knights in a fight on both sides of the board. 25 gds 26.gdl .tc7= Black prepares the transfer of his bish­ op to the a7-gl diagonal. . • •

1S4

7 .tg5 •

White would not achieve any­ thing with 7.!f4 !fS 8.ti'b3 (8.ti'cl tLibd7 9.h3, Radjabov - Al Sayed, Doha 2016, 9 . . . tLie4 ! ?=) 8 . . . ti'b6 9.tlJd2, Kharitonov - Tukmakov, Riga 1988, 9 ... tlJhS ! ? 10.!e3 tlJd7oo It is obviously bad for White to opt here for 7.e3, because his dark-squared bishop would re­ main restricted in his own camp. 7 . . ..tfS 8.!d3 hd3 9.Yfxd3 i.d6 10.0-0 0-0 ll.e4. Now, White's bishop will have the possibility to go to gS, or h6, but he ends up with an isolated pawn. 11 . . . dxe4 12.tLixe4 tLixe4 13 .Wxe4 ges 14. Wd3 tLid7 ts ..tgs Was 16.a3 ti'ds+ Bohm - Chekhov, Polanica Zdroj 1981. Black's pieces are very ac­ tive and the vulnerability of the

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. 11Jj3 11Jf6 4. 11J c3 e6 5.cd ed 6. 'i!! c2 g6 7. ig5 ie7 isolated d4-pawn may hurt White in the future.

7 ie7 • • •

Black has also tried in practice to fianchetto his bishop: 7 . . . i.g7 8.e3 MS 9.i.d3 hd3 10.'i!!xd3 0-0 11.0-0 11Jbd7 12.b4 i!e8 13.i!fc1 i!c8= Bayer - Knaak, Germany 1991.

Here, White can choose the calm move Bl) 8.e3 and the more active B2) 8.e4. 8 .i.h6 i.fS 9.'\Wcl 11Jbd7 10 .h3 '\Wb6 11.e3, Studnicka - Konopka, Decin 2 0 09, 11 . . . 11Je4 ! ? 12 .i.e2 �f8 13.�f4 id6= He would not achieve much with the move 8 .h3, with the idea to follow with g2-g4, because Black can simply remove his bish­ op from fS to e6. 8 . . . �fS 9.'\Wb3 '\Wb6 10 .g4 '\Wxb3 ll.axb3 i.e6 12 . .ih6 11Ja6= Van der Wiel - Jadoul, Brussels 1986. It is White who must play carefully in this end­ game, because he has isolated pawns on the b-file.

8 . .bf6. White exchanges his bishop with the idea to provoke Black's bishop to occupy the f6square from where it cannot im­ pede the pawn-advance b2-b4. 8 . . . .bf6

The move 9.e4 is not in the spir­ it of the position, because Black has the two-bishop advantage and the opening of the position would be in his favour. 9 . . . 0-0! 10.exdS cxdS 11.i.e2 11Jc6 12.'\Wd2 MS+ Khe­ gay - Shomoev, Nizhny Tagil 2014. 9.e3 �.fS 10.i.d3 hd3 11.'i!!xd3 11Jd7 12.0-0 (12 .b4 a6 13 .0-0 0-0, or 13.a4 0-0 14.0-0 11Jb6 see 12.0-0) 12 . . . 0-0 13.b4 a6 14. a4 11Jb6. Black's knight can go to c4 from this square. 15.i!abl (Af­ ter the straightforward move 15. bS, Black can create an outside passed pawn on the a-file with the line: 15 . . . cxbS ! 16.axbS aS+ Nei Van Scheltinga, Beverwijk 1966.) 15 ... i.e7. Black's bishop on f6 was restricted by the pawn on d4, so he transfered it to a more active position - the d6-square. 16.11Jd2 i!e8 17.i!fcl i.d6= Javakhishvili Korneev, Linares 2005. 155

Chapter 12 Bl) 8.e3 If White manages to develop his bishop on d3 he would have the edge, but it is Black's move now . . .

8 . . . U5 .

White has a choice now. He can play Bla) 11 .ih6, impeding his opponent's castling kingside, or castle immediately Blb) 11. •

0-0.

9 .id3 •

Black's bishop is very active on f5, so White should better ex­ change it. Or 9 .VHcl, Radjabov - Wang, Beijing 2 0 13, 9 . . . lll bd7 ! ? = Following 9.VHb3 VHb6 10.lll d 2 lll bd7 11.i.e2 h6 12.i.f4, Black can enter a favourable endgame. 12 . . . VHxb3 13.axb3 g 5 1 4 . .ig3 0 - 0 15. 0-0 ©g7 16.gfcl a6+ Graf - Lan­ da, Cappelle-la-Grande 1995. His superior pawn-structure provides him with a slight but stable edge.

9

• • •

.ix:d3 10.VHxd3 lll bd7!?

This is Black's most precise move. Now, after an exchange on f6, he will be able to capture with his knight and his bishop will not lose the control over the b4square. 156

About 11.hf6 lll xf6 12.0-0 0-0, or 11.h3 0-0 1 2 . 0 - 0 ges, or 12.i.f4 ge8 13 .0-0 lll b 6 - see var­ iation Blb. 11.gbl. White would not achieve much if he delays his cas­ tling. 11 . . . a5 12 . .ih6 (12.0-0 0-0 - see 11.0-0) 12 ... i.f8 13.i.xf8 ©xf8 . Black is not afraid of the loss of his castling rights. 14.0-0 ©g7 15.VHc2 , Andersson - Farago, Dortmund 1978. Here, it seems very good for him to transfer his knight to the d6-square : 15 . . . lll e 8 ! ? 16.gfel lll d 6= The move 11.h4 seems a bit too active. 11 . . . 0-0 (diagram) Following 12 . 0-0-0 ges 13. hf6 lll xf6 14.h5 lll xh5, White does not obtain sufficient com­ pensation for the pawn. 15.gh3 lll f6 16,gdhl, Williams - Stanke-

1.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3. liJj3 liJf6 4. liJ c3 e6 5.cd ed 6. Vf!c2 g6 7. i.gS i.e7

vicms, ICCF 2003, 16 . . . i.f8 ! ? Black prepares the transfer of his bishop to g7 where it would pro­ tect reliably his king. 17.liJeS i.g7 18.g4 gxeS ! It is now time for Black to sacrifice ! 19.dxeS liJxg4. He sacrifices the exchange and seizes the initiative. 2 0.'We2 liJxeS 21.gxh7 Wf6 2 2 .f4 liJc4+ 12 .liJeS liJxeS. Black wishes to reduce his opponent's attacking potential by exchanging pieces. 13.dxeS, Oral - Konopka, Czech Republic 2 0 0S, 13 . . . liJg4 ! ? Black forces the enemy queen to protect the pawn on eS. 14.Wd4 hS 1S.!f4 f6 16.e6 'Wc8 17.f3 liJeS 18 .heS fxeS 19 .'WxeS gfs 2 0 .'Wd4 'Wxe6+ He has succeeded in trading his f­ pawn for White's e-pawn. Later, in a fight on both sides of the board, Black's long-range bishop with be obviously stronger than White's knight.

Bla) 11 . .th6 liJg4 Black wishes to oust the ene­ my bishop and to castle.

12 . .tf4 With the move 12 .!g7, White can deprive his opponent of his

castling rights, but later Black may castle queenside, while White will miss badly his power­ ful dark-squared bishop. 12 . . . gg8 13.i.eS liJgxeS 14.liJxeS liJxeS lS. dxeS 'Wc7 16.Wd4, Arkell - Demp­ sey, Hastings 199S, 16 . . . 0-0-0 ! ? Black would not mind the ex­ change of his rook pawn for White's central pawn. 17.Wxa7 WxeS 18.0-0 d4 19.exd4 Wxd4 20 .'Wa8+ ©c7 21.'WaS+ ©b8 22. gadl Wb4 23.'WeS+ i.d6 24.Wf6 'Wf4 2S.Wxf4 i.xf4+ Black's bishop will be more powerful than the enemy knight in this endgame.

12 . . . 0-0

13.h3 Or 13.0-0 ge8 14.a3 (14.h3 liJgf6, or 14.gabl as 1S.a3 liJgf6 16.h3 a4 - see 13.h3) 14 . . . as lS. 'Wc2 liJb6 16.b3 i.d6 17.hd6 'Wxd6 18.h3 liJf6 19.liJeS liJc8 20.Wb2 liJd7 2 1.liJd3, Seirawan - Khalif­ man, Bali 2000, 21.. .'Wf6 ! ? = , fol­ lowed by liJd6.

13 . . . tll gf6 14.0-0 1S7

Chapter 12 14.g4 ge8 1s.@fl .if8 16.@g2 llie4= Antoshin - Spassky, Sochi 1967. White's king will not be so reli­ ably placed on the queenside. 14.0-0-0 ? ! bS lS.llieS llixeS 16. ixeS llid� Braun - Halkias, Peri­ steri 2010.

14 . . . ges

16.a3 a4= Houska - Koneru, Antakya 2 0 1 0 ; 16.gfcl .if8 17.llid2 lli b 6 1 8 . �c2 ge6= Gyimesi - Dreev, Vi­ enna 1996. 16.�c2 llib6 17.llieS (17.llid2 llihS 18 ..ih2 .id6 19 ..b:d6 �xd6= Ivkov - Hemasian, Siegen 1970) 17...llihS 18 ..ih2 .id6 19.gbel, Vol­ kov - Pashikian, Abu Dhabi 2 0 14. Here, Black had to remove imme­ diately his knight from the edge of the board, obtaining a quite ac­ ceptable position 19 . . . llig7! ? =

15.llie5 15

• • •

�b6

1S.�c2 aS 16.a3 �b6= Seira­ wan - Norowitz, Vancouver 2012. lS.gfcl llib6 16.�c2 .id6 17. ixd6 �xd6 18.llieS �e7 19.llid3 llie4 20 .llieS, Gareev - Bruzon Batista, Las Vegas 2 0 14, 20 . . . llid6 ! ? = 1 S . .ih2 , Nepomniashchy - Ya­ kovich, St Petersburg 1994, lS . . . llib6 ! ? = 1s.gabl as (diagram) 16.�e2 llif8 17.a3 .id6= Polu­ gaevsky - Tal, Leningrad 1962 . 1S8

Black's plan is very simple in similar positions. He must place immediately one of his knights on b6 and to transfer his other knight to d6, via e8, or e4. After that

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. l:i:ij3 l:i:if6 4. l:i:i c3 e6 5.cd ed 6. Wic2 g6 7. igS ie7 White can hardly find any active plan, because the pawn-minority attack (b2-b4) would weaken hor­ ribly the c4-square.

16 .igS l:i:ie4 17 .ixe7 Wffxe7 18.Wic2 l:i:id6! 19.l:i:ia4 l:i:ibc4 20. l:i:ixc4 l:i:ixc4 21.�cS �d6+ •

•

39.ti'eS ti'c8 40.ti'f4 gf8 41. Vies gf5 0-1

Blb) 11.0-0 0-0

12.gabl This position was reached in the famous game Bobotsov T.Petrosian, Lugano 1968. White has no active plan at all. Black can improve patiently his posi­ tion on the kingside preparing an attack against the enemy king there. 22.gacl Wigs 23.ti'dl hS

24.@hl ge7 2S.�d3 �e4 26. �cs �d6 27.�d3 ti'f5 28.�es f6 29.�t'3 gg7. Black is perfectly ready to begin a pawn-offensive with g6-g5-g4. 30.�h2 ges 31. @gl �e4 32.ti't'3 ti'e6. Naturally, he should be reluctant to ex­ change the queens. 33.gfdl gS!+ Black sacrifices a pawn and be­ gins a decisive attack. 34. ti'xhS

White is preparing the pawn­ minority attack. He can prepare the pawn-ad­ vance b2-b4 also with the move 12 .a3, but even then after 12 . . . ge8 ! ? , Black equalises easily. 13.b4 a6 14.Wic2 �b6 15 . .ixf6 .ixf6= Polugaevsky - Karpov, Mar del Plata 1982. 12 . .ih6 ge8 13.h3 a5= Gheor­ ghiu - Ivkov, Petropolis 1973.

f5 3S.ge1 g4 36.hxg4 fxg4 37.t'3? This was not White's best

12 .gfel. The central strategy would not promise much to White here. 12 . . . l:i:ie4 13 . .if4, Iniyan Golikov, Khanty-Mansiysk 2016 and here, Black could have tried to seize the initiative with the line: 13 . . . gS ! ? 14 . .ig3 fSt

defence, but his position was already tremendously difficult anyway. 37 gxt'3 38.�xt'3 gb7

12.gadl ge8 13.gfel l:i:ie4 14. .ixe7 Wffxe7 15.l:i:id2 fS 16.f3, Gonda

• • •

159

Chapter 12 - Erdos, Hungary 2008, 16 . . . llJgS ! ? = White's e3-pawn i s weak and the pawn-advance e3-e4 would lead to further exchanges. 12 .'%!fc2 ge8 13.gabl llJe4. Black would not mind furth er s i m ­ plifications ( 1 3 . . . a S - s e e 1 2 . gabl). 14.llJxe4 (White should possibly choose here the modest line: 14.he7 '%!fxe7= Kuzmin Vladimirov, Dubai 2002.) 14 . . . dxe4 1S.he7 '%!fxe7 16.llJd2 cS ! ? 17.gbcl. After a n exchange o n cS, Black's knight will occupy quickly the d3-square. 17 . . . cxd4 18.exd4 llJf6 19.gfel gad8+ Gyimesi Khalifman, Ulcinj 1998. Black has a superior pawn-structure and more harmoniously deployed pieces. 12.ixf6. This exchange is rea­ sonable only when Black is forced to capture on f6 with his bishop, so that White can play b2-b4 im­ mediately. 12 . . . llJxf6 13 .gabl as 14.gfcl ge8 = Kurajica - Ribli, Surakarta 1982. 12 .h3. White is preparing a square for his bishop. 12 . . . ge8 13 . .if4. There has arisen a posi­ tion like in variation Bla, but without a tempo for White. This circumstance does not influence the evaluation of the position as approximately equal. 13 . . . llJb6 14. gacl (14.gabl, Harikrishna - Bar­ sov, Hastings 2 003, 14 . . . llJc4 ! ? = ) 1 4 . . . llJc4. Black prepares the transfer of his bishop to the d6160

square. 1S.b3 llJd6 16.llJeS aS= Ciucurel - Begliy, ICCF 2 0 14. 12.llJd2. White takes the e4 and c4-squares under control. 12 . . . ge8 13.gael (13 .gabl as - see 12.gabl ; 13.gfel llJe4 14 ..ixe7 Wxe7 1S.f3 ttJxd2 16.Wxd2, Bu Xiangzhi - Bhat, Seattle 2001, 16 . . .fS = , preventing e3-e4.) 13 . . . llJf8 . Black prepares the transfer of his knight to e6. l4.ge2 llJe6 1S.hf6 .ixf6. His minor pieces exert powerful pressure against White's d4-pawn and thus de­ prive him of an active play con­ nected with the pawn-advance e3-e4. 16.b4. This move looks rather inconsistent. White had at first centralised his rook on al and then began active actions on the queenside. 16 ... aS 17.bxaS gxaS 18.llJb3 ga3+ Hulak - Be­ liavsky, Murska Sobota 2 0 07. White's weak a2-pawn needs per­ manent protection.

12

. . .

as

Black impedes the pawn-ad­ vance b2-b4.

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. 11Jj3 11Jf6 4. 11J c3 e6 5.cd ed 6. �c2 g6 7. ig5 i.e7 13.a3 13.11Jd2 ge8 14.f3 (14.gfcl i.d6 - see 13.gfcl) 14 . . . 11Jf8oo Jakab Todorovic, Budapest 2003. 13.h3 ge8 14.i.f4 (14.Wfc2 11Je4 - see 13.Wfc2) 14 . . . i.f8 15.Wfc2 �b6= Burmakin - Dreev, St Pe­ tersburg 1999. 13.gfcl ge8 14.11Jd2 (14.a3 11Je4 - see 13.a3 ; 14.�c2 11Jb6 - see 13.Wfc2) 14 . . . id6. Black is prepar­ ing �b8 and 11Jh5. 15.11Jfl Wfb8 16.f3 11Jh5oo His prospects are not worse and White's too active move l 7.g4? ! led only to the weak­ ening of his kingside. 17 . . . 11Jg7+ Tangborn - Bhat, ICC 2 0 07. 13.Wfc2 ge8

king does not seem to be so safe in this middle game. In addition, the attacking potential of Black's tan­ dem queen + knight is well known . . . 14.11Jd2 11Jf8 ! ? = Bunzmann Klovans, Schwerin 1996. 14.gfcl 11Jb6 15.11Je5 11Jfd7. Simplifying of the position is Black's simplest road to equality. 16.i.xe7 �xe7 17.11Jd3 (Following 17.11Jxd7 �xd7 18.11Ja4, Black can refrain from exchanging the last couple of minor pieces and trans­ fer his knight to the d6-square. 18 . . . 11Jc4 19.�dl �e7 2 0 .b3 11Jd6 21.l1Jc5 hS+ Koneru - Nielsen, Es­ bjerg 2 0 03. The arising position resembles very much a game, we have already analysed in variation Bla - Bobotsov - T.Petrosian.) 17 ... 11Jc4= Spassky - Hort, Co­ logne 1989.

13 . . . ges

About 14.a3 11Je4, or 14 . .ixf6 11Jxf6 15.a3 i.d6 - see 13.a3. The line: 14.h3 11Je4 15.if4 i.d6 16.11Jxe4 leads to complica­ tions which turn out to be in fa­ vour of Black. 16 . . .dxe4 17.hd6 exf3 18 .gxf3 Wff6 19.if4 g5. He re­ gains his pawn. 2 0.i.g3 Wfxf3 2 1 . gfe1 11Jf6 2 2 .Wfe2 �f5+ Meenakshi - Makka, Athens 2006. White's

14.�c2 14.gfcl 11Je4 15.if4 id6 16. i.xd6 11Jxd6= Tomaszewski Flear, Buende 1985. 161

Chapter 12 14 ..txf6 llJxf6 15.'\Wc2 i.d6 16. h3 (16.b4, Chuprov - Shomoev, Khanty-Mansiysk 2010, 16 . . . bS ! ?+; 16.llJe2 '\We7= Vescovi Mekhitarian, Americana 2 010) 16 ... '\We7= Jakovenko - Gelfand, Odessa 2 0 09. Black has no prob­ lems at all, which is by the way typical for the Carlsbad pawn­ structure when he has managed to exchange his passive light­ squared bishop.

with the weakening of his pawn­ structure in order to prevent the appearance of Black's knight to the d3-outpost. 18.l:!bcl (18.l:!fel, Vera Gonzalez Quevedo - Maro­ vic Fernandez, Havana 1999, 18 . . . bS ! ? 19.l:!bcl l:!ac8= ) 18 . . . cxd4 1 9 . exd4, Nikolic - Lagumina, Lu­ gano 1989, 19 ... llJf6!?= Now White must play very precisely not to end up in an inferior position. The vulnerability of his isolated d4pawn may hurt him in the future.

14 . . . lll e4 15 .ixe7 •

16 About 15.llJxe4 dxe4 16.he7 '\Wxe7 - see 15.i.xe7.

15

• • •

. . •

lll d6

This is the ideal square for Black's knight in this variation.

Wxe7

17.bxa5 16.b4 There arises a complicated ma­ noeuvring battle after 16.l:Ucl llJd6 17.llJe2. White prepares the trans­ fer of his knight to the d3-square. 17 . . . ©g7 18.llJf4 llJf8 19.llJd3 llJe6= Ivanchuk - Girl, Leon 2 013. 16.llJxe4 dxe4 17.llJd2 cS ! ? Af­ ter this move, White must comply 162

17.Wb3? axb4 18.Wxb4, Sta­ menkovic - Korneev, Forni di So­ pra 2011, 18 . . . bS ! ?+ 17.b5 llJc4 18.bxc6 bxc6. White has succeeded in creating a weak­ ness on c6 for his opponent, but thanks to the powerful placement of his knight on d6, Black manag­ es to get rid of it by advancing c6-c5. 19.l:!al llJdb6 20.llJa4 llJxa4

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. liJ.f3 liJf6 4. liJ c3 e6 5.cd ed 6. Wic2 g6 7. .igS ie7 2 1.Wxa4 i'fac8 2 2 .i''i:fc l cS= Gar­ darsson - Ruimy, ICCF 2008.

17 gxa5 18.a4 ga6 19.liJel • • •

White prepares the transfer of his knight to d3. Black does not need to waste time and can send his own knight to the c4-square. 19.�fel liJb6= Galliamova A.Petrosian, Lvov 199S.

White wishes to exploit his lead in development, but his pawn-break in the centre would lead to the appearance of an iso­ lated pawn in his position.

8

• • .

dxe4 9 .ixf6 •

Or 9.liJxe4 liJxe4 10.Wxe4 .ie6 11.ih6, Toth - Nagy, Budapest 2 0 04, 11 . . . liJd7 ! ?+

9

• • •

.ixf6 10.Wxe4+

It would not be so energetic for White to play here 10.liJxe4 .ifs+ Baron Rodriguez - Rodriguez Guerrero, Mataro 2004.

10

• • •

ti'e7

19 ttib6 20.ttid3 liJbc4 21. gb4, Inkiov - Abramovic, Bor 1983, 21 ©g7!?oo The powerful • • •

•••

placement of Black's knight on c4 provides him with at least equal prospects.

B2) 8.e4 11 .ic4 •

White's pieces have been de­ ployed very actively, but his queen is pinned. After its exchange, if Black manages to complete the development of his pieces, he will succeed in exploiting the vulner­ ability of the d4-pawn. About ll.ti'xe7+ liixe7 12 . .ic4 .ifs - see 11.ic4. 163

Chapter 12 11

• • •

.lfS

Black develops his bishop with tempo.

12.'f«xe7+ 12 .\We3 llid7 13.0-0 0-0+ Orzech - Parramon Guillaumet, Balaguer 2009.

12

• • •

©xe7

13.0-0-0 Besides this move, White has tried in practice: 13.h3 hS. Black should better not allow g2-g4. 14.0-0 gd8. He has taken measures against the possible check on el. 1S.gfe1 + ©f8 16.gadl (After 16.llie4, Black can simply exchange the enemy knight. 16 . . . .ixe4 17.gxe4 llid7 18.gf4 ©g7oo Johansen - Sandler, Mel­ bourne 1998. White must play ac­ curately in this endgame. ) 16 . . . llid7 17.llie4 .ixe4. This move is necessary; otherwise, Black can­ not neutralise his opponent's ini­ tiative. 18.gxe4 llib6 19 ..ib3 llidS. This black knight, placed in the 164

centre, will impede the enemy bishop on b3 to exert pressure against the f7-square. 2 0 .llieS ©g7 21.g3, Grigore - Dumitrache, Bucharest 1992, 2 1 . . .aS ! ?oo 13.0-0. Now, just like after 0-0-0, White plans to give a check from the el-square. Still, his queen's rook will occupy a less active position. 13 . . . gd8 14.gfel+ ©f8 1S.llie4, Beim - Portisch, Frankfurt 1998 (1S.h3 hS, or lS. gadl llid7 16.h3 hS - see 13.h3) 1S ... .ixd4 ! ? Black exploits the in­ sufficient protection of the pawn on d4 and can simply capture it. Naturally, White still maintains the initiative, but his compensa­ tion for the sacrificed pawn is insufficient. 16.llifgS f6 17.llif7 gd7 18.llied6 llia6 19.gadl .ixb2. White's pieces seem very active, but Black has already two extra pawns. White's attempt to restore the material balance would lead to numerous exchanges. 2 0 .llixfS gxdl 21.gxdl gxfS 2 2 .llid8 llicS 23 .llie6+ llixe6 24.he6 bS 2S. .ixfS cs 26 . .ixh7 i.d4 27.©fl as+ Now, thanks to the powerful posi­ tion of his bishop and the far-ad­ vanced queenside pawns, Black's prospects seem preferable.

13

• . •

�d7 14.h3

It is obviously worse for White to play here 14.dS ? ! Sanikidze M.Gurevich, Metz 2012, since fol­ lowing 14 . . . ghc8 ! ? 1S.d6+ ©f8+, Black manages to avoid the dis-

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. CiJj3 CiJf6 4. CiJ c3 e6 5.cd ed 6. V!ic2 g6 7. .ig5 .ie7 coordination of his rooks and White's pawn, having penetrated to the d6-square, is much rather a liability than a real danger.

14 . . . c!bb6

(16.l'!hgl h4+ Sulava - Brkic, Marija Bistrica 2011; it is better for White to play here 16.l'!del + ©fS - see 15.l'!del.) 16 . . . ©fS. With a rook on dl White cannot play CiJe5, because of the enemy bish­ op-check on g5. 17 . .ic2 . White de­ prives his opponent of the two­ bishop advantage, but with the exchange of every piece the vul­ nerability of his isolated d4 pawn becomes more and more obvious. 17 . . ..ixc2 18.©xc2 ©g7 19.CiJe4 CiJd5+ Capuano - Zawadka, ICCF 2 0 14.

15 ©f8 16 .lb3 h5 17.c!be5 .lgs+ 1s.©d1 gds 19.c!bxf7 gxd4+. Here, Black could have . • •

15.gdel+

•

While Black's rook remains on hS, it is important for White to give a check on the e-file, so that Black's king, after its retreat to the f8-square, would impede the coordination of his major pieces.

.ld3+ 21.©:f3 gf4+ 22.©e3 gxf7+ 23.©xd3 gd7+ 24.©c2 ©g7= Deforel - Bericat, ICCF

15 ..ib3 h5 16.l'!hel + The check with this rook looks less precise.

2016. The tactical complications are over and the position is just dead simple and equal.

even tried to obtain an advantage if his rook on hS had not been so horribly misplaced. 20.©e2

165

Part 4 1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . lti:f3 ltif6 4.ltic3 e6 5.e3

ed by such strong players as V.Anand, L.Aronian, M .Carlsen, P.Elianov, G. Kasparov, A.Mo­ rozevich, A.Tomashevsky, V.To­ palov . . .

The fourth part of our book will be devoted to the analysis of one of the two main lines for White on move five - 5.e3. As an opening weapon for Black we will not choose the Meran variation (5 . . . lll bd7), but 5 . . . a6 ! ? The point is that after 5 . . . lll b d7, there has been played an enormous amount of games and there has been amassed so much theory both in the Meran varia­ tion (6.i.d3), as well as in the An­ ti-Meran set-ups (6.�c2), so that not every reader will manage to find his way in these intricacies. The move 5 . . . a6 has not been so well studied, but has been test-

166

I n Chapter 1 3 we will analyse the moves 6.h3, 6.i.d2 and 6.a3 as well as some other possibilities for White. The Chapters 14-15 will be devoted to the moves with White's bishop: 6.i.e2 (Chapter 14) and 6.i.d3 (Chapter 15) . The occupation of space (6.c5) will be dealt with in Chapter 16. Finally, in Chapters 17-18, we will analyse White's popular moves 6.b3 and 6.�c2.

Chapter 13

1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . lLJf.J lLJf6 4.lLJc3 e6 5.e3 a6

6.lL!eS cS 7.cxdS (7.a4 id6 see 6.a4) 7 . . . exdS 8 . .ie2 (8 .id3 .id6 9.0-0 0-0 10 .h3, Gagunash­ vili - Kobalia, Istanbul 2003, 10 . . . bS ! ?oo Black begins immediate ac­ tive actions on the queenside.) 8 . . . .id6 9.0-0 0 - 0

Black prepares dxc4, followed by b7-bS and contrary to the Meran variation, does not deter­ mine yet the placement of his knight on b8. It can often go to a more active position (the c6square), even after a loss of a tem­ po, following c6-cS. In this chapter we will analyse White's relatively seldom played moves: A) 6.h3, B) 6 . .id2 and

C) 6.a3. 6.�b3. This move does not seem logical. Why should White protect once again his c4-pawn, if it is defended by his bishop on fl? 6 . . . dxc4 7.hc4 bS 8 . .ie2 c5 9.dxcS hes 10.0-0 0-0= Dimakiling Alavkin, Moscow 2011.

10.b3, Moiseenko - Bojkov, Plovdiv 2008, 10 . . . �e8 ! ? = 10.f4. The basic defect o f the plan with lL!eS and f2-f4 is that White weakens the e4-square. 10 . . . lL!c6 11.@hl cxd4 12.exd4 \Wb6= Moiseenko - Svane, Hel­ singor 2 0 14. 10 . .if3 .ie6. Black parries eas­ ily the threats against his dS-pawn. ll.b3 cxd4 12.exd4 \Wc7. White's knight is very active at the centre of the board and Black must exert pressure against it. 13 ..ib2 lL!bd7!?= 167

Chapter 13 6.a4. White impedes his oppo­ nent's counterplay, connected with b7-b5, but weakens the b4square. 6 . . . c5. Black prepares lDc6. The loss of a tempo is not so important here, because White's "extra" move a2-a4 does not seem so useful either. 7.cxd5 (7.ie2 dxc4, or 7.id3 dxc4 8.hc4 lDc6 - see Chapter 14; 7.lDe5, Lugovoi Grigoriants, Krasnoyarsk 2 0 03, 7 . . . .id6 ! ? 8.cxd5 exd5 9.g3 ie6=) 7 ... exd5

Grande 2002) 11 . . . 0-0 12.lDxc6 bxc6 13.Wic2 id6oo Siebrecht Drozdovskij , Dresden 2 0 07. You can see once again the negative consequences of the move a2-a4. White does not have the standard manoeuvre for similar positions lDa4-c5, because of that.

A) 6.h3 White is waiting. He wishes to capture with his bishop without the loss of a tempo after Black takes on c4. Still, the move h2-h3 does not seem to be so useful.

6

8.lDe5 lDc6 9 . .ie2 id6 10.lDxc6 bxc6 11.0-0 0-0= Purnama Nguyen, Jakarta 2 015. Black's pawns look a bit weak, but the po­ sition is approximately equal, be­ cause his pieces are very active and White's queenside has been weakened by the pawn-advance a2-a4. 8.ie2 lDc6 9.0-0 .id6 10.dxc5 (10.b3 cxd4 11.lDxd4 Wffc7 12.lDf3 ie6 13.ia3 ha3 14.gxa3 0-0= Grivas - Giorgadze, Ankara 1995. Here, just like in our previous notes, White's queenside has been compromised after a2-a4.) 10 . . . .ixc5 11.lDd4 (11.b3 0 - 0 12 .i.a3 ha3 13.gxa3 ie6 14.Wffa l Wffe 7= Neverov - Gormally, Cappelle-la168

• • .

lll b d7! ?

This is an interesting decision. Black transfers into Meran set­ ups in which his move a7-a6 will be more useful than his oppo­ nent's move h2-h3.

7.Wffc 2 White plays in the spirit of the Anti-Meran. The move 7.a4 weakens the b4-square and Black can exploit this immediately. 7 . . . ib4 8.id2 0-0 9.ie2, Ehlvest - Malakhov, Jurmala 2 0 15, 9 . . . a5 ! ? =

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. Ci:ij3 Ci:if6 4. Ci:ic3 e6 5.e3 a6 7.b3 ib4 8 .i.d2 0-0 9.i.e2 i.d6. We will analyse similar posi­ tions in Chapter 17, but there White does not lose time for the unnecessary move h2-h3. 10.0-0 eS 11.dxeS Ci:ixeS 12.cxdS cxdS= Giffard - Kurmann, France 2 0 07. White's attempt to occupy space on the queenside with 7.cS frees Black's hands for counter­ play in the centre. 7 . . . g6 8.i.d3 i.g7 9.0-0 o-o 10 .b4 ge8 ll.i.b2 eS 12.Ci:ixeS Ci:ixeS 13.dxeS gxeS. He does not need to be afraid of White's possible knight-sorties. 14.Ci:ia4 ge8 1S.i.d4 Ci:ie4 16.he4 gxe4= Stocek - Cerveny, Pardu­ bice 2 0 07. 7.a3. White makes too many moves with his rook-pawns. 7 . . . .id6. Now, h e has n o more wait­ ing moves and must clarify the position. 8.cS. This is an impor­ tant decision. White occupies space on the queenside, but with his bishop on the h2-b8 diagonal Black will accomplish easily the thematic pawn-advance e6-eS. (White would not achieve much with 8 . .id3 dxc4 9.hc4 cS 10. dxcS hcS 11.0-0 bS. Black pre­ pares the development of his bishop on b7 with tempo. He has no problems whatsoever. 12 . .ie2 ib7 13 .b4 .ie7 14.i.b2 0-0= Sto­ cek - Laznicka, Czechia 2012.) 8 . . . ic7 9.b4 eSoo Naumkin - Ko­ balia, Moscow 2008.

7 . . .id6 .

8.g4 White is fighting for the initia­ tive on the kingside. 8.cS .ic7 9.i.d3, Kozul - Gla­ vas, Bihac 1999, 9 . . . eS= 8.b3. This fianchetto of White's bishop seems to be too slow. 8 . . . eS 9 . .ib2 e4. Black occu­ pies space. 10.Ci:id2 0-0 ll.g4 h6 12 . .ie2 ge8 13.0-0-0 bS 14.cS . Now, Black cannot open the b­ file, but on the other hand, he does not need to worry about the protection of the dS-square. (Fol­ lowing 14.gdgl, Black must take care about the possibility g4-gS. 14 . . . Ci:ih7 lS.©bl bxc4. He opens the b-file for his rook. 16.bxc4 gb8 17.©al i.b4 18.cxdS .ixc3 19. §'xc3 cxdS 20 ..ia3 Ci:ib6 21.gbl .id7= Petersons - Schoch, ICCF 2 0 1S . Black's king is safer than its counterpart.) 14 . . . .ic7 lS.gdgl Ci:ih7 16.h4 Ci:idf8. He is preparing f7-fS. 17.Ci:idl fS 18.gS. White sac­ rifices a pawn for the initiative. 18 . . . hxgS 19.hxgS Ci:ixgS 20 .f4 Ci:igh7oo Grabliauskas - Pezzica, ICCF 2014. White has managed to 169

Chapter 13 open the h and g-files, but Black has an extra pawn. In addition, he has more space too.

8 . . . h6 Black prevents g4-gS.

hc4 bS 13 . .ie2 c5 14.dxeS lll xeS lS.0-0-0, Berczes - Baramidze, Budapest 2010, 1S . . . b4! ?oo) 11 . . . bS 12 . .ie2 cS 13.h4 (13.dxcS lll xcS+ Sakhabeev - Alderisio, ICCF 2012) 13 . . . b4. Black ousts the en­ emy knight to the edge of the board. 14.lll a 4, Rodshtein - Droz­ dovskij, Cappelle-la-Grande 2007, 14 . . . cxd4 ! ?oo

9 . . . J.e7!?

9.c5 If White wishes to occupy space on the queenside, he should better do this before Black has played b7-bS. About 9.b3 es 10 . .ib2 e4 11. lll d 2 0-0 - see 8.b3 . 9 . .id2 bS 10 .cS .ic7 11 . .id3 aSoo Richardt - Eldridge, ICCF 2 013. 9.:!!g l Wie7. Black's plans in­ clude the exchange on c4, fol­ lowed by b7-bS, c6-cS, .ib7. He does not need to be in a hurry to castle kingside, because after g4gS, his king may come under an attack. 10 . .id2 (10 .h4 dxc4 11. hc4 bS 12 ..ie2 cS 13 .gS hxgS 14. hxgS lll d S= Valli - Cecchelli, ICCF 2009) 10 ... dxc4 ll ..ixc4 (11.e4 Black parries easily his opponent's threat to win a piece. 11 . . . eS 12. 170

The bishop usually retreats to c7, or b8 in similar positions. Still, Black's further plans include not e6-eS, but b7-b6. In these lines, the bishop will be better placed on the a3-f8 diagonal, controlling the important cS and b4-squares.

10.J.d2 Or 10.:!! g l b6 11.cxb6, Ding Vitiugov, Sochi 2009 and here, Black does not need to lose time to capture the pawn, but can play immediately 11 . . . cS ! ?oo

10 . . . b6 11.cxb6, Adhiban Moscow 2012, 11 . . . ti'xb6 ! ? 12.gS (Following 12.lll a4 Ragger,

l.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3. l:iJ.f3 l:iJf6 4. l:iJc3 e6 5.e3 a6 ffc7 13Jkl i.b7=, Black can de­ fend easily his weakness on c6, while White can hardly find a safe haven for his king.) 12 . . . l:iJe4. Black sacrifices a pawn for the initiative. 13.c!Oxe4 dxe4 14. ffxe4 .ib7 15 . .ig2 (15.gxh6? ! cS 16.hxg7 gg8t) 15 . . . cs 16.ffg4 hxg5= , restoring the material balance.

V!!e7 10.a3 0-0= Nakamura - Fer­ nandez, Orlando 2011.

7 . . . exd5

B) 6 . .id2 White wishes to develop quickly his queenside pieces, but with a bishop on d2, his queen would not control the important d4-square.

6 . . . c5

8 . .ie2 White's bishop will be less ac­ tive on this square than on d3, but on the other hand Black would not be able to win a tempo with the move c5-c4.

7.gcl t:fJc6 8.cxdS exdS - see 7.cxdS.

8.dxcS. White prefers to play against an isolated pawn. 8 . . . i.xcS 9 .ffa4+. He wishes to exploit Black's delay with castling. (After White's calmer line: 9 .gcl t:fJc6 10.l:iJa4 i.d6 11.i.c3 0-0 12 .i.e2 t:fJe4=, Black's centralised knight is obviously more powerful than White's knight on a4, Nikolic Girl, Hilversum 2009. 9.g3 t:fJc6 - see 8.g3.) 9 . . . t:fJc6 10 .i.bS i.d7 ll.i.xc6 i.xc6 12.V!!f4 0-0 13 .0-0, Vovk - Rutkowski, Mrzezyno 2011, 13 ... t:fJe4 ! ? 14.gfdl f5oo Black's bishop-pair and his powerful knight in the centre compensate the weakness of his dS-pawn.

7.ffc2 t:fJc6 8.dxcS i.xcS 9.gdl

8.g3 . White prepares the fian-

Black is not bothered by the loss of the tempo and is preparing t:fJc6. His plan is to create pressure against the enemy centre as quickly as possible.

7.cxd5

171

Chapter 13 chetto of his bishop. 8 . . . ll:lc6 9. dxcS (9.i.g2 i.g4 10.0-0 cxd4 11. exd4 i.e7= Hebden - Haslinger, Great Yarmouth 2 007) 9 . . . ixcS 10.i.g2 0-0 11.0-0 i.g4. There has arisen a typical position with an isolated queen's pawn in which Black's active pieces compensate the slight weakness of his dS­ pawn. 12 .h3, S.Atalik - M.Gure­ vich, Istanbul 2 0 03, 12 . . . ifS ! ? 13.ll:le2 ll:le4 14Jkl 'i;1fd7 1S.g4 i.e6oo 8.i.d3 ll:lc6 9 .ll:leS (After the rather slow move 9 .h3, Gajewski - Barnaure, Jerusalem 2 0 1S, Black can try to occupy additional space on the queenside, instead of exerting pressure against the d4pawn: 9 . . . c4 ! ? 10 .i.c2 bSoo) 9 . . . cxd4 10.ll:lxc6 bxc6 ll.exd4 i.d6 12.0-0 0-0 13.i.gS, Markus - M. Gurevich, Khanty-Mansiysk 200S, 13 .. .!�bB ! ? 14.ll:la4 h6 lS. i.h4 i.f4. He is preventing the move �cl. 16.a3 as 17.�el 'i;1fd6 18.i.g3 i.g4 19.'i;1fc2 ll:lhS= We have already seen in this variation that Black's active pieces compensate the vul­ nerability of his c6-pawn.

After 9.i.d3, Morozevich Malakhov, Moscow 2 013, Black can occupy advantageously addi­ tional space on the queenside with the move 9 . . . c4 ! ?oo Following 9.ll:leS cxd4 1 0 .ll:lxc6 bxc6 11.exd4 i.d6= , the slight weakness of Black's c6-pawn is practically irrelevant, Vitiugov Ni Hua, Ningbo 2010. 9 .i.e2 , Shalimov - M.Gure­ vich, Istanbul 2006, 9 . . . cxd4 ! ? 10. ll:lxd4 i.d6 ll.ll:lxc6 bxc6 12.ll:la4. White wishes to exploit the weak­ ness of the enemy c6-pawn, but Black can deploy his knight at the middle of the board. 12 . . . ll:le4 13. i.f3 (It would be too dangerous for White to accept the pawn­ sacrifice : 13.�xc6? ! 'i;1fh4t) 13 . . . ll:lxd2 . Black exchanges his active knight, but obtains the two-bishop advantage. 14.'i;1lxd2 as 1S.a3 i.d7 16.ll:lcS i.c8 17.ll:ld3 i.d7 18.0-0 0-0= His powerful bishop-pair compensates the slight vulnera­ bility of Black's pawn-structure.

8

• • •

c!Oc6

8.�cl ll:lc6

9.0-0 172

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. &iJ.f3 &iJf6 4. &iJc3 e6 5.e3 a6 9 .&iJeS cxd4 10.exd4 id6 11. &iJxc6 bxc6 12 .i.g5 �b8 13 .�d2 h6 14.i.h4 0-0 15.�cl �e8= Bareev ­ Malakhov, Sochi 2006.

9 ... .te6 Black is not in a hurry to de­ velop his bishop to d6 in order not to lose a tempo after White cap­ tures dxc5.

Bischoff - M.Gurevich, Germany 2 0 0 2 . Black has completed the development of his pieces. It is in­ conceivable how White can de­ velop his initiative later. The ex­ change on e6, after fxe6, would lead to the opening of the f-file and the fortification of the pawn on d5.

lOJkl C) 6.a3 l0bd7 10.&iJeS cxd4 ll.exd4 .ld6 12. &iJxc6 bxc6 13 . .lgS �b8 . Black re­ moves his queen from the pin. 13 . . . 14.h3 &iJe4 15.&iJxe4 dxe4 16.V:Va4 i.d5. His bishop cements perlectly his position on this square. 17 . .lc4 0-0= Jussupow M .Gurevich, Bastia 2 004.

10

• • .

This transfer to the Meran set­ ups seems logical, because the move a6 seems more useful than White's move a3.

�k8

7 .td3 •

7.c5 g6 - see Chapter 16. 7.i.e2 dxc4 8.i.xc4 - see 7. i.d3. White has no more waiting moves, so he must exchange on c5. 11.dxc5 hc5 12. l0a4 .ta7 13.V:Vb3 ti'e7. Black complies with the penetration of the enemy knight to the b6-square, but that is practically useless for White.

14.l0b6 gbs 15. l0g5 0-0oo

7.h3 i.d6 - see 6.h3. 7.b3 i.d6 8.ib2 0-0 9.ie2 b6 ! ? With this move Black not only prepares the development of his bishop on b7, but also c6-c5. 10.0-0 i.b7 11.V:Vc2 c5 12.dxcS 173

Chapter 13 bxcS= Bilobrk - Kovacevic, Sibe­ nik 2009. The move 7.cxdS is not good for White, because after 7 . . . exdS, Black's rook will have the semi­ open e-file in the middle game and his bishop will gain access to the h3-c8 diagonal. 8 . .id3 .id6 9 . 0-0 0-0= Karaklajic - Minev, Sambor 1966. 7.W/c2 .id6 8.e4. This move leads to simplifications. (8 .b4 es - see 7.b4) 8 . . . dxe4 9 .tlJxe4 tlJxe4 10.Wfxe4 cS 11 . .igS, Grigoryan Wells, Aix les Bains 2011 (The po­ sition might seem absolutely equal, but White must play care­ fully, because after 11 . .id3 cxd4 12 .b4 tlJf6 13.Wfxd4, Black can ex­ ploit his opponent's delay of cas­ tling and accomplish a dangerous break in the centre with 13 . . . eS ! , seizing completely the initiative. 14.W/e3 e4+ Kotsur - Kvon, Al Ain 2012.) 11 . . . W/aS+ ! ? 12 . .id2 Wc7= 7.b4. White occupies space on the queenside, but after 7 . . . .id6, Black's counterplay, connected with e6-eS, would be sufficient for him at least to maintain the equal­ ity. 8 . .ib2 (8 . .id3 eS = ; after 8.Wfc2 eS 9 . .ib2 , Malaniuk - Lau, Monte­ catini Terme 1994, Black can oc­ cupy space advantageously with 9 . . . e4 ! ? 10.tlJd2 0-0oo) 8 . . . 0-0 (diagram) 9.h3 Wfe7 ! ? = 9.Wfb3. White exerts pressure against the dS-square with the 174

idea to prevent the enemy pawn­ break e6-eS. Still, Black can un­ dermine White's centre with his other pawn after the preliminary move b7-b6. 9 . . . We7 10.h3, Vol­ kov - Svetushkin, Moscow 2008, 10 . . . b6 ! ? ll ..ie2 dxc4 12 .hc4 cS= 9.cS. White occupies even more space on the queenside, but reduces his pressure against the pawn on dS. Now, the pawn-break e6-eS will be even more effective for Black. 9 . . . .ic7 10.tlJa4 Wfe7 11. .ie2 �b8 ! ? He removes his rook in advance against the possible attack tlJb6. 12.0-0 es 13.tlJxeS tlJxeS 14.dxeS hes lS.heS WxeS 16.W/d4, Lantier - M .Gurevich, Moscow 2002 and here, Black's simplest road to equality would be the prosaic trade of the queens : 16 . . . Wxd4 ! ? 17.exd4 .ifS= 9 .Wc2 We7 10 . .ie2 (10 . .id3 dxc4 11.hc4 es - see 10 . .ie2 ; 10. �dl dxc4 11.hc4. After the re­ moval of the rook from al, the move b4-bS becomes impossible. Black can exploit immediately this circumstance with the move 11 . . . aS+ Krasenkow - Kobalia, Port Erin 2006.) 10 . . .dxc4 11. hc4 es 12 . .ib3 (12 ..ia2 .ic7= Bauer - Gelfand, Biel 2 0 0S) 12 . . .

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. liJj3 liJf6 4. liJc3 e6 5.e3 a6 aS 13.bS, K.Georgiev - Dorfman, Moscow 1990, 13 ... exd4! ? 14.l/Jxd4 liJeSt Black's pieces have been much more harmoniously de­ ployed.

7 dxc4 8 .ixc4 b5 . . .

.

Now, White must make up his mind where to retreat his bishop to.

9 .le2 .

9 . .la2 cs 10.0-0 .ib7

White would not achieve much with the move ll.e4, because of Black's simple response ll . . . cxd4. He does not need to calculate the variations, connected with the capturing on e4. 1 2 .l/Jxd4 .icS 13. .le3 0-0 14.f3 liJeS= Hoi - Pe­ tursson, Reykjavik 1981.

11.l3el. White is preparing e3e4, but reduces the protection of his pawn on f2 . ll . . . .id6 12 .e4 (12. dS exdS 13.e4 d4 14.eS liJxeS lS. liJxeS 0-0+ Kruck - Beyer, Ger­ many 2001. Black has more than sufficient compensation for the sacrificed piece.) 12 . . . cxd4 13. �xd4 .lcS 14.�dl l/Jg4. He attacks the f2-pawn and wins an impor­ tant tempo, managing to transfer his knight to the es-square. 1S.l3fl liJdeS 16.liJxeS liJxeS= Santos Etx­ epare - Llorach Garcia, ICCF 2012. 11.�e2 .id6. Black's bishop will be very active on the h2-b8 diagonal. Later, he can follow with �c7, or �b8, increasing the pressure against the h2-square. 12 .l3dl (12.e4 cxd4 13.liJxd4 l3c8!?=; 12.dxcS liJxcS 13.b4 l/Jcd7 14 . .ib2 0-0 1S.l3fdl �e7= Khalilbeili Ustinov, Batumi 1961. White's knight is better placed on d2 than on c3 in similar positions.) 12 . . . �c7 13.dxcS (After 13.dS, Black has the powerful resource 13 . . . c4 ! ?+, restricting the enemy bish­ op on a2, Bauer - Lautier, Eng­ hien les Bains 2001. Following 13.h3 0-0=, White should better refrain from 14.e4?! cxd4 1S.liJxd4 liJcS+, with rather unpleasant pressure against the pawn on e4, Kozul - Varga, Medulin 1997.) 13 . . . liJxcS 14.b4 l/Jcd7 1S ..ib2 l3c8 16.l3acl �b8 17.h3. Now, White must play very precisely not to end up in an inferior position . (For example: he cannot equalise with 17.e4, because of 17 . . . 0-0 17S

Chapter 13 18.g3, Piskov - Rublevsky, Helsinki 1992, 18 . . . gfd8 ! ?+, followed by lll b6-c4.) 17... 0-0 18 . .ibl gfd8= Velilla Velasco - Van der Hoeven, ICCF 2010. 9 . .id3 cS 10.0-0 .ib7. Black deploys his pieces analogously to the line with 9.h2, which we have just analysed. 11.'1Mfe2 (11 . .ic2 Y!!!c7= ; the move 11.dxcS only enhances the development of Black's piec­ es. 11 . . . lll xcS 12 . .ic2 '!Mfc7! ? Black avoids the trade of the queens and shows his aggressive intentions. He will not be happy anymore with just equalising. 13.Y!!le 2 .id6 14.e4 0-0 1s.ge1 lll cd7 16.h3 lll eS+ Moutousis - Halkias, As­ propyrgos 2 003.) ll.. . .id6

dxcS) 13 . . . 0-0 14.h3, Korchnoi Acs, Paks 2 0 07, 14 . . . cxd4 ! ? lS. exd4 gfes+ The vulnerability of White's isolated pawn may hurt him in this middle game.

9 . . . c5 10.dxc5 10.0-0 .tb7 ll.dxcS hc5 - see 10.dxcS.

10 . . . .hc5 11.0-0 11.b4 .ie7 1 2 . 0-0 .ib7, or 12. .ib2 .ib7 13.0-0 0-0 - see 11.0-0.

11 . . . .tb7 12.b4 .te7

13.'!Mfb3 12 ,gdl 0-0 13.dxcS lll xcS 14. e4 (14 ..ic2 Y!!!c7 1S.e4 lll cd7 - see 14.e4) 14 ... '!Mfc7 1S . .ic2 lll cd7!? Black parries the threat e4-eS and frees the cS-square for his bishop in the process. 16.'!Mfd2 .icS+ Boreika Gudkov, ICCF 2012. 12 . .ic2 Y!!!c7 13,gdl (It is possi­ ble that White should better think about equalising here and try to simplify the position, exchanging pieces. 13.dxcS lll xcS - see 11. 176

After White's alternatives, Black has no problems at all. 13 ..id2 0-0 14.a4. After this move, the queenside pawns are exchanged and there arises com­ plete equality. 14 . . .hb4 lS.axbS axbS 16,gxa8 ha8 17.lll xbS hd2 18.lll x d2 lll e S= Vidit - Lu, Pune 2 0 14. 13.lll d4 0-0 14 . .ib2 gcs - see 13 . .ib2 .

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. l:Dj3 l:Df6 4. l:Dc3 e6 5.e3 a6 13 . .ib2 0-0

gac8, in order to remove his queen away from the c-file, to a safer place.

15 . .ib2 gac8 16.gacl '%Yb8

14.�b3 .id6 - see 13.Ylllb 3. 14.0id4 l:k8 15.0ib3 0id5 16. 0ixd5 i.xd5= Andersson - So­ sonko, Wijk aan Zee 1988. 14.�d4, Capablanca - Euwe, Amsterdam 1931, 14 . . Jk8 ! ? = 14.l:'kl gc8 15.Yllib 3, Glienke Blauert, Germany 1997, 15 ...i.d6 !?=

13 ... 0-0 14,gdl 14 . .ib2 i.d6 ! ? Black is prepar­ ing We7. 15,gfdl Yll!e 7 16,gacl gac8 17.&Dbl i.d5 18.Yllid3 i.b8 = Alexan­ drova - Delchev, Cappelle-la­ Grande 2 005.

14 .. .'�c7 Before White has played gacl, Black must succeed in playing

17.h3 17.a4 bxa4 18.Yll!xa4 0ib6 19. �b3 0ig4+ Karpov - Illescas Cor­ doba, Wijk aan Zee 1993 .

17 . . . 0ib6 18 . .ial gfd8

It is only Black who can play for a win in this position, because he can seize the initiative at an opportune moment with the move 0ic4. 19,gxd8 + gxd8 20.YlYbl h6 21,gd1 gc8 = Karpov - Ka­ simdzhanov, San Sebastian 2009. 177

Chapter 14

1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . llJf'3 llJf6 4.llJc3 e6 5.e3 a6 6.i.e2 dxc4

more often after the move-order: l.d4 d5 2 .c4 dxc4 3.llif3 llif6 4. e3 e6 5.hc4 c5 6.llic3 a6 7.a4.

9.0-0

7.a4!? This is an interesting possibility after which there arises by transposition a line from the Queen's Gambit Accepted, but not in the best possible version for White, since he has played too early llic3.

Following 9 .d5 exd5 10.llixd5 ie6 ll.lll xf6+ �xf6 12.ixe6 Wfxe6, only White may have problems, because Black can easily advance his pawn-majority on the queenside. 13.0-0 ie7 14.id2 0-0 15. Wfc2 b5 ! ?+ Aliekhin - Lebedev, Moscow 2011.

9

• • •

.ie7!?

7.ixc4 b5 - see Chapter 15. 7.0- 0 ? ! b5+

7. . . c5 8 . .ixc4 8.0-0 llic6 9 . .b:c4 ie7 - see 8.ixc4.

8

• • •

llic6

This 178

position

arises

much

Black should not exchange on d4 in order not to allow his opponent to develop his bishop on f4, or g5. Here, you can see the con-

3. l:jjf3 l:jjf6 4. l:jj c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6. i.e2 de 7.a4 c5 8. i.xc4 l:jj c6 9. 0 - 0 .ie7 sequences of White's loss of a tempo for the move (jj c3 . His d4pawn is not sufficiently protected, so he is incapable of accomplish­ ing the standard set-up for simi­ lar positions �e2 , l:Ml.

Nova Garica 2008. White has the two-bishop advantage indeed, but Black's pieces are very active. In addition, White needs to com­ plete the development of his queenside.

Now, we will analyse in de­ tails: A) 10.dxcS and B) 10.ee2.

10.(jj eS cxd4 11.(jj xc6 bxc6 12. exd4. The pawns on d4 and c6 are about equally weak. 12 . . . aS. Black emphasizes the vulnerability of the b4-square and prepares the exchange of his "bad" bishop (.ia6). 13.�f3 0-0 ! ? 14.l:3dl (Fol­ lowing 14.�xc6 l:3b8= , due to the threat i.b7, White fails to protect his d4-pawn, Polajzer - Zhelian­ dinov, Ptuj 1993 ; 14 . .ie3 (jj dS 15. l:3acl i.a6 16.b3 �b6= Piket - Ni­ kolic, Wijk aan Zee 1993.) 14 . . . (jj dS 15.(jj e4 .ia6 16.b3 �b6 17. eg3. White wishes to begin an at­ tack with the move .ih6, but 17 . . . \Wb8 parries this threat. 18.eh3 l:3d8= Pinter - Hoelzl, Austria 1998.

10 .h3. This move does not seem so active. 10 . . . 0-0 11.dxcS .ixcS 12 .�e2 es 13.l�dl �e7 14.e4 (jj d4 1S.(jj xd4 exd4 16.(jj dS (jj xdS= Costa - Boikov, IECG 2001. 10.�d3 0-0 11.l:3dl �c7. Black continues to refrain from ex­ changing on d4. 12 .\We2 l:3d8 13.h3 h6 14.dS. White's waiting moves have ended and he is forced to clarify his further plans. This pawn-break in the centre howev­ er, leads only to the simplification of the position. 14 . . . exdS 15 . .ixdS (jj b 4. Black's knight will be well­ placed and stable on this square. 16.i.c4 l:3xdl+ 17.(jj x dl, Can - Sa­ kaev, St Petersburg 2015, 17 . . . i.d7 ! ? = 10.dS. Black i s well prepared to counter this pawn-break. 10 . . . exdS. Now, his bishop o n c 8 will be developed to an active posi­ tion, which cannot be said about its white counterpart on cl. 11. (jj xdS 0-0 1 2 .(jj x e7+ (12 .h3 (jj xdS 13 . .ixdS, Uhlmann - Gustafsson, Dresden 2 003, 13 . . . \Wd6 ! ?oo, pre­ paring i.e6) 12 . . . �xe7 13.h3 (jj e4 14.\We2 l:3d8 = Milanovic - Erdos,

10 .b3 0-0. Black is not in a hurry to exchange on d4, before White has played .ib2, in order to obtain a position with an isolated pawn in which White's bishop will be restricted by his own pawn on d4.

179

Chapter 14 11.i.b2 cxd4 12.exd4. It is only Black who can fight for an advan­ tage in this position (Therefore, White should possibly consider here 12.llixd4 i.d7= Deich - Na­ sybullin, Khabarovsk 1990). 12 . . . llib4. Black increases his control over the strategically important dS-square. 13.llieS (13.i!el b6= ; 13.Wfe2 b 6 14.llieS .ib7 - see 13. llieS) 13 ... b6 14.Wff3. White pre­ pares the transfer of his queen to the g3-square with tempo. (14. \We2 i.b7 15.i!acl llifdSoo Kempin­ ski - Van Wely, Gothenburg 2 0 05) 14 . . . i!b8 15.Wfg3 (The char­ acter of the position remains more or less the same after 15. i!adl i.b7 16.Wfg3 llibdS 17.llixdS llixdS 18.f4, Lima - Quinn, Yere­ van 1996, 18 . . . g6 ! ?+) 15 . . . i.b7 16. i!acl i!c8 17.i!fdl i.d6 18.i.a3 llibdS 19.hd6 \Wxd6+ Molzahn Grabner, ICCF 2013. White has got rid of his passive bishop on b2, but the vulnerability of his isolated d4-pawn provides Black with a slight but stable advantage. 11.dxcS. Now, White is at least not worse. 11 . . . hcS 12 .i.b2 (12. \We2 eS 13.i!dl \We7 14.llidS llixdS 15.hdS, Paredes - Mazziotti Iri­ goyen, Buenos Aires 2 0 03, 15 . . . llib4 ! ? = ) 12 . . . i.d7 13.Wfbl lliaS= Vieito Ribelles - Tinjaca Ramirez, ICCF 2011.

A) 10.dxc5 After this move, there arises an endgame in which White can hardly exploit his slight lead in 180

development due to the vulnera­ bility of the b4-square.

10

. . •

'Bxdl ll.gxdl hc5

12.i.d2 Besides this, White has nu­ merous alternatives, but neither of them provides him with any chance of obtaining an advantage, About 12.lligS ©e7 13.llige4 llixe4, or 13.llice4 llixe4 14.llixe4 i.b4, or 13 . .id2 i.b4 14.llice4 llixe4 15.llixe4 i.d7 - see 12.llid2. 12.llid2. White prepares the transfer of his knight to the e4square. 12 . . . ©e7. It is well known that the king is better placed at the centre of the board and not at the edge in an endgame. In addi­ tion, here it covers the d6-square against the penetration of the en­ emy knight. 13.llide4 llixe4 14. llixe4 i.b4 15.i.d2 .id7 (diagram) 16. ©fl, Thomas - Rubinstein, Scarborough 1930, 16 . . . i!hd8 ! ? = , followed by l::1 ac8. 16.i.c3 hc3 17.llixc3, Uhlmann - Wells, Austria 2002, 17 ... llib4!?=

3. liJ.f3 liJf6 4. liJ c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6. j,e2 de 7.a4 c5 8. hc4 liJ c6 9. 0 - 0 i.e7 gc8= Kose - Acs, Yerevan 2000) 13 . . . liJaS

16.i.e2, Can - Gordievsky, Sit­ ges 2 0 15, 16 . . . .ixd2 17.gxd2 liJb4= 16 . .ixb4+ liJxb4 17.liJcS. White must play energetically; other­ wise, Black may obtain an edge. (17.liJd6? ! This strike is useless 17 . . . i.c6+ 18.e4? ! Shinkevich Vorobiov, St Petersburg 2011. Here, Black can obtain an advan­ tage exploiting the drawbacks of the placement of White's seemingly active knight on d6 : 18 .. . gad8 ! ? 19.eS f6 2 0 .f4 gS+) . 17 . . . ic6 18.liJd3. White trades the ac­ tive enemy knight and maintains the balance. 18 . . . liJxd3 19 ..ixd3 ghd8= Lilienthal - Bronstein, Moscow 1962. 12 .b3 0-0 13.ib2 b6 14.liJgS. The transfer of the knight to the e4-square leads to further simpli­ fications. 14 . . . ie7 15.liJge4 liJaS 16.h3 liJxe4 17.liJxe4 ha3 18. gxa3 ib7 19.liJd6 gfd8 2 0.gaal ic6 2 1.f3 @f8 2 2 .e4 ©e7= Farago - Trent, Porto San Giorgio 2004. 12 .h3. White defends against the knight-sortie liJg4 and pre­ pares the advance of his e-pawn. 12 . . . b6 13.e4 (13.liJd4 liJb4 14.liJb3 i.e7 15.e4 j,b7 16.f3 liJd7 17.i.f4

14.ia2 ib7 15.eS (ls.gel?! This removal of the rook from the open file seems bad for White. 15 . . . 0-0+ Bourgoin - Luers, IECC 2001.) 15 . . . liJd7 16.liJgS liJxeSoo Littlewood - Wells, West Brom­ wich 2 0 0 2 . White has compensa­ tion for the sacrificed pawn, but not more than that. 14.id3. This move allows the penetration of Black's knight to the b3-square after which he ob­ tains the two-bishop advantage. 14 . . . liJb3 1s.gb1 liJxcl 16.gbxcl j,b7 (16 . . . id7? ! 17.eSt Bareev Kasparov, Novgorod 1997) 17.eS liJdS 18.liJxdS hdS 19.liJgS ie7 2 0 .liJe4 0-0. Black has completed the development of his pieces and his bishops may become very powerful in the endgame. There­ fore, White's most reasonable de­ cision is to force a draw by a rep­ etition of moves. 2i.gc7 id8 2 2 . gccl i.e7= Shinkevich - Filipen­ ko, Kazan 2012.

12

. . .

b6

Black only needs to solve the problem with his bishop on c8 181

Chapter 14 in order to equalise completely. With his last move he prepares its development on b7.

Following 15.ic3 0-0 16.tlixf6+ ixf6 17.ie4 gfd8 18.ixf6 gxf6, White will be incapable of exploit­ ing the slight vulnerability of Black's kingside pawn-structure, since there is just a few material left on the board. 19.tlid2 fS 2 0 . if3 tliaS. Black exchanges the ac­ tive enemy bishop. 21.ixb7 tlixb7 2 2 .tlic4 bS= Kulaots - Sulskis, Borup 2009.

15 .ixf6 • • .

13 .id3 •

13.tlia2, Postny - Baron, Beer­ sheba 2 014. White prepares the pawn-advance b2-b4. Meanwhile, it is not dangerous for Black. 13 . . . ie7 ! ? 14.b4 ib7= 13.tligS tlieS 14.ie2 (14.ib3 ib7= Meins - Svane, Bad Zwisch­ enahn 2 0 13) 14 . . . ib7 15.tlia2 h6 16.ic3 tlied7 17.if3 ixf3 18.tlixf3 0-0 19.gacl gfc8= Lahaye - Ok­ kes, Hilversum 2008. 13.gacl ib7 14.tlia2 (14.id3 gd8 15.iel <Jle7= Hera - Macieja, Kallithea 2008) 14 ... 0-0 15.iel as. Now, White is deprived of the possibility b2-b4, while the weak­ ening of the bS-square is immate­ rial in this position. 16.tlic3 gfd8= Karpov - Hjartarson, Seattle 1989.

13 .ib7 14.tlie4 .ie7 15. c!lixf6+ •••

182

16Jfacl 16.ie4 gc8 17.gacl 0-0 18 .b4 gfd8 19.bS. There arise further exchanges after this move. 19 . . . axbS 20.axbS tliaS 2 1.ixb7 (Fol­ lowing 21.ixaS gxdl+ 2 2 .gxdl ixe4 23.ixb6, Black regains the pawn after 23 . . . gb8 24.gd6 ile7 2s.gd7 @f8=) 2 1 . . . tlixb7 2 2 . gxc8 gxc8 23.e4 ile7= Cantelli - Kor­ chut, ICCF 2 0 07.

16

• . .

0-0 17. .ie4 gfc8 18.b3,

Ivanchuk - Naiditsch, Dortmund 2008, 18 gabS ! ? = White's pieces are slightly more active, . • •

3. &iJj3 &iJf6 4. &iJ c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6. i.e2 de 7.a4 c5 B. i.xc4 &iJ c6 9. 0 - 0 ie7 but Black has no pawn-weakness­ es in his camp.

B) 10.%Ye2

14.�es

White's attempt to play �e2 and �dl leads to considerable simplifications.

10 . . . cxd4 11.gd1

14.%Ye3 0-0 15.�xd4 (After 15.�xd4, there arises a transposi­ tion to the main variation, but with an extra tempo for Black. This would not influence the eval­ uation of the position as approxi­ mately equal. 15 . . . %Yxd4 16.�xd4 i.cS 17.gdl ig4 18.13el �ac8 = Kahlert - Korpa, Germany 2 0 15.) 15 ... %Yc7. Black is threatening i.cS.

The pawn-sacrifice ll.exd4?! seems rather dubious, because af­ ter ll . . . 11Jxd4 1 2 .&iJxd4 %Yxd4 13. 13dl �g4+, White does not obtain full compensation for it. 14.f3 �hS+ Van Foreest - Loiseau, Lille 2 0 15.

11 ... eS! 12.exd4 exd4 13. �xd4 White restores the material balance with this temporary piece-sacrifice. 13.&iJeS? ! 0-0 14.if4 id7 15. &iJdS &iJxdS 16.ixdS if6+ Jianu V. Popov, Dresden 2 0 07.

13 . . . �xd4

16.%Yf3 %Yes 17.%Yf4 �xf4 18. ixf4 - see 16.%Yf4. 16.%Ye2 , Sasikiran - Wells, Hastings 2 0 0 2 , 16 . . . icS ! ? = 16.�f4 �xf4 17.ixf4 ie6 ! ? This i s the simplest fo r Black. He exchanges the active enemy bish­ op and the arising weakness on e6 after that will be protected easily. 183

Chapter 14 18.he6 fxe6 19 . .id6 (19.gadl .ic5 20 .g4d2 gac8 2 1..ieS ib4= Alves - Frey Beckman, ICCF 2002) 19 . . . gfd8 20.gadl @ f7 21.@fl, Miladi­ novic - Guliyev, Frascati 2 0 0S, 2 1 . . .hd6 2 2 .gxd6 lll d S 23.gxd8 gxd8=

14

. • .

2 0 . . . gac8 2 1..ieS gfe8 2 2 .hf6 gxf6= Ftacnik - Z.Polgar, New York 1987. Both sides have pawn­ weaknesses and they balance each other. 17.gdl 0-0

�d6

There arises an approximately equal endgame after this move.

15.�xd4 1S.�xd6 ixd6 16.gxd4 .ieS

17.gh4 0-0 18 ..if4 hc3 19. bxc3 ifs. White has the two-bish­ op advantage, but his queenside pawn-structure has been weak­ ened. 2 0.f3 (20 . .ieS, Psakhis Tai, Tel Aviv 1990, 2 0 . . . gac8 ! ? = ) 184

18.ge1 ge8 19.id2 .id7= Cvi­ tan - Horvath, Pula 1997. 18.h3, Tregubov - Agrest, Ohrid 2001, 18 . . . .ifS ! ? 19 . .ie3 gac8= The move 18.lll dS leads to the simplification of the position. 18 . . . ie6 19.lll xf6+ hf6 2 0.he6 fxe6. The bishop on f6 exerts powerful pressure against White's queen­ side. 2 1..ie3 hb2 2 2 . gabl gad8 23.gfl .id4= Speelman - Movse­ sian, Caleta 2 0 1 0 . 18 . .ie3 .ifs 19 . .id4 gfe8. Black has completed the development of his pieces and has equalised completely. 2 0.heS gxeS 21.f3 .ie6= Mueller - Bindrich, Germa­ ny 2010.

15 . . . �xd4 16.l'�xd4 .ic5 Black wins a tempo by attack­ ing the enemy rook.

17.gdl 17.gh4 0-0 18 ..igS (18.h3 h6=

3. &i:if3 &i:if6 4. &i:i c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6. i.e2 de 7.a4 c5 8. i.xc4 &i:ic6 9. 0 - 0 .ie7 Hebden - Harikrishna, Hastings 2002) 18 ... &i:ig4 19.&i:ie4, Neverov Meister, Togliatti 1985, 19 ...i.b6 !?= 17.i:!d3 . White prepares the transfer of his rook to the f3square. 17 . . . .ifS 18.l:!f3 .ie6 19. .ixe6 (19 ..ie3 l:!c8 2 0 . .ixe6 fxe6= Le Quang Liem - So Wesley, Saint Louis 2012) 19 . . . fxe6 2 0 .i.gS 0-0 2 1.l:!dl i:!ad8 22.i:!xd8 i:!xd8 23. ©fl ©t7= Koneru - Ju Wenjun, Chengdu 2 016. Black gradually neutralises his opponent's initia­ tive by exchanging pieces.

17

. . .

0-0

18 .if4 .

18.h3 i.e6 19.i.xe6 fxe6 20.©fl (20 . .ie3 .ixe3 21.fxe3 l:!ad8 2 2 .aS ©t7= Todorovic - Madeja, Budva 2 009) 20 . . . &iJdS 2 1.f3 &i:ixc3 2 2 . bxc3 l:!ac8 23.l:!bl b 6 = Eljanov Caruana, Douglas 201. 18.l:!el .ifs 19 . .igS l:!ac8. Black is not afraid of the exchange on f6, since he would obtain the two­ bishop advantage after that. 2 0 .

i.e2 . White wishes to play a4-a5 and i.f3, squeezing the enemy pieces with the protection of the pawn on b7. Still, Black can pre­ vent the fixing of his queenside. 2 0 . . . aS 21.i.f3 b6 22 .h3 l:!fe8 23. l:!xe8+ l:!xe8 24.l:!dl h6 25 . .ixf6 gxf6 26.©fl ©g7= Epishin Khenkin, Bolzano 2000. 18.i.gS i.g4 19.l:!d3 (19.l:!d2 i:!ad8 2 0.i.dS, Hertneck - Aroni­ an, Bad Wiessee 2 0 0 2 , 20 . . . b6 ! ? = ) 1 9 . . . i.fS 2 0.l:!f3 .ig6 21. i.xf6 (21.h4, Gabuzyan - Chi­ bukhchian, Jermuk 2 0 13, 2 1 . . . &i:ig4 ! ? = ) 2 1 . . .gxf6

22 .h4. White plans to chase the enemy bishop on g6. 22 . . . i.d4 23 .l:!dl i.eS 24.g4 hS 25.gS l:!ad8 26.l:!xd8 l:!xd8 27.&iJdS, Khenkin Aronian, Germany 2 0 04, 27 . . . ©g7 ! ? 28.gxf6+ ©h6+ White has played too actively for a win and has serious problems now. His extra doubled pawn is useless, while Black's two powerful bish­ ops control almost the entire board in this open position. 22 ..idS l:!fd8 23 . .ixb7 l:!ab8 24.ha6 i:!xb2 25.h4 l:!dd2iii Tis­ dall - Elsness, Norway 2016. 185

Chapter 14 22.l'!xf6 1!ad8 23.:!!e l, Keymer Wichmann, Schwaebisch Gmu­ end 2 0 17, 23 . . . ©g7 ! ? 24.1!f3 1!d2ii5 In the last two variations Black's pieces have become very active, compensating the minimal mate­ rial deficit.

18 . . . .ig4 He develops his bishop with tempo.

19.gel gac8 20.ctld5 gfd8 21.ltlxf6+ gxf6 22.b3 (diagram) White has managed to realise the maximum in this position. He has weakened his opponent's pawn-structure without present­ ing him with the two-bishop ad­ vantage. Still, this is insufficient

186

for an advantage, because Black's pieces are very active and his pawn-weaknesses are easily de­ fensible.

22 . . . ©g7 23.h3 .if5 24.gadl .ib4 25.gxd8 �d8 26.gcl .ia3= 27.gel .ib4 2s.gc1 .ia3 29.gel, draw, Ivanchuk - Wang Hao, Beijing 2 013.

Chapter 15

1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . lL!f3 lL!f6 4.lL!c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6.J.d3 dxc4 7.J.xc4 b5

e4 cxd4 10.�xd4 �xd4 11.tll xd4, Werle - l.Sokolov, London 2007, 11 . . . eS ! ? = , while following 9.dxcS �xdl+ 10 . .b:dl .bes ll.a3 .ib7 12 .b4 .id6 13 . .ib2 tll b d7= Rakh­ manov - Shimanov, Minsk 2 014, there arises an approximately similar endgame as in the main variation.

9 . . .ib7 .

Black plays in the spirit of the Meran variation, but his knight is still on b8. Later, he can develop it not only on d7, but also on c6, after the preliminary move c6-c5. Now, White's most popular re­ treat of the bishop in this position is - C) 8 . .id3. Before that how­ ever, we will analyse the less pop­ ular alternatives A) 8 . .ie2 and

B) 8 . .ib3. 10.dxc5 A) 8 . .ie2 c5 Black attacks immediately the enemy centre.

9.0-0 White would not obtain much with the straightforward line : 9.

After this move, the endgame is with about equal prospects. About 10.a3 tllbd7 11.dxcS .ixcS - see Chapter 13, variation C. 10.tll e S. White is preparing 187

Chapter 15 if3, but this plan seems to be too slow. Later, Black can not only equalise, but can think about something more in this position. 10 . . . id6 11.if3 Wfc7 12.a4 cxd4 13.exd4 b4 14 . .b:b7 Wfxb7 15.lll e 2 0-0+ Uhlmann - Jonkman, Dres­ den 1993. After the exchange of the light-squared bishops, White can hardly develop any initiative, while the vulnerability of his iso­ lated pawn will hurt him. 10.b3 lll c6 11.dxcS hes 12. ib2 0-0 13.gcl Vfie7 14.Vfic2 gac8= Cvek - Haba, Czech Re­ public 2012.

10

• • •

Y«xdl lU:�xdl .bc5

gacl gac8 15.@fl h6= Salov Karpov, Moscow 199 2 . 12.lll e 5 lll b d7 13.lll xd7 (13.lll d3 id6 14.f3, Hedman - Lind, Hall­ stahammar 2001, 14 . . . b4 ! ? Black occupies space on the queenside. 15.lll b l a5= ) 13 . . . lll xd7 14.id2 @e7= Smederevac - Gaprindash­ vili, Hoogovens 1966. 12 ..id2 lll b d7 13.b4. Before playing a2-a4, White wishes to fix the enemy pawn on bS. Still, this plan only leads to the exchange of the queenside pawns. (13.iel 0-0=) 13 . . . .ie7 14.a4, Adly - M. Gurevich, Port Erin 2 007, 14 . . . .ixb4 ! ? 15.axbS axbS 16.gxa8+ .ixa8 17.lll xbS .ixd2 18.lll xd2 @e7= 12.a3. White is preparing b2b4, after which the pawn-struc­ ture would become quite symmet­ rical. 12 . . . lll b d7 13.b4 ie7 14.ib2 0-0 15.gacl (15.lll d 2 gfd8=) 15 . . . gac8 16.@fl gfd8 17.h3 @f8 = Pomar Salamanca - Spassky, Go­ thenburg 1971.

12 . . . �bd7 13.�b3 .ib4 12.�d2 The transfer of the knight to the b3-square seems rather time­ consuming, but after his alterna­ tives White has no hopes of obtain­ ing an advantage in the opening. 12.lll d4 lll b d7 13.lll b3 ib4 see 12.lll d 2 . 12 .b3 lll b d7 13 .ib2 0-0 14. 188

2.c4 c6 3. li:Jj3 li:Jf6 4. li:Jc3 e6 5.e3 a6 6. id3 de 7.hc4 b5 8. i.b3 c5 14.i.d2

gradually equalise completely with an accurate play. 18 i.dS 19.fJ. White restricts the enemy minor pieces and prepares the move @f2 . 19 gxal 20.gxal gc8 21. gel i.xb3 22.�xb3 gxcl+ . The draw outcome becomes more and more probable with every ex­ change. 23.�xcl �cs 24.'it>t'2 • • •

Following 14.a4 bxa4 15J:!xa4 as, White will hardly manage to increase his pressure against the enemy a5-pawn and he has no other objects to attack. 16.i.d2 0-0 17J%aal, Vidit - Sengupta, Dharamshala 2 014, 17 . . . l:!tb8 ! ? =

• • •

�dS 2S.e4 �b6 26.'it>e3 es. 14

• . •

0-0 1S.a4

15.f3, Vitiugov - Vidit, Tsagh­ kadzor 2 0 15, 15 . . . l:!fc8 ! ? = 15.a3 li:Jc5 16.li:Jcl i.xc3 17.ixc3 l:!fc8. White has the two-bishop advantage, but Black's pieces are very active. 18 . .!d4 i.d5 19.f3 i.c4. He wishes to deprive White of his only advantage. 2 0 . 'it>f2 i.xe2 21. 'it>xe2 lt.JdS 2 2 .l:!d2 f6 23.i.xcS l:!xcS 24.li:Jd3 l:!c7= Kramnik - To­ mashevsky, Moscow 2012.

Black fixes the enemy pawn on the same colour of the square as his bishop. 27.b3 'it>f8 = Topalov - Wang Hao, Stavanger 2 013.

B) 8.i.b3

1S bxa4 16.li:Jxa4 as 17. i.xb4 axb4 18.li:JacS • • •

8

White's pieces are a bit more active, but he has no concrete threats in sight. Black should

• • •

cs 9.0-0

It would be premature for White to play here 9.a4, because after 9 . . . b4, his knight would need to retreat to a passive position. 10.li:Je2 i.b7 11.0-0 li:Jbd7 12.li:Jf4, Epishin - Meister, Togliatti 1985. This transfer of the knight has taken too many tempi for White . . . 12 . . J''k8 ! ?+

9

• • •

i.b7 189

Chapter 15 after the capturing on e4. 11.llJxd4 llJc6

10.'fl!fe2 He is preparing 13dl. After 10.13el, Black can play 10 . . . llJc6, increasing his pressure against the d4-square and imped­ ing White's pawn-advance e3-e4. 11.d5 exd5 12 .e4. This is an inter­ esting pawn-sacrifice, but insuffi­ cient for White to maintain an advantage. 12 . . . dxe4 13.i.g5 Wfxdl 14.13axdl llJd4. Black exchanges pieces and neutralises his oppo­ nent's initiative. 15.llJxd4 cxd4 16.1xf6 gxf6 17.13xd4, Graf - Sar­ gissian, Batumi 2 0 0 2 , 17 . . . i.cS ! ? = After 10.dxc5 Wfxdl 11.13xdl, Mirzoev - Yanev, Spain 2013, Black should better not capture on c5 with his bishop. It seems much better for him to choose in­ stead 11 . . . llJbd7 ! ? = , followed by llJxc5. 10.e4. White exploits his lead in development and begins im­ mediate active actions in the cen­ tre. 10 . . . cxd4. This is Black's most reasonable reaction. He does not need to enter the complications 190

12 .i.e3 llJxd4 13.hd4 i.e7 14. f3 (14.e5 llJd5= Cornette - David, Cap d'Agde 2 010) 14 . . . 0-0 15.a4, Wojtaszek - Kulaots, Warsaw 2 0 13 , 15 . . . b4 ! ? 16.llJe2 llJd7oo Black's knight is very passive on the f6-square, because it is se­ verely restricted by the enemy pawns on e4 and f3. Therefore, he should better transfer it to a more active position. The move 12.llJxc6 would lead to simplifications. 12 . . . Wfxdl 13. 13xdl hc6 14.f3 i.c5 + . Black de­ velops his bishop with tempo. 15. ©fl ©e7. He connects his rooks. 16 . .ig5 (After 16.e5 llJd7 17.i.g5+ , Korobov - Lesiege, Baku 2016, Black can simply retreat his king: 17 . . . ©e8 ! ? , for example: 18.13acl h6 19.i.d2 13c8 2 0.f4 ©e7=) 16 . . . h6. Black should better get rid im­ mediately of the rather unpleas­ ant pin. 17.i.h4 g5 18.i.f2 i.xf2 19. ©xf2 13hc8 20.13acl llJd7= Pono­ mariov - Anand, Moscow 2009.

10

• • •

llJc6 lU::! d l

ll.d5 llJxd5 12 .13dl i.e7 13.

2.c4 c6 3. l:i:ij3 l:i:if6 4. l:i:i c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6 . .id3 de 7.hc4 b5 8 . .ib3 c5 l:i:ixdS exdS 14 . .ixdS Wfb6 - see lU�dl. 11.dxcS hcS 12 .e4 (After 12. l'!dl the fifth World Champion has shown how to play with Black: 12 . . . 1.Wc7 13 .i.d2 0-0 14.l'!acl l:i:ieS 15.l:i:ixeS 1.WxeS+ Winter - Euwe, London 1946. His pieces have been much more actively de­ ployed.) 12 . . . l:i:id4 13.l:i:ixd4 hd4 14.eS l:i:idS 15.l:i:ixdS hdS 16.l'!dl hb3 17.axb3 1.Wb6 18 .i.d2 0-0 19 . bs 1.Wa7= Kramnik - Pono­ mariov, Dortmund 2012. The po­ sition has been simplified consid­ erably. Black has completed his development and has no prob­ lems at all.

jovcic, Warsaw 1959 (15.l:i:ixeS WfxeS=) 15 . . . 0-0 ! ?oo

12

• • •

exdS 13.l:i:ixdS

13 . .ixdS Wfc7 14.e4 l'!d8= Lan­ dau - Rubinstein, Netherlands 1930.

13

. • •

lll xdS 14.hdS Wfb6

.

11

• • •

.ie7 Black removes his queen away from the dangerous juxtaposition with the enemy rook. It would be sufficient for White to castle in or­ der to complete his development. After that, the activity of his pieces would compensate Black's pawn-majority on the queenside.

15.e4 The development of the bish­ op to the al-hS diagonal does not promise anything to White either. He does not exchange on d4 in order not to help in the activation of White's bishop on cl.

12.dS After 12.dxcS Wfc7, Black re­ gains his pawn and obtains an ex­ cellent position. 13.e4 hes 14.h3 l:i:ieS 15 . .igS, Litmanowicz - Bul-

15.i.d2 0-0 16.i.c3 l'!ad8 17.b3 l'!feS 18.l'!acl h6= Bubir - Semrl, ICCF 2 0 14. 15.b3 0-0 16 . .ib2 l:i:ib4 17 . .ixb7 Wfxb7 18.e4 l'!feS 19 . .ic3 .ifS 2 0.eS l:i:idS 2 1.Wfe4 l'!ad8= Defore} - Sad­ ler, ICCF 2015. 191

Chapter 15 15

. . •

0-0 16 .ie3 tbb4 •

Black exchanges the powerful enemy bishop.

17.hb7 Wxb7 18.a3 tbc6 19.l"!d5 c4 20.i;adl i;ad8 21.h4 gfe8= Vescovi - Fuentes Vasallo, Villa Martelli 1997.

C) 8 ..id3 c5

Here, White can either begin immediate active actions on the queenside by attacking the enemy b5-pawn - Cl) 9.a4, or at first castle - C2) 9.0-0, concealing for the moment his further plans. 9.a3 tbbd7 - see Chapter 13, variation C. 9.'!We2 tbbd7 10.a4 (10.0-0 .ib7 - see variation C2b) 10 . . .b4 11.tt:le4 .ib7 - see variation Cl. 9 .tt:le4. This seems to be better when the moves a2-a4 and b5-b4 are included, because then White can exploit the weakening of the c4-square in the middle game. 9 . . . tt:Jbd7 10.0-0 .ib7. 192

11.tt:lxf6+ tt:lxf6 12.dxcS hc5 13 .'!We2 0-0 14.Ei:dl \We7= Toth Tornyai, Hungary 2010. After 11.tt:lxcS, Black can reply with 11 . . . hcS ! ? 12.dxcS tt:lxc5. He has presented his opponent with the two-bishop advantage, but his pieces are very actively placed. 13 . .ie2 0-0 14.b3. White prepares the development of his bishop to an active position, but weakens the c3-square. Later, Black will play tt:ld5, tt:le4, b4 and will ac­ complish penetration to the c3square. 14 . . . Ei:c8 15 . .ib2 tt:lce4 16. Wxd8 Ei:fxd8 17.Ei:acl tt:ld5 18.Ei:fdl Ei:e8 19.@fl tt:Jec3 2 0.hc3 tt:lxc3 21.Ei:d2 b4= Michiels - Ghyssens, ICCF 2009. Black has gradually managed to realise his plan. His prospects are not worse in this endgame. 9.dxc5 hc5

2.c4 c6 3. li3j3 li3f6 4. li3 c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6. id3 de 7.hc4 bS 8 . i d3 c5 10.0-0 ib7 or 10 .'!We2 liJbd7 11.0-0 ib7 - see variation C2a. The move 10.a4 only leads to simplifications, because after 10 . . . b 4 ll.liJe4 liJxe4 12.!xe4, Black can exchange not only the knights, but the queens as well. 12 . . . \Wxdl+ 13 .@xdl 1'fa7 14.b3 ib7= Soysal Kanmazalp, Kocaeli 2 015.

Cl) 9.a4 b4 10.liJe4 liJbd7 He is fortifying his c5-pawn.

the pawn and preserving all the advantages of his position. 11.liJed2 ib7 12.0-0 ie7, or 12.a5 ie7 13 . 0-0 0-0, or 12.liJc4 ie7 13 .0-0 0-0, or 12 .'!We2 ie7 13.0-0 0-0, or 13.a5 0-0 14.0-0 \Wc7 - see 11.0-0. 11.b3 cxd4 12.exd4. White has an isolated pawn, but not in the most favourable version. 12 . . . ib7 13.\We2 ie7 14.0-0 liJxe4. As it is well known, the exchanges are in favour of the side, which plays against the isolated pawn. It is be­ coming weaker, when the posi­ tion nears an endgame. 15.!xe4 !xe4 16.\Wxe4 0-0 17.id2 liJf6 18. \Wd3 \Wd5= M.Gurevich - Krivo­ shey, Bastia 2 0 05. 11.liJxf6+ liJxf6

11.0-0 About ll.'!We2 ib7 12.liJxf6+ liJxf6 13.0-0 cxd4, or 13.dxc5 hc5 14. 0-0 0-0, or 14.e4 0-0 15.0-0 id6 - see variation Cla. 11.a5 i.b7 12.liJed2 ie7 or 11. liJed2 i.b7 12 .a5 ie7 - see 11. liJed2 . After 11.dxc5, Black can seize the initiative by sacrificing a pawn. 11 . . . i.b7 ! ? 12.liJd6+ hd6 13.cxd6 liJc5 14.i.c2, Gavrilov Bezgodov, Moscow 1995, 14 . . . a5 ! ?+, followed b y �a6, regaining

12.0-0 ib7 - see 11.0-0. 12 .b3 cxd4 13.liJxd4 ib7 14. 0-0 \Wd5. Black's queen frees the square for his rook with tempo. 15.liJf3 �dB+ Vidal Zamora Aroshidze, Sitges 2016. His pieces have been obviously more actively deployed. 12.dxc5 hc5 13.b3 (13.0-0 193

Chapter 15 .ib7, or 13 .We2 0-0 14.0-0 .ib7, or 13.e4 .ib7 14.We2 0-0 15.0-0 .id6 - see 11.0-0) 13 ....ib7 14. .ib2, M.Gurevich - Pavasovic, Plovdiv 2008. Here, Black could have ex­ ploited immediately the weakness of the c3-square : 14 . . . llid5 ! ? 15. 0-0 llic3 16.'!Wc2 .id6 17 . .ixc3 bxc3 18.Wxc3 .ixf3 19.gxf3 .ixh2+ . H e sacrifices a piece and forces a draw by a perpetual check. 2 0 . 'i!?xh2 Wh4+ 2 1.'i!?gl Wg5=

11 . . . ib7

Now, we will analyse in de­ tails: Cla) 12.�xf6 and Clb)

12.�ed2. Alexander Alekhine showed how to play with Black after 12. llixc5? ! : 12 . . . .ixc5 ! 13.dxc5 �xc5 14 . .ic4 0-0 15.We2 a5+ Reinfeld - Alekhine, Pasadena 193 2 .

move with his queen. Still, fortu­ nately for him, the position is within equality. 14 . . . .ixf3 15.gxf3 (15.Wxf3 ? ! Wxf3 16.gxf3 c4 17.ie2 a5+ Dothan - Napalkov, ICCF 2008. In this endgame, Black's prospects seem preferable thanks to his far-advanced queenside pawns.) 15 . . . .id6 16 . .ixa6 .ixh2 + 17.'i!?g2 '!Wg5= Nierobisz - Bala­ banov, ICCF 2008. 12 .llig3. White's knight is not so well placed here, as on d2, be­ cause in some variations Black can develop powerful initiative on the kingside by advancing h7-h5h4. 12 . . . id6 13.We2 (After the pa­ tient line: 13.b3 cxd4 14.�xd4 llJc5 15 . .ic4, Black can begin im­ mediate active actions on the kingside : 15 . . . h5 ! The threat of the advance of Black's h-pawn forces White to weaken seriously his pawn-structure. 16.h3 .bg3 17. fxg3 .id5+ Kameneckas - Rezzuti, ICCF 2008.) 13 . . . 0-0 14.gdl, Kummer - Koutsin, Oberwart 1998, 14 . . . Wc7! ?oo

Cla) 12.�xf6+ White is reluctant to waste a tempo for the retreat of his knight.

12 . . . �xf6 (diagram)

12 .'!Wc2 gc8. This move em­ phasizes the unfavourable place­ ment of White's queen on c2 . 13. �xf6+ '!Wxf6 14.'!We2 . The threat of capturing on f3, or d4 forces White to lose another tempo for a 194

13.dxc5 13.b3 cxd4 14.exd4 (14.�xd4 Wd5 15.f3, Sobek - Jirovsky, Prague 2 0 15, 15 . . . ic5 ! ?+) 14 . . . ie7 15 . .ic4 0-0+ Akobian - Shulman,

2.c4 c6 3. tfJj3 tfJf6 4. tfJ c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6. i.d3 de 7. i.xc4 b5 8. id3 c5

Stillwater 2 0 07. White has no compensation for the vulnerabili­ ty of his isolated pawn. After 13.aS, Black can retreat his knight 13 . . . tfJd7 ! ? , so that after an exchange on cS to play tfJxcS. 14.W/e2 ie7 1S.id2 0-0= Probst - Thier, Germany 2008. 13.Wi'e2 cxd4

14.tfJxd4 i.d6. Black's bishops exert powerful pressure against White's castling position. 1S.tfJf3 (1S.b3. This move leads to the weakening of the c3-square. lS . . . tfJdS 16 . .ib2 tfJc3 1 7. .b:c3 bxc3+ Opryatkin - Matei, ICCF 2007. Black's bishop-pair provides him with a stable advantage.) lS . . . tfJe4+ Ftacnik - Kramnik, Dort­ mund 1992. White is forced to be­ gin defending. 14.l'!dl i.d6 1S.exd4 0-0 16. i.gS, Farid - Malakhatko, Biel 2 0 13, 16 . . . h6 17.i.h4 aS ! ? = 14.e4. This interesting pawn­ sacrifice is still insufficient for White to maintain an advantage. 14 ...i.e7 1S.i.f4 0-0 16.l'!fcl l'!c8 17. eS l'!xcl+ 18.l'!xcl .b£3. Black wish­ es to neutralise his opponent's in­ itiative by exchanging pieces. 19. %!/xf3 tfJdS 2 0 .i.d2 as 21.%!/g4 W/b8 2 2 .W/xd4 l'!d8 23.%!/e4 g6= Krasen­ kow - Dreev, Esbjerg 2003. White has managed to restore the mate­ rial balance, but Black's prospects are not worse thanks to his pow­ erful centralised knight on dS.

13 . . . .ixc5 14.'Be2 0-0 14.exd4. This straightforward transfer into a position with an isolated pawn cannot be ap­ proved, because after 14 . . . i.e7 lS. i.e3 0-0 16.tfJeS Wi'dS, Black's pieces become very active. White has no compensation for his weak d4-pawn. 17.f3 as 18.l'!fcl l'!fc8 19. i.bS W/d6 2 0 .i.f2 tfJdS+ Semenov - Lovakovic, ICCF 2011.

I. �

19S

Chapter 15 15.e4 There arises an approximately equal position after 1s.gd1 Vf!e7 16.aS (16.e4 eS= ) 16 . . . gfdS 17.i.d2 eS 1S.e4 h6= Gagunashvili - Ka­ zhgaleyev, Bastia 2006.

his rook on as in order to equalise completely. 20.:gxcS+ WxcS 21. .ibl .ie7 2 2 .h3 Wes 23.llid2 :gas 24.llib3 llif6=

17 h6 18.gacl a5 19.gc2 gds 20.h3 J.f4 21.hf4 %'ixf4= • • •

Bokar - Zhak, ICCF 2 013.

15

• • •

J.d6 ! ?

This i s not Black's most popu­ lar move, but it is very good. He exploits the circumstance that White cannot play e4-eS and es­ tablishes control over the h2-bS diagonal. Later, Black's plans in­ clude Vf!bS and gas.

Clb) 12.llied2 J.e7

16.gdl 16.eS?! i.xf3 17.gxf3 (17.Wxf3 hes+) 17 . . . heS+ 16.gel llid7=

16

• • •

Vf!b8

13.Vf!e2 This is the best square for White's queen. It squeezes the en­ emy rook to protect the pawn on a6. 13.llic4 0-0 14.:gel, Golod Ribli, Germany 2007 (14.aS Wc7 - see 13.aS; 14.Vf!e2 Vf!c7 - see 13. We2) 14 ... gcs lS.llifeS Vf!c7! ?oo

17.J.d2 White would not achieve much by attacking the enemy knight on f6. 17.i.gS llid7 1s.gacl :gcs 19. .ie3 h6. Black only needs to bring 196

13.aS 0-0 14.llic4 (14.Vf!e2 %'ic7 - see 13.Vf!e2) 14 . . . %'ic7 1S.h3 (lS. We2 llig4 - see 13.We2 ; following lS.llifeS gads 16.Vf!e2 cxd4 17. exd4 llixeS lS.dxeS, Black obtains a very good position by transfer­ ring his knight to the cs-square . 1S . . . llid7 19.i.f4 llicSoo Bennborn

2.c4 c6 3. 11Jj3 11Jf6 4. 11J c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6 . .id3 de 7.hc4 b5 8. id3 c5 - Gysi, ICCF 2 0 07.) 15 . . JUd8 16.�e2 11Je4. Black begins active actions in the centre and on the kingside. 17 . .id2 �c6. White is practically helpless against Black's pressure on the hl-a8 diagonal. 18.:gfdl l:iJgS+ Troia - Domancich, ICCF 2012. 13.:gel 0-0 14.e4. This is a double-edged pawn-sacrifice with which White risks more than Black. (14.11Jc4 :gc8 - see 13.11Jc4) 14 . . . cxd4 15.eS 11Jg4 ! ? 16.�e4. White wishes to trade the powerful ene­ my bishop. (After 16.h3, he can­ not oust Black's knight. 16 . . . l:iJcS 17.11Je4 11Je3 ! 18.fxe3 11Jxe4 19. exd4, Korchnoi - Ponomariov, Karlovy Vary 2 007, 19 . . . l:iJgS ! ?+ White's weak d4-pawn will cause plenty of problems for him.) 16 . . . d3 !

17.h3 .he4 18.:gxe4 fS 19.exf6 11Jgxf6. Black has managed to solve the problem with his knight on g4. 20.:gxe6 (White's attempt to eliminate the powerful enemy passed d3-pawn would not solve his problems either. 20.:gd4 '\Wc7!? 21.:gxd3 11Jc5. White's unfortunate rook comes constantly under an attack by Black's pieces. 22 .:gd4 es 23.:gxb4 e4 24.l:iJel e3 25.fxe3 l:iJdS+) 2 0 . . . l:iJcSt

13 . . 0-0 .

14.gdl

With this powerful move, Black opens the a7-gl diagonal for his queen. White ends up in an inferior position after 17..hb7 fil6+, while capturing the rook 18 . .ha8? just leads to a smothered checkmate, or the loss of the queen 18 . . . /1Jxf2-+ 19.�b3 11Jh3 + 2 0.©hl '\Wgl+ 21.:gxgl 11Jf2 #

14.11Jc4 '\Wc7 15 . .id2 (15.:gdl !!fd8 - see 14.!!dl; 15.l:iJfeS, Vesco­ vi - Leitao, Rio de Janeiro 2 0 07 15 ... aS!?+) 15 ... 11Jg4. Black is threat­ ening to capture on f3 and this forces White to weaken the long light-squared diagonal. 16.g3 fS+ Koskela - Pfiffner, ICCF 2 009. 14.e4 cxd4 15.eS. This pawn­ sacrifice for initiative cannot pro­ vide White with more than equal­ ity. 15 . . . l:iJdS. The basic defect of the plan, connected with the 197

Chapter 15 pawn-advance e3-e4-e5, is that Black's knight gains access to a wonderful square at the centre of the board. 16.tlJb3 (16.%Ye4 g6 17. tlJb3, Ibragimov - Volzhin, Voro­ nezh 1991, 17 . . . V;Yc7! ? Black pro­ tects his bishop and is threatening the rather unpleasant knight-sor­ tie from the dS-square. 18 .i.h6 gfd8+ Black's pieces have been deployed much more harmoni­ ously.) 16 . . . aS 17.%Ye4 g6 18.i.h6 ge8 19.i.bS. White wishes to ex­ ploit the vulnerability of the bS­ square. 19 . . . %Yb6 2 0 .%Yxd4 (20. i.xd7 tlJf6 21.V;Yf4 tlJxd7oo) 20 ... tlJcS. Black avoids material losses with a precise play. 21.tlJfd2 i.c6 22..ixc6 %Yxc6 23.gfcl gec8. White cannot achieve anything out of the pin on the c-file. 24.tlJxcS i.xcS 25.%Yh4 V;Yb6 26.gc4. The rooks will be soon traded on the c-file after which the position will be consid­ erably simplified. 26 . . . gc7 27.gacl gac8 28 .b3 i.e7 29.gxc7 gxc7 30. gxc7 %Yxc7 31.V;Yc4 %Yd8= Degtya­ ryov - Iordanyan, ICCF 2 0 14. 14.aS. White fixes immediately the enemy pawn on a6, so that Black would not be able to play later a6-a5. 14 . . . %Yc7

198

1s.gd1 gfd8 - see 14.gdl. 1s.ge1 gfd8 16.tlJc4 (After 16. e4, it seems good for Black to choose 16 . . . g6 ! ? 17.tlJb3 cxd4 18. eS hf3 19 .gxf3 tlJdS+ Ramik Fessler, ICCF 2011. His superior pawn-structure provides him with a stable edge.) 16 . . . i.e4. Black ex­ changes the powerful enemy bish­ op and leaves him with the pas­ sive bishop on cl. 17.b3 (17.i.xe4 ttJxe4+ Lenic - Berczes, Rogaska Slatina 2 0 09) 17 . . . gac8 18.i.xe4 ttJxe4 19.i.b2 cxd4 2 0.exd4 tlJc3 2 1.%Ye3 tlJf6. Black's pieces are completely dominant over the dS-square. 2 2 .gacl ttJfdS 23.V;Yd3 V;Yb8 24.tlJceS V;Ybs+ Atakisi - Jop­ pich, ICCF 2011. The move 15.tlJc4 leads to interesting complications 15 . . . tlJg4 ! ? 16.e4 (16.tlJcd2 tlJgf6=) 16 . . . cxd4 17.h3 , Alekhine - Bogoljubow, Germany 1934, 17 . . . ttJgf6 ! ? 18 .eS. White sacrifices another pawn for the initiative. 18 . . . i.xf3 19.%Yxf3 tlJxeS 2 0 .V;Yg3 i.d6 21.tlJxeS i.xeS 2 2 .%Yh4. Black has a huge materi­ al advantage, but his defence is not easy at all. He cannot play h7h6, because White will immedi­ ately counter that with a bishop­ sacrifice. 22 . . . hS ! ? 23 .i.gS tlJdS 24.gfcl V;Yd6 25.V;YxhS g6 26.%Yf3 b3. Black is preparing tlJb4. 27.g3 tlJb4 28 .i.e4 gac8 29.V;Yxb3. He gives back his extra material and neutralises his opponent's initia­ tive. White must play very pre­ cisely in order not to end up in an inferior position. 29 . . . d3 30.gc4 gxc4 3 1 .%Yxc4 i.xg3 . Black will

2.c4 c6 3. 0.j3 0.f6 4. 0. c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6. i.d3 de 7. hc4 b5 8 . i d3 c5 obtain two pawns for the piece and his passed d-pawn will become very dangerous. 32 .fxg3 '1Wxg3+ 33.ig2 \Wxg5 34.'1Wxb4 gc8 35,gfl gel 36.'1Wd4 d2 37.h4 \Wxa5. Black collects already a third pawn for the piece. 38 .b4 dlWI' 39.gxdl gxdl+ 40.Wfxdl Wfxb4= The position is objectively drawish, but it is only Black who can play for a win.

14 . . . Wfc7

advance anymore, because after 16.id2 , Black will play himself 16 . . . aS, for example: 17.gacl ic6 18.b3 '1Wb7 19.gc2 ids 20.iel cxd4 21.exd4 0.f8. His knight is headed for the g6-square from where it might go to f4. 2 2 .0.cd2 0.g6+ De Oliveira - Ruemmele, ICCF 2008. Black's pieces have been much more actively deployed.

16 . . . .ie4 17.he4 Following 17.b3 cxd4 18.exd4 ixd3 19.gxd3, White must play very accurately; otherwise, he might end up in a worse position due to his weak d4-pawn. 19 ... '1Wb7 2 0 .igS h6 2 1.ih4 0.d5 22. ixe7 0.xe7 23.0.fe5 0.f6= Kaupert - Molina, ICCF 2013.

17. . . �xe4 18 . .id2 �fac8 15.�c4 There arises a complicated po­ sition with mutual chances after 15.aS gfd8 16.h3 (16.0.c4 .ie4 see 15.0.c4) 16 . . . g6 17.0.c4 0.e4 18 . .id2 cxd4 19.exd4 0.xd2 2 0 . 0.fxd2 0.f6 2 1.0.b6 ga7 2 2 .gacl Wff4oo Kameneckas - Zhak, ICCF 2008. The a7-square is not the best for Black's rook, but he has two powerful bishops, while White's isolated d4-pawn would need permanent protection.

15 . . . �ffd8 16.aS White cannot delay this pawn-

19. gacl 19 . .iel Wfb7 20.0.feS 0.ef6. Now, White should already think about equality. 21.0.b6 0.xb6 22. axb6 Wfxb6 23.Wfxa6 \Wxa6= Cat­ tani - Bergmann, ICCF 2010. 199

Chapter 15 19 Wi'b7 20.i.el g6. Black wishes to exchange on d4 and to follow this with e5. Therefore, he covers immediately the f5-square against the penetration of the enemy knight. 21.h3 cxd4 22. lll xd4 e5 23. ttJb3 Wi'b5 = Petkov - Freeman, ICCF 2 013. • . .

C2) 9.0-0 i.b7

We will deal now with : C2a)

10.dxc5 and C2b) 10.Wfe2. About 10.a3 lll b d7 - see Chap­ ter 13, variation C, 9.�d3. It would be too slow for White to opt here for 10 .b3 cxd4 ! ? 11. lll xd4 �e7 12 .�b2 lll b d7 13.:E&cl :E&c8 14.�bl 0-0 15.Wi'e2 Wi'a5+ Lippmann - Schulz, Kiel 2 015. Black's pieces are more active. 10.a4 b4 11.lll e 2 (11.lll b l lll bd7 12.lll b d2 �e7, or 12 .�e2 �e7 13. lll b d2 0-0, or 13.:E&dl �c7 14. lll b d2 0-0 - see variation Clb) 11 . . . lll b d7 12 .b3 (12 .lll g3 �d6 13. b3 cxd4 14.lll xd4, Burmakin - Le200

vin, Benidorm 2008, 14 . . . h5 ! ?+) 12 . . . cxd4+ White is already facing serious problems. 13.lll fxd4 e5. Black ousts the enemy knight from its active position. 14.lll f5 g6 15.lll fg3 h5+ Jussupow - Ivan­ chuk, Linares 199 2 . The threat h5-h4 is very unpleasant for White.

C2a) 10.dxc5 hc5

11.a3 White �b2 .

is

preparing

b2-b4,

After 11.a4 b4, h e must worsen the placement of his knight. 12. lll e 2 lll bd7+ After 13.lll g 3? ! , Black has a resource that we have al­ ready encountered in this varia­ tion - 13 . . . h5 ! + Hjartarson - Ehl­ vest, Reykjavik 1991. 11.b3 0-0 12 .�b2 �e7 ! ? = Ko­ tenko - Volodarsky, Russia 1996. ll.e4 lll b d7 12 .�f4 (12 .�e2 �b8 - see 11.�e2) 12 . . . lll h 5 13. �g5 �e7 14.�e3 lll hf6= Bondars Sorcinelli, LSS 2011.

2.c4 c6 3. lllj3 lllf6 4. lll c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6. id3 de 7. ixc4 b5 8. id3 c5 ll.�e2 lll b d7

12 .a3 0-0 - see 11.a3. 12 .b3 0-0 13 ..ib2 !k8 14.l''ffd l .ib4 - see 12 .l:!dl. 12 .l:!dl 0-0 13.b3 l:!c8 14 . .ib2 .ib4 lS.lll b l, Grachev - Filippov, Sochi 2 0 04, 1S . . . ixf3 ! ? This is a non-standard decision. 16.�xf3 �c7. White has the two-bishop advantage, but has problems to complete the development of his queenside pieces without posi­ tional concessions. 17.a3 ie7 18. l:!a2 . He wishes to develop his rook via the c2-square. 18 . . . l:!fd8 19.ixf6 lll xf6 2 0 .l:!c2 �b8 21.l:!xc8 �xc8 2 2 .�e2 g6+ Now, White would need to make many more accurate moves in order to equal­ ise completely. He will hardly manage to improve the placement of his knight on bl, since it must protect the pawn on a3. In addi­ tion, the penetration of Black's queen to the c3-square might be a serious threat. 12 .e4 �b8 . Black does not need to be in a hurry to castle; otherwise, he will have to consid­ er the move e4-eS and after the retreat of his knight - the stand­ ard bishop-sacrifice on h7. 13 ..igS

(13 .a3 id6 14.h3 0-0= Straeter Schandorff, Germany 2007) 13 . . . 0-0

14.l:!adl, Uhlmann - Lukacs, Debrecen 1988, 14 . . . l:!c8 ! ?+ 14.a3 h6 1S.ixf6 lll xf6 16.eS ixf3 . Now, White must comply with the weakening of his king's shelter in order not to lose his eS­ pawn. 17.gxf3 lll h S+ Mannermaa - Olofsson, ICCF 2009. 14.l:!acl .id6. Black has suc­ ceeded in establishing control over the es-square. lS.l:!fdl h6 16 . .ih4 .if4 17.l:!c2 l:!c8+ Lagowski Kempinski, Warsaw 2 0 07. His pieces have been much more har­ moniously deployed.

11 . . . 0-0 12.b4 White should better clarify im­ mediately the position of the ene­ my bishop on cS, because after 12 .�e2, Black can deploy it even more actively. 12 . . . lll b d7 13.b4 (or 13.e4 .id6 14 . .igS �b8= Johann Nesterov, Germany 2009) 13 . . . .id6 1 4 . .ib2 , Najdorf - Becker, Munich 1936, 14 . . . l:!c8=

12 . . . J.e7 13.J.b2 �bd7 201

Chapter 15 tage, because White's pawns on a3 and b4 have been fixed on squares with the same colour as his bishop.

15 . . . �c7 Black must remove his queen away from the c and d-files in or­ der to avoid the attack of White's rooks.

16.gacl �b8 14.YlYe2 14J�kl l"k8 15.�e2 .txf3 - see 14.YlYe2 . The careless move 14.YlYb3? ! would leave the bishop o n b 2 de­ fenceless and would enable Black to inflict a simple tactical strike and to obtain an advantage - 14 . . . llJcS ! 15.hh7+ llJxh7 16.bxc5, Heis­ senbuettel - Kahn, Schwaebisch Gmuend 1993, 16 . . . hc5 ! ?+ 14.llJe2 l:k8 15.llJf4, Kryakvin - P.Smirnov, Olginka 2 011, 15 . . . �c7 ! ?oo

14 . . . gcs 1s.gfdl It would be less precise for White to play here 15.gacl hf3 ! ? 16.gxf3. Naturally, h e cannot cap­ ture here with his queen because of llJe5. 16 . . . llJe5 17.gfdl llJxd3 18. Wxd3 �xd3 19.gxd3 gc4 2 0 .llJe2 gxcl + 21.llJxcl llJd5 22 .llJb3 gc8+ Lanzani - Godena, Padova 2 0 14. The position has been simplified and there has arisen an endgame in which Black has a stable advan202

17.h3 17.llJbl gxcl 18.gxcl .txf3 19. �xf3 gd8 2 0 .'119e 2 llJe5 2 1..ic2 llJc4= There has arisen a position with dynamic balance. White has the two-bishop advantage, but Black has a powerful knight on the c4-square.

17 . . . gfdS = Spirin - Malakhat­ ko, Esbjerg 2008.

C2b) 10.Yl\'e2 White's queen frees a square for his rook.

10 . . . llJbd7

2.c4 c6 3. l:i:ij3 l:i:if6 4. l:i:i c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6. i.d3 de 7. hc4 b5 8. i.d3 c5 11.b3. The development of the bishop on b2 seems rather slow. 11 . . . i.d6 12 .i.b2 0-0 13.!!acl (13. !!adl cxd4! ? 14.l:i:ixd4 !!c8+; 13. !!fdl !!c8 14.!!acl cxd4 - see 13.!!acl) 13 . . . !!c8 14.!!fdl cxd4 15.l:i:ixd4, Pi­ casso Gallego - Korneev, Malaga 2010, 15 . . . l:i:ie5 ! ?+ Black's pieces have been more actively deployed.

lU�dl About 11.dxc5 i.xc5 - see variation C2a.

11 . . . YHb6 He removes immediately his queen from the X-ray juxtaposi­ tion with White's rook.

11.a4 b4 12.l:i:ibl i.e7 13.l:i:ibd2 0-0 - see variation Clb. 11.a3 i.d6 - see Chapter 13, variation C, 9 .i.d3 . The straightforward attempt to advance e3-e4-e5 would lead to problems for White, due to the weakening of the d4-square. 11. !!el i.e7 12 .e4 ? ! cxd4 13.l:i:ixd4 l:i:ic5 14.!!dl b4 15.e5, Horvath Veress, Hungary 2010, 15 . . . bxc3 ! ? 16.exf6 i.xf6 17.bxc3 �d5 18.f3 l:i:ixd3 19.�xd3 0-0+ Black has not only the two-bishop advan­ tage, but also a superior pawn­ structure.

Or 12 .a3 !!d8 13.i.c2 i.d6 14. i.d2 cxd4 15.exd4 0-0+ Martins Barriga - Saglione, ICCF 2015. White has obtained a position with an isolated pawn in not the best possible version.

11.i.d2 . White's bishop will impede from this square his own rook to fight for the d-file. 1 1 . . . i.d6 12.!!acl 0-0 13.!!fdl c4oo, oc­ cupying space on the queenside, Nawrocki - Snihur, Borowice 2012.

12 .b3 cxd4 ! ? 13.exd4, Gouy Solakian, France 1996 (13.l:i:ixd4? ! e5+) 13 . . . i.b4 ! ? 14.i.b2 0-0+ White's dark-squared bishop is not well placed, because his own pawn on d4 restricts considerably the sphere of its actions.

12.a4

203

Chapter 15 12 .ic2 l'k8

The seemingly active move 13.e4 only leads to the weakening of the gl-a7 diagonal. 13 . . . cxd4 14. lll xd4 i.c5 15.i.e3 0-0+, followed by lll e 5, lll g4 (lll c4), Milinaroli Rabiega, Berliner 1995. 13.a3 ie7 14.dxc5 (After 14.e4, Black can transfer quickly his knight to the c4-square, from where it will exert powerful pres­ sure against White's queenside. 14 . . . cxd4 15.lll xd4 lll e 5 16.ig5, Em. Lasker - Duras, St Petersburg 1909, 16 ... lll c4! ?+) 14 ... '!WxcS. Black is preparing the transfer of his queen to the kingside. 15.e4 '!Wh5 16.if4 0-0= Reshevsky - Naj­ dorf, New York 1952.

12

• • •

c4!?

White restores the material balance, but allows the transfer of the enemy queen to the h5square. From there, it can partici­ pate in an attack against White's king. There arises a complicated strategical battle after the line : 16.e4 !k8 17.ig5 b3 18.ibl ib4oo Istratescu - Sturua, Istanbul 2003. White has a pawn-centre, but his pieces are dis-coordinated. In ad­ dition, it should not be forgotten that Black has an extra pawn.

16 . . . Vhs 17.Ve2 The move 17.'!Wc7 would lead to a perpetual check after 17 . . . ixf3 18.gxf3 lrxf3 19.lll b 6 b3 2 0 .hb3 '!Wg4=

17. . . .td6 18.h3

Black reduces his pressure against the enemy centre and re­ lies on utilising of his pawn-ma­ jority on the queenside.

After the careless move 18.e4?, White loses a pawn: 18 ... ixh2+ Berczes - Galyas, Budapest 2 0 0 2 .

13 .tc2 b4 14.a5 lrc7 15.lll a4

Black has managed to impede the enemy pawn-advance e3-e4.

•

The other retreats of White's knight lose a piece for him.

15 . . . lrxaS (diagram)

16.Vxc4

2 04

18 . . . t0e4

19.b3 o-o 20 .tda as 21. .tb2 h6= Black has an excellent •

position thanks to his powerful centralised knight.

Chapter 16

1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 .tll t'3 tll f6 4.tll c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6.c5

White occupies space on the queenside, but now, he must be constantly on the alert about the undermining moves b7-b6, or e6e5.

6 ... �bd7! ? This is a flexible move. Black does not clarify his plans for the time being. Later, depending on the circumstances, he may either inflict a counter strike in the cen­ tre e6-e5 (immediately, or after the preliminary moves g6, i.g7, 0-0), or can begin active actions on the queenside with b7-b6. (diagram)

7.b4 White fortifies his c5-pawn and prepares the development of his bishop on b2.

Besides this move, he has many other possibilities : The move 7.a3 does not look so active. 7 . . . g6 ! ? 8.b4 !i.g7 9.!i.b2 0-0 10 . .ie2 fie7 11.�a4 �e8 ! ? ( 1 1. . . �e4?! Speelman - M.Gure­ vich, Port Erin 2 0 07, 12 .�eS ! ?;t, followed by f2-f3) 12.0-0 e5. This thematic pawn-advance equalis­ es. 13.dxeS �xe5= 7.�a4. This does not look like the right time for White to de­ centralise his knight. 7 . . . e5 ! 8. �xeS (8 .i.d2 �e4= Botvinnik Rabinovich, Moscow 1937) 8 . . . �xe5 9.dxe5 �e4= White has temporarily an extra pawn, but can hardly hold on to it, because 205

Chapter 16 after 10 .b4? ! , Black has the powerful resource 10 . . . bS ! 11.llib6 '\Wxb6! This is the point! Black sacrifices temporarily his queen and obtains a serious advantage after that. 12.cxb6 hb4+ 13.i.d2 hd2+ 14.'\Wxd2 llixd2 1S.c;!;ixd2 gb8+ The move 7.i.d2 does not pre­ vent Black's pawn-break in the centre. 7 . . . eS 8.dxeS (8.llixeS llixeS 9.dxeS llid7= White is inca­ pable of protecting simultaneous­ ly his pawns on eS and cS.) 8 . . . llie4 9 .e6, Lymar - Ettinger, Tel Aviv 2003. White has an interest­ ing resource here, which is still insufficient to maintain an advan­ tage. 9 . . . fxe6 ! ? This is the sim­ plest. Black is not afraid of having a weak pawn on e6. 10.llixe4 dxe4 11.llid4 llixcS 12.llib3 llixb3 13. '\Wxb3 id6 14.gdl Wle7 1S.Wlc4 es. Black opens the diagonal for his bishop. 16.Wixe4 0-0 17.i.d3 ifs 18 .%!/c4+ i.e6= After 7 .ie2, Black can begin active actions on the queenside. 7 . . . b6 ! ? 8.cxb6 i.d6 9.0-0 0-0 10.'\Wc2 , Javakhishvili - Krush, Is­ tanbul 2008, 10 . . . %!/xb6 ! ? The weakness on e6 is easy to defend for Black and he will exchange his "bad" bishop after a6-aS, ia6. 11. llia4 '\Wc7 12 .b3 as 13 . .!b2 ia6 14.gfcl llie4 1S.ha6 gxa6= 7.Wic2 . With the help of this move Boris Gelfand won his game in the World Championship match in the year 2012 against 206

Vishy Anand. Still, later Black found quickly reliable ways of equalising. 7 . . . b6 8.cxb6

8 ... %!/xb6 ! ? 9.i.d2 id6 10.gc1 i.b7 ll.i.d3 aS. Black wishes to ex­ change the light-squared bishops at an opportune moment and White's activity in the centre 12. e4 would lead to quick simplifica­ tions. 12 . . . dxe4 13.llixe4 llixe4 14. .he4 cS 1S.hb7 %!/xb7 16.0-0 cxd4 17.llixd4 0-0 18 .%!/c6 '\Wxc6 19.llixc6 a4 20.gfdl llif6 = , fol­ lowed by llidS, Ugrinovsky - We­ ber, ICCF 2012. 8 . . . llixb6 9.i.d2 cS. Black gets rid of his weak pawn. 10.gc1 cxd4 11.exd4 i.d6 12 .i.gS (12 .i.d3 0-0 13.0-0 i.b7 14.llia4 llixa4 1S.V9xa4 aS l6.gc2 llie4= Gelfand - Aro­ nian, Paris 2 0 13) 12 . . . 0-0 13.id3 h6 14.ih4 if4 ! ? Black ousts the enemy rook from the c-file (In the above mentioned game Anand played against Gelfand the move 14 . . . i.b7.). 1s.gd1 llibd7 16.0-0 aS ! ? 17.%!/e2 %!/b6= Frolyanov Iskusnyh, Kazan 2012. 7.i.d3 es About

(diagram) 8.dxeS llig4

9.llia4

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. l:i:ij3 l:i:if6 4. l:i:ic3 e6 5.e3 a6 6.c5 l:i:i bd7

l:i:igxe5 10.l:i:ixeS l:i:ixe5 - see 8. l:i:ixe5. Following 8.ic2 e4 9.l:i:id2 b6= Khruschiov - Vysochin, St Peters­ burg 2009, or 8.ie2 e4 9.l:i:id2 b6 10.cxb6 id6 11.0-0 0-0+, Black obtains a space advantage, Ver­ meulen - Niewold, ICCF 2 0 15. 8 .l:i:ixe5 l:i:ixe5 9.dxe5 l:i:ig4 10. l:i:ia4 (White's protection with the other pawn 10.f4 does not prom­ ise him anything either: 10 . . . hcS ll.'!Wf3 '\1;¥b6= Bromberger - V. Georgiev, Neuhausen 2008. Black's pieces exert rather unpleasant pressure against the e3-pawn.) 10 ... l:i:ixeS 11.0-0 g6 ! ? The fian­ chetto of the bishop is Black's simplest road to equality. The move 12 .e4 leads to simplifica­ tions. 12 . . . dxe4 13.he4 °\1;¥xdl 14. gxdl ie6 15.if4 ig7 16.l:i:ib6 gd8 17.l'�xd8+ ©xd8 18 .gdl+ ©e7= Pintonello - Konstantinov, LSS 2011.

however, White's bishop is on f4 and not on cl. With his last move, Black not only undermines the enemy c5pawn, but also prepares the exchange of his bad bishop (a6-a5, i.a6).

8.ib2 Following 8.id2 a5 9.b5, Black fortifies the c6-square with the move 9 . . . i.b7 and after 10.cxb6, he does not need to lose time to regain his pawn, but can play more actively: 10 .. . cS ll.dxc5 l:i:ixc5 12.l:i:ia4 l:i:ife4 13.gcl, Shirov Fridman, Riga 2 0 14, 13 . . . gc8 ! ?oo

8 . . . a5 9.a3 ie7

7 . . . b6 (diagram) The pawn-structure resem­ bles the famous variation of the Queen's Gambit l.d4 d5 2 .c4 e6 3.l:i:ic3 l:i:if6 4.l:i:if3 i.e7 5.i.f4 0-0 6.e3 l:i:ibd7 7.c5 c6 8 .i.d3 b6. There

10.id3 207

Chapter 16 About 10 .i.e2 0-0 11.0-0 i.a6 12 . .ixa6 l:!xa6 - see 10.i.d3.

10

• • •

0-0 11.0-0

ll.Wfc2 V9c7 12.0-0 i.a6 13. .ixa6 l:!xa6= Onischuk - Motylev, Poikovsky 2010.

n . . . J.a6

13 .Wie2 WfcB 14.l:!abl axb4 15. axb4, Vachier Lagrave - Melku­ myan, Biel 2012, 15 . . . W/b7 ! ? = , fol­ lowed by l:!fa8. Black has less space indeed, but his bishop is more ac­ tive than its white counterpart .

13 cxb5 14.c6 tLib8 15. tLle5, Korchnoi - Golod, Beershe­ ba 2004, 15 tLieS!? • • •

•••

Black has realised his plan and has equalised completely.

12 .ixa6 •

If White refrains from this capture, the character of the fight remains more or less the same : 12.l:!el .ixd3 13.Wfxd3, Dyach­ kov - Rublevsky, Dagomys 2010, 13 . . . W/c7=, or 12.lliel, Ding - Aro­ nian, Paris 2013, 12 . . . W/c8 ! ? = , 12. Wfe2 .ixd3 13.V9xd3 V9c7 14.h3 l:!tb8 15.l:!tbl l:!b7 16.Wfc2 h6= Matlakov - Jakovenko, Dagomys 2010.

This is Black's most reliable move. He is preparing f7-f6, while his knight from e8 will go later to c7, taking part in the blockade of the enemy pawn on c6. 16. tLixb5 f6 17.Wlg4. White contin­ ues to increase the pressure, but Black's position remains quite solid. 17 fxe5 18.V9xe6+ m'7 19. e4! ? gas. Black frees a square for his knight. 20.dxe5 (Following 20.exd5? llia6 21.dxe5 llic5- + , White's centre crumbles.) 20 •••

. • •

tLl a 6 21.gadl tLiac7 22.tLixc7 tLixc7 23.Wfh3 d4! 24 .ixd4 Wic8 25 .ixb6 Wixh3 26.gxh3 .ixa3 27.f4 tLie6= Black can defend •

12

• • •

gxa6 13.b5

White is reluctant to comply with the rather calm develop­ ments and wishes by all means to complicate the matters. 208

•

successfully in this endgame and can even seize the initiative at an opportune moment.

Chapter 17

1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . tl'if'3 tl'if6 4.tl'ic3 e6 5.e3 a6 6 .b3

and can transfer his knight to a more active position at an oppor­ tune moment: tlJa6-b4.

7. . . tlJbd7

White defends his c4-pawn. Now, he does not need to worry about the possibility dxc4, fol­ lowed by b7-b5. Still, the move 6.b3 has a drawback - the weakening of the el-a5 diagonal and Black can ex­ ploit this immediately.

6 . . . Ab4 7.Ad2 White's bishop will be less ac­ tive on this square than on b2, but he cannot play 7.i.b2? ! , since he would lose a pawn after 7 . . . Wfa5 8.Wfc2 tlJe4 9.l'kl 1l;l/xa2 10 .i.d3 ixc3+ 11.i.xc3 Wfxc2 12.!!x:c2 tlJxc3 13 .l':�xc3, Shipov - Dreev, play­ chess.com 2 006, 13 . . . aS ! ?+ This is Black's most precise move. He impedes the pawn-advance b3-b4

8.Ad3 White develops his bishop to an active placement and prepares castling kingside. 8.Wfc2 0-0 9 . .ie2 (9.i.d3 i.d6 - see 8.i.d3) 9 . . . i.d6 10.0-0 e5 see 8 . .ie2 . The move 8.g3 does not com­ bine well with e2-e3. 8 . . . 0-0 9. i.g2 1l;l/e7 10.0-0 b6. Black wishes to exploit the removal of White's bishop from the fl-a6 diagonal. 209

Chapter 17 11.tlJel aS=, followed by i.a6, Khis­ matullin - Reshetnikov, Tagan­ rog 2011. It is not good for White to play here 8.cS, because this clarifies the pawn-structure too early. Now, Black's pawn-advance e6-eS be­ comes much more effective. 8 . . . 0 - 0 9 .tlJa4 ( 9 . .id3 es. This tem­ porary pawn-sacrifice is Black's simplest road to equality. 10.tlJxeS ttJxeS 11.dxeS tlJd7 12.tlJa4 i.xd2+ 13 .�xd2 ttJxeS=) 9 ... i.xd2+ 10. �xd2, Akesson - Cramling, Goth­ enburg 2 00S (10.tlJxd2 eS= Be­ rezovsky - Krivoshey, Germany 2 0 04) 10 . . . eS ! ? t 8.ie2. White's bishop will be less active here than on the d3square. 8 . . . 0-0 9.0-0 .id6. Black should not overlook the possi­ bility tlJxdS. 10.Wl'c2 (lOJ'kl �e7 11.�c2 es 12.cxdS cxdS 13.dxeS Godena, tlJxeS= Tkachiev Cannes 1999) 10 . . . eS

There has arisen a position with an isolated pawn. It is not easy for White to increase his control over the strategically im­ portant d4-square, because he cannot transfer his knight on c3 there. In addition, his queen might turn out to be misplaced on c2 if Black manages to develop his rook on c8. 13.�fdl. White's rook is re­ moved from the protection of his king. 13 . . . .ie6 14.tlJd4 �c8 1S.Wl'b2 Wfe7 16.a4. He defends against the threat ia3, but weakens the b4square. 16 . . . tlJc6 17.if3, Granda Zuniga - Agrest, Turin 2006, 17 . . . tlJg4 ! ?+ White's king i s seriously endangered. 13.h3 ie6= Kovalenko - Re­ shetnikov, Moscow 2 013. 13.�adl .ie6 14.�bl �c8 = Mir­ zoev - Wirthensohn, Basel 2010.

8 ... 0-0 9.0-0

11.dxeS ttJxeS 1 2 .l:Ud l , Portisch - Khalifman, Bazna 2007 (12. cxdS cxdS - see 11.cxdS) 12 . . . ttJxf3 + ! ? 1 3 . .ixf3 tlJg4t 11.cxdS cxdS 12.dxeS tlJxeS 210

After White has removed his king from el, he is threatening to capture on dS with his knight, so Black must take some measures against that. It is not good for White to de­ lay his castling. 9.Wfc2 id6 10.tlJe2

4. li:i c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6.b3 i.b4 7. i.d2 li:i bd7 8. i.d3 0 - 0 9. 0 - 0 i.d6 (10.0-0 - see 9.0-0) 10 . . . cS! ? This move looks more reliable than the advance of the other pawn. (10 . . . e 5 11.cxdS cxdS 12.dxeS li:ixeS 13. li:ixeS heS 14 . .ic3 .ixc3+ 1S.Wfxc3;!; Jussupow - Kempinski, Germany 2009. White's bishop is more ac­ tive than its counterpart. There has appeared an isolated pawn in Black's position.) 11.0-0 b6. He is preparing to develop his bishop on b7. 12.cxdS exdS 13.li:ig3 i.b7 14.li:ifS /i.c7 lS.dxcS bxcSoo Huz­ man - Kasparov, Rethymno 2003. There has arisen a standard posi­ tion with hanging pawns in which Black's prospects are not inferior.

9 . . . .i.d6 9 .. J3e8? 10.li:ixdS ! li:ixdS 11. cxdS hd2 12.dxc6 i.b4 13.cxd7 hd7 14.li:ieS± Goryachkina Bulmaga, Moscow 2012.

10 .�e2 l'!e8 11.h3 eS 12.dxeS li:ixeS 13.li:ixeS heS 14.l'!adl, Ras­ mussen - Hansen, Aalborg 2006, 14 ... bS ! ? lS.cxdS cxdS+, followed by dS-d4. You can see the conse­ quences of the misplacement of White's queen on e2 impeding the move li:ie2. After 10.cS i.c7 ll.e4, Black can play 11 . . . eS ! , after which the game is sharpened. 12.exdS, Ip­ polito - Erenburg, New Jersey 2008 (12 .dxeS? ! Le Quang Llem Nguyen Huynh Minh, Singapore 2 006, 12 . . . li:ixeS ! ? Black wins by force the pawn on h2. 13.li:ixeS dxe4 14.li:ixe4 li:ixe4 1S.he4 !i.xeS 16.l'!cl hh2 + 17.©xh2 �h4+ 18. ©gl Wfxe4+) 12 . . . exd4 ! ? Black un­ dermines the base under the ene­ my pawn on cS. 13.d6 li:ixc5 14.dxc7 Wfxc7. He regains his piece and ends up with an extra pawn. Still, White has two powerful bishops and this compensation is suffi­ cient for him to maintain the bal­ ance. 1S.i.c2 dxc3 16.i.xc3 l'!d8 17. Wfcl li:idS 18.i.eS �e7 19.l'!el li:ie6oo 10.l'!el h6

We will analyse in details now:

A) 10.lkl, B) 10.e4 and C) 10.'8c2. 10.h3 h6 11.�c2 (lUkl l'!e8 see variation A) 11 . . . eS - see vari­ ation C.

11.l'!cl es - see variation A. 211

Chapter 17 11.\Wc2 eS see variation C ll.h3 eS 12.cxdS cxdS= Potkin - Jakovenko, Moscow 2012. After 11.\Wcl, Bu Xiangzhi Rublevsky, Sochi 2016, it is good for Black to choose 11 .. J!e8 ! ? = , followed by e6-eS. 11.e4 dxc4. This is a typical re­ source for Black in similar posi­ tions. Before playing eS-e6, he exchanges on c4. 1 2 .bxc4 eS 13.cS !i..c7 14.lll a 4. The edge of the board is not the best place for White's knight. (He should have possibly chosen the more reliable move 14.\Wc2 , although even then after 14 . . . exd4 1S.lll e 2 lll g4 16.lll exd4 lll deS 17.h3 lll xd3 18.\Wxd3 lll eS 19.lll xeS .ixeS= , Black would not have any problems thanks to his two powerful bishops, Bacrot Rublevsky, Poikovsky 2011.) 14 . . . exd4 1S.h3. White takes the g4square under control. 1S .. J:�e8 16. �kl (16.l"�bl, Rodshtein - Delor­ me, Biel 2011, 16 . . . lll h 7! ?oo) 16 . . . lll h 7+± White must play very pre­ cisely in this position; otherwise, Black's kingside counterplay might turn into a decisive attack. For example after: 17.i.bl? ! lll gS 18. lll xd4, Matlakov - Iskusnyh, Khan­ ty-Mansiysk 2011, 18 . . . lll eS ! ?+, White would be beyond salvation, since after 19 . .ie3? ! , Black would have the resource 19 . . . lll xh3+ ! 20.gxh3 \Wh4 2 Uk3 i.xh3-+

A) 10.!!kl h6 Black does not clarify his fur­ therplans yet. 212

11.h3 About ll.\Wc2 l'!e8 12 .h3 cS see variation C. 11.lll e 2, Aronian - Jakovenko, Moscow 2009, White increases his control over the d4-square. This may be very useful for him if Black advances e6-eS and there arises a position with an isolated queen's pawn. Still, Black can undermine the enemy centre with his c-pawn as well: 11 . . . dxc4 ! ? 12 .bxc4 cs 13. lll g 3 b6 14.i.c3 cxd4 1S.exd4 \Wc7 16.lll e4 lll xe4 17.he4 i.b7= 11.l'!el. White increases the ef­ fect of the threat e3-e4, but Black takes actions first. 11 . . . eS 12.cxdS cxdS 13.dxeS (The move 13.e4 leads to exchanges. 13 . . . dxe4 14. lll xe4 lll xe4 1S.he4 exd4 16.lll xd4 lll f6= Chadaev - Rublevsky, Ta­ ganrog 2 011.) 13 . . . lll xeS 14.lll xeS heS lS.lll e 2, Sargissian - Illescas Cordoba, Istanbul 2 0 1 2 , lS . . . lll e4 ! ? = Black has obtained a good position with an isolated pawn.

11 . . . ges 12.e4

4. l:iJ c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6.b3 !ib4 7. !id2 l:iJ bd7 8 . .id3 0 - 0 9. 0 - 0 .id6 12 .W/c2 c5 - see variation C. White should better not post­ pone this move, because after 12. gel, Scekic - Erenburg, New Jer­ sey 2008, Black can play 12 . . . eS ! ? 13.dxeS l:iJxeS 14.l:iJxeS hes lS. cxdS l:iJxdS 16.l:iJxdS �xdS=

12

• • •

later .ie6 with tempo. 19.l:iJb6 !i.e6 20 . .ic4 hb6 2 1.�xb6 hc4 2 2 . gxc4 l:iJgS 23.l:iJxgS hxgS 24.f3 gad8 2S.�b2 f6= The position has been simplified considera­ bly.

18 ctlh:f8 19.ctlb6 gbs 20 . .ic4 ctlxe5 • • •

dxc4 13.bxc4

13.hc4 eS= Volkov - Motylev, Moscow 2008.

13

• • •

es

Black wins a pawn, but ena­ bles the opponent to pin him on the e-file. This pin is harmless for him, though . . . 21 .b:eS hes 22. •

gel Bc7 23.Bb3 .if5 24.ctlxeS gxe5 25 .lxf7+ ©h8 26.Bg3 �el+ 27.gxel Bxg3 28.fxg3. •

Black wishes to exchange on d4 and to gain access to the eS and cs-squares for his minor pieces. White is fighting for the cS­ square. Still, his pawn on cS will need protection later.

Black must play accurately in this endgame, because White's pieces are much more active. 28 .ih7. Black prepares .ig8, in order to exchange the active enemy bish­ op. 29.ge7. This penetration of the rook is harmless for Black.

14 .ic7 15 .ie3 exd4 16. hd4 Be7 17.ctla4 ctlh7 18.e5

29 .ig8 30 .ib3 ctlg6 31.ge4 hb3 32.axb3 ©g8. Centralis­

Following 18.W/b3, Guedon P.Martynov, Cappelle-la-Grande 2 013, it seems very good for Black to play 18 . . . l:iJdf8, in order to play

ing the king is the simplest road to equality. 33.ctlc4 @f7 34.©f2 @f6= White's pieces are more ac­ tive, but Black has a better pawn­ structure.

14.cS

• • •

•

• • •

• • •

•

213

Chapter 17 B) 10.e4

harmoniously deployed, while White's passed pawn has been re­ liably blocked.) 13 . . . h6 14.i.h4 g5 ! ? 15.i.g3, Uhlmann - Ushe­ nina, Marianske Lazne 2008. White's bishop is misplaced here and he will need plenty of efforts to bring it back into the actions. 15 . . . cxdS ! ? 16.cxdS i.g4+

12

. • •

i.c7

This is a straightforward move. White does not lose time to im­ prove his position and advances immediately e3-e4. Black is per­ fectly prepared to counter it.

10

• • •

dxc4 11.bxc4

Capturing with the bishop cannot create problems for Black. In addition, it does not seem logi­ cal, since then the move b2-b3 be­ comes senseless for White. 11. i.xc4 e5 12 .i.g5 b5 13.i.e2 (13 .i.d3 i.b7 14.lDe2, Aleksandrov - Dziu­ ba, Dresden 2 0 07, 14 .. J'!e8 ! ?oo) 13 . . . h6 14 ..ih4 13e8 15.13cl i.b7 16.dxeS lDxeS 17.lDd4 lDg6+, Black gets rid of the pin and is threaten­ ing later to play c6-c5, winning the pawn on e4, Wiedenkeller Karjakin, Ohrid 2009.

11

. • .

e5 12.c5

The move 12 .dS weakens the c5-square. 12 . . . lDcS 13.i.gS (13. i.c2 cxd5 14.cxdS b5 15.Wie2 i.g4+ Gasanov - Malakhatko, Moscow 2007. Black's pieces have been 2 14

13.lDa4 About 13 .i.gS exd4 14.lDa4 13e8, or 13.h3 exd4 14.lDa4 13e8 see 13.lDa4. 13.i.e3 fie7= A.Moiseenko Huzman, Montreal 2 0 04.

13 . . . exd4 14.h3 14.i.gS. This pin of the knight does not bring White anything. 14 . . . 13e8 15.13el (15.fffc 2? ! lDf8+, with the rather unpleasant threat i.g4, Dzagnidze - Stefanova, Lo­ pata 2 0 14.) 15 . . . 13b8 16.i.c2 h6 17 ..ih4 lDf8 18.Wxd4 .ig4oo Van Wely - Rublevsky, Foros 2 0 07.

4. l?i c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6.b3 !ib4 7. i.d2 l?i bd7 8. !id3 0 - 0 9. 0 - 0 !id6

16.E!cl l?if8 17.eS l?id5oo Sasiki­ ran - Kempinski, Warsaw 2008.

Now, Black's queen may go to the kingside. 18.gbdl, Riazant­ sev - Sakaev, Moscow 2008 (18. E!b3 ? ! �f6 19. !i.c4 l?ig6+ Braun M.Gurevich, Dresden 2008) 18 � e 6 19.eS. White prevents �f6. 19 gb8oo Black's position is a bit cramped, but he has no pawn­ weaknesses. It should not be for­ gotten that he has an extra pawn as well. • . •

• • •

After 16.'!Wcl, Malakhatko Kharlov, Zvenigorod 2008, Black has the interesting possibility 16 . . . l?ih7!?+ His knight frees the square for his queen and later it can go to e6 or g6 from the h7-square.

C) 10.'Bc2 16

• • •

l?if8 17.'!Wc2

17.'!Wcl, Palliser - Malakhatko, Port Erin 2 0 05, 17 . . . l?i6d7 ! ? 18. l?ixd4 l?ie5 19.�c3 l?ixd3 20.�xd3 l?ie6 2 1.i.e3 E!b8+ Black's two powerful bishops provide him with a slight but stable advantage.

This is a useful move. White connects his rooks and increases his control over the e4-square.

10

• • •

h6

17.E!b4, Van Wely - Bacrot, Germany 2 0 06, Black can neu­ tralise the threat against the d4pawn with the move l?ie6. 17 . . . l?ie6 ! ? 18.E!c4 E!b8 19.eS /?ids 2 0 . �c2 i.d7oo

17

• • •

�6d7! 215

Chapter 17 He has numerous alternatives here, but neither of them provides him with an advantage. 11.cS .ic7 12 Jfael es - see 11. gael. 11.gacl ges 12 .h3, Gajewski Potkin, Pardubice 2 0 0S, 12 . . . cS ! ? 13.cxdS exdS 14.dxcS lll xcS= 11.gael eS 12.cS !i.c7 13.lll xeS heS ! ? This is Black's simplest road to equality. 14.dxeS lll xeS. He is threatening dS-d4, as well as lll xd3, depriving his opponent of his two-bishop advantage. 1S.f3 (Following lS.!cl, Riazantsev Tomashevsky, Dubai 2 0 14, lS . . . lll xd3 ! ? 16.Wxd3 lll e4 17.lll xe4 .ifs 18.Wc3 he4 19.!i.b2, Black neu­ tralises the activity of White's pieces on the long diagonal with the move 19 .. .f6 and obtains a quite acceptable position 2 0.f3 ig6=) 1S . . . d4 16.lll e4 lll xd3 17. Wxd3 lll xe4 18 .fxe4 dxe3 19 .Wxe3. White's pieces are better devel­ oped, but his e4-pawn is weak. 19 . . .f6 (19 . . . .ie6 ! ? = ) 20 .eS. He gets rid of the isolated pawn, but now, Black succeeds in complet­ ing his development. 20 . . . fxeS 21.gxf8+ Wxf8 2 2 .\1;!/xeS .id7 23. gfl \1;!/e8 = Lysyj - Rublevsky, So­ chi 2 01S. 11.gfe1 eS 12.cxdS cxdS 13.e4 dxe4 14.llJxe4 lll xe4 1S,gxe4 lll f6 16.gh4 (After 16.dxeS, White does not obtain sufficient compensa­ tion for the exchange. 16 . . . lll xe4 216

17.he4, Kashlinskaya - Bulma­ ga, Athens 2012, 17 . . . !i.bS ! ?+) 16 . . . e4. Black sacrifices a pawn and neutralises White's activity on the kingside. 17.!i.xe4 lll xe4 18.\1;!/xe4 ges 19.\1;!/d3 Wf6 20 .ge4 !i.fS 21. gxe8+ gxe8 2 2 .Wc3 gcs 23 .\1;!/e3 gc2 = Learte Pastor - Camacho Dominguez, ICCF 2012. Black's two powerful bishops in this open position compensate fully his minimal material deficit. ll.e4 dxc4 12 .bxc4 eS 13.cS (The move 13.dxeS leads to the weakening of the dark-squared complex at the centre of the board. 13 . . . lll xeS 14.lll xeS heS lS. gadl lll g4 16.g3 .id4t Shirov Gelfand, Odessa 2 007.) 13 . . . .ic7 14.lll a4 exd4 1S.h3 ges 16.1%adl (16.gfel lll h Soo Nguyen Ngoc Tru­ ong Son - Zhang Ziyang, Manila 2008; 16.gabl, Kuzubov - Koba­ lia, Port Erin 2 00S, 16 . . . lll f8 ! ?+) 16 . . . lll f8 = Chatalbashev - Mala­ khatko, Athens 2 0 07. After 11.h3, the move 11 . . . eS is even more effective for Black. He wishes to obtain a position with an isolated pawn, because White's king shelter has been weakened by the pawn-advance h2-h3. 12. cxdS (12.dxeS lll xeS 13.lll xeS hes 14.gadl, Kasimdzhanov - Bacrot, Bastia 2006, 14 . . . ges ! ? = ) 12 . . . cxdS (diagram) 13.dxeS lll xeS 14.lll xeS hes lS.gadl (The move lS.gacl ena­ bles Black to play 1S . . . d4 16.exd4, Huzman - Najer, Moscow 2006,

4. CfJ c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6.b3 .ib4 7. .id2 CfJ bd7 8 . .id3 0 - 0 9. 0 - 0 i.d6

16 . . . hd4 ! ? = He has got rid of his only weakness and the position is equal.) 1S . . . .id7 16.CfJe2 :gc8 17. Wfbl ge8= , preventing .ic3, Ku­ laots - Godena, Saint Vincent 2 00S. The placement of White's bishop on b2 is not so good. If he is reluctant to play the position against the isolated pawn, White can choose 13.e4, which would lead to a calmer game. 13 . . . clxe4 14.CfJxe4 CfJxe4 1S.ixe4 exd4 16.CfJxd4 CfJf6. The central pawns have been exchanged. Neither side has pawn-weaknesses. Later, both sides will have difficulties to improve their positions and to break the balance. 17 . .if3 i.eS 18. .ic3 Wfb6 19.gadl i.d7 2 0 .Wfd2 gac8 2 1.i.aS Wfa7 2 2 .Wfb4 bS 23. gfel gfe8= Tomashevsky - Jako­ venko, Moscow 2010. 11.CfJe2. The transfer of the knight to the g3-square seems a bit slow. ll . . . Wfe7 ! ? (diagram) 12.cS .ic7 13.CfJg3 eS. Black is not afraid of the loss of a tempo after CfJg3-fS. 14.CfJfS Wfe8 lS.CfJxeS CfJxeS 16.clxeS hfS. He exchanges the active enemy knight. 17.exf6 hd3 18.Wfxd3 Wies. This is the

point! White must lose a tempo to defend against the checkmate and Black manages to preserve the harmony in his kingside pawn­ structure. 19.g3 Wfxf6= Prati Cvak, ICCF 2 0 14. 12.CfJg3 b6 13.e4. Black is well prepared to counter this move. (13.gadl .ib7 14.gfel gfd8= Vol­ kov - Rodshtein, Dresden 2 007) 13 . . . clxe4 14.CfJxe4 CfJxe4 1S . .ixe4 .ib7 16.gfel gfd8 17.gadl CfJf6 18. .id3 . Black cannot play yet c6-cS, because of d4-dS, but he can ac­ complish that pawn-advance lat­ er. (18 . .ic3, Ftacnik - Erenburg, Germany 2006, 18 . . . aS ! ? = ) 18 . . . aS= Noeth - Pavlicek, ICCF 2012 .

11 . . . e5 12.cxd5 cxd5

13.e4 217

Chapter 17 The transfer into a position with an isolated pawn 13.dxeS does not promise much to White. 13 . . . lll xeS 14.lll xeS hes 15.lll e 2. His knight is headed for the blocking d4-square. Black can impede this manoeuvre, however... 15 ....ig4 16. h3 (The move 16.f3 weakens the e3-pawn. 16 .. .l:kS 17.V!ibl .id7 18. l:kl V!ib6 19.�cS �c8 20.gc1, Sar­ gissian - Hansen, Turin 2006, 20 ... .ic7 ! ? This is Black's most precise move. He prepares V!id6, in order to weaken White's king shelter even more. 21.lll d4 V!id6 22 .g3 ge8 =) 16 ... gcs 17.V!ibl .be2 ! ? (17 . . . .id7? ! 18 . .icl ! V!ie7 19 . .ib2 gfe8 2 0.V!ial hb2 21.V!ixb2;t Nyback - Frid­ man, Germany 2 006) 18 . .ixe2 V!id6= , followed by the doubling of the rooks on the c-file, gc6, gfc8.

13 dxe4 14.�xe4 15.he4 exd4 16.lll xd4 •••

�xe4

White would not achieve much if he postpones the regaining of his pawn: 16 . .ih7+ ©h8 17 . .ifS, Aleksandrov - Fridman, Turin 2006, 17 . . . lll cS ! ? = , or 16 . .icl lll f6 17 . .ib2 ges 18 . .ifS V!ia5= Ftacnik - M.Gurevich, Warsaw 2005.

Following 17.lll f3? ! lll xe4 18. V!ixe4 ges+ Radjabov - Erenburg, Rishon Le Ziyyon 2006, it is only Black who can play for a win thanks to his two bishops. 17.h3 lll xe4 18.V!ixe4 ges 19. V!if3, Carlsen - Erenburg, Reykja­ vik 2006, 19 . . . .ieS ! ? = 1 7. .if3 .ixh2 + 18.©xh2 V!ixd4 19.©gl .ig4. Black continues to strive for simplifications. Natu­ rally, White will regain the sacri­ ficed pawn, but he would have no chances of playing for a win. 2 0 . .bh6 V!ieS 2 1.gfel V!ihS 2 2 . .ixg4 lll xg4 23 ..if4 gads 24 . .ig3 gxdl 25.V!ixdl lll f6= Navalon - Pericot, ICCF 2012.

17 �xe4 18.V!ixe4 :!ie8 19. V!i:f3 hf5 20.V!ixf5 V!ic8 21.%Yxc8 :!iaxc8 22 .ixh6 hh2 + 23. ©xh2 gxh6= Maksimenko • . •

16

•••

�f6

White's pieces are more active, but he cannot realise anything meaningful out of this. (diagram)

17.�f5 This seemingly active knight­ move leads only to further ex­ changes. 218

•

Kempinski, Gorzow Wielkopolski 2 0 14. In this endgame Black's kingside pawn-structure is a bit weak, but this is not important, since there is just a few material left on the board.

Chapter 18

1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3.�t'3 �f6 4.�c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6. �c2

contribute to the development of White's kingside. 7 . . . l2Jc6 8.dxcS i.xcS= Nakamura - Fernandez, Orlando 2011. 7.b3. The development of the bishop on b2 seems rather slow. Black manages to create pressure against the d4-pawn. 7 . . . l2Jc6

White is fighting for a tempo. After . . . dxc4, he wishes to recap­ ture .ixc4, therefore he is reluc­ tant to play with his bishop. Still, the placement of his queen on c2 may turn out to be bad if the c-file is opened, moreover that his con­ trol over the d4-square has been weakened as well.

6 . . . c5 Black wishes to exploit the de­ fects of the move 6.�c2 . He would not mind losing a tempo in order to do that.

7.cxd5 Before developing his bishop on e2, White deprives Black of the possibility to capture on c4. 7.i.d2. This move does not

8.cxd5 l2Jb4 ! ? = 8.dxcS i.xcS 9.i.b2 0 - 0 10.a3 (10.l::M l �e7 11 . .ie2 gd8 = Scherer - Spreemann, Email 2013) 10 . . . d4= Sasikiran - Sarakauskas, Beijing 2008. 8 . .ib2 cxd4 9.exd4 dxc4 ! ? This is a principled move. Black wishes to capture on d4. 10.bxc4 (This move is forced, because after 10. !xc4 bS ll ..ie2 .ib'l+, there arises an unfavourable version for White 219

Chapter 18 of a position with an isolated pawn, because his bishop on b2 is very passive.) 10 . . . lll xd4 11.lll xd4 \!;!fxd4 12.lll dS \!;!fcS 13.lll xf6+ gxf6 14.h-£6, Sultana - Coimbra, Khanty-Mansiysk 2010. White has regained the sacrificed mate­ rial, but after 14 . . . l:!g8 ! ? 15.g3 i.d7oo, Black's prospects are not worse at all. 7.a3. White is preparing dxcS and b2-b4, but it is Black to move now and he accomplishes a similar plan before his opponent. 7 . . . dxc4 8.hc4 (8.dxcS hes - see 7.dxcS) 8 . . . bs 9.i.a2 lll b d7 10.0-0 (After 10 .dS, White would not achieve much, because following 10 ... exdS 11.lll xdS i.b7 12.e4, Black can play 12 ...c4oo, occupying additional space on the queenside and restricting the enemy bishop on a2, Mame­ dyarov - Andreikin, Baku 2 0 14.) 10 . . . i.b7 11.'l&e2 (11.13dl '\Wc7 ! ? 12. \!;!fe2 i.d6 - see 11. '1We2) 11 ... i.d6

Black's bishop will be more ac­ tive on this square than on e7. He should not be in a hurry to ex­ change on d4, because White's bishop on cl will be activated af­ ter exd4. 220

Following 12 .e4 cxd4 13.lll xd4 0-0 14.l:!dl, Dizdar - Lalic, Se­ ville 2011, it seems very good for Black to play 14 . . . \!;!fc7! ? = , winning a tempo by attacking the pawn on h2. 12.dxcS lll xcS 13.b4 lll cd7 14. i.b2 0-0 15.l:!fdl \!;!fe7= Inkiov Danailov, Sofia 1985. In positions of this type White's knight is bet­ ter placed on d2 than on c3, be­ cause it does not stand in the way of the bishop on b2. 12 .l:!dl \!;!fc7

13.dS c4 ! ?+ Bauer - Lautier, Enghien les Bains 2001. Black has no problems at all after 13.h3 0-0 = , while after White's careless reaction 14.e4 ? ! cxd4 15.lll xd4 lll cS+ Kozul - Var­ ga, Medulin 1997, Black's pieces will exert powerful pressure against the enemy e4-pawn. The move f2-f3 will weaken consider­ ably the dark squares around White's king. 13.dxcS lll xcS 14.b4 lll cd7 15. i.b2 l:!c8 16.l:!acl '1Wb8. Black re­ moves his queen away from the juxtaposition with the enemy rook. 17.h3 0-0 18 .i.bl l:!fd8= Ve­ lilla Velasco - Van der Hoeven,

1.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3. 11Jj3 11Jf6 4. 11J c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6. Vf!c2 c5 ICCF 2010. His pieces have been very harmoniously deployed. 7.dxc5 .ixc5 8.a3 (8.b3 dxc4 9 . .b:c4 b5 10 .i.e2 i.e7= Ghosh Movsesian, Pardubice 2 015; 8. ie2 dxc4 9.0-0 0-0= Hambleton - Erenburg, USA 2 0 17; 8.cxd5 exd5 - see 7.cxd5) 8 . . . dxc4. White wanted to play b2-b4, therefore, Black had no time to wait for the development of the enemy bishop on fl. 9 . .b:c4 b5

10.ia2 . This is not going to be the best square for White's bishop in this middle game, because it will be restricted by the pawn on e6. 10 . . . 11Jbd7 11.b4 i.e7 12 .i.b2 ib7 13.0-0 (13.e4, Agrest - Go­ dena, Batumi 1999. After this un­ timely activity Black obtains an edge: 13 . . . gcB ! ?+) 13 . . . gcs= Smys­ lov - Pelletier, Zuerich 1998. 10 .ie2 11Jbd7. Black defends against 11Jxb5. 11.0-0 ib7 12 .b4 (12 .id2 0-0+ Lastin - S.Atalik, Istanbul 2 003) 12 . . . ie7 13.ib2 0-0 14.gfdl (14.a4 a5= Beliavsky - Cheparinov, Amsterdam 2 0 07) . Black's queen on dB is misplaced under the X-ray juxtaposition with the rook on dl. Still, he can

transfer it to a8 after gc8-c7. 14 . . . gcs 15.gacl gc7 ! ?oo Flohr/Reilly - Alekhine/Monosson, Nice (con­ sultation) 1931. 10 .id3. This is the most active retreat of the bishop, but it is still insufficient to provide White with an advantage. 10 . . . 11Jbd7

11.0-0 i.b7 12.a4 (The move 12 .e4 weakens the gl-a7 diagonal. 12 . . . Vf/c7 13.ig5, Rustemov - Vera Gonzalez Quevedo, Mondariz 2 0 0 2 , 13 . . . 11Jg4 ! ?+) 12 . . . 0-0 13. 11Je4. The exchange of the knights leads to simplifications, but White had nothing better anyway. 13 . . . gcs 14.11Jxf6+ 11Jxf6= Grachev Bareev, St Petersburg 2009. 11.b4. White prepares the de­ velopment of his bishop on b2. ll ... ie7 12 .ib2 .ib7 13 .0-0 (13. gdl Vf/c7= Kornienko - Iskusnyh, Novokuznetsk 2 0 03) 13 . . . gcs 14. gfdl W!c7 15.gacl W!b8. Black's queen is going to the a8-square in order to increase the pressure on the long light-squared diagonal. 16.Wibl, Chemin - Malakhatko, Bastia 2 0 05, 16 . . . W!aB ! ? = 11.11Je4 ie7 12.11Jxf6+ (It i s less consistent for White to play here 12 .id2 ib7+, followed by gcs, 221

Chapter 18 S.Atalik - Gurevich, Saint Vin­ cent 2 0 03.) 12 . . . i.xf6 13 . .ie4, Tu­ rov - Kobalia, playchess.com 2006. White exploits the fact that Black has failed to play .ib7 and wishes to cause disharmony in the deployment of his pieces. Still, Black has the powerful transfer of his rook to the c7-square. 13 . . . �fa7 ! ? 1 4 . .id2 l'k 7 15.\Wbl .ib7 16. .ixb7 (The attempt to win the ex­ change with the move 16 . .iaS might create problems for White. 16 . . . \WaB ! 17.!xc7? ! !xe4 18.\Wa2 lDcS. Black wishes to attack the weak b3-square. 19.0-0 .idS ! 2 0 . \Wbl lDb3+) 16 . . J'�xb7=

.ib4+ 11 . .id2 .ixd2+ 12.\Wxd2 \WxdS 13.\Wxd4 \We6= Ivanisevic Oms Pallisse, Andorra 2003. 8 .g3. White's light-squared bishop is better placed on the fl­ a6 diagonal, because it does not control the d3-square from g2. Black can make use of this cir­ cumstance. 8 . . . lDc6 9 . .ig2 lDb4 10. \Wd2 .tfS 11.0-0 .id3 = Now, White has nothing better than to comply with the repetition of the position. 12 .l'�dl .ic2 13.�fl .id3 14.�dl .ic2 = Blagojevic - Voiska, Plovdiv 2010. 8.dxcS !xcS

7

. . .

exd5

8 .ie2 .

White wishes at first to com­ plete the development of his king­ side pieces and to castle. About 8.lDeS .id6 9 . .ie2 0-0 10.0-0 .ie6 - see 8 . .ie2 . The strike i n the centre 8.e4 would only lead to simplifications 8 . . .cxd4 9.lDxdS lDxdS 10.exdS 222

9 . .ie2 lDc6 10.0-0 .ie6 - see 8 . .ie2 . Following 9.a3 lDc6 10.b4 .ia7 11 . .ib2 , Radjenovic - Huebscher, Berlin 1999, Black has an inter­ esting possibility to sacrifice a pawn for the initiative. ll . . . d4 ! ? 12.exd4 .ig4iii 9.lDe2, Nikolic - Handke, Ger­ many 2012, 9 . . . \We7 ! ? 10.lDed4 0-0 ll . .id3 .ig4= The activity of Black's pieces compensates the vulnerability of his isolated pawn .

J.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. 0.j3 0.f6 4. 0. c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6. Wic2 c5 7.cd ed 8

• • •

.ie6! ?

This is considered to be his most precise move. After 8 . . . 0.c6, White has the additional possibility 9.0.e5, threatening to double the enemy pawns on the c-file.

ib6oo, followed by !i..c7, with the idea to create weaknesses in White's king shelter, Rodshtein Rublevsky, Khanty-Mansiysk 2010. Black's piece-activity compensates with an interest the slight weak­ ness of his pawns on c6 and d5.

9

• • •

0.c6

9.0-0 10.gd1 9 .0.e5 id6 10.0-0 0-0 11.b3 (The move 11.f4 weakens the e4square. 11 . . . 0.c6 12.0.xc6 bxc6+ Ushenina - Girya, Khanty-Man­ siysk 2 0 14.) 11 . . .cxd4 12.exd4 Wic7 13.ib2 0.c6 14.0.xc6 \Wxc6+ Kra­ senkow - Ni Hua, Helsingor 2011. Black's pieces are more actively placed. 9.dxc5 hc5 10.0.d4 (10. 0-0 0.c6 - see 9 . 0-0) 10 ... 0-0 11.0-0 \Wd6 12.l3dl (After 12.0.xe6, White obtains the two-bishop advan­ tage, but fortifies the enemy d5pawn and opens the f-file for Black's rook. 12 . . . fxe6 13.b3 0.bd7 14.ib2 l3ac8 = Medvegy - Banusz, Heviz 2 012.) 12 . . . 0.c6 13.0.xc6 bxc6 14.b3 0.g4 15.hg4 hg4 16.0.e2

10 .id2 gc8 = Bischoff - E.Ata­ lik, Wijk aan Zee 2006. 10.a3. This move may tum out to be not so useful for White in the forthcoming battle. 10 . . . cxd4 ll.exd4, Ki.Georgiev - Svetush­ kin, Subotica 2008, 11 . . .h6! ? Black prevents the development of the enemy bishop on g5. 12.if4 id6 13.hd6 \Wxd6 14.h3 0-0= 10.0.es gcs (diagram) 11.'1Wa4, Sadler - M.Gurevich, Germany 2 003, ll . . . cxd4 ! ? 12. exd4 Wib6 13.0.xc6 l3xc6= After 11.if3 id6, White can­ not hold on to the eS-square. 12. 223

Chapter 18

llixc6 gxc6 13.dxcS gxcS 14,gdl 0-0 1S.�d3 llig4 16 . .ixg4 i.xg4t Black's pieces are very active. For example, after 17.llie2? ! W/gS 18. gel, Coleman - Ramirez, Free­ mont 2012, he has the line: 18 . . . he2 19.�xe2 �es 2 0 .g3 �e4 2 1 . id2 gc2+ and White i s beyond salvation. 11.gdl cxd4 12.exd4 id6 13. llixc6 gxc6 14.igS 0-0 1S.if3 h6 16.ih4 i.xh2 + ! ? This bishop-sac­ rifice is Black's simplest road to the draw. 17.xh2 llig4+ 18 . .ixg4 W/xh4+ 19.i.h.3 i.xh3 20.gxh3 W/f4+ 21.hl W/f3= Komev - Ni Hua, Moscow 2012. White's king can­ not go to the g-file, so he is forced to comply with the perpetual check. 10.dxcS. This move only en­ hances the development of Black's pieces. 10 . . . .ixcS

2 24

11.llia4. This transfer of the knight to cS is not dangerous for Black. 11 . . . id6 12.llicS W/e7 13. llixe6. Black's dS-pawn is fortified after this exchange. 13 . . . fxe6 14. llid4 gc8= Loiseau - Salles, Saint Paul Trois Chateaux 2 013. 11.b3 gc8 12 .ib2 0-0 13.gacl ia7 14.gfdl �e7 lS.�bl gfd8= There has arisen a typical position with an isolated pawn with ap­ proximately equal chances. Later, in the game M.Gurevich - Mo­ rozevich, Moscow 2001, White played rather carelessly 16.lligS? and Black seized the initiative with the move 16 . . . d4+ 11.llibS. This is a good posi­ tional move. White increases his control over the important d4square. ll ...ib6 12.llibd4 llixd4 13. llixd4 0-0 14.W/d3 id7= Lalic Damljanovic, Lorca 2 0 0S. 11.a3. White is preparing b4 and ib2 . ll . . ,gc8 12 .b4 id6 13. ib2 0-0 14.gacl (14.�bl, Ruste­ mov - Erenburg, Germany 2006, 14 . . ,ge8 ! ? = ) 14 ... llieS lS.llixeS .ixeS= Binder - Bachner, St Poel­ ten 2009. The pressure on the c­ file is very unpleasant for White. 11.gdl. White is threatening llixdS. 11 . . . �e7

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. &i'Jj3 &i'Jf6 4. &i'Jc3 e6 5.e3 a6 6. W!c2 c5 7.cd ed Following 12 .b3, Black com­ pletes effortlessly his develop­ ment and advances d5-d4. 12 . . . 0 - 0 1 3 . .ib2 1'fac8 14.l'facl .ia7 15. W!bl :afd8 16.h3 d4 17.exd4 &i'Jxd4 18.&i'Jxd4, Fressinet - Gagunash­ vili, Warsaw 2 005, 18 . . . hd4 ! ? = 12.a3 0 - 0 13.b4 .id6 1 4 . .ib2 :aac8 15.:aacl (15.W!d2 :afd8= Na­ kamura - Shankland, Baku 2015) 15 . . . a5 16.bxa5 (16.&i'Jg5, Moise Pedersen, ICCF 2009, 16 . . . g6 ! ? = White i s incapable o f exploiting the vulnerability of the al-h8 di­ agonal.) 16 . . . &i'Jxa5 17.a4 :afd8= 12.&i'Jd4 &i'Jxd4 13.exd4, Bischoff - Schandorff, Germany 2 004, 13 . . . .ia7 ! ? 14.W!a4+. White ex­ ploits the fact that his opponent has not castled yet and forces the transfer of Black's bishop from e6 to c6. This is still insufficient for White to maintain an edge. 14 . . . .id7 1 5 . W!b3 .ic6 16 . .ig5 0 - 0 17. .if3. White increases his pressure against the d5-square. 17 . . . :aadB 18.&i'Jxd5 hd5 19.hd5 :axd5 2 0 . hf6 W!d7. He has a n extra pawn at the moment, but is incapable of protecting the d4-pawn. 2 1.Wfg3 g6 2 2 .h3 :ae8 . Black does not need to capture on d4 immediately. 23.W!h4 :ae6 24.:ael hd4=

10

• • •

cxd4 11.&i'Jxd4

White wishes to exploit the weak­ ness of the isolated pawn on d5. He would not obtain much af­ ter ll.exd4 id6 12 . .ig5, Gordi­ evsky - Belous, Moscow 2 0 14, 12 . . . h6 ! ? 13 . .ih4 0-0=

n . . . &i'Jxd4

12.gxd4 White's rook will come under an attack with tempo on this square. Even after 12.exd4 .id6, White would not achieve anything. 13 . .ig5 0-0 14.W!b3 h6 15.hf6 (After 15.ih.4, Black should play 15 ... b5 ! = , defending against the manoeuvre &i'Ja4-c5, Schepetkova - Girya, Khanty-Mansiysk 2013.) 15 ... W!xf6 16.W!xb7, Girl - Tomashevsky, Al Ain 2012. White has an extra pawn, but Black's bishops are very pow­ erful. 16 . . J':UdB ! ? 17.g3 (After 17. W!b3 g6 18.g3 ©g7 19.&i'Ja4 :aab8 2 0 .Wff3 W!xf3 21.hf3 id7 22.&i'JcS :axb2 23.&i'Jxa6, Black's pieces are very active. For example: 23 . . . :aaB 24.llJc5 .ic6 25.llJd3 :abxa2 26. :aacl .ia4 27.hd5 hdl 28.ha2 .ig4 29 . .id5 :aa4 30 ..ic4 .if5 31. &i'Jb2 :ab4 32 .llJdl .ie4 33.&i'Je3 .ib8 34.d5 :ab2 = and White is incapa­ ble of realising his extra pawn.) 17 ... :aabB 18.W!xa6 :axb2 19.:aabl. He exchanges the active enemy rook. 19 . . . :axbl 20.&i'Jxbl W!e7 21. 225

Chapter 18 l'kl \Wf6. Now, White's queen is squeezed to protect the d4-pawn. 22 .'1Wd3 gas 23.gc6 i.f8 24.lll c3 ifs 2s.gxf6 .ixd3 26.gb6 .ixe2 27.lll x e2 gxa2 = Black has restored the material balance.

12 . . . i.c5 13.lii d l 13.i%d 2 . White's rook is not better placed here than on dl. 13 . . . \We7 14.\Wa4+ id7 lS.'IWdl 0-0 16. lll xdS lll xdS 17.gxdS ic6�. Black has sufficient compensation for the pawn. Later, in the game Yuf­ fa - Rublevsky, Cheliabinsk 2016, White played rather carelessly 18.ghs?! and after 18 . . . g6 19.gh3 gfd8 2 0.\Wel i.b4 21.\Wfl gac8 2 2 . a 3 i.d6+, ended u p i n a very diffi­ cult position, because his queen­ side pieces were not developed and his rook on h3 was misplaced.

13 . . '1We7 .

14.i.t'3 White increases the pressure against the pawn on dS. 14.b3 . White prepares the fi226

anchetto of his bishop, but with a calm play he would be incapable of preventing Black's pawn-break dS-d4. 14 . . . 0-0 1S . .ib2 gac8 16. gacl gfd8 17.\Wbl d4 18.lll a4 i.a7 19.hd4 hd4 20.gxd4 gxd4 21. exd4 gxcl+ 2 2 .\Wxcl .ixb3. Black restores the material balance. 23. \Wc8+ lll e 8 24.axb3 \Wxe2 25.h3 ©f8= Aleksandrov - Rublevsky, St Petersburg 2 0 15. 14.lll a4 .id6 15.lll b 6. This is an interesting pawn-sacrifice. It is not sufficient to provide White with an edge, however ... lS ... i.xb.2+ 16.©xh2 \Wd6+ 17.©gl \Wxb6 18. \Wa4+ i.d7 19.\Wf4 (After 19.\Wa3, Guseva - Schepetkova, Khanty­ Mansiysk 2 013, the simplest way for Black to equalise would be 19 . . . gc8 ! ? 2 0 . .id2 gc2 21.i.f3 \Wxb2 2 2 .\Wd6 gc6. Now, White must comply with the repetition of the position; otherwise, his sit­ uation would be worse. 23.'1Wb8+ gcs 24.\Wd6 gc6=) 19 . . . o-o 2 0 .b3 gac8 2 1.i.b2 \We6 2 2 .i.xf6 \Wxf6 23.'1Wxf6 gxf6 24.�ds. White has regained the sacrificed pawn, but there is just a few material left on the board. Black's kingside pawn­ structure has been compromised indeed, but he can maintain the balance with a precise play. 24 . . . i.e6 2s.gd4 gc2 26.ig4 (26.if3 gb8= Schepetkova - Girya, Mos­ cow 2014) 26 .. .fs 27.i.f3 b6 2s . .ids gfc8 29 .he6 fxe6 3o.gd7 gsc7. Black exchanges the active enemy rook. 31.gxc7 gxc7= Alek­ sandrov - Rublevsky, Loo 2 013.

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. 0.}3 Ci:Jf6 4. Ci:J c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6. W!c2 c5 7.cd ed 14.W/a4+ i.d7 1S.�b3. White is attacking the pawns on b7 and dS. (1S.�h4 ? ! h6 16.�g3 i.d6 17.f4 i.c6 18.i.f3 0-0+ Gordievsky Rublevsky, St Petersburg 2 0 14. Black has completed his develop­ ment, while White has to worry about the weak e3-pawn in his camp.) lS . . . 0-0

2 1.�g4 i.c6 22 .i.b2 (It is bad for White to play here 22 .i.d2 ? ! , be­ cause of 2 2 . . . hS 23.W/e2 �es 24. i:!cl l3d8. Black's pieces are obvi­ ously more active. 2S.i.c3 Wigs. This move provokes a weakening in White's position. 26.g3 l3e8 27. i.b2 l3xe3 ! After this simple com­ bination, Black not only regains the material, but also remains with an extra pawn. 28.fxe3 he3+ 29.'it>fl hcH) 22 . . . he3 ! =

14 . . . 0-0

16.i.f3. White can capture on dS on his next move. 16 ... i.e6 17.0.xdS Ci:JxdS 18.hdS hdS 19. i:!xdS l3ad8. White has an extra pawn, but has difficulties to com­ plete the development of his queenside pieces. 2 0.g3 i.b6 21. i:!xd8 i:!xd8 2 2 .i.d2 (He loses after 2 2 .�xb6, because of 2 2 . . . l3dl+ 23. 'it>g2 �e4+ 24.f3 �c4-+) 2 2 . . . i:!xd2 23.�xb6 W/e4 24.i:!cl h6 2S. W/b3 �fS 26.i:!fl bS= Bluebaum Heimann, Athens 2012. White has an extra pawn in the arising endgame with major pieces, but his rook is squeezed with the pro­ tection of his f2-pawn. 16.Ci:JxdS Ci:JxdS 17.�xdS, Zon­ takh - Korchmar, Voronezh 2 0 14, 17....!a.4! ? This is Black's most pre­ cise move. He removes his bishop from the d-file with tempo. 18.b3 l3ad8 19.WfhS i:!xdl+ 2 0.hdl g6

15.�xd5 About lS.hdS Ci:JxdS 16.Ci:JxdS i.xdS 17J�xdS l3ac8 - see lS.Ci:JxdS. White would not achieve much if he refrains from capturing the pawn. 1S.b3 l3ac8 16.i.b2 l3fd8 17. �e2 , Iljiushenok - Lintchevski, Moscow 2 016, 17 . . . bS ! ? After this move, White's knight cannot go to a4 if Black plays dS-d4. 18.i:!acl d4=

15 . . . hd5 16.hd5 17.gxd5 gac8

�xd5

227

Chapter 18 20

White cannot realise his extra pawn due to the lack of develop­ ment of his pieces.

18.J.d2 18.\Wdl gfd8 19.g3, Yuffa - An­ dreikin, Sochi 2016, 19 . . . !b6 ! ? 2 0 .gxd8+ gxd8 2 1.Wfc2 \Wc7 2 2 . 1l;\le2 1l;\le5 23.1l;\lc2 1l;\lc7= 18.1l;\ld3 gfd8 19.g3 gxdS 2 0 . 1l;\lxd5 gd8 2 1.Wff3, Kovalenko Shimanov, Wroclaw 2014, 2 1 . . . !d6 ! ? The transfer o f Black's bishop to the es-square is his sim­ plest road to equality. 2 2 .gb1 (22. i.d2 hg3 23.hxg3 gxd2 = ) 22 ... i.eS 23.e4 1l;\lc5 24.i.gS Wfc2 . White cannot avoid the loss of his b2pawn. 2s.ge1 f6 26.1l;\lf5 1l;\lxb2=

18

• • •

ixe3

Black restores the material balance. White's pieces are active, but he cannot obtain anything meaningful out of this.

19 .lc3 .lb6 20.'ef5 •

Or 2 0 .Wfb3, Schandorff - Er­ enburg, Helsingor 2 0 13, 20 . . . gfe8 ! ? = 228

• • •

Wfe6

This is Black's simplest reac­ tion. He would not mind the ap­ pearance of a weak pawn on e6 in his position, because he can easily hold this endgame.

21.Wf:f3 2 1.gadl WfxfS 2 2 . gxfS gcd8 . Black only needs to centralise his king in order to equalise com­ pletely. 23.gfdS f6 24.@fl gxdS 2s.gxdS gd8 26.gxd8+ hd8 27. @e2 @f7= Froewis - Svane, Ru­ zomberok 2 0 14.

21

•••

f6

This move prevents White's plan to attack the g7-square.

22.h4 ti'c6 23.h5 gfd8 24. fu(d8+ gxd8 25.ti'xc6 bxc6 Black's queenside pawn-struc­ ture is a bit weak, but this is prac­ tically irrelevant.

26.gel @f7 27.g4 .ld4 The exchange of the bishops is Black's simplest way of equalis­ ing.

28.�kl ixc3 29.gxc3 gd4= Gelfand - Anand, Moscow 2012.

Part s 1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . �t'3 �f6 4.�c3 e6 5 . .tg5 dxc4

In this part of our book we will analyse 5.ig5 and then 5 . . . dxc4, after which Black is trying to hold on to his c4-pawn, complying with the destruction of his pawn­ chain on the kingside. The variations in this scheme are usually very complicated and are full of plenty of tactical possi­ bilities. Black's last move is named in the theory of the open­ ings as "The Botvinnik System". Mikhail Moiseevich was not the first who played this system, but this opening scheme was named after him quite deservedly, since he contributed greatly to the development of its theory. He played for the first time the move 5 . . . dxc4 in his game against Zhiv­ . tsov (Moscow 1943) and this sys­ tem was universally acknowl-

edged after the famous game Denker - Botvinnik (radio match USA - USSR 1945), in which Black scored a crushing victory. The idea of the Botvinnik System is that Black wishes to hold on to his c4-pawn and is ready to com­ ply with almost complete destruc­ tion of his kingside pawn-struc­ ture. Instead he manages to cre­ ate counterplay in the centre and to obtain pawn-majority on the queenside. He can use this in the endgame and his king usually finds its shelter on the queenside in the middle game. In addition, in some variations Black can use the open h and g-files on the king­ side in order to organise an attack against the enemy king. We devote to the Botvinnik System chapters 19-2 2 . In Chap­ ter 19 we will analyse the varia­ tions in which White refrains from the most popular move 6.e4. In Chapter 2 0 , White plays 6.e4, but after 6 . . . b5 7.e5 h6 8 . .ih4 g5, he does not play 9. tlJxg5 and tries instead 9 . .ig3, or 9.exf6. Finally, Chapters 21-22 will deal with the main lines of the Botvinnik Sys­ tem, arising after 9.tlJxg5. 229

Chapter 19

1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . ll:if3 ll:if6 4.ll:ic3 e6 5.i.g5 dxc4

6.a4 This move looks too timid in comparison to 6.e4. Instead of playing actively in the centre and on the kingside, White applies prophylactic on the queenside. He can hardly fight for the open­ ing advantage playing in this fashion. 6.e3 bS 7.i.e2 (7.a4 i.b4 - see 6.a4) 7 . . ..ib7 8.0-0 lll bd7+ Me­ duna - Ostenstad, Gausdal 1988. 6.g3. The combination of the moves .igS and g3 does not seem harmonious at all. 6 . . . bS 7 . .ig2 i.b7 (diagram) It would be rather difficult for White to prove here that his lead 230

in development and more active pieces are sufficient to compen­ sate the sacrificed pawn. 8.0-0 !ie7 9.a4 (Following 9. e4 h6 10.!ixf6 i.xf6 11.eS .ie7+, Black has not only an extra pawn, but also the two-bishop advan­ tage, Guijarro - Moreno Trujillo, Madrid 2013.) 9 ... a6 10.lll e5 (White ends up in a bad position after 10.e4 h6 11 ..bf6 .bf6 12.axbS axbS 13.!�xaS ha8 14.\l;!lal lll d7 15.\l;!la7 0-0 16.eS .ie7+ Andreikin - Shi­ rov, Loo 2 013.) 10 . . . lll d S. Black wishes to neutralise his oppo­ nent's pressure by exchanging pieces. 11.he7 \l;!fxe7 (diagram) 12 .e3. The transfer of the queen to hS seem rather slow. 12 . . . 0-0 13.�hS f6 14.lll f3 lll d7+ Kozul - Sulava, Bol 2 0 15. Following 12.lll e 4, Black can

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. t:fJj3 t:fJf6 4. t:fJc3 e6 5. .lg5 de 6.a4 .lb4

oust at first one of the enemy knights away from the centre of the board: 12 .. .f6 13.t:fJf3 t:fJd7 14. W/c2 0-0 15.b3 and then the other one: 15 . . .f5 16.t:fJed2 c3 17.e4, A. Smirnov - Volkov, Izhevsk 2011, 17 ... fxe4 18.t:fJxe4 b4+ Black's pro­ tected passed extra pawn pro­ vides him with a stable advantage. 12.e4. White occupies the cen­ tre with his pawns, but reduces the scope of action of his bishop on g2. 12 . . . t:fJxc3. Black continues to play for simplifications. 13.bxc3 0-0 14.f4 f6 15.t:fJg4 t:fJd7+ Karthi­ keyan - Sardana, New Delhi 2010. White's pawn-centre is powerful, but is insufficient to compensate fully his sacrificed pawn. 8.a4 a6 9.t:fJe5. White wishes to provoke immediate tactical com­ plications, before Black has com­ pleted his development and cas­ tled. 9 . . . W/cS 10.0-0 t:fJbd7

Black must exchange the ac­ tive enemy knight as quickly as possible. 11.f4?! Flores - Santiago, Mon­ tevideo 2 0 15. It seems too risky for White to cut off the possible retreats of his bishop on g5. 11. . . b4 ! ? 12.t:fJe4 t:fJxe4 13.he4 t:fJxe5 14.dxe5 c5+ 11.W/c2 h6 12.t:fJxd7, lzoria Timofeev, Oropesa del Mar 2001, 12 . . . t:fJxd7! ? 13 . .if4 .ie'l+ 11.e3 t:fJxe5 12.dxe5 t:fJd5 13. t:fJe4 h6 14.Wh5 W/c7oo Kamsky Pridorozhni, Kazan 2016. Now, White must play very precisely; otherwise, he may lose his dark­ squared bishop, which is deprived of squares to retreat to. 11.t:fJxd7 t:fJxd7 12 .e4 h6 13 . .ie3 .ie7 14.e5 0-0 15.W/g4 ©hS, Ro­ manishin - Movsesian, Solin 2006, 16.W/h5 c5 17.d5 b4= Here, White has nothing better than to force a perpetual check after 18. hh6 . 11.ixf6. White preserves his centralised knight from being ex­ changed, but presents his oppo­ nent with the two-bishop advan­ tage. 11 ... t:fJxf6 12.e3 .id6 13.b3 cxb3 14.Wxb3 0-0oo Ashwin - S.Atalik, Golden Sands 2012. White's piece-pressure compensates the sacrificed pawn, but not more than that.

6

. . .

.lb4

Black exerts pressure on the el-a5 diagonal with the idea to force the enemy bishop to come back to the d2-square. 231

Chapter 19

7.e4 This is White's most popular move in this position. He occu­ pies the centre with his pawns, a move later, though . . . 7 .hf6 \Wxf6+ 7.g3 ttlbd7 8 .i.g2 aS. Black in­ creases his control over the weak b4-square. 9.0-0 h6 10 .id2 0-0+ Stupak - Braun, Gaziantep 2008. 7.e3. White's pawn is not so active here as on e4. He cannot obtain sufficient compensation for the sacrificed pawn with such humble moves. 7 . . . bS

8.i.e2 ttlbd7 9.0-0 \Wb6 10. \Wc2 0-0 11.e4. White has to play e4 anyway. 11 . . . i.b7 12 .i.e3 a6 13. 232

eS ttldS 14.ttlgS g6. He will hardly manage to exploit this slight weakening of Black's king shelter. 1S.\We4 h6 16.ttlxf7. White sacri­ fices a piece in the hope to con­ tinue with his ebbing off initia­ tive. 16 . . . @xf7 17.ttlxdS cxdS 18. \Wf4+ ©g8 19.\Wxh6 l:!f7 2 0 .\Wxg6+ l:!g7 21.\WhS i!h7 2 2 .\Wg6+ ©h8+ Simeonov - Spasov, ICCF 2 0 14. In this middle game Black's piec­ es will be obviously stronger than White's two pawns. 8.ttld2 a6 9.axbS cxbS 10.ttlxbS axbS! Black sacrifices the exchange and seizes the initiative. ll.l:!xa8 !b7 12 .l:!al (12 .!xf6?! gxf6 13.l:!al eS+ Van der Werf - Piket, Am­ sterdam 2000) 12 . . . eS !+ 13.i.e2 ? ! Nordahl - Korneev, Gausdal 200S, 13 ... \WdS ! ? 14.i.f3 e4+ After 7.\Wc2, Black can play 7 . . . bS ! , without being afraid o f any tactical complications.

8.g3 i.b7 9.i.g2 ttlbd7 10.0-0 \Wb6 ll.e4 a6 12.l:!fdl h6 13.ie3 0-0+ Mamedyarov - Carlsen, Shamkir 2 0 14. Black has an extra pawn and a good position. 8.e4 h6. He gets rid immedi­ ately of the unpleasant pin. 9.

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. &iJj3 &iJf6 4. &iJ c3 e6 5. i.g5 de 6.a4 i.b4 i.xf6 %!/xf6 10 .i.e2 a6 11.0-0 i.b7 12 .b3, Savon - Neverov, St Pe­ tersburg 1996, 12 . . . cS ! ?+ 8.i.xf6 gxf6 9 .g3 a6+ Capa­ blanca - Nimzowitsch, Bad Kiss­ ingen 1928. Black's prospects seem preferable thanks to his ex­ tra pawn and the two powerful bishops. After 8.axbS cxbS 9.i.xf6, Black can play 9 . . . Wxf6 ! ? , without being afraid of 10.%!/e4, because of 10 . . . 'll;lffS ! This i s the point! Black sacri­ fices the rook on a8 in order to capture the enemy b2-pawn with his queen. ll.'\1;lfxa8 '\1;lfc2 12 .&iJd2 %!/xb2 13.gdl .bc3 14.f3 ? ! White opens a leeway for his king on f2 . (It seems more resilient for White to choose here 14.'\1;lfxb8, but even then after 14 ... i.xd2+ 15.�d2 %!/bl+ 16.gdl %!/b4+ 17.gd2 0-0 18.e3 c3+, his extra rook would not save him.) 14 . . . 0-0 15.'\1;lfxb8. White has already an extra rook, but his lag in development and his king, stranded in the centre, doom him to a quick demise. 15 . . . hd4. Black not only captures the ene­ my central pawn, but frees the way forward of his c-pawn, which should settle the issue. 16.gbl %!/a2 17.'ll;lfxbS c3 18.&iJe4, Lain Lettieri, Bratto 2 005 and here, Black's simplest winning line is: 18 ... c2 19.gcl '\1;lfa3 2 0 . gxc2 '\1;lfal+ 2 1.@d2 gas 2 2 .%!/d3 i.a6-+ Now, White must either give up his queen, or allow a deadly discov­ ered check.

7 Wa5 • • •

8.i.d2 White is forced to retreat with his bishop, because the following line is very bad for him: 8.eS &iJe4 9.i.d2 &iJxd2 10.'\1;lfxd2, Ernst - Pot­ kin, Wijk aan Zee 2012, 10 . . . bS ! ?+ 8.'\1;lfc2? &iJxe4+

8 . . . c5 Black undermines the enemy centre and prepares the develop­ ment of his bishop to the c6square.

9.A.xc4 9.eS, Timoscenko - Berezjuk, Czech Republic 2006, 9 . . . &iJfd7! ?oo 9.dxcS %!/xc5 10.es .bc3 11. .bc3 &iJdS. White has the two­ bishop advantage, but regaining the c4-pawn will take too much time for him. 12 .'\1;lfd4 (12 .i.d2 i.d7 13.gcl c3 14.bxc3 &iJb6oo) 12 ...%!/xd4 13 .hd4, Rychagov - Goumas, Malevizi 2 016, 13 . . . c3 ! ? Black will lose his c-pawn anyway, but with this move he compromises his opponent's pawn-structure on 233

Chapter 19 the queenside. 14.bxc3 llJc6 lS.aS llJxd4. Black deprives his oppo­ nent of his two-bishop advantage. 16.llJxd4 id7 17.@d2 f6=

9

• • •

cxd4 10 .!Lixd4 0-0 •

11 .!Lic2 •

White's pieces are very unsta­ ble on the fourth rank, so he re­ moves immediately his knight from the centre, attacking the en­ emy bishop. 11.0-0 �cs. Now, White must enter tactical complications in or­ der to save his hanging pieces. 12.tLicbS, Cramling - Grandelius, Tallinn 2016, 12 . . . hd2 ! ? 13.�xd2 a6 14.:Bfcl .!Lixe4 1S.�e3 axbS 16. he6 .be6 17.:BxcS llJxcS 18.:Bcl llJbd7 19.b4 llJxa4 2 0 .llJxe6 fxe6 2 1.�xe6+ :Bfl+ The tactical com­ plications are over and it is only Black who can play for a win in this endgame with a rather non­ standard material ratio. ll.llJb3. Now, contrary to 11. llJc2, Black's bishop on b4 is not threatened after this retreat o f 234

White's knight. 11 . . . �c7 12 .�e2 llJc6 13.0-0 llJeS 14.llJbS �e7 lS. :Bfcl. White's pieces are seemingly more active, but Black can oust them quickly and obtain the two­ bishop advantage after the ex­ change of his knight on eS for the enemy bishop. 1S . . . a6 16.llJSd4, Reyes la Rosa - Figlio, ICCF 2009, 16 ... id6 ! ? 17.id3 llJxd3 18.�xd3 :Be8 19.lDf3 eS 2 0 .llJaS ie6 21. llJxb7. White is already forced to fight for equality. 2 1 . . .�xb7 2 2 . �xd6 llJxe4 23.�c6 �xc6 24.:Bxc6 llJxd2 2S.llJxd2 l3eb8 26.llJf3 i.dS 27.:BcS .ixf3 28.gxf3 :Bxb2 29.:BxeS :Bc8+ In the arising endgame with four rooks on the board, Black has some edge thanks to his superior pawn-structure. After ll.�e2, Black should continue with ll . . . llJc6 ! ? , without being afraid of the appearance of a weak pawn in his position. 12.llJxc6 (12.llJc2 :Bd8 - see 11. llJc2) 12 ... bxc6 13.0-0, Sriram Sundararajan, Mumbai 2 0 09, 13 ... llJd7! Black's knight on f6 is severely restricted by White's pawn on e4, so Black is transfer­ ring it to the b6-square. 14.f4 llJb6 1S.i.d3 l3d8 ! ? 16.:Bfdl cS 17.i.el ib7= The activity of Black's piec­ es compensates the defects of his pawn-structure.

11

• • •

.!Lic6 12 . .!Lixb4

About 12.0-0 :Bd8 13.llJxb4 (13 .�e2 llJxe4 - see ll.�e2) 13 . . . �xb4 14.b3 �e7 - see 12.llJxb4.

J.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. ll:Jj3 ll:Jf6 4. ll:Jc3 e6 5. il.g5 de 6.a4 i.b4 Following 12 .Wi'e2 l:!d8 13.0-0, Black has a powerful tactical ar­ gument - 13 ... ll:Jxe4! 14.li:Jxb4 li:Jxd2 1S.li:Jxc6 bxc6 16.l:!fdl ll:Jxc4 17.b4 ! (17.%Vxc4, Farago - Kozak, Buda­ pest 2 016, 17 . . . il.d7! ?+) 17 . . . %Vc7 18.l:!xd8+ %Vxd8 19.%Vxc4 i.d7 2 0 . l:!dl W/e7 2 1.li:Je4 .ie8 = His extra pawn compensates all White's po­ sitional pluses.

12 . . . %Vxb4

1s.ge1 lS.YlVel b6 16.il.cl i.b7= Lege­ maat - Smith, ICCF 2 013.

He has the two-bishop advan­ tage, but Black has a better de­ velopment. In addition, White's queenside has been weakened by the pawn-advance a2-a4.

13.b3 �MS 14.0-0 %Ve7 Black obtains a very good posi­ tion too after 14 . . . ll:Jd7 ! ? . He is not afraid of the enemy knight-sorties and wishes to transfer his own knight to eS, or cS as quickly as possible. lS.li:JbS %Ve7 16.Wi'cl li:JdeS 17.i.gS f6 18.il.e3 b6 19.i.e2 i.b7 2 0 .f3 l:!ac8 2 1.%Va3 W/xa3 22.li:Jxa3 ll:Jd4. The activity of Black's pieces forces White to part with his two­ bishop advantage. 23 . .ixd4 l:!xd4=

lS.YlVcl b6 16.f3 li:JaS. White's light-squared bishop cannot avoid the exchange, because of the vul­ nerability of the b3-square. 17. li:JbS ll:Jxc4 18.bxc4. Now, White must play accurately, because his queenside pawn-structure has been weakened. 18 . . . a6 19. li:Jc3 il.b7 2 0 .i.e3 ll:Jd7 2 UM 1 h 6 = Holroyd - Reinhart, ICCF 2 01S. Following 1S.Wi'c2 b6 16.l:!fdl il.b7 17.f3 YlVcS + , Black's queen becomes very active. 18.©hl Wi'f2 19 .Wi'a2 li:JeS 2 0 .i.fl li:Jd3 21.il.gS YlVcS. White has managed to neu­ tralise the activity of Black's piec­ es, but this leads to numerous ex­ changes and a very likely draw. 2 2 .hf6 gxf6 23.hd3 %Vxc3 24. i.c4 ©g7 2S.Wi'f2 Wies 26.©gl fS 27.exfS YlVxfS 28 .E:d4 E:xd4 29. W/xd4+ %Vf6 30 .E:dl W/xd4+ 31. E:xd4 i.c6= Weber - Mendl, ICCF 2 0 1S. 23S

Chapter 19 1S.f3. White protects reliably his e4-pawn. 1S ... lt:\d7 16.ie3 lt:\de5 17.1/Nc2 lt:\xc4 18.bxc4 id7 19.lll bS (19.cS a6 2 0 .i:!abl ie8 = Benzoni - Noble, ICCF 2 0 09) 19 . . . a6. Black ousts the enemy knight to the edge of the board. 2 0 .lll a3 eS 21.ib6 i:!dc8 2 2 . i:!fdl lt:\d4. This pawn-sacrifice is Black's simplest road to equality. If he plays pas­ sively, he may encounter difficul­ ties after c4-c5, lll a 3-c4-d6. 23. ixd4 exd4 24.i:!xd4 i:!d8 2S.i:!adl ie8 26.i:!xd8 i:!xd8 27.i:!xd8 �xd8 28 .�b3 1/Nd4+ 29.'it>fl ic6. White's attempt to activate his knight leads to a perpetual check. 30. lll c 2 �dl+ 31.'it>f2 1/Nd2 + 32 .'it>gl 1/Ndl=

236

This position w as reached in the game Nakamura - Girl, Saint Louis 2016. Here, Black had to continue with 15 b6!?, without being afraid of the move e4-eS. 16.Yfcl (The pawn-advance 16.eS? ! only helps Black to transfer his knight to cS. 16 . . . lt:\d7 17.f4 lll c S+) 16 lll eS= ...

. . .

Chapter 2 0

1.d4 d 5 2 . c4 c 6 3.�t'3 �f6 4.�c3 e6 5.J.g5 dxc4 6.e4

Pushkov - Yagupov, Orel 1999, 10 . . . '!Wxe7! ?+, or 7.'!Wc2 h6 (The in­ clusion of this move is very useful for Black.) 8 . .ih4 llJbd7 9 . .ie2 .ib7 10.0-0 '!Wb6 lUfadl .ib4+ Dziuba - Dimakiling, Calvia 2006. White does not have compensation for the pawn in both lines.

This is the best for White ! He occupies the centre, attacks the c4-pawn and creates the threat e4-e5 in the process.

7.a4. Black can easily parry the attack against his bS-pawn with the move 7 . . . '!Wb6.

6 . . .b5 This is the essence of Black's idea in the Botvinnik System. He protects the c4-pawn and plans to get rid of the pin of his knight with h7-h6, g7-g5, complying with the considerable weakening of his kingside.

7.e5 Refraining from this move would not end up well for White. For example: 7 . .ie2 h6 8 . .ih4 (8 ..ixf6 '!Wxf6 9.0-0, Zherebukh - Sevian, Saint Louis 2 0 17, 9 . . . a6 ! ?+) 8 . . . .ie7 9.eS llJdS 10.ix:e7,

8.1!;!/c2 llJbd7 9 . .ie2 as 10. 0-0 b4 11.lDdl b3 12 .'!Wbl .ia6+ W. Schmidt - Henley, Indonesia 1983. 8 . .ixf6. White weakens his op­ ponent's kingside pawn-struc­ ture, but presents him with the two-bishop advantage. 8 . . . gxf6 9 . .ie2 (9.g3. It seems too slow for 237

Chapter 2 0 White to fianchetto his bishop in this position. In addition, it weak­ ens the fl-a6 diagonal and Black's bishop will be placed there very soon. 9 . . . lll d7 10 .i.g2 b4 11.lll e 2 i.a6+ Groenhout - Gray, ICCF 2 016.) 9 . . . i.b7 10.0-0 a6 11.dS (Following ll.b3 '11;!/aS 12.'11;!/c l b4 13.lll d l c3+, Black obtains a pro­ tected passed pawn, Halkias Bruno, Bad Wiessee 2 0 07). White leads in development and wishes to open the position. On the other hand, Black has the two-bishop advantage and the opening of the game may turn out to be in his fa­ vour. 11 . . . lll d 7. He is not afraid of the weakening of the hS-e8 diago­ nal. 12.dxe6 (12 .b3 cxdS 13.exdS b4 14.aS '11;!/d 6 1S.dxe6 fxe6 16.lll a4 c3+ Gyimesi - C.Horvath, Buda­ pest 2 0 04; 12.lll d 4, Cramling Piket, Spijkenisse 1978, 12 . . . lll eS+) 12 . . . fxe6 13.lll d4 cS 14.i.hS+ . Black i s not afraid o f the loss of his castling rights, because White's pieces are incapable of organising an effective attack against Black's king. 14 . . . @d8 lS. lll xe6+. White's attacking pros­ pects are just minimal, so he can­ not afford to sacrifice a piece. (lS. lll c 2 b4 16.lll e 2 @c7+) 1S . . . \Wxe6 16.axbS gg8+ Naumkin - Kor­ neev, Assisi 2003. 8.i.e3 ! ? This is the only way for White to obtain a good posi­ tion after 7.a4. 8 . . . b4. Black wish­ es to oust the enemy knight, but weakens the pawn on c4. 9.aS. White frees a square for his knight. 9 . . . \Wd8 10.lll a4 i.a6 11. 238

i.gS b3 12.lll c3 h6 13.i.xf6 \Wxf6 14.lll eS cS 1S.i.xc4 i.xc4 16.lll xc4 cxd4 17.lll bS i.b4+ 18.@fl '11;!/e 7 19.lll xd4 o-o 2 0 .\We2 gd8 21. lll xb3. White has already an extra pawn, but has lost his castling rights. 2 1 . . .'11;!/b 7 2 2 .g3. He pre­ pares an artificial castling. 22 . . . i.e7 23.lll c d2 lll c 6 24.@g2 lll d4 2S.lll xd4 gxd4 2 6.ghel a6 27.b3 gad8 28.lll f3 gb4. Black's pieces exert powerful pressure and White cannot hold on to his extra material. 29.gabl gc8 3 0 .lll d 2 i.gS 31.gedl gd4 3 2 .lll c4 gxdl 33.gxdl '11;!/xb3= Dhanish - Cruza­ do Duenas, ICCF 2012.

7 ... h6 8 . .th4 g5

We will analyse the move 9 .lll xgS in the following chapters, while now we will deal with A) 9.exf6 and B) 9 . .tg3.

A) 9.exf6 The exchange of White's pow­ erful bishop for the enemy knight is just horrible for him.

9 . . . gxh4 10.ltieS

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. 0ij3 0if6 4. 0i c3 e6 5. i.g5 de 6.e4 b5 7.e5 h6 8. j.h4 g5 White wishes to play g3 and i.g2 , in order to exert pressure against Black's queenside. About 10.a4 a6 11.lDeS Wfxf6 see 10.lCieS.

10

ti'xf6

•••

Black has already two extra pawns.

cxbS 14.lCixbS. White has man­ aged to regain one of his pawns, but after 14 . . . i.b4+, Black brings his bishop into the actions with tempo. 15.0ic3 ! This is the right move ! (After 15.©fl 0-0 16.0ic7 ga7, White's knight is obviously lost inside the enemy camp. 17. 0ixa6, Marzolo - Ribli, Germany 2011, 17 . . . i.e7! ?-+) 15 . . . .ixc3+ 16. bxc3 0ixe5 17.dxeS WfxeS+ Baum­ gartner - Kloster, ICCF 2010. Now, even if White manages to regain his c4-pawn, Black will re­ main with an extra pawn anyway.

11

••.

�d7

11.g3 Following ll . .ie2 ? ! , Black can give up one of his extra pawns in order to develop quickly his queenside. ll . . . 0id7! 12.0ixc6 .ib7 13.i.f3 a6 14.0-0 !k8 15.lCieS j_xf3 16.0ixf3, Csiszar - K.Szabo, Zala­ karos 2009, 16 . . . h3 ! ? 17.g3 .ie'l+ 11.a4 a6 12 . .ie2 (Unfortunate­ ly for White, he cannot regain his pawn by exploiting the pin on the a-file. 12.axbS cxbS 13.lCixbS?! axbS ! 14.gxa8 .ib4+ 15.©e2 .id6 16.0ig4 §'g7-+ Muradli - San­ zhaev, Moscow 2 016.) 12 . . . 0id7! 13.axbS (13.0ixc6? b4 14.0ie4 ti'fS 15 . .if3 .ib7 16.0id2 gcs-+ Clark­ son - Manarin, ICCF 2 0 13) 13 . . .

12.ti'e2 White preserves his control over the es-square. 12.0ixc6? ! .ib7 13 . .ig2 gcs 14. dS, Mozharov - Fluvia Poyatos, Platja d'Aro 2 016, 14 . . . exdS ! ? 15. §'e2 + Wfe6+ 12 .f4?! White fortifies his knight, but weakens his g3-pawn. 12 . . . .ib7 13 . .ig2 , Portisch - Ribli, Warsaw 1979, 13 . . . gg8 ! ?+ 239

Chapter 2 0 12

. • •

J.b7 13.J.g2

13.l.lJxd7 ©xd7 14.!g2 ©c7+ Cheng - Izzat, Adelaide 2 016.

13

•.•

c!LJxe5 14.dxe5 Y:!lg5

diagonal. Black has however a very strong positional exchange­ sacrifice: 17 gds!+ 18.gfel J.e7 19.c!LJxd5 cxd5+ He has two pawns for the exchange and what is even more important - his c6pawn is already on the d5-square. • • •

B) 9.J.g3

15.gdl After 15.a4 a6 16.f4, White sends the enemy queen to the queenside, but it will be very well placed there, defending the bish­ op on b7 and exerting pressure on the gl-a7 diagonal. 16 . . . Y:!ldS 17. l'!dl (17.Y:!le3 ib4+) 17 . . . �b6+ Arregui - Razzeto, ICCF 2 0 14. 15.f4 �d8 16.1.lJxbS, Braun O'Donnell, Crawley 2 0 16, 16 . . . �b6 ! ? This i s Black's simplest move. After 17.l.lJd6+ .ixd6 18. exd6 �b4+ 19.�d2 Y:!lxd2+ 20. ©xd2 0-0-0+, the position is simplified and Black has excellent chances of realising his extra ma­ terial in this endgame.

1s hxg3 16.hxga gds 17.0-0. White's bishop exerts • • •

powerful pressure on the hl-a8 240

This is an interesting move. White avoids the competition with his opponent - who knows the theoretical variations better, since some of them end up deep into the endgame. He wishes to focus on the complicated middle game in which he has some com­ pensation for the sacrificed pawn.

9

• • •

c!LJd5 10.c!LJd2

White is preparing l.lJde4. 10 .i.e2 i.b4 11.l'!cl �as. The pressure of Black's pieces on the el-aS diagonal is very powerful. 12 .\!;Yd2 l.lJd7 13.0-0 l.lJ7b6 14.!dl. White defends against l.lJa4, Kier­ zek - Meyer, Hessen 2000. Still, after 14 . . . g4 15.l.lJh4, Black can ex­ ploit the defencelessness of the

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. CfJj3 CfJf6 4. CfJ c3 e6 5. igS de 6.e4 b5 7.e5 h6 8. !h4 g5 enemy queen and simply capture on a2. 15 . . . 'i;1lxa2-+ 10.h4. White attacks immedi­ ately his opponent's weakened kingside. Still, after 10 . . . �aS 11. l'kl !b4, Black's queenside coun­ terplay seems much more danger­ ous. 12.hxgS CfJxc3 13.bxc3 hc3+ 14.CfJd2 , Dubov - Shirov, Moscow 2013, 14 . . . CfJa6 ! ? 15.Elxh6 Elg8+

10 . . . J.b7

11.J.e2 11.CfJde4 CfJd7 12 .h4 (12 .ie2 'i;1!b6 - see 11.ie2) 12 . . . CfJxc3 - see 11.h4. ll.a4, Lobron - Slingerland, Amsterdam 1996, 11 . . . !e7! ?+ The move 11.h4 ! ? leads to a very interesting game. 11 . . . CfJd7 (diagram) 12.CfJde4 CfJxc3 13.CfJxc3 'i;1la5. Black is perfectly prepared to castle queenside and to follow this with c6-c5. The juxtaposition of his rook with the enemy queen

will be then obviously in his fa­ vour. 14.ie2, Thorhallsson Thompson, Reykjavik 2010, 14 . . . 0-0-0 ! ? 15.hxgS CfJcS+ 12.hxgS 'i;1lxg5 13.CfJde4 �g6 14.Elh4 0-0-0 15.!e2 CfJcS. Black's position is a bit cramped, so the exchange of pieces would be in his favour. 16.ihS (It is less precise for White to play here 16.CfJxcS .b:cS 17.CfJxdS Elxd5 18.!f3 Eld7 19. Elg4 ib4+ 20.©fl 'i;1!d3+ 21.'i;1lxd3 cxd3 2 2 .Eldl hS 23.Elh4 as 24.ElxhS ElxhS 25.hhS fS. Black is prepar­ ing Elh7. 26.Elxd3 Elh7 27.a3 ha3 28.bxa3 ElxhS+ Konstantinov Lykke, ICCF 2 015. In the arising endgame, despite the presence of bishops of opposite colours on the board, White must still find nu­ merous accurate moves in order to make a draw.) 16 . . . �h7 17.dxc5. This is an interesting queen-sacri­ fice. 17 . . . CfJxc3 18.�xd8+ ©xd8 19. bxc3 !e7 20.0-0-0+ ©cB 21.CfJd6+ ©c7 22.Elhd4. White has sufficient compensation for the sacrificed material. There might follow: 22 . . . EldB 23.©b2 !c8 24. Elf4 Elf8 25.Elf6 ! This is an exchange-sacri­ fice, which should not be accepted 241

Chapter 2 0 by Black, because then White's bishop on g3 will join into the attack with a decisive effect. 2 5 . . . Wfg8 26 ..if3 a5 27. l3xh6. White has regained the pawn on h6, but it is inconceivable how he can improve his position later. 27 . . . .ia6 28 .l3d4 .ig5 29.l3hl \:Wg6 30 . .ie4 Wfg7 31..if3 Wfg6= Turgut - Cruzado Duecas, ICCF 2 0 15.

11

White, because after 20 . . . Wfg6 21. \:Wh4, Black can free the seventh rank fo r his rook: 21. . . fS 2 2 .llif3 llid3+ 23.©fl l3d7. White is inca­ pable of holding on to his h7pawn. 24.\:Wf6 'l!Wxf6 25.exf6 l3dxh7 26.l3xh7 l3xh7+ Coyne - Rawlings, ICCF 2 015.

12 . . . llid7

'l!Wb6

•••

13.0-0 12.�de4 It is worse for White to play here 12 .h4, because of 12 . . . llid7 ! ? . Black is reluctant to lose time for the protection of his pawns on g5 and h6. 13.hxgS 0-0-0 14.gxh6 c5. White's centre is about to crumble. 15.llixdS i.xd5 16.h7 cxd4. White has a far-advanced passed h-pawn indeed, but his position is difficult, because Black obviously dominates in the centre. 17 . .if3 llic5 18 . .bdS exd5 19. Wg4+ (19.Wfh5 l3d7 20.©fl d3+ Boldysh - Secchi, ICCF 2 0 15) 19 . . . \:We6 2 0 .Wfxd4. Winning the d4pawn is small consolation for 242

It seems less logical for White to opt here for 13.a4, because Black has pawn-majority on the queenside and h e i s supposed to play there. 13 . . . aS 14. 0-0 (14. axb5 cxb5 15.0-0 llixc3 16.llixc3, Swayams - Potkin, Moscow 2 0 16, 16 ... .ib4+) 14 ... b4 15.llibl (15.llia2 . White's knight will be misplaced on this square and he will have problems to bring it into the ac­ tions from there. 15 . . . 0-0-0 16. llid2 (16.i.xc4 llif4+ Nakamura Gustafsson, Austria 2 0 09) 16 . . . \:Wxd4 17.llixc4 llif4 ! 18 .l3el Wfxdl 19.i.xdl c 5 2 0 . .ixf4 gxf4 21.llixaS .id5+ Johansson - Efremov, ICCF 2012) 15 . . . .ia6 (Black can obtain

l.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3. tiJj3 tiJf6 4. tiJc3 e6 5. 1J.g5 de 6.e4 b5 7.e5 h6 B. 1J.h4 g5 an edge too with the move 15 . . . 0-0-0 ! ? , but after 16.tiJbd2 \!;lfxd4 17.\!;l/c2 c3 18.tiJb3 §'b6 19.bxc3 tiJxc3 2 0 .tlJxc3 bxc3 21.§'xc3 .ib4 2 2 .§'e3 §'xe3 23.fxe3 ghf8 24. gacl ©b8+, White managed to draw, despite being a pawn down in the endgame, Rawlings - Bol­ dysh, ICCF 2 016.) 16.gel (16.\!;l/d2, Lemos - Fabian, Buenos Aires 2011, 16 . . . c5 ! ?+) 16 . . . .ie7 17.tlJd6+ .ixd6 18.exd6. Naturally, White's d6-pawn is powerful, but still in­ sufficient to compensate his ma­ terial deficit. 18 . . . 0-0 19 . .if3 (19 . .ih5 ©g7 2 0 .h4 gg8+ Martynov Roze, ICCF 2 0 13) 19 . . . ©g7 20 .h4 gh8 2 1.§'d2 gag8 2 2 .hxg5 ©f8 23. hd5 cxd5. White's hopes are based on the passive position of the enemy bishop on a6. 24.gxh6 gg6 25 . .if4 .ic8 26.g3 tlJf6+, pre­ paring tlJg4, regaining the pawn on h6, Schafer - Jensen, ICCF 2 0 15. White's queenside pieces are still not developed.

13

• • •

14

• • •

.b:d5 15.tlJc3

White sacrifices his d4-pawn and wishes to exchange the pow­ erful enemy bishop on d5 and to remove the blockade against his pawn on e5.

15 cxd4 17 . .ih5 .ie7 •••

16.tlJxd5

exd5

18.a4 White opens a second front and wishes to complicate his op­ ponent's defence. At first, he wishes to deflect the enemy queen from the protection of his king­ side.

c5

Black wishes to activate his bishop on b7 as quickly as possi­ ble. It was restricted until now by his own pawn on c6.

18.e6. This pawn-sacrifice is premature at the moment: 18 . . . \!;lfxe6 19.gel §'f6+ Babula - Rag­ ger, Austria 2 0 14.

14.tlJxd5 18 0-0 19.axb5 a5. Black defends against ga6. 20.f4 d3+ •••

The move 14.dxcS only en­ hances the development of Black's pieces. 14 . . . hc5 15.a4 tlJxc3 16. tlJxc3 a6+ Lajthajm - Aleksan­ drov, Budva 2003.

21.©hl f5 22.e6 'exe6 23.gel 'ed6 24.fxg5 f4 25.gxh6 c!Llf6 26 .if2 ©h7oo Lins - Stockert, •

ICCF 2016.

243

Chapter 2 1

1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c 6 3 . �t'3 �f6 4.�c3 e6 5 . .ig5 dxc4 6.e4 b5 7 .e5 h6 8 . .ih4 g5 9 . �xg5 hxg5 10 .hg5 �bd7

11.exf6 ll.'!Wf3 ib7 12.exf6 '!Wb6, or 11. g3 .tb7 12.exf6 \Wb6, or 12 .i.g2 \Wb6 13.exf6 0-0-0 - see ll.exf6.

11 . ib7 12.g3

ment of the theory of the Botvin­ nik System. 12 . . . '!Wb6. Black pre­ pares castling queenside and at­ tacks the d4-pawn. 13.'!We3 0-0-0 14.o-o-o '!Was lS.©bl lLib6 16.h4 b4 17.lLie4 cS= Zhivtsov - Botvin­ nik, Moscow 1943 . The position is approximately equal indeed, but Black's play is much simpler, be­ cause White's king shelter is not reliable. There followed 18.f3? ! c3 ! 19.i.e2 ids 2 0.a3. Here, the easiest win for Black would be the move - 20 . . . ib3-+ 12 .ie2. White's bishop is not so active here as on g2. 12 . . . '!Wb6

. .

With the fianchetto of his light-squared bishop White solves several problems. At first, his bishop will be very active on g2, impeding Black's pawn-advance c6-c5. Secondly, the move g2-g3 fortifies White's kingside and neutralises Black's possible at­ tacks on the g-file as well as on the h2-b8 diagonal. 12.\Wf3. White used to play this move at the dawn of the develop244

13.if3. This move seems stronger than 13.0-0. White wish­ es to play \We2 and 0-0-0, evacu­ ating his king to the queenside.

4. l:i:Jc3 e6 5. !gS de 6.e4 b5 7.e5 h6 8. ih4 g5 9. &i:Jxg5 hg 1 0 . hgS &i:J bd7 13 . . . 0-0-0 14.'!We2 ! ? White gives back his extra pawn in the fight for the initiative. (14.0-0 i.h.6 - see 13 . 0-0) 14 . . . '!Wxd4 lS.!!dl �es 16. h4 i.d6 17.&i:Je4 ic7 18.g3 cS 19. !f4 '!WfS 2 0.&i:Jd6+, draw, Batrakov - Efremov, ICCF 2 0 1S, because after 20 . . . .ixd6 2 1..ixb7+ ©xb7 2 2 .�f3+ Wa6 23.'!Wa3 = , Black's king cannot run away from the perpetual check. 13.0-0 0-0-0 14.a4 (The move 14.h4 only weakens the shelter of White's king. 14 . . . ih6+ Ragozin ­ Botvinnik, Moscow 1941; after 14. b3, Spassky - Heyken, Germany 1987, Black can reply with the energetic strike in the centre 14 . . . cS ! ?+; but White has the pos­ sibility 14.if3 il6 1S.ie3 &i:Jxf6 16.'!We2 he3 17.fxe3 �c7 18.g3 !!h6oo Cebalo - Fercec, Rijeka 2 007) 14 . . . b4 1S.&i:Je4 cs+ White's position crumbles. 16.'!Wbl �c7 17.&i:Jg3 cxd4-+

This position was reached in the famous game Denker - Bot­ vinnik, radio match 194S. Black has a powerful pawn-centre and an attack. 18.hc4 �c6 19 .f3 . White frees the gl-a7 diagonal. 19 . . . d3 2 0 .'!Wcl icS+ 21. Whl �d6

2 2 .'!Wf4. Now, Black forces a win with a beautiful rook-sacrifice. 22 . . . l"!xh2 + ! 23.Wxh2 l"!h8+ 24. �h4 l"!xh4+ 2S . .ixh4 �f4 0-1 12 .h4. This move seems il­ logical, because White advances his rook-pawn when his king has not castled yet. Still, the move has venom... 12 ... &i:Jx:f6 ! ? This is Black's only move. (After the straightforward response 12 . . . '!Wb6, White has a very interesting pawn-sacrifice: 13.�c2 ! ? �xd4 14.l"!dl \Wes+ 1S.'!We2 '!Wc7 16.g3t Walters - Rodriguez, ICCF 2016.) 13.'!Wf3. White increases his pres­ sure against the enemy knight on f6. 13 . . . ie7

Capturing the pawn 14.&i:JxbS leads to the simplification of the position. 14 . . . '!Wb6 1S.&i:Jc7+ �xc7 16.ixf6 cS= Nikolic - Ivanchuk, Monte Carlo 1997. Following 14.ie2 &i:JdS lS.he7 �xe7 16.&i:JxdS, the simplest for Black would be to capture the en­ emy e-pawn, so that he can acti­ vate later his bishop via the c8square. 16 ...exdS 17.�f4 ©f8. Black is preparing l"!e8. 18.Wfl l"!e8 19. !f3 Wg7= Voll - Serban, ICCF 24S

Chapter 21 2012. He wishes to continue ei­ ther with Wf6, or with gh6. 14.0-0-0 lDdS 1S . .txe7 Wxe7 16.lDe4 (After 16.g3, Black ad­ vances 16 . . . cS and equalises ef­ fortlessly. 17.dxcS �xcS 1S . .ig2 b4 19.lDe4 �c7 20.lDf6+ @fS= Black's king is placed unreliably, but its white counterpart might come under an attack after c4-c3.) 16 ... 0-0-0

17.lDcS ©bS 1S.We4 f6. Black sacrifices the pawn on e6 and ac­ tivates his pieces. 19.�xe6 Wh7 20 .�el gheS 21.�d2 .icS 2 2 .a4 �hS 23.axbS cxbS 24.WaS, Hanel - Schmidt, Germany 2014. Here, the simplest solution for Black would be 24 . . . lDc7 ! ? 2S.g3 Wf3 26 . .ih3 .ixh3 27.gxh3 Wxf2 and White would have nothing better than to force a perpetual check with 2S.lDa6+ lDxa6 29.�xbS+ ©as 30.Wc6+ ©bs 31.WbS= 17.g3 lDb4 lS.lDcS. White sac­ rifices his a2-pawn for the initia­ tive. lS . . . lDxa2+ 19.Wbl lDb4. Black has an extra pawn, but his bishop on b7 is "bad". 20 . .ig2 �c7 2 1.hS. The advance of White's h-pawn seems very dangerous for Black,

246

but he manages to cope with the brave enemy pawn. (21.g4 lDdS 2 2 .�a3 ©bS 23.hS �f4 24 . .txds gxdS 2S.f3 @as 2 6.h6 .icS 27.lDe4 eS= , Black succeeded in activat­ ing his light-squared bishop.) 2 1 . . . @bS 22 .h6 .icS 23.Wa3 lDdS 24. gdel lDe7. He prepares the trans­ fer of his knight to the fS-square in order to increase the pressure against the enemy d4-pawn. 2S. �f3 lDfS 26.h7 f6. Black is threat­ ening to capture on h7 and after 27.�xc6, there arises a transfer to an approximately equal endgame. 27 . . . �xc6 2S . .ixc6 lDxd4 29 . .ig2 ©c7 30.gh6 fS= Taner - Noble, ICCF 2012. White's powerful passed pawn compensates his material deficit, but not more than that. 17.hS eS. This pawn-sacrifice is Black's simplest way of equalis­ ing. 18.WfS+ (White cannot ob­ tain an advantage even if refrains from capturing material. 1S . .ie2 ©c7 19.dxeS WxeS 2 0 .gd2 .icS. Black is preparing �JS. 21.gh4 .ifS. He finally solves the problem with his "bad" bishop. 2 2 .lDc3 .id3 23.lDxdS+ gxdS=) 1S . . . ©c7 19.�xeS+ WxeS 2 0 .dxeS gdeS 21. lDd6 gxeS 2 2 .lDxb7 ©xb7. Black has managed to restore the mate­ rial balance and his powerful knight in the centre cements his position. 23.h6 ©c7 24.a4 a6 2S. gd4 gfs 26.axbS axbS= Sanchez Ortega - Filho, ICCF 2 0 14.

12 . . . �b6 13 . .ig2 0-0-0

4. liJ c3 e6 5. i.g5 de 6.e4 bS 7.eS h6 8. i.h4 gS 9. liJxgS hg 1 0 . i.xg5 liJ bd7

14.0-0 White plays sometimes here 14.Wg4 c5 15.hb7+ ci>xb7 16.gdl (Following 16.We4+ Wc6 17.0-0-0 cxd4 18.gxd4 !c5 19.gddl hf2 2 0 .liJxb5 llic5 2 1.Wxc6+ ci>xc6, there arises a complicated endgame on the board. After 22.gxd8 gxd8 23.liJa3 liJd3+ 24.ci>bl ci>d5iii , the activity of Black's pieces compensates his minimal material deficit, Trani - De Sa Nobrega, !ECG 2002.) 16 . . . Wc6 17.0-0 cxd4 18.Wxd4 �b4 19.h4 liJc5. Black prepares a transfer of his knight to the outpost on d3, which is quite typical for the Botvinnik system. 2 0 .We5 .ixc3 2 1.bxc3 liJd3 22 .We2 a5= Paredes - Sadowski, ICCF 2 0 14.

the pawn on f6. 18.h4 (18.i.xh6 gxh6 19.gadl gxdl 20 .liJxdl gxf6 2 1.b3 Wc6+ 2 2 .f3 liJd3 23.bxc4 bxc4 24.liJf2 liJxf2 25.ci>xf2 gf5 26.gcl gc5= Acevedo Villalba Bokar, ICCF 2013. Black's power­ ful passed c4-pawn compensates the unreliable shelter of his king.) 18 ... hg5 19.hxg5, Timman - Tai, Hilversum 1988. White has pro­ tected reliably his f6-pawn, but has weakened his king, moreover that the pawn on g5 would also need protection. 19 . . . ghg8 20. We3 (The move 2 0 .f4? ! weakens seriously White's king 2 0 . . . gd3+) 2 0 . . . gd3 21.Wf4 Wc6+ 2 2 .f3 e5 23.Wf5+ Wd7 24.Wxd7+ ci>xd7 25. gadl gxg5. After the fall of the pawn on g5, White will fail to hold on to his f6-pawn as well. 26. liJxb5 ci>e6 27.gxd3 liJxd3 =

15 ... b4

14 . . . c5 15.d5 15.dxc5. White would not achieve much exchanging pawns in the centre. 15 . . . liJxc5 16.We2 (16.hb7+ Wxb7= Nyzhnyk - Se­ vian, Rockville 2 0 14) 16 . . . hg2 17.ci>xg2 i.h6. Black wishes to ex­ change the bishop and to capture

16.gbl Black has attacked the enemy knight with his last move, but White does not plan to retreat it. White's main line 16.liJa4 will be analysed in the next chapter. 247

Chapter 21 16.lll e 2 exd5 17.lll f4 d4 18.lll d5 hd5 19.hd5, L'Ami - Seps, Budva 2003, 19 . . . ih6 ! ? = 16.dxe6 ixg2 17.e7 hfl 18. lll d5 \We6 19.lll f4, De Wolf - Van der Veen, Dieren 1982, 19 . . . \We4 ! ? 2 0.%Vd6 .b:e7 2 1.fxe7 gdg8 2 2 .ge1 \Wxel. Black has a huge material advantage, but his king cannot run away from the perpetual check. 23.\Wc6+ ©b8 24.\Wd6+ ©c8=

17. . . .ixg2 18.e7 White's alternatives are obvi­ ously worse. 18.©xg2? ! Wxe6+ 18.gel ? ! bxc3 19.e7 ia8 2 0 . exd8§'+ ©xd8 2 1.bxc3 i.d6 2 2 . ge3 ©c7+, followed b y %Vc6 and lll e 5, Volek - Sykora, ICCF 2009. In this middle game Black's two minor pieces will be stronger than White's rook and two pawns.

16 . . . %Va6 18 . . . .ixfl Black should better not accept this gift, because after 16 . . . bxc3? 17.bxc3, the opening of the b-file would be deadly for his king 17 . . . Wa6 18.gxb7! Wxb7 19.dxe6 %Vb6 20 .e7+- Gajdos - Svizensky, Se­ nica 2 0 15.

19.©xfl It is premature for White to choose here 19 .exd8§' +? ©xd8 2 0 .Wxfl bxc3 2 1.bxc3 id6 2 2 .%Vg2 ©c7 23.Wd5 Wc6 24.Wxf7 %Ve4-+ Galanov - Tinture, ICCF 2 0 15.

17.dxe6 17.We2? ! bxc3 18.dxe6 %Vxe6 19. Wxe6 fxe6 2 0.bxc3 hg2 21.©xg2 id6+ Iriarte Gomez - Figlio, ICCF 2006. White's two pawns do not compensate fully his missing piece. 248

After 19.Wd5, the simplest for Black would be to choose 19 . . . .b:e7 ! ? 2 0 .fxe7 and here 20 . . . i.d3 ! 21.lll e4 (21.exd8\W+ gxd8 2 2 .lll e4 hbl - see 2 1 .lll e 4) 2 1 . . . .b:bl. White's attacking prospects seem quite real, but Black's material

4. &i::J c3 e6 5. j,g5 de 6.e4 b5 7.e5 h6 8. ih4 g5 9. &i::J xg5 hg 1 0 . hgS &i::J bd7 advantage is too big . . . 2 2 .&i::J d 6+ (22 .exd8\W+ gxd8 23.&i::J d 6+ ©c7 - see 2 2 .&i::J d 6) 22 . . . ©c7

23.exd8\W+ gxd8 24.if4 ©b6 - see 23.if4. White's attempt to avoid the draw would lead to a lost position for him: 23.&i::J xf7? gc8 24.if4+ ©b6 2S.\Wxd7 Wtb7 26.\We6+ \Wc6-+ Vovk - Kulaots, Fagernes 2 0 1S, or 23.&i::J xc4? f6-+ 24.if4+ &i::J e S 2S.\WxcS+ ©b8 0-1 Mchedlishvili - Dvirnyy, Porto San Giorgio 2013. 23.if4 ©b6 24.&i::J xc4+ (24. exd8\W+ gxd8 2S.&i::J x c4+ ©bS 26. &i::J d 6+ ©b6=) 24 . . . ©bs 2s.&i::J d 6+ ©b6

2 6 .a4. White continues to re­ kindle his ebbing off attack. (26. &i::J c4+ ©bS=; 26.exd8\W+ �d8 27. &i::J c 4+ ©bS= ) 26 . . . bxa3 27.\Wb3+

(Following 27.&i::J c4+ \Wxc4 28.\Wxc4 a2, Black's far-advanced passed pawn guarantees him against any difficulties. 29.exd8\W+ gxd8 30. \Wb3+ ©c6 31.Wi'f3+ ©b6 32 .\Wa3 &i::J eS 33.Wi'b3+ ©a6 34.\Wa4+ ©b6= Here, White must comply with the draw, because after 3S.heS? al\W 36.\Wxal gd1+ 37.©g2 �e4+ 38.f3 hf3+ 39.©xf3 gxal-+, the endgame would be hopeless for him, Mikhalevski - Karim, Gibral­ tar 2008.) 27 . . . ©c6 28.&i::J xf7 (28. W!f3+ ©b6 2 9.\Wb3+ ©c6=) 28 . . . gb8 2 9.hb8 gxb8 30 .\We6+ ©bs 31.\Wxd7+ ©c4 32.&i::J e S+ ©b3

Black has evacuated his king to a relatively safe place. 33.bxa3 \We2 . He begins a counter attack. The idea is to give a perpetual check. 34.e8\W gxe8 3S.Wi'xe8 ie4 36.\Wf7+ c4 37.\Wxc4+. The trans­ fer to an endgame with four pawns against a bishop and a pawn is White's last attempt to play for a win. It is still insuffi­ cient, though . . . 37 . . .\Wxc4 38. &i::J xc4 ©xc4 39.f4 as 40. g4 a4 41. fS ©d4 42.©f2 ©es 43.©g3 ic2 44.©h4 ©f6 4S.©g3 ©es 46.h3 id3 4 7 .h4. Now, Black can enter a king and pawn ending thanks to 249

Chapter 21 his far-advanced a-pawn. 47 . . . i.xfS 48.gxfS @xfS= 49.@f3 @g6 SO. '>t>e4 @hs Sl.'kt>d4 @xh4 S2.'>t>c4 @gs S3.@bs @f6 S4.@xa4 @e7 SS.@bS @d7 S6.@b6 @c8 . Black's king has succeeded just in time, draw, Andreikin - l.Popov, Dago­ mys 2010. Let us go back to 19.@xfl.

19 ... .ixe7 20.fxe7 gdg8 21. �e4 c3+ 22.@gl gxg5 23.�xgS Wg6 This is the essence of Black's defensive idea. Now, he is threat­ ening not only to capture on gS, but also c3-c2 .

After 24.Wfcl c2 2s.ga1 ges, Black manages to annihilate his op­ ponent's dangerous passed pawn. 26.Wfe3 §'f6 27,gcl gxe7 28.Wfd2 Wxb2 29.gxc2 Wes 30 .gcl @b7 31. �f3 WffS 32.@g2 �b6oo Gilimshin - Ohtake, Czech Republic 2003. There has arisen a complicated po­ sition in which Black's prospects are not worse thanks to the plan, connected with the advance of his queenside pawns (a7-aS, cS-c4). 24.Wfl. White sacrifices a piece and begins an attack against the enemy king. 24 . . . WfxgS 2S.Wa6+ @c7 26.Wxa7+ @c8 27.Wfa6+ @c7 28.bxc3 Wxe7 29.Wa7+ @c8 30. Wfa8+ �b8 31.cxb4 Wb7. Black's idea is to exchange the queens af­ ter which the vulnerability of his king would be irrelevant. 32 .Wfa4 �c6 33.Wc2 cxb4 34.a3 gh6 3S. axb4 WbS 36.Wfd2 gf6oo

24 . . . WfxgS 25.Wfe2 ti'e5 26. ti'a6+ '>t>b8

27.ti'bS+ 24.bxc3 2SO

White does not obtain an ad-

4. li:Jc3 e6 5. i.g5 de 6.e4 b5 7.e5 h6 8. !i.h4 g5 9. li:Jxg5 hg 1 0 . hg5 li:J bd7 vantage after 27.cxb4 cxb4 28. \Wa3 \Wd6 29.\Wxb4+ \Wxb4 30. l'!xb4+ @c7 31.l'!f4 f6 32 .l'!e4 l'!e8. Black can defend successfully this endgame. 33 .l'!e6 fS 34.@fl (34. @g2 f4 35.g4 li:JcS 36.l'!f6 li:Jd3. It is essential for Black to preserve his f4-pawn. 37.l'!a6 li:Jel+ 38.@fl li:Jf3 39 .h3 l'!xe7 40.l'!xa7+ @d6 41.l'!xe7 @xe7. White has an out­ side passed pawn indeed, but he cannot win this position. For ex­ ample: 42.a4 @d6 43.gS l?JxgS 44. @g2 @cS 45.h4 li:Je6= Hefka - Ser­ ban, ICCF 2 0 1 2 ; or 34.h4 f4 35.g4 li:JcS 36.l'!f6 li:Jd3 = Milanollo Kleiser, ICCF 2 0 14.) 34 . . .f4 35.g4 li:JcS 36.l'!f6 l'!xe7 37.l'!xf4 l'!e4 38. l'!xe4 l?Jxe4= Once again, Black's knight copes successfully with White's three pawns. 39.h4 (Fol­ lowing 39.a3 , Magat - Woodard, ICCF 2 016, 39 . . . li:Jd2+ 40.@e2 li:Jbl= , White cannot save his a­ pawn.) 39 . . . @d6 40.f4 li:Jf6 41.gS li:JhS 42.fS li:Jg3+ 43.@g2 li:JxfS 44.h5 @e7=

27

• • •

@c7

After 28.\WaS+ @b7 29.cxb4 (29.\Wd8 l?Jb6 30.cxb4 c4 - see 29.cxb4) 29 . . . c4, Black's powerful passed c-pawn provides him with good prospects. 30 .\Wd8 li:Jb6.

31.\Wf8 li:Jc8 32.\Wxf7 \Wxe7= 31.h4 fS 32.l'!dl c3 33.bS (33. \Wf8 f4 34.e8W/ \Wxe8 35.\Wg7+ @b8 36.\Wxc3 fxg3 37.fxg3 \Wh5 38 .\Wd4 l'!g8 = Chubukin - Efremov, ICCF 2 008) 33 . . . c2 34.l'!cl f4 35.g4 li:Jc8. Now, White has nothing bet­ ter than to comply with the repe­ tition of the position. 36.\Wd7+ @b8 37.\Wd8 @b7 38.\Wd7+ @b8 = Bychkov - Wegman, ICCF 2007. 31.a4 li:Jc8 32 .\Wd7+ @b8 33.l'!cl l?Jxe7 34.l'!xc4 \Wel+ 35.@g2 fuh2 ! = Black sacrifices a rook and forces a draw. 36.@xh2 Wfxf2 + 37.@h3 \Wfl+ 38.@h2 \Wf2 + 39.@h3, draw, Merrell - Naumenko, ICCF 2016.

28 Wfxe7 29.Wa5+ @b7 30. bxc5+ @a8 • • •

(diagram)

31.c6

28.cxb4

31.\Wc3 \Wf6 32.Wxf6 li:Jxf6. The vulnerability of Black's king is ir­ relevant in this endgame, while White's kingside passed pawns 251

Chapter 21 The forced play has ended in this endgame in which it may seem that White has a clear ad­ vantage thanks to his three con­ nected passed pawns on the king­ side. The computer however, evaluates this position as com­ pletely equal...

39.h4 ©b7 40.hS a5

are still too far from promotion. 33.©g2 lLid7 34.c6 lLib6 35.gel lLic8. Black prevents the penetra­ tion of the enemy rook to the e7square. 36,gbl lLib6 37.gb4 ©b8. Black should not forget to central­ ise his king in this endgame. 38. a4 ghs 39.gb5 gd5 40.h4 ©c7 41.h5 ©xc6 42 .h6 gd6 43.gh5 gd8 44,gf5 gh8 45.gxf7 gxh6 46. gxa7 gh8 47.g4 lLidS 48.a5 ©bs 49.©g3 gf8= Sienkiewicz - Com­ pagnone, ICCF 2 015. Black pre­ vents f2-f4 and holds successfully his defence in this endgame.

31 lLieS 32.Wds We6 33. Wxe6 fxe6 34.c7 gcs 35.©g2 gxc7 36.gel lLid3 37.gxe6 gc2 38.gf6 gxa2 • • •

Black wishes to deflect with his a-pawn White's rook from the support of his passed pawns.

41.h6 gc2 42.h7 gcs

Black's rook has managed to come back to his own camp in or­ der to hold the enemy passed h­ pawn just a step before its promo­ tion.

43.g4 43.gh6 �h8 44.g4 lLie5 45.©g3 lLid7 46.g5 lLif8 = Ruiz Romero Perez Ferris, ICCF 2010.

43 a4 44.gd6 lLie5 • • •

(diagram)

45.ge6 White's alternatives would not provide him with much, for exam252

4. � c3 e6 5. i.g5 dc 6.e4 b5 7.e5 h6 8. i.h4 g5 9. �xg5 hg 1 0 . bgS � bd7 a draw. 46 .. J'�hS 47.ge7+ ©c6 48. fxg4 ©d6. White fails to capture the enemy passed pawn and to prevent his own h7-pawn at the same time. 49.ga7 ©es 50.©g3 @f6 51.©f4 ©g6 s2 .ga6+ ©xh7= Limbert - Henri, ICCF 2 014.

46 . . . c!Lie3+

ple : 45.g5 a3 46.f4 ghs 47.gh6 �g6 48.©g3 a2 49.ghl ©b6 50. gal gxh7 51.gxa2 ghl= Mielke Noble, ICCF 2 0 1 2 . Now, in order to make a draw, it would be suffi­ cient for Black to give up a knight, or in some variations even a rook, for the enemy two pawns.

45

•..

c!Lixg4

White's three connected passed pawns have disappeared off the board.

46.gg6 Now, due to the threat ggs, White wins a knight. This would not change anything, though . . . The move 46.f3 also leads to

47.©t"3 47.fxe3 ghs 48.gh6 a3 49.©f3 a2 50.ghl ©c6 51.gal gxh7= Rob­ ert - Pinho, ICCF 2 0 14.

47 ghs 48.©xe3 lllh 7= •••

Jacot - Mendl, ICCF 2 0 16.

I can understand that some of my readers may be disappointed having seen such long variations, ending up with almost complete an­ nihilation of all the pieces, but this is contemporary chess. The com­ puter analyses can turn some opening variations into a lifeless de­ sert. . .

253

Chapter 2 2

1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c 6 3 .lll :f3 lll f6 4. lll c3 e6 5 . .ig5 dxc4 6.e4 b5 7.e5 h6 8.i.h4 g5 9 . lll xg5 hxg5 10 ..bg5 lll b d7 11.exf6 J.b7 12.g3 �b6 13 . .ig2 0-0-0 14.0-0 c5 15.d5 b4

16.�a4 White's knight runs away from the attack with tempo, but its placement at the edge of the board may turn out to be unfavourable for him.

16 . . . �b5 17.a3 White wishes to open the a-file in order to bring his rook into the attack against the enemy king. He would not achieve much with 17.dxe6 hg2 18.©xg2 (It is bad for him to opt for 18.e7? ! , because of 18 ... �c6 19.exd8W/+ ©xd8 20 .�el. White has won the exchange, but the light squares around his king are hopelessly weak. 2 0 . . . i.hl 21.f3 hf3 2 2 .W/c2, Braeutigam - Strobel, Bayern 2002, 2 2 . . . i.d6+) 18 . . . W/c6+ 19.f3 (19 .�f3?? �xh2+ ! 20.©xh2 W/xf3 254

21.exd7+ ©xd7 2 2 . �adl+ i.d6 0-1 Aseev - Bagirov, Helsinki 1992) 19 ... �xe6 2 0 .�c2 (20.h4 i.h6 21. Wfcl i.xgS 2 2 .W/xgS, Haba - Sha­ balov, Oberwart 1992 , 22 . . . W/c6 ! ?+ Now, White must fight for equali­ ty due to the misplacement of his knight at the edge of the board.) 20 ...�eS 21.�ael b3 ! ? 22.axb3 cxb3 23 .Wfe2 W/h3 + 24.©gl �d3 25.�c3 c4. It is essential for Black to pre­ serve his active knight on the d3outpost. 26.�e4 W/e6 27.h4 i.h6 28.i.xh6 �@ Glembek - Weber, ICCF 2010. His powerful knight is sufficient to compensate Black's missing pawn.

17 . . . �b8 Black will increase his pres­ sure against the dS-square.

18.axb4 cxb4

13 . .ig2 0 - 0 - 0 14. 0 - 0 cS 15.dS b4 16. liJa4 W!b5 17.a3 liJ b8 18.ab cb We will analyse now: A) 19. .ie3, B) 19.ti'd4 and C) 19.Yfg4. 19.ti'e2 .ixdS 2 0.E:fcl (20 . .ixdS E:xdS 2 1..ie3 liJc6 - see 19 . .ie3) 20 . . . liJc6 21..ixdS exdS 2 2 .b3. Black cannot hold on to his c4pawn, but White has no advan­ tage anyway. 22 . . . ©b7. Black re­ treats immediately his king away from the dangerous file. 23.bxc4 dxc4 24 . .ie3 E:hS 2S.E:xc4 liJd4 26. .ixd4 E:xd4 27.liJb2 E:hdS 28.E:acl E:xc4= Aguiar Garcia - Perez Fer­ nandez, ICCF 2 016. Black's king is vulnerable, but his pawns are very dangerous.

24 ..ie3 (24.liJb6 c3 ! 2S.WxbS �bs+ Loos - Paszewski, Zalakaros 2 016) 24 . . . E:d3. White is already beyond salvation. 2S.E:fl (After 2S.f4, Black has the powerful re­ source 2S .. J�xh2 ! , deflecting the enemy king under a double attack by the knight. 26.©xh2 E:xe3 27. Wdl, Koopmans - Van der Muy­ senberg, Netherlands 1991, 27 . . . E:el ! -+) 2S . . . W!c6 26.f3 .id6 27. ©g2 l:fa8 ! ? 28.liJb6 E:xal 29J�xal E:xe3 30.W!xe3 ti'xb6-+ 23 . .if4 .ih6 24.b3 i.xf4

A) 19 .ie3 hd5 20.hd5 gxd5 21.ti'e2 liJc6 22.gfcl liJe5 •

Naturally, Black should not al­ low his opponent to regain the pawn on c4.

23.f4 White ousts the enemy knight from eS, but weakens the position of his own king. 23 . .ixa7? ! Capturing of this pawn is obviously bad. 23 . . . ©b7

After the intermediate move 2S.bxc4?, Black has the beautiful resource 2S . . . E:dl + ! 26.E:xdl Wc6. His king has found a safe haven be­ hind the pawn on c4, while Black's threats on the hl-a8 diagonal seem very powerful. 27.E:d3. Now, White must part with an exchange in order to defend against the threat liJt'3. 27 ... liJxd3 28.ti'xd3 .ieS 29Jfa2 E:d8 30.ti'b3, Kacheishvili Yang, Saint Louis 2011, 30 ....ixf6 !? 31.f3 aS-+ It would be sufficient to compare the power of the bish­ op on f6 and the knight on a4 in order to evaluate this position correctly. 2SS

Chapter 22 2S.gxf4 lll d 3 26.13xc4+ ©b8 27.lll b 2. White is in a huny to ac­ tivate his knight. 27 . . . lll xf4 28. 1l;!/e3 13d4. This is a beautiful rook­ sacrifice. 29.13xd4 lll e 2+ 30 .©hl lll xd4 31.1l;!/xd4 '!Wc6+ 32 .©gl 13g8+ 33.@fl 1l;!/hl+ 34.©e2 1l;!/xal = Black has already an extra exchange, so White is forced to give a perpetual check. 3S.'!Wd6+ , draw, Balabanov - Fetisov, ICCF 2010.

2010. White can hardly find a way to improve his attack against his opponent's king, deprived of any pawn-shelter.) 29.13xd3 1l;!/xd3 3 0 . '!Wxd3 lll xd3 31.l3dl ©xa7 32.l3xd3 13d8 33.h4 i.c7= Giese - Herold, Germany 1996.

23.b3 c3 24.lll xc3. This was the idea behind White's previous move. He sacrifices a knight for two pawns in order to open files for his rooks. 24 . . . bxc3 2S.13xc3+ ©b8

White has a queen and a pawn for two rooks. His knight on a4 however is still misplaced, so Black manages to coordinate his rooks.

23 ... lll d3 24.gxc4+ '!Wxc4 2s.gc1 1l;!/xcl + 26.hcl lll xcl 27.'!Wc4+ ©b8 28.'!Wxcl

28 . . . J.d6

26 . .ba7+ ©b7 27. '!WxbS+ 13xbS 28.ie3 id6 29.13a7+ ©b8+ Peder­ sen - Schandorff, Denmark 2016. Black has managed to coordinate his pieces and White must already fight for a draw. 26.'!Wc2 i.d6 27 ..ba7+ ©b7 28. b4 l3d3. This move leads to equal­ ity. (Black could have tried here to fight for the advantage with the line: 28 .. Jfa8 ! ? 29.l3aS 1l;!id7 3 0 . !b6 l'fa 6 31.l3xa6 ©xa6 32 .icS ©b7+ Rattay - Krakovsky, LSS

2S6

29.'!Wc4 29. ©g2 . This is an interesting move, but still insufficient for White to obtain an advantage. 29 . . J�k8 30.1l;!/hl ! ? l3c2 + 31.©f3 13cd2 32.©g4 eS 33 .fxeS .beS 34. '!Wf3 ©c7 3S.©h3 ©d8. Black's king is trying to run away from the queenside. His idea is to pro-

13 . .ig2 0 - 0 - 0 14. 0 - 0 c5 15.d5 b4 16. ltJ a4 W!b5 17.a3 ltJ bB 18.ab cb tect the important t7-pawn. 36.b3 hl 37.'!We3 !xf6 38.'!Wxa7 ©e8 39. ltJb6. Finally, White's knight is back in action. 39 . . .!'�h5+ 40.Wg4 gg5+ 41.©f3 gf5 + . White's king must go to the centre of the board in order to avoid the perpetual check. 42.We3 .ic3 43.'!Wb8+ gds 44.W!b7 .id4+ 45.©e4 ge5+ 46.©f4 ge7 47.'!Wc6+ ©f8 48.ltJd5, draw, Tsygankov - Tinture, ICCF 2 0 14. Following 48 ... ged7 49.ltJxb4 gd6= 50.W!b7 .ic3 51.ltJc6 gf6+ 52.©e4 ge6+ 53.©f3 gf6+ 54.©g4 gg6= , White must give u p his h2-pawn if he wishes to avoid the perpetual check. 55.©f3 gf6+ 56.Wg2 gd2 + 57.©h3 gh6+ 58.©g4 gg6+ 59. ©f5 gxh 2 =

29

• • •

!1!c8 30.'i'e2 !1!d8

B) 19.ti'd4

This is an ambitious move. White prepares a queen-sacrifice. The tournament practice shows however that he risks more than his opponent in this line.

19 . . . ltJc6 20.dxc6 Black should not be afraid of 20 .ltJb6+. Before sacrificing the queen, White brings his knight on the altar of the attack in order to open the a-file for his rook. 20 . . . axb6 21.dxc6 .ixc6. White's pawn on b7 will be very dangerous with the a-file opened. 2 2 . .ixc6 W!xc6 23 .W!g4

31.'i'a6 (31.W!c4 gcs 32 .'!We2 gd8= Dzenis - Eshuis, ICCF 2 0 16) 31 !1!c8 32.Wg2 !1!c2 + 33.©h3 e5. Black opens files for his rooks. 34.fxe5 .ixe5 35.b3 • • •

.id4 36.'i'fl .i:f2 37.'i'al !1!h5+ 38.©g4 gds 39.'i'bt !1!d4+ 40.Wh3 gdd2 = Black's rooks are very well coordinated.

23 . . . ©b7 (Black should not allow White's rook to the a7square : 23 ....icS 24.ga7--+ Carlsen 257

Chapter 22 - Smeets, Wijk aan Zee 2010). The tactical complications are over. Black's prospects are not worse in the arising position thanks to his possibility to create quickly a passed pawn on the queenside. 24.b3 (24.l:Ud l ? ! ic5+ The move 24.l:'ffc l ? ! only helps Black to advance his pawns. 24 . . . b5+ Maze - Brunner, Guingamp 2010.) 24 . . . c3 25.Wi'e2 .ic5 (25 . . . .ih6 26.hh6 gxh6, Hebden Arun Prasad, Edinburgh 2009. Now, White must try to organise counterplay with the move 27. ga4 ! ?� ; otherwise, he may end up in an inferior position.) 26 . .if4 b5 27.ga5 @b6

Black follows the advice of Steinitz who considered the king to be a powerful piece. 28.gfal gas 29.�a8 �a8 30.�a8 Wi'xa8. The arising endgame might seem dangerous for White, but he man­ ages to draw it after an accurate play. 31.Wi'd3 Wi'e8 32 .h4. White's counterplay is connected with the advance of his h-pawn. 32 . . . e5 33. Wi'e4 id4 34.ig5 '1;!.lc8 35.@g2 c2 36.icl Wi'c3 37.h5 Wi'xb3 38.h6. White succeeds in deflecting the enemy queen from his passed 258

pawns by advancing his h-pawn. 38 . . . Wi'e6 39.h7 Wi'xf6 40.Wi'xc2 b3 41.'1;!.le2 e4 42 .ie3 @c6 43 .hd4, draw, Murden - Adelseck, ICCF 2 0 15. Later, there may follow this variation: 43 . . .Wi'xd4 44.Wi'h5 b2 45.hBWI' Y;!fxh8 46.Wi'xh8 blWI' 47. Wi'f6+ @c5 48.Wi'e7+ @c4 49. Wfxfl+ @c3 50.'1;!.lf6+ @c4= White man­ aged to save the draw somehow, but this was not an easy task at all .

20 . . . gxd4 22.Ae3 e5

21.cxb7+

@b8

Naturally, Black should not al­ low the enemy bishop to occupy the gl-a7 diagonal.

23.b3 White must play very precisely now, because a single mistake may lead to a hopeless position for him. For example: 23.gfcl? ih6- + Ernst - Burg, Amsterdam 2 0 14. 23.lll c3 This sacrifice of anoth­ er piece seems to be too risky for White. 23 . . . bxc3 24.bxc3 ic5 25. gfbl gdl + ! This is the point! After

13 . .ig2 0 - 0 - 0 14 . 0 - 0 c5 15.d5 b4 16. lt:ia4 Vflb5 17.a3 lt:i bB 18.ab cb this not so obvious rook-sacrifice, Black seizes completely the initia­ tive. 26.gxdl .ixe3 27.fxe3 Wi'b2 28.gacl. Now, White's rook must occupy this passive position in or­ der to protect his c3-pawn. 28 . . . Wb6 29.gel Wi'xf6 30.gc2 Wg6 3 1 . gd2 fS. Black prepares the move eS-e4 in order to cut off White's bishop from the protection of the pawn on b7. White prevents this with 32 . .idS, but after 32 . . . gd8 33.gee2 as-+ , the game is practi­ cally over. 34.©fl a4 3S.e4 a3 36. ga2 Wh6 37.gal fxe4 38 . .ixe4 gd3 0-1 Claus - Rada, ICCF 2011. 23.gfel .ih6. Black wishes to trade the active enemy bishop. 24.f4. White is preventing the ex­ change. Still, after 24 . . . .ixf4 2S. gxf4 gg8, his king becomes too vulnerable and Black's counter­ play becomes sufficient for a per­ petual check. 26 . .ixd4 exd4 27. ges Wi'a6 28.©f2 Wxf6 29.lt:icS , draw, Yeremenko - Noble, ICCF 2011, 29 . . . Wi'xf4+ 30.©gl gxg2+ 31.©xg2 Wi'g4+ 32 .©fl Wi'f4=

23

• • •

c3

24.!Udl 24.gadl gd6 2s.gfe1 as 26.h4 gd3 27 . .ie4 gxdl 28.gxdl .ih6 29. .icS .id2 30 ..id6+ ©a7 31.gal c2. Now, White has nothing better than to give a perpetual check. 32 .icS+ ©b8 33 . .id6+ ©a7= Bor­ stnik - Efremov, ICCF 2011.

24 J.h6 • . •

25 .ixd4 •

The exchange-sacrifice 2S. gxd4? ! leads to difficulties for White after 2S ... exd4 2 6 . .ixd4 c2 27.lt:icS ge8 ! Black defends against ieS. 28 . .ifl Wc6 29.lt:ia6+ ©xb7 30 .J.g2. White regains the queen, but this is still insufficient for equality. 30 . . . clW+ 31.gxcl .ixcl 32 . .ixc6+ ©xc6 33.lt:ixb4+ ©bS+ Altanoch - Henri, ICCF 2011. Black's rook will be obviously more mobile than White's minor pieces in actions on both sides of the board.

25 gc4

• • •

exd4 26.gxd4 c2 27.

2S9

Chapter 22 27.f4? '1We2-+ Krush - Wang, Philadelphia 2011.

gni - Duliba, ICCF 2010.

29 . . . cre+ 30.�ct .bet 31. l0c5 gd6 Black's rook protects simulta­ neously the a6 and d7-squares.

27... Yfxc4! ? This is the simplest for Black. He gives back the queen and en­ ters an endgame in which White needs to play very precisely.

32 . .ldS !

28.bxc4 gds

29 ..l:f3 White loses after 29.i.dS?, because of 29 . . . b3 30.fl cl'IW+ 31. gxcl hcl 32 . .ixfl b2. Black's pawn has advanced too far and White will have to give one of his minor pieces for it later. 33 .i.g6 �d6 34.i.e4 gxf6 3S.lll cS gd6 36. h4 i.d2 37.@g2 .lb4-+ Serradimi260

32.g2 ? ! i.b2 33.h4 (33.lll b 3 hf6 34.lll aS gd2 3S.h4 gb2 36.cS i.c3 37.i.dS ci>c7 38.fl l:!d2 39. i.g2 b3 ! Black sacrifices a pawn and forces White's knight to oc­ cupy an unfavourable position. 40.lll xb3 �d8 41.c6 i.b4. White's knight has been severely restrict­ ed. Black's a-pawn will settle the issue. 42.i.e4 aS+ Drenthen - Pan­ nekoek, ICCF 2 0 1S.) 33 . . .hf6 34. hS as 3S.h6 i.h8 36.h7 fS+ 37.i.dS b3 ! We are already familiar with this resource. Here however, it is not used with the idea to restrict the enemy knight, but to help the advance of Black's a-pawn. 38. lll xb3 a4 39.lll c l a3. It is well known that knights are very inad­ equate in the fight against the passed rook-pawns ... 40.lll a 2 �b6 41.©f3 �b2 42.cS gd2 , followed

13. il..g 2 0 - 0 - 0 14. 0 - 0 cS 15.dS b4 16. EiJ a4 Wib5 17.a3 EiJ bB 18.ab cb by il..d 4, 0-1 Hiltunen - Noble, ICCF 2008.

32 as 33.@fl .ib2 34.ttle4 ga6 35.ttlcS gd6= Domer •••

24.l3xc4 l:!xal-+ Van Wely - Shabalov, New York 1993.

22 . . . gxgS

Feco, ICCF 2012.

C) 19.'9g4

23.'9d4 White prevents ii.cs. Black has temporarily an extra piece, but cannot avoid the loss of his knight on c6. White pins the pawn on e6 and impedes capturing on dS with the pawn.

19 . . . .ixdS 20.gfcl Or 2 0 .hdS ? ! l:!xdS 2 1 .il..e 3 (21. if4 EiJc6 22.l:!fcl l3d4 23.Wie2 W!dS+ Bacrot - Fier, Le Port Marly 2012) 2 1 . . . ttlc6 2 2 . l:!fcl EiJeS 23.W!e4 W!c6 24.©g2 .ih6 ! 25.l:!el EiJd3 26.l:!e2 he3 27.13xe3 13hh5 28. ©gl 13he5-+ Buj - Pappier, Argentina 1992. White fails to r egain the pawn on c4 in both the variations.

20 . . . ttlc6 22.�c4

21.hdS

Following 23.Wie4, Black suc­ ceeds in creating counterplay against the f2-square. 23 . . . .icS 24.b3 l3f5 25.l:!acl .ixf2 + 26.©g2 ©b8 27.Wixc6 '9xc6+ 28.l3xc6. Af­ ter the trade of the queens the vulnerability of Black's king would be irrelevant. 28 . . . .id4= Harikrishna - Mulyar, Toronto 2010.

23 . . . ©b8 24.�c6 gxg3+ This intermediate move is nec­ essary.

gxd5

2 2 .il..e 3 EiJeS - see 2 0.hdS. 2 2 .Wixc4? l:!dl+ 23.©g2 '9xc4

24 . . . '9xc6? 25.Wif4+-

25.fxg3 '9xc6 26,gdl Black's king seems quite vulnerable, but there is just a few 261

Chapter 22 material left on. the board, so White cannot bring into the at­ tack his knight, which has re­ mained at the edge of the board. 26.b3 .td6 27.gd1 gas= Robert Perez - Sevian, Saint Louis 2013.

26

•••

ti'c7

27.b3 White protects his knight, just in case . . . The evaluation o f the position remains the same after 27.@fl White removes his king away from the dangerous gl-cS diago­ nal. 27 . . . ghs 28.\WdB+ '\Wc8

Here, White has several active possibilities, but Black holds sue262

cessfully the defence in all the lines. 29.lll b 6 gfs+ 30 .Wel. White's king is forced to go to the e-file, because his other possibilities lose. (30.Wg2? axb6 31.\Wxb6+? Y!\'b7- + ; 30 .Wgl?? .icS-+) 30 . . . ges= Kozak - Mihok, Budapest 2 0 1S. 29 .h4 gas. It is essential for Black to exchange the enemy rook, since it might join into the attack later. 30.gxdS exdS 31. \WxdS ti'a6+ 32.Wf2 Y!\'xa4 33. \Wd8+ Wb7 34.Y!\'xfB. There has arisen a king and queen ending in which Black exploits the mis­ placement of the enemy queen on the f8-square and ends the game with a perpetual check. 34 . . . \Wc2 + 3S.We3 \Wcl+ 36.Wd3 \Wfl+ 37. @d4 \Wxf6+ 38.@c4 Y!\'e6+ 39.Wxb4 ti'b6+ 40.Wc4 Y!\'e6= Shkuro Ghane Gardeh, Azov 2010. 29.gd7. This move may seem very dangerous for Black, but he can capture cold-bloodedly the pawn on f6. 29 ... gfS+ 30.Wg2 gn6 31.ti'xcB+ @xc8 32.gxa7. Black's king is cut off on the penultimate rank, but his bishop is more pow­ erful than the enemy knight in a fight on both sides of the board. 32 ... lt>dB 33.gas+ lt>e7 34.gbs .th6 3S.lll cs gfs 36.lll e4 gas 37.�b4. White has managed to win a pawn, but Black's pieces have been activated considerably. 37 . . . fS 38 .gb7+ @dB 39.lll c3 l'! d 2 + 4 0 . @fl. Now already, White's king has become passive. 40 . . . .ie3 41. lll e 2 @cs 42.gb3 ga1+ 43.lt>g2

13. ig2 0 - 0 - 0 14. 0 - 0 cS 15.dS b4 16. tfJ a4 W!b5 17.a3 tfJ bB 18.ab cb ia7 44.l:!c3+ ©d7 4S.l:!c2 ib8 46. h4 ©e7 47.b4 ieS 48.hS l:!bl = Van Seben - Starke, LSS 2012. The ac­ tivity of Black's pieces is sufficient to maintain the equality. 29.b3 l:!dS 30.l:!xdS exdS 31. W!xdS W!a6+ 32 .©g2 W!xf6. In the arising endgame White's only chance of obtaining an edge is connected with the advance of his h-pawn. 33.h4 ©c7 34.hS W/c6. The trade of the queens is Black's most accurate way of reaching the draw. 3S.W/xc6+ ©xc6 36.@f3 ©d6

37.tfJb2 ©es 38.tfJc4+ ©fs 39. g4+ ©gs 40 .tfJe3 ( 40 .tfJeS fS=) 40 . . . ig7= Ham - Cruzado Due­ cas, ICCF 2 0 1S. 37.©f4 ©e6 38.g4 id6+ . Now, irrelevant of where White will re­ treat with his king, he will be inca­ pable of obtaining an advantage.

3 9 . © g S . H i s king is trying to go to the h7-square. (39. ©e4 ©f6 40. tfJb2 ©gs 41.tfJc4 .if8 42 .tfJe3 aS= ; 42.tfJeS f6 43 .tfJd7 ih6 44.@f3 fS 45.gxfS @xfS= Duliba - Noble, ICCF 2 0 09) 39 . . . ie7+ 40.©h6 if8+ 41.©h7 fS

This is a quite concrete deci­ sion. Black allows his opponent to obtain two connected passed pawns, but relies on his powerful f-pawn. 42.gS (42. gxfS+, Nilsson - Efremov, ICCF 2012, 42 . . . @xfs 43.©gS ih6= ) 42 . . .f4 43.g6 f3 44.h6 f2 4S.g7 flWI 46.gSW/+ W!f7+ 47.W/xf7+ @xf7. The pawn races cannot change the evaluation of the position as approximately equal. White's king stands in the way forward of his h-pawn and h i s knight cannot help the king, because it must prevent Black's pawn-break a7-aS-a4. 48.tfJb2 ©f6 49.tfJd3 as so. tfJf4 ©fs Sl.tfJd3 ©gs s2.tfJes ixh6= S3.tfJf7+?? ©f4 S4.©xh6 a4-+

27

. . .

©c8

Black defends against W/d8.

263

Chapter 22 ICCF 2010. The position has been simplified considerably and after 34 . . . i.eS, White must be ready to exchange the queens in order to prevent the activation of Black's pieces. 3S. \Wes VNxcS 36.lLixcS ©c7 37.lLia6+ ©d6 3S.lLixb4 i.xf6=

28.ti'e3 White has some other moves with his queen as well. 2S.ti'd2 . After this move Black can win a tempo for the develop­ ment of his bishop. This does not influence the evaluation of the po­ sition at all. 2S . . . i.h6 29.\We2 gas 30 .\Wa6+ ©bS 31.gxdS+ \WxdS 32. \WbS+ . Now, White has nothing better than to give a perpetual check. 32 . . . ©aS 33.\Wc6+ ©bS = Craig - Dijon, ICCF 2012. 2s .'1We4 ©bs 29,ga4 (29.VNd4 ©cS = ; 29.\Wd3 i.cS+ 30.lLixcS \Wxc5+ 31.VNd4 \Wc3 - see 2S. \We3) 29 . . . i.d6 30 .gc4 (Following 30. ©g2 , Black can activate his rook. 30 . . . ghs 31.h4 ges 32.ti'd3 \Wc6+ 33.©h3 gas= Tazelaar - Schwarte, ICCF 2011; 30 .h4, Shimanov - I. Popov, Loo 2014, 30 ... aS! ? He frees the a7-square for his queen. 31. gc4 \Wa7+ 32.©g2 ghs 33.VNc6 VNb7 34.VNxb7+ ©xb7= After the trade of the queens Black has nothing to worry about.) 30 . . . \WaS 31.ti'd3 gas 32.©g2 i.c7 33,ga4 gxd4 34. \Wxd4, draw, Bokar - Duecas, 264

2S.Wd3 ghs 29.Wt'3 gbs. Black's rook has come just in time to help his king. 30 .WaS+ gbs 31.ti'e4 gbs 32 .lLib2 . Finally, White has decided to improve the placement of his knight. (32.ga4 ©bS 33. Wd3 \Wcl+ 34.©g2 VNc6+ 3S.We4 Wxe4= Dothan - Perez Fernan­ dez, ICCF 2 0 16.) 32 . . . ©bS 33.lLic4 as. Black makes use of the remov­ al of White's knight from the a4square in order to create counter­ play with aS-a4. 34.©g2 (34.gal i.d6 3S.©g2 ggs 36.Wh4, Alexa Davis, ICCF 2012, 36 . . . gcS=) 34 . . . a 4 3S.bxa4 gc5 36.lLie3 gc3. Black has activated his pieces at the price of a pawn. 37.©h3 i.d6 3S. ga2 \Wes 39.lLidl gc4 40.\Wh7 i.c7= Bubir - Ohtake, ICCF 2 0 07.

2s . . . ©bs White was threatening gel.

13. �g2 0 - 0 - 0 14 . 0 - 0 c5 15.d5 b4 16. CiJ a4 �b5 17.a3 CiJ bB 18.ab cb 29.�d2 About 29.�d3 Ac5+ 30.CiJxcS �xc5+ 31.�d4 �c3 - see 29.�d2 .

29 Ac5+ 30.CiJxc5 ti'xc5+ 31.ti'd4 • . •

Now, White must exchange the queens if he wishes to contin­ ue to fight for a win.

34.g4 ©b7 3S.h4 gc5 36.©f2 (36. hS ©c6=) 36 . . . ©c6 37.b4 gc4 38. gS ©d6 39 .hS gh4= Babushkin Butov, ICCF 2011.

34

• • •

gc5

Black is preparing ©c7, fol­ lowed by ©d6-eS.

31.@g2 �c6+ 32 .@gl �CS=

31

• • •

ti'c3

35.g4 White's alternatives would not change the character of the posi­ tion.

32.ti'xc3 32.�f4, Ding Ding Liren - Yu Yangyi, Danzhou 2 0 16, 32 . . . eS ! ? 33.�e4 gc8=

32

• • •

bxc3 33.�kl �k8

Black must play very accurate­ ly in this rook and pawn ending in order not to lose his c3-pawn and not to allow the promotion of the enemy h2-pawn.

34.©f2 White is activating his king. He cannot obtain an edge after

3S. ©e2 ©c7 36.g4 (36. ©d3 ©d6 - see 3S.©e3) 36 . . . ©d6 37. ©d3 ©es - see 3S.g4. 3S. ©e3 ©c7 36. ©d3 (36.g4 ©d6 - see 3S.g4 ; 36.©d4 ©d6 37. i:!xc3 gxc3 38. ©xc3 @es - see 36.©d3.) 36 . . . ©d6 37.i:!xc3 (37.g4 @es - see 3S.g4) 37 . . . i:!xc3+ 38. ©xc3 ©es. Black will restore the material balance on his next move. 39.©d3 (39 .©d2 ©xf6 = ; 39.g4 ©xf6 40.h4 ©es 41.hS ©f6 42.©d4 ©gs 43.©es fs 44.gxfs exfS= Nilsson - Krzyzanowski, ICCF 2 016.) 39 . . . @xf6. The king and pawn ending is a draw. 40. 26S

Chapter 22 ©e4 @gs 41.h3 as 42.@f3 f6 43 . h4+ ©hs 44.©f4 ©g6 4S.g4 ©h6 46.gS+ fxgS, draw, Nouveau Verhaeren, ICCF 2 016, because after 47.hxgS+ ©g6 48.@es ©xgS 49.©xe6, Black's king manages to gobble the enemy b3-pawn just in time. 49 . . . @f4 SO.@ds ©e3 Sl. ©c4 ©d2 S2.@bs ©c3 S3.©xaS ©xb3.

35

•••

©c7 36.©e3 ©d6

40.gxc3 The inclusion of the move 40 .b4 does not promise anything to White. 40 .. Jk8 41.13xc3 13d8+ 42.©e4 ©xh4 43.g6 @gs 44.gxf7 @xf6 4S.13c7 ©g7, Vecek - Taras, ICCF 2013, 46.13xa7 13b8 =

40

• • •

gds+ 41.©e3

41.©e4 13f5 42 .13c7 ©xh4 43. 13xa7 ©xgS 44.13xf7, draw, Lege­ maat - Boskovic, ICCF 2011. Fol­ lowing 44 . . .13xf6 4S.13xf6 @xf6 46.b4 ©e7= , Black's king holds the enemy b4-pawn.

41

• • •

©xh4 42.g6

37.h4 37.©d3 ©es 38 .gS @fs 39.h4 ©g4 - see 37.h4.

37 ©g4

. • •

©es 38.gS ©f5 39.©d3

Black can simply ignore this pawn-break. 42 @gS 43.gxf7 • • •

gds 44.gc7 ©xf6 45.�a7 gf'8 46.©e4 (46.b4 13xf7 47.13al ©eS=) 46 gxf7 47.gal gd7. •••

This is the most precise way for Black to draw. He cuts off the en­ emy king from the b-pawn and will place his rook on dS on his next move. Later his king will go to the c8-square. 48.b4 gds

49.gbl ©e7 50.bS ©d7 51.b6 ©c8= 266

Part 6 1.d4 d5

In the final part of our book we will analyse the opening varia­ tions in which White plays l.d4, but after l.. .d5 refrains from ad­ vancing c2-c4 on his second and following moves. As a rule, in these variations he plays 2 .lll f3, but not always. For example in Chapter 23 we will analyse the set-ups in which White plays nei­ ther c2-c4, nor lll f3 . The London system, in which White develops his bishop on f4

will be dealt with in Chapter 24. Chapter 25 will be devoted to the Torre system - 2 .lll f3 lll f6 3 . .ig5. Finally, the last chapter of the book will be devoted to the varia­ tions beginning with 2 .lll f3 lll f6 3.g3. We have to mention that the connection of the openings "The Slav Defence + the Caro-Kann Defence" enables Black to avoid many problematic opening varia­ tions. For example, after l.d4 d5 2 .lll c 3, he can play simply 2 . . . c6, avoiding the main lines of the Ve­ resov Attack, arising after 2 . . . lll f6 3 . .ig5. In the London system, which has become very popular lately, after 1.d4 d5 2 ..if4 c5 3.e3, Black can simply exchange on d4 - 3 . . . cxd4 4.exd4, after which there aris­ es on the board a harmless varia­ tion of the Caro-Kann Defence (1. e4 c6 2 .d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4 . .if4).

267

Chapter 23

1.d4 d5 2 . c3 2 . lLJ c3 Chigorin Variation Stonewall Attack 2 .e3 2.e4 Blackmar - Diemer Gambit 2 .i.g5 Bishop Attack

A) 2.c3 c5 The simplest response for Black, preparing an exchange on d4 af­ ter which there arises a position from the Caro-Kann Defence, or the exchange variation of the Slav Defence.

About 2 .lild2 tt:lf6 3.c4 (3.lilgf3 c6 - see Chapter 24) 3 ... c6 - see Chapter 1. 2 .f4 tt:lf6 - see volume 2, the Bird Opening. 2 .i.f4 cS - see Chapter 25, var­ iation A. 2.g3 tt:lf6 3.i.g2 (3.c4 c6 - see Chapter 1; 3.lilf3 c6 - see Chapter 26) 3 . . . c6 4.lild2 (4.tt:lf3 i.g4 - see Chapter 26; 4.c4 i.g4 - see Chap­ ter 1) 4 . . . ig4 5.lilgf3 e6 - see Chapter 26. 2.a3 lilf6 3.tt:lf3 c6 - see Chap­ ter 24. 268

3.dxc5 This is a principled move for White. He wins a pawn and will try to preserve it later. About 3.i.f4 cxd4 4.cxd4 lilc6, or 3.i.gS h6 4.i.h4 cxd4 5.cxd4 tt:lc6 - see Chapter 3. 3.lilf3 cxd4 4.cxd4 tt:lf6 - see Chapter 4.

1.d4 d5 2.c3 c5 3.dc e6 3.e3 cxd4 4.exd4 �c6 - see the Caro-Kann Defence (volume 2).

3

• • •

e6

ondly his king's knight is devel­ oped to an active position to f6 and not on e7. 9 . . . ib6 10 .�b3 �e4 ll.�bd4 ig4 12 .ie3 ge8 13.gel \1;Vf6 14.\1;Vd3 gad8= Zindel - Lputian, Geneve 1986. Black's pieces are very active and the vul­ nerability of his d5-pawn is irrel­ evant.

4

• • .

a5 5.a3 b6 6.cxb6

4.b4 It is just bad for White to play here 4.e4, because after 4 . . . i.xcS, Black restores immediately the material balance. 5.exd5 exd5 6. �f3 �c6 7 ..le2 �f6 8.0-0 0-0 9.�bd2

6

• • •

\1;Vxb6

Black is forced to sacrifice a pawn.

Similar positions arise very of­ ten in the Tarrasch system in the French Defence (l.e4 e6 2 .d4 d5 3.�d2). Here however, it is in a very good version for Black, be­ cause at first he has not lost a tempo for the move id6 and sec-

It would not work for him to play 6 . . . axb4 7.cxb4 ixb4+? ! , in view of 8.axb4 gxal 9.ib2± Hort - Velimirovic, Novi Sad 1976 and thanks to the double attack White regains the material and pre­ serves all the pluses of his posi­ tion.

7 .le3 'flc7 8.�d2 �f6 9. �g£J .ld6 10.�kl 0-0;; Green •

Cvetnic, ICCF 2 0 15. Black has very good compensation for his minimal material deficit.

269

Chapter 23 B) 2.lLJc3 White is preparing e2-e4, but the placement of his knight in front of the c2-pawn may turn out to be unfavourable for him in this middle game.

2

• • •

c6 !?

This is the simplest. Black is offering his opponent to trans­ pose to the Caro-Kann Defence.

out venom. 3 . . . Wb6 ! ? (After the straightforward reaction 3 . . . .ifS, Black must consider f2-f3, fol­ lowed by g2-g4, h2-h4, or e2-e4.) 4.l'!bl (After 4.lLJa4, Black's sim­ plest response would be 4 . . . �aS+ S.lLJc3, Sychev - Vitiugov, Sochi 2 016, S . . . Wb6 ! ? = ; there arises a double-edged position after the pawn-sacrifice 4.�d2 Wxb2 S.l'!bl �a3oo Cornette - Genov, Morzine 2 0 14.) 4 lLJf6 s.e3 .ifs 6.lLJf3 (Af­ ter 6.f3, Black should better de­ fend in advance against g2-g4-gS. 6 . . . h6 7.g4, Darini - Melkumyan, Doha 2 0 16, 7 . . . .id7. Black's bish­ op is more reliably placed here than on g6, or h7. 8 .h4 cS+± Black follows the classical principle and counters the enemy flank attack with a counter strike in the centre. White has managed to advance his kingside pawns, but will have serious problems to find a safe haven for his king in the forth­ coming middle game.) 6 . . . e6 7. id3 i.xd3 8.cxd3 . White opens the c-file for his rooks, but com­ promises his pawn-structure. (8 .�xd3 lLJbd7 9 .h3 i.e7= Hill­ mann - Lombardy, Nice 1974) 8 . . . aS. Black impedes the pawn-mi­ nority attack of his opponent (b2b4) . 9.0-0 ie7 10.lLJa4 �bs 11. Wc2 lLJbd7= Ibarra Jerez - Perez Candelario, Navalmoral 2 0 1 2 . • . .

3.ig5 Black has not played yet lLJf6, so this bishop-sortie is not so ef­ fective. About 3.e4 dxe4 - see the Ca­ ro-Kann Defence (volume 2). 3.lLJf3 i.fS 4 . .if4 (After 4.igS, Black can solve the problem with the development of his bishop on f8 with Wb6, e6. 4 . . . h6 S.ih4 �b6 6.l'!bl e6 7.e3 i.e7 8.i.xe7 lLJxe7 9.i.d3 lLJd7= Mueller - Simon, Germany 1992.) 4 . . . e6 S.e3 i.d6 6 ..ig3 lLJf6 7 . .id3 .ixd3 8.�xd3, Lindinger - Pedersen, Germany 2 0 04, 8 . . . 0-0 ! ? = The move 3 . .if4 i s not with270

3

. • •

h6

This is a useful move for Black if he plans to castle kingside. He provides his king with a leeway in advance.

1.d4 d5 2. lDc3 c6 3. igS h6 4 .ih4 Yfb6 •

The move 6. e3 leads to a qui­ eter game. 6 . . . e6 7 . .id3 llid7. Black prepares the development of his knight to the f6-square. 8. llJge2 lDgf6 9 . 0-0 .ie7 10.f3 .ixd3 11.cxd3 0-0 12 .e4 as 13.f4, Kava­ lenia - Shalimov, Dimitrov 2007, 13 . . . 'l&d8 ! ? = It is not easy for White to develop his initiative on the kingside.

6

. • .

e6 7.e4 .ih7 8.i.-rl

This is an important move. White's plan includes the moves °l&d2 , 0-0-0, f2-f3, e2-e4. Now, he must either sacrifice his b2pawn, or lose the possibility to castle queenside.

5.l:'!:bl It would be too risky for White to choose here 5.'19d2 'l&xb2 6.!!bl 'l&a3 7.e4 dxe4+ Black lags in de­ velopment indeed, but he has no pawn-weaknesses in his position and White can hardly find targets for attack. For example, White may have serious problems, after the straightforward move 8 .dS? ! . 8 . . . llJf6 9 . .ig3 lDbd7 10 .lDge2, Mi­ ladinovic - Starostits, Cutro 2005, 10 ... e5 11.dxe6 lDb6 12.exf7+ @xt'7-+

5 . . . i.f5 Before playing e7-e6, Black develops his bishop to an active position.

6.£J

8

• • •

dxe4

Black begins an attack against the e4-square

9.fxe4 After 9.lDxe4, the position be­ gins to resemble the classical sys­ tem of the Caro-Kann Defence. 9 . . . llJd7 10 . .id3 llJgf6 ll.c3 l3d8 =

9

• . •

�f6 lO.i.d3 i.h4 n.es.

White must present to his oppo­ nent the dS-square. ll ... .ixd3 12.cxd3 �d5 13.llJge2 0-0= White has more space, but Black's pawn-structure is much more elastic.

271

Chapter 23 C) 2.e3 �f6

3 . .id3 White preserves the possibility to advance f2-f4. About 3.f4 .ifS - see volume 2 . 3.�f3 .ig4 - see Chapter 24. 3.c4 c6 - see Chapter 1. 3.�c3. White's knight will be misplaced on this square imped­ ing the pawn-advance c2-c4. 3 . . . c S 4.�f3 �c6.

After S.dxcS eS 6 ..ibS .ig4 7.h3 i.xf3 8.'fixf3 .ixcS, Black restores the material balance. 9.0-0 0-0 10 .l:!dl e4 ll.'fie2 , Lugovskoy Kupreichik, Tula 2 0 17, ll . . . �e7 ! ? 272

Black protects reliably his dS­ pawn. 12 ..ic4 .id6 13 ..ib3 .ib8 14.g3 'fid7. He would not mind the exchange of the dS-pawn for the enemy h3-pawn, since the po­ sition would be considerably sim­ plified after that. lS ..ixdS �exdS 16.�xdS �xdS 17.c4 �c3. This is an important intermediate move leading to the weakening of White's queenside pawn-struc­ ture. 18.bxc3 'fixh3= S . .ibS. White exerts pressure on the a4-e8 diagonal with the idea to provoke .id7, so that after e7-e6, Black's light-squared bish­ op would be restricted. Still, this would not be sufficient for White to maintain an advantage in the opening. S . . . e6 6.0-0 .id7 7.b3 (7.a3, Kovacevic - Sermek, Ma­ karska 199S, 7 . . . a6=) 7 . . . cxd4. Black opens the c-file for his ma­ jor pieces. 8.exd4 a6 9 . .id3 .id6 10.�e2. White is preparing the exchange of the dark-squared bishops. 10 . . . 0-0 ll . .if4 .ixf4 1 2 . �xf4 'fic7 13 .'f!d2 l:!fe8. Black wishes to accomplish the freeing pawn-break in the centre e6-eS. 14.l:!fel h6 1S.c3 l:!ac8 16.l:!adl es 17.�xeS �xeS 18.l:!xeS l:!xeS 19. dxeS 'fixeS= Hering - Rosa Solor­ zano, ICCF 2 016. The weaknesses of the pawns on c3 and dS balance each other,

3 . . . �c6!? Black places his knight i n front of his c-pawn, but the threat e7-eS compensates this defect of his po­ sition.

1.d4 d5 2.e3 lllf6 3. i.d3 lll c6 favourable position at the edge of the board. 6.lll a3 cS 7.c3. After Black has advanced c7-cS, his knight might retreat. 7 . . . lll c6 8. lll f3 e6 9.lll c 2 .id6 10.lll eS �c8+ Meijers - Fedorovsky, Germany 2012.

5 . . . li)xd3+ 6.cxd3 e6 7.li)c3 c5 4.f4 It might seem that Black's strategy is in doubt after this move. After 4.lll f3 .ig4, White cannot prevent the pawn-advance e7-eS. S.lll b d2 (S.0-0 es 6.dxeS lll xeS=) S . . . eS 6.dxeS lll xeS 7 ..ie2 lll xf3+ 8.lll xf3 .id6 9.0-0, Orban - Bese­ nyi, Szekszard 1989, 9 . . . Wfe7! ?+ There arise similar positions, but with colours reversed, in the Ru­ binstein system in the French De­ fence. Black has a freer game. 4.c3 eS S . .ibS e4. Black occu­ pies space. 6.c4 .id7oo, preparing lll b 4, Galego - Narciso Dublan, Mondariz 2000.

4

. • •

8.dxc5 8 . .id2 cxd4 9.lll xd4 .icS 10. lll c e2 Wfe7 11.�cl 0-0. Black has evacuated his knight away from the centre and has a slight but stable edge thanks to his two­ bishop advantage. 12.0-0 .id7 13. h3 �fc8+ Llagaria Vidal - Castro Cruz, ICCF 2 0 14.

li)b4!?

This i s the point! Black wishes either to exchange on d3, obtain­ ing the two-bishop advantage, or to follow with .ifs, attacking the c2-square.

8

• . •

hc5 9.d4

White increases his control over the es-square, but weakens the light squares in his camp.

9 ... .ie7 10.li)eS

5.li)f'3 S ..ie2 .ifs. Now, White's knight is forced to occupy an un-

The move 10 .Wfd3, Showalter - Pillsbury, New York 1898, has the defect that after 10 . . . 0-0!?, 273

Chapter 23 followed by b7-b6 and a7-a5, Black will win a tempo by attack­ ing the enemy queen with the move .ia6.

10 0-0 11.0-0 �e4 12. �xe4 dxe4 13.id2, Marshall Leonhardt, Vienna 1908, 13. . . Wid5! ? Black is centralising his queen. 14.Yfb3 Yfxb3 15.axb3 f6 16.�c4 J.d7 17.gfcl gfc8+ He •••

has the two-bishop advantage, while White's queenside pawns have been weakened.

At first Blackmar used to play 3.f3? ! , but it became obvious quickly that after the energetic strike in the centre 3 . . . eS ! Black would seize the initiative. 4.dxeS. This seems to be the most resil­ ient move for White (Following 4.dS �f6 5.�c3 .ib4 6 ..igS, Rossi ­ Have, Corsica 2004, 6 ... h6 ! ? 7.ixf6 hc3+ 8.bxc3 Yfxf6+, Black preserves the extra pawn, because cap­ turing on e4 is impossible due to the check on h4.) 4 ...Yfxdl+ 5.tiixdl ttJc6

D) 2.e4 This is the so-called Blackmar - Diemer Gambit. White sacrific­ es a pawn, but can hardly obtain sufficient compensation for it.

2

• • •

dxe4

Naturally, Black can simply transfer to the Caro-Kann De­ fence with the move 2 . . . c6. Still, why not capture a central pawn? (diagram)

3.�c3 This is the improvement by Diemer, after which the gambit was named after the two of them. 274

6.fxe4 ! ? (6.J.f4 exf3 ! ? 7.tDxf3 .ie6 8 .J.bS ttJger+, followed by 0-0-0. Black has a better pawn­ structure, while White will have problems with his king, despite the fact that it is an endgame. There are still too many pieces left on the board.) 6 . . . ttJxeS+

1.d4 dS 2.e4 de 3. llic3 llif6 3 . . . �f6 Naturally, Black is reluctant to give back so easily his extra pawn and later he intends to preserve it, for example, with the help of the move .ifs.

4.f'3 4 ..ic4 .ifs S.f3. The e4-pawn is doubled, but it hampers the de­ velopment of the knight on gl. Therefore, White wishes to ex­ change it, opening in the process the f-file for his rook. (S . .igS e6 6 .llige2 llic6+; S.llige2 llic6 6.0-0 e6+) S . . . e6

Black does not wish to ex­ change on f3, not to enhance the development of his opponent's pieces.

6 . .igS .ib4. The pin of this knight is very unpleasant for White. 7.�d2 llibd7 8.0-0-0, Reh - Mueller, Bad Zwesten 1999, 8 . . . c6 ! ?+ After the advance of his g­ pawn - 6.g4, White can restore the material balance, but at the price of the considerable weaken­ ing of his kingside. 6 . . . .ig6 7.gS llidS 8.llixe4 h6. Black exploits immediately the defect of his op­ ponent's position. 9.h4 hxgS 10.llixgS, Portisch - Jankovics, Zalaegerszeg 19S9, 10 . . . cS ! ?+ 6.fxe4 llixe4 7.llif3 .ib4 8 . 0-0. White must continue with his sac­ rifices in order to maintain his ebbing off initiative. 8 . . . llixc3 9. bxc3 hc3 10 . .ia3 . He adds the exchange on the altar of the at­ tack, Markwardt - Mueller, Ger­ many 19S7. Black may refrain here from capturing the rook. 10 . . . llic6 ! ? 11.E:bl llixd4 12.@hl llixc2 13 ..icS �xdl 14.E:fxdl .ib4 ! ? Black sacrifices two pieces fo r a rook here and simplifies consid­ erably the position. 1S.i.xb4 llie3 16 . .icS llixdl 17.E:xdl c6 18 .E:el b6 19 . .if2 c5 20 . .ibS+ @e7- + 4 . .igS c6 ! ? This is the right move for Black! He does not need to be in a hurry to play .ifS, be­ cause White can counter this with �e2 , followed by �bS. S . .ixf6. White restores the material bal­ ance, but Black's bishops will be very powerful on this open posi­ tion. (S.�e2? ! �xd4; White can­ not equalise with the gambit ap27S

Chapter 23 proach 5.f3 exf3 6.llixf3 i.g4 7. %Yd2 llibd7 8.0-0-0 e6+ Eschert - Turowski, ICCF 2 016. Black has an extra pawn and a solid posi­ tion.) 5 . . . exf6 6.llixe4 Vb6

This is his most precise move. Now, White will have problems with the protection of his pawn on b2. 7.b3. This move weakens the el-aS diagonal (White would not solve his defensive problems with the line: 7J�bl i.e6 8.llic3 llia6+, followed by 0-0-0, Lipski - Du­ kaczewski, Jarnoltowek 2 0 07.). 7 . . .fS 8.llic3 i.b4 9.llige2 %Ya5 10. Vd3 0-0 11.0-0-0, Klinger Wetscherek, Oberwart 1991. Here, Black can obtain an advantage in numerous ways, but the simplest would be to transfer the knight to the f6-square in order to in­ crease his control over the central squares. ll . . . llid7 ! ? 12.
our volume two after the move­ order l.e4 c6 2 .d4 dS 3. llic3 dxe4 4.f3 exf3 5.llixf3 llif6.

s ... tfxd4 6.i.e3 Yfg4

Black lags in development and naturally, he would not mind a transfer into an endgame.

7.tft'2 7.llibS. The attempt to capture Black's a7-pawn may end up trag­ ically for White's knight. 7 . . . llia6 8.0-0-0 c6 9.llixa7, Maciulewicz - Sakai, Email 2001, 9 . . . i.d7 ! ? 10.%Yxg4 llixg4 ll.i.b6 llib4 12.a3 llidS-+

7 %Yf5! ? • • •

Black continues the chase af­ ter the enemy queen.

8.�f'J 4 . . . ext'3 5.Vxt'3 White sacrifices his second central pawn for the sake of main­ taining his initiative. After 5.llixf3 c6, there arises a position from the Caro-Kann De­ fence, which will be analysed in 276

White allows llig4. After 8.Vd2 e6 9.0-0-0 !i.e7 10. llif3 o-o ll.fi.d3 Vas 12.�hel llic6+, White has no compensa­ tion for the pawn at all.

8

• • •

�g4

1.d4 d5 2. ig5 h6 3. J.. h4 c5 J..g 7 in the future, or just to use the h7-square as a place for his bishop on f5 to retreat to, or as a leeway for his king.

3.J..h4 3.if4 ifS ! ? 4.c4 ( 4.e3 e6 5. id3 .ixd3 6.cxd3 id6=) 4 . . . e6 5.llJc3 c6 6.e3 id6 7 . .ixd6 '1Nxd6= Rafa - Balda, Poland 2 0 07. Black trades the powerful ene­ my bishop. 9.'ffd.2 �xe3 10.ti'xe3

e6 11. 0-0-0 J..e 7 12.J..d3 ti'a5 13.ghfl., Helman - Jan, ICCF 2 0 07, 13 �c6 ! ? Black is not in a

3 .. c5 .

Black begins an immediate fight for the centre.

•••

hurry to castle kingside. After id7, he might castle queenside at an opportune moment. 14.J..e4 ti'b6+

E) 2.J..g5

4.dxc5 White wins a pawn, but weak­ ens the al-h8 diagonal and Black exploits this immediately. About 4.c3 cxd4 5.cxd4 llJc6 see Chapter 3. White is waiting for the ap­ pearance of the enemy knight on f6 in order after ixf6 to compro­ mise the enemy pawn-structure.

2

h6

•••

It is useful for Black to play this move, because he might have the possibility to play g7-g5 and

It is obviously not correct for White to sacrifice a pawn here 4.e4?! dxe4 5.d5 g5 6.ig3 ig7 7. llJc3, Mehmeti - Postny, Baku 2016, 7 . . . fS ! ?+ Following 4.llJc3 , Black can continue to exert pressure against 277

Chapter 23 the enemy central pawn. 4 . . . lLic6 5.lLif3 (5.e4 dxe4 6.dS lLid4+ Che­ pukaitis - Grachev, St Petersburg 2 0 0 2 ; 5.e3 cxd4 6.exd4 lLif6 7.lLif3 ig4 - see 5.lLif3) 5 . . . lLif6 6 .e3 cxd4

7.!i.xf6. This move presents Black with the two-bishop advan­ tage. 7 . . . gxf6 8.exd4 eS 9 .ibS e4 10.lLid2 a6 11.hc6+ bxc6+ Gazi Delizia, ICCF 2012. 7.exd4 i.g4. Here, before play­ ing e7-e6, Black develops his bish­ op to an active position. 8.ie2 e6 9.lLieS ixe2 10.lLixe2 lLixe5 11.dxe5, Neronov - Fiodorov, Yuzhny 2008. The pin of the knight is harmless for Black, because he can play simply 11 . . . gS ! ? 12 .ig3 lLid7 13. 0-0 �b6 14.lLid4 hS 15.h3 i.e7+ Later, he can continue with his pawn-offensive against the enemy king. His king can always find a safe haven on the queenside. 4.e3 lLic6 (diagram) 5.lLic3 cxd4 - see 4.lLic3 . After 5.dxcS lLif6, White can preserve his extra pawn with the line : 6.ibS WfaS+ 7.lLic3 a6 8.ia4 e6 9.!i.xf6 gxf6 10.�d4 �xcS 11. �xf6 �gs:;.;, but the two-bishop 278

advantage, as well as the better development more than compen­ sate Black's minimal material def­ icit, Demian - Ressler, ICCF 2011. Following 5.lLif3 �b6 6.lLic3, Black obtains a good position af­ ter transferring his knight to the fS-square. 6 . . . e6 7.ie2 cxd4 8 . exd4 lLige7oo Eliseev - Korbut, St Petersburg 2001. It would not be easy for White to preserve his dark-squared bishop after lLifS. 5.c3 �b6 6.Wfb3 c4. Black oc­ cupies space on the queenside. 7. Wfxb6 (After 7.�c2 , Black can play 7 . . . i.fS ! ?+, and the defenceless­ ness of the b2-pawn does not pro­ vide White with the possibility to capture the bishop, Kindermann - Landa, Germany 2016.) 7 . . . axb6 8.lLid2 bS+, followed by b5-b4. White cannot counter Black's queenside offensive with the counterstrike in the centre 9 .e4? ! , because after 9 . . . dxe4+, Black's threat to win the bishop with g7g5, f7-f5-f4, would not allow White to regain his pawn, Polaczek Sretenskij , Dos Hermanas 2003.

4 . . . g5 5 . .ig3 li..g7

Black develops his bishop to an active position with tempo.

1.d4 d5 2. i.g5 h6 3. i.h4 c5 4.dc g5 5. i.g3 .lg7 10.t'3!

6.c3 tLJa6

This is the only move after which White can obtain an ac­ ceptable game. His position is inferior after 10. h4 fS 11.hxgS hxgS 12.gxh8 i.xh8+ Konenkin - Landa, Minsk 201S, as well as following 10.lLJa3 fS 11. 0-0-0+ @e8 12.i.c7, Paragua - Ara­ dhya, chess.com 2017, 12 . . . �b7! ?+

10 ... e3 ll.lLJa3 f5 12.0-0-0+ @es t3.f4 e5 ! 7.e4 White sacrifices a pawn in an attempt to deprive his opponent of his castling rights. 7.lLJf3 tLJxcS+ Artemiev - Jojua, Minsk 2 0 17. After 7.1.Wa4+ i.d7 8.�a3, White can try to preserve his ma­ terial advantage, but following 8 . . . 1.Wc8 9.b4 (9.c6, Kamsky - Shi­ rov, Moscow 2 0 07, 9 . . . �xc6 ! ?+) 9 . . . tLJc7 10 .�b2, Afanasiev - Devi­ atkin, Moscow 2 016, 10 . . . aS ! ? 11.a3, Black can advance his pawns in the centre and on the kingside. 11 .. .fS 12 .e3 eS�

7 . . . dxe4 8.�xd8+ 9.i.xa6 bxa6

@xd8

It is essential for Black to de­ fend his pawn on e3 ; otherwise, this pawn, cut off away from the rest of his forces, might perish. 14.fxeS lLJe7 (After the straight­ forward line: 14 .. .f4 lS . .lel hes, Tamosaitis - Kazakovskiy, Lithu­ ania 2 016, 16.lll c4 .lc7, White can exploit his superior development and begin an attack against his op­ ponent's far-advanced pawns. 17. h4 g4 18.lLJe2 gh7oo) 15.lLJc4 f4 16 •

.let tLJc6 17.tLJt'3 .le6 18.lLJd6+ @e7 19.lLJd4 tLJxe5f Velasco Miras Garcia, ICCF 2 0 1S. Black's position seems preferable thanks to his two powerful bishops and his far-advanced f and e-pawns. 279

Chapter 24

1.d4 d5 2 .i.f4 2 . tll t'3 tll f6 3.i.f4 London System

In this chapter we will analyse the rather popular lately London system, which can be character­ ised by the early development of White's bishop to the f4square. At first we will see this de­ velopment of the bishop on move two - A) 2 . .if4, and then on the third move - B) 2.c!LJ:f3 c!Of6

3.e4 This pawn-sacrifice is double­ edged. About 3 .c3 cxd4 4.cxd4 t.tJc6 see Chapter 3, variation A. 3.e3 cxd4 ! ? 4.exd4 t.tJc6 - see the Caro-Kann Defence (volume 2).

3 . .if4.

A) 2 . .if4 c5 This is Black's most practical response. In some variations Black can exchange on d4 after which there will arise by transposition lines either from the exchange variation of the Slav Defence, or from the Caro-Kann Defence. 280

3 . .ixb8. This voluntary ex­ change of the bishop for the ene­ my knight is obviously bad for White. 3 . . . i!xb8 4.c3 ( 4.dxc5 e6 5. '!Wd4 t.tJe7 6.e3, Stefanova - Skrip­ chenko, Shenyang 2000, 6 . . . t.tJc6 7 ..ibS '!Was+ 8.l.lJc3 a6 ! ? 9 . .ia4 '!WxcS 10 .'!WxcS .ixc5+ Black has a stable advantage thanks to his bishop-pair.) 4 . . . cxd4 5.cxd4 '!Wb6+

1.d4 d5 2 . .if4 c5 Chernyshov - Solodovnichenko, Voronezh 2006. 3.llif3. Now, Black can occupy the centre with his pawns. 3 . . . cxd4 4 . .ixb8 (It i s worse fo r White to play here 4.llixd4, because of 4 .. .f6 S.i.g3 es 6.llib3 llic6 7.e3 .ie6 8 . .ie2 llih6 9.llild2 llifS+ Bo­ zic - Zelcic, Ljubljana 1999. Later Black can exchange on g3, obtain­ ing the two-bishop advantage.) 4 ... �aS+ Black protects in ad­ vance his pawn on a7 with this in­ termediate check. S.c3 l3xb8 6. �xd4. Black lags in development and has no time for f6 and eS. Still, after 6 . . . llif6 7.llibd2 e6 8. llib3 (8.e3, Skatchkov - Bezgo­ dov, St Petersburg 1998, 8 . . . .id7! ?+) 8 . . . �b6 9.�xb6 axb6oo A.Sokolov - Westerinen, Gausdal 1996, White must play very accu­ rately in order not to end up in an inferior position, because despite the vulnerability of his doubled pawns on the b-file, Black's posi­ tion seems preferable thanks to his two-bishop advantage. 3.llic3 llic6 4.llif3 ( 4.e3 cxd4 S. exd4 i.fS - see the Caro-Kann De­ fence, volume 2) 4 . . . llif6 S.e3 cxd4

About 6.exd4 .ig4 - see the Caro-Kann Defence, volume 2 . 6.llibS. White's desire t o create a double attack on the c7-square may lead to difficulties for him. 6 . . . �aS+ 7.�d2 �xd2+ 8.lt>xd2 dxe3+ 9.fxe3 @d7! ?+, Black re­ moves his king in advance against the double attack, Rakic - Cvet­ kovic, Kladovo 1991. Later, he can defend the c7-square against the penetration of White's knight with the moves e7-e6, .ic5-b6. 6.llixd4 e6 7 ..ibS .id7 8.0-0 i.e7= Ryska - Ingersol, ICCF 2009. 3.dxcS llic6. Black is threaten­ ing e7-eS.

4.e4 llif6 S.exdS llixdS 6 . .ig3 .ifs. Black is preparing e7-e6. 7.c3 e6 8.llid2 (White cannot defend his pawn with 8.b4? �f6 ! 9 . .ibS llidxb4-+) 8 . . . .ixcS+ Bu Xiangzhi - Ding Liren, Shenzhen 2 0 16. Black's prospects are already preferable thanks to his superior development. 4.llif3 e6 S.e3 (S.e4 .ixcS 6.llic3 llige7=) S . . . hcS 6.c3 llif6 7.llibd2 0-0. Black has evacuated his king away from the centre. His posi­ tion is already preferable. 8 . .id3 281

Chapter 24 l3e8 9.llieS. White prevents e6-e5. 9 . . . .id6. Black insists on the con­ tinuation of his plan. 10.llixc6 bxc6 ll.ixd6 1/Nxd6 12.0-0 es+ Rozhko - Elistratov, Moscow 2 015. Black's powerful pawn-cen­ tre provides him with an edge.

3 dxe4 4.d5 �f6 5.�c3 g6! ? • . •

10.h4, Winants - Okkes, Netherlands 2006 (10.f3 exf3 11. gxf3 11Nd6=) 10 �g4!? This is a very practical decision. Black ousts immediately the enemy queen further away from his king. 11.'lfd2 e3. Black cannot hold his e4-pawn anyway. 12.fxe3. After the removal of the pawn from the f-file, it would not be easy to oust the knight from the g4-square. •.•

Black plays much more often here 5 . . . a6, defending against the knight-sortie. Still, the threat llibS is not so dangerous for him.

6.'1Nd2 White not only prepares cas­ tling queenside, but also wishes to trade his opponent's dark­ squared bishop.

12 �d7 13.hS �df6 14.hxg6 fxg6 15.e4 b5 16.%!fel. White is • • •

preparing e4-e5, but this threat is not so dangerous for Black. 16 • • •

tfa5 17.eS �h5 18.d6 exd6 19. exd6 �f2 Here, White has noth­ ing better than after 20.gxhs �xdl 21. tfe7 gxh5 to force a draw by repetition of the position :

22.1/NgS+ ©h8 23.'lfeS+ ©g8 = 6.'1Ne2?! .ig7 7. 0-0-0 0-0 8.d6 l3e8 9.llibS, Valero - La­ crosse, Benidorm 2 011, 9 ... llic6-+ Black should not be afraid of 6.llibS llia6 7.d6, Toupalik - Spiel­ mann, Prague 1912, 7 . . . ie6 ! ?+

6 .tg7 7.0-0-0 0-0 8 .th6 .ixh6 9.tfxh6 a6 • • •

282

•

B) 2.�f'3 �f6 3 .tf4 •

This system for White is be­ coming very popular lately. M. Carlsen, V.Kramnik and many other strong grandmasters have played like this once in a while. This fact does not prove that the move 3 .if4 is particularly strong .

J.d4 dS 2. ttJ.f3 ttJf6 3. i.f4 c5 The opening theory is developing so fast every year that it has be­ come very difficult for White not only to obtain an advantage after the main lines arising after 3.c4, but also to enter a fighting posi­ tion. So, he is looking for sidelines in which he can obtain a fighting position, even if it is about equal, if his opponent has not subjected it to a thorough computer analysis.

3 . . c5 .

Now, just like after 2.M4, Black would not mind transposing to the exchange variation of the Slav Defence, or to a rather harmless variation of the Caro-Kann De­ fence.

4.dxc5

ble thanks to his bishop-pair. 5.c3 e6 6.e3 (The chase after the ene­ my a7-pawn would end tragically for White's queen: 6.'\Wa4+ ? ! id7 7.Wixa7? Wic8-+ 8.'\Wb6 gas 9.Wb3 ia4 10.Wb6 ttJd7 0-1 Knechtel Letourneau, corr. 1982.) 6 . . . bS+ Fritsch - Drexel, Wattens 1999. 4.c4. The combination of the moves 3 .if4 and 4.c4 is obviously bad for White. 4 . . . cxd4 5.ttJxd4 ttJbd7. The threat e7-e5 is very un­ pleasant for him. 6.'\Wa4, Hoenig - Van den Doel, Germany 2 016. It might seem that White has pre­ vented his opponent's threat, but Black can play 6 . . . eS ! ? anyway, sacrificing a pawn for the initia­ tive. 7.i.xeS icS 8.e3 0-0 9.ixf6 ttJxf6 10.ttJc3 i.xd4. Black ex­ changes his powerful bishop, but opens the e-file. ll.exd4 ges+ 12. i.e2 i.g4. It is useful for Black to weaken his opponent's position. 13.f3 i.d7 14.'\Wc2 dxc4+ Black's advantage is doubtless here thanks to his superior pawn­ structure.

4 . e6 . .

4.ttJc3 ttJc6 - see variation A. 4.c3 cxd4 5.cxd4 ttJc6 - see Chapter 4. 4.e3 cxd4 5.exd4 ttJc6 - see the Caro-Kann Defence, volume 2 . After 4.i.xb8 gxb8, Black's prospects seem already prefera283

Chapter 24 5.e3 About S.lll c3 hc5 6.e3 0-0, or S.c3 hc5 6.e3 0-0, or S.lll b d2 hc5 6.e3 lll c 6 - see S.e3. S.id6 hd6 6.cxd6 W/xd6 7.c3 lll c 6 8.e3 eS 9 .ie2 0-0+ Kolbus Yagupov, Biel 2006. White should better not try to hold on to his extra pawn, since following S.b4? ! as 6.c3 axb4 7.cxb4 (7.hb8 l:!xb8 8.cxb4 b6 9 .Wfa4+ lll d7! + Now, Black re­ gains his pawn anyway, because White cannot play 10 .c6?, due to 10 . . . W/f6-+ Schroll - Palac, Abe les Bains 2011.) 7 . . . lll c 6 8 .id2 (8.Wfb3 lll e 4. Black prepares the develop­ ment of his queen on f6, or g7-gS and ig7. 9.lll c3 W/f6 10.id2. White has managed to cover the al-h8 diagonal, but there comes trouble surprisingly from another side . . . 10 . . . lll xb4 ! 11.Wfxb4 hes 12 .Wfb2 hf2 + 13.©dl icS+ Williams Perkiomaki, ICCF 2010.) 8 . . . lll e4 9.a4, Polyaninov - P.Smirnov, St Petersburg 2 014, 9 . . .Wff6 10.l:!a3 gS ! 11.ic3 lll xc3 12.l:!xc3 lll xb4+ The pawns are equal indeed, but White's queenside pawn-struc­ ture has been horribly weakened and his pieces are not developed.

5 . . . .bc5 (diagram)

6.c4 6.c3 0-0 7.lll b d2 lll c 6 - see 6. lll b d2 . 284

6.a3 0-0 7.c4 dxc4 - see 6.c4. 6.lll c3 lll c 6 7.id3 h6 8 .lll bS 0-0 9.0-0 Wfe7. Black's prospects look preferable thanks to his pawn­ dominance in the centre. 10.lll b d4 lll g4 11.lll xc6 bxc6 1 2 .lll eS lll xeS 13.heS f6 14.ic3 eS+ Jefferson Sherwood, ICCF 2 01S. After 6.id3, Black can begin a chase after the enemy bishop on f4. 6 . . . lll h S 7.hb8 l:!xb8 8.ibS+ @f8 ! ? This is an interesting deci­ sion after which Black preserves his two-bishop advantage. The loss of his castling rights would not be so important. 9.0-0 lll f6 10.lll b d2 g6+ Mouron - Moskvi­ chev, ICCF 2011. 6.ie2 lll c 6 7.0-0 0-0 8 .c4 (8.lll b d2 W/e7 - see 6.lll b d2) 8 . . . dxc4. This i s the simplest way for Black to obtain a good position. 9.hc4 W/e7 10.lll c3 l:!d8 11.W/e2 h6 12.lll eS lll xeS 13.heS id7=, fol­ lowed by ic6. Wang Chen - Wang Hao, Xinghua 2 01S. Black solves the problem with his bishop on c8 and equalises completely.

1.d4 d5 2. lllf3 lllf6 3. i.f4 c5 4.dc e6 5.e3 hc5 6.lll b d2 lll c 6

Or 7.a3 dxc4 8.Wffxd8 gxd8 9.hc4, Wen Yang - Asgarizadeh, Baku 2 0 14, 9 . . . b6=

7 c!Llc6 •••

7.a3 0-0 8.b4 ie7= Anto­ niewski - Smolen, Slovakia 2016. 7.id3 Wfe7 8.lll e 5 (Following 8.ig5, Black advances e6-e5 and obtains a stable advantage. 8 . . . h6 9.ih4, I.Sokolov - Matlakov, Du­ bai 2 0 14, 9 . . . e5+) 8 . . . lll d 7 9.lll xc6 bxc6 10.ig3 0-0=i= Andersson Hector, Malmo 1995. 7.c3 0-0 8 .id3 (8 . .te2 h6 see 7.ie2) 8 . . . ge8 - see variation A, 3.dxc5 lll c 6 4.lll f3 e6. 7.ie2 0-0 8.c3 (8.0-0 Wfe7 9. lll b 3 ib6 10.lll e5 gd8+; 10.lll b d4, Kurajica - Lautier, Belgrade 1999, 10 ... lll e4+) 8 ... h6 9.0-0 lll h5 10. lll b 3 ib6oo, followed by the ex­ change of the knight for the ene­ my bishop, Demircioglu - Yilmaz, Izmir 2016. Now, Black can even try to fight for the advantage thanks to his two powerful bishops.

6

•••

0-0 7.c!Llc3

There has arisen a position from the Queen's Gambit (1.d4 d5 2 .c4 e6 3.lll c3 lll f6 4.lll f3 ie7 5. .if4 0-0 6.e3 c5 7.dxc5 hc5), but with an extra tempo for Black, be­ cause he has saved it for the move .ie7.

8.a3 White lags in development and must play very carefully not to allow the opening of the centre after d5-d4, because Black is very well prepared for that. 8.cxd5 c!Llxd5 9.c!Llxd5 exd5 10. a3 d4+ Stajcic - Yakovich, Kec­ skemet 1991. After 8 . .ie2 dxc4, there arises an approximately equal endgame. 9.hc4 Wffxdl+ 10.gxdl .ib4 11. 0-0 hc3 12 .bxc3 b6 13.c!Lld4 ib7 14.lll xc6 hc6= Comtesse - Ru­ dykh, ICCF 2013. White's two-bish­ op advantage is compensated by Black's superior pawn-structure.

8

d4

•••

White's king is still stranded in the centre, so Black wishes to open the position. His idea is to advance e6-e5. 285

Chapter 24 9.exd4 l!Jxd4 10.i.e2 After 10 .�d3 l!Jxf3+ 11.Y*fxf3, Black can play immediately 11 ... eS 12 .�gS h6 13.�6 Wxf6 14.Y*fxf6 gxf6oo Broekmeulen - Greenfeld, Rosmalen 2 0 14. His two powerful bishops compensate the weaken­ ing of his kingside pawn-struc­ ture.

12.he5 Y*fxdl+ 13.@xdl l!Jg4 14.hg4 hg4+ 15.f3 i.f'5 16.b4 gfd8+ 17.l!Jd5 i.f8 18. @cl f6 19.i.g3 i.d3

10 . . . l!Jxf3+ 11.i.xf3 e5! ?

Black wishes to undermine the base under the powerful enemy knight on dS. 20.l!Jc7 gac8 21.

c5 b6 22.cxb6 i.d6 23.@b2 axb6 24.l!Je6 hg3 25.hxg3.

Black sacrifices a pawn and seizes the initiative. In addition, he will soon obtain a bishop-pair, which will be very active in this open position.

286

White has managed to preserve his extra pawn, but Black's pieces are very active and this compen­ sates his minimal material deficit.

2s . . . gc2+ 26.@b3 gdc8 27. gbdl g2c3+ 28.@b2 gc2+ 29. @b3 gsc3+ 30.@a4 g5oo Sesko - Woznica, ICCF 2016.

Chapter 25

1.d4 d5 2 . �f'3 �f6

In this chapter we will analyse all the possibilities for White be­ sides 3.if4 and 3.g3.

3.ig5 This bishop-sortie is much more justified when Black has played e6, instead of dS (The Torre Attack), because then his knight is pinned and he cannot reply with tlJe4. About 3.c4 c6 - see Chapters 5-2 2 . 3.tlJbd2 c 6 4.e3 ( 4.g3 ig4 5.ig2 e6 - see Chapter 26; 4.c4 ifs - see Chapter 5) 4 . . .ifS 5.ie2 (5.c4 e6 - see Chapter 5, variation A) 5 . . . h6. Black prepares in ad­ vance a square for the retreat of

his bishop. 6.tlJeS tlJbd7 7.f4. White fortifies his knight at the centre of the board, but weakens the e4-square. 7 . . . e6 8.0-0 ie7 9.g4. This is a risky decision for White, since it is well known that pawns cannot come back. .. 9 . . . ih7+ 10.gS hxgS ! Black i s not afraid of the opening of the f-file, because after 11.fxgS, he has pre­ pared the piece-sacrifice 11 . . . tlJxeS 12.gxf6, Naiditsch - Vitiugov, Jurmala 2 0 16, 12 . . . gxf6 ! ? 13.dxeS fxeS+ He has obtained two pawns for the knight, a powerful pawn­ centre and excellent attacking prospects against the enemy king. 3.a3. This move is often played by the French GM Eric Prie. White is ready to counter the move c7-c5 after which he will simply capture the pawn and will protect it with b2-b4. Still, after 3 . . . c6, the move 3.a3 will hardly be so useful. (diagram) After 4.e3 ig4 5.h3 ixf3 6. \Wxf3 tlJbd7 7.c4, Black can exploit his lead in development and play 7 . . . eS, beginning active actions at the centre of the board. 8.cxdS, 287

Chapter 25

Kivimaki - Olsson, Norrkoeping 2010, 8 . . . exd4 ! ? 9.dxc6 lll eS 10. \1;Vf5 lll xc6 11.ibS dxe3 12 .he3 \1;Vd5 13.\1;Vxd5 lll xdS. White will hardly manage to make use of his two-bishop advantage in this end­ game, because Black's pieces are very active. 14.id2 0-0-0 15.0-0 id6 16.:Bcl lll d e7 17 . .ic4 f6 18.:Bdl ieS 19.lll c3 :Bd4 2 0.ie6+ ©b8 21. :Bahl :Bhd8 22 .iel :Bxdl 23.lll x dl lll d5 24.@fl lll f4 25.ic4 lll d3. White is forced to trade his bishop for the enemy knight after which the position becomes completely equal. 2 6.hd3 :Bxd3= 4.if4. Before playing e3, White develops his bishop to an active position. 4 ... ifS 5.e3 e6 6. c4 (6.lll b d2 .id6 7.ig3 0-0 8.c4 W!lc7 9.ie2 as 10 .hd6 Wlxd6 11. lll h4 ig6 12.0-0 lll b d7= Fuller Serradimigni, ICCF 2 015. Black has no pawn-weaknesses in his camp, while White has no active plan in sight, since the pawn-ad­ vance c4-c5 will free Black's hands for actions in the centre with e6e5.) 6 . . . .id6 7.hd6 Wlxd6 8 .\1;Vb3 W!lc7 9.lll b d2 (9 .id3 hd3 10. Wlxd3 lll bd7 11.lll c3 0-0 12.0-0 :Bfe8 13.cxdS exdS. After this cap­ ture, there arises a Carlsbad 288

pawn-structure on the board. As a rule, in it White can rely on ob­ taining an advantage only if Black's passive light-squared bishop re­ mains on the board. Here, the bishops are exchanged so Black has no problems at all. 14.:Bfcl Wld6= Prie - Bonnaud, Avoine 2008.) 9 . . . lll b d7 10.:Bcl 0-0 11 . .id3 hd3 12 .Wlxd3 :Bfe8 13.cxdS exd5 14.WlfS, Prie - Kononenko, Elgoibar 2 0 06, 14 . . . g6 ! ? 15.\1;Vc2 . Now, Black obtains a very good game after the standard transfer of the knight for similar positions - 15 . . . lll b 6=, followed by lll c 8-d6. 3.lll c3. In the closed openings this knight is developed only very seldom in front of the pawn on c2, because later White cannot attack the enemy centre with the move c2-c4. 3 . . . c5

About 4.e3 cxd4 5.exd4 ig4 see the Caro-Kann Defence (vol­ ume 2). 4 . .if4 lll c6 - see Chapter 25, variation A. Following 4.igS lll e4 5 . .if4, Black can play 5 .. .f6, increasing his control over the central e5square and preparing cxd4, fol-

l.d4 dS 2. tlJj3 tlJf6 lowed by e7-eS. 6.e3. After the move id2 has become impossi­ ble, Black caqn pin the knight on c3. 6 . . . W/aS 7.tlJd2 tlJxc3 8.bxc3 1M'xc3 9 .l'�bl e6 10.ibS+ tlJc6oo Peled - Tudor, ICCF 2 01S. Later, White must play very energetical­ ly in order to prove that the activ­ ity of his pieces compensates the sacrificed pawn. 4.dxcS tlJc6 S.a3. White con­ tinues with his risky flank strate­ gy ignoring the fight for the im­ portant central squares. (It would be more reliable for him to opt here for S.e4 d4 6.tlJe2 es 7.tlJg3 hes 8.id3 ib4+ 9.id2 hd2 + 10.W/xd2 1g4= Pandavos - Adler, France 1982.) S . . . d4 6.tlJa2 eS 7. tlJb4 hes 8.tlJxc6 bxc6

9.e4. Now, White must admit that his previous strategy has failed and should try to play for equality; otherwise, he would end up in an inferior position. (Win­ ning a pawn with the move 9.tlJxeS would be very risky after 9 . . . 0-0 10.tlJd3 ib6. Now, while Black's pawn is on d4, White cannot play e2-e3 and his attempt to fian­ chetto the bishop with the move 11.g3 would be countered by Black

with 11 . . . W/ds 12 .l'�gl ge8 13.ig2 tlJe4+ Kokorin - Stanishevski, ICCF 2 0 1S.) 9 . . . tlJxe4 l0.1d3 1M'dS 11.1M'e2 fS 12. 0-0 1e6 13.gel 0-0 14.ixe4 fxe4 1S.1M'xe4 1M'xe4 16. gxe4 idS, Vandermeulen - Nefe­ dov, ICCF 2 0 1 2 , 17.gxeS id6 18.ge2 c5 19 .igS .txf3 2 0 .gxf3 gxf3 = White's kingside pawn­ structure has been weakened, but there is just a few material left on the board so the most likely out­ come of the game would be a draw. 3.c3. White is planning to play the Slav Defence himself, but still you should try to obtain an ad­ vantage and not to equalise when you are playing with White. 3 . . . ifs

The move 4.igS is not danger­ ous for Black at all, because he can simply play 4 . . . tlJbd7, defend­ ing against ixf6. S.tlJbd2 h6 6. i.h4 e6 7.e3 1e7 8.ie2 cs 9.0-0 0-0. Black has already a some­ what freer game. 10 .1g3, Torre Huebner, Brussels 1987, 10 ...W/b6 ! ? 11.'Mlcl tlJhS+, followed by tlJxg3. Black has a slight but stable edge. 289

Chapter 25 4.�b3. The attack against the b7-pawn is parried easily. 4 . . . �c8 S.i.gS (S.i.f4 e6 - see 4.i.f4) S . . . tlibd7

Black can counter 6.tlibd2 with the interesting possibility 6 . . . aS ! ? . With this advance o f his rook pawn Black wishes at first to oust the enemy queen from the b3square and then to weaken his queenside. 7.tlih4 a4 8.�dl .ie6 9.e3 c6 10.tll hf3 h6 ll.hf6 exf6 12 . .id3 a3 13.b3 fS. Now, White cannot play e3-e4. 14. 0-0 tll f6 1S.�c2 i.d6 16.c4 ib4 17.gacl 0-0 18.tll eS l3e8= Winter - Baby­ chuk, ICCF 2 0 14. Black's position is easier to play from the practical point of view. He has two power­ ful bishops and if in this middle game, or in the endgame, his knight manages to reach the c3square, the vulnerability of White's a2-pawn will hurt him horribly. 6.e3 e6 7.c4. White has lost a tempo, but has accomplished this standard pawn-advance for the Closed openings (7.tll b d2 h6 8. i.h4 ie7 9.gcl cS= Hulak - Ste­ vie, Pula 2001.). 7 . . . h6 8 . .ih4 c6 9.tll c3 .id6 10 . .ie2 0-0 11.0-0 290

tlie4 12.gacl �b8 = , Black removes his queen from the X-ray juxtapo­ sition with the enemy rook, Mar­ kowski - Navara, Poland 2 0 1S. 4.if4 e6

S.tll b d2 .id6. Now, White must either exchange his bishop, or lose a tempo for its retreat. 6 . .ig3, Zurek - Malisauskas, Pardubice 1996, 6 . . . h6 ! ? = S.�b3 �c8 6.e3 id6 7.ig3 (7. i.bS+ tlibd7 8 . .ixd6. This move doubles Black's pawns, but also opens the c-file for his major piec­ es. 8 . . . cxd6 9.0-0 0-0= Hulak Gulko, Moscow 1990.) 7 . . . 0-0 8. c4 ixg3 9.hxg3 c6 10.tll c 3, Ruste­ mov - Drozdovskij , Internet 2003, 10 . . . h6 ! ? = S.e3 .id6. Black does not play c7-c6, because later he wishes to advance c7-cS at once. 6 . .ig3 (6. .ixd6 �xd6=) 6 ... 0-0 7.tlibd2 h6 ! ? Black should not allow his opponent to trade his bishop after tlih4. 8.tll e S cS 9.dxcS. After this exchange, it is only Black who can fight for the advantage. 9 . . ..ixcS 10.i.d3. White should forget about his dreams of obtaining an edge and by exchanging pieces should be careful not to become worse.

1.d4 d5 2. lLij3 lLif6 10 . . . .b:d3 11.lLixd3 i.d6 12 .Wff3 lLic6 13.i.h4 i.e7= Susedenko Grabner, ICCF 2012. 3.e3. White usually plays this move when he wishes to develop his pieces according to the follow­ ing plan: i.d3, 0-0, b3, i.b2 , lLibd2 . Still, this i s good when the opponent is playing the Queen's Gambit after the move 3 . . . e7-e6. Here, the adherents to the Slav Defence can simply reply 3 . . . ig4

Later, depending on the cir­ cumstances, Black can play either lLibd7, advancing later e7-eS, or e7-e6 and c7-cS, obtaining an ex­ cellent position. About 4.c4 c6 - see Chapters 8-9. 4.i.d3 lLibd7 s.h3 (S.lLibd2 es - see 4.lLibd2) S . . . hf3 6.Wfxf3 eS= 4.lLibd2 lLibd7 s.h3 (S.i.d3 es 6.dxeS lLixeS - see Chapter 23, 2 . e 3 lLif6 3.id3 lLic6 4.lLif3 i.g4; S.c4 e6 6.i.e2 c6 or S.ie2 e6 6.0-0 i.d6 7.c4 c6 - see Chapter 8 , vari­ ation A) S . . . i.hS 6.c4 e6 7.Wfb3. This queen-sortie is usually not dangerous for Black when he can protect his b7-pawn with his rook. 7 .. J'�b8 8.cxdS exdS 9.i.d3 c6 10.

Wfc2 ig6. Black exchanges the powerful enemy bishop. 11.hg6 hxg6= Kovacevic - Timman, Bu­ gojno 1984. 4.h3 hf3 He cannot save his bishop from an exchange anyway (After 4 . . . ihS, White has g2-g4 and lLieS.). S.Wfxf3 e6 6.c4 cS (6 . . . i.b4+ ! ? 7.i.d2 hd2 + 8.lLixd2 0-0= Bayer - Nisipeanu, Austria 2017) 7.cxdS WfxdS 8.ibS+ lLibd7!? This move is stronger than the de­ velopment of this knight to c6, be­ cause it does not allow the dou­ bling of his pawns. 9. WfxdS lLixdS 10.lLic3 lLJSb6 11.0-0 �c8 12.dxcS hc5 13.�dl
8.exd4. Now, White's bishop would be restricted by his own pawn on d4. (The move 8.lLixd4 leads to simplifications 8 . . . he2 9.Wfxe2 lLixd4 10 .hd4 ie7 11.lLid2 291

Chapter 25 0-0= Arencibia Rodriguez - Ro­ driguez Cespedes, Matanzas 1997.) 8 . . . i.e7 9.ttJbd2 0-0 10.ttJeS (10. c4 l�k8 11. h3 i.hS 12.a3 ttJe4oo, fol­ lowed by f7-f5, i.f6, Gelashvili Skembris, Kavala 2 0 04.) 10 . . . i.xe2 11.Wfxe2 gcs 12 .c4 dxc4 13. ttJxc6 gxc6 14.bxc4, Smyslov Sveshnikov, Tilburg 199 2 . Here, Black could have played 14 . . . '\WaS ! ? , without being afraid o f the enemy pawn-break in the centre. 15.dS exdS 16.'\Wxe7 '\Wxd2 17.i.xf6 gxf6 18.gadl '\Wc2 = Black equalis­ es with this precise move. The point is that White cannot create a passed pawn 19.cxdS?, because Black has the powerful argument against that - 19 . . . gxf2 ! +

3

• . •

ttJe4

Now, White must choose a square for the retreat of his bish­ op: A) 4 ..th4 or B) 4.i.f4. 4.h4?! cs 5.e3 '\Wb6 6.'\Wcl ttJc6 7.c3, Tiumentsev - Fominyh, Tomsk 2003, 7 . . . eS ! ?+

A) 4.i.h4 c5 292

Here, White suddenly has dif­ ficulties to hold his centre.

5.dxc5 This move is practically forced. White's attempt to hold the centre leads to problems for him. For example: 5.c3 cxd4 6.ttJxd4 (6.cxd4 W/b6 7.'\Wb3 W/xb3 8.axb3 e6 9.ttJfd2 i.b4+ Jaunooby - Sum­ merscale, Sheffield 2011. Black maintains a stable advantage thanks to his superior pawn­ structure.) 6 . . . W/b6+. It is bad for White to play here 7.'\Wb3? ! , be­ cause of 7 . . . '\Wh6 ! His bishop on h4 is hanging and Black is threat­ ening the rather unpleasant pen­ etration to the cl-square. White loses material. 8.ttJf3 Wfcl+ 9.Wi'dl '\Wxb2 10.ttJbd2 ttJc6-+ Kaiser Friedrich, Germany 2008. 5.e3 Wfb6 6.'\Wcl ? ! (Here, White should probably choose the least of evils : 6.ttJc3 ttJxc3 7.bxc3 Wfb2 , M.Hansen - LB.Hansen, Den­ mark 1995, 8 .@d2 ! ttJc6 9.Wi'bl '\Wxbl 10.gxbl c4+ White's queen­ side pawn-structure has been

l.d4 d5 2. llJ.f3 llJf6 3. i.g5 llJe4 weakened, but he still preserves chances of a successful defence.) 6 . . . cxd4 7.exd4 g5 !

This is the point! After this surprising strike with Black's g­ pawn, White's seemingly reliable defence is broken. Following 8.ixg5 llJxg5 9.llJxg5 i.h6 10.f4 �xd4, Black restores the material balance and pre­ serves all the advantages of his position. 11.i.e2 llJc6+ Legall Prats Rodriguez, Cannes 2000. 8 .llJxg5 �h6 9.�f4 f6 10.llJh3 hh3 ll.�xh6 hh6 12 .gxh3 i.cl. This penetration of Black's bishop inside the enemy camp is another proof of his advantage. 13.a3 hb2 14.l:!a2 hd4+ Luther - Liepold, Grossenseebach 2012. 8.i.g3 �6 9.c3 g4 10.llJfd2 i.f5 11.a4, Gouloutis - Iskos, Nea Moudania 2016, 11 . . . 0-0+ Black has a superior development, while White's knight has come under a rather unpleasant pin.

5

• • •

c!Dc6 (diagram)

seems very good for Black to choose here 7 . . . f6 ! ?+, preparing the occupation of the centre with e7-e5 and restricting the bishop on f4 and the knight on f3. 6.llJbd2 llJxc5 7.c3 (7.e3 g6 see 5.e3; 7.llJb3 llJxb3 8.axb3, Gulko - Timoscenko, Volgodonsk 1981, 8 .. .f6 ! ?+) 7 .. .f6 8.b4 llJe4 9. llJxe4 dxe4. After this move there arises a complicated endgame. 10 .�xd8+ llJxd8 11.llJd2 , Tang­ born - Kallai, Wiesbaden 1991, 11 ... gS ! ? Black frees the g7-square for his bishop with tempo. 12 .i.g3 i.g7 13.e3 f5oo ·

6

• • •

g6 7.c!Dbd2

About 7.i.e2 i.g7 8.c3 llJxc5 9. llJbd2 0-0 - see 7.llJbd2 .

7

• • •

c!Dxc5

After White has traded a flank pawn for a central pawn, it is only he who might have problems.

8.c!Db3

6.e3 Following 6.c3 llJxc5 7.e3, Pos­ cente - Oesterle, Forli 1990, it

8.c3 i.g7 9.llJb3 (9 .i.e2 0-0 see 8.i.e2) 9 . . . llJe4 - see 8.llJb3. 293

Chapter 25 8.i.e2 i.g7 9.c3 0-0 10.0-0 as 11.lll d 4, Nikolac - Pinter, Rome 1984, 11 . . . h6 ! ?oo

8

• . •

i.g7

10.lll fd2 lll d 6+ Sergeev - Boro­ vikov, Ordzhonikidze 2001. 10.i.e2 0-0 11.0-0 h6 1 2 .lll fd2 lll d 6+ K.Mueller - Lukacs, Aus­ tria 2001. Black has more space, so he should better avoid the ex­ change of pieces.

10 . . . 0-0

9.c3 9.lll xcS. The exchange of the knights would not solve White's problems. 9 ... ti'aS+ 10.c3 �xcS 11. i.e2 (11.�b3 0-0 12.l:!dl e6 13. !e2 , Kharitonov - Yakovich, Leeuwarden 1997, 13 ... lll aS ! ? Black is preparing the transfer of his knight to the c4-square. 14.�bS. After the trade of the queens, Black will manage to win a tempo for his pawn-offensive on the queenside. 14 . . . �xbS lS.hbS a6 16.i.e2 bS+) 11 . . . 0-0 12.0-0 i.g4 13.h3 hf3 14.hf3 e6. White's two-bishop advantage is irrele­ vant here. Black has a clear-cut plan for queenside actions : b7-bS, a7-aS, lll e S-c4. 1S.i.e2 bS 16.l:!cl lll eS 17.i.g3 l:!fc8 18.l:!el lll c4 19. �c2 aS+ Lambrecht - Boehnke, ICCF 2012.

9 294

• • •

lll e4 10.i.d3

11.J.xe4 White doubles the enemy pawns, but presents his opponent with the two-bishop advantage. After 11.0-0, Black obtains an excellent position by advancing his pawns in the centre and on the kingside. 11 . . . h6 12 .l:!el gS 13.i.g3 es 14.lll fd2 lll xg3 1S.hxg3 e4 16. i.e2 fS 17.lll fl i.e6+ Feldis - Duch­ ardt, ICCF 2016.

11 . . . dxe4 12. ti'xd8 13.tLlfd4 f6 !?

Ihd8

Black's position i s very good anyway, so he does not need to sacrifice a pawn at all: 13 . . . lll eS 14.he7 l:!e8 1S.i.a3 lll d3+ 16.©e2

1.d4 d5 2. tlif3 tlif6 3 . .ig5 tlie4 b6� Timman - Shirov, Wijk aan Zee 2001.

14.0-0-0 tlie5+ Gavrijski Brewer, ICCF 2009.

B) 4 .if4 c5 •

sonko, Hoogovens 1987) 6 . . . tlixcS 7.e3 (7.c3 g6 8 . .ie3, Miladinovic, - Boudriga, Monastir 2012, 8 . . . eS ! ?+) 7 . . .f6 8 . .ig3 e S . White's main problem is not so much that Black has occupied the centre with his pawns, but that his bish­ op on g3 has been isolated from the actions for long. In order to activate it White must at first re­ move his knight from f3 and then the pawn from f2 , but all this would take too much time. 9.c3 ifs 10 .tlih4 .ie6 11.tlib3 Wb6 12. ie2 tlie4+ Weggen - Lipecki, ICCF 2 0 14.

5

•••

Wb6

5.e3 S.c3 cxd4 6.cxd4 tlic6 7.tlic3 f6 - see Chapter 4, 6 . .igS tlie4 7 . .if4 f6. White only worsens his pawn­ structure with the line: S.tlic3 tlixc3 6.bxc3 tlic6 7.e3, Ntoutsou­ lis - Tepelenis, Porto Rio 2 0 14, 7 ... WiaS ! ? 8.Wd2 c4+ After S.tlibd2 , it seems very good for Black to continue with S ... cxd4! ? 6.tlixd4 tlid7 7.tlixe4 dxe4 8.tlib3 eS+ Kiratzopoulos - Niko­ laidis, Leros 2009. S.dxcS. White gives up the centre with this move and ends up in an inferior position. S . . . tlic6 6.tlibd2 (6.e3 f6 ! ?+ Hulak - So-

6.Vcl After 6.tlibd2 , White does not obtain sufficient compensation for the pawn. 6 . . . tlixd2 7.Wxd2 (7.tlixd2 cxd4 8.exd4 Vxb2+ Son­ ntag - Lazarev, Uebach 1996) 7 . . . '%\'xb2 8 .l'k l c4. Black lags i n de­ velopment, so he should better prevent the opening of the posi­ tion. 9.ie2 e6 10.0-0, Berend Kappler, Dijon 1994, 10 . . . .ie7 ! ?+ 29S

Chapter 25 Following 6.lll c3 Was 7 . .hb8 lll xc3 8.Wfd2 :Sxb8, no matter how White would recapture on c3, his queenside pawn-structure would be compromised. 9.Wixc3 (9.bxc3 c4+) 9 . . . Wlxc3+ 10.bxc3 c4. Black occupies space on the queenside. 11.:Sbl e6 12 .e4 bS 13 . .ie2 :Sb6 14. exdS exdS lS.0-0 .ie7 16.lll eS hS 17 ..if3 .ie6 18.:Sfel gS+ Kmiecik Lubas, ICCF 2010. Black has the two-bishop advantage and more space.

6

• • •

lll c6 7.c3 f6

ICCF 2008, 12 . . . eS ! ?+, White's bishop might get lost inside the enemy camp.) 10 . . . dxe4 11.dxcS WxcS 12.lll d 2 h4 13 . .ic7 WfS 14.h3 eS. Now, White must compromise irrevocably his queenside pawn­ structure in order not to lose a piece. 1S.b4 Wd7 16.bS Wlxc7 17. bxc6 Wxc6+ Lagergren - Langer, ICCF 2 01S.

8

• • •

e5

Now, Black would not need to play g7-gS.

9.�xe4

He is preparing g7-gS, fol­ lowed by h7-hS.

9 8.�fd2 White reduces his control over the centre. 8.lll b d2 gS 9 . .ig3 (Giving up the centre with 9.dxcS does not facilitate White's task. 9 . . . llJxcS 10 . .ig3 .ifS+ Jacquin - Schuster, ICCF 2009.) 9 . . . hS. The threat hS­ h4 is very unpleasant for White. 10.lll xe4 (After 10.dxcS WxcS 11. Wc2 h4 12 . .ic7, Jacquin - Joao,

296

• • •

cxd4

He can afford this intermedi­ ate exchange, because White is incapable of removing simultane­ ously both his pieces away from the attack.

10.cxd4 exf4 11.�ec3 .ie6 12.�a4 (12.lll d 2 .id6+) 12 Yfa5+ 13.�ac3 .id6 1 4 .ie2 0-0+ Baciak - Pecka, ICCF 2 0 1S. • • .

•

This is an open position and Black's advantage is doubtless thanks to his powerful bishop­ pair.

Chapter 2 6

1.d4 d 5 2 .lll f'J lll f6 3.g3

5.h3 .ih5 6.tlJe5 (6. 0-0 e6 see 5.0-0) 6 . . . tlJbd7 7.f4 e6oo Kar­ g! - Kilgus, Austria 1999. 5.tlJbd2 e6 6.0-0 (6.c4 tlJbd7 - see Chapter 6, variation B) 6 . . . .ie7 - see 5.0-0. 5.tlJe5 .ifS 6.c4 e6, or 6.0-0 e6 7.c4 tlJbd7 - see Chapter 6, varia­ tion A. White wishes at first to fian­ chetto his bishop and to evacuate his king away from the centre. The defect of this plan is that White's bishop on g2 will be se­ verely restricted by the pawn on d5.

3

. . .

5

. • .

e6

c6 4 . .ig2

About 4.tlJbd2 .ig4 5 . .ig2 e6 see 4 . .ig2 . 4.c4 .ig4 - see Chapter 6.

4 . . . .ig4 5.0-0

6.�bd2

5.c3 e6 6.0-0 .ie7 - see 5.0-0.

White wishes to play l"iel and to follow that with e4.

5.c4 e6 - see Chapter 6, variation B.

6.c3 .ie7 7.tlJbd2 tlJbd7 - see 6.tlJbd2. 297

Chapter 26 6.c4 llibd7 - see Chapter 6, variation B. The inclusion of the moves 6.h3 i.hS does not promise much to White. 7.c4 i.e7. Black is not in a hurry to develop his queen's knight, because after the exchange on dS he will manage to develop it to a more active position - the c6square. 8.llic3 (8.llieS llibd7 9 . llic3 0-0 10.g4 i.g6 - see 8.llic3 ; 8.cxdS i.xf3 9.i.xf3 cxdS 10.�b3 llic6 11.e3 0-0 12 .i.d2 �d7 13.l'!cl l'!fc8 = Vachier Lagrave - Dreev, Doha 2 016. White has the two­ bishop advantage indeed, but the position is rather closed, so Black's prospects are not worse.) 8 . . . 0-0

9 .�b3 �b6 10.i.f4 (10.llieS, Lorparizangeneh - Sargissian, Rasht 2017, 10 . . . llifd7= , Black is preparing the exchange of the powerful enemy knight.) 10 ... llibd7 11.cS �xb3 12.axb3, Margvelash­ vili - Mulyar, Rockville 2 0 14, 12 . . . a6 ! ? = White can obtain a n advan­ tage in similar endgames only if he manages to advance b3-b4-b5. Here, this pawn-break is impos­ sible, so the prospects of both 298

sides can be evaluated as approxi­ mately equal. 9 .g4. White wishes to obtain the two-bishop advantage. Still, after 9 . . . i.g6 10.llieS llibd7 11. llixg6 hxg6, it will not be easy to break Black's defence, because he has no weaknesses in his camp. 12.�d3 (12 .b3 i.b4 13.�c2 �e7oo Vitiugov - Tomashevsky, Sochi 2 0 16) 12 . . . dxc4 13.�xc4, Hari­ krishna - Adams, Shenzhen 2 0 17. Here, Black's simplest road to equality would be 13 . . . llib6 ! ? 14. �d3 �c7 15.e4 cS. He attacks im­ mediately the enemy pawn-cen­ tre. 16.dxcS i.xcS= Following 6.b3 llibd7, there arises most often a transfer to a variation which we will analyse in volume two after the move-order l.c4 c6 2 .llif3 dS 3.b3 llif6 4.g3 i.g4 5.i.g2 e6 6.0-0 llibd7.

About 7.c4 i.e7 - see Chapter 6, variation B2. 7.i.b2 i.d6 8.c4 0-0, or 8. llibd2 0-0 9 .c4 �e7 - see volume 2. 7.llibd2 i.d6 8.c4 0 - 0 9 .i.b2 �e7, or 8 .i.b2 0-0 9 .c4 �e7, or 9. llieS i.t5 10.c4 �e7 - see volume 2 .

l.d4 d5 2. t:fJj3 t:fJf6 3.g3 c6 4. !ig2 fig4 5. 0 - 0 e6 6.t:fJeS ihS 7.c4 (7.t:fJc3 t:fJbd7= Vajda - Pacheco, Istanbul 2012). White has changed a bit the move­ order (at first t:fJeS and then c4) and has managed to avoid the variation with 6 . . . .ifS, which has been analysed in the part about the Slav Defence. This does not change the evaluation of the posi­ tion as approximately equal. 7 . . . fie7 8.t:fJc3 t:fJbd7

6

• • •

.ie7

7,ge1 7.c3 t:fJbd7 8.ge1 0-0 - see 7.gel. 7.c4 t:fJbd7 - see Chapter 6, variation B. 9.h3 0-0 10.g4 .ig6 - see 6.h3. 9 . .if4 t:fJxeS 10.dxeS t:fJd7oo 9.cxdS t:fJxeS ! This is a powerful intermediate move. Before capturing on dS, Black doubles the enemy pawns on the e-file. 10.dxeS t:fJxdS 11.�c2 0-0 12 .h3 VNaS 13.t:fJxdS cxdS. Black is al­ ready a little better thanks to his superior pawn-structure. 14.g4 .ig6 1S.V9b3, Romanishin - Kar­ pov, Moscow 1983, 1S . . . �c7 ! ?+ After 9.�b3, Black can simply capture 9 . . . t:fJxeS ! ? , ignoring the threat against his pawn on b7. 10.dxeS t:fJd7 11.V9xb7 0-0 12. �xc6, Thompson - Purtell, ICCF 2009, 12 .. J�c8 ! ? 13.�a4 gxc4 14. �xa7 t:fJxeSiii Black's pieces are very active and White's extra pawn is practically irrelevant.

Following 7.t:fJes fibs 8.h3 t:fJbd7 9.g4 fig6, White obtains the two­ bishop advantage indeed, but his kingside pawn-structure is com­ promised. 10.t:fJxg6 hxg6 11.c4 �c7 12 .e3 t:fJe4= This move has be­ come possible, because the pawn on h3 is not sufficiently protected, Tocchioni - Godena, Arvier 2008. 7.b3 t:fJbd7 8 . .ib2 (8.c4 0-0 see Chapter 6, variation B2) 8 ... 0-0 9.gel (9.c4 as - see Chap­ ter 6, variation B2) 9 . . . .ihS 10 .e4 dxe4 11.t:fJxe4 t:fJxe4 12.gxe4, K. Larsen - Zhao, Copenhagen 2 007, 12 . . . V9c7 ! ? =

7 ... 0-0 8.e4 8 .c3 t:fJbd7 9.V9b3 (9.e4 fihS 299

Chapter 26 see 8.e4) 9 ... gbs 10 .e4 ihS - see 8.e4.

8

• • •

c!Libd7

This is an important moment. Black should not exchange on e4, because this would activate the bishop on g2. After that Black would hardly manage to organise counterplay. He should better wait for e4-eS, after which he can begin active actions on the queen­ side (c6-cS). As a rule, the ex­ change on e4 in this variation is done by Black only after White plays c2-c4, because then Black can create pressure against the enemy d4-pawn on the semi-open d-file.

9.c3 This is a useful move. White also follows a waiting tactic and postpones the move e4-eS. 9.c4 i.b4 ! ? 10.cxdS cxdS 11.eS c!Lie4 12 .ge3, Lagunow - Velicka, Berlin 1999, 12 .. .f6 ! ? 13.li)xe4 dxe4 14.gxe4 li)xeS=

300

9.h3 i.hS 10.eS (10 .c3 i.g6 see 9.c3) 10 . . . li)eS - see 9.es. 9.eS. This move has the draw­ back that White shows immedi­ ately his intentions and thus frees Black's hands for active actions on the queenside. 9 . . . li)eS 10 .h3 (10.c3 i.hS - see 9.c3 ; 10.li)b3 li)c7 11.h3 i.hS - see 10.h3) 10 . . . i.hS

About ll.c3 li)c7 - see 9.c3. After 11.li)b3, White's knight may come under attack when Black advances aS-a4. ll . . . li)c7 12. i.e3 h6 13.li)cl. White is not wait­ ing for Black's pawn to come to a4 and transfers his knight immedi­ ately to f4. This manoeuvre takes too much time, though . . . 13 . . . i.g6 14.li)d3 as 1S.a4 li)a6 16.li)f4 i.h7 17.c3 cSoo Rudykh - Adamko, ICCF 2009. 11.li)fl cs 12 .g4 ig6 13.li)g3 gcs 14.c3, Wojtkiewicz - Waitz­ kin, Philadelphia 1997, 14 . . . h6 ! ?oo, Black prepares in advance a square for his bishop to retreat to and also prevents g4-gS, followed by h4. White can hardly organise an effective attack on the king-

1.d4 d5 2. liJ.f3 liJf6 3.g3 c6 4. i.g2 i.g4 5. 0 - 0 e6 side. On the other hand, Black's counterplay on the opposite side of the board may turn out to be very dangerous.

9

. . .

increases his pressure against the e4-pawn.

.ih5

Black's last move may be use­ ful, because he can play later i.g6 and after e4-e5 centralise his knight to the e4-square, instead of retreating to the edge of the board.

10.e5 Or 10.Wfe2, Heberla - Jarmu­ la, Warsaw 2 0 17, 10 . . . a5 ! ?+:t In similar positions, after 10. exd5, Black usually captures 10 . . . cxd5= Mirzoev - Krivoshey, Salon 2008. Later, he organises the pawn-minority attack: b7-b5b4. 10.h4 cS 11.e5 liJe8 12 .liJfl cxd4 13.cxd4 l:k8oo Predojevic - Diz­ dar, Dresden 2 007. 10.h3 i.g6. Black exploits his opponent's rather timid play and

11.exd5 cxd5 12.liJe5 (12.liJfl h6=) 12 . . . liJxe5 13.dxe5 liJd7 14. liJb3. Without this move, Black would play liJc5-d3. 14 . . . Wfc7 15.f4 gfd8 16.i.e3, Sajtar - Szilagyi, Warsaw 1956, 16 . . . a5 ! ? 17.a4 liJcS= ll.e5 liJe4 1 2 .liJxe4 .ixe4 13. liJh2 i.g6. Black's light-squared bishop seems more active than its white counterpart, so Black is re­ luctant to exchange it. 14.h4 h6 15.i.fl cS. Black prepares the opening of the c-file after which his bishop on g6 will help his piec­ es to penetrate to the c2-square. 16.i.d3. White trades the power­ ful enemy bishop. On the other hand he has a space advantage, so the exchanges of pieces are in fa­ vour of Black. 16 . . ..ixd3 17.Wfxd3 cxd4 18.cxd4 Wfa5 19.ie3 gfc8oo Anand - Mcshane, London 2013. 10.a4. White prevents in ad­ vance Black's pawn-minority at­ tack. 10 . . . i.g6 ll.exd5 (ll.e5 liJe4 12.liJfl cSoo Garcia Palermo Godena, Martina Franca 2 008) 11 ... cxd5 12.a5 (Following 12.Wfb3 Wfc7 13.liJfl, Black should better 301

Chapter 26 continue here with 13 ... .id6, pre­ venting .if4. 14.h4 h6 15.lll e 3 llie4+ Drabke - Sax, Dresden 2002.) 12 . . . a6 13.lll eS llixe5 14. dxe5 llid7 15.lll b 3 l:k8= Berkovich - Girl, Groningen 2009. 10 .'\Wb3. This queen-sortie does not promise anything to White. 10 . . J'�b8

11.exdS cxdS 12.lll fl (12.c4 �e8= Lenic - Pavasovic, Rijeka 2 0 05) 12 ... bS. Black's play is much easi­ er in similar positions. He has an easy plan - to organise the pawn­ minority attack, while White can hardly find an object to attack. 13 . .if4 �b6 14.a3 llie4 15.llieS llixe5 16.heS lll d 6. Now, White must either allow the move llic4, or present his opponent with the two-bishop advantage. 17.hd6 hd6 18.lll d 2 a5+ Wigger Sasikiran, Dresden 2005.

10 . . . llie8

There arise simplifications af­ ter 11.c4 llixe4 1 2 .lll xe4 dxe4 13. �xe4 '\Wb6 14.'\Wxb6 llixb6 15.b3 �bd8= Pigusov - V.Georgiev, Me­ rida 2002. After ll.a4 .ig6 12.exdS cxd5 13.aS '\Wc7 14.llih4, Black can play 14 . . . i.d3 ! ? , preventing the ex­ change of his bishop for the ene­ my knight. 15 . .ifl i.xfl. Now, he does not object to the trade of the bishops, because then White is left with a "bad" bishop. 16.lll xfl .id6= Hausrath - Avrukh, Biel 2008. All White's pawns are placed "against the rules" - that is on squares with the same colour as his bishop. The position still re­ mains approximately equal, but White must play very accurately; otherwise, he might end up in an inferior position. 302

11.lll b3 White must remove his knight from d2 in order to develop his bishop on cl. He can do that ei­ ther to b3, or to fl. Both these re­ treats of the knight have defects. In the first case, the knight will be attacked after a7-a5-a4, while in the second case the knight on fl will not prevent c6-c5. About 11.h3 llic7 12.lll fl (12. lll b 3 a5 - see 11.lll b 3) 12 . . .cS - see 11.lll fl..

l.d4 dS 2. &iJj3 &iJf6 3.g3 c6 4. j,g2 j,g4 5. 0 - 0 e6 11.&iJfl &iJc7 12 .h3 cS 13.g4 j,g6 14.&iJg3 &iJa6 ! ? Black's knight is misplaced on c7, so he wishes to transfer it to c6, via the b8-square, and it will be much more active there. 15.a3 l:k8 16.j,fl &iJab8oo Petkov - Mascaro March, Can Picafort 2 013.

11

•••

c!LJc7

12 .le3 •

12.h3, Palecek - Arslanov, Par­ dubice 2010, 12 . . . aS ! ? 13.a4 &iJa6oo After 12.j,f4, Black can ad­ vance his rook-pawn just like in the main line. 12 . . . aS 13.&iJcl, Ga­ buzyan - K.Georgiev, Padova 2 014, he removes immediately his knight against the possible attack a5-a4. (13 .�d2 a4 14.&iJcl cS= Za­ tonskih - Mikhalevski, Schaum­ burg 2 0 06) 13 . . . bS ! ? Black is not in a hurry to play c6-c5 and wish­ es at first to advance b5-b4, at­ tacking the c3-square. Black's task in similar positions is to or­ ganise active actions on the queenside with the idea to deflect

the enemy forces from the attack against his own king. 14.&iJd3 b4oo

12

•.•

as 13.c!LJcl

Or 13.a4, Rombaldoni - Sedi­ na, Acqui Terme 2011, 13 . . . &iJa6 ! ? = , followed by c6-c5.

13

•••

a4 14.c!LJd3

14 . . . .lg4!? Black has no time to play j,g6, h6, j,h7, because af­ ter &iJf4, White will exchange his bishop. Therefore, Black is trying to play trickier . . . 15.h3 .if5 16. c!LJf4 h6 17 .ifl c!LJb6. Black pre­ pares the transfer of his knight to c4 and it will exert from there powerful pressure against White's queenside. 18 .id3 c!LJc4. Black is not afraid of the exchange on fS, because after 19 .ixf'S exfS his knight will gain access to the e6square. 20. �c2 �c8 21.h4 c!LJe6 22.c!LJg2 c!LJxe3. Without this move, Black cannot play g7-g6. 23.gxe3 g6 24.h5 .lg5 2s.ge2 @g7oo Klewe - Salzmann, ICCF 2016. White can hardly break his oppo­ nent's defence on the kingside. •

•

•

303

Index of Variations Chapter 1 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 various 3.e3 lll f6 .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

9 11 .

Chapter 2 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.�c3 �f6 various 15 4.i.gS de . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 4.e3 e6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 .

A) B)

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Chapter 3 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.cd cd A) B)

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2 4.i.f4 lll c 6 . . 22 4.lll c3 lll f6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 4 .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Chapter 4 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.cd cd 4.ltlt'3 ltlf6

A) B) C) D)

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 5.lll c3 lll c 6 various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 6.i.f4 ifs 7.e3 e6 various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 8.i.d3 .ixd3 9.�xd3 i.e7 . . . . . . . . 38 8.lll eS lll xeS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 8.Wb3 i.b4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 8.i.b5 lll d 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

Chapter 5 1.d4 d5 2 .c4 c6 3.lll t'3 ltlf6

A) B)

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.lll b d2 i.fS various . . 5.e3 e6 . . 5.g3 e6 . .

. . . .

........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . .

. . . .

........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . .

. . . .

........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . .

. . . . . 54 . . . . 55 . . . . 56 . . . . 58

Chapter 6 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.�t'3 ltlf6 4.g3 i.g4 A) B)

5.lll e5 i.f5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 5.i.g2 e6 various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 6.0-0 lll b d7 various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 Bl) 7.Wb3 Wb6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 B2) 7.b3 i.e7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73

Chapter 7 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.ltlt'3 ltlf6 4.�c2 dxc4 A) B) 304

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 5.e4 b5 . . . . 77 5.�xc4 i.f5 various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Index of Variations Bl) B2)

6.g3 e6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 6.tll c3 e6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86

Chapter 8 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.tll :f3 tll f6 4.e3 .tg4 A) B) C) D)

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 S.tll b d2 e6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 S.cxdS i.xf3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 0 0 S.�b3 �b6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . lOS S.tll c3 e6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106

Chapter 9 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.tll :f3 c!LJf6 4.e3 .tg4 5.h3 .th5 A B) C) D)

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 0 6.tll b d2 e6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 0 6.g4 i.g6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 3 6.cxdS cxdS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 6 6.tll c3 e6 various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 8 Dl) 7.�b3 �b6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 9 D2) 7.g4 i.g6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3

Chapter 1 0 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c 6 3.tll :f3 c!LJf6 4.c!LJc3 e6 various 131 S.�b3 dxc4 6.�xc4 bS 7.�b3 tll b d7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132 7.�d3 i.b7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 .

A) B)

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Chapter 11 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.c!LJ:f3 c!LJf6 4.tll c3 e6 5.g3 dxc4 A) B)

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138 6.i.g2 tll b d7 7.a4 i.b4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140 7.0-0 bS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143

Chapter 12 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.c!LJ:f3 c!LJf6 4.c!LJc3 e6 5.cxd5 exd5 A) B)

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 6.i.gS h6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . lSO 6.�c2 g6 various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1S4 7.igS ie7 various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . lSS Bl) 8.e3 ifs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1S6 B2) 8.e4 dxe4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163

Chapter 13 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.tll :f3 c!LJf6 4.c!LJc3 e6 5.e3 a6 A) B) C)

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167 6.h3 tll b d7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 6.i.d2 cS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 7 1 6.a3 tll b d7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173 30S

Index of Variations Chapter 14 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.tb:f3 tbf6 4.tbc3 e6 5.e3 a6 6 .ie2 dxc4 7.a4 c5 8.bxc4 tbc6 9.0-0 .ie7 •

A) B)

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179 10.dxcS �xdl 11.gxdl hes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180 10 .�e2 cxd4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183

Chapter 15 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.tb:f3 tbf6 4.tbc3 e6 5.e3 a6 6 . .id3 dxc4 7 .ixc4 b5 •

A) B) C)

8 . .ie2 cS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187 8 . .ib3 cS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189 8 . .id3 c5 various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192 Cl) 9.a4 b4 10.tLle4 ttJbd7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193 9.0-0 .ib7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 C2)

Chapter 16 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.tb:f3 tbf6 4.tbc3 e6 5.e3 a6 6.c5 tbbd7 various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20S 7.b4 b6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207

Chapter 17 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.tb:f3 tbf6 4.tbc3 e6 5.e3 a6 6.b3 .ib4 7 .id2 tbbd7 •

A) B) C)

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 . .id3 0-0 9.0-0 .id6 various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 .gcl h6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 .e4 dxc4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 .�c2 h6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

209 211 212 214 2 1S

Chapter 18 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.tb:f3 tbf6 4.tbc3 e6 5.e3 a6 6.�c2 c5 various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 19 7.cxdS exdS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222

Chapter 19 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.tb:f3 tbf6 4.tbc3 e6 5 . .ig5 dxc4 various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230 6.a4 .ib4 various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232 7.e4 �as . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233

Chapter 20 1.d4 d5 2 .c4 c6 3.tb:f3 tbf6 4.tbc3 e6 5 . .ig5 dxc4 6. e4 b5 A) B) 306

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237 7.eS h6 8 . .ih4 gS 9.exf6 gxh4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238 9 . .ig3 tLldS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240

Index of Variations Chapter 21 1.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.�fJ �f6 4.�c3 e6 5 ..igS dxc4 6. e4 b5 7.e5 h6 8 .ih4 g5 9.�xg5 hxg5 10.hgS �bd7 11.exf6 .ib7 •

various 244 12 .g3 \Wb6 13 .ig2 0-0-0 14.Wfg4 cs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247 14.0-0 cS lS.dxcS tll xcS . . . . . . . . . . . . 247 lS.dS b4 16.gbl \Wa6 . . . . . 248 .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Chapter 22 1.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.�fJ �f6 4.�c3 e6 5 .igS dxc4 6.e4 b5 7.e5 h6 8 .ih4 g5 9.�xg5 hxg5 10.hgS �bd7 11.exf6 .ib7 12 .g3 Wfb6 13 .ig2 0-0-0 14.0-0 c5 15.dS b4 16.�a4 \Wb5 •

•

•

A) B)

17.dxe6 .ixg2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2S4 17.a3 lll b 8 18.axb4 cxb4 19 .\We2 i.xdS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2SS 19.i.e3 i.xdS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2SS 19.Wfd4 lll c 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2S7

Chapter 23 1.d4 d5 A) B) C) D) E)

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 .c3 cS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 .lll c3 c6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 .e3 lll f6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 .e4 dxe4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 .i.gS h6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

268 268 270 272 274 277

Chapter 24 1.d4 dS A) B)

2 .if4 cS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 280 2 .lll f3 lll f6 3.if4 cS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283

Chapter 25 1.d4 dS 2 . �fJ �f6 A) B)

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287 3.igS tll e4 4.i.h4 cS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292 4.if4 cS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29S

Chapter 26 1.d4 dS 2.�fJ �f6 3.g3 c6 4 . .ig2 .ig4 various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297 S . 0-0 e6 various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297 6.lll b d2 ie7 . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 299 .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

307

Other CHESS STARS Books Repertoire books : Opening for White Acc. to Kramnik 1 . lll £J by A. Khalifman Volume 3: English, 2 0 1 1 Volume 4 : Maroczy, Modern, Trifunovic, 2 0 1 1 Opening fo r White According t o Anand 1 . e 4 b y A . Khalifman Volume 13: The Sicilian, English Attack, 2 0 1 0 Volume 14: The Sicilian, Najdorf, 2 0 1 2 Opening fo r Black According t o Karpov b y A. Khalifman Current theory and practice series: The French Defence Reloaded by Nikita Vitiugov, 2 0 1 2 The Open Games F o r Black b y Igor Lysyj a n d Roman Ovetchkin, 2 0 1 2 The Berlin Defence b y Igor Lysyj a n d Roman Ovetchkin, 2 0 1 2 Dreev v s . the Benoni b y Alexey Dreev, 2 0 13 The lfltimate Anti-Griinfeld. A Siimisch Repertoire by Dmitry Svetushkin, 2 0 13 The Modern Anti-Sicilian by Sergei Soloviov, 2 0 14 Leningrad Dutch. An Active Repertoire Against 1.d4, 1.c4, 1.lll f3 by Malaniuk, 2014 Anti-Spanish. The Cozio Defence by Alexey Dreev, 2 0 14 A Practical White Repertoire with l.d4 and 2 . c4 by Alexei Kornev Volume 1: The Queen's Gambit, 2 013 Volume 2: The King's Fianchetto Defences, 2 0 13 Volume 3: The Nimzo-Indian and Other Defences, 2 0 14 The Modern Vienna Game by Roman Ovetchkin and Sergei Soloviov, 2015 Rossolimo and Friends. A Complete Repertoire vs. the Sicilian by Alexei Komev, 2 0 15 The Queen's Gambit Accepted by A. Delchev and S. Semkov, 2 0 15 The Safest Scandinavian by Vassilios Kotronias, 2 0 16 The Spanish Main Road. A Black Repertoire by Evgeniy Solozhenkin, 2 0 16 �f4 in the Queen's Gambit and the Exchange Slav by Alexey Dreev, 2016 Attacking the English/Reti by A. Delchev and S . Semkov, 2016 A Practical Black Repertoire with li:lf6, g6, d6 by Alexei Kornev Volume 1: English, Pirc, Reti and Other Defences, 2 0 16 Volume 2: The King's Indian Defence, 2 0 16 Attacking the Flexible Sicilian by V. Kotronias and Semko Semkov, 2 017 The Hedgehog vs the English/Reti by Igor Lysyj and Roman Ovetchkin, 2 0 17

More details at www . chess-stars.com

•

Most Chess Stars books are also available in the interactive electronic format ForwardChess. It is a free application which presents the books as they look in print. Furthermore, it also provides a board which displays the text moves or your own analysis. Read more information about Forwardchess at: http ://chess-stars.com/Forwardchess.html