Analyse to Win

Byron Jacobs

B. T. Batsford Ltd, London

First published 1997 © Byron Jacobs 1997

ISBN 0713478047

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data. A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, by any means, without prior pennission of the publisher.

Typeset by First Rank Publishing, Brighton and printed in Great Britain by Redwood Books, Trowbridge, Wilts for the publishers, B. T. Batsford Ltd, 583 Fulham Road, London SW6 5BY

To Emily.

ABA TSFORD CHESS BOOK Editorial Panel: Mark Dvoretsky, Jon Speelman Commissioning Editor: Paul Lamford General Manager: David Cummings

Contents

Bibliography 4

Preface 5

Introduction 7

1 Accurate Attack 13

2 Decisive Defence 41

3 Energy in the Endgame 69

4 Material versus the Initiative 97

5 Tough Decisions 120

• • Bibliography

100 Master Games of Modern Chess Dr. S. Tartakower & 1. Du Mont (Dover 1975) 500 Master Games of Chess Dr. S. Tartakower & 1. Ou Mont (Dover 1975) Aron Nimzowitsch: Master of Planning Raymond Keene (Batsford 1974) The Art of Defence in Chess Lev Polugaevsky & lakov Damsky (Pergamon 1988) Capablanca's Best Games Harry Golombek (Batsford 1996) The Caro-Kann Advance Byron Jacobs (The Chess Press 1997) Chess at the Top Anatoly Karpov (Pergamon 1984) Chess: The Adventurous Way Jan Timman (Interchess BV 1994) Dynamic Chess Strategy Mihai Suba (Pergamon 1991) Elista Diaries Anatoly Karpov & Ron Henley (R&D Publishing 1996) Fighting Chess Garry Kasparov, Jon Speelman & Bob Wade (Batsford 1995) Fire On Board Alexei Shirov (Cadogan 1997) The Games of Robert J. Fischer Robert Wade & I<.evin O'Connell (Batsford 1972) Grandmaster Achievement Lev Polugaevsky (Cadogan 1994) A Guide to Attacking Chess Gary Lane (Batsford 1996) H 0. T. Chess Paul Motwani (Batsford 1996) The King-Hunt William Cozens & John Nunn (Batsford 1996) Marshall's Best Games o/Chess Frank 1. Marshall (Dover 1960) My 60 Memorable Games Bobby Fischer (Faber & Faber 1972) My Best Games of Chess 1908-1937 Alexander Alekhine (Dover 1985) My Best Games of Chess 1935-1957 Vassily Smyslov (Dover 1972) My Best Games of Chess 1905-1954 Savielly Tartakower (Dover 1985) New Ideas in the Queen's Gambit Accepted Glenn Flear (Batsford 1994) The Oxford Companion to Chess David Hooper & Kenneth WhyJd (0. U.P. 1992) Paul Keres: The Quest for Perfection Paul Keres & John Nunn (Batsford 1997) Positional Play Mark Dvoretsky & Artur Yusupov (Batsford 1996) Secrets of Chess Tactics Mark Dvoretsky (Batsford 1992) Secrets o/Grandmaster Chess John Nunn (Batsford 1997) Secrets o/Spectacular Chess Jonathan Levitt & David Friedgood (Batsford 1995) The Sorcerer's Apprentice David Bronstein & Tom Furstenberg (Cadogan 1995) Taimanov's Selected Games Mark Taimanov (Cadogan 1995) Test Your Chess IQ: Grandmaster Challenge August Livshits (Cadogan 1993) Trainingfor the Tournament Player Mark Dvoretsky & Artur Yusupov (Batsford 1993) Winning at Correspondence Chess Tim Harding (Batsford 1996) Winning with the French Wolfgang Uhlmann (Batsford 1995) World Cup Chess Lubomir Kavalek (Bloomsbury 1990)

British Championship 1995 (Swansea) Bulletin; British Chess Magazine; Chess Mail Magazine; Correspondence Chess Magazine; New in Chess Magazine; Sahovski In/ormator

Preface

'How can I improve at chess?'

'In my games, I often get very good or even winning positions, but I always find it very difficult to finish them off. What can I do about this?'

'I play quite well, but I always seem to overlook something im­portant. What do you think I should do?

In my experience, the above are typical of the questions that chessplayers almost never ask, either rhetorically, or in the hope of receiving a useful reply. The following are more familiar:

'[ was all over him. [ had a huge attack, his pieces were playing on another board. And then, he had this ridiculous defence - it ."hould never have existed. How could I be so unlucky?'

'What should White play after 20 ... 'ii' b4 in that currently fash­ionable line of the Poisoned Pawn variation of the Sicilian Naj­dorf?'

'Whose round is it?'

The latter set of questions (with the possible exception of the last one) have marginal relevance to improving one's play. Of course openings are important and top grandmasters will spend many hours studying them. However, I suspect that the 99.99% of players who exist lower down the chess evolutionary spectrum expend far too much time looking at openings to the detriment of other areas of their game.

In this book I have tried to isolate an area where I believe almost aU competitive players could aim to improve - the ability to analyse accurately. The capacity to make sense of complex positions is per­haps related to chess talent, but I believe it is an area of the game

6 Preface

that every enthusiastic player can usefully nurture, rather than re­lying on what nature gave them and studying openings instead.

You could easily spend much of your spare time learning and,~ analysing, for example, the Samisch variation of the King's Indian Defence and you might get to play this line in one game in ten. However, in virtually aJl your games, there will be critical moments when it is essential to analyse the position accurately. It may be in order to find a clever combination that successfully concludes an attack, an accurate defence to hold the balance in a difficult posi­tion' or a finesse in an endgame. I believe that developing and honing this skill will reap greater practical rewards than looking for subtle improvements on move 20 of an obscure opening variation.

In this book I have tried to give examples of situations where a critical moment has arisen and an accurate analysis of the position can immediately affect the result. If you are serious about wanting to develop this area of your game, I would suggest that you set the positions up on a board and spend some time trying to work them out. Do not be discouraged if your attempts do not, at first, correlate with the analysis given. Some of the positions are very difficult and have defeated even the strongest players. The important lessons are to get into the habit of noticing when critical moments arise and to develop a logical structure to your analysis in order to deal with them successfully.

The classic text to emphasise the importance of analysis of variations is Alexander Kotov's Think Like a Grandmaster, which I would heartily recommend to any aspiring player. My aim here is to expand on some of Kotov's themes and give the reader practice in identifying and analysing those situations where accurate calcula­tion is most vital.

If you enjoy reading Analyse to Win and want to pursue this theme further, then similar positions can be found in almost all game collections as well as the thrice yearly publication Informator. Less useful as sources for material are magazines, as these tend, understandably, to concentrate on brilliancies and combinations. Play through the games, find the critical moments and then try to work them out. You may be surprised at how much easier you will find it to analyse complex positions when they next arise in your games.

Byron Jacobs, Brighton,

November 1997

Introduction

Visualising Victory Why does a good player beat a weaker player? There are, of course, many possible reasons: knowledge of an opening trick, n better understanding of a mid­dlcgame theme, greater tactical sharpness, more sensible use of t he clock, better concentration, stronger detennination, elimi­nation of blunders, etc, etc - the list is endless.

However, I would suggest that there is an important ele­ment to winning at chess which has rarely been discussed in hooks or magazine articles. This is the ability to recognise the key moments in the game and find the best continuations. Many players are capable of huilding up promising positions hy good positional play. There will then usually come a mo­ment when the opportunity arises to convert this promising position to either a very good or a winning position. Good play­ers will usually recognise this moment and spot the opportu­nity. Less strong players will be

oblivious to this key moment and let the chance slip by. They may well retain a modest ad­vantage, but the opportunity to build upon it has been missed. Evgeny Bareev sums this up well in his contribution to the book Positional Play by Dvoretsky and Yusupov: 'In games there are key moments on which much will depend. You either find the right plan and seize the initiative, or fail to solve the problems and find yourself being trampled on. ' Perhaps 'being trampled on' is an exaggeration, but spotting the critical moments and acting upon them is a key concept for improving one's game.

Spotting such opportunities is tricky as there is no obvious indicator that something is to be found. There is no caption pointing the way with 'White to play and win', or 'Can you find the saving resource?' There are any number of books that con­centrate on finding such win­ning combinations. Some of these books even have ranking

8 Introduction

systems, so that you can try to solve the puzzles in set amounts of time and then gauge your playing strength according to the speed and accuracy of your answers. I have often found my­self looking through such books and intoning, 'Queen takes pawn check ... check ... check ... check ... aaahh, mate. ' Such combinations are not difficult to find: you know there is some­thing in the position and you know it is likely to be a flashy combination - it is probably quite difficult to miss.

Such clear-cut combinations will occasionally crop up in your games, but not all that of­ten. They may decide perhaps 5 % of games, but unfortunately they do not necessarily arise in the other 95%. In this other 95 % - the bulk of competitive chess - the result is usually de­cided by a player spotting a small finesse rather than a sacri­ficial checkmating combination. Consider the following position from a game played by the young Kasparov.

(see following diagram)

Kasparov, playing White, has built a promising initiative at the cost of a pawn. His rook and knight are ready to swing over to the kingside where the black king, short of defenders, is badly exposed. How should he continue?

Kasparov-Ivanov Daugavpils 1978

White to play

If. this were a puzzle in a newspaper or magazine, the answer would be likely to be something like 29 llJxf6 or 29 e5 or a similar flashy continua­tion. Here, however, the prob­lem is more mundane, but it is also the sort of problem which is frequently met over the board and not always solved correctly. The solution does not rely on brilliant insight, but on exam­ining the situation carefully and finding the most accurate con­tinuation.

The future world champion continued with the natural 29 :e3? , after which Black was able to defend, e.g. 29 .. :ii'fS 30 l:.h3 'ilg7 31 llg3 'ilf8 32 llJf4 i..e8! and Black has been al­lowed time to cover his weak­nesses on the kingside.

The game continued 33 llJe6 'ikf7 and now 34 ~g 1 (34 :tg7

"xg7 35 tlJxg7 rJ;;xg7 would It~BVe only Black with winning dlances).

Kasparov's last move set a trap. If Black now tries the plausible 34 ... ..td7? (in the ~ame, Black played 34 ... 1Ih5! and after 35 'ti'xh5 ..txh5 36 %1g7 lte2! he drew without problems) to harry the knight on e6, White wins with the neat 35 t;i)d8 'iWf8 (checking with the rook accomplishes nothing - the white king runs to d 1)

and now the typical wmnmg puzzle move 36 iib6!

I am sure that almost all rea­sonable players would spot 36 'i'h6, but the precise sequence which could have decided the

Introduction 9

game would elude many of them, as it did Kasparov.

Returning to the initial posi­tion:

The solution is the accurate 29 tlJf4! which wins because Black has no defence against the introduction of the white rook into the attack along the third rank. Specifically the knight move prevents the de­fence 29 ... 'ti'f8 (30 tlJg6+) , which turns out to be critical. After 29 tlJf4! Black's tries all fail, e.g. 29 ... i.e8 30 ltJe6 'iWa5 31 'iig3 or 29 ... 'iWe8 30 l.te3 'ilf7 31 :1g3 and Black is help­less against tlJg6+.

It is from a successful han­dling of just such positions that I believe most players would witness a substantial improve­ment in their results and this is the theme I will be concentrat­ing on in the following chapters.

One thing that particularly struck me while writing this book is the extent to which

10 Introduction

older 'pre-computer' analysis is unreliable. We are very lucky nowadays in that we can ana­l yse games on screen and, at the click of a button, obtain an as­sessment from very powerful analytical engines. They are, as yet at least, of little use in quiet positional struggles, but in tac­tical melees, they come into their own. Like little children, they often require a degree of hand-holding to point them in the right direction, but once they get their teeth into a juicy mess they become terrier-like, unwilling to let go until they have extracted all the secrets from the position. Take the following example from the early part of Alekhine's career.

Spielmann-Alekhine Stockholm 1912

Black to play

In the book of his best games, Alekhine asserts that Black has only one way to win this messy

POSItIon, namely 2S ... l2Jf4 26 :ad1 .i.xe1 27 :d7 .i.b4, which was indeed the conclusion.

Alekhine's notes state that 2S ... ltJf4 was the only way to win, dismissing 25 ... :f3 with 26 i.g6+ <t>f8 27 :1f1 :xfl + 28 ':xf1+ .i.f6 29 .i.xf6 gxf6 and 25 ... ltJe7 with 26 llad1 .i.xe1 27 :d7 as now 27 ... .i.b4 runs into 28 .i.xe7 !i.xe7 29 !i.g6+. He also suggests that 27 ... .i.b4 was another accurate move as 27 ... l2Je2+ would be met by 28 cwt?g2 ltf2+ 29 \t>h1 .i.b4 30 :xg7 when 'Black would have to be content with a draw by perpetual check'.

This struck me as a promis­ing candidate for the chapter on defence - the young Alekhine coolly cutting through the com­plications to find the accurate wilUling moves and not being side-tracked by the lure of an instant win of a rook, etc etc.

However, a few moments of computer-assisted analysis re­vealed seri OllS fla ws in these notes, viz: 25 ... l2Je7 26 :ad1 .ixe1 27 :d7

Here, rather than 27 ... J.b4, the simple 27 ... J.f2+ 28 ~g2 %1f6 leaves White utterly lost. I ;urthennore, the game now ~ontinued 25 ... lLlf4 26 ':adl .i.xel 27 :d7 ~b4, and here Alekhine dismissed the alterna­tive 27 ... lLle2+ on account of 28 ~g2 llf2+ 29 cwth 1 ~b4 30 llxg7

which is also some way off the mark as Black actually wins here very easily with 30 ... :fl + 31 ~g2 (31 cwth2 .i.d6+ leads to mate) 31. .. lLlf4+ 32 ~h2 (32 ~xfl e2+ forces a new queen while 32 .i.xf4 :xf4 is also ob­viously hopeless) and now Black can win with almost anything including 32 ... e2, 32 ... lLlxe6 and 32 ... ~f8.

I am in no sense suggesting here that Alekhine was an in­competent analyst - his collec­tions of best games are wonder­ful books that have become classic works. Many of his combinations feature in the ex-

I ntroductio n 11

amples in this book. The choice of this example was random - I could easily have chosen a po­sition by any other well-known player or author. The only point is that it is much easier to be accurate in the era of computer­assisted analysis.

Broadly speaking, I have di­vided the material in this book into the following themes: at­tack, defence, converting an advantage and the endgame. However, I appreciate that this division is somewhat arbitrary. A position from the section on converting an advantage could perhaps easily be in the attack­ing section and I am sure that there are numerous other ways of di viding up the material.

The major theme that I am concentrating on throughout this book is noticing the critical moments in games and anal ys­ing them accurately. In a sense it does not really matter if these moments occur in the opening, middlegame or endgame or whether the positions require an attacking solution or a defen­sive one. However, although pleasingly minimalist, it would be strange to have a book con­sisting entirely of an introduc­tion and only one chapter, so some sort of division has to be made.

1 Accurate Attack

Probably the most clear-cut ex­amples of when accurate calcu­lation is required are those po­sitions when the battle is all but won. A powerful attack has been built up and a winning situation arri ved at. There is now a temptation to relax, con­gratulate yourself on the ex­pected imminent victory and then start daydreaming. You imagine yourself telling all your friends about your wonderful win, seeing the '1' against your name on the sc ore chart , won­dering who you might play in the next round. Maybe you then start thinking about how you are going to annotate the game for a magazine or perhaps for the future collection of your best games. And then you miss something ... and suddenly the 4 l' against your name on the scorechart seems a long way away.

This is obviously not the way to convert your winning posi­tions to full points, but it is very easily done and there cannot be many chessplayers around who

have not yielded to such temp­tations. However, this is a time for self-control. You may have spent hours creating your mas­terpiece, and it does not make much sense to risk ruining it for the want of a few minutes hard concentration. The old adage 'when the win is in sight, sit on the hands' is highly appropriate.

Keeping a cool head Making a mess of a winning position can be very demoral­ising. It is often a severe dent to one's confidence, and such feelings can affect games play­ed on the next day or even later in the tournament. Chess is an unusual game in that it is possi­ble to ruin everything with one small lapse. In a tennis match you can be up by two sets to love and 5-2 in the third. You might lose concentration for a point or two but, as long as you get your act together in time, it is unlikely to be fatal. This sim­ply does not apply in chess. One tiny error can throwaway hours of hard work.

14 Accurate Attack

Let us consider some exam­ples:

Tartakower-Spielmann Vielllla 1913

White to play

Here Tartakower has what logic tells us must be a winning position. True he is a rook down, but he can recapture the bishop on c6 when he will only be the exchange for a pawn down. The exposed situation of Black's king makes it unlikely that he will be able to survive for long. In such a position a knight is hardly less valuable than a rook. The only real re­maining problem is to find an accurate way to finish off - not a straightforward task, as White has various tempting possibili­ties. A casual analysis suggests the following:

a) The simple 26 ifxc6, re­gaining a piece and expecting that the black king will not sur­vive White's attack.

b) 26 'iWg7+ 'iitd6 and now 27 ltJe5, when the black king is horribly exposed and the threats against c6 and f7 appear deci-. stve.

c) 26 'iWc5+, noting that 26 ... %ld6 has disconnected the black rooks and that 27 'iI g5+ looks tenninal.

Maybe they are all good but, more likely, only one of them will win - or at least only one will be completely clear-cut. This is just the kind of position where maximum concentration is called for. We can sense that there ought to be a win, hut Whi~e 's position does not look so overwhelming that anything will he good enough.

A clear head and competent analytical powers reveals the following:

a) 26 'ii'xc6 is okay but unin­spiring. Black can reply with 26 ... 'iWxh2 and White has noth­ing clear.

h) 26 if g7 + at first sight looks very promlslng, e.g. 26 ... <iitd6 27ltJe5

and it looks as if Black doesn't

have a decent move. 27 ... 'ii'xb2 loses immediately to 28 ttJc4+ while 27 ... :hg8 28 ':xc6+ ~d5 lind now 29 "c7, defending the knight and covering the back runk looks tenninal. White is, rffectively, level on material nnd the black king cannot sur­vive long. So, 26 'if g7+ is the nnswer? No! At the end of the previous variation Black has 29 .. .'t'ib 1 +! 30 ltcl 'fixcl + 31 "xcI <iitxe5 and White is better, hut Black has fair chances to secure a draw in the ensuing (~ndgame.

c) 26 'ifc5+!, as played by Tartakower, is the way to go. 26 ... ~d7 27 ttJe5+ and 26 ... ~e8 27 ~xc6+ are obviously hope­less. 26 ... <itrf6 27 'ii' g5+ ~f7 28 l{)e5 + can also be swift! y ex· eluded as a possible defence for Black. We are thus left with 26 ... J:d6 and 26 ... ~f7 as possi­hIe defensive tries. First of all 26 ... ~f7. This can be met by 27 li.Je5+ <itrf6 28 ttJxc6 which is terrible for Black. So the only try is 26 .. J~d6 and now 27 'iWg5+:

Accurate Attack 15

Here everything loses: cl) 27 ... r:Jid7 28 'i'g7+ and a

rook goes with check. c2) 27 ... <itrf8 28 fie5 forking

two rooks is one way to win. c3) 27 ... ~e8 28 jl'e5 and the

fork on the rooks is again deci­sive, the main point being 28 ... l:.g8 29 'ii'xd6 .txf3 30 :'c8+ <itrf7 31 .f4+ mating.

c4) 27 ... ~f7 28 ltJe5+ r:Jie8 29 ttJxc6

with a decisive attack, one line being 29 ... .:xc6 30 ':'xc6 'fial+ 31 ltcl 'ii'xb2 32 ltd1 with a winning attack.

None of this is terribly diffi­cult to calculate but, with the excitement of an imminent victory clouding one's judg­ment, mistakes can easily occur.

Making life difficult One reason why very strong players become very strong is that they are extremely difficult to beat. No matter how terrible their position gets, they con­tinue to find resources and set problems. Finding correct solu­tions to these problems can

16 Accurate Attack

prove very wearing and the ex­pected inuninent victory can often prove to be some way off. A renowned troublemaker in this respect was world cham­pion Emanuel Lasker. Lasker, who was imbued with a tre­mendous fighting spirit allied to a shrewd insight into psychol­ogy, saved an extraordinary number of dreadful positions during his career.

Marshall-Lasker New York 1924

White to play

In this position, after 43 moves of a Slav Defence, the dangerous attacking player Frank Marshall has obtained a highly promising position against the defensive maestro. Material is level, but White can capture the loose black pawn on e6. More to the point, however, is the situation of the kings. Both kings have lost their pawn cover, but the white pieces are

doing by far the better job of shielding their own monarch whilst simultaneously preparing to launch an attack against the opposite number.

However, the familiar prob­lem exists - how to continue? There are many promising can­didate moves such as 44 'iixe6, 44 :h2+ and 44 ltJh6. Which is the most accurate? In the game, Marshall failed to find the cor­rect solution to this problem. He continued with the natural 44 'i'xe6? but after 44 ... :xf1 +! 45 ~xf1 i.b5+

46 :e2 (there is nothing better as the black queen is about to invade) 46 ... i.xe2+ 47 ~xe2 "ii'f7+ 48 "f2 rJ;g7 the wily Lasker had escaped to a play­able endgame which, after fur­ther adventures, he eventually drew.

In fact, this black defensive resource of sacrificing the ex­change on f1 is the key to the position and explains why many· of White's tries fail, e.g. 44 :h2+ ~g7 45 ~xe6? :xfl +! 46 ~xf1 i.b5+, or 44 ltJh6

':xfl+! 45 ~xf1 J..b5+ and White must again interpose the f'(mk as 46 ~g 1 runs into 46 ... iLf4! when the white pieces nre hanging, and he has no good follow up.

The correct continuation, as pointed out by the great tactical ~cnius and world champion Al­l~xander Alekhine, is to sidestep this defence with the simple 44 .i.d3! This creates threats of 45 ~h3+ as well as 45 :h2+ and llh7+. Black has no reasonable defence, e.g. 44 ... 1Wf7 45 :h2+ <Jig8 46 llJg6+ or 44 ... iLh5 45 4Jh6! ':f8 (this is forced) 46 'iWg5

White suddenly has the at­tractive threats of 47 'ii'g8+ and 47 'ilf6+ as well as the more mundane 47 _xh5. Black has no good reply. Not a difficult continuation to find but suffi­ciently tricky to cause Marshall to lose his way. Top players of the era always found wins against Lasker hard to come by and this example perhaps gives an indication of why this was the case.

Accurate Anack 17

Thomas-Unzicker Hastings 1950/51

White to play

In this position, arising after 20 moves of an Evans Gambit (long before it was patronised by Garry Kasparov), the Eng­lish master Sir George Thomas has gambited two exchanges. However, in return, he has a wonderful pair of bishops which are more than a match for Black's donnant rooks. White must now act quickly to bring his attack to a conclusion before Black has time to co-ordinate his forces. This is clearly the critical moment of the game. What is the best way to con­tinue? Two lines of play suggest themselves:

a) 21 "§b4+ with the idea of capturing on b7. White gains material and creates further weaknesses in the black posi­tion (for example, J..b5 be­comes an attractive possibility for White).

18 Accurate Attack

b) 21 'ii'g3 with the powerful threat of 22 "f4+ cite8 23 "'e5+ "'f8 24 i.e6! when the black position becomes de­fenceless.

One of these wins, and the other only draws. Which is the route to victory?

In fact, line 'a' is the correct solution. As Sir George quickly discovered, the problem with 'b' is that after 21. .... d6! 22 'if g4 g6! Black just hangs on, e.g. 23 ~h6+ rj.Ie8 24 "xe4+ ~d7 and now White had to bale out with a draw with 25 .. g4+ <lte8 26 1i'e4+ <ltd7 27 "g4+ "'e8.

The victory could have been achieved with the help of a sub­tle switchback after 21 'iIh4+! "'d6 (21. .. <lte8 22 .xb7 ltc8 23 .xe4+ citf8 24 ~e6! wins) 22 .xb7 :e8

and now 23 .td2! when the threat of 24 ~b4 suddenly ren­ders the black position hopeless, e.g. 23 ... :e7 24 "c8+ l:e8 25 "'f5+ 'i'f6 26 .ib4+ ':e7 27 'i'c8 mate or 23 ..... d8 24 i.b4+ :e7 25 ~xe4

and Black cannot swvive the ravages of the bishops: 25 ... g6 26 ~e6 ~e8 27 ~b5+ <ltf8 28 "f6+ ~g8 29 i.c4+ or 25 .. :ii"d7 26 'i'a8+ 'ii'e8 27 "f3+.

Distracted by brilliancy We all like to win with brilliant combinations but sometimes these can act as a distraction from the business of finishing the game in the simplest and most efficient manner. Consider the following position.

Bronstein-Kotov Moscow 1946

White to play

White has built up a good at­tucking position and the black kingside appears dangerously exposed. However, the white ,(ueen is attacked and retreating will allow Black to make a safe ,'xchange on g5, after which White will have no advantage whatsoever. An imaginative tactical player, being keen to avoid this, will quickly spot the possibility of 21 'iixg7+. The thrill of winning with such a hrilliant idea can be very per­suasive. There cannot be many players who have not gone through a similar thought proc­l~SS to the one that follows:

If I retreat my queen the game will be completely equal, so I might as well examine the queen sacrifice. It does not matter if I spend a lot of time on this possibility as this is clearly a critical moment. Anyway, it looks very promIsIng, e.g. 21 .. /~xg7 22 iLxe 7 + and now if 22 ... ~h6 23 liJf5+! exf5 24 :d4

Now Black's only defence to :lh4 mate is to return the queen with 24 ... 'iWe4 25 liJxe4 but this

Accurate Attack 19

is hopeless as the rook on f8 is still en prise with check.

But what about 22 ... <it;h8?

Now if White moves the knight on d4 then J:txd7 and Ji.f6 mate can follow. Is there a way to exploit this feature of the position? An obvious try is 23 liJf5 after which 23 ... exf5 allows 24 :xd7, but what about 23 ... f6? This seems to hold the black position together as 24 iLxf8 exf5 25 iLg7+ ~g8 leaves White with nothing clear. But what about the idea of 23 liJf5 f624lLJh6!

White introduces new themes of a rook rna te on g8 or a knight mate on f7 and, despite being a queen for a piece ahead, a short

20 Accurate Attack

analysis should convince us that Black cannot organise a good defence. In fact the best that he can do is 24 ..... c7 25 .i.xf8 1i'xg3 26 hxg3 liJxf8 when White is a pawn up with a good position.

However, checking over this we may suddenly notice a flaw in the fonn of 21 'irxg7+ ct;xg7 22 .i.xe7+ ct;h8 23 liJf5 exf5! 24 :xd7 'iW c6, preventing the mate on f6, after which White is certainly not better. Disap­pointed, we settle back to have another look around and re­member that, after 21 'iWxg7+ ct;xg7 22 .i.xe7+ ~h8, White can try a knight move other than 23 liJf5. What about 23liJc6?

It would now be easy to be­come embroiled in variations such as 23 .. .f6 24 liJd8!? (with the point 24 ... .:xd8 25 ~xf6+) or 23 ... 'iixc6 24 :xd7 e5 25 ~xd6 'iixd6 26 i.xd6 when White has a pawn and a strong initiative for the exchange. Un­fortunately, this flight of fancy is convincingly refuted by the reply 23 .. :i'xc6 24 :xd7 h5!

which, in our excitement, we mayor may not spot.

Let's return for a moment to the original position.

If we can haul ourselves away from our deep sea diving after 21 iixg7+ it may suddenly occur to us that there could be another move apart from the retreat of the queen or the queen sacrifice. We may then sud­denly notice that the rather mundane 21 ~h6 actually forces Black's resignation. The calculations after 21 i.h6 do not require any breathing appa­ratus as 21. .. liJxe5 22 ~xg7+ ~g8 23 .i.xe5+ i.g5 24 :xg5 is mate, 21. .. .i.f6 22 i.xg7 + also mates as does 21 .. .f6 22 ~xg7 + <tftg8 23 .i.xf6+.

This example shows how easy it can be to become side­tracked by the possibility of a beautiful finish. However, a further lesson is that it is a good idea to consider all reasonable moves in the initial position before wading into the deep.

Positional features count Finding the direct route to the win is usually, but not always, a 'llicstion of calculating the tac­Iks accurately. You must also he able to tease out the relevant positional ideas. Even in the III idst of the most fearsome tac­Ikal sequences, it is important 10 keep an eye on the strategic dcments of the position. For c"xample, in the earlier Thomas­llnzicker extract, too great an emphasis on the tactical possi­hilities after 21 "iig3 would make it difficult to spot that, after the apparently less direct 21 'iib4+ and 22 "iixb7, the di­agonals towards the black king are fatally weakened, thus al­lowing the decisive regrouping (If the bishop with 23 i.d2.

A similar concept occurs in t he following contemporary win by the world champion.

Kasparov-Lautier Moscow Olympiad 1994

White to play

Accurate Attack 21

Kasparov has built up a very promising attacking position and there are many weaknesses in the blaek position: his king has no free squares, only the black queen prevents -. g7 mate and the back rank is weak. All of these features sound alann bells and suggest that there may well be combinational themes in the air. If this were a puzzle in a magazine, then the solution would surely not be too difficult to find. However, it does not appear immediately obvious that White has a direct route to victory and meanwhile Black is intending to play 27 ... .:g8, ti­dying up his position and cov­ering some of his weaknesses. So, how should White con­tinue?

The world champion found the very clever move 27 1.:h5! after which Black's position is, surprisingly, completely hope­less. The pressure along the fifth rank means that Black is now threatened with 28 ltJg4 and he has no good defence. In the following variations the tactical weaknesses in the black position are very obvious:

a) 27 ... ltJc6 28 ltJg4 fxg4 29 'iig7+! iixg7 30 hxg7+ ~xg7 31 ltxc5. It is hard to imagine in the original position that the rook on c5 could prove to be a tactical weakness.

b) If 27 ... ltJg6 28 l:td8 and Black cannot meet the threat of 29 ltxf8+ and 30 -.d8, e.g.

22 Accurate Attack

28 ... :c6 29 tZJxf5 i.xf5 30 :xf8+ tZJxf8 31 'i'xf5 and White wins easily or 28 ... ~e6 29 tZJg4! fxg4 30 llxf8+ tZJxf8 31 '-xe5 llxe5 32 :xe5.

c) 27 .. J~g8 28 tZJg4! :1xg5 (28 ... 'i'e6 29 lId8 again applies intolerable pressure) 29 tZJxe5 l:txh5 (there is nothing better) 30 nd8+ tZJg8 31 tZJxf7 mate.

The final combination is not too difficult to find, but the move that set it up, 27 .l:h5!, is a very classy one.

Wait! Can you do better? There is a well known adage in chess that when you find a good move you should look for a better one. This advice is dou-

ble-edged. Tournament games are played under time con­straints, and if you find some­thing that looks promising it is often a good idea to play it quickly rather than searching for perfection. This mainly ap­plies when it is clear that noth­ing much is happening in the position and that no one con­tinuation is going to be sub­stantially better than any other. However, when you sense that you are really getting some­where, then accuracy is required if you are hoping to increase your advantage to decisive pro­portions. This is the situation when a good move might not be enough and a really accurate continuation is needed. Con­sider the following position.

Karpov-Hiibner Montreal 1979

White to play

Anatoly Karpov is in the process of conducting one of his

fUlIlous squeezes. His bishop is IIIt1ch superior to his opponent's lind he has made good 'progress ill infiltrating via the c-file. So, how best to continue?

Karpov came up with 39 .c4, which looks very promis­ing. The increased pressure nlong the c-file and a2-g8 di­Ilgonal creates threats of pene­I ration on c7 and possibilities to move the bishop from d5 and invade with the queen on g8. Additionally the obvious re­sponse of 39 ... 'iib5, hoping to exchange queens due to the veiled threat to invade on e2, fails to the tactic 40 ':c7 'ittf8

41 l'lxe7! rl;xe7 42 'ifc7+ rl;e8 43 i..f7 + ~f8 44 i..c4 and White wins.

After 39 'jj'c4 Black seems desperately short of moves. 39 ... ~d8 is possible but then 40 if cS turns up the heat. So was Karpov's plan correct?

Unfortunately not. Hubner defended with the very accurate 39 ... :f61 after which Karpov could find nothing better than 40 ltc7 'iid6 41 h4 :f8 42 11a7.

I

Accurate Auack 23

White was still on top, but after 42 ... hS, his advantage proved insufficient to win.

So, returning to the original position:

Can you do better? If you found the idea of 39

:g8+ ~h7 40 ':xg6, then you will eventually emerge a pawn up in an endgame. Capturing the rook obviously loses the black queen to a discovered check, but Black has 40 ... ltd6!, when White has nothing better than 41 :xd6 • xd6 and he still needs to work hard for the win.

In fact this is a position where, having found the prom­ising 39 .c4 and then the better 39 ':'g8+ ~h7 40 ltxg6, you need to sit on your hands one more time in order to find the crushing 39 ltg8+ ~h 7 40 'if e3!

(see following diagram)

Now it's all over. The twin threats of 41 .xb6 and 41 :h8+ are impossible to meet.

24 Accurate Attack

The best Black can do is 40 ... :e6 but then 41 i.xe6 (41 %la8 may be slightly more accu­rate, but it doesn't much matter - White no longer needs to sit on his hands to win the posi­tion) 41. .. 1i'xe6 42 ':a8 and White will win easily.

See how you get on with the following positions. Rather like a real game of chess, they are a complete mixed bag, and in no particular order. The only link­ing thread is that it is obvious that one side is doing very well and there is a clear cut con­tinuation which increases this advantage decisively. However, it might be a positional idea, a tactical idea or a combination of the two. They are also not in order of difficulty. During a game you do not get a hint that you can win if you find, for ex­ample, a difficult tactical idea, so I will not offer any such signposts here. However, I will identify the main ideas in the position and leave you to work out which ones work, which don't, and why not.

Exercises

Position 1 Vanheste-Nijboer

Groningen 1991

White to play

This position occurred after 28 moves of a King's Indian Defence. White is material down, having only a rook against knight, bishop and pawn. However, his forces are very active and the dark squares in Black's kingside are particu­larly weak. How should White proceed?

a) 29 gxf4, in order to open up the g-file for a further ave­nue of attack against the black king.

b) 29 • d 1, swinging the queen over towards the kingside and gaining time by hitting the knight on h5.

c) 29 :txf7 ~xf7 30 l1h6, at­tacking the knight and h-pawn after which White has a WUl­

ning attack.

d) 29 :f6, forcing the reply 1<J ... liJxf6 30 'iixf6 and Black is unable to defend his position.

Position 2 Broadbent-Aitken

London 1948

White to play

After 23 moves, White has built up a promising position with good central control and play on the kingside. Black has just played his knight in to b4 in an attempt to force exchanges and free himself. How should White respond?

a) The dramatic 24 e5, plan­ning to bring the d2-knight to e4 and developing a vicious attack.

b) 24 lle3, intending to ferry the rook across to the kingside when Black's position will soon come under too much pressure.

c) 24 liJf4, aiming at the weak e6 and g6-squares.

d) The combinational 24 liJxf6, breaking into Black's position.

Accurate Attack 25

Position 3 Kasparov-Roizman

USSR 1978

White to play

In this position White has opened up the e- and f-files to­wards his opponent's king and his play along these avenues gives him a big advantage. A further important feature of the position is the exposed pawn on h5. However, Black is not with­out chances: his pressure against g2 from his bishop and rooks gives him hope of turning the tables. What is White's best way to proceed?

a) Immediate action with 22 g4, meeting 22 ... hxg4 with 23 hS.

b) Regrouping with 22 liJg3 attacking the h-pawn and also introducing the possibility of liJf5.

c) The subtle retreat 22 .f3, eyeing the h-pa wn.

d) 22 c4, meeting 22 ... dxc3 with 23 liJxc3, intending to

26 Accurate Attack

dislodge the strong black bishop on dS, after which White's at­tack along the e- and f-files will be decisive.

Position 4 Lane-Adams

London (Lloyds Bank) 1993

White to play

In this position Michael Ad­ams, one of the world's top ten players has, very uncharacteris­tically, made a complete hash of the opening. You don't get too many chances to win Quickly against one of the world's strongest players but fmding the right continuation here will en­able you to do so.

White is a pawn ahead and has a big attack looming on the kingside. There are only two sensible ways for White to play:

a) 19 i.xf7+ b) 19~5 One wins, the other doesn't.

It's the usual problem. Which is which?

Position 5 Canal-J obner Carlsbad 1929

White to play

Opposite coloured bishops positions are well known for being drawish when nothing much is going on, but do heav­ily favour the attacking player if one side has the initiative. The defence can often seem to be playing a piece down. This is just such a position. White has excellent chances against the black kingside which has been weakened by the advances of the g- and h-pawns. Which of the following summarises the best way forward for White:

a) 24 e5 is very powerful. Black cannot capture this pawn due to 25 llf8+.

b) There is no immediate at­tacking win for White so he should be content to grab the b­pawn with 24 .dS+. With an extra pawn and a good position, White will win easily.

c) White must activate the only piece of his that is not pulling its weight - the rook on a 1. Therefore building up with 24 :afl is best.

d) White needs to relocate his bishop to a more useful diago­nal and should thus play 24 .i.b3+.

Position 6 Taimanov-Fischer Buenos Aires 1960

White to play

Here Taimanov has the great Bobby Fischer in serious trou­ble. Black has just played 18 ... lLlf3+ and after White re­captures, he will have to move his queen. White will then have chances to damage the black position by capturing on f6 and perhaps pursuing the black queen. However, White has a critical decision to make which could well affect the outcome of the game. Should he recapture with the pawn or the queen?

Accurate Attack 27

Position 7 Botvinnik-Euwe

Moscow 1948

White to play

This position should favour White as the black king is so exposed and his pawns rather scattered. However, it is the kind of position which can eas­ily turn in Black's favour ( especially in an endgame) as he has his own potential pluses in the fonn of strong central pawns and a powerful minor piece. The key element in this position is the initiative. White has active pieces and it is his move. He must make the most of his chances with an immedi­ate strike. How can he achieve this?

a) 22 lLlf3, keeping the initia­tive by hitting the Black d­pawn.

b) 22 ltJg4, attacking the f6-pawn.

c) The tricky 22 ltJg6, eyeing the rook and meeting the cap-

28 Accurate Attack

ture 22 ... hxg6 with 23 iYxg6+ <itf8 (anything else loses the rook) 24 "'xf6+ with a power­ful attack.

d) Something else.

Position 8 Botvinnik-Smyslov

Moscow 1958

White to play

Here White is a pawn down and his queenside is a complete mess. His only compensation lies in his control of the e-file and the active placing of his queen, dangerously close to his opponent's king. A quick ap­praisal of the position reveals various tactical themes: the idea of :e7, meeting .. .liJxe7 with ':xe7 and White has strong threats along the seventh rank; if the white knight moves, then .id5+ could be strong as ... ':xd5 may run into Ite8. How can White tie these themes to­gether to create a winning at­tack?

Position 9 Smirin-Alterman

Haifa 1995

White to play

Here White has sacrificed two pieces to drive the black king up the board. Logic sug­gests that White must be doing well: he has three pawns for his two pieces; his major pieces are all in the vicinity of the black king; the black queen, knight and king's rook are not contrib­uting to the defence. White needs a successful method of opening further files and the game should be over. What is the best continuation?

a) 24 cxd5, opening the c-file for the major pieces as quickly as possible.

b) 24 ':ac 1 , bringing the queen's rook into play.

c) 24 ii'c7+ to drive the black king further into the white camp.

d) A different method of at­tack.

Position 10 Van der Wiel-Zaichik

Katerini 1992

White to play

White is two pawns down and his rook and knight are hanging. However, he has two promising lines: 33 l1c8+ and 34 ~xb7 or the tactical 33 i.b5+. Which is stronger?

Position 11 Marshall-Schlechter

Os tend 1907

White to play

Accurate Attack 29

White has a strong pair of bishops which are actively placed along the weak diagonals pointing towards the black king. There may also be chances to exploit the slight weaknesses in the black queenside as White is slightly more active on that side of the board. How can White best combine his positional ad­vantages to increase the pres­sure on his opponent's position?

a) 23 h4, gaining a tempo and freeing White from his back row weakness. 23 ... 'i'xh4 is not possible as Black is mated after 24 i.xg7+! r3;xg7 25 'i'b2+.

b) 23 :cdl to firm up control of the d-file and threaten to penetrate with ltd7.

c) 23 'iWd2 to bring the queen into operation on the queenside.

d) 23 ':xd8+ is best for tacti­cal reasons.

Position 12 Kubanek-Kopriva

Prague 1952

White to play

30 Accurate Attack

In this messy position, White has a strong attack against Black~s weakened kingside, but is playing without the help of his rooks. White has various promising looking moves in­cluding 1 'iih6+, 1 'ii'xh7+, 1 ltJe4 and 1 c3. Which is the most accurate?

Solutions

Position 1 Vanbeste-Nijboer

Groningen 1991

White to play

a) 29 gxf4 is playable, but in­sufficiently active for inunedi­ate results. A good reply for Black is 29 ... ~f8, when White has nothing clear.

b) 29 'ii'dl was played in the game. Black retreated his knight with 29 ... CiJg7 and White could find nothing better than 30 "aI, repeating the position. In fact, this led to an immediate draw as Black acquiesced in the repeti-

tion with 30 ... CiJh5. c) 29 :xf7! ~xf7 30 .:th6

wins by force: cl) 30 ... CiJg7 31 l:txh7 Wg5

32 h4! (this advance of the h­pawn is the key to White~s win­ning plan) 32 .. :ii'g6

33 h5 'ii'xh7 (if Black doesn't take the rook the further ad­vance 34 h6 will be devastating) 34 'iif6+ ~g8 35 ltJe7+ Wh8 36 1WfS+ mating.

c2) 30 ... ~e6 returns the extra material but fails to keep the white forces at bay, e.g. 31 :xh5 'WhS 32 nxh7+! 'ti'xh7 33 Wf6+ ~e8 34 'i'xe6+ and Black's position is hopeless.

c3) 30 ... fxg3!? 31 lhh5 gxf2+ 32 ~xf2 again leaves

Black defenceless, e.g. 32 ... ~gS .n 'ii'gl+ ~hS 34 l:g5!, threat­tOning 'ji'a1+.

d) 29 :f6 is a good try but just falls short, e.g. 29 ... ttJxf6 (Black must capture, as 29 ... ttJg5 gets crushed by 30 l:[h6) 30 1i'xf6 1i'fS and there does not appear to be anything more than a draw for White with 31 'i'c3 (or indeed, 31 'ji'b2 or 31 .a1) 31. ..• dS (forced, but sufficient) 32 'iif6 repeating (32 lDf6+? ~fS 33 l%eS+ .xeS 34 lDxeS ~xeS is good for Black).

Position 2 Broadbent-Aitken

London 1945

White to play

a) 24 e5 is a good try, as 24 ... dxe5 loses to 25 lDxf6! gxf6 26 lDe4 and 24 ... .:xe5 loses similarly to 25 :xe5 dxe5 26 lDxf6! gxf6 27 lDe4. Unfor­tunately after 24 e5 the simple 24 ... ttJxd5! 25 cxd5 :xe5

Accurate Attack 31

leaves White without a decent continuati on.

b} 24 ':e3 is possible but rather feeble.

c) 24 ttJf4 - see 'b'. d} 24 lDxf6 wins by force, but

perhaps not for the obvious rea­son. After 24 ... gxf6 25 i.xf6+ 'iixf6 26 "xeS i.b7, the White position is promising, but the game is not over, e.g. 27 e5 "ii'g7! and 2S .. .fxe5. Instead, White should combine ideas from ~ a' and 'd' with 24 lDxf6 gxf6 25 e5! after which the white pieces co-ordinate beauti­fully and his attack cannot be met.

Black cannot defend his po­sition, e.g.

d1) 25 ... .tg7 26 exf6 l:xe1+ 27 ':xel.

d2) 25 ...• d7 26 .i.xf6+ and White soon piles through, e.g. 26 ... i.g7 27 e6 iic6 2S .i.xg7+ ~xg7 29 'iVg5+ (29 'iif7+ also wins) 29 .. /.tihS (29 ... ~fS loses to 30 f6 or 30 'i'f6+ and 31 l:.e3) 30 'i'f6+ ~gS and now the introduction of the rook into the attack with 31 l:.e3 is decisive.

32 Accurate Attack

d3) 25 ... :xeS 26 lIxeS and Black's cause is again hopeless as 26 ... dxe5 loses simply to 27 4Je4.

Position 3 Kasparov-Roizman

USSR 1978

White to play

a) 22 g4! as played by the future world champion, is very strong. It looks dangerous for White to open lines in front of his own king, especially consid­ering Black's pressure along the g-file. However, calculation demonstrates that the tactics fa vour White:

a1) 22 ... hxg4 23 h5 is very strong.

a2) 22 ... i.xe4 23 gxh5! wins material, as 23 ... l:(6g7 24 ':xe4 is horrible.

a3) Black tried 22 ... ~g7, but lost quickly after 23 gxh5 fxg5 24 .e5+ ~h6 25 hxg6.

a4) The best defence is 22 ... :'h8 which requires accu­rate calculation.

Now 23 gxh5 :xh5 24 lZJg3 looks promising but 24 ... i.d6! keeps the position unclear, e.g. 25 'ii'xf6+ (this seems forced) 25 ... ':xf6 26 lZJxh5 and now Black looks lost, but has the resource 26 ... J..h2+! 27 ~xh2 'ifbS+. Now White maintains a small advantage after 28 lZJf4, but Black is very much in the game.

Instead, White should meet 22 ... :hS with 23 i.xf6! i.xf6 (23 ... :xg4+ 24 'ii'xg4 hxg4 25 i.xe7+ ~xe7 26 lZJc5+ <it>d6 27 4Jxb7+ is a neat point) 24 g5 ~xe4 25 :xe4 keeping a strong initiative, e.g. 25 ... ~g7 26 l1e6 1:f8 27 ~h2.

b) 22 lZJg3 runs into 22 ... J..d6 23 ~f2 .txg3 24 'i'xg3 l:e8 (24 ... il.xg2!? also comes into consideration) and White is getting nowhere.

c) 22 'fif3 ~g7 is not encour­agIng.

d) 22 c4 dxc3 23 4.Jxc3 is the second strongest White option. White retains a good position, but this plan is not as incisive as 22 g4!

Position 4 Lane-Adams

London (Lloyds Bank) 1993

White to play

a) 19 iLxf7+? was played in the game: 19 ... ~xf7 20 'ii'h5+ 'Jig8 21 tDfg5 h6 22 'ii'f7+ ~h8 23 ~g6 (23 tDf6 Wixf6 24 'ii'xe8 li)xe5 and Black is still alive) 23 ... hxg5 24 tDxg5

and now with 24 ... .i.f5! (in the game Adams, remarkably, over­looked this and lost after 24 ... ifxg5?) 25 'itxf5 'iWd3 Black stays very much in the game. One possible line is 26 'i'f7 tbxe5 27 Wh5+ ~g8 28

Accurate Attack 33

:xe5 lIxe5 29 'iYf7+ with a draw.

b) 19 'iWh5! is the winning move. Black now falls apart: 19 ... tbxb3 20 ttJeg5 and the White attack is decisive, e.g.

20 ... .if5 (20 ... h6 doesn't help after 21 'i'xf7+ ~h8 22 'iYg6 hxg5 23 ttJxg5 'ii'xg5 24 i.xg5 lte6 25 'itf7) 21 'ifxf7+ ~h8 22 Wxf5 g6 23 'ii'f7'ii'e7 24 'ifxb3.

Position 5 Canal-J ohner Carlsbad 1929

White to play

Two of the suggested lines in

34 Accurate Attack

this position are strong, as long as they are followed up ener­getically. Sometimes it is neces­sary to find the one and only path to victory but on other oc­casions the position is so good that care rather than total accu­racy is sufficient.

a) In his notes Tartakower suggests that 24 e5 is less inci­sive than the move played as Black can respond 24 ..... g7 (dealing with the immediate threat of 1:f8+). Then, however, White simply piles on the pres­sure with 25 :tafl!

Black finds himself facing a fairly hopeless task as after 25 ... ':xe5 26 io b3+ ~h8 27 :f7 his position has been decisively invaded (27 ... .:e3 28 'iWbl -amongst others - is simple),

Other tries against 24 e5 also prove unsuccessful. 24 ... l:xe5 is met not by 25 :f8+? ~xf8! 26 'iixg6 :e 1 + but by 25 llxe5 ~xd3 26 :xe8+.

b) If you chose 24 'Wd5+ ~g7 25 .xb7 you are likely to want to give up chess after the counter blow 25 .... xf5I

c) 24 ':afl, as played in the game, wins fairly easily: 24 ... ':xe4 is met by 25 'Wd5+ ':4e6 26 :f6; 24 ... Ae5 by 25 .i.b3+ and 26 iof7; and 24 .... g7 by 25 e5 as in note ~a'. Johner tried 24 ... ~g7 but did not survive long after 25 e5 :th8 (White was threatening 26 :f7+ .xf7 27 Wh7+ mating)

26 e6 (not 26 .i.b3 when 26 ... ':f8 keeps Black kicking) 26. , .• xe6 (if 26 ... ':xe6 Tartak­ower gives 27 ~f7+ 'iWxf7 28 :xf7+ ~xf7 29 i.b3 but then 29 ... :f8! intending 30 'i'h7+ 'it;e8 leaves White with work to win the game; however, 27 ':xc5 is an immediate kill) 27 ':f6 .xf6 28 ':xf6 ~xf6 29 \i' g6+ and mate next move.

d) 24 i.b3+ ~g7 proves to have prematurely relocated the bishop. Although White is still doing well Black has far more resources than in lines 'a' or 'c', e.g. 25 ~afl :Xe4! 26 iof7 (26 i.d5 keeps White on top) 26 ... 'Wxf5 27 :xf5 :'el + 28 :fl ':xfl+ 29 "xfl :f8 and Black should not lose.

Position 6 Taimanov-Fischer Buenos Aires 1960

White to play

In the game Taimanov con­tinued with the inferior 19 ~xf3? and after 19 ... 'ii'd4+ 20 <Ji>hl 4Jg4! (20 ... 4Jxd5 21 i.xd5 and 20 ... 'ii'xc4 21 i.xf6 grant White a useful initiative) 21 hxg4 1fxc4 22 b3 jfb5 23 a4 'ifa5 Black drew without much trouble.

Taimanov could have in­creased his advantage deci­sively with the bold 19 gxf3!:

a) 19 ... Jlc5+ 20 ~hl 'i'd4

Accurate Attack 35

(20 ... 'ii xb2 is met by 21 i.xf6 gxf6 22 :e2 'ii'd4 23 'ii'xd4 i.xd4 24 :d 1 and Black loses material) 21 i.xf6 1ixc4 22 :c 1 and Black is falling apart.

b) 19 ... 'ifxb2 20 :e2 and now Black will be unable to deal with the threats to his kingside generated by the opening of the g-file:

bl) 20 ... 1ia3 21 4Jxf6+ gxf6 22 .Ji.xf6 i.xh3 (Black must ca pture this pa wn otherwise White will bring his rook to g2 with an overwhelming position) 231id5!

and now everything loses quick­ly for Black: the continuations 23 ... .Ji.c5+ 24 ~h2, 23 ... ..txf4 24 'jjfl5 and 23 ... 'iic5+ 24 "xc5 ..txc5+ 25 ~h2 are all obvious. Slightly tougher is 23 ... h6 but 24 'ii'h5 is still decisive after 24 ... 'ii'c5+ 25 'ii'xc5 i.xc5+ 26 ~h2 and the rook again comes to g2 with decisive conse­quences.

b2) 20 ... i.c5+ 21 ~hl 'ifd4 22 i.xf6 gxf6 23 1ixd4 i.xd4 24 l:d 1 c5 25 :xd4 cxd4 26 lLJxf6+ and 27 4Jxd7 winning.

36 Accurate Attack

Position 7 Botvinnik-Euwe

Moscow 1948

White to play

a) 22 tDf3 e5 is feeble, leav­ing White without a decent continuation.

b) 22 ttJg4 ~f7 (or perhaps 22 ... 0-0) again leaves White struggling for a follow-up.

c) 22 ttJg6 is all very well if Black captures, as White would have at least a draw and could look around for more. However, with the calm 22 ... gg8 23 lbf4 'f4g7 Black covers his weak­nesses and can look to the fu­ture with confidence.

d) White has one clear win -22 'iWg3 (as played by Botvin­nik). Now 22 ... fxe5 (22 ... !tf8 23 'ii g7 will transpose) is met by 23 'ilig7 :f8 24 l:c7 and the black queen goes (24 .... d6 25 1:xb7 d3 26 ~a7 'iWd8 27 '1Wxh7 is hopeless). Black is then too unco-ordinated to offer much resistance.

Position 8 Botvinnik-Smyslov

Moscow 1958

White to play

In the game Botvinnik played 23 ~h3? but the reply 23 ... lbe5 put an end to his play by identi­fying White's own weakness on n. White could have won with the remarkable 23 tDd4!, after which the white forces achieve a decisive co-ordination:

a) 23 ... cxd4 24 .i.d5+! ':xd5 (24 ... ~h8 25 lle7 ttJxe7 26 llxe7) 25 :e8! winning.

b) 23 ... ttJxd4 24 :e7! (Bot­vinnik originally gave 24 ~d5+? 1:xd5 25 :e7 which he dismissed as winning, but Dvoretsky points out the refu­tation 25 ... ttJe2+! 26 ~fl 1:f7 27 l:lxf7 ~xf7 28 'i'xh7+ ~f8 and Black escapes) 24 ... :f7

(see following diagram)

and now the most accurate (and spectacular) is 25 il.d5!

lilf3+ 26 ~h 1 and Black has no defence, the main problem be­ing 26 ... 'iVxf2 27 Ji.xf7+ ~h8 28 :!e8+!

Position 9 Smirin-Alterman

Haifa 1995

White to play

a) 24 cxd5 .xd5 appears to keep Black in the game, e.g. 25 ... a6 (25 1Iac 1 + ~d6 gets White nowhere) 25 ... e4 26 %lac 1 + ~d4 27 ltc4+ 'iite5 28 ltcxe4+ ~f5 and White has nothing clear.

b) 24 :ac 1, as played by Smirin, wins by force:

bl) 24 ... d4, trying to keep the

Accurate Attack 37

position closed, gets mated after 25 'iWc7+ ~b4 26 -.b6+ ~a3 27 ~a5+ ~b2 28 :bl+ 'iitc2 29 :lecl.

b2) 24 ... ~d4 25 cxd5

25 ..... xd5 (if 25 ... e4 White has various ways to win including 26 f4) 26 :lc4+.

b3) 24 ... Ji.g5 25 cxd5+ (or 25 'iWc7+) 25 ... i.xcl 26 ltxcl+ ~d6 27 .b6+ ~xd5 28 .c6+ mating.

b4) 24 ... ~d6 is Black's best, but 25 c5+ ~e6 26 -'a6+ ~f7 27 "'xd3 leaves White with an overwhelming position.

c) 24 'iWc7+ misplaces the white queen. Black continues 24 ... ~d4 and if 25 cxd5 1ic8 consolidates.

d) 24 i¥b5+ is quite good for White, but not as good as 'b', e.g. 24 ... Wd6 (in his notes, Smirin gave 24 ... <itd4(!) 25 cxd5 "ii'xd5 26 iWa4+ <itc5 as good for Black, but 26 1i'xd3+ ~xd3 27 %tad 1 + lea ves White with an overwhelming advan­tage) 25 c5+ ~e6 26 "'xd3 J.xc5 and White is doing well but there is a lot of fight left in

38 Accurate Attack

the black position. While checking this position

with Fritz looking over my shoulder it was gently, but in­sistently, pointed out to me that White does in fact have another clear cut win in the fonn of 24 b4+. The ideas are that 24 ... <1ttd6 25 c5+ ~e6 26 'I' a6+ and 'i'xd3 is overwhelming and that 24 ... r;t>d4 is mated in seven moves (or so Fritz infonns me) after 25 .a7+.

Position 10 Van der Wiel-Zaichik

Katerini 1992

White to play

This is an easy one. 33 :c8+ <it?d7 34 .i.xb7 .gl+ leaves White unable to escape perpet­ual check, e.g. 35 <1ttd2 'W'f2+ 36 'iie2 (36 ~c3 also fails to the checking sequence 36 ... "ii'xf3+ 37 ~b2 \ib3+ 38 r;t>c1 'iia3+) 36 .. :i'xd4+ 37 r;t>c2 "ii'a4+ 38 ~bl .i.xb7.

However, 33 .i.b5+f scores a

quick win, e.g. 33 ... :'xb5 34 nc8+ 'i'd8 (34 ... ~e7 35 "iig7+ r;t>d6 36 iic7 mate) 35 l:xd8+ <iPxd8 36 'l'f6+ winning further material.

Position 11 Marshall-Schlechter

Ostend 1907

White to play

a) 23 h4!, as played by Mar­shall, is a remarkable winning move. However, let us first con­sider the alternatives:

b) 23 ':cd 1 'iIIe7 leaves White with a small edge but is nothing special.

c) 23 'W'd2 l:txd6 24 'iIIxd6 iid8 and White's advantage is once again kept to a manage­able level.

d) 23 :'xd8+ and if 23 ... 'W'xd8 24 .-i.e6 wins a pawn. However after 23 ... ':xd8 the pressure on Black's position has been somewhat alleviated.

Returning to 'a': a) 23 h4!. As indicated in the

question, Black cannot capture this pawn, but he is also unable to maintain sufficient co­ordination to keep the white forces at bay, e.g.

al) 23 ..... e7 24 ':e6! "f7 (24 .. :iffS 25 h5! - the advance of this pawn is a recurrent theme - 25 ... ':d6 26 h6; 24 .. :ii'd7 25 h5 ..wd2 26 h6 1i'xe2 27 hxg7+ <wt>gS 2S :eS mate; 24 ...• xh4 25 :cxc6)

25 :exc6 'ii'xa2 26 :xcS :xcS (alternatively 26 ... J.xcS 27 ~xg7+) 27 ':xcS+ ~xcS 2S i.xg7+ and White wins the black queen.

a2) 23 ... \i'g4 241Wd2

(now that the Black queen has been diverted from control of

Accurate Attack 39

the e7 and dS squares, this move becomes very strong -White's immediate threat is 25 ':cxc6) 24 ... :xd6 251i'xd6 lIdS (other don't help, e.g. 25 .. .f4 26 ~e6 .g6 27 1i'd7; 25 .. :i'xh4 26 ~d5! .dS 27 'iffh6!) 26 'ikc7 i.aS and now the calm 27 i.b3, covering the back rank and Black has fallen apart on the queenside.

Position 12 Kubanek-Kopriva

Prague 1952

White to play

a) 1 lLJe4 is not a bad move. Black's best reply is 1. .. <1t>gS! (not 1. .. :xe4 2 ~h6+ and 3 'ii'f6 or 1..:iWdS 2 'i'h6+ and 3 lDg5 both winning immedi­ateIy) and now White can, of course, repeat the position with 2 lDf6+. Other continuations leave the position complicated:

a 1) 2 lDxd6 dxc2 and, al­though a piece down, Black has a powerful pawn on c2, a nasty

40 Accurate Attack

pin along the fourth rank and the white rooks are out of the game. The position remains messy.

a2) 2 cxd3 %1xe4!. 3 dxe4 'iib5+ and 4 .. :ii'xb2 and again the donn ant white kingside gives Black good chances.

b) 1 1Vxh7+? is a mistake. 1 ... \t?xf6 2 "'4+ ~g7! 3 J.h6+ ~h7! and White is struggling.

c) 1 1i'h6+!, resisting the lure of the h 7 -pa wn, is the correct route, e.g. 1 ... ~xf6 2 ~4+ ~f5 (now 2 ... ~g7 3 J.h6+ and 4 .f6 mates) 3 ~ g5+ ~e4 4 :el+ ~d4 (4 ... ~d5 5 :xe5+)

5 i..xe5+ i..xe5 6 c3+ cwt>c4 7 :e4+ and Black will emerge a large amount of material down with his king wide open.

d) 1 c3 '='xf4! 2 .xf4 1ib5 gives very good counterplay.

2 Decisive Defence

The art of defence is one of the most difficult skills to acquire in chess. Many players are for­midable with the initiative and, when things are going their way, appear able to upset al­most anybody. However, play­ers who are able to escape con­tinually from adverse situations are much harder to find.

There are many psychologi­cal reasons why defending is difficult. If we have a poor po­sition, it will almost certainly be due to mistakes made earlier in the game. We may even have had an advantageous, or win­ning position, messed it up with inaccurate play and now found ourselves reduced to grovelling around trying to keep the op­posing forces at bay. In such situations it is easy to become angry with yourself and lose objectivity about what is hap­pening on the board. Playing with the initiative is great fun -there are all sorts of interesting ideas to examine and, even if things go wrong, you will probably fmd yourself in an

equal position. Defence allows no such luxuries. Fail to find good moves and your position will quickly transform from difficult to hopeless. A further psychological reason why de­fence is difficult is that there is often no hope of winning and the struggle revolves around whether you will hang on for a draw or just lose. It is much more enjoyable to play when the outcome is in the balance between a win and a draw. Nev­ertheless, in the long run, a half point saved by good defence is just as valuable as a half point gained by converting a good position to a win.

The best players are, gener­ally, very strong in bad posi­tions, frequently able to save situations which seem to be completely lost causes. At a lower level, players will often try to save games by playing for a swindle, but this rarely hap­pens at a high level. Grand­masters will be more patient -taking their time, continually finding resources and ways to

42 Decisive Defence

complicate matters, and waiting for a slip from the opponent.

Greed is good? There is another kind of situa­tion where accurate defence is called for - not to save a posi­tion, but possibly to win the game - defending against what appears to be an unsound attack. If your opponent has compro­mised their position in some way (either by sacrificing mate­rial or making positional con­cessions) in return for an attack, then you may well be able to go on and win the game if you can beat off their efforts. However, some players find it much easier to spot tactical resources when they have the initiative and find it much more difficult when a defensive frame of mind is re­quired. Some players, when on the defensive, remain blissfully unaware of tactics that they would spot in an instant were they on the attack. Maintaining a cool head under defence is an important skill to acquire.

Let's consider some typical examples of the above themes.

The nineteenth century was a time when defensive technique, in general, left much to be de­sired. Paul Morphy, for exam­ple, was of course a brilliant player, but he seemed to arrive at many of his wins because his opponents accepted absolutely every sacrifice he threw at them - almost as if they were morally

bound to do so. In some of his games it appears as if his oppo­nents are mistakenly operating under the rules of draughts (checkers), where captures are obligatory, rather than those of chess. However, the following position is a fine example of an exception to this rule.

Janowski-Burn Cologne 1898

Black to play

Here White has mounted a crude but highly dangerous at­tack on the kingside - standard strategy for the time. He has chances based on the open a 1-h8 diagonal and his rook and queen are dangerously close to Black's king. However, to mod­ern eyes, this attack looks somewhat speculative: Black has good control of the centre, a solid position on the kingside and his own tactical theme of ... ltJg4, which will more or less oblige ':xg4 in reply.

Nevertheless, White does ha ve dangerous chances and Black must be careful. What is the best plan for Black?

The obvious try is 15 ... ttJg4 aiming to win material immedi­ately. White is forced to play 16 .uxg4 i.xg4 and now has the tactic 17 ttJxd5, threatening mate on g7. Black is obliged to play 17 ... f6 but now White powers through with 18 .1xg6 hxg6 19 'iixg6+ ~h8 20 tDxe7 'iixe7 21 "iWxg4

when he has three pawns for the exchange and should easily register the full point.

So, as 15 ... ttJg4 suffers a fi­asco, we need to look for something else. Black could consider a developing move such as 15 ... :e8 or 15 .. :i'c7, but he also has the possibility of a forcing continuation with 15 ... d4. Does this work? At first sight it looks rather dangerous. White continues 16 ttJe2 and now if 16 ... ttJg4 17 l%xg4 .1xg4 18 ttJxd4

A few moments analysis might convince us that this

Decisive Defence 43

looks terrible. White threatens to move the knight on d4 and give mate on g7.

The obvious defence 18 ... .1f6 is well met by 19 'l'f4, hitting the loose bishop on g4, as well as threatening 19 tDxc6. Now the only possible try is 19 ... c5 but then 20 ttJc6 .1g5 (forced) 21 it'e5 (21 tDxd8 is also promising) 21. .. .tf6 22 'iixf6 'ltxf6 23 .txf6 bxc6 24 i.e7 leaves White with a pleasant endgame with two pawns for the exchange and a solid posi­tion.

Returning to the previous diagram, we could trap the white queen with 18 ... .1g5 but then 19 ttJf5 wins brilliantly.

44 Decisive Defence

White threatens mate on g7 and will meet 19 ... i.xh6 with 20 liJxh6 mate. Spotting this, there would now be an inclina­tion to abandon the whole idea of trying to win the exchange and revert to looking at simple developing moves instead of 15 ... liJg4 or 15 ... d4. But there is a major flaw in White's plan, and a few seconds calm consid­eration will reveal it. In the pre­vious diagram, Black is not obliged, like many of Morphy's opponents, to mindlessly accept whatever is thrown at him. 19 liJf5 has actually left almost all of White's pieces hanging and the calm 19 ... ..tf6!

places White in a dreadful mess. His bishop on b2 is now threatened and if 20 ..txf6 'iixf6 hits the rook on a 1 as well as the knight on f5. Bum actually found this fine defence and White is now completely lost. In the spirit of the game he tried a final throw with 20 'ib4 but now the defence was more straightforward: 20 ... ~xb2 21 liJe7+ ~g7 and White resigned.

Here is another example where a clever defensive idea would have won the game.

Alapin-Chigorin Monte Carlo 1901

White to play

White is a piece up but Black's major pieces create strong threats against his king­side. However, White has his own pressure against e6 and it feels as if he should be able to see his way through to victory. 24 h3 is useless on account of 24 ... .:txh3+, but 24 .txb6 looks promising, e.g. 24 ... :xh2+ 25 ~gl and now if Black piles in with 25 ... l:.h1 + 26 <iitf2 .h4+ 27 ~e3 'iig5+ White centralises his king with 28 ~d4

(see following diagram)

and Black is getting nowhere, e.g. 28 ... .:th4+ 29 g4, 28 .. :.f6+ 29 .e5 and 28 ...• f4+ 29 ~c3 are all perfectly good for White.

Having your king driven into the middle of the board may feel uncomfortable but, para­doxically, it can often be safer there than behind the usual cas­tled position. After all, when the king is in the centre, you have to cover eight squares in order to be able to give checkmate -far more than when the king is on the edge of the board.

Having seen that Black's at­tempts to blow the white king into the open lead nowhere, we now have to check quieter con­tinuations. The first point that should occur is that after 24 .i.xb6 lixh2+ 25 <la>g! Black would do better to recapture the bishop with 25 ... axb6.

Decisive Defence 45

Now Black is only a piece for a pawn down and maintains his threats against the white king­side. (Incidentally, this position is also a good demonstration of the Nimzowitschian principle that the threat is stronger than the execution), If White contin­ues quietly with a move such as 26 lIcd! Black has 26 ... li'h4! and suddenly White is getting mated. So White very much wants to plough on with 26 fxe6 which again seems fine if Black chases the king, e.g. 26 ... :thl + 27 'it>f2 ~h4+ 28 ~e3

The white king appears safe in the open but in fact Black now has the sneaky move 28 ... .:IdS! cutting off the white king's escape to the d-file. Now after 29 exf7 + ~f8, the threat of ... iVd4 mate means that White must settle for perpetual check and a draw, e.g. 30 :cd1 'i'g5+ 31 ~f2 'iib4+ 32 ~e3. This was actually the conclusion of the game.

So, is the best that White can hope for a draw, or can he do better in the initial position?

46 Decisive Defence

We have already noticed that 24 h3 is no good on account of 24 ... ~xh3+. 24 g4 also looks pointless as Black can take this pawn when the pressure exerted by the c6-bishop is hugely in­creased. However, White has a trick: 24 g4 '1Ifxg4 (24 ... :xh2+ 25 .xh2 ~xf3+ 26 ~gl fixg4+ 27 ~f2 wins) 25 i..d5!

For obvious reasons, Black cannot capture this bishop and must reconcile himself to 25 ... 'iixf5 26 i..xc6 when the extra piece should win the game. This position is a good example of the value in keeping in mind all the strategic features

of a position even when imme­diate events are occupying your attention. Black's weak back rank pennits White this simpli­fying manoeuvre.

You have chances too! Defending can be very hard work and it is easy to acquire a negative mind set where you are looking only at your opponent's threats and how best to counter them. It is important to maintain a positive outlook and be pre­pared to keep an eye out for any tactical opportunities which come your way. After all, your opponent, who is probably quite happy with the way things are going, may also be concentrat­ing exclusively on his or her own attacking ideas and over­look defensive tactical ideas. You want to make sure that you don't miss them as well.

Nimzowitsch .. Fluss Zurich 1906

White to play

Despite his extra piece, the position looks distinctly average for White. Black threatens mate on g2 and the white defences do not look promising, e.g. 16 f3? ':xg3+ 17 hxg3 'i'xg3+ 18 ~h 1 l1g8 and mate follows, or 16 ..Itf3? ':xd4 17 'iie2 l:h4

and White is again getting mated, one attractive finish be­ing 18 llfel 'iixh2+ 19 ~f1 1i'hl +! 20 i.xhl :xhl. If White cannot improve on these varia­tions it looks as though he will have to reconcile himself to 16 liJxc6 or 16 liJf3.

In fact the fonner of these generates an unexpected and winning counter-attack, e.g. 16 ltJxc6! ~xd 1 17 ':fxd 1 bxc6

Decisive Defence 47

18 c5! and suddenly the black king is in terrible trouble. White threatens 19 i.a6+ and after either 19 ... a5 or 19 ... :g8 20 :ab 1 locks the black king in its box and mate with i.a6 follows.

Tolush-Smyslov Leningrad 1947

Black to play

Here Black is a pawn up but the main feature of the position is the completely disorganised nature of his forces. If Black is concentrating exclusively on a long range plan of disentangle­ment it would be easy to miss the golden opportunity which has just presented itself. Black can actually swiftly arrive at a winning position with the coup 17 ... ltJe5! (as played by Smyslov), exploiting the inse­cure position of the white queen. 18 .f4? runs into 18 ... ltJd3+ so White has no choice but to accept the knight offer with 18 dxe5. However,

48 Decisive Defence

after 18 ..... xe5+ 19 <it'f1 'iixg5 Black is two pawns up with a completely wirming position. Tolush soon resigned.

A clever tactical defence might not always win the game for you, but it might be a step in the right direction as in the fol­lowing example.

Sakhatova-Zaitseva Moscow 1985

Black to play

It does not take long to real­ise that, despite the extra pawn, Black has a very difficult posi­tion. White has an enormous concentration of force in the centre and is lining up for a powerful kingside attack. Meanwhile the black pieces are unco-ordinated and the knights in particular are on very un­promising circuits.

In the game Black could find no real solutions to the prob­lems of the position and went

swiftly downhill after the con­tinuation 27 .. .llJb7 28 .te5 'ile7 29 d5 .td7 (29 ... exd5 30 exd5 i.d7 31 ':xg6 is crushing) 30 lLJe3 f6

31 .txf6! 'iixf6 32 e5 lLJxc3+ 33 \itfl! lLJxd5 34 liJxd5 exd5 35 exf6 Jtf5 and now White finished off with the neat com­bination

361i'xf5! gxf5 37 :g7+. So, could Black have done

any better? Let's return to the original position.

(see previous diagram)

The main difficulty for Black is fighting against the huge central installation that White has constructed. In fact, there is

a fleeting tactical chance to do this with the clever 27 ... b4! Now 28 i.xb4 1ixf4 and 28 cxb4 1ixd4 both lead to huge improvements in Black's posi­tion. Additionally, if White continues as in the game with 28 iLe5 then Black has 28 ... b3! (also good is 28 ... lDxc3+ meet­ing 291ixc3 with 29 ...• xe5)

This is awkward for White who, for reasons we saw in the game, would like to maintain the queen on the bl-h7 diago­nal. However b 1 is obviously not advisable and if 29 'i'cl? then 29 ... b2 30 'iVc2 iYxe5 31 fxe5 b l'i' and wins. White would have to play 29 'iid2 when Black could retreat the queen with 29 ... 'Wie7. Of course the game is far from over and Black may still have a tough defensive task ahead. However, the Black position has under­gone a substantial improvement over the last few moves.

Keep it simple Sometimes an accurate defence will not necessarily consist of a

Decisive Defence 49

clever tactical sequence. In simple positions there can often be just one method that holds the balance, often based on a fairly trivial trick. However, it is easy to become lost in a maze of complications and fail to see the wood for the trees.

Salov-Ivanchuk Linares 1990

Black to play

The position is not a complex one, but Black has a difficult problem to solve - how to get his king to safety. White has annoying pressure on the d-file against Black's knight and this is keeping the black king pinned down. If he can castle he will have nothing to complain about and can look to the future with confidence. Indeed, in such po­sitions the queenside pawn ma­jority can prove to be a very useful asset for Black.

However, the immediate 17 ... 0-0 runs .into 18 'Wi d2 lDf6

50 Decisive Defence

19 :xdS ':xdS 20 .xdS+ mat­ing. Therefore it would appear that Black must make prepara­tions before he can get his king to safety and, in view of White's excellent development, one can guess that this will not be easy. Looking at a few variations reveals that this is indeed the case:

a) 17 ... 4Jf6? IS :xdS+ .i.xdS 19 ~xc5 is terrible for Black.

He could now recapture on e4, but will clearly run into dreadful trouble on the e-file.

b) 17 ...• c7, defending the rook on dS, prepares ... ltJf6. However, White can maintain a strong initiative, e.g. 18 'iid2

19 l:txdS+ i.xdS (19 .. JixdS 20 -.xdS+ .i.xdS 21 i.xc5 4Jxe4 22 :leI f5 23 4Jd2 and White will be a clear pawn ahead in the endgame) 20 e5! (20 i.xc5 4Jxe4 21 ..w e3 is also strong, but the text seems more clear cut) 20 ... 4Jd7 21 'i'd5 and with 22 e6 to follow, Black is in a dreadful mess.

c) 17 ... c4 to guard the vulner­able c5-pawn runs into IS ..wd2 and Black is still horribly pinned down along the d-file.

The prognosis appears very gloomy for Black. It would be easy to spend ages looking for an improvement in the previous analysis but maybe this is a situation where we can find a better idea in the original posi­tion?

I vanchuk, taking into account all the features of the position, no doubt spotted White's un­protected back rank. This led him to find the neat 17 ... 0-0! and meet the apparently crush-

Now IS ... ltJf6 again fails to ing 18 ii'd2 with the clever re-

treat 18 ..... a8! (Of course Ivan­chuk doubtless saw this idea some moves ago but unless he had foreseen this resource he may well have dismissed this position as very difficult for Black)

Now 19 :xd7 :xd7 20 'ii"xd7 lId8 is good for Black. Mean­while Black has co-ordinated his position and defended his rook on d8, allowing the simpli­fying ... !iJf6 next move. The game was swiftly agreed drawn.

This is another good example of the need to consider all rea­sonable moves in the original position before disappearing down a deep analytical black hole. Of course, it is easy to spot 17 ... 0-0 as a candidate move, but it is equally easy to dismiss it immediately and never look at it again.

See how you get on with the following test positions. Again, in order to mimic a game situa­tion, they are in no particular order, either in tenns of diffi­culty or theme.

Decisive Defence 51

Exercises

Position 1 Machate-Bogolyubov

Bad Elster 1936

White to play

White has strategic advan­tages including the better minor piece, strong centre and weak black pawns on a3 and b7 as targets. Tactically, however, the position is difficult due to the exposed white king and the fact that it is not easy to see how to remedy this problem. White's immediate dilemma is to decide where to move the queen. In such a tactical situation it is vi­tal to choose correctly. Where to go? There are six legal squares, but 29 'ilf c 1 looks odd and on 29 'iWd3 White is mated after 29 ..... aS+. That leaves:

a) 29 'ii"e2 b) 29'iWg2 c) 29 'ii'f2 d) 29 'ii"dl Which is the best?

52 Decisive Defence

Position 2 Daly-Smith

British Ch., Plymouth 1992

White to play

White has two huge passed pawns chugging up the board. If he can avoid suffering an acci­dent due to the restricted nature of his king, he will win the game. What is his best move?

Position 3 Korchnoi-Kurajica

Hastings 1972

Black to play

The always combative Viktor Korchnoi has just provoked complications by capturing a black pawn on h5. Black has three options to consider:

a) 24 ... gxh5 when White's intention is clearly 25 'iixe7.

b) The counter-attack with 24 ... 'i'xh5 25 'ilxe7 'ilxdl + 26 <it>h2. Although Black is now a piece for a pawn up White has maintained strong threats of 'Vi'xb7, :'c7 and perhaps even ltJe6+.

c) Ignoring the bishop with 24 .. J%h8, hoping to generate his own play on the kingside.

Which is best?

Position 4 Velimirovic-Uhlmann

Skopje 1976

Black to play

The Yugoslav grandmaster Velimirovic was one of the most feared attacking players of the 1970s. Here he has just captured on f6, expecting to

break up Black's kingside for middlegame attacking chances or to force weaknesses for the endgame. The situation is com­plicated by the fact that Black can now exchange queens and is also threatening the rook on el. How should Black respond?

a) 19 ... .ixel, attempting to win material.

b) The brave 19 ... gxf6, ex­posing his king but creating threats against the white knight and rook on el.

c) 19 ... 'ii'xf3, quickly ex­changing queens before any­thing too unpleasant happens?

Position 5 Miles-Romanishin

Tilburg 1985

White to play

In a tense middlegame, Black has just gained material by capturing a pawn on e4. What should White do?

a) Head for the endgame after 36 4Jxe4 .xe4 and hope to

Decisive Defence 53

hang on for a draw. b) Look for something better?

Position 6 Vaisser-Dautov

Baden Baden 1995

Black to play

In this position arising, un­surprisingly, from a Nimzo­Indian Defence, White has gambited a piece to open the h­file towards the black king. Ex­perience of similar positions will lead a strong player to sus­pect that the white attack will probably be enough to regain the piece but not sufficient to deliver checkmate - unless, of course, Black mishandles the defence. Black's obvious cour­ses of action are as follows:

a) 12 ... \ti>g7 with the intention of l3 .. J~h8.

b) 12 ..... xg5. c) 12 ... 4Jxg5. d) Something else. What move would you advise

Black to play?

54 Decisive Defence

Position 7 Topalov-Kramnik

Belgrade 1995

White to play

In this chaotic position, White has had his king chased across the board by the brilliant and highly imaginative young Russian Vladimir Kramnik. Kramnik is a player that Kas­parov himself has identified as a future potential world cham­pion. Topalov's immediate dif­ficulty is how to deal with the black threat of ... j"c3+. How­ever, White is a piece ahead and Black's own king is far from secure. In such a dangerous situation it is obviously essen­tial to find an accurate con­tinuation. What should White play?

a) 38 exf7+, immediately ex­posing the black king.

b) 38 j"xb5+, returning a piece-in-order to break the pow­erful bind that the a6 and b5 pawns exert over his king.

c) 38 c4, to prevent ... i.c3+ and create some space for White's pieces to defend.

d) Something else.

Position 8 Shirov-Leko

Belgrade 1995

Black to play

This position arose from a complex variation of the Ruy Lopez which was much tested in the Kasparov-Karpov World Championship matches. Alexei Shirov (born, along with the great attacking genius Mikhail Tal, in Latvia), has sacrificed the exchange for a dangerous attack. Black has two choices to consider:

a) He can move his attacked queen at once with 25 ... "'f6

b) He can try 25 ... Jtb3, counter-attacking against the white queen and freeing up central light squares as potential alternatives for his queen.

Which is best?

Position 9 Shirov-Nikolenko

USSR Championship 1991

Black to play

This position is a variation from the above game. Shirov, as is his trademark, has launched a ferocious attack. The position is a mess, but the problem is fa­miliar. What is the best move?

Position 10 Tartakower-Romih

Spa 1926

Black to move

Decisive Defence 55

Black is a piece ahead but White has active forces and dangerous passed pawns. This is the kind of position where an additional concern for Black is to decide whether he should be trying to win or draw. It is usu­ally best to put such thoughts out of your mind and concen­trate on finding the best moves. What is Black's best course of action?

a) 39 .. :i'e1 + hoping for per­petual check.

b) 39 ... :g7, preventing e7 and meeting 40 h6 with 40 .. ..:~h7 when he has consoldi­ated on the kingside and White has no immediate way to im­prove his position.

c) Something else.

Position 11 Belavanets-Smyslov

Leningrad 1939

White to play

White has a material advan­tage and a huge passed pawn on

56 Decisive Defence

the queenside. However, the alanning situation of his king means that he is very much on the defensive. The black rooks and bishops are indeed terrify­ing. How can White cope?

a) 35 b7, attempting to dis­tract Black from his kingside ambitions by advancing his passed pawn.

b) 35 ':e1, hitting the bishop on e3 to break up the coordina­tion of the black forces.

c) Something else.

Position 12 Bartrina-Ghitescu

Olot 1974

Black to move

The position is a mess with both sides having dangerous attacks against the opposing king. However, Black's situa­tion seems the more precarious, as his queen is threatened and his back rank is exposed. Nev­ertheless, if Black continues accurately, he can see his way

to a draw. What is the correct continuation?

Solutions

Position 1 Machate-Bogolyubov

Bad Elster 1936

White to play

a) 29 "e2? (as played in the game) is a definite mistake: 29 ...• a5+ 30 ~d3ltJe5+!

(This powerful centralisation is based on the fact that after 31 dxe5 :ad8+ 32 ~e4 lld2 33 'itrel f6! Black has a very strong attack) 31 ~e4 f5+ 32 ~f4 ltJg4

and Black has excellent play. b) 29 ., g2! is the best move,

after which White maintains the better chances, e.g. 29 ...• a5+ (29 ... liJxh2 is bad because White can then choose between 30:h1 'ila5+ 31 <Jird3 'ilf5+ 32 'ittc3 with at least a draw - 32 ~d2 is a good winning attempt and 30 .:If5 'ilh6 31 :h 1 fixe3+ 32 i.d3 :adS 33 d5 and the knight is dropping off) 30 'ittd3

30 ... liJh4 (crucially, the con­tinuation 30 ... liJe5+? - apeing Black's play from 'a' - fails to 31 dxe5 lIadS+ 32 ~e4 %td2 33 1:f2 and White is winning) 31 'ii'xb7 %labS 32 'ile4 and White is well on top.

c) 29 'iWf2 is worse than 'b' for two distinct reasons. After 29 ... fia5+ 30 ~d3 Black can try:

c1) 30 ... liJg5 (or 30 ... liJh4) and the b7-pawn is not dropping off.

c2) 30 ... liJe5+ and if 31 dxe5 :adS+ 32 <it'e4 .:Id2 33 'iie1 f6! as in variation 'a'.

d) 29 fid1 is very poor after 29 ... 'iia5+ 30 <it'd3 lDe5+ when

Decisive Defence 57

White loses either his c-pawn or his queen for rook and piece.

Position 2 Daly-Smith

British Ch., Plymouth 1992

White to play

White no doubt spotted that he needed to take some pre­ventative action on the queen­side as 37 d7? loses to the at­tractive combination 37 ... liJb4+ 38 ':xb4 ltxa3+ 39 <it'xa3 :a1 mate. He therefore made some air for his king with 37 b4 but, unfortunately for him, this al­lowed a different but equally efficient mating combination: 37 ... .td5+ 38 :xd5 ~xd5 39 d7 (there is nothing better as 39 <Jirb3 ~xd6 is completely hope­less) 39 ... <it'c4!

(see following diagram)

(threatening ... liJxb4 mate!) 40 .tc5 liJxc5 and the mate with ... :'xa3+ will again follow.

58 Decisive Defence

The correct preventative ac­tion would have been 37 a4! after which Black's mating threats evaporate and the best he can do is 37 ... lDb4+ 38 ':xb4 ~xd6 39 l:c4 r/;xe7 40 i.c5+ and 41 ':xc3 when White should win easily.

Position 3 Korchnoi-Kurajica

Hastings 1972

Black to play

a) 24 ... gxhS 25 iixe7 is sim­ply good for White as 2S .. :i'xe7 26 liJfS+ r/;f6 27 liJxe7 r/;xe7 28 ltc7+ wins the

bishop on b7. b) 24 .. :i'xh5 25 flxe7

-.xd1+ 26 ~h2 is apparently a difficult position for Black, e.g. 26 ... i.a6 27 ':c7 or 26 ... lDc5 27 b4 and White wins in both cases. However, if Black spots the counter-attacking 26 ... liJd2!

he will not be worse, e.g. bl) 27 l:xd2 -.xd2 28 -.xb7

llh8. White has a pawn and a solid position for the exchange but cannot really hope to be better.

b2) 27 ~g3!? is adventurous. Now 27 ... lDe4+ will probably force an immediate draw after 28 ~h2 liJd2. I suspect that even the fiercely combative Korchnoi would baulk at play­ing for the win with 28 r/;f4?! Meanwhile, if Black is feeling lucky he could try 27 ... lDf1 +!? 28 'iitf4 ~5.

(see following diagram)

In this position 29 iixb7 loses to 29 ... :e8, entombing the white king, but 29lDe6+ is very unclear.

c) Kurajica, possibly psyched out by Korchnoi, went for nebulous attacking chances with 24 ... ':h8? After 25 .i.f3 lDg5 26 .i.g4 lDe4 27 :dc 1 "f6 28 .i.f3 llJd6 29 'iixa7 White soon won.

Position 4 Velimirovic-Uhlmann

Skopje 1976

Black to play

a) 19 ... i.xe1 is not advisable. White wins with 20 .i.xd8.

b) 19 ... gxf6! (as played by the defensive expert Uhlmann) is a strong capture. White's at­tack looks very dangerous but

Decisive Defence 59

analysis demonstrates that Black can keep everything un­der control when his threats against the white pieces will win the game for him, e.g.

b 1) The simplest variation is 20 'ii'xd5? l:xd5 and White loses material.

b2) 20 .. g4+ also leads no­where: 20 ... ~f8 and now the best try is probably 21 'ii'h4 but then Black has the calm 21. .. i.xel (21. .. fxe5 22 'i'h6+ c:be7 also wins as White has back rank problems) and White has no good way to continue the attack. The back rank weakness also means that White cannot even escape into a messy posi­tion ~only' the exchange down, e.g. 22 'i'h6+ ~g8 (22 ... ~e7 also wins) 23 l:1xel (23 lDg4 \'If5!) 23 ..... xd4! and if 24 'tixf6 ':xe5.

b3) 20 'i'xf6 and now the key move for Black, 20 ... J:.d6! This is necessary, as 20 ... .i.xe 1 21 'i'g5+ allows White an enduring attack. After 20 Wxf6 :d6!

White again finds his attacking concepts all fail due to his back-

60 Decisive Defence

row pro blem and the pinned knight on e5:

b31) 21 'iYg5+ :g6! and White loses immediately.

b32) 21 "ii'f4 .i.xe1 22 ~xel. Now if White could consolidate his position, he would not stand so badly. Unfortunately, how­ever, Black continues 22 ... f6! 23 jfg3+ ~f8 and White's po­sition falls apart.

b33) 21 tiJd7 (this was the game continuation) 21. .. .i.xe 1 and White resigned.

c) 19 ... "ii'xf3? leaves White with a small plus after 20 tiJxf3 l:txe 1+ 21 tiJxe 1 gxf6 22 tiJc2.

Position 5 Miles-Romanishin

Tilburg 1985

White to play

This is a tricky position where the simplest solution ac­tually turns out to be the best:

a) White's best chance is to head for the endgame immedi­ately with 36 tiJxe4 'Wxe4 37

ii..xg7 ~xg7 38 'i'f6+ ~g8 and now 39 h3 reaching the fol­lowing position.

Of course Black is better, but the pressure against f7 and the weak black kingside will make it very hard for him to convert his advantage into a victory.

b) In the game Miles was se­duced by the possibility of 36 ~f4 but, as so often in these positions, his weak back rank told against him after 36 .. .'ii'd6! when he had to reconcile him­self to 37 'iixd6 (37 tiJxe4? Wxf4 and 37 'i'xe4? .i.xf6 38 We8+ riilg7 39 tiJe4 Wf4! are both much worse) 37 ... tiJxd6 38 .i.xg7 ~xg7 39 lid1 :e7 40 ~gllLJf5.

This endgame is very much worse for White than the one he could have reached in 'a' and Romanishin duly converted his advantage after 67 moves. The moral here is that you cannot always find wonderful saving resources and must sometimes be content to settle for the sim­ple solutions.

Position 6 Vaisser-Dautov

Baden Baden 1995'

Black to play

a) 12 ... <itg7? was Dautov's choice in the game. He may have been anticipating a con­tinuation such as 13 'ib4 :h8 14 'ii'h6+ ~g8 15 ttJge4 .tf8 16 1ih3 iLg7 and Black has con­solidated his position. If so, he would have been rocked back by White's reply: 13 ttJh5+! Now 13 ... \t>g8 14 ttJf6+ ttJxf6 15 gxf6 is clearly hopeless for Black, so he had to accept the second sacrifice with 13 ... gxh5.

Decisive Defence 61

Play continued 14 iixh5 l:h8 (forced) 15 'iWh6+ ~g8 16 .i.d3 and White had a very large ad­vantage as he was about to re­gain a piece and still has a mas­sive attack.

Dautov did not last long: 16 ... d6 17 .)i,xh7+ .:txh7 18 ~xh7+ ~f8 19 g6 'iie8 20 'iih4 1-0.

b) 12 ... 'i'xg5? is playable for Black but White re-establishes material equality after 13 \ib3 :lfe8 14 iixh7+ and, with the queens on the board, keeps good attacking chances, e.g. 14 ... ~f8 15 ttJe4 1i'f4 16 %:h4 ~f5 170-0-0.

c) 12 ... lZJxg5! is Black's best and holds the balance:

c 1) 13 'i'h4 ttJf3+ 14 gxf3 'ii'xh4 15 ~xh4 is fine for Black.

c2) 13 f4? f5f and Black is again doing very well.

c3) 13 ttJe4 is White's best. Now 13 ... ttJxe4? is a blunder on account of 14 \i'h3 but Black has the safe 13 ... iLe7 14 ttJxg5 iLxg5 15 'fib3 it.h4 16 1i'xh4 ifxh4 17 :xh4 with approxi-

62 Decisive Defence

mate equality. However, trying to maintain more tension in the position with 13 ... i.xc3+? 14 bxc3 q;g7 would backfire after 15 .f4! "fie7 16 "f6+ 'iWxf6 17 exf6+ ~g8 18 lDxg5 and :It7 follows.

d) There are no other good alternatives for Black.

Position 7 Topalov-Kramnik

Belgrade 1995

White to play

a) 38 exf7+? ~xf7 doesn't help White in dealing with the threats. The black king has been exposed slightly but the only way to utilise this is with 39 _f2+, planning iLd4, to blunt the threat of the black bishop on g7. Unfortunately, after 39 'i'f2+ fiJf5! covers d4 and White has run out of good ideas. After 38 exf7+ ~xf7 the best that White can do is 39 c4. Now Black has the very tempt­ing and rather flashy 39 .. :iWc2!?

and if 40 .txc2 ':xc4+ 41 ~a3 :a4 is mate. However, after the cold-blooded 40 fiJc5! Black has nothing better than repeat­ing the position with 40 ... 'iWb2+ 41 fiJb3. The best continuation for Black is 39 ... fiJe4!, rein­forcing the attack against the c3-square. It is now difficult to see a reply for White as 40 'i'fl + ~g8 doesn't help and 40 :c 1 is met by the simple 40 ... 'iWxa2 and White is still in a dreadful mess.

b) 38 .tx b5 + ! is the correct solution to White's problems, e.g. 38 ... axb5 39 exf7+ ~xf7 40 'iixg3.

White has regained his piece and created some air for his

king on the queenside. Black's best is now 40 .. :ifc3+ (Not 40 ... 'iixc2? when 41 'i'f3+f [and not the immediate 41 :cl? which loses to 41. .. ~f8+ 42 ~xb5 'ii'e2+] 41. .. ~g8 42 :cl! wins for White as 42 ... ~f8+ 43 ~xb5 is not dangerous) 41 'i'xc3 Jlxc3+ 42 ~xb5 ~xa 1 43 l2Jxa 1 h5 and in this complex endgame, Black has the better chances but White is very much in the game.

c) 38 c4? is met by 38 ... ttJe4, as in 'a' and White has no good defence.

d) Topalov tried 38 iLc5? which superficially seems good but he ran into 38 ... ~c3+! 39 ~xc3 a5+ 40 ~xb5li'xc3 0-1.

The position reached in the bracketed variation in note 'b' is worth a further look. The following position, which is a key element in White's defence, arises after 38 i.xb5+ axb5 39 exf7+ ~xf7 40 W'xg3 'ii'xc2 41 fif3+ ~g8.

Such a posItion, especially when analysing ahead, can ap­pear terrible for White. The

Decisive Defence 63

white king is wide open, and it looks as if the black forces are moving in for the kill. A brief look might be sufficiently alanning to tempt a player to abandon the whole variation and look for something else.

There is a useful lesson here (which was touched on earlier): the king, when in the open, is actually quite difficult to check­mate, as the attacker has to con­trol eight escape squares. When the king is stranded on the edge or in the comer, this number reduces to three or five and can increase the chances for an at­tacker trying to deliver mate. Of course, I am not suggesting that you should rush your king up the board at every available op­portunity, but a king is often far harder to damage in mid-board than might seem apparent.

Position 8 Shirov-Leko

Belgrade 1995

Black to play

64 Decisive Defence

a) 25 ... iif6 appears to keep everything under control as 26 ~h5 is met comfortably by 26 ... 'iih6. Leko did indeed choose this move but Shirov now opened lines decisively with the brilliant 26 :e6! ~xe6 27 fxe6

when, despite the rook deficit, White has a crushing attack. The main point is that the re­moval of Black's bishop en­ables White to operate unop­posed on the light squares. The key variation is 27 .. .ti:Je5 28 'ii'h5 'i'h6 29 i.h7+ ~h8 30 CiJf7+ CiJxf7 31 .i.xh6 CiJxh6 32 ~bl (In material tenus this is not too bad for Black, but he must deal with the threat of 'ii' g6 and has insufficient time to co-ordinate his forces) 32 ... c4 33 g4 CiJd3 34 g5 and White is winning comfortably.

As Black does not have time to move his knight on d7, White regains a substantial portion of his material investment and maintains a huge attack. The game concluded 27 ... g6 28 exd7 Itd8

29 'ikg4!? (Surprisingly, Shirov misses the more direct 29 i.a2+! CiJxa2 30 1i'd5+ c;t>h8 31 tiJf7+ ~g7 32 .i.h6+! ~h7 33 ..tg5 ~xb2 34 CiJxd8) 29 ... .i.e7 30 h4! d5 31 tiJf3 ~g7 32 .i.g5 "'xb2 33 .i.h6+ 1-0.

b) 25 ... ~b3! was the only move and would have held the game.

Play could continue 26 'iif3 i.d5 (Not 26 ... 'iWd5? 27 .i.e4 ilc4 28 :c3) 27 it'dl i.b3 with a draw. Attempts by White for more will inevitably backfrre, e.g. 27 'iie2 i.c4 28 "g4? (28 'it'dl will still result in a draw) 28 ... CiJf6 29 'iih4 'ifd5 and Black is fine, e.g. 30 :e6 \i'dl + 31 ~h2 i.xe6 32 fxe6 'iih5.

Position 9 Shirov-Nikolenko

USSR Championship 1991

Black to play

White has a huge initiative and a number of Black's defen­sive tries can be fairly easily dismissed:

a) 25 ... gxh6? is not advisable: 264:Jd6+ ~e6 27 :Lefl and here Black, with his totally unco­ordinated forces, is in a com­plete mess.

b) 25 ... 'ii'xal? is perhaps a strong temptation as White can­not deliver mate with checks and Black is now two rooks ahead - a substantial material advantage by any standards. However, the black forces are now so disorganised that a strong player would be very suspicious of this continuation and this suspicion is well justi­fied after 26 1i'xg7+ ~e6 27 'ii'e5+ ~d7 (27 ... ~f7 28 "f6+) 284:Jf6+ ~c8 and now 29 i.f4! forces mate.

Decisive Defence 65

c) 25 ... i.xe4 is a better try but after 26 1i'xg7+ ~e6 27 .:txfl J;Ig8 28 1i'e5+ although Black is not badly off in mate­rial terms, his king will never find shelter and White has an enduring attack.

The problem with the above three tries is that Black always loses his g-pawn and, along with it, any prospect of obtain­ing long-tenn shelter for his king. The best defence is there­fore the extraordinary ...

d) 25 .... f4!!

This remarkable move pins the white queen and thus saves the black g-pawn! After 26 i.xf4 ii.xe4 27 ii.e5 :g8 (not 27 ... g6? 28 'iib4) Black is very

66 Decisive Defence

much alive. He has a fantastic cause for concern. bishop on e4 and his knight can come to d5. It is difficult to see how White can disrupt Black before he gets co-ordinated. The extraordinary 25 ..... f4 is some­thing of a contrast to position 5 (Miles-Romanishin) where the most mlUldane continuation was in fact the best.

Position 10 Tartakower .. Romih

Spa 1926

Black to move

a) 39 ..... el + will keep Black in the game, e.g. 40 <ith2 'iib4+ 41 :h3? (White must settle for 41 ~gl "el+ 42 ~h2 'iib4+ drawing) 41. .. \if2 and wins. If 39 ...• el + 40 11ft 'li'xe3+ 41 ~h 1 l:txh5+ 42 'ii'xh5 "xe6 with an unclear position and chances for both sides.

b) 39 ... 11g7 40 h6 :117 might appear solid for Black, but re­treating the rook in such a pas­sive way should give great

In fact after 41 "i'h5! (eyeing up the e5-square) Black seems to be lost, e.g. 41. . .'i'bl+ 42 <ith2 :e7 and now 43 :f7 leaves Black without a reply.

Position 11 Belavanets-Smyslov

Leningrad 1939

White to play

a) 35 b7!, blithely ignoring Black's kingside demonstration is, in fact, the only way to save the game. If Black now ploughs ahead with 35 .. J1dd2? then 36 'li'xe5+ ~xe5 37 b8"IW+ ~f6· 38

'iYhS+ wins for White. Black in fact must meet 35 b7 with 35 ... :tfd2, preparing ... J.f4+. Black's attack looks terrifying but it is only enough for a draw: 36 bS. i.f4+ 37 <itih4 g5+ (37 ... .ltg5+ is an immediate draw) 38 <t>h5 .ltf7+ 39 ~xh6 g4+ 40 'iith7 i.g8+ 41 'iithS

and now in this curious position 41. .. ii.f7+ is in fact the only way to draw for Black as 41. .. J.c4+? loses to 42 "e8!

b) 35 :el?, as played by Be­lavenets is exposed as a blunder after 35 ... l:.dd2! 36 :'xe3 (36 :gl g5 also leads to a quick mate) 36 ... g5 and the white king is caught in a mating net.

c) White has other tries but it is clear that they all put him on the defensive, so he should set­tle for the draw with 'a', e.g.:

cl) 35 ':fl ltxfl! 36 .xfl lld2 and it is clear that Black will always be able to take per­petual check. In fact he may well achieve more: 37 b7 ~g5! 38 f4+ (forced, as 38 h4+ <t>h5 doesn't help White) 3S ... exf4+ 39 ct>f3

Decisive Defence 67

39 ... J.xh3! and Black wins as 40 'ii'xh3 'ii'f2 is mate.

c2) 35 .ltd3 (excepting 35 b7, this is White's best) 35 ... l:d5! (35 .. J::td2 36 i..e2 is unclear) 36 'iieS (36 .a6 e4 is terrible for White) 36 .. .l1xd3 37 'Wf8+ i.f7 and it is clear that White can only hope to draw the game, although he will probably do so.

Position 12 Bartrina-Ghitescu

Olot 1974

Black to move

Black starts with 1 ... i..f2+ when White must play 2 ~fU

68 Decisive Defence

as 2 ~xf2? l:.xb2+ wins, as does 2 q;h I? .i.xg2+! 3 ~xg2 'i'g3+ 4 ~fl 'Wgl+ 5 ~e2 :xb2+.

After 2 ~fl Black has a cou­ple of false trails: 2 ... .i.xg2+? 3 ~xf2! :xb2+ 4 <Ji>gl leaves Black without a decent follow up, while 2 ... JTLb5+? (as played in the game) fails to 3 q;xf2 'We2+ 4 \t>g3 ifxdl

5 .i.h8! -.d6+ 6 q;f2 and White Wins.

The dra wing line is 2 .. .f6! when White's trick with 3 .i.h8 can be met by 3 ... .i.b5+ 4 ~xf2 'ii'e2+ 5 ~g3 'ii'eS+ with a draw. White could also try 3 .i.xg6, but this is a position where all roads lead to Rome: 3 .i.xg6 .ixg2+ (3 ... hxg6 4 'iib8+ ~f7 5 'ii'f8+ ~e6 61i'c8+ ~f7 is another way to draw) 4 ~xf2 :xb2+ 5 ~gl hxg6 6 'iib8+ ~f7 7 "f8+ q;e6 with a draw. Either Black or White will de­liver perpetual check.

Note that Black could also start with 1. .. f6 when White's best 2 .ih8 is met by 2 ... .if2+ with a transposition to the main line.

3 Energy in the Endgame

At some point you may have said to yourself something along the lines of: 'I must go on a diet', or 'I must take more exercise', or some other quickly made and quickly forgotten resolution. Or perhaps it was: 'I must study some endgames'. With a big sigh you dig out your one and only endgame book and commit some tedious theory to memory.

Having worked away at this chore for what seems like ages, you naturally feel quite pleased with yourself and are ready to employ the hard-earned knowl­edge in a real game. One match goes by, and another ... One event goes by, and another ... And still you have not been given the opportunity to dem­onstrate your powerful tech­nique. One season goes by ...

Three years later the required endgame appears on the board and of course you have forgot­ten all the theory. How much more profitable it is, you think, to study openings!

The other problem with end-

games is that - as one would expect - they come at the end of the game. Very often you will ha ve spent a lot of your allo­cated time thinking in the mid­dlegame, and when a difficult endgame does arise you find you don't have long enough left to work it all out. Also your energy resources may be drain­ed as fighting a long complex battle is tiring. Nevertheless, it is foolish to jeopardise the re­sults of many hours hard think­ing by laziness at a critical mo­ment in an endgame.

Practice makes perfect There is no easy solution to these problems. The only thing to do is to keep in practice, maybe try to look each week at two or three endgames taken from practical play. And make sure when you do reach an end­game that you have played quickly enough before then to have sufficient time to find the best moves. There is nothing more depressing than spoiling a won position, or failing to ob-

70 Energy in the Endgame

tain your rightful draw, merely because you have been unable to apply - or even to learn -something that 'every Russian schoolboy knows'. You can tell everyone afterwards that you were winning or that you had an easy draw ~ but of course you will know that only the result is ever remembered.

In each of the positions be­low, taken from master games, there is a critical decision to be made. Sometimes the players found them at the board, some­times they didn't. Sometimes they tried to find them at home or in the post mortem and still didn't.

Bologan-Kramnik Germany 1994

White to play

The Moldovan Grandmaster Bologan has Super-Grand­master Krarnnik on the ropes and the win is 'just a matter of technique'. He now has only to

decide between two plans: To queen his b-pawn as soon as possible with 54 <;ir>b6 (or 54 ~a6) followed by b5, ~a7, b6 etc. Or to seek to restrain the e­pawn with 54 ':e3 or 54 :h4, noting that the exchange of h­pawn for e-pawn would guar­antee a winning rook and pawn v rook endgame due to the ex­treme distance of the black king from the white b-pawn.

Bologan chose the former plan, 54 ~b6? and Black man­aged to draw by advancing his e-pawn: 54 ... e4 55 b5 lieS 56 Wa7 e3 57 l:hl e2 5S lIe 1 ~xh6 59 b6 ~g5 60 b7

60 ... c;t;>g4! (but not 60 ... c;t;>f4?? 61 ':xe2 l:xe2 when White queens with check) 61 :xe2, and the players agreed a draw because of 61. . .lIxe2 62 bS'if :a2+ 63 ~b7 :b2+ and :'xbS.

After the game Bologan de­cided that the second plan would have won: 54 :e3 lIeS 55 ~c5 ~g6 (if 55 ... ~xh6 56 c;t;>d5 %tbS 57 %te4 1.1b5+ 5 S ~c6 :bS 59 b5 etc.) 56 ~d5 ~f5 57 h7 l1dS+ 5S ~c6 :hS 59 :It3

<&t>g4 60 :hI e4 61 b5 e3 62 b6 e2 63 b7 ~f3 64 ltb 1 ~f2 65 b8'ji' 1:xbS 66 l:1xbS el'ii' 67 hS'ji' , and wins' . But is this won? Although White has an extra rook it is not clear where his king is going to hide. In­stead of 56 ~d5, 56 h7! wins:

56 ... ~f5 (if 56 ... ~xh7 57 ~d5, or 56 ... e4 57 hS'ii l:txhS 58 :xe4) 57 :h3 :h8 58 :hI e4 (5S ... ~f4 59 <itfd5 e4 60 ~e6 intending <itf6-g7, or 5S ... ~e4 59 ~d6 ~d4 60 ~e6etc). 59 <itfd4 ~f4 60 :fl + and ~xe4 with a winning rook and pawn endgame.

However, this is unnecessar­ily complex. The waiting move 54 ':h4! wins more easily:

Energy in the Endgame 71

54 ... l:leS 55 ~c4 e4 56 ma e3 57 ~d3 :bS 58 :b2 :le8 59 b5 ~xh6 60 b6 ~g5 61 b7 :b8 61 ~xe3 and the king marches to a 7. And after 54 :b4 Black has no other useful moves. The only candidate is 54 ... ':c7 but then 55 :e4 is a much more simple win than 53 :e3 since the black rook is badly placed on the second rank; i.e. 55 ... :e7 56 ~c5 ~g6 57 ~d5 ~f5 58 :h4 ':d7+ 59 <itc6 1:h7 60 b5 e4 61 b6 etc.

Kamsky-Karpov DortmWld 1993

White to play

This position arose in the later stages of a game where Karpov produced the remark­able 11. .. ~e7 in a nonnal Caro­Kann middlegame. Short of time, the twelfth World Cham­pion has offered the exchange of bishops. Clearly White can­not acquiesce because then his only asset, the passed h-pawn,

72 Energy in the Endgame

would be easily stopped: 38 -txd7 ~xd7 intending ... l::Ih7, or if 39 lIfl ~e7 40 h7 %td8 and ... :h8 and Black wins with the central pawns. The unfortunate position of the white king on the bl-h7 diagonal prevents him from ignoring the attack on his bishop since it would be taken with check. Although the ex­posed black rook allows White to slip in 38 ~cl before moving the bishop, after 38 .. ..:td4 the c4-pawn will fall with check.

Kamsky chose to move the bishop: 38 .i.g6?, but after 38 .. J~h2 39 h7 lj;;e7, having stopped the h-pawn Karpov was able to win by advancing his central pawns:

40 -td3 .i.e6 41 :g 1 f5 42 ~g7+ ~f6 43 lIxa7 e4 44 i.e2 f4 45 b3 f3 46 .i.d 1 .i.f5 4 7 ~c 1 i.xh7 48 :b7 ~e5 49 ~xb6 ':xa2 and White resigned.

Karpov later showed that 38 'iti>c I! was correct, analysing 38 ... Itd4 39 .i.xd7 :xd7? 40 l:.d1 or 39 ... ~xd7? 40 :hI and the h-pawn wins, while after 39 ... .:xc4+ 40 \tb 1 lih4 (not

40 ... ~xd7? 41 %:thl again) 41 l::Id1

White has a clear advantage as the bishop is stronger than the three pawns.

But better still is 38 ~c 1 %td4 39 .i.e4! obstructing the rook's path to the h-file.

Then 39 ... :xc4+ 40 Ij;;d2 ':d4+ 41 ~c3 llxe4 (what else?) 42 l:txe4 J.f5 43 l::Ig4! and White wins with 44 l::Ig7.

In the two examples above, strong Grandmasters failed to take their chances against supe­rior opponents. In the following three games the Grandmasters with the advantage demonstrate their technique.

Keres-Geller Budapest 1952

White to play

Keres has reached the end­game with an extra pawn on the kingside and the possibility of winning a second pawn on a6. He also has the chance to ex­plait some unpleasant pins: with %:td 1 pinning the black bishop to the rook; and subsequently :xd5 l:xd5, J.c4 pinning the black rook to the king. With so much going for White one might think that almost any­thing would win but, in fact, this is a moment when accuracy will be well rewarded. With the above ideas in mind White can consider:

a) Capturing immediately with 26 i.xa6.

b) Pinning immediately with 26 ':d1.

c) Removing the a-pawn from the gaze of the black bishop with 26 a4.

d) Adopting the same plan as

Energy in the Endgame 73

in 'c' but playing 26 a3, so as not to have this pawn fixed on a light square after ... a5.

a) Keres rejected 26 i.xa6 because of 26 ... :a8 27 c4 ~xg2 28 'ltxg2 ':xa6 or 27 ... ':xa6 28 cxd5 lIa5 29 a4 ~f8 and Black should hold the rook endgame. While the bishop endgame of­fers better chances after the al­ternative 27 i.e2

27 ... .:xa2 (not 27 ... J.xa2? 28 ':xa2 :xa2 29 i.c4+) 28 :'xa2 i.xa2, winning it will not be easy.

b) If 26 :'d 1 Black sidesteps the pin by 26 ... lle8! and White is not making progress.

c) Moving the a-pawn is the correct idea. The game contin­ued 26 a4! ':d6 (against 26 ... a5 Keres planned 27 ltd 1 ':e8 28 ':xd5 :xe2 29 g3 :c2 30 :'c5) 27 lId 1 threatening 28 ':xd5 ':xd5 29 i.c4, so Geller tried 27 .. .r:t.f7 with the idea 28 ltxd5? rlxd5 29 J.c4 'it>e6 30 c:t.f1 ~d6 31 i.xd5 'ltxd5 32 ~e2 'it>c4 33 'ltd2 'it>b3 and Black takes con­trol. But Keres instead played 28 a5!

74 Energy in the Endgame

fixing the weak pawn at a6, which is the reason for 26 a4 rather than 26 a3. After 28 ... :e6 29 .i.f1! .i.b3 30 :d7+ Keres won a second pawn and went on to win the game as well.

d) See note 'c'.

Nunn-Seirawan London 19S4

White to play

The advanced d-pawn gives White a decisive advantage. In fact the pawn can be immedi­ately traded in for the black bishop: 31 ':xdS+ .i.xdS 32 4Jb7 i.c7 33 dSii+ i.xdS 34

lDxdS, which seems simple enough. However, Black will have two pawns for the piece and the chance to create a passed a-pawn. Maybe White should not allow this? The black rook is pinned to the king so there is not necessarily any need to win the piece immedi­ately. Or is there?

White can consider four pos­sibilities:

a) 31 :'xd8+ i.xd8 32 lDb7 forcing through the d-pawn.

b) 31 4Jxa6 to capture the potential passed pawn.

c) 31 4Jb7 to drive the rook from dS.

d) 31 b4 to fix the black pawns.

a) Nunn rejected 31 :xdS+ .i.xdS 32 4Jb7 .i.c7 33 dS1W+ .i.xdS 34 4JxdS because 34 ... a5

grants Black serious counter­play. The forthcoming ... a5-a4 will force either the white king or knight to the queenside and Black can then try to draw by eliminating the kingside pawns.

b) 31 4Jxa6 relinquishes the chance to win the piece. White

may still win after 31. .. ~fS 32 lbbS r (not 32 lbc5 ~e7 intend­ing ... .i.e5-d6, or 32 lbb4 ~e7 33 lbxd5+ ~xd7 34 ':c7+ 'lttd6 35 l:.xf7 ~xd5 36 :'xf6 ~e4) 32 ... 'ltte7 since Black is totally tied down - the white king will come forward, and if the bishop leaves the h4-dS diagonal White plays lbc6+ and ltxdS, while ... ~d6 is answered by ':c6+ and .:Ib6 - but this is unnecessarily complicated.

c) Nunn found the accurate route to victory: 31 tiJb7! nfS 32 b4! ~g7 (if 32 ... a5 White can capture 33 lbxa5! since the d7 -pawn is no longer attacked) 33 'lttf2 iLe7 34 lIeS iLh4+ 35 ~f3 h6

and with his opponent's poten­tial counterplay nullified Nunn finally decided to win the piece: 36 ':xfS <it>xfS 37 dS'ii'+ iLxdS 3S tiJxdS ~e7 39 tiJb7 and Sei­rawan resigned.

d) 31 b4 is along the right lines, but it fails in its objective of restraining the black pawns. After 31. .. ~g7 32 :'xdS .i.xdS 33 lbb7 .i.c7 34 d8" .i.xd8 35

Energy in the Endgame 75

lbxd8 a5! the pawn will again prove a distraction: 36 lbc6 (36 bxa5 b4 37 a6 b3 3S a7 b2 39 aSW bl 'ii'+ again leaves a lot of hard work to land the full point) 36 ... a4 37 lbd4 a3 38 lbb3 'lttf6 and Black is still fighting.

Smyslov-Simagin USSR Ch., Moscow 1951

White to play

Material is equal, but White's pieces are so active they should give him good chances for the full point. Nevertheless, Black is not without counterplay as the white pawns are scattered and vulnerable. Black threatens 42 ... :f5+ picking up the g5-pawn, or he might play 42 ... .:f2 to win the a-pawn and create connected passed pawns on the queenside, and the e3-pawn may also come under attack if White opens the e-file by cap­turing on e6.

A further difficulty for White is that the very activity of his

76 Energy in the Endgame

pieces provides him with a con­fusing number of plausible pos­sibilities. He can move up with his king (42 <itd6) or move round with the rook (42 nb6), check on b7 (42 ltJb7+) , capture with check on e6 (42 ltJxe6+), or take time out to prevent Black's ... l:fS+ (42 e4).

Working through these we see that 42 tLJb7+ ~d7 achieves nothing, while after 42 ltJxe6+ ltJxe6 Black regains the pawn (43 l:xe6 11f5+ and ... J:xgS, or 43 ~xe6 :e7 + and ... :xe3) and has reasonable chances in the rook endgame. Furthennore if 42 e4 Black counterattacks else­where with 42 ... .:f2 43 lld6+ ~c8 or 43 ltJxe6ltJxe6 44 l:xe6 l:txa2 and the passed pawns are very dangerous. This would not be a great way to play for a win.

The correct plan is to bring up the king, but the immediate 42 ~d6 would be met by 42 ... ltJe8+ forcing 43 ~xe6 lte7+ 44 ~d5 l:txe3. For this reason Smyslov played the sub­tle 42 :b6!

making room for the king to

come to c6. Then he analysed 42 .. .lIf5+ 43 ~d6 ltJe8+ 44 ~c6 ~e7 45 :b7+ <it>f8 46 ltJxe6+ ~g8 47 lIe7 or 42 ... ~e7 43 e4 J:f2 44 ':b7 ~d8 45 <It>d6 :d2+ 46 ~c6

and White wins. The game continued instead

42 ... ~c8 43 ~d6 :f2 (if 43 ... ltJe8+ 44 ~c6 ':c7+ 45 ~b5) 44 ~c6 ':c2 45 ':b7 ltJe8 (if 45 ... ltJdS 46 cxd5 l:xc5+ 47 ~xc5 ~xb7 48 dxe6 ~c7 49 ~b5) 46 :a7 ~b8 47 :e7 and Simagin resigned.

Perhaps Black's best try was 42 ... 11f2 43 ~d6 ltJe8+ 44 ~c6 ltJg7 (if 44 ... ltxa2? 45 J:b7 or 44 ... ~c8? 45 ':a6) but White has a forced win:

45 :b8+ ~e7 46 :b7+ ~f8 47 ltJd7+ 'iife8 (if 47 ... ~f7 48 ttJe5+ ~g8 49 l:b8+ :f8 50 :xf8+ 'it;xf8 51 ~b5 or 47 ... ~g8 48 ~b8+ ~h7 49 ltJf6+ ) 48 ltJe5 with the dual threats of 49 lXxg7 and 49 :b8+ 'it;e7 50 ttJxg6+ ~f7 51 :f8+, while if 48 ... liJf5 49 e4 wins.

The next example sees the great theorist and teacher Lev Polugayevsky trying to hold his own against the (then) new kid on the block.

Kasparov-Polugaevsky Moscow 1979

White to play

On his previous move, with his rook on g5, the young Kas­parov considered a trick: 28 f6 with the idea 28 ... hxg5?? 29 :h 1 and IDl8 mate. He rejected this because of 28 ... :f2+ 29 'it;d3 :f3+ when the white king cannot escape the checks: 30 'it;d4? hxg5 31 ~hl :f4+ and

Energy in the Endgame 77

:it4, or 30 ~c2? :c8+ 31 'it;bl :Xc 1 + 32 ~xc 1 hxg5 or 30 ~e2? l:xf6. 28 :hl failed similarly to 28 ... :f2+, so Kas­parov moved his attacked rook to h5. Now Black faces the question, which pawn (if any) should he capture?

a) 28 ... :xe5 pinning the f5-pawn and intending to capture either on g7 or f5 the following move.

b) 28 ... ~xg7 removing the advanced pawn and braving the inevitable 29 :gl +.

c) 28 ... :12+ intending to capture on b2.

d) 28 ... ~h7 to defend his own h7 -pawn.

a) 28 ... :xe5? was played by Polugaevsky. Unfortunately the future 13th World Champion replied 29 f61 whming immedi­ately

due to the decisive twin threats of :c8+ and :txh6. After 29 .. J::tf2 + 30 ~d3 .1:.f3+ 31 ~d4 l:te4+ 32 ~xd5 :e8 33 lIxh6 :f5+ 34 ~d4 :f4+ 35 ~c5 ':e5+ 36 ~b6 :e6+ 37 ':c6

78 Energy in the Endgame

Black resigned. b) Black had to remove the

invading pawn: 2S ... ~xg7, and after 29 ltg 1 + ~h7 (not 29 ... ~fS? 30 f6 lle6 31 ':cl! <&t>eS 32 :cS+ \t?d7 33 :fS 11f2+ 34 <itd3 l:xb2 35 :xf7+ ~c6 36 l:tf5 intending :'g7, f7 and wins) 30 f6 :gS 31 l:xh6+ ~xh6 32 ':xgS (Kasparov) 32 ... 11f5

and Black should be okay. c) 2S ... :f2+? 29 ~e3 :xb2

fails to deal with the relevant features of the position; White wins easily with 30 f6 and 31 Itxh6, or if 30 ... ~h7 31l:tchl.

d) 2S ... ~h7? is also insuffi­cient for Black because after 29 f6 (threatening 30 llchl etc) 29 ... 11f2+, the white king does not need to hit the black rook as his own rook is no longer en prise: 30 ~d3 ':f3+ 31 <&t>d4 11f4+ 32 ~c5! and if 32 ... l:cS+ 33 ~d6 1:xc 1 34 llxh6+ ~xh6 35 gS'i6 and in this position the e- and f-pawns will win the game for White, or alternatively 32 ... lIc4+ 33 :xc4 dxc4 34 ~d6 and White wins.

To exchange or not Correspondence chess is per­haps a more relaxed form of chess than its over-the-board counterpart but in postal play accuracy at critical moments is, of course, even more important.

o im .. Zagarovsky Axelson Memorial,

corr. 19S4-93

White to play

A common problem in end­games - in chess in general, in fact - is deciding when or if to exchange. The diagram position arose in a game between two world correspondence chess champions: Tonu aim, the ninth W orId Champion from Estonia, and Vladimir Zag a­rovsky, the fourth World Cham­pion from Russia. White clearly wants to continue his attack on the f7 -square by 41 .id5 but has to decide whether or not to ex- 'J

change on b5 fust. :i

a) 41.i.d5 is the obvious ~

move, immediately attacking the f7-square; after 41. .. bxa4 42 i.xf7+ lbxf7 43 ~xf7 the ad­vance d6-d7 will result in the win of a piece and the game soon after.

b) 41 axb5, on the other hand, appears beset with problems. Apart from recapturing the pawn, Black can attack the white rook by 41. .. i.f5, or can exchange the dangerous bishop with 41. .. lbxf3.

Is this assessment accurate? a) After 41 .i.d5? bxa4 42

.1l..xf7 + lbxf7 43 :xf7 :xb2 the seemingly weak doubled black a-pawns are, surprisingly, very strong:

44 d7 (if 44 :1c7 .i.f5 45 g4 a3 or 45 lbf7 ~f8) 44 ... .i.xd7 45 :xd7 a3 46 lld6 a5 47 lla6 llb5 and the a-pawn queens. White has to struggle for a draw instead with 46ltJe4! (intending 47 ltJf6+ <it>f8 48 lbh 7 + etc) 46 ... ~f8 47 ltJf6 (47 :d6? a5 48 ':a6 ':'b5) 47 ... I:tb6 48 ltd1 (48 ':d2? .:Ibl+ 49 ~e2 :b2) 48 .. J~xf6+ 49 c;t>e2 and 50 llal.

b) Surprisingly 41 axb5! is

Energy in the Endgame 79

correct; if 41. .. i.f5 42 .i.d5! .i.xh7 43 bxa6

and the a-pawn will regain the rook leaving Black with a lost endgame; or if 41. .. lbxf3 42 gxf3 ~xb5 43 IIxf7 i.xh3+ 44 ~f2 :'xb2+ 45 ~g3 and the d­pawn will cost Black a piece.

Dim had worked out the way to the win: 41 axb5! l:.xb5 (41. .. axb5? would close the b­file) 42 ~d5 %lb6 (if 42 ... lixb2 43 .1l..xf7 + !Dxf7 44 :xf7 :d2 45 ':'c7 .1l..f5 46 g4 drives the bishop from the c8-h3 diagonal) 43 .i.xf7+ lbxf7 44 :xf7 llxd6 45 %ta 7 .i.f5 46 g4 :g6 47 gxf5 with a winning rook and pawn endgame. Therefore Zagarov­sky resigned.

Following are twelve more positions for you to solve. Some may seem straightforward, oth­ers may seem more complicated - it all depends on you! But try to analyse quite deeply if you feel the position warrants it. In this way you will be sharpening your skills for when the real test comes in a real game.

80 Energy in the Endgame

Exercises

Position 1 Bigot-Purdy

1st World corr. Ch. 1947-48

White to play

White is a pawn up against the future World Correspon­dence Champion, but the black pieces are circling menacingly around the white king. In par­ticular, Black threatens 63 .. .l::tdl wiJUling the bishop, and 63 ... ~f2 intending 64 ~al ~g3 and 65 ... l:h2 mate. How should White defend?

a) 63 b5 using the passed pawn to distract the black . pIeces.

b) 63 i.g2+ relocating the bishop with tempo.

c) 63 i.c4 moving the bishop to a more useful square.

d) 63 ':a 1 to defend the back rank.

e) 63 :d3 preventing ... .:td 1 and offering the exchange of rooks.

Position 2 Polugaevsky-Averbakh

Moscow 1961

White to play

Here Black is a piece up - a solid material advantage, but his opponent has a passed pawn ready to queen. White caJUlot win the pawn: If 50 'iie2 Black plays 50 .. :iibl attacking the cl­bishop. Similarly, after 50 .i.d3 'iib 1 White is unable to attack the pawn for a second time. The attempt to exchange queens with 50 -'c4 in fact loses to 50 ... 'ifel threatening both the bishop and 51. .. 'if g3 mate.

Left to his own devices Black will play either ... 'iib3 (or per­haps ... 'ifc3) and ... .i.a3, or ... 'iibl and ... .i.b4-c3-b2 and force his pawn through, so White must act swiftly. He has three options:

a) 50 i.d3 threatening 51 'i'e2 to win the pawn, or to at­tack with 51 f4 and 52 f5 or 52 e5.

b) 50 f4 to attack with either 51 e5 or 51 f5.

c) 50 e5 sacrificing a pawn to accelerate the attack.

Position 3 Isakson-Morris

Pretoria 1963

White to play

White has an advanced pro­tected passed pawn, but the black king is in attendance and the white king and infantry have no obvious way to break through. He can consider:

a) 1 g5+ to double the black kingside pawns.

b) 1 a4 intending 2 a5 bxa5 3 c5 creating connected central passed pawns.

c) 1 ~d4 not fearing 1 ... h5 because after 2 gxb5 gxb5 the h-pawn will fall, and Black cannot create another passed pawn on the queenside, nor can his king cannot leave the vicin­ity of the e6-pawn.

d) Triangulating with 1 ~f3

Energy in the Endgame 81

aiming for it to be Black to move in the diagram position after 1. .. ~e7 2 ~f4 ~f6 3 ~e4.

Position 4 Tartakower-JafJe

Carlsbad 1911

White to play

In this game early in his ca­reer' Tartakower has just broken a pin on his knight by 31 .i.c3-d4, also threatening both a bishop on e4 and a discovered attack on the black queen. Jaffe responded by moving his bishop from e4 to attack the a2-pawn. And now White has four possi­bilities:

a) 32 a4 moving the attacked pawn.

b) 32 ltJxe6 with a double at­tack against the queen and the dark-squared bishop.

c) 32 ltJxa6 intending 32 ... 'iixa6 33 a4 when 34 .i.c5 cannot be prevented.

d) 32ltJe4 intending 33 tDf6+ gxf6 34 .i.c5 regaining the piece

82 Energy in the Endgame

with the black king in the open.

Position 5 KarpovooMiles London 1982

White to play

In this position, arising from the Dragon variation of the Si­cilian Defence, Karpov has just sacrificed the exchange on d5. The point of this gambit is to clear the long diagonal for the bishop to support the passed a­pawn. The black b-pawn is also a potential target and the white king is much more active than its counterpart. How should White continue?

a) 30 .tg2 to seize the long diagonal.

b) 30 a7 with the idea 30 ... :a8 31 .tg2 skewering the rooks.

c) 30 ':c3 to exchange a pair of rooks or otherwise seize the c-file.

d) 30 <it>b4 to attack the b5-pawn.

Position 6 Balashov-Shirov

Klaipeda 1988

Black to play

Although White is the ex­change up, the black king and bishop are actively placed and the pawns are all on one side, so Black has good chances to draw. This is the critical mo­ment of the endgame as Black must make a very important decision as to how to defend his b-pawn. He can play 51. .. ~c4 when he has a very compact fortress but there is a danger that his pieces may be too con­stricted. The alternative is 51. .. .tc4 when, in order to make progress, White will have to attack the queenside pawns with his king. Black will then have the opportunity to do the same with his king and may be able to liquidate to a bare rook v bishop endgame. Note that whichever plan he chooses, Black is unlikely to be able to

regroup his forces due to the weakness of the b-pawn. It is therefore imperative that he makes the right decision now. So which is it to be?

a) 51. .. <t>c4. b) 51. .. .i.c4.

Position 7 Koblents-Moiseev

Riga 1955

Black to play

Black has a dangerous ad­vanced passed pawn for his piece, but the white rook and bishop are lined up to deliver a decisive discovered check. Black also has the threat against his rook on h3 to consider. How should he proceed?

a) Queen the pawn, 37 ... fl. - the simple solution.

b) Remove the king from the battery, 37 ... ~c8.

c) 37 ... :e3 hitting the bishop to hinder potential discovered checks.

d) Something else.

Energy in the Endgame 83

Position 8 Kamsky-Nikolic

Belgrade 1991

Black to play

After 44 moves of a French Winawer the black c3- and d4-pawns, having sat out the battle on their respective squares since Black's 16th move, are now ready to march forward. As is usual in the Winawer, White also has his trumps in a pair of passed kingside pawns. After playing .i.g5 to keep the knight at bay his pawns, too, will be ready to advance.

Black must decide whether to rush on with his pawns without wasting time, or whether to take time first to try and stop White's pawns. To this end he has three choices:

a) 44 ... d3 trying to queen the pawns immediately.

b) 44 ... ~f6 to halt the white pawns with the knight.

c) 44 ... :xcl sacrificing to remove the troublesome bishop.

84 Energy in the Endgame

Position 9 Polugaevsky-Hartston

Las Palmas 1974

Black to play

The text books will tell you that endgames can often be conducted along simple strate­gic lines. Capablanca was fa­mous for analysing endgames in tenns of where he wanted his pieces, rather than concerning himself with any immediate tac­tics. Typically, he would pick up a knight from, say e3, relo­cate it to c5 in one move and then perform the same manoeu­vre with a rook from d2 to a6. He would then announce that this was how White should play the endgame.

One could be forgiven for thinking that the endgame is a purely technical struggle but this is not always the case. Some positions are just a mess and strategic analysis and plan­ning has to go out the window in favour of straightforward

calculation. This is difficult as reduced material does not al­ways simplify the tactical na­ture of the position. Further­more, analysing towards the end of a tough game is hard work and there is always a temptation to play anything. The following is a typical position where fid­dly tactics predominate.

Thinking (correctly I) that the position is an easy draw Black has been playing casually and now faces some problems. The strategic consideration of ele­ments such as bishop v knight, passed pawns and active pieces are now completely irrelevant. The question is simple - where should he put the knight?

a) 43 ... ltJd5. b) 43 ... ltJdl. c) 43 ... ltJa2. d) 43 ... ltJa4.

Position 10 Adams-Kramnik

Moscow Olympiad 1994

White to play

Black has just sacrificed on d5, hoping after 52 'iitxd5 ~f4 to gain a draw with his sup­ported passed pawn. In reply, White must decide whether or not to exchange on a5 before capturing the bishop. So, what do you think?

a) Exchange first, 52 bxa5. b) Capture the bishop first, 52

~xd5. c) I t makes no difference,

Black gets a draw either way.

Position 11 Kamsky-van der Sterren

Wijk aan Zee 1994

White to play

Black has three pawns for the bishop and, as they are widely spread, White is hard pressed to contain them. Black also has the opposition, and even if White plays one of his two waiting moves (72 h4 or 72 .tb2) to gain the opposition himself, by advancing the f-pawn Black can easily force the white king to

Energy in the Endgame 85

give way. White has four op­tions.

a) Attack the kings ide pawns with 72 ~e3 and <iiff4.

b) Attack the pawns with 72 'iitc4.

c) Play a waiting move, 72 Ji.b2.

d) Play an alternative waiting move, 72 h4.

Position 12 Griinfeld-Tartakower

Vienna 1922

Black to play

This position was reached in the first game of a match (later drawn 3-3) between the two famous hypermodern Grand­masters. Black has a promising position; although he is the ex­change down, he has a strong passed e-pawn and a very active king. How should he continue?

a) Ignore the attack on the bishop and infiltrate immedi­ately with the king by 39 ... <iife3 and ... ~f2.

86 Energy in the Endgame

b) Play 39 ... .ta8 retreating the bishop to a safe square and only then move up with the king.

c) Sacrifice the bishop with 39 ... J.xg2 to clear the path for the f-pawn to advance.

d) Advance the f-pawn im­mediately with 39 ... f3.

Solutions

Position 1 Bigot-Purdy

1st World COtTo Ch. 1947-48

White to play

Lines 'a', 'd' and 'e' go down quickly:

a) 63 b5? does not distract Black in the slightest: 63 ... '1t>f2! 64 ..tg2 ltd1+ or 64 ':a1 ~g3 and White gets mated.

d) Similarly 63 :a I? only an­swers the threat of 63 ... .:d1; after 63 ... ~g3! White again gets mated.

e) Finally 63 ltd3? offers only a temporary reprieve: Af-

ter the reply 63 ... l:b2! the threats remain and this time White has no defence; e.g. 64 .tg2+ ~f2 65 l:td1 ~g3 66 l:e1 J.d4 66 l:.d1 :e2!

intending 67 ... ~e3 and wins. This leaves 'b' and 'c' as

candidates for potential salva­tion.

b) 63 ~g2+? was chosen by White. Purdy replied 63 ... ~f2! (threatening 64 ... :Idl + 65 ~h2 ..tf4+ mating) 64 :al ~g3 65 ':e 1 J.d4 66 :b 1.

Now Black could have fin­ished with 66 .. J~xg2! 67 :b3+ ~f2 intending ... ~e5 and ... l:h2 mate since the bishop prevents the check from b2. Instead the Australian chose 66 ... !te2 and

Black resigned anyway. c) Surprisingly, Purdy con­

sidered the original position to be won for Black, but in fact White can defend with 63 .i.c4!, the key point being that White has now created the option of ':a2, countering the pressure of the black rook along the seventh rank, e.g. 63 ... q.,f2 is answered by 64 :a2 forcing the exchange of rooks. Furthermore after 63 ... .:d1 + 64 ~h2 :d2+ 65 q.,h1 Black has nothing better than perpetual check. Trying to dislodge the bishop by 63 ... :c2 fails to 64 j"d5 +, and if 63 ... .:d4 64 ltc3! ~f2 65 ':c2+ ~g3 66 ':g2+ Wxh3 67 .i.e6+ and Black is driven back by the white pieces.

Position 2 Polugaevsky-Averbakh

Moscow 1961

White to play

a) Polugaevsky discovered after the game that 50 .i.d3 1Wb 1

Energy in the Endgame 87

51 f4 would have won, since the attack with e4-e5 and f4-f5 is decisive. The light-squared bishop blocks the third rank so 51..:iib3 is answered simply by 52 We2 winning the c2-pawn, or if 5l. .. 1Wal. 52 ~g4! (break­ing the potential pin on the third rank) 52 ... ..ta3 53 .i.xa3 'iixa3 54 .i.xc2 and wins. If 51. .. .lib4 the attack crashes through: 52 e5 .i.c3 (intending ... j"b2)

53 f5 gxf5 (or 53 ... ..tb2 54 fxg6) and now 54 j"xf5 j"b2 55 .i.h7+ Wf8 56 e6 (Polugaev­sky), or 55 i..e6 fxe6 56 g6, or 54 "1Wxf5 "1Wxcl 55 'Wh7+ all lead to mate.

b) 50 f4? seems the most natural move, but the exposed position of the white king al­lows Black to conduct his ma­noeuvre with gain of time: 50 ... 1Wb3+ intending 51. .. .i.a3, or if 511Wd3 "bI.

c) In the game White sought to gain time himself with 50 e5? i..xe5 51 ..td3 1Wbl 52 'iiel .i.f4 (else 53 "1Wd2 winning the c-pawn) 53 .i.c4 threatening 54 1We8+ and wins.

88 Energy in the Endgame

But in time trouble he had overlooked 53 ... .te3! closing the e-file, and had to hurry to make a draw: 54 'Wa5 .xc! 55 i.xf7+ cwt>xf7 56 1id5+ 1;g7 57 .e5+. If 53 'ti'e8+ <tJg7 54 .txf4 Black gives perpetual with 54 .. :~i'h! + etc., while if White tries 53 .txg6 Black again answers with 53 ... .te3!

Position 3 Isakson-Morris

Pretoria 1963

White to play

a) 1 g5+! is the correct move. Because of the check Black is

forced to capture: 1. .. hxg5 (if 1. .. <iitxg5 the e-pawn queens) and now White can break through: 2 ~f3 ~e7 3 ~g4 ~f6 4 a4 a5 5 ~g3 <iite7 6 ~f3 ~f6 7 ~g4 winning both g-pawns, or if 6 ... <it>f8 7 <t;g4 1;g8 8 ~xg5 ~g7 9 e7! with a won, endgame.

Against anything else Black plays 1. .. ~e7 and will be care­ful not to put the king back on f6. White is unable to make progress. Isakson played 1 ~d4? and the game was later drawn. 1 a4 ~e7 2 <t;d4 ~e8 3 a5?? even loses: 3 ... bxa5 4 c5 1;e7 and the black king can hold both the c and e-pawns (5 c6 \t(d8) whereas his counter­part is overstretched by the far­flung a and h-pawns.

Position 4 Tartakower-latTe

Carlsbad 1911

White to play

a) The best move is 32 a4! as ;

played by Tartakower, main­taining all the threats. Some­times a quiet strengthening of the position is stronger than the immediate execution of a threat. This is just such a position. The game concluded: 32 ... .llc2 33 a5 f6 34 exf6 e5 35 .ie3 .if5 36 lLJd3 'Wb7 37 .ic5 .ixd3 38 ,*xf8+ ~h7 39 .ie7 gxf6 40 .£7+ and Black resigned.

In his notes Tartakower also gave 32 ... 'i'e7 33 'ikxe7 .ixe7 34 lLJxa6 .ic2 35 a5 i.xb3 36 ttJc7 when the a-pawn will cost Black a piece, and 32 ... a5 33 ~e2 (planning lLJd7) 33 ... ,*e7 34 flxe7 i.xe7 35 lLJb7 .ib4 36 Jic5. In the latter case, how­ever, Black has the move 36 ... .ic3 and seems to be well in the game.

After 32 ... a5 the correct con­tinuation is 33 b41 axb4 (not 33 ..... e7 34 'fixe7 .ixe7 35 bxa5) and now if 34lLJxe6 "e7 35 .-xf8+ 'ikxf8 36 lLJxf8 'it>xf8 37 a5 Jif5 38 a6 ~c8 39 a7 .ib7 40 .i.c5+ 'iti>e8 41 .ixb4 'it>d7 and Black is okay; hence 34 a5!

Energy in the Endgame 89

34 ... Jif5 (if 34 ... b3 35 lDxe6 'fie7 36 'ikxf8+ 'ikxf8 37 lDxf8 'iti>xf8 38 a6 wins; or 34 ... 'fie7 35 'fixe7 .ixe7 36 a6) 35 a6!

and Black has run out of moves: 35 ... b3 36 lDxe6 fxe6 (36 ... 'ike7 37 flxe7 Jixe7 38 a7) 37 .ixa7 b2 38 "Wb8 bI" 39 'i'xbI .i.xbI 40 ii.b6 and wins.

b) And after 32 ttJxe6? Tar­takower analysed 32 ... 'ike7 33 'fixf8+ 'ikxf8 34 lLJxf8 ~xf8 35 a4 .ia2 and Black regains the pawn.

c) Against the capture 32 lLJxa6, 32 ... 'ike7? is bad because of 33 "xe7 .ixe7 34 a4 .ia2 35 .ic5, but after 32 ... 'Wxa6 33 a4 lib7! 34 .ic5 'ikxb3

Black has strong counterplay:

90 Energy in the Endgame

35 .xf8+ ~h7 36 li'xfi 1ib2+ and 37 ... li' xe5.

d) If 32 lDe4 'ii'e7f and White has achieved nothing.

Position 5 Karpov-Miles London 1982

White to play

a) Karpov rejected 30 .tg2 because of 30 ... :d4 'and Black is all right'. If 31 .i.b7 :d8 32 :e4 :xe4 33 .txe4 d5 34 .ltd3 :b8 35 ~b4 ~e8 36 .ltxb5+ ~d8 37 ~c5 ~c7 and if 38 .ltc6 :b6.

b) 30 a7 is similarly an­swered by 30 ... ltd4 31 .ixb5 :a8 or 31 .ltg2 d5.

c) Karpov played 30 :c3! analysing 30 ... :xc3+ 31 ci;xc3 :c5+ 32 ~b4 :c7 33 .ltg2 and .tb7, a7 etc., or 30 ... :dc5 31 :xc5 dxc5 32 .ltg2 and wins. The game concluded 30 ... :d8 31 :c7! (more straightforward than 31 a7 b4 32 axb4 :dl 33 .ltg2 d5 34 :c7)

31 ... :dl 32 .ltxb5 e5 33 a7 exf4 34 l:.b7 :b 1 + 35 ~a4 :xb5 36 :xb5 f3 37 :b8 f2 38 :xd8+ and Black resigned.

d) 30 ~b4 Black can defend the b-pawn by 30 ... :b8 intend­ing 31. .. :d4+ and 32 ... d5, and if 31 c3 :c5 32 .ltg2 ::'c4+ 33 <ittb3 :c7 intending ... :a7 (or 34 ~b4 :'c4+! 35 ~b3 :c7 repeating moves).

Position 6 Balashov-Shirov

Klai peda 1988

Black to play

a) Shirov played 51. .. ~c4?:

but resigned immediately fol­lowing White's reply, 52 ~d2. The black pieces are too re­stricted, and Shirov realised too late that he would end up in zugzwang: 52 ... .i.a2 53 <itc2 .i.b3+ 54 ~c 1 .li.a2 55 Ad6 ~b3 (55 ... .i.b3 56 ~b1) 56 Ad8 ~c4 (56 ... b4 57 l:[b8)

57 ~c2 ~b3+ 58 \tb 1. b) Black could have drawn

quite easily with 51. .. .i.c4 52 :b8 ~e5 53 :e8+ ~d5 54 <itf4 ~a2 55 :d8+ ~c4 56 ~e5 ~b3 57 :d2 b4 as shown by Shirov.

Then 58 cxb4 cxb4 59 axb4 ~xb4 (intending ... a3) 60 :d8 ~b3 61 1:tb8+ ~c2 intending ... .tb3, <it?xb2, or 60 ~d4 ~b1! with the intention of playing

Energy in the Endgame 91

... ~b3, ... .i.c2, ... ~xb2 (but not 60 ... a3?? 61 bxa3+ ~xa3 62 ~c3 and White wins).

Position 7 Koblents-Moiseev

Riga 1955

Black to play

Lines ~a' and 'b' can quickly be discarded: 37 ... fl'ii? 38 :f6+ wins the new queen; and 37 ... ~c8? loses to 38 :f6 stop­ping the f-pawn and remaining a piece ahead.

c) 37 ... Ae3 is sufficient for a draw: 38 :f6+ :xe5 39 :xf7+ ~d6 40 l:xf2 ~xd5 and while the g-pawn will cost Black the rook, advancing the queenside pawns will create some winning chances, but the likely outcome is a draw.

d) But the punchline in this position is that 37 ... f5+ wins! If 38 ~xf5 or 38 ~xh3 the Black f-pawn queens with check, while if 38 gxf6 fl" wins since the white rook is unable to at-

92 Energy in the Endgame

tack the new queen. Moiseev played 37 ... f5+! and Koblents resigned.

Position 8 Kamsky-Nikolic

Belgrade 1991

Black to play

a) Nikolic chose 44 ... d3? but after 45 ~g5 he had to mount a swift rearguard action to stop the g-pawn: 45 ... lita2 (if 45 ... d2 46 ':hl 1) 46 g7 :a8 47 h5 d2 48 .tth l! (not 48 :f1? tDf6! 49 h6 tDe4+ 50 ~f4 llJxg5 51 ~xg5 c2 and wins) 48 ... tDf6 49 <it>f3 tDxh5

50 i.xd2! tDxg7 (or 50 ... cxd2 51 llxh5+ ~d4 52 c;t>e2) 51 !tcl :a3 52 l:txc3+ Itxc3+ 53 i.xc3 tDf5 and the players agreed a draw.

b) 44 ... tDf6? is also inade­quate: 45 iag5 llJh5+ 46 ~g4 "tDg7 47 ':g1 (not 47 h5? llg2+) intending h4-h5 and both sets of passed pawns are very strong.

c) Nikolic later discovered the correct method: 44 ... :xc 1 ! 45 llxc1

45 ... ~c4 (not 45 ... d3? 46 ':xc3+! tDxc3 47 g7 etc.) 46 g7 tDf6 47 ~f2 d3 48 h5 d2 and wins. If instead 48 c;t>e3

intending 48 ... c2? 49 c;t>d2 or 48 ... d2? 49 1:fl c;t>b3 50 ~d3 ~b2 51 Itd 1 and :xd2, then

48 ... lLlg4+ 49 ~f4 lLlh6! wins because 50 ~e3 would now drop the g7-pawn to 5o ... lLlf5+.

Position 9 Polugaevsky-Hartston

Las Palmas 1974

Black to play

a) Hartston played 43 ... lLld5? and after the reply 44 l:td3! ~c6? (44 .. Jlxb7? 45 lIxd5+ ~xd5 46 .i,g2+)

45 l::tdlJ llxb7 46 llxd5 he had to resign. 44 .... i1iie5 was better, although White should still win with 45 ~d I! lIb2 46 J.g2 lLlf4 47 :d8 lLlxg2 48 b8'iW :xb8 49

Energy in the Endgame 93

l::txb8. Both 'b' and 'c' also lose the knight: 43 ... lLldl 44 b8i1 1:xb8 45 lld3+ or 43 ... lLla2 44 lIa3 lLlcl 45 1%a I!

d) The only move, as pointed out by Polug2cvsky, was 43 ... lLla4! and Black holds on. After capturing the b7-pawn Black can, if necessary, give up the knight for the f-pawn and the rook and bishop v rook end­game is a book draw. Although the analysis is not complex, 43 ... lLla4! is perhaps a difficult move to see as there is a strong inclination against situating a knight on the edge of the board.

Position 10 Adams-Kramnik

Moscow Olympiad 1994

White to play

a) Adams actually exchanged pawns: 52 bxa5? bxa5 53 ~xd5 ~f4 54 lla3 and a draw was agreed.

b) However, it did make a difference. White could have

94 Energy in the Endgame

won by capturing first, as dem­onstrated by the endgame maes­tro, Jon Speehnan: 52 ~xd5! ~f4 53 %Ie I! and if 53 ... axb4 54 ~d4! ~f3

55 <it'd3! <iPf2 56 J:e2+ ~f3 57 :e6 g3 58 :f6+ <it'g2 59 ~e2 and the g-pawn is stopped; or 55 ... g3 56 :fl + ~g2 57 ~e2 <iPh2 58 ltbl g2 59 <it'f2 or 58 ... b3 59 ~f3 g2 60 J:b2 and wins; while after 53 ... ~f3 White's pawn comes in very handy: 54 b5! g3 55 ~c6 g2 56 ~xb6 ~f2 57 l:a 1 a4

5 8 ~a5! with the amusing spectacle of a king successfully chasing a pawn from behind: 58 ... a3 59 ~a4 a2 60 ~a3 and White wins.

Position 11 Kamsky-van der Sterren

Wijk aan Zee 1994

White to play

a) 72 ~e3 is far too slow: 72 ... ~d5 73 ~f4 ~c4 7 4 ~xf5 ~b3 and Black wins easily with ... ~c2, ... b3-b2 etc

b) 72 ~c4? , as Kamsky played, is also insufficient. Van der Sterren replied 72 ... ~c6! and White could no longer save the game: 73 ~b3 (if 73 ~xb4 ~d5 74 ~c3 ~e4 75 ~d2 ~f3 intending ... <ifg2, and to queen the f-pawn) 73 ... ~d5 74 <it>xa2 f4

75 i..f6 f3 76 i..h4 ~d4 77 c;itb3 <ite3 78 ~xb4 f2 79 i..xf2+ c;itxf2 and Kamsky resigned. After 80 ~c4 c;itg3 81 ~d3 ~xh3 82 ~e2 ~g2 White is one move too slow.

c) White must sit back and do nothing. Unfortunately the sim­ple 72 ~b2 fails because the bishop is vulnerable on b2. Af­ter 72 ... f4 73 ~e4 ~c5 74 c;itxf4 ~c4, 75 ... <itb3 hits the bishop and Black then wins with ... <itc2, ... b3-b2 etc.

d) However, 72 h4! holds. If Black tries 72 ... ~e6 then White can now pass with 73 .i.b2! since the white king can reach d2 (to prevent ... c;itc2) before the black king reaches b3. If Black tries for more than a draw, he loses, as analysed by van der Sterren: 72 ... b3 73 ~c4 f4

74 ~d4! f3 75 <ite3 ~d5 76 c;itxf3 c;itc4 77 <ite2 ~b4 78 ~d2 ~a3 79 ~c 1 and White wins (79 ... ~a4 80 i..f6 ~a3 81 i..e7+ ~a4 82 ~b2 ~b5 83 i..f6 ~c4 84 ~a3! or 83 ... ~a4 84 i.c3); or 72 ... ~c6 73 ~e5 c;itc5 74

Energy in the Endgame 95

c;itxf5 c;itc4 75 c;ite4 ~b3 76 ~d3 etc.; or 72 ... f4 73 c;ite4 ~c5 74 ~xf4 ~c4 75 ~e4 c;itb3 76 ~d3.

Position 12 Griinfeld-Tartakower

Vienna 1922

Black to play

a) 39 ... ~e3 can be easily dismissed. Although 40 :xd5 ~f2 wins a rook by this stage Black is already behind by this much material. After 41 :c 1 (say) 41. .. el'ii 42 :xel ~xel 43 %ld4 White will win with his kingside pawns.

d) 39 ... f3 is too impetuous. After 40 gxf3 i.xf3 41 %:.gg 1 Black cannot make progress; e.g. 41. .. ~e3 42 lIcl :d8 43 :c3+ ~f2 44 tlc2.

c) It is also too soon for 39 ... .i.xg2, although Tartakower actually won quickly after 40 :g4? iLf3! 41 :xf4+ ~e3 42 ':£7 ~f2. Griinfeld should have captured the bishop, 40 ~xg2!,

96 Energy in the Endgame

when Tartakower analyses the line 4O ... ~e3 41 ~gl f3 42 :g3 :gS 43 ':xe2+ ~xe2 44 ltxgS f2 + and wins; but White can make things much more diffi­cult with 41 11f5! (threatening l:xe2+) 41. .. ':g8+ 42 ~h2 f3

43 h4! ~f2 44 J:tbl :eS 45 b4! (intending 45 ... ~e3 46 ~g3 l%g8+ 47 :g5 :'xg5+ 48 hxg5 f3 49 ':b3+ ~d2 50 ':b2+ with a draw) 45 ... e1. 46 ltxe1 ltxe1 47 h5 and White has good pros­pects for a draw.

b) 39 ... Ji.aS! is the best move, putting the bishop on its least exposed square and maintaining all the threats. After 40 ~gl (to

prevent ... ~e3-f2) 40~ .. ~e3 41 :g7 (to answer 41. .. f3 with 42 gxf3 Ji.xf3 43 %lal! :IdS 44 lte 7 + ~f4 45 'it>f2 l:.d 1 46 .:n + or 44 ... Ji.e4 45 %leU and Black has no better than a draw: 45 .. J~g8+ 46 'iith2 ':g2+ etc., but not 45 ... :d I? 46 ltxe4+ ~xe4 47 ~f2)

and now is the time for 41. .. .i.xg2! 42 lUe2+ (if White takes the bishop then 42 ... f3 wins) 42 ... 'iitxe2 43 :'xg2+ ~e1 44 :g7 (44 :f2? :g8+ 45 ':g2 :xg2+ 46 'it>xg2 <ifr'e2 or 44 :te2 :g8+ 45 ~h2 f3) 44 .. .f3 45 :£7 :gS+ 46 ~h2 f2 47 :e7+ ~fl planning ... l1d8-d2-e2 and wins.

4 Material versus the Initiative

Mass and Energy One of the great discoveries of the twentieth century was made by Albert Einstein, who, with his famous equation e = mc2,

atUlounced to an astonished world that mass and energy were actually interchangeable. In fact, it is possible to apply a similar principle in chess, al­though perhaps not with such profound results. Mass can be regarded as the material balance and structural features of a po­sition; energy incorporates the dynamic factors, i.e. who has the initiative and how strong it is. As with the physical world, these can often be exchanged, although on the chessboard it does not require a nuclear reac­tion to achieve this.

A common situation in chess is that one side has sacrificed for an attack. The sacrifice may be a simple material one or may take the fonn of a positional concession such as accepting an isolated pawn or giving the op­ponent the two bishops. Many openings are geared directly

towards creating such an imbal­ance. Classical gambit openings such as the King's Gambit, Evans Gambit and Scotch Gam­bit, all somewhat crudely offer the lure of material in order to further one side's development. More modem openings demon­strate greater subtlety with the distribution of risks and re­wards. Isolated queen pawn po­sitions - which can arise from almost any opening - handicap one side with a structural weak­ness but grant active piece play in return. The Nimzo-Indian often leads to White having a crippled pawn structure and weak squares, but offer the lure of easy development and chan­ces to develop an attack.

The player with the active position often faces a dilemma while trying to develop his or her initiative. An opportunity often arises to convert the mo­mentum into something more tangible such as perhaps the win of pawn or maybe even the ex­change. However, the attack may be very strong and trading

98 Material versus the Initiative

this in for a modest material reward may not be a good deal. Such decisions can be quite tricky. Consider the following examples:

Karpov-Topalov Linares 1994

White to play

This position is from a tour­nament where Karpov was in extraordinarily powerful form, scoring 11/13 against the world's top players, including Garry Kasparov. Here Karpov has developed a promising ini­tiative against the strong Bul­garian grandmaster Veselin To­palov and can gain his reward by winning a pawn with 20 .l.xc6 :a7 (this tactic limits Black's losses to a pawn) 21 • d3 :xc6 22 cxb5. This looks promising: White will be a clear pawn ahead with a passed a­pawn and will soon be able to exert a clamp on the black queenside with a4. However,

Karpov turned this opportunity down. In his notes he indicates the further continuation 22 ... c4! 23 '6'f3 ':c8.

True, White is a pawn ahead and may well win the game, but he has many technical obstacles to overcome before he can hope to score the full point. Black has fair 'Benko Gambit style' pres­sure along the a- and b-files which he can augment by re­aligning his bishop to the al-h8 diagonal. Psychologically, To­palov would probably be feeling quite happy here. His unpleas­ant defensive situation has been transformed to one where he has the initiative and he can look forward to setting his op­ponent awkward problems for some time to come.

If we consider the original position we note that it is, in fact, on the kingside that Black has problems, as all his major pieces are huddled together on the opposite wing. By attempt­ing to pursue his initiative on the queenside White is, in a sense, playing to his opponent's

strengths. Karpov thus turned his attention to the opposite wing and uncorked his own sac­rifice with 20 ltxe6!

Suddenly Black is under ter­rible pressure as if 20 .. .fxe6 21 'ii'xe6+ ~f8 22 .txc6 'ii"b6 23 'Wxe7+ ~xe7 24 ltJd5+ and White wins. Topalov tried to wriggle with 20 ... :a7 but now there followed further demoli­tion with 21 :xg6+! fxg6 (as the white queen is attacked Black can try to decline the sac­rifice, but this is also unsuccess­ful, e.g. 21. .. ~f8 22 ~3 fxg6 23 'ii'h8+ ~f7 24 it.d5 mate; or 21. .. ~h7 22 1ib3+ ~xg6 23 .te4+ ~g7 24 'ifh7+ and White wins) 22 'ii'e6+ rt;;g7 23 .txc6

Material versus the Initiative 99

Now White has a fantastic position. Rather than being bogged down in a long techni­cal endgame, he has activated his pieces, ripped open the black king and established ex­cellent central squares for his minor pieces. The game contin­ued 23 ... ltd8 (Topalov adopts a similar strategy of trying to ac­tivate his forces rather than worry about material; unfortu­nately his position is already beyond hope) 24 cxb5 Ji.f6 25 lbe4 .li.d4 26 bxa6 and White soon won.

Spassky-Karpov Leningrad 1974

White to play

Here Boris Spassky has ob­tained a useful initiative against Karpov's Caro-Kann Defence. He could now capture the loose Black pawn on b5 but then, as in the previous example, Black could well develop useful play along the resultant open lines.

100 Material versus the Initiative

However, White has many other trumps in his position. The black kingside is slightly vul­nerable as the front g-pawn is a little loose and the lever h5-h6 will further compromise the Black Icing's position. Addition­ally White has the advance d4-d5 up his sleeve. If Black cap­tures then White can develop strong play along the d- and e­files with the knight on d7 being a particular target. If Black ad­vances ... e5 in reply to d5 then White will have a strong passed pawn and a useful square on f5 for his knight. Finally, if Black ignores the advance then White can prise open the black king­side with dxe6 or even create a passed pawn with d6.

With such a catalogue of promising plans at White's dis­posal it is not surprising that Spassky opted for the direct 23 d5. Now 23 ... exd5 is well met by 24 liJxd5 when Black is in trouble as 24 ... 1ib7 can be met by 25 'Wd2 and White wins the g5-pawn - a much more valu­able prize than the b5-pawn. It is difficult to see how Black can defend after 23 d5 as 23 ... e5 is terrible on account of 24 'ii'xb5 and now that White can meet 24 ... .:ab8 with 25 1i'c6, Black has no counterplay and is sim­ply a p"awn down.

Karpov, however, kept his nerve and met 23 d5 with the calm 23 ... a6!, consolidating the queenside and daring White to

do his worst on the opposite . wmg.

Now 24 dxe6 fxe6 leaves Black with a ropey pawn struc­ture on the kingside, but never­theless White would not hold the advantage. White's own pawns on f2 and g4 are also exposed and Black has useful play along the open f-file. Fur­thermore, although the black pawn on e6 looks sickly, it is doing a fine job of restricting the white knight. Spassky in­stead tried to open further lines with 24 h6, also setting the trap of 24 ... g6? 25 dxe6 fxe6 26 liJf5! after which White wins, e.g. 26 ... exf5 27 'iWe6+ ~f7 28 1i'xg6+ ~f8 29 h7. However Karpov met White's 24 h6 with 24 ... gxh6 25 :hl liJf6! (another accurate move; 25 ... <ittg7?! al­lowed White a dangerous attack with 26 f4, e.g. 26 ... gxf4 27 'i'h2 :lI8 28 d6 and 29 'ti'xf4) and after 26 l:xh6 ~g7 27 %thhl l:Iad8 28 dxe6 fxe6 29 l2Jc21i'f4 Black was okay.

The lesson here is that al­though the potential White at-

tack on the kingside seemed promising, a closer examination of the position reveals that Black has sufficient defensive resources. In particular, the white knight is not pulling its weight. So can White do better? Let us return to the original po­sition.

Surprisingly, White's best in here is the materialistic 23 "xb5! His position does not have sufficient momentum to justify an aggressive plan and so it is time to take something. However, he must not take too much. After 23 ... .:labS, he should retreat with 24 "e2, as the greedy 24 'ii'xg5 is swiftly mated by 24 ... :xb2+. After 24 "e2 White will undoubtedly be in for a tough struggle, but at least he is starting off a pawn ahead and must stand better. He can consolidate with l:d I-d2 and l:tgl-cl and will always maintain the long term possi­bility of advancing d4-d5. The contrast between this example

Material versus the Initiative 101

and the previous one is that Karpov's position against To­palov justified .an attacking continuation, whereas Spass­ky's did not.

Getting active As well as exchanging material (or a material advantage) for an initiative, it is also possible to trade in positional advantages for raw activity. The following is a famous example.

Fischer .. Petrosian Buenos Aires

White to play

This game was played in the Candidates cycle when Fischer had been beating world class players by the sort of score usu­ally associated with defeats of the English cricket team. How­ever, in the Candidates Final against Tigran Petrosian he fi­nally appeared to have run into an opponent capable of holding his own against him. This was a

102 Material versus the Initiative

key position from the seventh game.

Fischer has a wonderful po­sition. He has much the better bishop, all his pieces are more active than Black's and he has the better pawn structure as well. However, although very passi ve, Black is solid and it is up to White to find a break­through. Various possibilities suggest themselves: 22 a4 and later a4-a5 to pin the black pawn down on a6; 22 g4 to ad­vance on the kingside while the Black rooks are tied down on the other wing; or the simple 22 cat.>f2, activating his king. All these are perfectly possible and would probably be sufficient for Fischer to win against a weaker opponent. However, Petrosian was famous as an immensely gritty defender and Fischer would have needed to play very well to win.

After some thought, Fischer came up with the surprising 24 ~xd7+! :xd7 25 ':cl.

This looks very strange: White voluntarily exchanges off

his wonderful knight on c5 for the crummy black bishop on d7 which was hemmed in by its own pawns. What is going on?

The key to Fischer's play is a transfonnation of his advantage from a strategic one to the ini­tiative. With his exchange he has activated his major pieces. His knight on c5 was very pretty but, apart from pressing slightly against the pawn on a6, was not actually causing Black much hann. Fischer has main­tained elements of his strategic advantage and is judging that, as Black struggles to defend his weaknesses, his rooks will gain opportunities to invade. The further play in the game demon­strates this to be excellent judgment:

23 ... :d6 (Black does not want to allow a White rook onto the seventh rank but he had to do something about :c6 and 23 ... l:b7 24 a3 a5 is well met by 25 b5 with a big passed pawn) 24 lIc7 ~d7 25 lIe2

Now Black has a further problem. If he ever moves his

knight from d7 White will dou­ble along the seventh rank with :tee7. The game continued 2S ... g6 26 <i1tf2 hS 27 f4 h4? (Black wants to prevent the white plan of bringing his king to gS and then playing fS; nev­ertheless, despite the previous comment, Black would have done better to try 27 ... ttJb6 28 l:Iee7 l:f6) 28 ~f3! fS 29 <i1te3 d4+ 30 <i1td2

(White now plans to dislodge Black's only decent piece with .i.c4 and lle6) 30 ... ttJb6 (as this loses quickly Black should have tried 30 ... rj;f7 31 ~c4+ <itr>f6 but after 32 ~d3 he is very short of moves) 31 llee7 ttJdS 32 :f7+ ~e8 33 :b7 ttJxb4 34 ..tc4 1-0

Material versus the Initiative 103

A triumph for the initiative. White's strategic and positional advantages have evaporated but this matters little as Black is about to be mated. There is no defence to the plan of 3S :h7 %:tf6 38 llh8+ llf8 37 i.f7+ ~d8 38 :xf8 mate.

Active Defence The question of whether to take material or pursue a different aim can also arise in defence. If you are under pressure but do not necessarily stand worse (you may be material up but under attack) the opportunity may arise to capture a large lump of material which, if you can withstand the resultant on­slaught, will then win the game for you. You may go for this or alternatively you may consider that you are doing quite well anyway and see no need to take risks. However, opting for this more circumspect course may mean that you pass by an op­portunity to obtain a decisive advantage. This is where accu­rate calculation is called for. Consider the following exam­ples.

(see following diagram)

White is a pawn up and there is nothing very much wrong with his position. He is under some pressure along the g-file but the b lack king is also in an unhappy situation. Intuitively it

104 Material versus the Initiative

feels as though Black's attempts to attack will be thwarted by the insecure situation of his king. This is all very well, but how shou1d White continue?

Fine-Capablanca AVRO 1938

White to play

Two plans suggest them­selves:

a) 26 fxe5 when White has to consider the replies 26 .. :iffxe5 and 26 ... :'xg2+ 27 l:lxg2 ~xg2.

b) 26 12Jc5 which obliges Black to burn his remaining boats with 26 ... i.xg2 as re­treating the bishop would be hopeless, e.g. 26,..i.d5 27 fxe5 and Black's position is devas­tated.

So, which line is best? Accu­rate calculation is required.

a) 26 fxe5! is very strong as after 26 ... :xg2+ 27 :xg2 i.xg2 White has the important inter­mezzo 28 e6+! which forces Black's resignation. Black must

therefore meet 26 fxe5! with 26 .... xe5 and now White has the pleasant choice between 27 ltJxd4 with two extra pawns or 27 'if xd4 .. xd4 28 llJxd4 i.xg2 29 l:lxg2 ':xd4 and although White is only one pawn up in the rook and pawn endgame, the three to one majority on the queenside should make the technical task straightforward.

b) Fortunately for Capabal­nca, Fine chose 26 12Jc5? and after 26 ... i.xg2 27 l:lxg2 l:tag8 it was actually White who had to be the more careful:

28 ':ee2 (forced as 28 :g3 loses to 28 ... ltxg3+ 29 hxg3 ltxg3+ 30 ~f2 1i'h3 and White gets mated.) 28 ... exf4f and sud­denly ... f3 is a powerful threat. White has many ways to go wrong here: 29 Wxd4 f3; 29 'i'd3 'i'xd3 30 12Jxd3 f3; or 29 'itb4 f3 30 "c4+ ~g7 31 :e7+ ~h8 32 l:tg3 llxg3+ 33 hxg3 'ti'h3 and Black wins. Fine found the best move for White after 28 ... exf4! which is 29ltJb7 holding up Black's play thanks to the threat of 30 ltJd6+.

Play continued 29 .. :~Wd5! 30 :xg4 :'xg4+ 31 :g2 ':'xg2+ 32 '*i'xg2 f3 33 'ti'h3 '*i'gS+ 34 'ifg3 (forced) 34 .. :.wc 1 + 35 ~f2 'tie3+ 36 ~f1 and White held on for a draw.

Karpov-Yusupov USSR Championship 1983

White to play

White is doing very nicely -he is a pawn ahead and Black has little to show for it. How­ever, even world champions like to finish games off quickly if possible and this position pre­sents the possibility of 38 ~g3,

Material versus the Initiative 105

trapping the black knight. Should White succumb to this temptation or is a more circum­spect course with, for example, 38 f3, preferable?

White can certainly continue solidly and should be able to nurse his extra pawn to victory but Karpov, refusing to see ghosts, boldly advanced with 38 ~g3! which swiftly terminated the game: 38 ... fxg4 (Black can save the knight with 38 ... f4+ 39 i.xf4 lDfS+ 40 ~h2 lDe7 but, wi th White's two extra centre pawns about to advance up the board, Black might as well re­sign) 39 ~xh4 gxh3

40 f4 (40 ~xh3 should also win but after 40 ... 'ii'e6+ 41 ~h2 'iff5 Black has an irritating ini­tiative on the light squares) 40 ... 'ife6 41 'fIhs 'ii'e7+ 42 ~xh3 i1f7 43 ':h2! (directed against Black's threat of 43 ... l:g3+ 44 ~h4 :h3+ ) 43 ... '*i'd7+ 44 f5 and Black re-signed.

See how you get on with the following positions.

106 Material versus the Initiative

Exercises

Position 1 Karpov-Timman Rotterdam 1989

White to play

This position arose from a line of the Griinfeld Defence which was tested extensively in the late 1980s, particularly in the Karpov-Kasparov World Championship matches. Here Titrunan, a champion of the Grunfeld Defence, is a pawn down but has a very active queen and rook. Furthennore his knight on a5 is poised to leap into the weak c4-square. Karpov now has a tricky deci­sion to make. Should he:

a) Capture the black bishop with 21 gxh6 and hope to beat off the black attack?

b) Ignore the seductive bishop, whose prospects are limited anyway, and concentrate on consolidating his own posi­tion?

Position 2 Yates-Nimzowitsch

Semmering 1926

Black to play

Black is a pawn ahead for which White has no real com­pensation. What is the best way for Black to continue?

Position 3 Browne-Keres

Vancouver 1975

Black to play

White is making an optimis-

tic attempt to generate kingside pressure. This strategy is not really justified in this position as two pairs of minor pieces have been exchanged and one would thus not expect Black to experience difficulty defending his kingside. Nevertheless, care must be taken, and Black has a difficult decision to take. Which is the best course of action?

a) Trap the white knight with 16 ... hS. White will be forced to launch a desperate attack, but Black will beat it off.

b) Attack the white knight on h4 with 16 ... lDc6, maintaining the option of ... hS for later.

c) Plans 'a' and 'b' are too risky, so play solidly with 16 ... ~h7 and ... lDgS. White will not break through and Black will soon counterattack in the centre with ... dS.

Position 4 Taimanov-Uhlmann

Belgrade 1970

White to play

Material versus the Initiative 107

White has a very promising endgame thanks to his rook on the seventh rank and his active minor pieces. He has various ways to continue which look promising. Which of the fol­lowing assessments best sums up how White should continue?

a) 26 :cS wins a pawn by force after 26 .. JlxcS 27 iLxe6+.

b) 26 dS with a decisive breakthrough into the black po­sition.

c) There is no rush to play dS so White should play 26 J.g3 (to cut out the defence ... lDeS in reply to dS)

Position 5 Shirov-Benjamin

Horgen 1994

White to play

Black is a piece down but will inevitably regain it thanks to the fork of the white queen and bishop. What is White's best plan?

a) The flashy 22 ltJg4, build-

108 Material versus the Initiative

ing up an immediate attack on the kings ide.

b) The materialistic 22 .ixe5 dxeS 23 .xe5, noting that 23 ... Ji.xa3 is impossible on ac­count of 24 ttJg4. A further point is that after 22 St.xeS dxeS 23 'fixeS, White has not re­nounced the intention of gaining kingside play as ttJf2-g4 is still in the air.

Position 6 Polugaevsky-Tal

Tbilisi 1974

White to play

Lev Polugaevsky was re­nowned for his liking for com­plex play and the skill with which he handled such posi­tions. Here his extra pawn gives him a promising position but he has a difficult decision to make. Should he play:

a) 20 l1d2 ~xf3 21 gxf3 (21 1i' xf3 tiJxd4 is very poor for White) when he keeps his extra pawn but will have penn anent

problems with his kingside weaknesses.

b) 20 ':e 1 i.xf3 21 'fi xf3 when he keeps his kingside in­tact but must find a counter to 21. .. 1i'd7 22 dS (othexwise the pawn goes) 22 ... ltJd4, hitting the queen and threatening a fork with ... ttJc2.

Position 7 van der Sterren-Kamsky

Wijk aan Zee 1994

White to play

White has sacrificed a pawn for the attack and has just pro­voked the weakening ... gS. He now faces the familiar dilemma of whether to restore material parity (line 'a') or pursue his attack (line 'b'). Which would you recommend?

a) 22 fxeS, recapturing the pawn and expecting to maintain an attack thanks to Black's open king position. White's plan is 22 ... dxeS 23 "xeS countering the threat against his own.

bishop on d3 with an attack against the black knight on e6.

b) 22 fxg5 with positional compensation for the pawn.

Position 8 Fischer-Stein

Sousse Interzonal 1967

White to play

The American Bobby Fisch­er, possibly the most famous chessplayer of all time, has built up a strong attack from a Ruy Lopez. He has won a pawn and exposed the black king, but Black has fair counter-chances thanks to his queenside play. White could now retreat his at­tacked f5-bishop and hope that his initiative will allow him to hold the extra pawn. Alterna­tively, he could try to pursue his attack. What is the best line of play?

a) Retreating the bishop with 30 i..e4.

b) Pursuing his attack with 30 ~h4.

Material versus the Initiative 109

Position 9 Keres-Spassky

Gothenburg Interzonal 1955

White to play

White appears to be able to win material with 26 ttJxe5 as the reply 26 ... .:xe5 seems forced. Is this White's best or can he disdain material gain in order to pursue his attack?

Position 10 Keres-Gligoric

Munich 1959

White to play

110 Material versus the Initiative

Paul Keres was a fine expo­nent of the white side of the Ruy Lopez. Here he has built up a promising attacking position and can win the exchange with the simple combination 33 ltJh6+ ~h8 34 ltJf7+. Is this good and can he do any better?

Position 11 Nunn-Mestel

Lloyds Bank, London 1994

White to play

Pawn grabbing at the expense of development, a plan that Black has executed here, is al­ways a risky strategy. White is temporarily a piece ahead but his knight and bishop are at­tacked. Again he has a choice between naked materialism and pursuing the initiative. Which is best?

a) The fonner which is achieved with the peculiar knight manoeuvre 10 ltJb6 :a7 11 ltJc8 ':c7 12 ltJd6+ ..txd6 13 exd6.

b) The latter, arrived at with 10 ..tc2 bxa4 11 ltJe2 when White will regain the a4-pawn and can look for a quick attack along the b-file.

Position 12 Levitt .. Yeo

British Ch., Swansea 1995

Black to play

After a complex opening both sides have exposed kings and undeveloped pieces. In such positions it is often difficult to judge whether one should grab material at the cost of develop­ment, or if the better plan is to sacrifice something oneself in order to further one's own at­tack. Black has three options:

a) 9 ... ltJc2+ grabbing a rook. b) 9 ... ..tc5 trying to develop

as quickly as possible. c) 9 ... c6 sidestepping the

immediate tactical struggle in I

favour of a positional continua-I tion. , 1

Which is best?;

Solutions

Position 1 Karpov-Timman Rotterdam 1989

White to play

a) 21 gxh6?! is playable but allows Black a strong attack: 21. .. lbc4 22 1i' c 1 (note that 22 jib 1, so effective in line 'b', is impossible here - 22 ... lbd2+) 22 ... iif5! 23 lbf4 (unfortunate but 23 1i' e 1 lDe3+ 24 ~g I lbc2 25 lbg3 'i'f4 is difficult for White) 23 ... 1i'xf4 24 "'xf4 ':xf4 with a balanced position.

b) It is obvious that the black bishop is not doing a great deal on h6, so why waste time cap­turing it? It will be a long time before it performs any sort of useful function and this is a key indicator that White may well be better off improving his po­sition elsewhere. In fact, White has a good method of consoli­dation with 21 '*i'bu iie3 22 'tiel i..g7 (22 ... lbc4 fails after

Material versus the Initiative 111

23 ~gl) 23 ~gl '1i'e4 and now with 24lbg3!

White completes a successful regrouping. He is still a pawn ahead and the black minor pieces are operating substan­tially below maximum capacity. The endgame after 24 .. :i'xel+ 25 ~xel would be miserable for Black so he tried 24 ... 'iixh4 25 lbe4 lixf2 but Karpov consoli­dated easily with 26 lbxf2 cxd4 27 l:.dl and won quickly.

Position 2 Yates-Nirnzowitsch

Semmering 1926

Black to play

112 Material versus the Initiative

All you need to do here is avoid getting carried away with 35 ... lDel? If this move were good it would win the game immediately. Unfortunately it isn't and the reverse occurs: 36 :e2! :xe2 37 ifd8+ ~h7 38 ltJg5+ ~h6 39 ltJxf7+ ~h5 (39 ... ifxf7 40 '1Wh4 is mate) 40 \i'h8+ ~g4 41 "iih3+ <ifi>f4 42 1i g3+ 'it>e4 43 ltJd6+ and White . WlDS.

Black actually has a very simple win, as played by Nimzowitsch, with 35 .. . :lc8! rounding up a further pawn on c5 after which White did not survive long.

Position 3 Browne-Keres Vancouver 1975

Black to play

a) 16 ... h5? is far too pro­vocative. After 17 ltJh6+ gxh6 181ixh5 White has a very dan­gerous attack. It is difficult to see how Black can organise a

defence on the kingside. He has a clever try with 18 ... ltJg6!? 19 ltJxg6 if g5

but White has an equally clever refutation with 20 ltJe7+! 'fIxe7 21 jI xh6 and .:tg3 is coming.

b) 16 ... ltJc6! gains a crucial tempo over variation 4 a ' and creates the important defensive resource ... .:te6 for Black. White will be struggling to find full compensation for the piece which he will now inevitably be forced to sacrifice. Play could continue 17 ltJxh6+ gxh6 18 'iih5 ':e6! (defensively, Black's position now makes a lot more sense as he has untangled, de­fended the h-pawn and has ... 'i'fS in the offing)

and now after 19 J:g3+ (19ltJf5 'Wf8) 19 ... ~f8 20 ltJf5 (20 'ifg4 1W g5) 20 ... 'iff6 21 'i' g4 'iWh8 Black keeps control.

Other tries for White after 16 ... ltJc6 are also insufficient: 17 g3 h5 18 ltJh6+ gxh6 19 'iixh5 'it g5 or 17 ltJf5 i.xf5 18 exf5 h5 19 lih3 hxg4 20 'iixg4 'ii'f6 21 iih5 ~f8 and in both cases Black is a piece up for not much.

c) Keres actually played the overly cautious 16 ... ~h7? after which Black was certainly quite comfortable but this was not as incisive as 16 ... ltJc6. The game continued 17 J:g3 ltJg8 18 ltJf3 i..xg4 19 :!xg4 ltJf6 20 ':h4 ~g8 21 l:th3 d5 22 ~e21j'd7 23 ltJh4 dxe4 24 dxe4 :ad8 and Black went on to win.

Position 4 Taimanov-Uhlmann

Belgrade 1970

Material versus the Initiative 113

which does indeed win a pawn. However, Black simply took his medicine with 26 ... :xc8 27 ~xe6+ ~f8 28 i.xc8 and after 28 ... ltJb4 29 ltJcl Wfl he had an active position and good chan­ces to save the game. White's position is too strong for him to be satisfied with such a modest outcome.

b) 26 d5!? is tempting but it seems that Black has enough resources to hold the balance: 26 ... ltJe5 27 d6 (27 dxe6 ltJxc4 28 ~xc4 i.xb3 29 axb3 :xe6 is fine for Black). This looks pro­mising for White as 27 ... ltJxc4 28 l:xc4 i.b5 29 :c7 leaves White well on top, but here Black has the excellent defence 27 ... Jtf8f

Now 28 ltJd4 looks like White's best bet as it also sets a trap. If now 28 ... .txd6 29 ~xe6+! ':xe6 30 :xa7! and White regains his piece with an excellent position. However, White's back rank has been

White to play subtly weakened and Black holds the balance with the

a) Taimanov played 26 :c8 straightforward 28 ltJd4 ltJxc4

114 Material versus the Initiative

29 :Lxc4 i.d7 as 30 J:c7 is met by 30 ... :c8. White may retain a tiny edge but, as with line 'a', this is unsatisfactory consider­ing White's initial position.

c) The quiet 26 i.g3! is very strong. White threatens d4-d5 and it is difficult to see a de­fence, e.g. 26 ... <it'h8 27 i.xe6!; 26 ... a5 27 d5 4Jb4 28 d6 4Jd5 (28 ... .tf6 29 d7 and .txe6+) 29 i.xd5 exd5 30 d7 Ad8 31 ltc8 i.f6 32 i.c7; 26 ... ~f8 27 .td6+ ~g8 28 ltc8 (28 d5 .Jte5) 28 .. .lixc8 29 ~xe6+ and White has won a pawn without allow­ing counterplay.

Position 5 Shirov-Benjamin

Horgen 1994

White to play

a) 22 4Jg4! may be flashy but it is also highly effective and enabled Shirov to quickly build up a winning attack: 22 ... f6 (alternatives were also unat­tractive, e.g. 22 ... exd4 23 4Jh6+

~g7 24 4Jxf7

24 ... .tg5 [24 ... .i.e8 25 .h6+ ~g8 26 lLlg5 is decisive] 25 .xg5 ':xf7 26 e5! with a very big attack; 22 ... exf4 23 4Jh6 mate is also undesirable) 23 .tc4+ ~h8 (23 ... d5? 24 exd5 .txd5 25 4Jxe5 fxe5 26 "xe5 wins) 24lLlxe5 dxe5 251i'xe5

25 ... ~g7 (not 25 .. .fxe5? 26 J..xe5+ when, despite being a whole queen down, White's pressure on the diagonals is so strong that he quickly gains a material advantage: 26 .. J:tf6 27 ltxf6 ~g7 28 :xc6+ and 29 ':c7) 26 .f4 and White won.

b) 22 .txe5? is feeble in comparison. After 22 ... dxe5 23 .xe5 f6! 24 'ife6+ ~g7 the

bishop pair grants Black fair compensation for a pawn.

Position 6 Polugaevsky-Tal

Tbilisi 1974

White to play

a) 20 :d2 ii.xf3 21 gxf3 is quite good for White who IS a pawn up after all. The big passed d-pawn should be enough to distract Black from too much activity on the king­side. A struggle is still in pros­pect however.

b) 20 l:.e1 .Jixf3 21 1ixf3 "d7 22 d5lDd4 23 .d3lDc2

Material versus the Initiative 115

runs into a winning attack after 24 .Jib II lDxel 25 -.xh7+ ~f8 26 .tf5! 'iixd5 (26 ..... e8 sets a clever trap: 27 -.n8+? 1;e7 28 ':xe 1 + ~d6 29 ':xe8 :c 1 +, but 27 .Jtxc8 wins easily) 27 ':xe1 f6 (27 ..... e5 28 iib8+ 1;e7 29 ':xe5+ ~f6 30 'iih4+ ~xe5 31 g4) 28 ~xc8 :xc8 29 h4 and White is winning easily. Un­characteristically, however, Pol­ugaevsky made a mess of the position and allowed Tal to es­cape with a draw.

Position 7 van der Sterren-Kamsky

Wijk aan Zee 1994

White to play

a) The opening of the p<?si­tion after 22 fxe5? (as played by van der Sterren) actually fa­vours Black much more than White. The game continued 22 ... dxe5 23 .xe5? (White should have reconciled himself to 23 l:tad1 'Wd4+ 24 <iithl lDh5 although Black is clearly better)

116 Material versus the Initiative

23 .. :i'xd3 24 'iWxe6 (White may have been planning 24 ':ad 1, but it falls well short: 24 ... 1ixc4 25 :d7 + c;t>g6 26 1If5+ ~h5 27 'iih3+ [27 ':d3 ~c5+] 27 ... 'Wh4 28 'iYxe6lDxd7 and White's fun is over) 24 ... :'ae8

and suddenly White is com­pletely lost as ... lDg4 or ... lDe4 is coming. The game finished 25 'i'f5 (25 ilh3 ifd4+ 26 <it>hl lDg4) 25 ... lDe4! and White re­signed as 26 'iid5 'We3+ 27 c;t>hl lDf2+ wins quickly as does 26 .h3 'Wd4+ 27 ~hl llxfl +.

b) 22 fxg5! gave White per­fectly good play for a pawn, e.g.

22 ... lDxg5 (22 ... hxg5 23 :f5 is promising for White who can follow up with !taft giving full

compensation for the sacrificed pawn) 23 h4 12Jh5 and White has the option of offering a repetition with 24 'W g4 lDf6 25 'i'g3 or, as is justified by the position, playing for more with 24 'i'g4lDf6 25 -.f5.

Position 8 Fischer-Stein

Sousse Interzonal 1967

White to play

a) For once, the great Bobby got it wrong. He continued 30 .Jte4 1ixf4 31 .Jtxf4 and went on to win after 31. .. :e8? 32 :tadl. However, if Black had played the bold 31. .. l:xa2! 32 lIxa2 lDxa2 the struggle could have gone on for some time, e.g. 33 lDe5 g5 34 i-g3 lDb4! (not 34 ... lDxe5 35 .ltxe5+ i.f6 36 i-xf6+ ~xf6 37 i.c6) and White has good chances, but Black is still in the game.

b) 30 lDh4!, as pointed out by Littlewood, would have ended the game much more quickly,

e.g. 30 ... .txh4 (30 ... g5 31 .g3 \i'f6 32 ltJg6) 31 'iWxh4

and now: a) 31. .. 'iWf6 32 'iig3 _xf5 33

'i'ic7+ and wins. b) 31. .. gxf5 32 'iYg5+ ~h7 33

e7 'ii'e8 34 lle6 lta6 35 'i'xf5+ ~g8 36 'iWg5+ ~h7 37 ':xa6 lDxa6 38 'ii'h6+ ~g8 39 'iixa6 'ii'xe7 40 Wg6+ and wins.

c) 31..:iif5 32 iie7+ ~g8 33 .d8+ ~g7 34 .c7+ <it>g8 35 e7 and the passed pawn is decisive.

Position 9 Keres-Spassky

Gothenburg Interzonal 1955

White to play

Material versus the Initiative 117

Many of the positions in this chapter demonstrate the advan­tages of keeping the initiative instead of grabbing material, but this policy is not always correct. Keres played 26 ltJxe5 but after 26 ... .te6 27 \i'g3 ':'xd 1 28 l:txdl b5 (other moves are also possible) Black's position was not bad. Instead the greedy 26 .txe5 l:txe5 27 ltJxe5 would have won the exchange without too many complications. The only tactical point that White needs to notice is that after 27 ... i.e6, 28 'tWg3? is bad on account of 28 ... l:xdl 29 ':xdl ltJh5. However, instead of 28 ~g3 White has the simple 28 .tf5 and he emerges a clear ex­change ahead.

The game continuation, how­ever, proved that even world class players can go astray when defending against a nag­ging initiative: 26 tLJxe5? .te6 27 'iig3 ':xdl 28 ':xdl b5 29 :flltJ6d7?

30 'iixg7+ and Spassky resign­ed as he gets carved up after 30 ... ~xg7 31 ltJxd7 +.

118 Material versus the Initiative

Position 10 Keres-Gligoric

Munich 1959

White to play

33 liJh6+ ~h8 34liJf7+ is by no means bad but after 34 ... .:Ixf7 35 jixf7 1:.f8 36 "iie7 "c5 37 "xc5 liJ7xc5, Black can put up stubborn resistance in the endgame, although White should win.

Sometimes it does actually happen that there are brilliant winning combinations in the air and this is just one such posi­tion. Full marks if you spotted 33 ':xd3! cxd3 34 i.b3+ ~h8

35 lDxf6! l:xf6 36 liJg5 win­ning. Gligoric tried to distract Keres with 36 ... l:.xf2+ but the Estonian grandmaster was hav­ing none of it: 37 ~gl :f1 + 38 ~h2 1-0.

Position 11 Nunn-Mestel

Lloyds Bank, London 1994

White to play

In this position greed is most definitely good:

a) 10 ttJb6! lta7 (l0 ... exf5 needs to be looked at, but since White will be a rook ahead with good development, it is not sur­prising he has a simple win: 11 liJxa8 'iie7 12 a4 'fia7 13 axb5 cxb5 14 jibl) 11 liJc8 and the best that Black can now do is 11. .. l:c7 12 liJd6+ i.xd6 13 exd6 l:d7 14 i.d3 'i'xc3+ 15 ~e2 but White should win this without too much trouble.

b) White tried 10 J.c2? bxa4 11 ttJe2 and obtained a modest initiative, but nothing dramatic

enough to compensate for not taking a whole piece: 11. .. g6 12 "bl We7 13 ..wb6 ~a7 14 .:Ibl Wxb6 15 ':xb6 tDd7 16 :xc6 tDe7 17 ':c7 ~d8 18 ':b7 ~c8 19 :b 1 a3 and the game was soon drawn.

Position 12 Levitt-Yeo

British Ch., Swansea 1995

Black to play

a) 9 ... tDc2+? is .not recom­mended as after 10 <ifi>d 1 tDxa 1 11 i.b5+ ':xb5 (11. .. ~e7? 12 ':el is mate) 12 ..wxb5+ ~d7 White can choose between tak­ing an immediate draw with 13 ~b8+ 'ti'd8 or trying for more with 13 tDxd5, expecting, with some justification, to regain the trapped knight on a 1.

b) 9 ... i.c5?! was tried in the game but White kept control with 10 .i.e3 (10 .i.b5+ tDxb5

Material versus the Initiative 119

11 ~c6+ with an approximately equal position is safe for White) 10 ... tDc2+ 11 ~d2 tDxe3 12 'ii'c6+! Wd7 13 'Wxc5

13 .. J~xb2+ (13 ... tDxfl + 14 ':hxfl ':xb2+ 15 ~cl ':b6 16 .:Ie 1 + .:Ie6 17 :xe6+ fxe6 18 ':b 1 leaves Black struggling to develop) 14 ~cl :tc2+ 15 ~bl (it looks as if Black is making all the running, but he has got his pieces in a tangle) 15 ... ':xc3 16 ..wxc3 tDxfl 17 :xfl 'i'b5+ 18 ~c2 when White is on top and went on to win the game after 51 moves.

c) The simple 9 ... c6, elimi­nating the possibility of .i.b5+, leaves Black with a reasonable game, e.g. 10 .i.d3 'Wc7 and Black has the plan of ... .i.d6 and ... tDe7 to complete develop­ment. If 11 .i.e3 then 11. .. tDe6, controlling the important dark squares in the centre, keeps Black's position co-ordinated.

5 Tough Decisions

Develop your intuition Most of the positions in this chapter are, as is implied in the title, very difficult. Even a strong grandmaster would not expect to find their way through the complications in some of the tougher challenges. In such situations, intuition as well as logic has to playa part in find­ing the right plan. However, the more ideas that you can find in a position, the better your chances of hitting upon a good continuation. Your chess 'feel' will always benefit from as much hard infonnation as pos­sible.

It is always worth trying to fight your way through posi­tions that are fearsomely com­plex as then the more straight­forward ones suddenly seem so much easier. This is also good training for analysing complex opening variations.

Many seemingly innocent de­cisions can turn on very subtle points. Witness the following which caught out as strong a player as Anatoly Karpov.

Karpov-Gelfand Sanghi Nagar (2) 1995

White to play

In an otherwise even position White has one advantage in that he controls the open c-file. Oi ven the chance Black will of course contest the file with ... .:c8 so White must straight­away double his heavy pieces. The question is, on which square, c 1 or c2, should he put his queen?

Karpov played 27 'i'cl but this allowed Black nevertheless to contest the open file with 27 ... .i.b7! and 28 ... :tc8, since if

28 :c7 l:c8! 29 :xd7 :xc 1 + 30 ~h2 .ixf3 31 .!i..xf3 :c2 and Black is fine. Instead Karpov played 28 lDe1 when the game continued 28 ... ::'c8 29 .ixb7 ':xc3 30 'iixc3 "xb7 31 lDd3 1;f7 and Gelfand was able to draw.

The queen should have gone to c2, and 27 'it'c21 .ib7? 28 ':c7!

shows why: if 28 ... :c8 29 ':xd7 wins because Black does not capture the queen with check while his b7-bishop in en prise. If 28 ... "d5 White can exploit the long diagonal in three ways: 29 ':xh7 (29 ... ~xh7? 30 lDg5+ wins the queen), or 29 lDel 'it'a5 30 Jixb7 \i'xe1 + 31 <lftg2 and 32 1Ic6, or 29 "c1 when Black has no defence to the coming 30 lDe1.

Karpov was doubtless put off by the obvious 27 ... .!i..e4, since after 28 .. c 1 Black can go back to 28 ... ..tb7 and apparently 27 .. c2 has made no difference. But instead moving his queen again White had a very strong riposte in 28 lDe5! Now:

Tough Decisions 121

a) 28 ... .txc2 loses a piece to 29lDxd7.

b) 28 ... .ixe5 loses a pawn to 29 .txe4 fxe4 30 1Ixe4.

c) However, Black should ac­cept the pawn loss because de­fending the bishop is much worse: 28 ... 'Wb7 and now not 29 :c7? .txe5 30 llxb7 .ixc2 31 dxe5 .te4 when Black has rea­sonable drawing chances, but 29 ..txe4J and wins:

c1) 29 ... 1Ixe4 30 :c8+ ':xc8 31 "xc8+ ri;g7 32 1fxe6.

c2) 29 ... fxe4 30 :c7 1Id5 (30 ... 'Wb8 31 'ii'c6! 'iie8 32lDg4 .!i..g7 33 "b7 'ii'f8 34 :xg7+ and wins) 31 ':c8+ :xc8 32 "xc8+ <lftg7 (32 ... .id8 33 lbc6 or 32 ... 'iid8 33 "xe6+) 33 'it'c7+ ~h8 (33 .. .c.t>h6 34lbg4+) 34 "f7 "dS 35 lDc6 winning the bishop.

d) 28 ..... d5 29 :cS+ :xcS 30 "xcS+ r:Ji;g7 31 .ixe4! transposes to 'c', or if 29 ... ~g7 30 'iic7+ ~h6 31lDf7+ ~h5 32 .ixe4 "xe4 (32 ... fxe4 33 1If4) 33lDd6 wins.

If Black does nothing, White can prepare infiltration as in the

122 Tough Decisions

game with 28 ttJe 1 to exchange bishops, and control of the c­file guarantees him the advan­tage: 27 .. :ii'd6 28 ttJel (28 ':c7 i.d8!) 28 ... :td8 29 ~xd5 'ii'xd5 30 ltJd3 (intending ~f4) 30 ... e5 31 :c6 followed by 32 ~b4 and 33 'ii'c4+ (or if 32 ... 'tWf7? 33 llc7) and White is much beUer.

In the next example White again has a choice between seemingly equivalent moves.

Smyslov-Lilienthal Moscow Ch. 1938

White to play

White has a strong passed d­pawn. Advancing this with d4-d5 will threaten: e5-e6 to ex­pose the black king, d5-d6 cre­ating a protected passed pawn and also the chance to attack on the dark squares with ~f6+. Also, the black a5-pawn is weak and should Black choose to trade it for the d-pawn, White's b-pawn is potentially very dan-

gerous in the endgame. The d-pawn cannot be ad­

vanced immediately since be­hind it the e5-pawn is unpro­tected, so how should White continue? He can consider:

a) 34 f4 or 34 ltel to defend the e5-pawn and thus enable the advance d4-d5.

b) 34 'ii a7 hitting the rook and the a5-pawn, with the ideas 34 ... 'iixd4 35 e6! and 34 ... 'tWxb3 35 d5.

c) 34 ,.. d8 again hitting the rook and preparing a possible fu ture 'if f6+.

Considering each in turn: a) 34 £4 fails after 34 ... ':xb3

35 d5 'ii'd4+ 36 ~h2 'ii'c4 37 l:tf2 ~ d4 38 ':f1 'ii' c4 and Black draws by perpetual at­tack. Similarly 34 :el 'iixb3 35 d5 ~c3 36 ~fl 'ii'd3+ 37 'itgl 'ii'c3, or if 36 :e2 'ii'cl + 37 ~h2 ~f4+ 38 g3 'iif3 and White has to hurry to take the draw with 39 e6 "xe2 40 "iixf7+ etc.

b) The future world cham­pion played 34 fj' a7?, giving Black the chance to equalise with 34 ... :txb3! and if 35 e6-

-I

:b7. Unfortunately Lilienthal] missed this, playing 34 .. .'iWxb3, and after 35 ~xa5 f4 36 'ii'd2 f3, 37 d5 fxg2 38 'itxg2 ~c4 39 d6.. Smyslov went on to win. ;

c) In his book of collected I' games Smyslov gave the correct. way: 34 1id8! when: I

cl) 34 ... :xb3? loses to 35~1' "f6+ ~g8 36 e6. J

c2) 34 ... 'ii'xb3 35 d5 intends d5-d6 when the weak dark squares coupled with the passed d-pawn give White a decisive advantage.

c3) If 34 ... :e6 35 f4 intends d4-d5-d6 again; while if 35 ..... xb3 36 d5 'iib6+ 37 iixb6 l:xb6 38 d6 the protected passed d-pawn gives White a winning endgame.

c4) 34 ... :a6 35 f4 'ifxb3 36 d5 is no better.

c5) If Black tries to counter­attack with 34 ... :c6 then 35 ~xa5!

35 ..... xb3 36 d5, or 35 .. J~cl 36 ~a6 I:txfl + 37 "xfl with an extra passed pawn and safer king in the endgame.

Finally 35 ... iixd4 36 "aU l:tc3 (36 ... iixal 37 :xal is a winning rook endgame) 37 e6! fxe6 38 J:d 1 .e5 (not 38 .. :.-f6? 39 J:d7+ and 40 l:c7 wins) 39 :e 1 and 40 :xe6 again with a clear pawn extra.

Working at home Finding the best move, every move, over the board is not

Tough Decisions 123

easy. There is a greater chance to work things out home when your clock is not ticking relent-1essly. This may be why many players enjoy postal chess.

In a game in the British CC Championship Candidates, the following position arose from a French Winawer. 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 liJc3 i.b4 4 e5 c5 5 a3 i.xc3+ 6 bxc3liJe7 7 'iig4 .c7 8 "xg7 :g8 9.xh7 cxd4 10 liJe2 liJbc6 11 f4 i.d7 12 'ii'd3 dxc3 13 :b 1 0-0-0 14 h4 liJf5 15 h5 d4 16 :gl liJh6 17liJxd4 liJxd4 18 ~xd4 i.b5 19 ~xa7 i.xfl 20 :xfl ltxg2.

M. Alcock-P. Acton correspondence 1993-94

White to play

In this introduction to this book, I suggested that study time was more effectively util­ised by developing analytical skills rather than concentrating exclusively on opening theory. Sometimes, however, the two

124 Tough Decisions

activities can be combined and this is just such a situation.

Black has utilised a well­known theme: sacrificing his d­pawn to open the file for his rook, and by the manoeuvre ... Ji.d7 -b5xf1 removed the de­fenders from around the white king. While this was happening the white queen infiltrated to a7 so the black king is not looking too comfortable either. Fur­thermore, it is White to move. Given a couple of free moves the black pieces would be fully and decisively massed, so White must press on without delay. He can consider:

a) 21 ..te3 intending Ji.b6. b) 21 1Ia8+ to displace either

the black king or queen. c) 21 ':b4 preparing "l'a8+. d) 21 ltf3 to swing the rook

across to the queenside. a) After 21 ~e3 ttJf5! Black

is okay since if 22 i.b6 lLlg3! and the black queen cannot be taken because of the mate on e2; or if 22 ~f2 lldd2 23 :b4 lLJh4! 24 "e3 (or 24 1Ia8+ <it'd7 25 'iia4+ <it'c8) 24 ... ttJf5 25 1If3 ':xc2! 26 'iWxg2 l1c1 + with a draw.

b) 21 11 a8+ is also insuffi­cient: 21. ... b8 (not 21. .. ~d7? 22 .a4+ ~e7 23 'We4 or 22 ... ~c8 23 :b4 <it'b8 24 ~e3) 22 .a4 tiJf5! 23 :f3 Wc7 24 "a8+ ~d7 25 gd3+ <it>e8 and Black may well be better; e.g. 26 l1xd8+ 'i'xd8 27 'ifxd8+ <it'xd8 when the knight is much

better than the bishop, or if 26 1Ia4+ ~f8 27 1Ib4+ ~g7 28 :xc3 ttJg3!

and remarkably White has no good defence to the threat of 29 ... .:e2 mate. 29 ':xg3+ ':xg3 is hopeless as the black rooks are so active.

c) 21 ':b4? ttJf5 22 lWa8+ ~d7 23 'l'a4+ ~e7 and White has no more threats, while Black intends 24 ... ttJg3 or if 24 ':c4 'iib6 25 lIxc3 l1dd2! and wins (26 .i.xd2 "iib1 +).

d) Although it allows checks on the back rank 21 llf3! is cor­rect. White threatens 22 ':xb7 .xb7 23 ':xc3+ wirming, while a thorough analysis demon­strates that Black is not really threatening anything at alL

dl) 21. .. l:xc2 22 _a8+ <it'd7 23 'Wa4+ and "xc2, or 22 ... ~8 23 Wa4 and if the c2-rook moves 24 ':xc3+.

d2) 21. .. lLJf5 22 l:xb7 :gl+ 23 ~f2 lIg2+ 24 ~xg2 Wxb7 25 "xb7+ <it'xb7 261lxc3.

d3) 21. .. 1i'c6 22 'l'a8+ rt;c7 23 lixb7+ "xb7 24 lIxc3+, or 22 ... rt;d7 23 :d3+.

d4) 21. .. lldg8 22 'iW a8+ ~d7 23 lld3+ rJi;e7 24 :xb7 ':xa8 (not 24 ... :g1 +? 25 ~f2 l:8g2+ 26 rJi;f3 :g3+ 27 ~e4) 25 ltxc7+ 'it'f8 26 l:dxc3 ~g7 27 .i.e3 with a winning endgame.

d5) 21. . .1%h2!? 22 l:xb7

22 ... :tdl + (if 22 ... 11hl + 23 <it>f2 ltJg4+ 24 'it>g3 l:tgl + 25 ~xgl ~xb7 26 .hI! and either 27 ~xg4 or 27 :xc3) 23 rJi;xdl l::h 1 + 24 <it>e2 'Wi' c4+ 25 :d3 'ife4+ (if 25 ... :h2+ 26 rJi;fl ~hl + 27 'it'f2 ltJg4+ 28 ~g3 :gl+ 29 ~h4 l:hl+ 30 'it>g5) 26 ..te3 16 g2+ (or 26 ... :h2+ 27 <it>dl 'fif3+ 28 rJi;cl :hl + 29 i.gl l:xgl+ 30 'iixgl 1r'xf4+ 31 rJi;b 1 ~xb7 32 :d6) 27 .tf2 .e4+ (if 27 ... 'iWfl+ 28 ~f3 lih3+ 29 ~e4 'Wi'hl+ 30 ~d4 or 28 ... "ifh3+ 29 ~e4 'fif5+ 30 rJi;d4 'ii'xf4+ 31 ~xc3 l6xe5+ 32 i.d4) 28 ii'e3 'ii'xe3+ (not 28 ... 'ii'xb7? 29 'Wi'c5+ l6c7 30 iif8+) 29 llxe3 rJi;xb7 30 %:.xc3 llxh5 31 ~d3 and White has a winning endgame.

d6) 21. .. :dl+!? (Black's ac­tual choice in the game) 22 rJi;xd 1 'fi d8+

Tough Decisions 125

23 rJi;el (not 23 ':d3?? 'Wi'xd3+! 24 cxd3 c2+ and Black wins) 23 ... ~4+ 24 1:(f2 'ithl+ (or 24 ... .:tg 1 + 25 'Wt?e2 'ii'xh5+ 26 'li;d3) 25 ~e2 and:

c61) 25 .... ':xf2+ 26 16 xf2 ~e4+ 27 <it>fI 'iYhl+ 28 1igl "f3+ 29 ~el 'iWe4+ 30 'fie3 'ii'h 1 + 31 ~e2 and the king es­capes.

c62) 25 ... :g3 26 'Wi'xb7+! 1Wxb7 27 :Lxb7 'it7xb7 28 :f3 with a winning endgame.

c63) 25 .. J~gl 26 .c5+ 'it'b8 27 'fid6+ rJi;c8 28 l:b5 and Black resigned, since if 28 .. :ii'xh5+ 29 ~d3 ':d1 + 30 ~d2! :'xd2+ 31 l:txd2 'ii'f3+ 32 rJi;c4 or 28 .. :iWe4+ 29 ..te3 ii'xc2+ 30 rJi;f3.

This analysis can be regarded as opening 'theory' , even though it runs as far as move 32. The position after 12 ... dxc3 arises regularly at all levels of play and, in fact, the position in the original diagram has arisen many times. Anyone who has studied the consequences of 21 ':f3 beforehand will be re­warded with an easy point.

126 Tough Decisions

There are plenty of openings where one can get by (at least below the very highest levels of chess) with a broad under­standing of themes rather than intense knowledge of variations. However, if highly complex openings appeal to you, then you must ensure that you have studied them care full y, as, no matter how refined your ana­lytical skills become, it will prove difficult to constantly work them out over the board. Witness the following example.

Hiibner ... Waitzkin San Francisco 1995

White to play

In this game from a complex variation of the Ruy Lopez, Black has just played the nov­elty 20 ... ..., a 1. White has to sort through the complications to find the only move that will offer any advantage. Actually, the advantage is probably deci­sive, but first White has to find

it. He can consider: a) Capturing a bishop with 21

llxe7 b) Capturing the other bish­

op: 21l:Ixb7. c) Defending the back rank

and the dark-squared bishop with 21 :dl.

d) Defending the bishop and the b2-pawn with 21 "c2.

e) Defending two bishops and a knight with 21 'tic4.

Considering each in turn: a) White played 21 :xe7?

'i'xc 1 + 22 'tin -.xfl + 23 ~xfl i.a6 24 .id7 :xf2+ 25 ~el g6 and Black was okay. The game was later drawn.

b) Taking the other bishop is worse: 21 :'xb7? 'tixc 1 + 22 -.fl 'ii'c5 defends the bishop and attacks f2; while if 23 ':c7 \ib6 and virtually the entire white anny is en prise.

c) 21 l:Id I? allows Black to force a draw: 21. .. ':xf2! (not 21. .. ltJxf2? 22 :el i.c5 23 i.e3) 22 'WeI (if 22 'tie3 'iWa4, or 22 'ii'g4 i.c5, or 22 'tid3 :xg2+ 23 ~xg2 ltJc5+, or 22 'i'c4 ttxg2+) 22 ... i.c5 23 ~hl (not 23 i.e3? 'iixdl! 24 'iixdl i.xe3 25 ~hl ltJg3+ and wins) 23 ... ltJd2 24 i.h3 :xg2 25 i.xg2 i.xg2+ 26 ~xg2 'ii a8+ 27 ~h3 'iif3+ 28 'iig3 'iib5+ 29 'iih4 iff3+ with a draw.

d) The correct move is 21 "c21 and then if 21. .. i.c5 (21. .. :xf2? loses to 22 ':xe7, or if 21. .. i.g5 22 :dll %lxf2 23 'iic7) 22 :xb7 i.xf2+ (not

22 ... .:xf2? 23 "xc5!) 23 <irt>hI

23 ... ltJc5!? (if 23 ... ~e3 24 :f7! ltJf2+ 25 ':xf2 ~xf2 26 ltJd6) 24 ':a7 (24 JlgSf? ~xg8 25 'Wc4+ ~h8 26 ltJd6 is also strong) 24 ... ..te3 25 Jlc4 .xci + 26 "xcI ~xci 27 ltJd6 and White should win.

e) 21 .. c4 ? is insufficient: 21. .. i.c5! 22 :xb7? ttJc3!

23 1i'fi (not 23 bxc3? .xcl + 24 .f1 i.xf2+ when White gets mated) 23 ... :xf2 24 :b8+ (what else?) 24 ... :fS+ 25 ~hI :xbS 26 bxc3 l:xb5! with a decisi ve advantage. Better is 22 ltJd4 although Black still has the advantage after 22 ... i.a6 23 1i'c2 ..td3, e.g. 24 1'Ixd3 .xci + 25 .fI 'iixb2 or 24 ttJb3 i.xc2

Tough Decisions 127

25 ltJxai i.xf2+ 26 ~hI i.a4.

A fter the battle It is important to analyse your own games to discern your strengths and weaknesses. From the point of view of identifying problem areas the losses are obviously more important. However, everyone likes to play through their wins. Witness Leonid Yudasin annotating his win against his fellow GM Finkel in New in Chess #8/96.

Yudasin-Finkel Israel Ch., Jerusalem 1996

White to play

Here Yudasin played what he thought was the most accurate move and, in his notes, he at­tached to the move an exclama­tion mark with the words 'The winning move.' Was he right? White can choose between:

a) 31 ltJxbS. b) 31 .d5. c) 31 .d6.

128 Tough Decisions

d) 31 :cl intending i.c6. Yudasin himself swiftly dis­

cards lines 'a' and 'b': a) 31 lDxb8 ':xb8 32 'ii'd6

i.xb6 33 l:xb6 'iWcl+ and Black gives perpetual check, or if 34 .tdl :xb6 35 1i'xb6 'ii'xdl+ with equ,ality.

b) 31 'ii'd5 i.xb6 32 :'xb6 :'xb6 33 ltJxb6 "cl + 34 'iifh2 (not 34 iLdl? :tal) 34 ... 1i'f4+ again; or if 32 liJxb6 ltxb6 33 :xb6 ':xa4 34 .xe5

and now Black has the neat 34 ... :'xe4! and, after 35 ':xg6+ (35 1i'xe4 "c1+ and ..... c7+) 35 ... hxg6 36 'ii'xe4 White's winning chances are slim.

If White tries 31 'i'd5 i.xb6 32 iLb3 Black has good chances to hold with 32 ... 'ii'd8 33 1i'xf7+ ~h8 34ltJxb8 (or 34 :d1 i.d4, but not 34ltJf6 l:.a7) 34 ... :xb8.

c) Yudasin played 31 "d6! and the game ended 31. .. :'b7? 32 .i.c6 :'xd7 33 1i'xd7! 'ii'xd7 34 i.xd7 'iiff8 35 b7 :b8 36 i.c8 rl;e7 37 :d1 it.b6 38 :'d7+ ~e8 39 ~fl h5 40 rl;e2 i.a7 41 f3 and Black resigned since the white king is coming to c7. 32

ltJf6+ ~h8 33 ltJe8 (threatening 'iWf8 mate) was also very strong: 33 ... ~g8 34 "f6 ~f8 35 lDd6 and wins.

However, Black should have played 31. .. ~xb6! when it ap­pears that White is not winning immediatel y.

In New in Chess Yudasin gives: ~3l ... iLxb6 32ltJxb61i'a6 33 i.b3!, intending i.xf7+, is equally hopeless.' However, 32 ... :'a6! is much stronger. Af­ter 33 ltJxc8 :xbl + 34 'it>h2 :'xd6 35 lDxd6 White can of course play for the win but, with no weaknesses, Black has fair chances to hold.

d) 31 ':cl ~d8 32 i.c6 (if 32 liJxb8 .xdl + 33 ':xdl :xb8) 32 ... i.xb6 33 i.xa8 :Xa8 34 ltJxe5 "f6 and Black has good chances to draw (35 ltJf3 :a2).

In the above game there was no most accurate move - chess is very often like that! Consid­ering the result, the adage ~the

stronger player is always lucky' comes to mind. See if you can be equally fortunate in the next twelve positions.

Exercises

Position 1 Capablanca-J anowsld

San Sebastian 1911

Black to play

The tournament at San Se­bastian was the ftrst major event of Capablanca's career. Here, Janowski has the chance - per­haps his only ever chance - to inflict a defeat on the future world champion. Black has been on top for the entire game and here he can regain his missing piece (should he wish to do so) and his passed h-pawn is very strong. However, White's b-pawn also requires attention. Black has only to choose between the following:

a) 53 ... 1ihl + with the inten-tion of ... It.Jxe5.

b) 53 .. :ii'el+ with the inten­tion of tbxe5.

c) 53 .. :i¥xe5 meeting the cap­ture 54 'ii'xc4+ with 54 ... ~f8 55 'iWxd3 h2.

Tough Decisions 129

Position 2 Alekhine-Cohn Stockholm 1912

White to play

Material is equal but Black's queenside pawns are weak and, with the absence of his rooks, so is his back rank. How should White best take advantage of these factors?

Position 3 Capablanca-MarshaU

Havana 1913

White to play

130 Tough Decisions

In the game to decide the tournament the young Capa­blanca has the American Cham­pion on the ropes. The white pieces are far more active than their black counterparts, and if the queens come off Black's queenside pawns will be ripe for picking. Which plan should White adopt?

a) 33 iLe7 threatening 34 :f1 to win the f6-pawn, or if 33 ... :d7 34 'ii'e6! forcing the exchange of queens.

b) 33 :fl followed by 34 !lLe7 to win the f6-pawn.

c) 33 :e7 to double on the seventh.

d) 33 'iia7 threatening the a­pawn or to double on the sev­enth.

Position 4 Nimzowitsch-Euwe

Carlsbad 1929

Black to play

White is a temporarily a pawn up but his position is un-

enviable. Both his knight and his d-pawn are en prise and the black e-pawn is potentially very dangerous. However, Black must still be careful as White threatens to double on the f-file by l:afl, or to capture on f7 immediately (i.e. 24 l:xf7+ l:txf7 25 "xcS). What should Black play?

a) 23 ... :xc3 capturing the knight.

b) 23 ... 'ii'xd4 capturing the pawn.

c) 23 ... :tce8 defending the passed pawn.

Position 5 Marshall-Alekhine

New York 1929

Black to play

Black is the exchange up and his pieces are beginning to swann around the opposing king. Realising that he is objec­tively lost Marshall has just ventured 41 ~ d2 hoping to mount a counterattack on the

dark squares with 42 "d4. How should Black meet this threat­ened invasion?

a) 41. .. iLa6 with the intention of 42 "d4 llc2.

b) 41 ... ':'e8 with the intention of 42 "d4 lIc2.

c) 41. .. fif5 with the intention of 42 "d4 "g6.

d) 41. . .l:1a8 with the intention of 42 "d4 ':a2.

Position 6 Bondarevsky-Smyslov

USSR Ch., Moscow 1950

Black to play

Again the white king is ex­posed in the presence of the black queen, while the white queen is occupied by the menial task of blockading the b-pawn. How can Black manoeuvre his forces to tum these advantages into victory?

a) 44 ... iLd1 b) 44 ... iLd3 c) 44 ..... f4+ d) 44 ... 'ii'h4+

Tough Decisions 131

Position 7 Kasparov-Timman

Belgrade 1989

Wh ite to play

Kasparov needs only to dis­tract the black queen from her defence of the light -squared bishop and Black's fragile po­sition will collapse. How should White achieve this objective?

Position 8 Miles-Pritchett

Lloyds Bank, London 1982

Black to play

132 Tough Decisions

In positions with the kings castled on opposite sides of the board, positional niceties are often abandoned in favour of a race to give checkmate. Here Black has three pieces pointing at the white castled position, while White has pressure against the II -square and down the d-file. However, it is Black to move. How can he get his retaliation in first?

a) 32 ... i.xc3 with the idea 33 bxc3? "itxa2 mate.

b) 32 ... 'iVc2 to attack b2. c) 32 ... :el. d) 32 ... :f8 to defend II. e) 32 ... :8e6 to block the at-

tack on II.

Position 9 Suba-Petursson

Thessaloniki Olympiad 1984

White to play

One might be forgiven for thinking that there is a mistake in the diagram, that the respec­tive a-pawns are the wrong col-

our. But no, the diagram is cor­rect. The question is, whose pawn is stronger, or are the pawns equally strong? White should have the better chances as his pawn is one square fur­ther advanced and it is his move. Which of the following possibilities should he select?

a) 28 ':b8 with the intention of 28 ... .:Ixb8 29ltJd7.

b) 28 ltJd7 with the intention of 28 ... 'iVxd7 29 l:b8.

c) 28 llb6 with the intention of :a6.

Position 10 Van der Sterren-Kamsky

Wijk aan Zee 1994

White to play

Which rook to play to which square, when given a choice, is a perennial problem. It most frequently occurs in opening positions when the apparently simple choice between, for ex­ample, llad 1 and :fd 1 can lead to prolonged head-scratching.

Indeed, in his recent book The Heavy Pieces in Action, Dam­sky devoted 74 pages to the subject of which rook to which square.

In this game, the fifth from the Candidates match between the two players, White had the difficult choice of capturing on g7 with either rook. 23 :cxg7, keeping firm control of the g­file is the more defensively minded continuation, while 23 :gxg7, doubling along the sev­enth rank aims firmly at the black king. However, in such messy situations strategic fac­tors have to take a back seat and pure calculation takes over. Which rook move should White pin his hopes on?

Position 11 Andersson-McNab

Correspondence 1994-95

White to play

In the 50th Anniversary Tournament of the Norwegian

Tough Decisions 133

Postal Chess Federation two over-the-board Grandmasters are battling by post. White"s queen and bishop are well placed in the vicinity of the black king, but with the white king also in the open it is diffi­cult to make progress. How should White best guard against trouble?

a) 35 ~e2 b) 35 ~f3 c) 35 .llxf7 d) 35 g3

Position 12 Plaskett ... Tkachiev

Lloyds Bank, London 1993

White to play

Although the position appears to be rather equal, White has whatever chances there are as Black's a- and h-pawns are isolated. Can you construct a plan for White to exploit the slight weaknesses in Black's camp, and what is the most ac­curate continuation?

134 Tough Decisions

Solutions

Position 1 Capablanca-J anowski

San Sebastian 1911

Black to play

a) As Schlechter pointed out, by keeping control of the long diagonal, 53 ... 1ih1 +! 54 ~a2 lDxe5 wins easily. After the ex­change of queens by 55 ...• g2 the black knight can still stop the b-pawn from c6.

b) That seems simple enough, you might think, yet Janowski did not play this move. Instead he chose 53 .... el+? 54 ~a2 and now he should have forced the draw by 54 ... ltJc1 + 55 ~b1 lDb3+ 56 ~a2 ltJc 1 + etc. In­stead, he made things difficult: 54 ... ltJxe5 55 b7! liJd7 56 lDc5 liJb8 57 'Wixc4+ ~h8 (57 ... ~h7 dra ws) 58 liJe4

(see following diagram)

58 ... ~h7? (58 .... e3 still held the draw; if 59 .c2 a4!) 59

'Wid3! g6 60 'ii'xh3+ ~g7 61 'Wif3 .c1? 62 .f6+ ~h7 63 .f7+ ~h6 64 'Wif8+ ~h5 65 'it'h8+ ~g4 66 'Wic8+ and Jan­owski had to resign.

c) 53 ...• xe5? is no good: 54 'Wixc4+ <ittf8 55 .xd3 h2 56 .f3+ and if White cannot find anything better he can take a draw by perpetual check.

Position 2 Alekhine-Cohn Stockholm 1912

White to play

a) 25 liJde6?? loses a knight to 25 ... :b8.

b) Alekhine found the most accurate move, 25 c5! and now:

bl) 25 ... :xc5? loses to 26 ttJde6.

b2) Cohn tried 25 ... l:a6 and Alekhine won with 26 ttJde6 (26 llJb5 is also good) 26 ... ~hS 27 l:tdS+ llJgS 2S llJxc7 ':xa2

29 l:Ifdl! (not 29 ttJxf7+? iLxf7 30 %:txf7 J:el+ 31 ~h2 ':ee2 32 %:tffS J:xg2+ 33 <it>h 1 h6! 34 l:xgS+ ~h7 and Black should draw) 29 .. .f6 30 :xgS+ <ifi>xgS 31 l:tdS+ iLeS 32 llJxeS and wins, since if Black captures on g5 33 llJd6+ mates.

b3) In response to 25 ... ':b7 Alekhine had prepared 26 l2Jc6 ':eS 27llJe7+ ~fS (27 ... <if.;hS 2S llJxg6+ fxg6 29 %:td7) 2SllJxg6+ hxg6 29 ':d7 l%e7 30 ':dS+ %:teS 31 llJh7+ ~e7 32 l::ddl! and wins; or if 29 ... f61 30 llJh7+!? (or simply 30 g4 <itgS 31 llJf3 intending c6 or llJd4) 30 ... ~gS 31 llJxf6+ gxf6 32 ':xf6 ttJf5 33 ':xg6+ <ithS 34 c6 and with four pawns and great activity for the knight, White will win.

c) 25 llJgf3 :eS 26 llJb5 c6 (or 26 ... c5 27 :d5) 27 llJxa7

Tough Decisions 135

lIa6 2S .:td7 wins a pawn but there is clearly a lot of work to be done to win the game.

d) The same is true after 25 ttJc6 I:eS 26 :Ifel ':xel + 27 lhe 1 <ifi>fS 2 S ttJxa 7.

e) Or indeed 25 llJb5 f6 26 l:dS+ l:eS 27 :xeS+ i.xeS 2S llJxc7.

Position 3 Capablanca ... Marshall

Havana 1913

White to play

a) Capablanca played 33 iLe7? but Marshall found a strong resource in 33 ...• d7! threatening 34 ... :fS, and in this position the exchange of queens is not favourable for White. If 34 1i'e6? 'ii'xe6 35 ':xe6 Black wins the bishop with 35 ... :eS and 36 ... i.fS. The game contin­ued 34 <ifi>f1 ':fS 35 'iWe6 'ii'xe6 36 ':xe6 .:teS 37 ':e2 ~gS 3S b3 ~f7 and the white pieces had been driven back. Capablanca later made another mistake and

136 Tough Decisions

lost both the game and the tour­nament.

b) 33 l:fl .g5 34 i.e7? in fact loses the bishop to 34 .... e3+ and 35 .. .l1d7. Instead White should play 34 ~h2 when his prospects remain good.

c) But as Marshall showed, the most convincing win fol­lowed 33 l:1e7! l:g8 34 lIa7 'ii'f4 (threatening perpetual check) 35 'ii'c7!

If the queens are exchanged then all Black's queenside pawns will drop. Otherwise 36 ..if8 wins; the only defence is 36 ..... e3+ (or 36 ... 'ii'cl+) 37 ~h2 h5 38 i.f8 "1i1t6, but then 39 i.e7 and White can capture pawns as he sees fit. If Black tries 34 ... 'ii g5, with the idea 35 'ii'c7 f5 36 i.f8? 'ii'e3+ 37 ~h2 f4!, White plays 35 i.d6! to control the h2-b8 diagonal and Black has virtually no moves.

d) Against 33 'ii'a7 Black counterattacks against the white pawns with 33 ...• c2, and if 34 :e7 Black draws with 34 ... 'Wc1 + 35 ~h2 'i'f4+ etc.

Position 4 Nimzowitsch-Euwe

Carlsbad 1929

Black to play

a) Sensing no danger Euwe took the knight: 23 ... .:xc3? and lost after 24 lIafl e2 25 :xf7+ :xf7 26 'iWxf7+ ~h6 27 'ii'f8+ and Black resigned, since if 27 ... ~g5 28 'ii'f6+ ~h5 29 g4+. 24 .. .<lfth6 is no better: 25 :xf7 lTh8 26111f4 'iig5 (26 ... 'ii'd8 27 :d7 and 28 :ff7, or if 26 ... 'ii'el or 26 ... 1fh5 27 'iie7) 27 l:g4 'iid8 (27 .. :iih5 2811e7) 28 :d7 'iWf6 29 .xd5 intending 30 'We4.

b) Black should have taken the pawn 23 ... 'ii'xd4! Then after 24 llxf7+ :xf7 25 'ii'xc8 he could have given a decisive check:

(see following diagram)

25 .... e5+ 26 ~gl e2 27 l:el l:1fl+! 28 :'xfl .e3+ and wins. Or if 24 ltafl 'ii'e5+ 25 ~h1

':c7 wins, since if 26 ':xe3 'ii'xc3!

c) 23 ... :'ce8? is no good at all: 24 :afll:te7 25 'ii'xd5 e2 26 4:)xe2 wins.

Position 5 Marshall-Alekhine

New York 1929

Black to play

a) 41. .. .i.a6 fails, as Alekhine spotted, for the unobvious rea­son that the bishops are no longer in opposition on the long diagonal, and White is therefore able to exchange queens; i.e. 42 'ii'd4 l:c2 43 'ii'h8+ ~e7 44

Tough Decisions 137

'ii'f6+ ~d7 (or 44 ... ~e8 45 4:)g7+) 45 'ii'xf7+ ~c8 46 'iW e6+! 1i'xe6 47 dxe6 and the black attack has dissipated.

b) Alekhine writes that it took him half-an hour to find the exact route to victory: 41. .. lie8! 42 'Wd4 (if 42 'iib2 Black can prosecute the attack on the light squares by 42 ... i..a6, and then 43 11 xb4 :c2 44 'i'xd6+ ~g8 wins, or 43 ~a 1 .i.d3 and 44 ... .i.e4, while if the queen leaves b2 or the rook leaves the a-file then 44 ... :'c2 wins) 42 ... l:.c2, and now

if 43 'iib8+ rlite7 44 'Wf6+ rlitd7 45 ~g4+ 'Wxg4 46 'ii'xt7+ ~d8 47 1i'xe8+ ~xe8 48 4:)f6+ ~e7 49 4:)xg4 b3 and the pawn will cost White a piece, while the presence of the black rook on the e-file prevents the queen exchange on e6 as in 'a'.

Marshall tried instead 43 1:d2 ~d2 44 -.xd2, but then Alek­hine was ready to continue with 44 ... ~a6! 45 'WeI (if 45 'i'xb4 'ii'fl + 46 ~h2 .f2+! 47 .i.g2 .i.fl 48 'ii'xd6+ rlitg8 49 4:)f6+ ~h8 and Black gives mate, or

138 Tough Decisions

47 <iti>h3 J..c8+ 48 J..g4 J..xg4+ 49 <iti>xg4 "e2+ 50 ~h4 1i'h2+ 51 ~g4 f5+ winning the knight) 45 ... b3

46 iLd 1 (or 46 liJf6 b2 47 lLlxe8 i..d3) 46 ... b2 47 'iWb4 when Alekhine finished off with 47 ..... f1+ 48 ~h2 "'f2+ 49 <it>h3 J..c8+ 50 f5 J..xf5+ 51 J..g4 i..xg4+ 52 <it>xg4 "'e2+ 53 ~h4 ~2+ 54 ~g4 f5+ and Marshall resigned.

c) 41. ..• f5 42 ""'d4 "g6 43 "xb4 is clearly not very prom­ising for Black.

d) After 41. .. :a8 42 "'d4? the infiltration of the a8-rook is decisive: 42 ... :a2 43 .h8+ ~e7 44 "f6+ 'it'd7 45 'iWxf7+ <it>c8 and now if 46 'W'e6+? 'ii'xe6 47 dxe6 iLxf3, or 46 "e8+ <it>c7 47 We7+ ~b8 48 'W'xd6+ <it>a7 and White has no more checks. After 49 i..e2 i.a6! (not 49 ... :xe2? 50 lla1+) 50 "e7+ ~a8 and White can resign since back rank checks are answered by ... :c8. How­ever, White is not obliged to play 42 "ii'd4 since 41 ... :a8 in itself does not threaten any-

thing. After 42 :e1) say, Black has still to come up with a win­ning plan.

Position 6 Bondarevsky-Smyslov

USSR Ch., Moscow 1950

Black to play

a) Smyslov found the only decisive move: 44 ... i.d1! in­tending 45 ..... e2+ 46 'iWxe2 iLxe2 47 c6 b2 48 c7 iLg4 and wins. If 45 h3 to prevent the later ... iLg4,

then 45 .... f4+ 46 ~g1 'iie3+ 47 ~f1 .e2+ (Black exchanges queens with check) 48 .xe2

.i.xe2+ 49 ~xe2 b2 and wins; or if 46 li)f3 .i.xf3 47 gxf3 'iWh2+ wins the queen.

Bondarevsky tried 45 c6 to distract the black queen and in this he was successful; but without the c-pawn the end­game is hopeless for White: 45 .. :~xc6 46 li)d3 'iWc4 47 ~e3 .i.c2 48 lDe 1 .i.f5 49 ~d2 'fib5 50 ~dl .i.g4+ 51 ~cl 'iWc4+ and White resigned.

Lines 4b~ 'c' and 'd' are eas-, ily dealt with, e.g. 44 ... 'ji'h4+ doesn't achieve very much: 45 ~fl 'i'xh2 46 lDxc2 "ii'f4+ 47 ~gl dxc2 48 "ii'xc2 and White should draw with his strong passed c-pawn; 44 ... 1if4+ 45 lDf3 is similarly ineffective, and 44 ... .i.d3 45 lDxd3 'ii'xd3 46 ~e 1 is also unclear.

Position 7 Kasparov-Timman

Belgrade 1989

Tough Decisions 139

played 38 li)c5 which looks convincing enough, but Black has an improbable draw with 38 ... 'iWb5 39 ~d7 'iWf1 + 40 ~g4 li)d6f

and now: al) 41 exd6 f5+ 42 ~f4 g5+

43 <iti>e5 lDxd7 + 44 :xd7 'fib5+ 45 ~e6 1ib3+.

a2) 41 lDxb6 'iWd3!! 42 exd6 f5+ and Kasparov later proved that the white king could not evade the checks:

43 ~f4 "ii'd4+f 44 <ittxf5 g6+ 45 ~e6 'ji'e3+ 46 ~d5 li'd3+ 47 ~c5 axb6+ 48 ~b4 1i'd4+ 49 ~b3 "ii'd3+ 50 ':c3 1i'b5+ 51

White to play ~a2 'i'a4+ 52 l:a3 .c4+ 53 ltb3 'iWa6+! 54 c;t>bl 'ji'fl+, or

a) In the game Kasparov 48 ~xb6 ~5+ 49 ~a7 'ii'a5+

140 Tough Decisions

50 "'bS 'tib6+ 51 ~cS 'ii a6+ 52 :b7 1WaS+ 53 riiic7 'iia5+ or 53 l:bS'ii'a6+.

a3) 41 tDf6+ and the game concluded 41. .. gxf6 42 exd6 h5+ 43 ~h4 'iie2 44 h3 riiig7 45 :e7 ~5 46 f4 ~d7 47 lie5! .£1 4S :g5+ when the players agreed a draw.

b) 3S b3? is too hasty: 3S .... b5 39 tDd4 (or 39 tDc5 ~h7) since 39 ... 'iixe5 still de­fends the bishop; after 40 ~xcS tDxcs 41 'ii'xcs <iPh7 Black is okay.

c) 3 S tDd 4! is the winning move, threatening b3 and forc­ing 3S ... ~h7 (if 3S ... ~fS 39 e6! shows up the weakness of f7). Kasparov then gives 39 e6 fxe6 40 b3 1Wb4 41 tDxe6 Jtd7 42 :xd7 tDxd7 43 'ii'xd7 and wins, but 40 ... 'ii'al! is stronger, so that the queen defends g7 after 41 tDxe6 ..td7 42 :'xd7 tDxd7 43 'ii'xd7 and Black can still resist. White should continue as planned with 39 b3!

Then the World Champion analysed 39 ... Jtd7+ 40 e6 'i'xd4 41 exd7 tDd6 42 "We7 'it'd3! 43

dS. 1Wfl + 44 ~g4 h5+ 45 ~f4 tDd5+ with a big mess. How­ever, 42 'i'f8! wins since 42 ... 'ii'd3 43 dS'if iff! + 44 ~g4 h5+ 45 <it>h4! liJf5+ does not win back a queen, and after 46 ~g5! f6+ 47 'ii'dxf6 Black is surrounded.

It is testament to the energy with which the world champion plays that such fearsomely com­plex positions frequently arise in his games.

Position 8 Miles-Pritchett

Lloyds Bank, London 19S2

Black to play

Both 'd' and ~e', 32 ... .:fS and 32 ... llSe6, display unwarranted timidity. Black has a forced win so there is no need to defend fl.

c) 32 ... .:el would win after 33 .xfl+? ~hS since if 34 1Wd5 ltxdl+ 35 1Wxdl 'i"xd7! Black also threatens 33 ... :xdl + 34 'ii'xdl "iixd7! and wins. But 33 f3! interferes with the attack

by discovering on the rook. b) 32 ... 'iYc2! is decisive: if 33

.xt7+ <it>h8 34 :b1 then Black mates with 34 ..... xb2+! 35 :'xb2 l:el+ 36 :b1 ..i.xc3; while if 33 l:.b 1 ..i.xc3! 34 .lie5 ~xe5 35 'iixt7+ ~h7! and White has to exchange queens (36 'if g6+) to avoid mate, re­maining a piece down.

a) Fortunately for Miles, Pritchett played 32 ... i.xc3? and thus missed his chance. Fur­thennore, after 33 1i'xt7+ he compounded his mistake by putting the king in the corner: 33 ... ~h8?? (after 33 ... ~h7 34 i.e5! 'ii'xd7 35 'iixd7 ~xe5! the position would still have been unclear)

and Miles won with the prob­lem-like interference move 34 i.e5! 'iixd7 (if 34 ... :g8 35 i.xc3) 35 if xd7 .ltxe5 36 'ii'xe8+ (check!) and Black re­signed.

As it happens, 32 ... ~h8!, pre­empting 'ii'xt7+, would also have won. Black threatens vari­ously 33 ... i.xc3, 33 ..... c2, and 33 .. J1xb2 34 ~xb2 ~4+, and

Tough Decisions 141

White cannot defend against everything. If 33 'l'f3 then the picturesque win is achieved by 33 .. J~e1 (threatening ..... xd7) 34l:7d2

34 ... 118e2!, while if 33 "xt7 anyway then 33 ... 'i'c2! trans­posing above.

Position 9 Suba-Petursson

Thessaloniki Olympiad 1984

Black to play

a) 28 :lb8? :xb8 29 liJd7 looks simple enough. Unfortu­nately after 29 ... i..b2! 30 axb8"ii' 'iixb8 31 liJxb8 a2

142 Tough Decisions

White cannot prevent the black pawn from queening.

b) The correct move order is 2S tiJd7! since if 2S ...• xd7 29 :b8 a2 30 a8" ':xbS 31 .xb8+ ~g7 32 .a3! and White wins by coming in on the dark squares. Petursson tried 2S ... .i.b2 (intending ... a2) and then 29 tIxb2! axb2 30 tiJf6+ wins for White:

30 ... ~f8 (30 ... ~h8? 31 tiJxe8 and 32 .e5+) 31 'iWa3+ 'fIe7 32 tiJxh7+ ~g7 33 .xe7 bl'ii 34 tiJg5 .f5 35 e4! 'ii'f6 36 .b7 : moves 37 h4! and the a-pawn cannot be stopped. In the game Suba played 29 .xa3? .ixa3 30 tiJf6+ 'itfS 31 tiJxeS ltaS 32 ':b7 .i.c5 33 liJf6 ~g7 34 tiJe4 and now Black could have found his way to a draw with the continuation 34 ... .i.d4! and 35 ... :xa7.

c) After 28 l%b6? ~g7 (not 28 ... :a8? 29 ll)d7!) 29 :a6 l:a8 30 ':xa3 'ile7 there is no obvi­ous win, while 29 .. .'1i"5!? 30 :xa3 'iWxe5 31 .xe5 .txe5 32 as. :xaS 33 :xaS might also prove troublesome to win.

Position 10 Van der Sterren-Kamsky

Wijk aan Zee 1994

White to play

a) Every chessplayer soon learns that doubled rooks on the seventh are very strong. So it is understandable that Van der Sterren played 23 l%gxg7. How­ever, after 23 ... .:xd6 24 i.c5, as Kuijf and de Boer showed, Black could have drawn with 24 ... tiJd7! !

25 tIcxd7 ':xd7 26 .1i.xfS ':xg7 27 .i.xg7+ ~xg7 28 'iie2 .f4 29 ~g2 .g5+, or 25 .i.xd6 .i.xf3+ 26 'iixf3 l%xf3 27 :gl

':xc3 28 bxc3 "iie4+ etc, while here 27 l:lcxd7? even loses to 27 ... :fl+ 28 l:tgl :xgl+ 29 ~xgl "g4+.

Instead Kamsky continued 24 ... e4? 25 1:Ig3 '1Ii'f4

when White could have won with 26 :xb7! .txf3+ 27 :txf3 exf3 28 i-xd6 'ilIxd6 29 'ilIxf3 and if 29 ... :g8 30 tiJe4. But Van der Sterren returned the favour, playing 26 i.xd6? and the game ended in a draw: 26 ..... xd6 27 ltxb7 'ilIxg3! 28 hxg3 i-xf3+ 29 ~gl! i.xdl 30 tiJxd 1 tiJxd5 31 :b3 lic8 32 ~c3 tiJxc3 33 lixc3 :d8 34 l::e3 1:.d2 35 ':xe4 :xb2 36 1:.a4 :b6 37 ~g2.

b) White should have cap­tured with the other rook, 23 ':cxg7!, when Kuijf and de Boer analyse 23 ... :xd6 24 i.c5 e4 (or 24 ..... f4 25 lilg3! e4 26 .txd6 'ilIxd6 27 'ii'd4! i-xf3+ 28 c;t;gl wins) 25 .txd6 i-xf3+ 26 '1Ii'xf3! exf3 and now

(see following diagram)

27 i.xf8 threatens 28 l:tg8+

Tough Decisions 143

lDxg8 29 J.g7 mate, while if 27 ... h5 28 :7g6 f2 (or 28 ... lDg4 29 lilxg4 hxg4 30 :h6+) 29 i..g7+ <itth7 30 ~h6+ ~g8 31 lth8+ ~f7 32 :f8+ ~e7 33 i.xf6+ and wins.

Position 11 Andersson-McNab

Correspondence 1994-95

White to play

Lines 'b' and 'c', 35 ~f3 .tdl + and 35 i.xf7 i-xe4, grant Black counterplay and show why White would like to pass in this position.

To this end 35 g3 seems

144 Tough Decisions

plausible, but after 35 ... i.bl 316 ~f3 White would have to con tent himself with an extra pawn in the bishop endgame follow­ing 36 ... .i.c2 37 'ii'xfl+ 'ilxfl 38 i.xf7 and, with 38 ... r:i;g7 and ... r:i;f6-e5, Black should be able to draw.

Analysing in his local cafe (apparently!) the Swedish Su­per-OM Vlf Andersson found the right way: 35 ~e2! and Black is in Zugzwang. McNab went 35 ... .i.bl and only then did White play 36 'it'f3, having made sure that his king could hide.

The game ended 36 ... i.c2 37 i.xf7 i.dl+ 38 "'£1 'ilc2+ 39 'it' g 1 'iW xe4 40 i.e6 'i' e3+ 41 <ithl "'f4 42 .i.f5+ r:i;g8 43 'ilg6+ ~f8 44 'i'xh6+ <j;fl 45 'iWe6+ Q;fS 46 'li'c8+ 'it'g7 47 'i'd7+ ~f6 48 'i'e6+ and Black resigned. After 4S ... <itg7 49 'ile7+ 'it'g8 50 i.e6+ 'it'h8 51 'iWdS+ picks up the bishop on dl.

'PbsitiQ.n 12 P.Jaskett-l~chiev

Lloy6s BaRk. ~ondon 1993

White to play

This is the kind of position where one can often spend con­siderable time looking for the most subtle nuances in order to maximise the chances that exist. However, it is easy to get car­ried away with analysing the most delicate of finesses and miss something that is right un­der your nose.

This is such a position. White has many different ways to try and build up gradually against Black's weaknesses. However, the clever trick 31 l:e5! wins a pawn at once. 31. .. dxe5 32 l2Jxe5+ picks up the rook on g4 while if he ignores the rook, Black is helpless against the threat of l:tea5, e.g. 31. .. ~cS 32 lIxc6+ ~d7 33 ':'a6.