Gur 1opred.pdf

SECTIONS

Gurgenidze System

ies. The connection between the Pirc­ Ufimtsev and Modern Defences is c l e ar en ough. The Gurgenidze

This system , characterized by the moves I. .. c6, 2 . . . d5 and 3 .. . g6, is a fusion of t he Caro-Kann and Pirc defences. It grew in p o pularity after the Fischer-Petrosian g ame (Belgrade 1970) in which B la ck obtained a slight initiat i ve and which clearly

System differs fr om these defences only if Black concentrates sol ely on play i ng d6 followed by eS. In many variat ions of th e Pirc-Ufimtsev and Modern Defences, Black does plan the move d6-dS , which leads us into lines similar to the Gurgcnidze Sy stem, where d7-d5 is played immediately, thus aainina a tem po for Black. If either the main line of

illustrated how the two defences could be combined successfully .

the Modern Defence (Matanovic­ Botvinnik) or the illustrative game Smejkal-Uhlmann (No . 8 in Section 2) is examined, then it is clear that although it was never played, the move d6-dS was being considered by both p l a y e rs . However, Black deci ded either to play e7-eS or to retain his central pawns on their original squares. Why was this? Clearly, Black tho ug h t that d6-d5 was us e ful, but White never allowed him the o p po rtu nity to pl ay this move. In many variations of the Pirc­ Ufimtsev, White must ens ure that Black is not able to play d6-dS. Other reasons why we have incor­ porated the Gurgenidze Sy �tem into this book are th at the system is mod­ ern, quite successf,JI and gives rise to a very clastic defensive pattern. A blockade strate&Y is followed, with a

INTRODUCTION TO THE GURGENIDZE SYSTEM One may o bj ect that the c6- dS-g6 pawn s truct ure chaiih:i•:nstic of the Gurgenidze Sy stem h,., nothing in common with either the Pirc or the Modern Defence. Strictly speaking this i� troJe, but we feel that the Pirc­ Ufimtsev, Modern and Gurgenidze Systems do possess certain similarit-

-75-

THE MODERN DEFENCE

fortress-type posmon being set up which should be contrasted with White's blockading d4-d5 move in the Pirc-Ufimtsev. The move d7-d5, by being played immediately in the Gurgenidze System, means that Black does not have to plan it, whereas in the Pirc­ Ufimtsev and Modern Defences, d6d5 determines the strategic nature of the game and needs considerable thought before being played. The Gurgenidze System is not recommended as the basis of a player's repertoi re, but has consider­ able potenc} as a surprise weapon. The Timoshchenko-Bronstein game (Illustrative Game No. 17) illustrates how Black can play in a most original manner. Should a player adopt the Gurgenidze System, he will not only be using an elastic and successful defence, but also playing really enter­ taining chess.

A: 4 eS

followed by S f4

I e4 c6 2 d4 d5 3 Nc3 g6

We take as our main line game Fischer-Petrosian, Belgrade 1970. 4

eS

Fischer gave 4 h3!? (variation B) as better immediately after the game. Two earlier games which are worth examining are given below.

Four variations are dealt with here, the first two being the most import­ ant. A: 1 e4 c6 2 d4 dS 3 Nc3 g6 4 eS followed by S f4; 8: 1 e4 c6 2 d4 dS 3 Nc3 g6 4 b3 followed by S Nf3 (p. 81), (Black plays an early ...b5 - p. 89); C: 1 e4 c6 2 d4 dS 3 Nd2 (p. 90); D: 1 e4 g6 2 d4 c6?1 3 c41 (p. 92).

In the first (Giigoric-Botvinnik, Hamburg 1965) of these examples, after I d4 g6 2 e4 c6 3 f4 d5 4 e5, Black attempted to obtain active play by means of a pawn sacrifice; 4...c5?! 5 dxc5! Nc6 (5 .. Qa5 + 6 c3! Qxc5 7 b4 gives White the advantage.) 6 Nf3 Bg4 7 Be2 e6 8 Be3 Nh6 9 c3 Nf5 10 Bf2 h5 11 Nbd2. Whitt. has main­ tained his extra pawn on c5, and so Black tries to mount an offensive on the king-side. ll...Bh6 12 Qa4 g5! 13 h3! Bxf3 14 Nxf3 gxf4 15 Nd4. White has now clearly won the theoretical struggle, but the rest of the game is interesting, being played at a high level throughout: 15... Qc7 16 Nxf5 .

The Gurgenidze System allows Black a fair degree of freedom in choosing his move order. He can begin with the Caro-Kann defence and then play 3...g6, or first fian­ chetto hi-s king's bishop before play­ ing 3...c6, or even 1.. .g6 and 2...c6. However, this last move order is dubious, as a fter I e4 g6 2 d4 c6?1 White has the strong reply 3 c41 (See variation D). -76-

GURGENIDZE SYSTEM

exf5 17 0-0 Kf8 18 Bd4 ReS 19 Bf3

Black intends to

Rg!l20

operations.

Rae! Qd7 21 Q b3 Rd8 22 Qc2 Ne7 23 Bxh5 Ng6 24 Bxg6 Rxg6 25 Rf3 Kg8 26 Qf2 Qe7 27 Rfl Kh7 28 Qc2 Qe6 29 b4 Rd g8 30 Rlf2 a6 31 a4 Qd7 32 Kh I R8g 7 33 Qb3 Rg8 34 b5 axb5 35 axb5 Ra8 36 Qbl Ra5 37 Rb2 Kg8 38Rfl Ra8 39 Rbf2 Rg3 40 Rb2 Rg6 41 c6! bxc6 42 b6 1-0. In the second game (Padevski­ Hort, Varna 1%7), Black played the less ambitious, but better, move 4 Na6!? and after S Nf3 (not S Bxa6 Qa5 +) S h5 6 Nbd2 Nc7 7 Bd3 Nh6 8 Nfl Nf5 9 Ne3 Bh6 10 Nxf5 Bxf5 I I Bxf5 gxf5 12 ()..{) e6 had exchanged off his 'bad' bishop and had a good position.

undertake king-side

. . .

• . •

4 The

•••

interesting

6

The other main alternative of 6 Be3!? is worth considering; e.g. 6... Nh6 7 Nf3 (7 h3!? NfS 8 Bf2 bS?! 9 Bd3 e6 10 Nf3 h4 11 ()..{) Bf8 12 Qe l Be7 13 Ndl ! leaves White with a slight advantage, Honfi-Stanciu, Bucharest 1975) 7. .. 8g4 8 Be2. There is a clear difference in strategy bet­ ween this variation, in which after Black captures on f3 the bishop recaptures, and the main line, in which White recaptures with the queen. In the game Radulov-Bohosyan, Bulgaria 1971, Black continued with the hasty 8 ... Bxf3?! 9 Bxf3 e6 10 g3 NfS 11 Bf2 Nd7 12 Qd2 Bh6?! 13 0-0-0 b5 14 h3 Qa5 15 g4?! (15 Kbl ! is better) 1 5... b4 16 Nbl hxg4 17 hxg4 .Ne7 18 Be3 0-0-0 19 a3 c5 20 dxc5 Nc6 21 g5 Bg7 22 Rxh8 Bxh8 23 c3 and White stands a little better. Several other games have con­ tinued with 8 . .. e6, and some examples are given below: (a) 9 Qd2!? Nd7 10 g3 Nf5 11 Bf2 bS (l l ...Bf8 is an alternative.) 12 h3

Bg7

alternative

of

4. .h5!? has been played by Ciocaltea who is considered to be a specialist in .

this defensive system. The idea behind this move is to save an importa nt tempo later, as the black­ squaJ nl bishop is not always best placed on g7, and often returns to f8 when the position becomes totally blocked. The game Velimirovic-Ciocaltea, Budapest 1973, now continued 5 f4?! Nh6 6 Nf3 Bg4 7 Be3 NfS 8 Bf2 e6 9 Be2 Be7 10 Nd2 Bxe2 11 Qxe2 Nd7 12 Nf3 b5 and Black had no problems. In a later game, Honfi-Ciocaltea, Bucharest 1975, White had the initi­ ative after 5 h3! Nh6 6 Nf3 b6 7 Be2 a5?! 8 ()..{) Na6 9 Rei Nc7 10 Bfl Ne6 11 Ne2 Nf5 12 Nf4 Neg7 13 c41

5

f4

Nf3

b5

This move is virtually forced if - 77 -

THE MODERN DEFENCE

Bxf3 13 Bxf3 Nb6 (13 ... Bf8 14 Nc2 Nb6 IS b3 aS 16 Kfl Bc7 17 Kg2 and

Bxf3 12 l:lxf3 h4 13 Ne2! Nd7 (an interesting alternative plan for Blac� would be 13. .. Na6 followed by . .. Be7, ... Kf8 and . .. Nc7-e8-g7-h5) 14 Kh2 Be7 15 Ngl Kf8 16 Be2 and now Black made the strategic error of 1 6... c5?, which was duly punished by White: 17 c4 ! dxc4 18 d5 exd5 19 Qxd5 Nb6 20 Qxb7. Instead of 16... c5? Black could try 16. ..Kg7 and 17 ...bS. (c) 9 g_; was tried in a game Radulov­ Arnaudov, Bulgaria 1971, and after 9 . . . NfS 10 Bf2 h4! ? 1 1 Rg1 Bf8 12 Ng5 Bxe2 13 Nxe2 hxg3 14 hxg3 Be7? (after 14 ...c51 15 c3 cxd4 the game is roughly equal) 15 g4 Nh4 16 Bxh4 Rxh4 17 Nf3 Rh8 18 Qd2 Qb6 19 � Nd7 20 f5 White had achieved his strategic goal and had the better game. As a final example, here are the opening moves of the gan1e Gligoric­ Cardoso, Manila 1973: 1 d4 g6 2 e4 Bg7 3 Nc3 c6 4 f4 d5 5 e5 h5 6 Nf3 Bg4 7 Be2 e6 8 Be3 Nd7 9 Qd2 Ne7 (9 . . . Nh6 leads to an identical pos­ ition.) 10 �!? QaS?! 11 Kbl NfS 12 Bf2 Bf8 13 Ne4 ! Bb4 (13 ...Qxd2 is better) 14 c3 Be7 15 Neg5! b5 16 h3 Bxf3 17 Nxf3 Nb6 18 g4 with the bet­ ter game for White.

White has a clear advantage in view of t h e advance g4 which is to follow, Radulov-Velikov, Bulgaria 1971 . ) 14 a4? (A strategic error; 14 b3 is es�ential) 14 ... Nc4 IS Qcl B f8 ! 16 axbS cxb5 17 NxbS Qb6 18 Na3 Nxa3 19 bxa3 Nxd4 20 Bdl Bc5 2 1 Rbl QaS + 22 Kfl NfS 23 Rb3 Bxf2 24 Kxf2 Qc S + 2S Kg2 d4 26 Bf3 R c8 27 Be4 h4! 28 g4 Ng3 29 Rei Nxe4 30 Rxe4 Qd5 31 Kf3 Qxb3 + 0-1, Zinn­ Ciocaltea, Havana Olympi ad 1966.

In a later game, Gipslis-Ubilava, 19 73 , Black obtained a good game after 9 Qd2 Nd7 10 g3 Bf8! 11 Bf2 (Gipslis suggests II a3 or 1 1 0-0) 1 l ... B b4 12 h3 Bxf3 13 Bxf3 N b6 14 0-0 (not 14 b3 Na4 ! 1S bxa4 QaS and Black wins) 14. .. Nc4 15 Qcl Bxc3 16 bxc3 NfS (even better is 16 ... QaS) . The following game is of theoret­ ical importance because of the order of the opening moves: 1 e4 g6 2 d4 Bg7 3 Nc3 c6 4 Be3 d5 5 e5 h5 6 f4 Nh6 7 Nf3 Bg4 8 Bf2 e6 9 Be2 Nf5 10 Qd2 Bf8 11 g3 Nd7 12 h3 Bxf3 13 Bxf3 Be7 14 0� bS 1 5 g4 Ng7 16 Rg 1 Nb6 17 Be2 with White having the better chances in a complex pos­ ttlo n , K u p r e i c h i k - P o d gae t s , U.S.S.R. 1974. (b) 9 0-0 has been tried in two games. Rossman-Uhlmann, East German Championship 1974, continued 9 . . . Nf5 10 Qd2?! ( 10 Bf2 is better) ttl . . . Nd7 11 h3 Bxf3 12 Bxf3 QaS! 13 a3 BfS 14 b4 Qd8 15 Bf2 (15 Na4 represented a better chance .) 1S. . . Nb6 16 Ne2 Nc4 17 Qd3 Be7 with a small plus for Black. Klovan-Podgaets, U.S.S.R. 1974, continued 9... Bf8 10 h3 Nf5 11 Bf2 U.S.S.R.

-78 -

GURGENIDZE SYSTEM

6

7

Bg4

b3

·

Brouwn, correspondence) 17 cxd5 cxd5 18 Rc2 ReS 1 9 Rfcl Rxc2 20 Rxc2 Nb6

7 Be2 can often transpose to variations given above. In Espig Zinn, East Germa ny 1 973, Black delayed developing his king's knight and after 7 .. .e6 8 Be3 Nd7 9 g3 b5? 1 0 h3 Bxf3 11 Bxf3 Bf8 1 2 Kf2 Nb6 1 3 b3 Qc7 1 4 g4 W h ite had clear attacking chances on the king side. -

-

7 8

BxfJ

QxfJ

This is es sential f5.

9

e6 ,

as

8...h4 fails to 9 21 Qg4 ! Qf7 22 Khl Nc8 23 Ngl Nee? 24 Nf3 . Black now loses his h-pawn, but Smys1ov desperately attempts to conjure up some counte rplay, and the game moves towards an interest­ ing finish. 24 ...Nh6 25 Qxh4 Nef5 26 Bxf5 Nxf5 27 Qg4 Nh6 28 Qg3 Nf5 29 Qh2 fxe5 30 dxe5 Bh6 31 g3 g5 (a last try) 32 g4 Ne7 33 f5 ! Qh7 34 f6 Qe4 35 fxe7 Qxf3 + 36 Qg2 Qdl + 37 Bg l ! Bg7 (if 37 ... Re8 38 Qf2!) 38 Qe2 ! Qa l 39 Qb5 Rxh3 + 40 Kg2 Rg3 + 41 Kxg3 Qxg l + 42 Kf3 Qd l + 43 Qe2 Qhl + 44 Kf2 Qh2 + 45 Ke l Qg l + 46 Kd2 Qd4 + 47 Qd3 Qb4+ 48 Qc3 Qf4 + 49 Ke1 Qe4+ 50 Kd1 1 �. A s plendid and instructive game.

g3?

Although this is in line with mod­ ern strategic principles, it may well be that 9 Be3 ! ? is p refe rable In the game Liberzon-Smyslov, Tbilisi 1967, play continued 9 ... h4 10 Bd3 Ne7 1 1 ()..{) Nd7 12 Bf2 Nf5 1 3 Ne2 Qe7 (1 3 .. .Bf8 14 b3 Be7 1 5 c4 Kf8 could have been tried) 1 4 b3 Q.4.0 1 5 c4 Kb8 1 6 Racl f6 (1 6. . .B f8 1 7 Rc2 ReS 18 Rfcl Nb6 1 9 c5 Nd7 20 b4 Ka8 21 b5 cxb5 22 Bxb5 gave White a .

strong

attack;

van

der

9

-··

QWil

This prevents White from develop­ ing na turally by 10 Be3 and 1 1 Q.4.0. The game is now even. 10 11 11

Tak-A.

- 79-

Qfl

Bd3

Nel

Ne7 Nd7

THE MODERN DEFENCE

18 . . . fxe5 19 fxeS BxeS 20 dxe5 Nxe5 21 Qfl , etc.

Or 12 Bd2 NfS 13 BxfS gxfS with approximate equality. 12 13 14

c3 b31

�

11

f61

...

cxd4

Black could delay this move and play 1 8 . Kb8 . . .

In order to meet 14 . Rhf8 with 15 Ba3 . .

14 15

Hal

.

19 20

Nf5 c5

21

cxd4 Kg2 Nell

Nb8 Nc6

White has now fully equalized.

:U 21

Qd2

Rd7

White could have kept queens on the board by playing 22 Rd I, fol· lowed by Nd3-c5 , but Fischer was leading 2-0 in the match at this stage, and decided to play safe.

11 13

QxaS

QaS

White cannot now avoid the exchange, as 23 Qb2 allows 23.. B f8 or 23 Qe2 fxeS! 24 fxeS Qc3. The game ended .

Black now has a slight initiative.

16

Bxf51

13 24 15

White must now take defensive measures, and so gives up his proud bishop, in order to be able to play Be3 .

16 17 11

Bel

l6 27 21

gxf5 Qa6

29 30 31 31

lm

White' s king heads for the safety of the king-side. Fischer has also suggested 18 Qf3! , as Black does not get enough for his piece after

Nd3 Rac l Rc3 Rgc l Nb4 Rxc6 Rxc6 Nxc6 Kf3

,

NxaS Nc6 Rc7 b6

Kb7 Rhc8 Rxc6 Rxc6 Kxc6 h-Yz

Fischer-Petrosian , U. S .S.R.-Rest of the World, Belgrade 1970. -80-

GURGENIDZE SYSTEM

ation. 4 ...Qb6? 5 exd5 Qxb2 6 Nge2 BfS? (6 . Nf6) 7 Rbl Qa3 8 Rxb7 Na6 9 dxc6 gS 10 NbS Qxa2 II Nec3 Qxc2 12 Qxc2 Bxc2 13 NdS 1-0. After 4 Bf4 Bg7 S exd5 cxd5 6 NbS Na6 7 Qe2 (th r eatening 8 Nd6 + ) 7 ..B e6 8 Nf1 White stands be t ter. A similar idea was demons trated in the game Stibcra-Nebolsin, Novosibirsk 1971, which began 1 e4 g6 2 d4 Bg7 3 Nc3 c6 4 Nf1 dS 5 exdS cxdS 6 Bf4. Black could now find no t hing better than 6 ...a6 to prevent the entry of the knight. After 7 Qd2 Nc6 8 NeS NxeS 9 dxeS e6 1 0 Bd3 Qc7 II 0-0 Ne7 12 Rae I Whi te had a clear advantage. Possibly the best reply to 4 Bf4 is 4 ... Nf6!'? when on S eS Black can gain a tempo to play ... Nh7-g7 (see Instructive G an1e No. 16).

8: 4 b3 followed b y S NfJ

. .

I e4 c6 2 d4 dS 3 Nc3 g6 4

b3

A prophylactic move which a voids

.

the pin of his king's knight when it reaches f3 ( we will follow Spassky Ts eshko v sky , U.S.S.R. Team Championship, Moscow 1974). ­

4 NfJ is also p layable, e.g. 4 . .Bg4 5 h3 Bxf1 6 Qxf1 e6 7 Bf4 Bg7 8 exdS .

exd5 9 0-0-0 Ne7 10 g4 and White has good attacking chances and the two bishops. 4. . Bg7 is better for Black, when W hite can tran spose into the main line by S h3. The game Tashkhodzhaev Roitman, Moscow 1972, began I e4 c6 2 d4 dS 3 Nc3 g6 4 Nf1 Bg7 S Bd3'?! Bg4 6 Be3 eS! 7 Be2 Bxf1 8 Bxf1 . .

-

4 b4? 1 was played in the game Kluger Vogt Lublin 1 972, but after 4 ... Bg7 S exdS cxdS 6 hS Nc6 7 Be3 Nh6! 8 BbS Nf5 9 Qd2 Nxe3 10 Qxe3 Bg4 11 f1 Be6 Black had no problems. -

,

4 g3 caused no difficulties for Black after 4... Bg7 5 e5 f6! 6 f4 Nh6 7 Bg2 0-0 8 Nf1 Bg4 9 0-0 (9 h 3 Bxf3 10 Bxf1 NfS!) 9. Qd7 10 Be3 Na6 II Qd2 Nc7 12 Ne2 Rad8 13 c3 b6 (Spassky-Karner, Tallinn 1973). . .

4 Be3 was tried in the game Velimirovic-Kavalek, The Hague 1966. After I e4 g6 2 d4 Bg7 3 Nc3 c6 4 Be3 dS S Qd2 dxe4 White typically sacrificed a pawn by 6 0-0-0 (6 Nxe4 Nd7 7 Nf3 Ngf6 8 Nxf6 + Nxf6 9 B h6'? Bxh6 10 Qxh6 Bg4! and Black had the better game, Radulov­ Liebert, Kapfenberg 1970.) 6 ... Nf6 7 Nge2 Be6 8 h3 h5 9 Kbl Nbd7 10 Nf4

8 ...c5 9 NxdS cxd4 10 Bd2 Nc6 11 0-0 Nge7 12 Nxe7 Qxe7 13 c3 0-0 1 4 cxd4 exd4 with good play for Black. 4 Bf4 is interesting ; White scored a dramatic success in the game Chernov-Gorchakov, U.S.S.R. 1973, but only after Black's full co-oper- 81 -

THE MODERN DEFENCE

BdS 1 1 Rgl when all W hite had for his pawn was a poor and difficult position.

After 1 e4 g6 2 d4 Bg7 3 Nc3 c6 4 Be3 dS S f311 Qb6? 1 6 a3 dxc4 7 fxe4 cS 8 Nf3 cxd4 9 Nxd4 QaS 10 Qd2 Nd7 11 ()..()..() NcS (Ozsvat h- Pod gaets , U.S.S.R. 1974), the position is diffic­ ult to assess, as White's lead in devel­ opment is countered by the strong position of Black's queen's knight.

There a re possibilities:

4

...

Bg7

4 ... Nf6?! is suspect; 5 e5 Nh5?

White won in a few moves (Sigurjonsson-Gurgenidze , Tbilisi

.

1974).

Nf3

main

� 9 � ReS 10 Rei Rxel + 1 1 Qxel Nd7 12 Bd2 b5 13 BaSI Nb6 14 Bb3 Qd7 15 Qe2 Bb7 16 Rei Bf8 17 Nd2 with advantage to W hite Andersson-Ljubojevic, Wij k aan Zee 1 973: 8 Bc4 0-0 9 0-0 Re8 10 Bb3 Nd7 1 1 c4 b6 12 Bf4 Bb7 13 Qc2 fS 14 a4 c5 15 dS aS 1 6 Rael Qf6 17 Re21

g4

-

t h ree

(a) 6••• Nf611 7 Nxf6+ B:itf6 8 Bo4 gives White the better game, Vasyukov-Basman, Varna 1 97 1 , con· tinued 8 . . . Qd6 9 Qe2 aS 10 � bS 11 Bd3 Bf5 12 a4 b4 13 Bc4.h5 14 Rcl Nd7 15 BgS, while Najdorf-Rossetto, Argentina 1973, w en t 8 . . . BfS 9 ()..() Nd7 10 Rei Nb6 1 1 B b3 h5 12 NeS e6 13 c3 NdS 14 Qf3 h4 1 5 Bd2 Kf8 16 c4 Nc7 J': l:lc3. In both cases, White had the aavdntage. 6. . . Nf6? 1 7 Nxf6+ exf6?1 allows White to obtain a las ting initiative as in similar lines of the Caro-Kann De fence . Three examples arc: Gheorghiu-Hug, Bath 1 973: 8 Bc4

(L.Nfd7 is better) 6 Be2 Ng7 7 Nt1 h5 8 Bf4 Bf5 9 Qd2 Ne6 10 Be3 h4 1 1 ()..()..() Nd7 1 2 g4, Black now has prob­ le ms with his queen' s bishop and a fter 12 . . . hxg3 13 fxg3 Rxh3 14 Rxh3 Bxh3 15 Nh4 1 g5 ( 16 g4 ! was threat­ ened) 16 BxgS NxgS 17 Qxg5 Qb6 18

5

now

Nf6

and White's chances are better in spite of Black's block ad e.

The latest theoretical idea. A w hole ·series of games has shown that White obtains a good game after A: s ue46Nu4.

Mista-Kupka,

Rimavska-Sobota

1974: 8 Bc4 � 9 0-0 Nd7 10 Re 1 Nb6 II Bb3 Re8 12 a4 Be6 13 aS Nc8 14 a6

...

- 82-

GURGENIDZE SYSTEM

bS 15 d5 Bxd5 16 Rxe8+ Qxe8 17 BxdS Qd7 18 Bxfi + and White stands better in view of Black's weak

Rcc8 20 Rad l Nf4? 1 21 c4! Nh5 22 d5 with a clear advantage to White, (Browne-Kovacevic, Zagreb 1970). 10 Rei ! Bf5 11 Ne5 (11 BgS Qc7 12 Qe2 Rae8 1 13 c3 Nd5 14 Qd2 Nf6 15 Qf4 Qxf4 16 Bxf4 Nd5 17 Bd2 B h8 18 Bh6 Bg7 19 Bd2 'h-Vz Parma­ Hart, Havana 1970.) l l ...Be4 12 BgS Bd5 13 Bd3 Be6 14 c3 Nd7 15 Nf3 ReS

points.

Bf5 7 Ng3 Nf6 8 Nxf5 gxf5 9 e6 10 Qe2 c5 11 dxcS QaS + 12 Bd2 Qxc5 13 Bc3 Nc6 14 040 (the immediate 14 g41 is better) 14 . . . 040 15 g4 Ne8 16 Bxg7 Nxg7 17 Qe3 Qxe3 + 18 fxe3 fxg4 19 hxg4 hS 20 gxh5 Rxh5 21 Rxh5 N xh5 22 Ng5 Ne5 23 Rh1 (23 Nxfi Rxd3 =) Vz-llz, Sahovic-Botvinnik, Belgrade 1970.

(b) 6

•.•

Bd3

(c) 6 Nd7 is the most solid alternat­ ive, but even here White can slowly build up a king-side advantage by means of 7 Bc4 Ngf6 8 Nxf6 + Nxf6 9 .•.

0-0 ().()

16 Rxe6 1 (a positional sacrifice which gives White a lasting initiative. ) 1 6. .. fxe6 1 7 Qe2 e 5 ( 17 . . . N f8 had to be tried) 18 Bc4 + Kh8 1 9 dxe5 Qc7 20 Bfi Rf8 21 e6 Nf6 22 Q<-.4 QaS 23 Rei Qd5 24 Qh4 Rxfi (25 Bxg6 was threatened) 25 Ne5 1 1 Nh5 26 Nxfi + Kg8 27 Bxe7 ReS 28 Nd6 Bf6 29 Bxf6 Qxd6 30 Bg5 Rxe6 31 Qc4 Ng7 32 Qb3 Kf8 33 Rd1 QeS 34 Bh6 Rd6 35 Rxd6 Qxd6 1-0 (Tal-Kolarov. Kapfenberg 1970). This is a very eff­ ective exchange sacrifice and repres­ en ts a c onstant threat in this type of posit i on. 10 Rell b6 11 Bg5 Bb7 12 Qe2 e6 13 Ne5 ! ( 13 Rad 1 Qc7 14 Ne5 NdS 1 5 Bh4 Rfe8- 1 5.. . Rae81? - 16 Ng4 Nf4 17 Qe3 c5 18 d51 with complications Westerinen­ Wh ite; favou ring Robatsch, Sochi 1974.) 13 . . . Qd6 14

The various possibilities are now: (cl) 10 c3 Qc7 11 Rei Nd5?! 12 Bb3 Bf5 13 Bg5 Rfe8? 14 Bh4 Rad8 15 Ne5 f 6 16 Ng4 Kh8 17 Qf3 and White (Ghizdavu-Buza, bette r stood Romania 1970) . (c2) 10 Rei ! (the mo st exact) IO . ..NdS 11 c3 a5 12 a4 b6 13 Qe2 Bf5 14 BgS (not 14 1Jx
THE MODERN DEFENCE

Nf3 g6 2 e4 8g7 3 d4 c6 4 Nc3 d5 � Be2 dxe4 6 Nxe4 Nd7 7 0-0 Ngfb & Nxf6 + Nxf6 9 Bf4 0-0 10 c3 Be6 1. Rei Qb6 12 b4 aS 1 3 a3 R.ii' ( 1 3 . . . Nd5!) 14 NgS BfS IS Bc4.

Bb3 h6 IS Bh4 Rad8 ( 1 S . . . Qxd4? 1 6 Bxf6 Bxf6 1 7 Nx f7! Rx f7 1 8 Radl! Qxb2 19 Bxe6 Rf8 20 Rd7 Bc8 21 Bxf7 + Rxf7 22 Rxf7 Kxf7 23 Qe8 + winning.) 16 Radl Qc7 1 7 f4 Rde8? ( 1 7 . . . cS was essential) 1 8 Qf2 Nd7 1 9 Qg3 with a strong attack (Ghizdavu­ Spiridonov, Romania 197 1 ) . (c3) 10 Bf4 b 6 I I Qe2 B b 7 1 2 Radl e6 1 3 NeS Qe7 14 Bh6 Rfd8 I S Bxg7 Kxg7 16 Rd3 with a minimal advantage for W hite (Gufeld­ Spiridonov, Tbilisi 1969). (c4) 10 Qe2 NdS I I Rei Qc7 1 2 Bb3 (or 12 c3 ! ? e6 13 BgS b6 14 Bb3 Bb7 IS Radl cS? ! 16 c4 Nf6 17 QeS ! QxeS 1 8 dxeS NhS 19 Nh2! h6 20 Bel gS 2 1 g 3 Rfc8 2 2 h4 ! with a winning game for White. Pribyi-Pithart, Olomouc 197S.) 12 . . . aS 13 a3 ! ( 1 3 c4?! a4 ! ) 1 3 . . . a4 ( 1 3 . . . e6 ! ) 14 Ba2 e6 IS c4 Ne7 16 Bd2 NfS 17 Bc3 b6 (better is the immediate 17 . . . c5 ! ) 18 Radl c5 (if 18 . . . Bb7 19 c5 is possible) 1 9 d5 Bxc3 20 bxc3 exdS 21 cxd5 Nd6 22 NgS! Bf5 23 g4 Rae8 24 Ne6! fxe6 25 dxe6 Re7 26 Qe5 NbS 27. Qxc7 Nxc7 28 Rd7 Rfe8 29 gxf5 with the better end­ ing for White (Gulko-Dvoretsky, U.S.S.R. 1970). A well played open­ ing by both sides.

As a result of the above example:.. Black has had to look for alternathe� to 5 . . . dxe4. 8: 5 ... Nb6 has been tried and is championed by Ciocaltea Four alternatives have now becatried.

=

(a) 6 Bd3?1 f6 7 0-0 Nf7 8 Rei 0-0 9 Qe2 e5 ! 10 Be3 f5! 11 exf5 (Whateve1 White plays, he must lose a piece and has to look for compensation.; 1 1 . . . e4 12 fxg6 hxg6 1 3 Nxe4 dxe4 14 Bxe4 Qf6 15 Ne5 Bf5 16 Bxf5 QxfS 17 Qc4 Nd7 with an unclear position (Kots-Lutikov, U.S .S.R. 1 970) . 6 Bd3?! 0-0 7 0-0 f6 8 B f4 Nf7 9 eS (otherwise Black will play . . . e5) 9 . . . fxe5 10 dxe5 ( 1 0 Bxe5'? NxeS II dxe5 Nd7 12 Rei Nc5 13 b4 Ne6 14 Ne2? Rxf3! 15 gxf3 Ng5 ! 16 f4 Nxh3 + 1 7 Kg2 Q f8 18 Kg3 Bxe5! 0 - 1, H u t t e m ann- C i o c a l t ea. Dortmund 1 974. Or 10 NxeS?! Ndl! 1 1 Nxd7 Bxd7 1 2 Ne2 eS 13 dxe5 Nxe5 with equality, Jansa- C iocaltea, Skopje Olympiad 1972) 10 . . . c5 II

Even if White's king's bishop is not developed on the most active square c4, White still has a comfort­ able game, e.g. I e4 c6 2 Nc3 d5 3 Nf3 go 4 d4 Bg7 S h3 dxe4 6 Nxe4 Nd7 7 Bd3 Ngf6 8 Nxf6 + Nxf6 9 0-0 0-0 1 0 Rei Qc7 I I Bg5 c 5 1 2 Qd2 cxd4 1 3 Nxd4 a6 1 4 c 3 with a slight advantage for White (Zinn-Bohnisch, East Germany 1972). In the game Uusi-Spiridonov, Sofia 1 969, White omitted h3, but still obtained the better game after I -84-

GURGENIDZE SYSTEM

plications. A simpler yet strong con­ tinuation would have been 10 cxdS QxdS 11 Nc3! and White completes his developmen t) 10 .. . eS ! (not 10. .. Be6? 11 Qe3 winning a piece) 11 dxeS fxe5 12 Bg5 (12 8xh6 Bxh6 13 cxdS e4! ) 12. ..QaS + 13 Bd2 Qb6 14 cxdS e4 IS d6+! (IS Be3 Nc5! ) 15 ... Kh8 16 Nfd4 NcS Black had good tactical chances in a complex

Rei Be6 12 Qd2 Nc6 13 BbS (13 Bfl with good play for Black, (Kostro-Ciocaltea, Wijk aan

Qd7) 13...Qb6

Zee 1971). (b) 6 Be2 0-0 7 0-0 f6 S Rei Nt7 9 Bfl b6 (9... as 10 b3 e6 11 Ba3 ReS 12 exdS cxdS 13 NgS Y2-Y2; Weinstein­ Ciocaltea, Wijk aan Zee 197 S) 10 b3 e6 11 a4 ReS 12 Ba3 a6! (preparing the manoeuvre ... Ra7-d7) 13 Nb l dxe4 14 Rxe4 cS IS Rei fS 16 c3 cxd4 17 cxd4 Nc6 IS Bb2 Ra7. Black has a

position. In the game Hernando-Diez del Corral, Orense 197S, W hite failed to understand the point of 6 Bf4! and 7 exdS! and instead vacillated with 6 Bf4 f6 7 Qd2? Nt7 8 Be2 (S exdS was essential) S. .. eS! 9 Bg3 Bh6 10 Qdl dxe4 11 Nxe4 f5 12 Nc3 e4 13 NeS

promising game with pressure on White 's d-pawn (Honfi-Ciemens, Solingen 1974). (c) 6 eS f6 7 Bd3 Nd7 S exf6 exf6 9 0-0 0-0 10 B f4 Nt7 II Qd2 ReS 12 Rfel Nf8 13 RxeS QxeS with an equal game (Golbin-Uusi, Gomel l 97 4).

Be6 14 Nxt7 Bxt7 IS BeS 0-0! with a clear

advantage

to

Black

who

is

threatening ... Nd7.

(d) White's best move is 6 Bf41 and after 6 .. . f6 (better than either 6... Qb6 ? ! 7 Qd2 dxe4 S Na4 QdS 9 Bxh6 Bxh6 10 Qxh6 QaS + 11 Nd2 Qxa4 12 Bc4 Qxc2 13 0-0 e3 14 Bxf7 + ! winning for White (Zhuravlev-Tseitlin, U.S.S.R. 1973) or 6 ... dxe4?! 7 Nxe4 NfS S c3 0-0 9 Bd3 b6 10 0-0 8b7 II Rei Na6 12 Qe2 Nc7 13 Rad l with the better game for White; N icevsk i-Notaros, Yugoslavia 1973) 7 exdS! (Otherwise Black consolidates with 7. ..0-0.) 7 . .. cxdS S NbS · (S BbS + is also good: S. .. Nc6 9 0-0 0-0 10 Rei Nt7 11 Qe2 e6 12 Na4 QaS 13 c4! a6 14 Bxc6 bxc6 IS Qc2 with a comfortable game for W hite; Lombard-Westerinen, Mannheim 197S) S... Na6 (White wins a pawn after S ... 0-0? 9 Nc7 eS 10 Bxh6! Qxc7 II B x g7 Kxg7 12 dxeS) 9 c4 0-0 10 Qb3? (as played in the game Keres­ Karner, Tallin n 1973, leading to com-

6

eS

White gets nothing after 6 Bd3 Nxe4 Nxe4 S Bxe4 Nd7 9 0-0 0-0 10 Rei ReS II c3 eS 12 dxe5 NxeS 13 QxdS N x f 3 + (Parm a-Hort, Portoroz/Ljubljana 197S). In this line 10 c3 cS 11 Bc2 cxd4 12 Nxd4 e5 13 NbS a6 14 Nd6 Qc7 15 Ne4 Nc5 16 Qd6 Qxd6 17 Nxd6 Rd8 18 Be3 Rxd6 dxe4 7

- ss-

THE MODERN DEFENCE

Bxc5 Rd5 leads to equality (Bronstein-Tseshkovsky, U .S.S.R.

19

7 8

NgS

9

lk4

dxe4 cS

1974).

6

Ne4

An interesting alternative is 6...Nfd7 7 Bf 4 e6 8 Qd2 h6 9 g4!? b6 10 h4?! Qe7 11 040 a6 12 Bg2 c5 with complications (Paoli-Bohnisch, Olomouc 1973).

This is a key move wi th which White burns all his bridges behind him. The two alternative moves are 9

cb:cSI? and 9 e6.

The sharpest continuation. White can avoid the following complic­

9 dxcSI? This is solid and sound, e.g. 9 .. . QaS + 10 Bd2 QxcS 11 8c3 Nc6 (1l...BxeS? 1 2 Bxe5 Qxe5 13 Qd8 + ! or 11. .. Nd71 12 Bd4 Qd5 13 e6! Bxd4 14 Qxd4 Qxd4 IS exf7+ Kf8 16 Ne6+ Kxf7 17 Nxd4 with a

ations by playing the little tested 7

clear endgame advantage for White;

Bd3, which turned out very success­ fully for White in the game

Karasev-Nebolsin, U.S.S.R. 1969) 12 Nxe4 Qb6 13 Bc4 (}..() (no t 13 . ..NxeS 14 Bxe5 Qb4 + 15 c3 Qxc4 16 Nd6 +

7

Nxe4

Gheorghiu-Cardoso,

Torremolinos

1974, which continued 7. . .Nxc3 8 bxc3 c5 9 dxc5 QaS 10 (}..() (}..() 1 1 Be3 Nd7 (if 1 L.Nc6 12 Bd4!) 12 c41 dxc4 13 Bxc4 Nxe5? (13 . . .Nxc5 is essential)

exd6 17 Bxg7 with White having the edge) 14 (}..() (14 f4!? Qe3 + 1 5 Qe2 Qxf4 with even chances, or 14 e6 15 bxc3 fS!) 14 ... Bxe5 IS Bxe5 Nxe5 16 Bb3 Be6 17 Qe2 Bxb3

Bxc3 +

14 NxeS BxeS 15 Rbl Bg7 16 Qf3 Qc7 17 Rb3 e6 18 Rhbl Rb8 19 c6! How­ ever. Black improved on this in a

1 8 axb3 with approximate equality (Dvoret sky-Zilbershtein, T bilisi

later game, Jansa-Spiridonov, Brno

1 973).

1976, with 9 ... Nc6! 10 (}..() (}..() 11 Bf4 -

Qa5 12 Qd2 Qxc5, giving a comfort-

9 e6 Bxe6 10 Nxe6 fxe6 11 dxcS Qxdl + 12 Kxdl (}..() gives rise to a rarely seen type of endgame. In the

able game. A draw was in fact agreed after 13 Rabl.

-86-

GURGENIDZE SYSTEM

game Timoshchenko-Machulsky, Chelyabinsk 1 974, White now played 13 Ke2 and after 13 ...Na6 1 4 Bel Rac8 1 S c3 NxcS 16 g3 Na4 Black s10od somewhat better. However, 1 3 Be3! seems better, e.g. 1 3. . .Bxb2 1 4 Rbl Rd8 + IS Ke2 with a complic­ ated position (analysis by Hort and Pribyl).

9 10

e6

IS 16

Bb7

There does not seem to be anything better. 16 17

Rfdl

a3

So far play has followed the earlier g a m e P e t r u s h i n- R a s h k o v s k y , U.S.S.R. 1 974, in which White played the sharp 1 7 h4!? Play con­ tinued 1 7 ... Rac8 18 a3 NaS 19 hS? Nc4 20 Rb 1 BdS! 21 hxg6 hxg6 22 Ng3 Bxe6 23 Qe2 Kf7! 24 Be4 (White tries vainly to increase his attack) 24 .. fS 2S Bb7 ReS ! 26 b4 ReS! (this exchange sacrifice swings the game in Black's favour) 27 BxeS NxeS 28 Bf3 Bc4! 29 Qd2 Nxf3 + 30 gxf3 BdS 3 1 Qd3 Bf6 3 2 f4 ReS 3 3 ReS BxeS 34 fxeS Bb7 3S Kfl Rc3 36 e6 + Qxe6 37 Qxd4 Qc4+ 38 Qxc4 bxc4 0-1. Instead of 1 9 hS ? White should have played the stronger 1 9 b4! creating a strong square on cS, e.g. 19...Nc4 20 NcS! Spassky's move secures d3 for his queen and it is quite possible that he knew about the improvement in the above game.

0-0 f6

For lO...fS see Timoshchenko­ Bronstein, Instructive Game No. 1 7. 11

Rei 814

Nxe4

.

11

.••

b5!

17

The fate of this whole variation hinges on this move as 1 2 BxbS loses to 1 2... Qa5 + 1 3 Nc3 fS ! 12 13 14

Bel Bf3

18

cxd4 Nc6

..

QdJ

The most critical moment in the game. 18 h4 is more aggressive. e.g. 18. .. a4 1 9 hS b4 20 hxg6 hxg6 2 1 Qd3! Ba6 2 2 Nxf6+ exf6 2 3 Qxg6 with a very dangerous attack. Spassky has a different strategy in mind.

0-0

.

aS

Preventing b4.

Of course not I 4 Nxf6+ Rxf6 I S Bxc6 Rxe6+ winning. 14

...

Qb6

-87-

THE MODERN DEFENCE

18 19 lO

24

a4

b4 Qe4

b4

This is the losing move. White tri� to exchange queens at any price, bui the price is a very heavy one, i.e. the loss of the game. 24 Qxa4! had to be played, affer which the position u very difficult to assess, e.s. 24...Nxf3 + (24... Bc4 25 Nxf6+ !) 25 gxf3 Be2 26 Qd7 Bxf3 27 Rxa8 Rxaa 28 Qxd8 + Rxd8 29 b5 and White's b­ pawn is very dangerous. Or 25 ...Bd3 26 Qd7 Bxc2 27 Rxaa Rxa8 28 Bc7! or 25 ... Qd5 26 Qd7 Qf5 27 Rxa6! with advantage to White in both cases. These lines should be compared with the endgame that occurs in the actual game when Black has retained his a-pawn.

Now White's queen is committed to glory or disaster. White does not now have time to exchange his h­ pawn for Black's g-pawn, but he could still try 20 h5! Ba6 21 Qd2 d3 22 hxg6 hxg6 23 Be3 with chances for both sides. lO

l1

Rdcl QcS

Black threatened 21 ... Ne5.

21 n l3

Qdl NeS Ba6?1

axb4

QbS

QaS?

24 25 26

All commentators on this game have praised this move, but not only does it seem inaccurate, it may even be an outright error. It was essential to play 23...Bc6! 24 Qe2 Nxf3 + 25 gxf3 (25 Qxf3? f5) 25 ... Qd5 when Black keeps his a-pawn on the board, and has various threats such as ... Qxe6, ...Qf5 and ... Bb5. If 26 Nc5, Black's best is 26 Qf5 27 Bg3 Bxf3 28 Qd3 Qg4 followed by ...f5-f4.

27 21 29

bxaS gxf3 b4 NcS BgS

QxaS Nxf3 + BbSI Rc4 fS

White seeks active play to the bitter end, but there is no way of holding Black's a- and d-pawns . 29

. . .

30

Redl

Rxc2 d3

The long diagonal is opened up and Black now wins quickly.

31 32 33 34

35 36

RaJ Rxa4 bxcS Rxd3 hS bxg6

Bb2 RxcS Bxa4 Kfl Ke8 0-1

Spassky-Tseshkovsky, U.S.S.R. Team Championship, Moscow 1974. - 88 -

GURGEN IDZE SYSTEM

Bialek plays an early b5 This combination is seen at its worst in the sequence ·1 e4 g6 2 d4 Bg7 3 NcJ c6 4 NfJ bSI when 5 e51 gives White much the better game.

thanks to the permanent weakening of Black's pawn structure.

•..

Mikenas-Seoev (Dn.:propetrovsk 1970): 6 Bb3 b4 7 Nce2 cxdS S a3! ( 8 Nf3 Nf6 9 0-0 0-0 1 0 a3! bxa3 1 1 Rxa3 Nc6 1 2 NeS Bb7 1 3 Nf4! e6 1 4 Nxc6 Bxc6 I S c 3 Nd7 1 6 Rei ReS 1 7 Nd3 Bb5 IS Bf4 Qb6 1 9 Ba4 aS 20 Qb3 Bxa4 21 Qxa4 with a definite plus for White, Lanc-Vogt, Brno 1975) 8 . .bxa3 9 Rxa3 Nf6 10 Nf3 0-0 II Ne5 Qb6 12 0-0 Ba6 13 Rei Bxe2 14 Qxe2 e6 1 5 Be3 Nfd7 1 6 Real ReS 1 7 h4 Nxe5 1S dxeS d4 19 Bf4 Nc6 20 hS and White has a clear advantage.

The game Lerner - Machulsky, U.S.S.R. 1 974, continued S...dS (or S...d6 6 Bf4! ) 6 h3 Nh6 7 Bf4 f6 S Bd3 0-0 9 0-0 Nf7 1 0 Rei. Had Black played a better move than . . . b5, his position would not be too bad. In the actual game, he committed suicide by 10 . g5? 1 1 Bh2 g4 1 2 exf6 exf6 1 3 Nh4 and Black's king position was in ruins. In this line 6 exd6 releases the ten­ sion too early, but even so Black gets a poo� pawn structure after 6... exd6 7 dS! b4 S Ne4 f5 (otherwise White plays Bg5) q Ng3 Ne7 1 0 dxc6 Nbxc6 11 Bb5 Qb6 i 2 Bxc6 + Qxc6 1 3 0-0 0-0 1 4 Ret NdS 1 5 a3 bxa3 1 6 Rxa3 Bb7 1 7 Ne2 Nc7 18 Ned4 Qd7 19 c3 (Sosonko-Quinteros, Wijk aan Zee 1974). .

.

.

1 e4 c6 2 d4 g6 3 Nc3 (3 c4! ) 3...Bg7 4 Bc4 bS?! S Bb3 b4 6 Nce2 Nf6 7 e5 Nd5 8 a3! bxa3 9 Rxa3 0-0 1 0 f4 and White stands much better (Georgadze-Radev, Tbilisi 1971 ). I e4 g6 2 d4 Bg7 3 Nc3 c6 4 Nf3 d5 5 h3 bS after which White played the modest 6 a3 dxe4 7 Nxe4 Nf6 8 Nxf6 + exf6 9 Bd3 0-0 10 0-0 Bc6 11 a4 h4 12 aS ReS 13 Bd2 Bf8 1 4 Ra4 and Hlack was now faced with the well-known problem of how to deal with White's queen-side majority.

More serious attention needs to be paid to ...b5 in the sequence 1 e4 g6 2 d4 Bg7 3 NcJ c6 4 Bc4 d5 S exd5 b5? 1 although the following games show that White retains the advantage

:5 ... b5?! can now probably be dis­ carded once and for all.

- 89-

THE MODERN DEFENCE

C: Tbe System with 3 Nell l l 3

e4 d4 Ndl

c6 d5

White hopes to support his pawn chain after 3 . ..g6 4 eS by a later c3. In addition, the knight seems well placed on d2 wh en Black plays ... Nh6, and c4 is always easy to carry out. As against these advantages, the main disadvantage is that the knight blocks the queen's bishop diagonal . Variations B and C are closely linked and Black can usually transpose by . . . dxe4 t o lines which have been examined earlier. In Sub - v '"'"""' w n (a), those games in which White plays eS are exam­ ined. Those games in which Black carries out the manoeuvre .. . Nh6, ... f6 and .. . Nf7 are dealt with i n Sub­ variation (b) , while those games in which Black re leases the tension with ..".dxe4 are included in Sub-v ar iation (c) .

(a)

Suetin-Gurgenidze,

U.S.S.R.

Geller-Sveshnikov, U.S.S.R. 1973: 1 t4 r;6 2 d4 c6 3 Nf1 (3 c41) 3 ... Bg7 4 BdJ d5 .S e5 c5 6 c3 Bg4 7 Nbd lc6 8 h3 Bd7? (8 ... Bxf3 9 Nxf3 e6) ':J 0-0 e6 10 Rei Nge7? (a positional error, all owi ng White's next move which forces Black to spend con siderable time recovering the pawn while White builds up a king-side attack) II dxcS! Qc7 12 Qe2 aS 13 a4 NbS 14 Nb3 Na6 15 BeJ 0-0 16 Bg5! Rfe8 17 Nh2! h6 18 Bf6 Nxc.S 19 N xc S Qxc.S 20 Ng4 KfB 2 1 Qd2 Ng8 22 Qf4 (threatening 23 Bxg6) 22 ... g.S 23 Qf3 Bc6 24 Bxg7 + Kxg7 25 N x h 6! f.S 26 exf6+ Nxf6 27 Re.S RfB 28 Rxg.S + K h8 29 Qg3 1-0.

Smejkai-Alster, Harrachov 1969: I e4 g6 2 d4 Bg7 3 c3 c6 4 Nf3 d.S S Nbd2 Nd7 6 eS e6? (ag ain , Black's queen bishop is blocked in; Black

1974: I e4 c6 2 d4 d5 3 Nd2 g6 4 Ngf3 Bg7 5 h3 Nd7 6 Bd3 NfB?! (This move

when White's king bishop is not on its most active square of c4. Black's h opes after the text move rest on the blockading square at e6.) 7 c3 Nf6 8 ()..() Ne6 9 Rei 0-0 10 eS N e8 (White has more space but Black's position is solid). For the rest of the game, sec Instructive Game No . 18 . The same two players had already played a ga:;» <>long similar lines a year previo:,.. in 1973: 1 e4 c6 2 d4 dS 3 Nd2 g6 4 N gf3 Nf6 S eS Nh.S?I6 h3 Ng7 7 Be2 Ne6 8 Nfl Nd7 9 h4 hS 10 NgS Nb6 II c3 NxgS 12 hxg.S Bg7 13 Bf4 Bt..-6 14 a4 Nd7 IS Ne3 Nf8 16 b4 aS 17 B d3 axb4 18 cxb4 Bd7 19 Nc2 Bg4 20 Qd2 Bf.S 21 BxfS gxfS and Black has a reasonable game, accord­ ing to Sue ti n . S ... NhS?! seem s even more bizarre than 6 . .. NfB in the pre­ vious game. alternative is 6. . . dxe4

seems very artificial; a possible -90-

GURGENIDZE SYSTEM

sho uld imitate G u r geni dze s imaginative 6 Nf8) 7 B d3 c5 8 0-0 Ne7 9 Rei Nc6 10 Nfl Rb8 II Bf4 bS 12 Qd2 Qb6 13 Bh6 and Whi te has an excellent position

ween 3 Nc3 and 3 Nd2, as White is now able to build up a pawn centre without loss of time .) 10 . . . Nd7 I I b3 Nb6 I2 Bb2 Bd7 1 3 a4 aS I4 Bc3 ReS 1 5 Qdl Qc7 16 Rei B h6 17 Re2 and W hite s space adv antage is indispu ta ble.

'

. ..

.

'

(b) Darga-Ciocaltea, West Germany 197 1 : I e4 g6 2 d4 Bg7 3 c3 dS 4 Nd2 c6 5 Bd3 Nh6?1 6 Ngf3 0-0 7 0-0 f6 8 Rei Nf7 9 Bc2 Na6 10 exdS cxdS I I Nfl eS 1 2 dxeS fxeS

(c) Adorjan-Vadasz, Hungary 1 970: I e4 c6 2 d4 g6 3 Nf3 B g7 4 c3 dS S Nbd2 Nd7 6 Bd3 dxe4 7 Nxe4 Ngf6 8 Nxf6+ Nxf6 9 0-0 0-0 10 Rei (this position is similar to those arising from 3 Nc3, but White has a pawn on c3 instead of h3, and his king's bishop is on d3 instead of c4, if this game is comp ar ed with Zinn­ Bohnisch in Section B)

Black has a seemingly powerful centre, but Darga finds the correct plan for White: 1 3 h4! Nc7 14 NgS! Qf6 IS Qe2 NxgS 16 BxgS Qf7 1 7 Radi Be6 1 8 Ng3 h6 1 9 Be3 Qf6 20 hS Qh4 (wi nni ng the exchange but obtaining a poor game) 21 Bxg6 Bg4 22 Qd2 Bxdl 23 Rxdl Rf6 24 Qe2 (threateni ng 25 Nf5) 24 . . Raf8 25 BcS (winning back the exchange with interest) 2S ... Ne6 26 Bxf8 Rxf8 27 RxdS N f4 28 Qe4 Rf7 29 Rd7 1-0.

10 . ReS? 1 1 Bg5 Qb6 12 Qd2 (White's pieces are economically placed) I 2 . Be6 1 3 Rxe6! fxe6 14 Rei cS I5 Bc4 NdS 1 6 Bh6 Rad8? (16 ... Bf6 is essential) 17 Bxg7 Kxg7 18 NgS Nc7 19 Qf4 RfB 20 Qxc7 Qxc7 21 Nxe6 + Kh6 22 Nxc7 ReS 23 Ne6 RfS 24 g4 1-0. .

.

.

. .

Pinter - Bi lek , B u d apest 1975: I e4 c6 2 d4 dS 3 Nd2 g6 4 Ng f3 Bg7 5 h3

Nh6 6 Bd3 f6 (6...0-0 7 0-0 aS 8 a4 Na6 9 Rei and White stood a little better, Tukmakov-Spassky, M osco w 1 97 1 ) 7 0-0 0-0 8 Rei Nf7 9 Qe2 e6 10 c4 (this highlights the difference bet-

Geller-Botvinnik, Moscow 1967: I e4 c6 2 d4 dS 3 Nd2 g6 4 -Bd3 Bg7 (4 . . dxe4 5 Nxe4 Qxd4 6 Bd2 and .

-91 -

THE MODERN DEFENCE

D: Tbe 3 c4 System

White has a lead in development) 5 c3 dxe4 6 Nxe4 Bf5 7 Nc5!? b6 8 Nb3 (8 Bxf5 bxc5) 8... Bxd3 9 Qxd3 Nf6 10 Nf3 0-0 II 0-0 Qc7 12 Rei with a min­ imal advantage for White.

1 2 3

e4 d4 c4l

g6 c6?l

Andersson-Benko, Palma de Mallorca 1971: I e4 g6 2 d4 Bg7 3 Nf3 c6 4 Be2 d5 5 Nbd2 dxe4?! (5... Bg4!? deserves attention) 6 Nxe4 Bg4? (6...Nd7 was essential) 7 c3 Nd7

With this move, White builds up a powerful pawn centre and puts a question mark over the whole of Black's strategy. 3 c4! is only strong because after ...c6, Black cannot transpose into the King's Indian which requires .. .c5. The Gurgenidze set-up is even more dubious in the sequence I d4 g6 2 c4 c6?! 3 Nc3 Bg7 4 e4 d5, e.g. Hort-Cardoso, Las Palmas 1975: 5 e5 dxc4? 6 Bxc4 Nh6 7 h3! Nf5 8 Nf3 b5 9 Bb3 h5 10 Ne4 Na6 II Neg5! e6 12 a4 b4 13 Ne4 (strategically the game has already been decided in view of Black's weak dark squares on his king-side) l3 . Qa5 14 Bg5 c5 15 Nf6+ Kf8 16 d5! Hh6 17 Bxh6+ Rxh6 18 0-0 Qd8 19 Qcl Kg7 20 Rdl Qe7 21 d6 Qd8 22 Ng5 Bd7 23 Bc2 Rh8 24 Bxf5 gxf5 25 h4 Bc6 26 Rd3 Rh6 27 Rg3 Rg6 28 Nxe6 + fxe6 29 Rxg6 + 1-0.

8 Nfg5! Bxe2 9 Qxe2 (White nov. sud­ denly threatens 10 Nd6 + and 10 Nxfi is also in the air) 9... Ndf6 10 Bf4 (maintaining the threat of Nd6 + and obtaining the better game. 10 Nxfi? fails to 10... Kxfi II Ng5 + Ke8 12 Ne6 Qd7 13 Nxg7 + Kfi and Black wins a piece) 10 ... Nxe4 I I Nxe4 Kf8 12 0-0 Nf6 13 Nc5 b6 14 Nd3 ReS 15 Rfel e6 16 Radl and White holds all the trump cards (see Instructive Game No. 19).

. .

Summing up, 3 Nd2 is well worth attention as it sets Black new prob­ lems . However, more practical examples are needed before a definit­ ive judgement can be made.

Olafsson-Cardoso, Las Palmas 1975: 5 e5 Be6 6 cxd5 (perhaps if -92-

GURGENIDZESYSTEM

5

Olafsson had known about the main

line: he would have tried Tal's pawn �crifice here) 6... Bxd5 7 Nge2 Nh6 8 Nxd5 Qxd5 9 Nc3 Q d 7 lO Bc4 Nf5 11 Be3 b5 12 Bb3 Na6 13 0-0 0-0 14 a4 b4 15 Ne4 Rad8 16 Ng5 Nc7 17 Qf3 Nd5 I!! Qe4 e6 19 Radl Bh6? 20 Bel

Nb6

Nc3

Tal now led the game into tactical

paths as follows:

6 7

Nde7? 21 g4! Nxd4

8e6

b4 Nh3

Sacri ficing

a

pawn,

although

7

cxd5 Bxd5 8 Nh3 would also give

White some advantage.

7 8

Nf4

9

b3! ?

dxc4 Bd5

22 Nf3 (winning a piece) 22...Qc7 23 Rxd4 Bxcl 24 Rxcl and White won in a

few more moves. During the

Las

Palmas tourna­

ment, Petros1an asked me one even­ ing whether· 4 ... d5 in this line was dubious for a more obvious reason.

This is correct as, with White's knight on c3 and Black's bishop on

clear, White opens up the a3-f8 diag­

g7, White can immediately obtain a

onal and plays for mate.

The point of the sacrifice is now

superior ending by 5 exd5 cxd5 6 Nxd5 c:6 7 Nc3 Bxd4 (7...Qx d4 8 whatever Black plays, inferior position.

cxb3

9 10 11

Qxd4 Bxd4 9 NbS!) 8 N g e 2 when, he has the

axb3 Bd3

e6

Nf5

Tal considers that Black should

dS

3 We

now

follow

the

have given up a piece for three pawns by l l . . . Bxg2 12 Nxg2 Qxd4 with

unclear pos i tion .

game Tal­

Zilbershtein, U.S.S.R. 1974.

4

eS

12 13

Bg7 -93 -

Bxf51 Bal

exf5 Bfl

an

THE MODERN DEFENCE

14 15

Bxf8 Qdll

18 19 20 21

Kxf8 Be6

I S hS was no better as White wins by 16 Ncxd5 cxd5 17 Qb4 + Qe7 18 Qxe7 + Kxe7 19 NxdS + followed by Nb6. . . •

16

Rdl

22

Qe7

White defends against dS , but his pieces are so passively placed that he cannot hold out for long .

Rh3

cxdS BxdS QxeS + Qd6

Or 2 1 . . . Qg7 22 Nc 7! Nxc7 23 Qd8 + mates .

l3

17

dS NfxdS NxdS Re3

Qc3 Nc7!

f6 1-0

Tai-Zilbershtein, U.S. S.R. 1974.

Na6 In conclusion, it appears that I o4 g6 2 d4 c6? 3 c4! gives White a good garile with more space and prospects of a king-side attack.

- 94 -

G U RGEN1DZE SYSTEM

Instructive Game N o . 1 6 10 11

W hite: Mukhin Black: Gurgenidze

Nf3 Bel

Bg4

e6

Ri_ga 1975 I 1 3

4

e4 d4 NcJ Bf4

c6

d5 g6 Nf6? 1

If we compare this posltlon with variation A: I e4 c6 2 d4 d5 3 Nc3 g6 4 e5 Bg7 5 f4 h5 6 Nf3 Bg4, there are three reasons why Black has a very satisfactory game; (a) the bishop is better placed on f8 than on g7 , (b) White's queen-side is already weak­ ened, and (c) Nb6 preparing for Nc8e7-fS has already been played.

Gurgenidze is fond of the Nf6-h5-

g7 manoeuvre, and now wins a tempo by attacking the bishop on f4. The position is a matter of taste, but I bel­ ieve that his greater space gives White the better -chances. The problem is how to continue in the middle-game which is very complicated.

5 6 7 8

eS Bel Qdl f4? 1

11 13 14 15 16

b3

Na4 c4 Bfl

NcB Ne7 NefS b4

Rfel?

White begins to play aimlessly.

NbS Ng7 Nd7

16 17 18 19

This is a very committing move; 8 Bh6 ! ? comes into consideration.

8 9

0-0

10 21

Nb6 bS

Rab 1 cS Bel B fl Bel

Be7 Nb6 N bS N fS Nh6

White would be satisfied with a

-

95

-

THE MODERN DEFENCE

11 11

13 14

Rb1 Qcl QxeJ

25 16

Nc3 Bell

b4

Rbb8 Rxa1 Ra3

StrategicaUy the game is now over, there are a lot of tactics hidden in the endgame, which is o f great interest. bu t

interesting

36

Rb3 Kfl

37

Kg8 Qf8!

38

Rc7 Rd7

39

QxfJ

40

.•

Nel

Rxc6 Bel

35

The f4 pawn is now very weak 27 l8

Rc1

34

Bf5 Ng4 NxeJ Kfll

The start of another manoeuvre.

axb4

32 33

draw, but Black finds a way to improve his position.

Ral + Ra6 Bd8 B:dl Raxb6

Black wins a pawn, but still needs to play very carefully to win.

Qb6 b61

41

g4 hxg3 Rbl

42

43

hxg3 + Ra61

After 43 g4, Black wins by 43 . . . Ra2! 44 Bb 1 Rxe2 + 45 Qxe2 Nxf4!

43 44

Bb3 Kgl

4S

45 g4? would lose immediately of 45 . . . Bh4 + 46 Kg2 Ng3 ! 47 Nxg3 Rc3.

Black now has much the better game . 29 30

31

Bel Bd3

Rebl

because

Bg4 Kg7 aS!

Bb6

4S 46

Qg4

46 g4? still does not work because o f 46. . Rc3! 47 Nxc3 Nxf4 + 48 Kg3 Rxb3! 49 Rxb3 g5 ! 50 Qd l bxc3 5 1 Rx b6 c2 ! and Black wins.

The 'bishop on e7 comes into play at j ust the right moment.

- 31

Rc8 Ra3

.

cxb6?

46

32 a3 offered more resistance.

47 - 96 -

Rb7

Rc6 Qbl

GURGENIDZE SYSTEM

48

Bxd5

The start combination. 49 SO

of

NxgJ Kfl

a

decisive

Rcl +

If SO Kf3 then SO . Rc3 wins. .

so 51 52 53

.

QxgJ QfJ

Nxg3 + exd5 Rhll

Rxb6

0.1

White

lost

on

ti me.

After

SJ . . . Rh l + S4 Ke2 Rxb l wins. One 48

•••

feels that Black calculated this ending better than a computer!

Rxgl + l

- 97 -

THE MODERN DEFENCE

Instructive Game N o . 1 7 Wblte: Tlmosbcbenko

13

Bel

13

...

Black: Bronstein

U . S. S.R. 1973 1 1 3 4 5 6 7 a 9

10

e4 d4 Nf3

&6 Ba7 c6

Nc3 b3 e5 Nxe4 N as

Nf6 Ne4 dxe4 c5

dS

� f57 1

lk4 e6

Only Bronstein would play a move like this, and on move 13 he makes an even more bizarre move. As we have already seen, IO . . . f6 is quite playable.

Nc6T I

A surprising move . If now 14 dxc6 then 14 . Bxe6 I S Nh6 + Kh8 with the threat of Rd8 and Black has com­ pensation for his piece. There is an old saying in chess - to be original is to lose many games. In my opinion 14 dxc6 Bxe6 I S NgS I R fd8 ( 1S .Rad8 16 Nxe61 Rxd l + 17 Bxd l wins for VVhite) 1 6 Qxd8 + Rxd8 17 Nxe6 leads to an advantage for White, as a rook and two bishops are stronger than a queen and two pawns. . .

. .

14 15

11

dS

n

Nn

b5 Qb6

bxa4

Adventurous, but it would have been better to have played more pro­ saically. Stronger was 1 S dxc6 Bxe6 16 NgS Rfd8 17 Qxd8 + Rxd8 18 Nxe6 and White has the upper hand.

Another unclear continuation is 12 . Rx f7 13 exf7 + Kxf7 1 4 Be2 ( 14 d6 + e6 ! ) 14 . . c4 I S a4 c3 ! ? with an unclear game. .

a4 b4?

.

.

15

- 98 -

.

..

Nd4

GU RGE N I DZE·SYSTEM

16 17

aS I axn

Rxa4 bS

This was an implicit draw offer, which was refused by Timoshchenko to his own cost.

The situation has now cleared a lillie, and Black has good compensa­ uon for the exchange. 18 19 20

exn +

Kxn

Bc4

Bd71 NbS

c3

l6

White plays on hoping to win and later loses. How many times this has happened in the annals of chess!

l6 27

But not 20 Bxa4? because of 2 1 Qxa4 and the knight o n d4 h as no retreat square. . . .

l1

l8

29

lJ l4 l5

Rill 0-0 Be3

Qd Bf4 Qe3

8e5

Rgl Bf6

White can still be satisfied with his position, as Black now has to prevent Qa7 .

Bel

21 Qb3? is not possible because of 21 . . . Rb8 22 Be2 Nxc3 1 with the better game for Black .

l1 ll

Rd1

29 30

31

Nd6 a4 c4 Qb3

Qg3 Be57

Ral Nb7

With both sides in time-trouble, White is the first to go astray. After the correct 3 1 hxg6 + ! h xg6 32 BeS I Black would have been Hl trouble.

Qal l

The game is still finely balanced. 25 Qxb3 cxb3 26 Raa 1 BbS has no fears for Black.

31

...

Now the black position i s very solid.

32

b6 7

This move is too optimistic, and loses the game since Black now wins a piece. It was necessary to play 32 Bxf6 Kxf6 33 f4 with an unclear out­ come, e.g. 3 3 . . .exO 34 QxO Nd6.

32 33 34 35

QbS - 99 -

BhS + Bxf4 Qxf4

f4 1 )(fl gxf4 Nd61

THE MODERN DEFENCE

36

37

g4 g5

42 43

Kg8 Bb8

44

45

The only square, but a good one .

46 38

39 40

41

g6 Bxf6 Bxe4 Qxe4

bxg6 Bf6 Nxe4 Kb8

47 48 49

Kbl Qe3 Rd4 Ral Qxd4 + Rei cxd4 0-1

Qb6 Qd6 Rf8 Bxd4 Qf6 Qxd4 Rf51

An exciting game ! White b now los t .

�

Important Booklet of Recent Modern Defence Games W e a t R . H . M . appreciate the su pport you a r e g i v i n g our

efforts to publish the fi nest i n chess literature. To show ou r appreci ati o n , we want to send you a free booklet, contai ning a collection of important and instructive recent games i n this openi n g , which we prepared after this book was pri nted . To receive your copy-there is no charge or obli gati on­ j u st send you r name and address as follows :

U.S., Canada, Mexico, Puerto Rico:

Europe and elsewhere:

MODERN DEFENCE

MODERN DEFENCE AFC-R. H . M . Europe Neugasse 28, CH-6300 Zug , Switzerland

R . H . M . Press 4 1 7 Northern Boulevard Great Neck , New York 1 1 021

- 1 00 -

GURGENIDZE SYSTEM

Instructive Game N o . 1 8 White: Suetin Black: Gurgenidze

20

N a6

White still has the edge. However, it is extremely difficult to make real progress with the passed a-pawn and Black has a considerable amount of counterplay. To handle this middle­ game correctly calls for real chess artistry.

Oaugavpils 1 974 1 e4 2 d4 3 Nd2 4 Ngf3 5 h3 6 Bd3 7 cJ 8 0-0 9 Ret 10 e5

buS

c6 d5 g6 Bg7 Nd7 N f8?1 Nf6 Ne6

21 22

0-0

Rabl Nal

Qa7

The first step towards exchanging the blockading piece on a6.

Ne8

21

••.

Rabl

22 . . . c5 would be premature because of 23 dxc5 ! Rxc5 24 R.xc5 Qxc5 25 Re i and White wins the pawn on d5. 23

Rxb8? 1

Better was 23 Nc2 ! Rxbl 24 Rxbl Rb8 25 Rxb8 + Nxb8 26 Qb3 ! keep­ ing the advantage. 23 24 25

White has more space, while Black's position is very elastic.

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

b4 a4 cxb4

Nxb8 Nd71 Bf8

a5

axb4

Black organizes his defensive resources very well. 25 . . . c5 ? ! would again be inferior as White has the better game after 26 dxcS QxcS 27 Nb4 Nxe5 28 NxeS Bxe5 29 QxdS .

N8c7

NbJ

b6

Bd2

Ba6 Qd7

Qc2 Ree l a51 Q�d3

Rbl Ncl

Rfct. 2.6

BxdJ buS ·

27 - 1 01 -

Ral

Nb4

Nbl

THE MODERN DEFENCE

27

a6

27 . . . c5 !

leads to equality after dxc5 Nxc5 29 Qxd5

28

Nbxa6. 27

21

Q b3

29

NdJ BgS?I

30

...

31

Qc2

Qt:7

J4

Nd8 e6 Na6

35 J6 37

J8

Changing his general strategy, White turns his forces against the enemy king. White cannot make any progress on the queen-side, e.g. , 30 Qb6 Qa8 with the threat of Rb8 . The question is whether 30 h41 7 was bet­ ter than the text. 30

nament . 34 B h6 ! was necessary, and a draw would have ensued after 34 . . . Be7 35 Bg5 BfB .

Rbl N xcS b4

RxaS NxcS RxcS

Rc4

White now has to fight desparately to save himself.

39

bS

b6? 1

Better w as 3 9 . . . Nd4 ! with good winning chances. 40

Rbl cS

QgS

41 41

QeJ

bxg6 + gJ

.Kb7

fxg6

Here the game w as adjo u rn ed . Home analysis showed that White has su fficient counterplay to draw, e.g. , 42 . . . Re4 43 Qb6! Qxb6 44 Rxb6 Rc4 45 Rb7 + Kg8 46 Nh4 . 43 Qb6! is also strong after 42 . . . Bg7 or 42 . . . Be7 . Black sealed another move which also leads to a draw. 43

NgS + I

BcS bxg5

41

32

dxcS

Nc6

Now Black has active counterplay, as Rb5 is a real and obvious threat. White must play sharply on the king­ side.

33 34

Qd1 Bf6?

Rb5

A lack of objectivity may be disas­

trous not only for the result of a single game but also for a whole tour- 102 -

44

QxgS

Bf8

45

.Kgl

46

Bxe7 Qxe7 + R b7 Rxe7 +

Ne7 Qxe7 Bxe7

47 48 49 50 51 51 53

Rxe6 + ReB fJ Rxe5 +

54

Kn

55 56

Kel

57

f4 pf4

g5 .Kg6 KfS Re4 Rxe5 Kxe5

Kd4 .Kc3 pf4

Yl· Yl

GURGE N I DZE SYSTEM

Instructive Game N o . 1 9 Whitr: Andersso n Black: Benko

White now stands much better .

8

...

Bxel

Palma de Mallorca 1 97 1

1 2 3 4 5

e4 d4 Nf3 Bel Nbdl

8 . . . Bf5 was no better because of 9 Qb3 !

g6 Bg7

9 10

c6

dS dxe4? 1

This move is often made without deep thought , but its consequences are often dramatic. Better is 5 . . Bg4 6 c3 e6 following lines similar to the closed variation of the Caro-Kann. .

6

Nxe4

c3

Ndf6

A very strong move. White is in no hurry, and now has the simple threat of I I Nd6 + , which forces the black king to move. 10 Nxn? ! would have been premature as after 10 . . . Kxn 1 1 NgS + Ke8 1 2 Ne6 Qd7 1 3 Nxg7 + Kn the black knight is trapped.

Ba4? 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Better was 6 . . . Nd7 7 0-0 Ngf6.

7

Qx.el Bf41

Nd7?

Black still does not sense any danger, else he would have played 7 . Bxf3 with a somewhat inferior game.

Nxe4 Nxe4 0.0 Nc5 Nd3 Rfel Rad1

Kfl Nf6 b6 Rei e6

. .

I

Another strong continuation was 1 6 NeS Qe8 17 a4 ! opening up the a­ file, but Andersson has another plan in mind.

N f&5l - 103 -

THE MODERN DEFENCE

16

17

••.

Ne5

31 Jl 33

)(gl Qe8

N (lt of course 17 . . . Nd77 1 8 Nxfi l and Whi te wins. II 19

b6 Nd7

20 ll

c4 Rd3

Qf3

n 23 l4 25

Bxe5 Qell Qxc4

b5 Nxe5 Qd7 bxc4 D7

RaJ!

IMI

33 34 35 36

.

37 31 39 40

41 41

115?

Natural, but it would have been better to have played 2S . . . BxeS followed by Rd8 . Black: would still be worse, but would not have lost

43 44

material.

47

26

l7

Qc51 Rxe5

45

46 48 49

Bxe5

50 51 51 53

Threatening 28 RxhS + I winning a

pawn .

17 21 l9 lO

lba7 lhe7 Qd

a3 lb.c6 Qxc6

Ral Ra6 lb.c6 Qxd4

Black could have resigned here the queen endgame is totally lost.

pressure.

. .

&3

)(b7 Qdl

Why not 33 b 5 ! winning at once? Andersson is sometimes too careful.

Black is still not out of danger, as White keeps up the positional 25

b4 ReS

54

55

)(g7 Rc7 Qxc7 Rei

56

57

5I

- 104 -

)(gl Qc5 bS )(bl

kgl bxgS QeJ )(bl

)(xaJ )(b4

)(g4 )(f5 Qxe5 Qf4 )(g4 b6

Qf3 )(f4 QeJ Qe4 + b7 1(15

e5 Qd3 Qe4 + Qf3 g5 b4 Qdl + bxgl + Qa l + Qbl + Qal + QdS Qf3 + QxaJ QbJ Qd l + Qa t + Qc l + Qcl )(g7 Qc l + 1-0

as

Addenda Edmar Mednis

This section has two major object­ ives. First, to add important recent instructive games to the sections excellently covered by Grandmaster Hort. Second, to present important variations which for reasons of space could not appear in the frrst part. So that the information is of greatest practical benefit, these variations are also presented through the medium of instructive games. The new varia­ tions are the A verbakh (3 c4. d6 4 Nc3 - games 23-25), the Pseudo-Austrian (3 Nc3 d6 4 f4 - games 26-28) and Geller's Quiet Line (3 Nf3 d6 4 c3 game 29).

A statistical count of the results of the ten games discussed shows that White won six, Black none and there were four draws. I ask the "Blacks'' not to be alarmed and discouraged, as the above result is more of a statis­ tical fluke than anything else. Using the criteria of timeliness and over-all instructiveness for selecting the instructive games, the game results happened to turn out the way they did. However, as the readers will learn from the game annotations, plenty of practical and theoretical information is presented which shows how Black can do better.

- 105 -