Understanding Your Chess [Paperback ed.] 1904600077, 9781904600077

Citation preview

Understanding Your Chess

James Rizzitano

First published in the UK by Gambit Publications Ltd 2004 Copyright ©James Rizzitano 2004 The right of James Rizzitano to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accor­ dance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1 988. All rights reserved. This book is sold subject to the condition that it shall not, by way of trade or otherwise, be lent, re-sold, hired out or otherwise circulated in any form of binding or cover other than that in which it is published and without a similar condition including this condition being im­ posed on the subsequent purchaser. A copy of the British Library Cataloguing in Publication data is available from the British Library. ISBN 1 904600 07 7 DISTRIBUTION:

Worldwide (except USA): Central Books Ltd, 99 Wallis Rd, London E9 5LN. Tel +44 (0)20 8986 4854 Fax +44 (0)20 8533 582 1 . E-mail: [email protected] USA: BHB International, Inc., 302 West North 2nd Street, Seneca, SC 29678, USA. For all other enquiries (including a full Jist of all Gambit chess titles) please contact the publishers, Gambit Publications Ltd, P.O. Box 32640, London W14 OJN. E-mail: [email protected] Or visit the GAMBIT web site at http://www.gambitbooks.com Edited by Graham Burgess Typeset by John Nunn Printed in Great Britain by The Cromwell Press, Trowbridge, Wilts.

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

Gambit Publications Ltd Managing Director: GM Murray Chandler Chess Director: GM John Nunn Editorial Director: FM Graham Burgess German Editor: WFM Petra Nunn

Contents

Symbols

5

Dedication

5

Acknowledgements

5

Bibliography

6 8

Introduction

1 Battling Goliath

10

Opening Selection against Stronger Opponents

Encounter with a Legend

10 10 17 23

2 Tactical Skirmishes

27

Gambits International Tournaments vs Swiss-System Events

Avoiding Tactical Blunders

27 27 32 34

3 Opening H its

38

Provocation Rivalry Slugfest

Unexpected Moves

38 39 49

4 Opening Misses

63

Developing an Opening Repertoire Piece Activity

Poor Opening Choices Dubious Opening Ideas

5 Opening Wars Four Knights Game Stand-Off Nimzo-Indian Defence Battles

6 Power of the Initiative Knight Outposts Patience Intuition

63 68 83 83 89 98 98 103 112

4

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

7 Accumulating Small Advantages T he Grinding Wheel A Question of Style

8 Runaway Tactics Exchanging the Wrong Piece Careening Toward Chaos

9 Endgame Adventures King and Pawn Endings Knight Endings Bishop Endings Bishop vs Knight Endings Rook Endings Queen Endings Index of Players and Analysts Index of Openings

120 120 124 1 33 133 146 1 67 167 169 170 173 181 187 190 192

Symbols + ++ # !! !? ?! ? ?? Ch corr. 1 -0 lf2_lf2

0- 1 (n) (D)

check double check checkmate brilliant move good move interesting move dubious move bad move blunder championship correspondence game the game ends in a win for White the game ends in a draw the game ends in a win for Black nth match game see next diagram

Dedication To my Mom.

Acknowledgements Thanks to Jerry Donahue for accidentally triggering this project, Joe Fang and Bill Kelleher for ac­ cess to their outstanding chess libraries, and Hal Terrie for verifying a dozen USCF ratings. Special thanks to my wife Kim and to our children Jillian and Jay for their enthusiasm and sup­ port.

Bibliography

Books Aagaard, J.: Queen's Indian Defence, Everyman 2002 Beliavsky, A. & Mikhalchishin, A.: Secrets of Chess Intuition, Gambit 2002 Donaldson, J. & Silman, J.: Semi-Slav Defence Non-Meran Variations, Summit 1988 Dvoretsky, M. & Yusupov, A.: Technique for the Tournament Player, Batsford 1995 Dunnington, A.: Attacking with I d4, Everyman 200 1 Emms, J.: Play the Open Games as Black, Gambit 2000 Estrin, Y. & Glazkov, 1.: Play the King 's Gambit Volume 2 King 's Gambit Declined, Pergamon 1982 Fine, R.: Basic Chess Endings, McKay 1941 Gallagher, J.: The Siimisch King's Indian, Batsford 1 995 Giddins, S.: How to Build Your Chess Opening Repertoire, Gambit 2003 Kasparov, G. & Nikitin, A.: Sicilian: ... e6 and ... d6 Systems, Batsford 1983 Keene, R.: Leamfrom the Grandmasters, Batsford 1975 Kinsman, A.: ModemBenoni, Everyman 2000 Matanovic, A. ed.: Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings A ('ECO'), 4th ed., Informator 200 1 Matanovic, A. ed.: Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings B ('ECO'), 4th ed., Informator 2002 Matanovic, A. ed.: Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings C ( 'ECO' ), 4th ed., Informator 2000 Matanovic, A. ed.: Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings D ('ECO'), 3rd ed., Informator 1 998 Matanovic, A. ed.: Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings E ( 'ECO'), 3rd ed., Informator 1 998 Muller, K. & Lamprecht, F.: Fundamental Chess Endings ( 'FCE'), Gambit 2001 Nunn, J.: John Nunn 's Best Games, Batsford 1995 Nunn, J.: Secrets of Practical Chess, Gambit 1 998 Nunn, J.: Secrets of Rook Endings, Gambit 1999 Nunn, J.: Tactical Chess Endings, Batsford 1988 Nunn, J., Burgess, G., Emms, J., Gallagher, J.: Nunn 's Chess Openings ( 'NCO'), Gambit/Everyman 1999 Nunn, J. & Burgess, G.: The Main Line King 's Indian, Batsford 1 996 Nunn, J. & Gallagher, J.: Beating the Sicilian 3, Batsford 1 995 Nunn, J. & Gallagher, J.: The Complete Najdoif: ModemLines, Batsford 1998 Nunn, J. & McNab, C.: The Ultimate Pirc, Batsford 1998 Pedersen, S.: The Main Line French: 3llJc3, Gambit 2001 Pedersen, S.: The Meran System, Gambit 2000 Psakhis, L.: The Complete Benoni, Batsford 1995 Rogozenko, D.: Anti-Sicilians: A Guide for Black, Gambit 2003 Roycroft, A. ed.: The Complete Studies ofGenrikh Kasparyan ( 'CSGK'), Russell Enterprises 1 997 Rozentalis, E. & Harley, A.: Play the 2 c3 Sicilian, Gambit 2002 Speelman, J.: Analysing the Endgame, Batsford 1 988 Timman, J.: The Art of Chess Analysis, RHM 1980 Vai"sser, A.: Beating the King's Indian and Benoni, Batsford 1 997 Watson, J.: Secrets of ModemChess Strategy: Advances Since Nimzowitsch, Gambit 1 999 Watson, J.: The Gambit Guide to the ModemBenoni, Gambit 200 1 Wells, P. & Osnos, V. : The Complete Richter-Rauzer, Batsford 1998 Yermolinsky, A.: The Road to Chess Improvement, Gambit 1 999

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Electronic/Periodicals Blitz Chess ChessBase Mega Database 2002 ChessBase Opening Encyclopaedia 2002 Chess Life Inside Chess Massachusetts Chess Association Chess Horizons New Hampshire Chess Association Newsletter New In Chess Magazine New In Chess Yearbook Players Chess News Sahovski Informator ('Informator' )

7

Introduction

The most important question confronting a chess-player is: "what should I study to improve my game?'' One of the most reliable techniques has been to analyse your own games to determine the strengths and weaknesses of your play. Armed with this knowledge, the student can direct his at­ tention toward improving the most glaring deficiencies in his game by utilizing his chess study time in the most efficient manner. Spending ti me trying to memorize the latest sharp variation in the Sicilian Defence won't pay off if your opponents constantly avoid the main lines and you find yourself floundering in quiet middlegames. For the same reason, striving to increase an already encyclopaedic knowledge of pawn endgames won't help much if you frequently end up in an in­ ferior position right out of your favourite opening. The question of what to study has a different answer for every chess-player - the only way to know what to study is to begin by studying your own games. Many years ago I resolved never to go to sleep after a loss until I had figured out what had gone wrong. If you are unable to determine why you are losing games, then it is pointless to continue competing in tournaments - you are wasting your time. Every game should be viewed as an oppor­ tunity to learn from your mistakes and as a mental reminder to avoid repeating these errors in the future. Losing a single game because of an unknown idea is a learning process - losing multiple games in a similar manner is a bad habit to be avoided. Chess is a mental exercise in managing fail­ ure - even the best players in the world find it difficult to play a flawless game. After graduating from college in the early 1980s and beginning a career in the software industry, I found that every year brought less and less time to study chess. I decided to take a year off from the game in 1 989. The idea for this book was hatched a year ago when I was contemplating a return to competitive chess after 'a year off' had stretched into a 1 4-year absence. Chess writers from Botvinnik to YermoIinsky have stressed the i mportance of studying your own games, and computer databases have made the entering and annotation of games a trivial matter in comparison to the old method of hunting through scorebooks and writing out notes by hand. Reviewing my own games and analysing my chess development over an extended time period was the ideal way to become re­ acquainted with the strengths and weaknesses of my play and to plot a course of action. One ofthe goals in writing this book was to confront some of the chess demons from the past by trying to determine what was really happening in certain critical positions. Some of these games were difficult for me to play over - analysing them in depth was downright painful. I decided to start with a foundation of 64 complete games because it would have been too easy to select frag­ ments and begin the analysis after the most complex and typically most instructive positions had already occurred. After finishing the complete games, I went back and augmented the chapter les­ sons with a combination of instructive positions from my own games and examples featuring other players which had caught my attention as a developing chess-player. A section of 20 instructive endgame positions was also added to round out the book. The games are presented chronologically within each section. The reader should carefully explore all analytical paths so as to obtain the most benefit from the game annotations. The definition of an instructive game is subjective and varies among authors. I have selected a mixture of interesting and decisive games based upon a combination of move quality and sporting significance without regard to the opponent's international title or rating. The book includes games against World Champions, Championship Candidates, and National Champions from various countries. Some of the highest quality games are played in weekend events against unheralded opponents at fast time-limits, and some of the lowest quality games are played in international

INTRODUCTION

9

tournaments against highly rated opponents at slow time-limits. Both extremes and something in between are included to give the reader a realistic view of competitive chess. A brief explanation of game heading information: the player ratings are USCF ratings; tourna­ ment directors assign an estimated USCF rating to non-United States players - in many cases, this is the same as their FIDE rating. Also note that most of the common place names (e.g., Cambridge, Manchester) refer to cities in the New England region of the United States. I previously annotated several of these games for various chess publications. All have been reanalysed and the opening comments have been updated to include the most recent opening the­ ory. In many cases new ideas were discovered which changed the evaluation of certain critical posi­ tions. The analysis was checked using the ChessBase Fritz 8 and Fritz Endgame Turbo 2 software programs. Break out your chess set and enjoy the chess journey of a lifetime. James Rizzitano Southborough, Massachusetts 2003 www.rizzitanochess.com

1 Battling Goliath

Opening Selection against Stronger Opponents What opening should you play against a strong opponent? The one that maximizes your strengths and minimizes your weaknesses. In an ideal situation, that same opening would also maximize your opponent's weaknesses and minimize his strengths. Good advice against any opponent, not just strong ones, but the advantages are more pronounced when there is an obvious skill difference between the players. The games in this chapter explore the challenges of playing strong opponents and show how my strategy changed over time as my chess strength increased. Another approach to the question of opening selection is to aim for an opening that your oppo­ nent has a track record of playing poorly against. This is easier said than done for the amateur player as it requires that you either be proficient in the opponent's 'problem' opening or have suffi­ cient time to learn it. As a player improves, trying to home in on the opponent's weaknesses be­ comes a critical factor in developing a professional opening repertoire that can both scale up (be played with confidence against increasingly stronger opposition) and scale out (has sufficient com­ plexity so that reasonable side-variations can be analysed and improved upon over time). I'll ex­ plore this topic more in Chapter 3, 'Opening Hits'. Chess-players frequently make the mistake of thinking that they have to play something unusual in the opening in order to get the higher-rated player away from his preparation. Be assured that strong players everywhere would like to encourage you to persist in this erroneous belief. Good luck playing something a little offbeat against a stronger opponent - he will happily serve you up for breakfast at the Road Kill Cafe. Grandmasters have a name for games in which their lower-rated opponents tried to surprise them with something completely new in the opening - they are called miniatures. My advice for selecting an opening to play against a stronger opponent is as follows: play what you know and know why you play it. What does this mean? You should play the opening you know best with the confidence that you have selected this variation because of its fundamental soundness. Let the higher-rated player worry about deviating from the main lines to avoid your the­ oretical knowledge. Ask yourself the following question: do you think your opponent would prefer to play against your memorized knowledge of Garry Kasparov's opening repertoire, or would he prefer to play against something you just made up over the board?

Gambits During my teenage years I had an insatiable thirst for the initiative and I quenched it by drinking gambits. At one time or another I must have played them all: King's Gambit, Goring Gambit, Milner-Barry Gambit, Morra Gambit - if a pawn could be sacrificed, I was all for it. There was only one problem - upon carefully analysing these games, I eventually concluded that although I was of­ ten successful with these openings, the results had very little to do with the choice of opening, and a lot more to do with what transpired in the middlegame and endgame. I also noticed that many of the opening books and articles espousing romantic gambit play had a tendency to overestimate the at­ tacker's chances and underestimate the strongest defensive continuations, yet many of these anti­ dotes seemed to be fairly well-known among strong players. Gambits which aim for longer-term

BAITUNG GOUATH

11

compensation such as the Benko Gambit and the Marshall Attack in the Ruy Lopez are excluded from this discussion because they are more accurately classified as positional gambits and have many highly-rated adherents. The inescapable conclusion is that romantic gambit play simply does not generate dynamic win­ ning chances against strong opposition on a consistent basis. Take a look at the opening repertoires of the world's top twenty players. Do any of them play romantic gambit openings regularly? No. Do you think this is a coincidence? No. The strongest players are usually right about the openings. If and when they are wrong, they will be replaced by new top players. When these new players be­ gin playing gambits and are able to maintain their place among the world's elite, I'll reconsider my conclusion. Most beginning players experiment with these openings at one time or another and they are an inevitable step toward helping a player to develop a feel for the initiative- any opening idea involv­ ing a sacrifice is an excellent way to learn about the fragile balance between time and material. Gambits have a role as an occasional surprise weapon as we will see throughout this book. I don't want to deprive anyone of the pleasure of playing gambits - I've certainly had my share - but at a certain point in your chess development it is time to move on.

Game 1 : Choosing Weapons

James Rizzitano 203 7 - Pal Benko 2526 World Open, Philadelphia 1 9 78 82 1 Sici lian Defence, Morra Gam bit The relative strengths and weaknesses of the players are an important factor in opening se­ lection, particularly between mismatched op­ ponents. Prior to this game (my first with a grandmaster), I was trying to decide what open­ ing to play. The white side of a Sicilian De­ fence, Sozin Attack was a possibility, but my opponent was one of the earliest and most skilled exponents of the system of defence be­ ginning with 6 .. .'ifb6. In such a situation, facing a 500-point rating difference and an experience deficit of more than 30 years, a sharp tactical opening seemed like a reasonable way to im­ prove the odds because I would not have had much of a chance in a complex positional battle.

1 e4 c5 2 d4 cxd4 3 c3 White chooses the Morra Gambit. I will have more to say about this opening in the notes to Games 3, 9 and 57. 3 dxc3 4 tDxc3 d6 5 tDf3 tDc6 6 i.c4 e6 Black's most highly-regarded idea is 6 ...a6 because it preserves the option of pinning the f3-knight with a future . . .i.g4. 7 0-0 i.e7 8 'iie2 a6 9 .l:.d1 i.d7 10 i.f4 e5 11 i.e3 tDf6 12 h3 •.•

NCO gives 1 2 l:tac l ( 1 2 .l:.d2 ! ? is also men­ tioned) 12 ...0-0 (12 ...tbg4!? is suggested too; White can retain his dark-squared bishop with 1 3 i.d2 or try the aggressive 1 3 tbd5 ! ? tDxe3 14 'iixe3 with compensation for the pawn) 13 a3 :c8 1 4 b4 b5 1 5 i.d5 tbxd5 16 tbxd5 i.e6 with equal chances. 12 0-0 13 .l:.acl .l:.c8 14 a3 A typical move in this opening as it prepares for queenside expansion and also enables the light-squared bishop to retreat along the a2-g8 diagonal in response to ...tDa5 . 14 h6 15 b4 i.e6 (D) Also possible is 1 5 ... b5 with the same posi­ tion as in the note to White's 12th move except that the moves h3 and ... h6 have been inserted. 16 i.d5? 16 i.xe6 fxe6 17 'iia2 is stronger, with the following possibilities: 1) 17 ...'i!fd7? walks into 18 tba4 !, and now: l a) 18 ... tbd4 19 i.xd4 'iixa4 20'i!f xe6+ �h7 21 'ilfxe7 exd4 22 tDxd4 and White has won a pawn. I b) 18 ... i.d8 19 tbc5 'i!fe7 20 tDxe6 and White has recovered the pawn with some ad­ vantage. •••

.•.

12

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

w

B

2) 17 .. .'�f7 ! 18 'ii'b3 with compensation for the pawn. 16 i.xd5 17 lDxd5 lDxd5 18 .:txd5 The exchange of two sets of minor pieces has eased Black's defensive task. White has minimal compensation for the sacrificed pawn because his remaining knight is unable to ex­ ploit the hole on d5 and he has no adequate counter to an eventual ...f5 break by Black. A knight located two diagonal squares away from a weak square is poorly placed because it needs three moves just to attack the target square. 18 ...'ii'd7 19 .l:tcd1 'ii'e6 20 b5 lDb8 The idea behind this move is to retain control of the b5-square. 20 ... axb5 21 'ii'xb5 is also possible: 1 ) 2 l ...lDd8 22 i.b6 f5 !? (22 ...lDc6 23 i.e3 repeats the position) 23 exf5 'ii'xf5 24 i.xd8 .:tfxd8 25 'ii'xb7 'ii'e6 with equal chances. 2) 2 l .. .f5 22 exf5 'ii'xf5 23 'ii'xb7 'ii'e6 is equal. 3) 2l ...'ii'g6! ? 22 lDd2 with compensation for the pawn. 21 bxa6 bxa6 22 i.d2 The beginning of a logical plan to gang up on the backward d6-pawn. 22 .l:tc6 23 i.b4 lDd7 24 'ii'd3 (D) 24 f5? Black should play 24...lDf6 25 i.xd6! (25 .l:ta5 l::tb8 is fine for Black) 25 ...lDxd5 (25 ...i.xd6 26 l:txd6 l::txd6 27 'ilfxd6 is equal) 26 exd5 .l:txd6 (26 ...'ilfxd6 27 dxc6 'ilfxc6 28 lDxe5 'ilfa4 29 'ilfd5 with equal chances) 27 dxe6 .l:txd3 28 .:txd3 (28 exf7+?? loses to 28 ....l:txf7 29 .l:txd3 e4 since the bishop is protected) 28 ...e4 29 .l:td7 i.xa3 30 e7 ! i.xe7 (30 ....:te8?? loses to 3 1 l:.d8) 3 1 l:xe7 exf3 3 2 .l:ta7 l:td8 3 3 l:txa6 .l:td 1 +

34 �h2 fxg2 35 �xg2 with a theoretically drawn rook endgame. 25 .l:ta5? White overlooks the powerful tactical idea 25 exf5 ! l:.xf5 (25 ...'ilfxf5 26 'ilfxf5 .l:txf5 27 lDd4 exd4 28 l:.xf5 i.f6 29 .:td5 gives White a clear advantage) 26 lDd4 ! (now that's a three­ way knight fork; the queen is boss after the weaker 26 'ii'xf5? 'ii'xf5 27 !D d4 'ii'e4 28 lDxc6 i.f8) 26 ...'ii'xd5 27 lDxc6 'ilfxd3 28 lDxe7+ �f7 29 .l:txd3 Wxe7 30 i.xd6+ with a slight edge in the endgame. 25 fxe4 26 'ii'xe4 .l:tb6 27 'ii'e2 'ii'f7 28 .l:td2 White's f2-pawn is exposed after the impa­ tient 28 l:xa6? l:txa6 29 'ilfxa6 e4. 28 l:.e8? Black should seize the open c-file by playing 28 ....l:tc8 29 l:.d1 l:.cc6 with a clear advantage. Both players were now running short of time and the quality of the remaining moves resem­ bles a blitz game. 29 l:tc2? White should recover the pawn by playing 29 l:.xa6 l::txa6 30 'ilfxa6 e4 3 1 'ilfc6 exf3 32 'ilfxd7 with equal chances. 29...lDf6 30 lDd2? Still time for 30 .l:txa6 .l:txa6 31 'ilfxa6 with equal chances. 30 'ilfe6 31 f4? At least White is consistent in his refusal to recover the pawn. The explanation is that I was trying to keep some complexity in the position because Pal had less time ah, the thought­ processes of a 1 7-year-old ! Despite the success of this strategy here, it is a low-percentage play and is not recommended. 31. .:tb5?

•••

•.•

•••

·

••.

•••

.••

-

.•

BATTLING GOLIATH

Black has several strong alternatives: 1) 3 I ...d5 32 fxe5 .i.xb4 33 axb4 1!i'xe5 34 'iVxe5 l:txe5 with an extra pawn. 2) 3 I ...tLld5 32 fxe5 dxe5 33 .i.xe7 :xe7 34 'iVf3 tLlf4 and again Black is a pawn up. 3) 3 l . . . .i.d8 (this move was Pal's prefer­ ence immediately after the game) 32 fxe5 .l:.xb4 (32 ...dxe5 33 .l:.ac5 e4 is also strong) 33 axb4 .i.xa5 34 bxa5 dxe5 and once more Black re­ tains his extra pawn. 32 .l:.xa6 .l:.eb8 33 :cc6? Stronger is 33 tLlc4 ! e4 34 .i.xd6 :cs 35 'iii>h2, when White has an extra pawn to go along with his compensation. 33 tLld5 34 .i.xd6 tLlxf4 35 11i'f3 .i.xd6 36 .l:.xd6 1!i'a2 36 ...11i'f5 is safer, in order to defend the king­ side. 37 :as (D) ••.

B

13

37 .l:.xa8?? This ghastly blunder finally loses the game. The black queen should return for defence with 37 ...1!i'f7 38 'ii'e4 .l:.xa8 (after 38 ...'ii'e8, 39 .l:.a7 keeps up the pressure) 39 'ii'xa8+ 'iii>h7 40 11i'e4+ g6 and although Black's king is slightly exposed he is not being checkmated. 38 1!i'xa8+ 'it>h7 39 'ii'e4+ 'it>g8 The weakness of the 7th and 8th ranks is also fatal after 39 ...g6 40 l:ld7+ 'iii>h8 4I 1!i'a8+ 1!i'g8 42 .l:.d8 winning the queen. 40 .l:.d8+ 'iii>f7 41 11i'f5+ 'it>e7 42 'ii'f8+ 'it>e6 Now White overlooks a mate-in-one but his move is sufficient to force resignation. 43 'ii'g8+ 1-0 •..

Game Lessons: I) Smart opening selection can help to miti­ gate the advantages of a higher-rated opponent. The grandmaster's subtle positional sense and endgame expertise were not a factor in this game. 2) Accurate opening play is absolutely es­ sential when playing gambits. The player who has sacrificed material cannot afford the luxury of an inaccuracy. 3) Avoid time-trouble - it is nothing but trouble. Even experienced world championship candidates can blunder with limited time on the clock. 4) If you have sufficient time, play the board, not the clock.

Game 2 : A Dubious Variation

Lev Alburt 2515 - James Rizzitano 2263 Atlantic Open, Washington 1 9 79 A67 Modern Benon i , Ta imanov The issues regarding opening selection prior to this game (my second with a grandmaster) were somewhat similar to those in Game I vs Pal Benko. How can I improve my chances for suc­ cess against such a formidable adversary? Once again, a sharp tactical opening seemed like the best bet. Although Black was relatively success­ ful in this particular game, recent theoretical

improvements and some of the notes below should be enough to convince even the most daring Benoni player that Black is on very thin ice in this variation. The problem with this line is that it requires the element of surprise to be effective. I certainly wouldn' t want to be the second player to try this variation against Lev Alburt.

14

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

1 d4 tiJf6 2 c4 c5 3 d5 e6 4 tiJcJ exd5 5 cxd5 d6 6 e4 g6 7 f4 J..g7 8 .i.b5+ tiJbd7?! A highly entertaining but dubious variation. Years later Stuart Rachels quoted me in Chess Life as having told him: "All lines of the Modem Benoni are good for White. I know because I play them all with Black !" Proof that the best jokes always contain at least a grain of truth; this is one of the variations I was referring to. 9 e5 dxe5 10 fxe5 tiJh5 11 e6 fxe6 The alternative 1 1 ...'ii'h4+ enjoyed a brief resurgence in the 1 990s before being put out of its misery. 12 dxe6 0-0 (D)

w

13 .i.xc3+ 14 bxc3 'ii'h4+ (D) •••

w

1 5 g3! This is ignored by ECO in favour of the weaker 1 5 'iti>d2? .i.xd7 16 .i.xd7 l:.f2+ 17 liJe2 l:.d8, and now: 1 ) 1 8 'iti>c2 'ii'e4+ 1 9 'iti>b3 (so far this is Brudno-Mercuri, Concord 1980) 19 ...l:.xe2 ! (a 1980 Chess Horizons suggestion of Joel John­ son which is also given in ECO) and Black has a decisive advantage. 2) 18 'iti>e1 l:.f7+ ( 1 8 . . . l:.xg2+? 19 liJg3 ! liJxg3 20 1!i'd5+ rJ;;g7 21 'ii'e5+ turns the tables) 19 g3 1!i'e4 20 l:g 1 l:.fxd7 and Black has a crushing attack. 15 11i'e4+ 16 'ii'e2 'ii'xh1 (D) ·

13 exd7 ECO gives this capture a question mark, but it is sufficient to win. White has a strong alter­ native in 13 tiJf3, and now: l ) 1 3 ...l:.xf3 and now White has: l a) 14 gxf3?! 'ii'h4+ 15 'iti>e2 liJe5? (Black lays an egg - 15 . . .tiJf8 ! is correct, with compen­ sation for the exchange) 16 1!i'd5 'iti>h8 17 .i.e3 (17 liJe4! is even stronger) and White had a clear advantage in A.Shaw-Rizzitano, Antrim 1 980. 1 b) 14 'ii'xf3 ! liJe5 1 5 1!i'd5 1!i'e7 16 J..g5 1!i'xe6 1 7 'ii'd8+ (stronger than 1 7 0-0?, as played in the game Bromberg-Rizzitano, Cambridge 1 982) 1 7 ....i.f8 1 8 0-0 tiJf7 19 l:.xf7 ! 'ii'xf7 20 l:.fl and White wins. 2) 1 3 ....i.d4 14 exd7 (also convincing is Da­ vid Norwood's variation 14 .i.g5 tiJdf6 15 'ii'e2 'ii'e7 1 6 0-0-0 .i.xc3 17 bxc3 liJg7 1 8 llhe1 "and Black is in big trouble") 14 ....i.xd7 1 5 .i.g5 'ii'e8+ 1 6 .i.e2 liJf4 1 7 .i.xf4 l:.xf4 1 8 tiJd5 and White had a clear advantage in Simoncini­ Caruso, corr. 199 1 .

••.

w

17 'ii'e6+? White should play 17 .i.e3! (also suggested by Joel Johnson) 1 7 ... .i.xd7 1 8 .i.xd7 1!i'd5 (the alternative 1 8 ...b6 is also hopeless: 1 9 0-0-0 'ii'e4 20 .i.b5 and White has a large advantage) 1 9 .i.b5 'iti>h8 20 l:tdl and Black resigned in

BATFLING GOLIATH

Valls Boixeda-Gude Fernandez, Spain corr. 1980. 17 �h8 18 'ili'e5+ Safer is 1 8 ..te3 ..txd7 19 ..txd7 'ili'xh2 with sharp play. 18 ltJg7 19 'ili'xc5 ..txd7 20 �xd7 b6 Also strong is 20 ...'ili'g2 2 1 ..tf4 g5 ! with a decisive advantage as the f4-bishop cannot move because of ....l:!.fl #. 21 'ili'd4 .:!.adS 22 ..te3 (D) •..

.•.

B

15

26 'ili'xd7 'ili'xg1+ 27 �c2 'ili'xh2+ 28 �b3 Also possible is 28 ..td2 h5 29 'ili'xa7 'ili'xg3 30 'ili'xb6 'ili'g4 with equal chances. 28 'ili'xh6 29 'ili'd8+ ltJe8 30 'ili'xe8+ 1Jg7 31 'ili'e7+ �g8 32 'ili'xa7 'ili'e3 The fireworks have fizzled out into an equal queen endgame although accurate play is re­ quired to hold the balance. Black centralizes his queen in order to protect his b6-pawn and keep an eye on the white king. 33 'ili'c7 h5 34 a4 'ili'e4 35 �b2 'ili'xa4 36 'ili'xb6 �f7 37 'ili'c7+ �e6 38 c4 'ili'b4+ 39 1Jc2 g5 40 'ili'c8+ �e5 41 'ili'c6 Or 41 'ili'h8+ �e4 42 'ili'h7+ �e3 43 'ili'd3+ �f2 44 'ili'f5+ �xg3 45 'ili'xg5+ �f2 with a draw. 41 'ili'a5 42 c5 'ili'd8 43 'ili'f3 'ili'd4 44 'iff8 'ili'c4+ 45 �d2 'ili'd4+ 46 �e2 'ili'e4+ 47 �d2 'ili'd4+ 1/z.l/z ..•

.•.

Game Lessons:

22 'ili'g2? Overlooking the simple 22 ...'ili'b7 ! (add an­ other example to the list of missed long diagonal retreating moves) 23 .l:!.d 1 .l:!.f7 24 ..tc6 .l:.xd4 25 ..txb7 .l:!.xd1 + 26 �xd 1 .l:!.xb7 and Black wins. 23 0-0-0 .l:!.fl 24 ..th6 .l:!.xd1+ 25 �xd1 .l:!.xd7 It is too late for 25 ... 'ili'fl +? 26 �c2 'ili'f7 27 ..te6 .l:!.xd4 28 ..txf7, when the two pieces are superior to the rook. .•.

1) Again, opening selection against a higher­ rated opponent is critical. Although this varia­ tion is now considered dubious, at the time of the game it succeeded in creating enormous practical problems. 2) Accurate calculation is the single most important skill in chess. White overlooked the strength of 1 7 ..te3 ! and Black missed easy wins with 20...'ili'g2 and later 22 ...'ili'b7 ! . 3 ) Learn the basic endgames - when the middlegame blunders are over, the endgame begins.

Game 3: Three Mistakes in a Row

James Rizzitano 2352 - Anthony Miles 2619 World Open, Philadelphia 1 980 822 Sici l ian Defence, 2 c3 At the t:me of this game Tony was playing the Sicilian Dragon extensively and had recently completed a book on the opening. Although I had no qualms playing into it against opponents around my own strength, with only a few min­ utes before the round for preparation it seemed foolish to venture into it against one of the world's leading exponents. The late great Tony

Miles was one of the most dynamic and colour­ ful characters in the chess world and he gener­ ously spent considerable time analysing this game with me, for which I am grateful.

1 e4 c5 2 d4 cxd4 3 c3 ltJf6 Tony explained afterwards that although he didn 't trust the pawn sacrifice, he preferred to

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

16

decline the gambit and steer the game into a variation that he had been experimenting with. This is an instructive practical decision, as he had considerable experience playing against the· 2 c3 Sicilian but limited experience vs the Morra Gambit. The game-within-the-game ends with both players succeeding in sidestepping each other's intended opening. In his book Anti­ Sicilians: A Guide for Black, Dorian Rogo­ zenko makes a similar point in recommending 3 ...lL!f6 here for Black: "I am convinced that in the 2 c3 Sicilian White has no advantage at all, while the Morra Gambit is less explored at high levels and there are several unclear positions in which White enjoys the initiative for the pawn." 4 eS liJdS 5 cxd4 e6 6 lL!f3 b6!? An interesting alternative to the usual 6 ...d6. 7 lL!c3 i..b7 8 i..d3 lL!xc3 9 bxc3 'ii'c7 10 i..d2 d6 1 1 0-0 liJd7 12 l:te1 This was the stem game for this variation; many subsequent games have continued with the aggressive 1 2 lL!g5 !? dxe5 1 3 'ii'h5 g6 14 'ii'h 3 i..e7 1 5 l:tfel with sharp play. 12 dxe5 13 lL!xe5 lL!xe5 14 l:txeS i..d6 15 l:th5 g6 This is necessary, since 15 ...0-0-0?! 16 a4 ! g6 17 l:th3 f5 1 8 a5 gave White strong queen­ side pressure in Spassky-Arakharnia, Women vs Veterans, Monaco 1998. 16 i..bS+!? Many subsequent games have continued with the quieter 16 l:th3 0-0 with equal chances. 16...i..c6 Several later games saw 16 .. .f8 with ap­ proximately level chances. 17 11i'f3! (D) White is left with light-square weaknesses after 17 i..xc6+ 'ii'xc6 1 8 l:th3. 17 0-0-0! Stronger than 17 ...l:tc8. Then: 1 ) 1 8 11i'f6 i..xb5 and now: 1 a) 19 11i'xh8+? �d7 20 'ii'xh7 (20 'ii'xc8+ 'iii>xc8 21 l:txb5 i..xh2+ 22 �h 1 i..d6 gives Black a clear advantage) 20...gxh5 2 1 'ii'xf7+ i..e7 22 i..g5 l:te8 23 i..xe7 (23 l:tel i..c4 de­ fends) 23 .. .lhe7 24 'ii'xh5 a6 and the bishop is superior to the pawns. l b) 19 l:txb5 ! i..xh2+ 20 �h l l:tg8 2 1 l:te1 .i.d6 22 l:txe6+! (White's attack requires more fuel) 22 .. .fxe6 23 'ii'xe6+ �f8 24 i..h6+ l:tg7 25 •••

B

l:td5 l:te8 (25 ...l:f.d8 26 'ii'f6+ �g8 27 .i.xg7 JJ..e7 28 l:txd8+ 'ii'xd8 29 'ii'e5 .i.d6 30 .i.f6 JJ..xe5 3 1 i..xd8 with an extra pawn) 26 i..xg7+ 'ii'xg7 27 'ii'xd6+ with an extra pawn. 2) 1 8 i..xc6+ 'ii'xc6 1 9 11i'f6 l:tf8 20 l:txh7 i..e7 (so far this is Nepomniashchy-Bonnet, World U- 1 2 Ch, Oroposa del Mar 200 1 ) 2 1 'ii'e5 with an extra pawn. 18 i..xc6 Also possible is 1 8 11i'xc6 !? 'ii'xc6 1 9 i..xc6 gxh5 20 i..g5 l:tdf8 21 i..f6 l:thg8 22 i..e4 l:tg6! 23 .i.xg6 fxg6 (23 ... hxg6! ?) 24 i..g7 l:tf5 and Black had a slight edge because of White's weak pawns in Salai-Orsag, Brno Morava 199 1 . 18 gxh5 19 a4 a6! 20 i..e4 �b8 21 'ii'xhS i..f4 22 i..el ! (D) More dynamic than 22 i..xf4 'ili'xf4 (Tony evaluated this as 'Black has the upper hand' in his lnformator annotations) 23 'ili'e2 !? �a7 24 l:tb1 l:f.hg8 25 g3 and White has some compen­ sation for the exchange. •.•

B

•••

22 f5 •••

·

BATTLING GOLIATH

Tony pointed out that the slower 22...rl;a7 23 g3, with the idea of ..i.g2 and 'ii'f3, gives White compensation for the exchange. 23 .id3 �a7 24 'ii'e2? With the onset of time-pressure, White be­ gins to lose the thread of the game. Logical and strong is 24 g3 ! .:thg8 25 'ii'e2 'ii'c8 26 a5 b5 27 c4! with sharp play ahead. 24 ..i.xh2+ 25 �h1? (D) A mistake which meets with a striking refu­ tation. White must play 25 �fl ! .:thg8 26 'ii'xe6 'ii'b7 27 f3 with compensation for the exchange. •••

17

my view 28 ...'ifg7 is also sufficient) 29 'ii'h5 (29 .id2 l:g3+!) 29 ... .tg1 ! 30 'ii'f7+ �xa6 3 1 11kxg8 'ilkh2#. 2) 26 aS b5 27 11kxe6 ! is similar to the fol­ lowing variation. 3) 2611kxe6 ! (Tony gave this a question mark but it appears to be the only try) 26 ....:tg6 27 'ilkxf5 l:h6 28 .ie4 and although White's king is uncomfortable Black has no obvious knockout punch. 26 h5! 27 �xh2 h4 28 �g1 Also hopeless is 28 �g2 hxg3 29 fxg3 'ii'b7+ 30 .ie4 (30 'i!if3 .:th2+) 30 ...fxe4 3 1 �g1 .:th3 and Black wins. 28 hxg3 29 fxg3 l:l.xg3+ 30 .ixg3 11kxg3+ 31 'ii'g2 'ilke3+ 32 �n Or 32 'ii'f2 .:tg8+ 33 �fl 'ilkxd3+ and Black wins. 32 11kxd3+ 33 �f2 'ilkd2+ 34 �n 'ii'f4+ 35 'itte1 'ii'c7 36 .:tel .:th2 37 'ilkf3 0-1 •..

•••

B

•••

Game Lessons:

25 .:tdg8! ! 26 g3?? Three mistakes in a row is usually enough to ruin any position; the alternatives are: 1 ) Tony gave the attractive variation 26 .ixa6?? .:txg2 27 �xg2 .:tg8+ 28 'ifi>h3 'iff4 (in ••.

1 ) Black's choice of opening is instructive ­ he managed to steer the game into a variation of his choosing rather than the Morra Gambit that White desired. 2) Before worrying about your own attack, always be alert for the opponent's threats. 3) Don't give up ! Although White had a dif­ ficult position after making a couple of poor moves, he still had chances to stay in the game.

International Tournaments vs Swiss-System Events Competing successfully in international tournaments instead of Swiss-system events requires sev­ eral adjustments: 1) The heightened level of competition - typically every player is strong and there are no easy rounds. Even after losing a game, the next pairing could be just as tough. In Swiss-system events, a loss or draw is usually 'rewarded' by being paired against a lower-rated opponent in the next round. 2) The scoring mentality is different - any result that adds to your score is a desirable outcome. In Swiss-system events a draw can often be as devastating as a loss, so the higher-rated players are more inclined to take real risks to try to win in the later rounds, especially against lower-rated opposition. 3) The time-limit is often slower - a classical game requires a different mind-set from a faster time-limit game. There is more time for calculation, so an impulsive move in the opening can be more easily punished by the opponent. The following two games were played in international tournaments which were preceded by large Swiss-system events. In both cases it was necessary to make a quick adjustment to the stronger com­ petition and the slower time-limit.

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

18

Game 4: Bone in the Throat

Jonathan Speelman 2578 - James Rizzitano 2457 Continen tal Chess Interna tional, New York 1 981 806 Pirc Defence The play revolves around an advanced white pawn on the e6-square - is it a bone in the throat or a weakness to be surrounded and captured? The answer lies somewhere in between.

1 d4 g6 2 e4 i.g7 3t'Df3 d6 4 i.c4 t'Df6 5 'ii'e2 c6 A passive alternative to the usual 5 ... i.g4. 6 i.b3 aS 7 a3!? An interesting novelty. The advantage of this move over 7 a4 is that a future c4 advance does not leave a hole on the b4-square for a black knight; the disadvantage is that it may allow Black to grab some space on the queenside by an eventual ...a4 followed by ....l:.a5 or ...'ii'a 5. 7 0-0 8 0-0t'Dbd7 A provocative move which invites White to play the following pawn advance. With the white pawn on a4, Dzindzichashvili-Speelman, Hastings I977/8 continued 8 ...i.g4 9 t'Dbd2 e6?! (more usual is 9... d5) 10 e5 dxe5 I I dxe5 t'Dd5 I 2 h3 i.xf3 1 3t'Dxf3 with a slight edge. 9 e5t'Dd5 10 e6!? (D) ...

1 1t'Dg5 f6!? I l . ..fxe6 is safer, transposing to the previous note. 12t'Dh3? Stronger is I 2 t'Df7 ! 'ii'e8 1 3 t'Dh6+ 'iii>h8, when White has a choice between repeating the position with 14 t'Df7+ or inviting sharp complications with I4 .l:.el . During the post­ mortem Jon made the instructive observation that he should have taken the f7 plunge with his knight and then spent some time analysing the position because he could always bail out and force a draw with the knight check. The knight retreat to h3 was less committal but simply did not meet the demands of the position - the onus is on White to strike quickly before Black has a chance to round up the e6-pawn. I thought of this adviCe often during future games because there are times when it is nice to 'take a closer look' at a sharp position, particularly when there is a draw in hand. 12 ...a4 13 i.a2t'Dc7 The beginning of a logical plan to surround the invading pawn. 14 i.f4 (D)

B

10 t'D7b6 Black should eliminate the advancing foot­ soldier by playing IO .. .fxe6 I I t'Dg5 t'D7b6 I2 t'Dxe6 i.xe6 1 3 'ii'xe6+ 'iii>h 8, when White's two bishops are offset by Black's slight lead in de­ velopment. •..

14 d5? Overlooking the knight tango I4 ...t'Dbd5 ! I 5 c4 ( 1 5 i.xd5 cxd5 costs White the e6-pawn) I 5 . . t'Dxf4 . 1 6 t'Dxf4 g5 ! ?. ( 1 6 . . . i.h6 is also .•.

BAITUNG GOUATH

strong) 17 ti:Jh5 ti:Jxe6 18 c5 d5 and White is left gasping for compensation. 15 i&.xc711¥xc7 16 ti:Jd2 1!Vd6 The immediate 1 6 ...f5 is also reasonable. 17 :ae1 f5 18 ti:Jf3 .l:[f6 19 ti:Jfg5 h6 20 ti:Jf7 11¥xe6 Black finally wins the pesky pawn at the cost of creating a gaping hole on the e5-square. 21 ti:Je511¥d6 22 ti:Jf4 g5 (D)

19

defensive function by preventing White from opening the position with c4. 28 .l:[fe2 i&.g8 29 ti:Jd3 ti:Jc8 30 :e5 b6 Black's plan is to unwind with ...l:ta7, ...1!Vd8, ...ti:Jd6 and ...tt:Je4, relieving the e-file pressure. 3111Vf2 1h.-1h. Time trouble was looming and neither player was particularly enamoured with his position. A possible continuation is 3 l . ...l:[a7 32 h3 ! ? gxh3 3 3 1!Vg3+ �h7 34 11¥xh3 1!Vd7 3 5 11¥h4 (preventing ...ti:Jd6) 35 ...1!Vd6 36 11Vh3 with a draw by repetition.

w

Game Lessons:

Forcing the issue before White has a chance to grab more space by playing h4. 23 ti:Jh5 .l:[f8 24 ti:Jxg7 cj;;xg7 25 f4 g4 26 .l:[f2 .l:[f6 2711Vd2 i&.e6 Although it is blocked by its own pawns, the light-squared bishop does perform a useful

1 ) Remain calm when confronted by new moves in the opening. One way to reassure yourself when faced with a novelty is to ask yourself the following question: if this move is so strong, why hasn't it been played before? 2) Be alert for unusual move-sequences. Black overlooked the idea of 14 ... ti:Jbd5 ! be­ cause he had just retreated his other knight from the d5-square. 3) Most positions contain defensive re­ sources no matter how visually unpleasant they may appear. Black was able to discover the idea of ...i&.e6-g8, ... b6 and ...:a7 followed by an eventual ... ti:Jd6-e4, which threatened to repulse White's attack along the e-file.

Game 5 : The Ugliest Move

James Rizzitano 2485 - Bent Larsen 2584 New York International, New York 1 984 C2 5 Scotch Opening Most chess-players can identify with the plot of the following game: 1 ) White plays a harmless opening, blun­ ders in the early middlegame and is saddled with a static weakness. 2) Black effortlessly achieves a large advan­ tage, but at the critical juncture he fails to play the 'sharpest line. 3) Black senses his advantage slipping away and plays an impulsive move which backfires. 4) A couple of errors follow and the game is eventually drawn.

Bent Larsen was clearly not at his best on this day, but I have been on the wrong side of this story many times and so consider myself more than qualified to explain it. When a large advantage is obtained with minimal effort, it is easy to become complacent and assume that the game will win itself. There is a natural ten­ dency to tum on the cruise control, stop calcu­ lating sharp variations and simply wait for the opponent to self-destruct. Most of the time they do, but every once in a while they don't. A common reaction is that the player with the

20

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

advantage becomes frustrated as his edge evap­ orates - he panics and plays a desperate move which allows his opponent back into the game. Sound familiar? Here's a game to think about the next time you are coasting to victory.

1 e4 e5 2 lDc3 Bent Larsen had authored the ECO section on the Vienna Game and I couldn't resist the opportunity to play it against him. After experi­ menting with just about everything for White after I e4 e5, I eventually came around to the generally accepted conclusion that White must play the Ruy Lopez if he wants to fight for an opening advantage. 2 .tc5 A rare but reasonable move. 3 liJf3 d6 More accurate than 3 ...lDc6 4 lDxe5 ! lDxe5 (4 ....txf2+ 5 �xf2 lDxe5 6 d4 lDc6 7 .te3 d6 8 .i.e2 lDf6 9 l:tfl 0-0 10 �gl h6 I I 'ii'e l gave White a clear advantage in the classic game Capablanca-Liebenstein, New York 1 9 1 3) 5 d4 .td6 6 dxe5 .i.xe5 7 i.d3 'ii'h4 8 liJd5 lDe7 9 g3 'ii'h3 10 lDxe7 �xe7 I I f4 with a clear advan­ tage for White, Glek-Romanishin, Biel 1996. 4 d4 White can obtain the bishop-pair by playing 4 lDa4 .tb6 5 lDxb6 axb6 6 d4 'ii'e7 7 .td3 lDf6 8 0-0 0-0 9 h3 lDc6 I 0 c3 h6, but this only led to equal chances in Benko-Larsen, Las Palmas 1972. 4 exd4 5 lDxd4 lDf6 6 lDb3 More ambitious is 6 .tg5 h6 7 .th4 0-0 8 .te2 l:r.e8 9 'ii'd3 lDbd7 1 0 0-0-0 lDe5 I I 'ii'g3 lDg6 1 2 .txf6 'ii'xf6 1 3 lDd5 'ii'd8 14 lDb3 .tb6 with equal chances in Thorhallsson-I.Sokolov, Akureyri 1 994. 6 .tb6 7 .i.g5 h6 8 .th4 liJc6 (D) The opening has transposed into a harmless variation of the Scotch Game. 9 .td3 White can play for queenside castling with 9 'i1Ve2 .i.e6 10 0-0-0 g5 I I .i.g3 'ii'e7 1 2 f3 0-0-0 1 3 .i.f2 d5 14 .i.xb6 axb6 15 exd5 lDxd5 16 lDxd5 l:lxd5 1 7 l:lxd5 .i.xd5 1 8 'ii'xe7 and a draw was agreed in Radulov-Smyslov, Hast­ ings 1972/3. 9 .te6 10 lDa4?! A novelty which should not be repeated. White should play the centralizing I 0 liJd5 ! g5 .••

•.•

w

1 1 lDxb6 axb6 12 .tg3 with balanced chances in Kernazhitsky-Hajnal, Tenkes Cup, Harkany 2000. 10 d5! Of course ! Black immediately strikes in the centre to take advantage of White's error. 1 1 lDxb6 axb6 12 exd5 'i1Vxd5 13 0-0 Prior to my l Oth move I had overlooked that 13 .i.xf6? 'ii'xg2 14 :n gxf6 is overwhelming for Black. 13 0-0-0 14 l:te1 Now that the g2-pawn is protected, White can consider 1 4 .i.xf6 gxf6 1 5 'ii'e2 with an un­ clear position. 14 g5 15 .i.g3 h5! (D) •••

••.

.••

w

•••

•••

Black's king is safely tucked away on the queenside so he is free to blast away on the kingside. Now I became spooked thinking about Game 3 vs Tony Miles four years earlier which featured a similar pawn-thrust. I decided that the queens should be exchanged despite the damage to my pawn-structure. This type of

BATTUNG GOUATH

musing about past games occurs among players at all levels and it is an open question as to whether it is desirable. Drawing upon previ­ ous experience is helpful if you win but detri­ mental if you lose. In this game I should have spent more time analysing the position on the board and less time reminiscing about previous games. 16 'fi'f3?? This ugly move still makes me cringe almost 20 years later. White must defend vigorously by playing 16 h4! l:thg8 (16 ...gxh4 17 ..txh4 .l:thg8 1 8 f3 ltJe5 19 ..te2 with equal chances) 17 hxg5, and now Black has a choice of recap­ tures: 1) 17 ....l:txg5 18 'fi'c 1 ! h4 ( 1 8 ...l:tg4 19 ..te2 and 1 8 ... .l:tdg8 19 'fi'f4 are fine for White) 1 9 c4 ! ( I overlooked this move during the game) 1 9 ...'ii'xd3 20 'ii'xg5 hxg3 21 'fi'xf6 gxf2+ 22 'fi'xf2 and Black has inadequate compensation for the lost exchange. 2) 17 .. :'ii'xg5 1 8 'ii'c 1 'ii'g7 ( 1 8 ...'ii'xc 1 19 .l:taxc 1 with equal chances) 19 'fi'f4 liJd5 20 'fi'a4 with a sharp struggle ahead. 16 'fi'xf3 17 gxf3 %lhg8 (D) ..•

21

White's dark-squared bishop is useless and it would be an improvement to exchange it for one of the black knights. 18...ltJxe5 I was more concerned about 1 8 ... ltJd5, angling for the f4-square. 19 ltxe5 .l:td5 1 9 ...ltJd5 is also strong. 20 ltael �d7 21 lLld2 h4 22 a3 c6 23 ltJc4 cj;c7 24 ltJd2 White has no reasonable way to improve his position, so his strategy is to avoid further weakening moves and await developments. 24 ...b5 25 lt5e3 ltJh5 26 ltJe4 .l:tgd8 27 ltJc3 lt5d7 28 ltJe2 'it?b6 29 .l:teS .l:tdS 30 l:te3 .l:t5d6 31 %le5 f6 32 l:te3 ..tc8 White is able to hang on after the more forc­ ing 32 .....tc4 33 ..txc4 bxc4 34 lte4 f5 35 l:txc4 .l:.e8 (35 ....l:td2 36 �fl holds) 36 'it?fl l:tde6 37 ltc3 liJf4 38 lte3 ltxe3 39 fxe3 .l:txe3 40 ltJd4 with equal chances. 33 lte7 %le6 34 ltxe6 ..txe6 35 ..tg6 ltJg7 36 f4 g4 37 ..td3 ..tc4 38 lLlcl lLlh5 Also strong is 38 ... ..txd3 39 liJxd3 liJf5 with a clear advantage. 39 fS ..tdS 40 .l:te3 liJf4 41 ltJe2 (D)

w B

White has squandered the advantage of the first move and must defend a difficult endgame with doubled isolated pawns. My first thought upon sitting here staring at the horrendous posi­ tion in front of me was that my 'romantic gam­ bit openings' phase was over - it usually takes a traumatic game like this one to decide it is time finally to move on. My second thought was 'How am I going to defend this position?' and I began to formulate a defensive plan. 18 ..teS!

41 ...lLlh3+ Black was understandably hesitant to enter the following variations where victory some­ times hinges upon a single tempo. At the risk of falling victim to his famous saying 'long analy­ sis, wrong analysis', here goes: 4 1 . . .lLlg2 ! 42 l:le7 (42 .l:te6? backfires after 42 .....txe6 43 fxe6 lLlel ) 42 .....tf3 43 .l:te6 b4! and now: 1 ) 44 .l:txf6 b3 45 .l:te6 bxc2 46 ..txc2 (46 lLlc 1 lLlf4 wins for Black) 46 .. .l::t d2 47 ..tb3

22

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

l:txb2 48 .td l l:tb1 49 ltJc3 l:tc l 50 f6 l::txc3 (an­ other way is 50 ...ltJf4 5 1 l::td6 ltJe2+ 52 ltJxe2 .txe2 53 f3 .txdl and Black has a decisive ad­ vantage) 5 1 f7 l::tc l 52 l:.el (the only try as 52 l:td6 .txdl 53 l:.xdl l:txd l + 54 �xg2 l:td8 is winning for Black) 52 ... ltJxel 53 f8'if ltJc2 54 'ifd8+ �a6 (not 54 ... �b5?? 55 'ii'g5+ spearing the rook) 55 'ifa8+ (55 'ii'd3+ loses to 55 ...b5 56 'ifxc2 :xdl + 57 'ii'xd l .txd l ) 55 ...�b5 56 'ii'xb7+ (56 a4+ �c4 57 'ii'g8+ �c3 wins for Black) 56 ...�c4 (56 ... �a4? 57 'ii'b4# is embar­ rassing) 57 'ii'a6+ �d5 58 'ifd3+ ltJd4 and Black wins. 2) 44 axb4 l:ta8 45 h3 ltal + 46 �h2 ltJf4 ! 47 ltJgl .td5 and Black has a decisive advantage. 3) 44 h3 bxa3 45 bxa3 gxh3 46 �h2 .txe2 47 l:txe2 ltJf4 48 :e3 �c5 and Black has a clear advantage. 42 �n ltJgS 43 ltJf4 l:ta8? Black can maintain a slight edge with the patient 43 ... ltd7. 44 ltJxdS+ cxdS 45 .te2! White's bishop suddenly springs to life. 4S l:tc8 46 c3 d4 47 cxd4 l:tcl + 48 �g2 h3+ 49 �g3 l:tgl+ SO �h4 l:tg2 Sl .txg4 l:txf2 (D)

2) 52 l:te2! (expelling the black rook from the 7th rank) 52 ...l:tf4 53 l:te8 l:txd4 54 �h5 !{ and White has some advantage in the endgame. 52 ltJxe6 53 fxe6 l:.f4! The bishop must be pinned as 53 ...l:tfl fails to 54 d5 l:.el (54...f5 55 e7 l:tel 56 d6! �c6 57 .th5 and White wins) 55 d6 �c6 56 d7 �c7 57 �xh3, when White has a clear advantage. 54 �h5 (D) Necessary as 54 d5? f5 turns the tables. .••

.••

w

52 l:te6+?? White commits a terrible blunder after having defended a difficult position for many moves. Stronger alternatives are: I ) 52 l::te8 :xh2 53 l:tf8 ltJe4 54 .tf3 ltJd6 55 ltxf6 �c7 and now: I a) 56 l:tf8 lhb2 57 �xh3 b4 58 axb4 l:txb4 59 d5 l:tf4 with equality. I b) 56 d5 l:txb2 57 �xh3 l:.b3 58 �g4 l:txa3 and a draw is the most likely outcome.

54...�c7 Alternatives: 1 ) 54 ...f5 55 .txh3 l:tf3 56 .txf5 l:txf5+ 57 �g6 l::tf4 ! 58 e7 l::te4 59 �f7 l::tf4+ 60 �e6 l:te4+ 61 �f7 l::tf4+ with a draw. 2) 54 ...l::txd4 55 .tf5 l::td2 56 �g6 l::txh2 57 �f7 l::txb2 58 .txh3 (58 e7 l:te2 59 .txh3 trans­ poses) 58 ...l::te2 59 e7 l::txe7+ 60 �xe7 with a draw. 55 .txh3 �d6 56 ..ti'g6 �e7 Not 56 ...l::txd4? 57 �f7 l::tc4 58 .i.f5 �e5 59 �g6 and the h2-pawn is ready to roll. 57 dS (D) 57 ..Jtd4?? Black chases the wrong pawn - he should eliminate the outside passed pawn by playing 57 . . .l::th 4! 58 .tf5 l::tx h2 59 d6+ (otherwise Black mops up the queenside pawns) 59 .. .'�xd6 60 �f7 l:.e2 61 .tg4 l:.e5 (with the idea of ...f5) 62 �xf6 l::te l and Black wins the queenside pawns; for example, 63 i.f5 :le2 64 �f7 l::tf2 65 �f6 l:.xb2 and Black wins. 58 .trs l::txdS 59 h4 l::td2 60 hS l::tg2+ 61 �h7 l::txb2 62 �g7 l::tg2+ �3 i.g6 :g3! More cunning than 63 ...f5 64 h6 f4 65 h7 lth2 66 h8'if l:txh8 67 'it>xh8 �xe6 68 .td3

BAITUNG GOUATH

B

�d5 69 i.xb5 �c5 70 a4 (70 i.e2 b5 71 ri;g7 b4 with a draw) 70 ...�b4 7 1 �g7 f3 72 ri;f6 f2 73 ri;e5 fl'ili' 74 i.xfl �xa4 with a draw. 64 h6 :xa3 65 h7 .l:la8! (D) An instructive example of how a strong player will continuously find ways to present his opponent with opportunities to go wrong. The obvious 65 ....l:lh3 is met by 66 i.f5 .l:lh 1 (not 66 ... .l:tg3+?? 67 �h6 .l:tg1 68 i.g6 .l:th 1 + 69 i.h5 and White wins) 67 h8'ili' .l:lxh8 68 �xh8 b4 69 �g7 b3 70 �g6 b2 7 1 �h5 with a drawn position similar to the game continuation.

w

66 i.f5! More precise than the tempting 66 .i.f7, and now:

23

1 ) 66...b4 67 i.g8 .l:la1 ! and White has a choice of promotions: 1 a) 68 h8'ili'?? .l:lg1 + 69 �h6 .l:lh 1 + 70 �g7 .l:txh8 7 1 �xh8 f5 72 �g7 f4 is winning for Black. 1b) 68 h8ltJ! .l:.g1 + (68 ....l:le1 69 liJg6+ �d6 70 e7 .l:lxe7+ 7 1 ltJxe7 �xe7 72 'iti>g6 with a draw) 69 ltJg6+ .l:lxg6+ (69 ...ri;d6 70 e7 .l:txg6+ 71 �xg6 �xe7 with a draw) 70 �xg6 b3 71 �h5 b2 72 .i.h7 �xe6 73 �g4 �e5 74 i.b1 b5 75 �f3 f5 76 .i.c2 f4 77 i.b1 with a draw. 2) 66...f5 67 .i.g8 .l:lal ! 68 h8ltJ! .l:lg1+ 69 ltJg6+ .l:lxg6+ 70 �xg6 f4 7 1 �g5 f3 72 i.h7 f2 73 i.d3 b4 74 ri;f4 �xe6 75 �e3 �e5 76 �xf2 �d4 77 �e2 �c3 78 .i.e4 b6 79 �d 1 with a draw. 66 b4 67 h8'ili' l:xh8 68 �xh8 b3 69 �g7 b2 70 �g6 b5 71 �h5 bl'ili' 1h.-lh. •••

Game Lessons: 1) If a move looks ugly, it probably is ugly. White should have analysed the position more carefully before playing into the horrible end­ game after 1 6 'i!i'f3??. 2) Sometimes the best plan in an inferior position is to do absolutely nothing. Be patient in poor positions and force the opponent to come up with a winning plan - don't win the game for him. 3) Be on guard against complacency ! When you have an advantage, carefully search for tac­ tical opportunities to end the game quickly. As the struggle drags on, the defender often finds ways to create counterplay and free his posi­ tion. 4) Accurate calculation is required in tactical endgames. White blundered with 52 .l:le6+?? and Black returned the favour with 57 ....l:.d4??. 5) Always give the opponent an opportunity to go wrong. Black presented White with the most problems by playing 65 ....l:la8 !. The end­ game contained several hidden surprises de­ spite the reduced material.

Encounter with a Legend The Chicago organizers scored a tremendous coup by arranging the participation of the popular former world champion Mikhail Tal in his first American Swiss-system event. Like many young

24

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

players, I grew up dreaming about someday playing a game with Mikhail Tal - the battle would be a wild tactical slugfest with pieces being sacrificed all over the board. The actual game was more akin to shadow-boxing, but you won't hear any complaints from me - I'm just grateful to have had the opportunity to play him before he passed away in 1992. By this point in my chess career I had finally accepted the fact that main-line openings are main lines for a reason - they are fundamen­ tally sound. Prior to the game I resolved to play the opening in a 'correct' manner, but there were a few dangers lurking beneath the surface.

Game 6: The Tip of the Iceberg

Mikhail Tal 2700 James Rizzitano 2563 National Open, Chicago 1 988 -

893 Sici l ia n Defence, Najdorf 1 e4 c5 2 l2Jf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 l2Jxd4 l2Jf6 S l2Jc3 a6 6 f4 eS 7 l2Jf3 l2Jbd7 8 a4 i.e7 9 i.d3 0-0 10 0-0 exf4 A year later I chose a different variation against Gata Kamsky - the brief comments are by Walter Browne in Blitz Chess: IO... 'ilfb6+ 1 1 'ifi>h 1 exf4 12 a5 ! 'ilfc7 ! 1 3 .ixf4 l2Je5 14 l2Jd4 i.e6 1 5 i.g3 .l:.ac8 ( 1 5 ....l:.fe8 ! ? is an interesting alternative) 1 6 l2Jf5 .ixf5 17 exf5?! ( 1 7 .l:.xf5 l2Jc4 leads to an unclear position) 1 7 ...d5 1 8 .l:.e1 .id6 (a solid set-up for Black) 1 9 i.fl l2Jeg4! 20 'i!fd3 i.xg3 21 'ilfxg3 'ilfxg3 22 hxg3 d4 23 l2Je2 l:.xc2 24 l2Jxd4 l:.xb2 25 .l:.ac 1 h5 26 lle7 .l:.e8 27 .l:.xe8+ l2Jxe8 28 l:.c8 l2Jgf6? (28 ...'ifi>f8 ! with the idea of ....l:.b1 wins) 29 .i.c4 .l:.b1 + 30 'ifi>h2 l2Jg4+ 31 'ifi>h3 l:.h 1 # (0- 1 ) Kam­ sky-Rizzitano, US Open Blitz Ch, Chicago 1989. l l �h1 The pawn sacrifice 1 1 i.xf4!? 'ilfh6+ 12 �h1 'ilfxb2 1 3 'ilfe1 'i!fb6 with complex play became popular during the 1 990s. l l l2Je5 Also possible is 1 1 ...l2Jh5 !? 1 2 l2Jd5 l2Jc5 1 3 l2Jd4 l2Jf6 1 4 i.xf4 l2Jxd5 1 5 exd5 i.f6 and a draw was agreed in Svidler-Savon, St Peters­ burg 1994. 12 i.xf4 'ilfc7 13 'ilfd2 i.e6 14 l2Jd4 .l:.ac8 15 l2Jce2 .l:.fe8 16 i.gS Or 16 l2Jg3 l2Jfd7 17 l2Jgf5 i.f6 with equal chances. 16 l2Jfd7 17 i.xe7 .l:.xe7 18 l2Jf4 With the idea of l2Jf5. 18 'ilfc5 19 i.e2 l2Jf6 20 'ilfe3 (D) 20 l2Jc4? ...

•.•

.••

••.

The weakness of White's e4-pawn can be ex­ ploited by the powerful retreat 20 ...i.d7 !, with the following possibilities: l) 21 .l:.ae1 l2Jc6 22 l2Jxc6 i.xc6 23 'ilfxc5 dxc5 wins the e4-pawn. 2) 2 1 c3 l2Jc4 22 i.xc4 'ilfxc4 and Black again wins the e4-pawn. 3) 21 l2Jd3 l2Jc4 ! 22 l2Jxc5 l2Jxe3 23 l2Jxd7 l2Jxd7 24 l:.f4 (24 .l:.fe 1 .l:.xe4 25 i.f3 l:.xd4 is good for Black) 24 ...g5 25 l2Jf5 l2Jxf5 26 l:.xf5 l:txc2 27 l:.xg5+ �f8 28 i.f3 l2Jc5 and Black has an advantageous endgame. 21 .i.xc4 i.xc4 22 l2Jd3 (D) 22 l2Jg4! This move was my initial idea and it felt right intuitively. I thought for almost 45 minutes here as Black has an interesting alternative which was difficult to calculate: 22 ...'ilfh5 ! ? (I simply did not trust this because of the looseness of the black pieces; another reasonable idea is 22 ...i.xd3 ! 23 cxd3 l2Jg4 24 'ilfgl transposing .•.

BAITUNG GOUATH

to the note to Black's 23rd move) 23 lLif5 ! (23 l:tf5?? loses to 23 ...'iixh2+! - not much chance of my opponent falling for that one !) 23 ...l:txe4 24 'iig3 with the following possibilities: 1) 24...g6 ! ? (a provocative move) 25 l2Jxd6 (25 'iixd6 l2Jg4) 25 . . .l:tg4 (D) and now White has:

I a) 26 'iif2? and then: l al ) 26 ... l2Je4 27 l2Jxe4 l:xe4 28 .l:.ael l:.xe l 29 l:txel i.xd3 30 cxd3 'iid5 31 :n with equal chances. I a2) 26 ... i.d5 !? giving White the choice of: I a2 1 ) 27 lLif4 l:.xg2! ! 28 lLixg2 lLig4 29 'iif4 (29 'iig3 .l:.xc2 wins for Black) 29 ...'iih3 30 'iig3 (30 l:.f2 lLixf2+ 3 1 'it'xf2 l:tc6 32 l2Je8 'iie6 33 l:tdl i.xg2+ 34 'it'xg2 'it'xe8 with an ex­ tra pawn) 30...'it'xg3 3 1 hxg3 l:txc2 (the attack rages on even though Black is a rook down) 32 l:tgl l2Je3 33 'it>h2 i.xg2 34 l:tgcl :d2 and Black wins. l a22) 27 l2Jxc8 i.xg2+ 28 'iixg2 .l:.xg2 29 'it>xg2 l2Jg4 30 'it>g3 lLie3 with a strong attack;

25

for example, 31 l:.f4 g5 32 l:.e4 'iie2 33 l:.g l lLlf5+ and Black wins. l a3) 26 ... l:xg2! (note how well-coordinated all of the black pieces are after this move) giv­ ing White the choice of: l a3 1 ) 27 �xg2 i.d5+ 28 'ito>gl :xc2 ! 29 'iixc2 'iig4+ 30 'it>f2 'iig2+ 31 'iti>e3 l2Jg4+ 32 'iti>d4 'iixc2 and Black wins. l a32) 27 'iixg2 .idS 28 l2Jxc8 ..ixg2+ 29 'ito>xg2 transposes into line ' l a22' above. I b) 26 'iie5 ! (this centralizing move is best) 26 ...'it'xe5 27 lLixe5 .ixfl 28 l2Jxg4 i.xg2+ 29 'ito>gl ! (stronger than 29 �xg2 l:txc2+ 30 �f3 l2Jxg4 3 1 �xg4 l:txb2 with an unclear position) 29 ...l:txc2 (29 ...l2Jxg4 30 l2Jxc8 with a clear ad­ vantage) 30 lLixf6+ �g7 (I evaluated this posi­ tion as unclear in my lnformator notes, but White has a few arrows left in the quiver) 3 1 l2Jde8+! and now Black has: l b l ) 3 l ...�h6 32 l2Jg4+ 'ito>g5 33 l2Je3 l:te2 34 l2Jxg2 l:txe8 35 l:tel and the knight is stron­ ger than the two pawns. l b2) 3 I ...'ito>f8 32 .:tel ..ic6 33 lLixh7+ 'iti>g8 34 lLihf6+ 'it>f8 35 b3 .:.g2+ 36 'ito>fl l:txh2 37 :e3 and again the knight is stronger than the two pawns. 2) 24...l2Je8 ! (D) (safest) and now White has:

2a) 25 h3 'it'g6 26 'iif3 1i'e6 27 'it'xe4 'iixe4 28 l:tael (a strange way to trap the queen) 28 ...'iix el 29 l:txel 'it>f8 and Black has an extra pawn. 2b) 25 lLixd6 lLixd6 26 'it'xd6 'ii'g5 looks a little better for Black. 2c) 25 l:tae l ! l:txel 26 'iix el l:tb8 27 'iie3 with good compensation for the pawn.

26

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

23 11i'gl 'ii'c7 Black should play the straightforward line 23 ....i.xd3 ! 24 cxd3 l:lec7 with a slight initiative. 24 b3 .i.e6 25 lbf4 lbf6 26 lDfxe6 fxe6 27 11i'e3 (D)

27 11i'c3 Also possible is the spectacular 27 ...d5 ! ? 28 exd5 11i'xh2+! 29 �xh2 lbg4+ 30 �g3 lbxe3, and now: 1) 3 1 lbxe6 lbxd5 ! (stronger than 3 1 ...lbxfl + 32 l:xfl l:c3+ 33 l:[f3 l:lxf3+ 34 �xf3 with a murky endgame) 32 l:ae 1 l:tce8 33 .l:.e5 (33 l:tf5 lbb4 34 l:lfe5 transposes) 33 ...lbb4 34 l:lfe1 lbxc2 35 :1 e4 b6 and Black has an extra pawn. 2) 3 1 dxe6! lbxfl + 32 l:lxfl g6 and Black has some winning chances if he can activate his rooks in conjunction with ... �f8-e7 to restrain the passed e6-pawn. 28 l:tael 11i'xe3 29 l:.xe3 ltJg4 30 l:.g3 lbe5 (D) The complications have dissipated into an equal endgame. 31 l:tdl g6 32 �gl l:tee8 33 c4 �f7 34 l:h3 l:.h8 35 'itO 'ite7 36 'it>e2 l:.cf8 37 lDf3 lt::lxf3 38 :xn :xr3 39 'itxr3 lfl.lfl •••

w

The post-mortem featured an analytical stream-of-consciousness from my legendary opponent. The lasting impression I have of it was his tremendous modesty and almost child­ like enthusiasm for exploring intricate side­ variations. Later I told Maxim Dlugy that I was amazed at the depth and breadth of variations Mikhail Tal had analysed during the game. Af­ ter he had stopped laughing long enough to speak, Maxim said "Yes, Jim, what were you expecting?"

Game Lessons: 1) Black achieved a reasonable position by playing into the main line of a heavily-analysed variation - no extraordinary measures were re­ quired. 2) Clock-time management is an important consideration in complex positions. The specu­ lative 22 ...11i'h5 !? defied accurate calculation during the game, so Black opted for the solid 22 ...lt::lg4! after expending a lot of time. 3) The lost time could have been used more productively several moves later when Black chose the tame 27 ...11i'c3 instead of the more ag­ gressive 27 ... d5 !?.

2 Tactical Skirmishes

Provocation Attempting to provoke an opponent into a premature attack is akin to being the matador at a bull­ fight. If you don't go far enough, nothing happens. Go too far, and you could get gored. Let's take a look at a couple of games in which I narrowly evaded the hom. Although the games were success­ ful from a competitive point of view, from a theoretical standpoint they convinced me that I needed to develop a sounder opening repertoire to compete effectively against strong competition.

Rivalry My 15-year battle with John Curdo was the quintessential chess rivalry. The whole thing began in­ nocently enough - at the time of our first game in 1975 John had been a National Master for almost 20 years and I was a 14-year-old beginner playing in my sixth adult tournament. The raw numbers do not do justice to the closeness and ferocity of the games. Opening preparation was difficult be­ cause there were no secrets between us - we played on adjacent boards at major New England events for many years and knew each other's opening repertoire in depth. John was one of the early exponents of the Rossolimo and Moscow variations against the Sicilian Defence and was also ad­ ept at handling the double king's pawn openings. I eventually adopted several of his opening ideas to utilize the expertise I had watched over the years. One of the traits that made John such a fonnidable competitor for so long was his contrarian opening philosophy. He played many less-fashionable openings which were not analysed correctly in the mainstream opening books. This strategy enabled him to rack up tremendous scores against many of his opponents who never figured out why they consistently obtained such poor positions out of the opening. Upon reviewing the past several years of opening theory it was not surprising to see that several of John's 'eccentric' opening ideas had eventually become popular. The rivalry with John was all the more compelling despite the 30-year age difference because my emergence as a National Master in 1978 coincided with his becoming a full-time chess-player in 1979 - the competition forced both players to improve their level of play. The table below shows how competitive the battle was over an extended time-period. It is also worth noting that the 19 draws averaged just under 40 moves per game.

Years 1975-1 976 1977 1 978 1979 1 980 1981 1 982 1983-1989 Totals (61)

James Rizzitano vs John Curdo Loss Draw Win -3 =0 +0 +2 =0 -1 -4 +0 =2 -1 =1 +1 -3 +2 =2 +3 -1 =2 -5 +2 =2 -1 +13 =10 -19 -1 9 +23

Net -3 +1 -4 = -1 +2 -3 +12 +4

28

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

Game 7: Superficial Attack

John Curdo 2463 - James Rizzitano 2388 Boston 1 981 828 Sici l ia n Defence, O'Kelly Black plays a provocative opening in an at­ tempt to create an unbalanced position, but the idea fails as White obtains a large lead in devel­ opment.

1 e4 cS 2 ltJf3 a6 An extreme method of preventing John from playing his favourite Rossolimo or Moscow Variation. 3 c3 White is aiming to transpose into a 2 c3 vari­ ation where ...a6 may not be as useful. White avoids 3 d4 cxd4 4 ltJxd4 e5, since this allows Black to justify his 2nd move fully. 3 b5?! This type of formation was all the rage at the time as a result of the famous game Kar­ pov-Miles, European Team Ch, Skara 1 980, which began 1 e4 a6 2 d4 b5 and Black went on to win. 4 d4 e6 5 a4!? i.b7!? After five moves we have a new variation. Black is willing to exchange his wing pawn for White's central pawn. 6 d5! A justified attempt to refute Black's opening strategy. The quieter 6 axb5 axb5 7 l:ba8 .txa8 8 .i.xb5 .i.xe4 is about equal. 6...'ii'b6 7 axb5 axb5 8 l:.xa8 i.xa8 9 ltJa3 liJf6 (D) •••

w

10 .i.xb5? White should crack open the position to take advantage of his superior development by play­ ing 1 0 dxe6, giving Black a choice of recap­ tures: 1) 10 ... 'ii'xe6 1 1 liJxb5 (the strange-looking 1 1 ltJg5 'fle7 1 2 f3 is also strong) 1 l .. .'flxe4+ 1 2 i.e2 ltJa6 1 3 0-0 and White has a crushing lead in development. 2) 10 ...fxe6 1 1 e5 ltJg4 12 .i.f4 and White has a clear advantage. 10 ltJxe4 1 1 dxe6 fxe6 12 0-0 l.e7 13 'fia4 The next few moves are revealing. White ap­ pears to be controlling the pace of the game, but his one-move threats only succeed in driving Black's pieces to better squares. The lack of central pawns makes it difficult for White to sustain the initiative. 13 .i.d5 14 ltJc4 'flc7 (D) .••

•.•

w

15 ltJce5 The knight looks impressive on the e5square, but it does not threaten anything and soon becomes a target for attack. 15 ltJd6! This strategic retreat is very effective; from the d6-square the knight controls several im­ portant squares. 16 .i.d3 c4 17 i.e2 0-0 18 'fid1 l:.f5 19 'fid4?? •••

TACTICAL SKIRMISHES

Time to sound the retreat by playing 19 lDg4 although after 1 9...i.b7 Black has a comfort­ able game. 19 i.f6! (D) •••

29

2) 20 'ii'e3 l:txe5 ! 2 1 lDxe5 lDf5 22 'ii'h 3 .ixe5 and again Black is clearly better. 20 l:txe5 21 lDxe5 lDc6 Development with a vengeance ! 22 'ii'd 1 lDxe5 23 f4 Hastening the end. Also hopeless is 23 i.e3 'ii'b7 24 f4 lDd3 25 .ixd3 cxd3 26 'ii'xd3 'ii'xb2 and Black wins. 23 'ii'b6+ 24 llf2 lDe4 0-1 ..•

.••

Game Lessons:

20 g4 Giving Black a choice of winning piece cap­ tures, but no matter how White squirms he can­ not safely break the pin: 1 ) 20 i.f4 lDf7 2 1 lDd3 'ii'b7 and Black has a clear advantage.

1 ) Provocative opening play can lead to un­ balanced opening positions, but it is a high-risk strategy. Although Black was successful from a competitive viewpoint, his opening idea must be viewed as a failure because White could have obtained a clear advantage by playing 10 dxe6. 2) White's initial burst of activity in the early middlegame was an illusion because he was unable to sustain the initiative without cen­ tral pawn-support. The careless 19 'ii'd4 ?? was a refusal to acknowledge that the attack was over.

Game 8: Impatient Attack

John Curdo 2463 - James Rizzitano 2388 MA Open Ch, N. Dartmouth 1 981 840 Sici l ian Defence, Pau lsen 1 e4 c5 2 lDf3 e6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lDxd4 lDf6 5 i.d3 d6 5 ...lDc6 is safer but drawish; for example, 6 lDxc6 dxc6 7 lDd2 e5 8 0-0 i.g4 9 'ii'e 1 i.e6 10 'iie2 'ikc7 1 1 i.c4 i.xc4 1 2 lDxc4 lDd7 1 3 a4 and a draw was agreed in Anand-Leko, Dort­ mund 200 1 . 6 0-0 i.e7 7 b3 0-0 8 .ib2 lDbd7 Four years later I played 8 ...lDc6 9 lDxc6 bxc6 1 0 e5 dxe5 1 1 i.xe5 lDd7 1 2 i.b2 lDc5 1 3 .ic4 .if6 with equal chances in Curdo-Rizzi­ tano, Providence 1 985 (see Game 66 for the conclusion). 9 c4 (D) 9 d5?! This dubious attempt to liquidate the cen­ tre only succeeds in opening the position for •..

B

White's well-placed pieces. 9 ...lDc5 is more prudent. 10 exd5 exd5 ll lDfS

30

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

Also strong is 1 1 cxd5 liJc5 12 liJc3 liJxd3 1 3 'ii'xd3 liJxd5 14 l:tadl and White has a slight edge because of his superior development. l l ....i.cS? l l ...dxc4 is safer, although 1 2 liJxe7+ 'ii'xe7 1 3 l:.el 'ii'd8 14 .i.xc4 gives White some advan­ tage because of the bishop-pair. 12 cxd5 liJb6 (D)

B

w

13 liJxg7!? This fascinating sacrifice is difficult to resist but objectively the simple 1 3 'ii'c 2! .i.xf5 1 4 .i.xf5 .i.d6 1 5 liJc3 i s stronger; then White has a clear advantage since it is not easy for Black to recover the pawn. 13 ...ct>xg7 14 'ii'c l! During the game I had only considered 14 'ii'h 5? h6, when Black can defend successfully. 14...'ii'xd5 15 'ii'f4 Stronger than the impatient 1 5 .i.xf6+? �xf6 16 'ii'h6+ �e7 17 'ii'h4+ f6 1 8 'ii'xh7+ l:tf7 19 liJc3 'ii'e 5, when Black has a clear advantage. 15....i.e7 Black is unable to develop his queenside pieces after 1 5 ...liJbd7 1 6 .i.f5 .i.e? 1 7 l:tel l:tg8 18 liJc3, when White has a strong attack. 16 'ii'g3+ 'it>b8 17 liJc3 (D) 17 ...'ii'h5 Black can also consider the paradoxical re­ treat 17 ...'ii'd8 !? (this type of move is often dif­ ficult to see) 1 8 liJe4 l:tg8 1 9 'ii'h4, and now: 1 ) 1 9 ...liJbd5? 20 liJg5 (20 liJxf6? loses to 20 .. Jlg7 ! !) 20...l:tg7 2 1 .i.xh7 'ii'd6 22 l:tfel with a crushing attack. 2) 1 9 ...l:.g7 ! 20 .i.xf6 .i.xf6 2 1 'ii'xf6 (21 liJxf6? loses to 2 l ...liJd7! - in many of these variations it is not easy to determine which

player is doing the pinning !) 2l ... .i.h3 22 'ii'xd8+ l:txd8 23 liJg3 .i.xg2 (23 ...l:txd3 !?) 24 �xg2 .:txd3 with an equal endgame. During the game I rejected the queen retreat 1 7 ... 'ii'd8 (this type of move is known as a switchback) on purely intuitive grou,nds. I rea­ soned that the lady had recently moved from the d8-square and should now shift over to the kingside for defence. I didn't give sufficient consideration to the fact that from d8 the queen defends the e7- and f6-squares. This is a good example of one of the advantages that computers have in analysing this type of posi­ tion - they are not burdened by the past or handicapped by the nebulous concept of chess intuition. 18 l:tael l:.g8 (D) Also possible is 1 8 ....i.e6 1 9 l:te5, and now: 1 ) 19 .. .'i!i'g4 20 liJe4! 'ii'xg3 21 fxg3 and White has a strong attack. 2) 19 ...'ii'h6 20 .i.c l 'ii'g7 21 l:tg5 'ii'h6 22 l:te5 'ii'g7 23 .:tg5 and White forces a draw by repetition.

w

TACTICAL SKIRMISHES

19 l:txe7 White can avoid the queen sacrifice by play­ ing 19 'ilkf4. Then: I) 1 9 ...'i!kh3 20 .i.e4 .i.e6 21 lt:Jd5 ! ? and now: l a) 2l ...lt:Jbxd5 22 .i.xd5 l:tg6 23 .i.e4 'i!kh5 24 .i.xg6 'i!kxg6 25 'i!kc7 .i.d5 (25 ...l:.g8 !?) 26 'i!kg3 .i.e6 27 'i!kc7 with a draw by repetition. 1 b) 21 ...l:txg2+ 22 .i.xg2 lt:Jbxd5 23 'ilkg5 h6 (23 .. .'�xg2+ 24 �xg2 l:tg8 25 'i!kg3 l:.xg3+ 26 fxg3 �g7 with roughly level chances despite the unusual material balance) 24 .i.xh3 hxg5 25 .i.xe6 fxe6 26 l:txe6 �g7 27 l:te5 �g6 28 l:.d l l:tc8 29 l:texd5 lt:Jxd5 30 l:txd5 l:tc2 3 1 .i.e5 l:txa2 32 'itg2 with an equal endgame. 2) 1 9 ....th3 20 g3 .i.xfl 21 .i.xfl lt:Jg4 22 h3 .i.f6 23 hxg4 'i!kg6 24 l:te7 (24 g5 lt:Jd5 25 lt:Jxd5 .i.xb2 is fine for Black) 24 ...'i!kg7 (or 24... .i.xe7 25 lt:Jd5+ l:tg7 26 lt:Jxe7 'i!ke6 27 lt:Jf5 f6 28 lt:Jxg7 �xg7 29 g5 and the nasty bishop­ pair gives White a strong attack) 25 'i!kxf6 'i!kxf6 26 lt:Jdl 'i!kxb2 27 lt:Jxb2 l:tab8 and White doesn't quite have enough compensation for the exchange. 19...l:txg3 (D)

31

1 a) 23 ... h5 24 l:.e8+ �g7 25 l:txa8 lt:Jxa8 26 l:le8 lt:Jc7 27 l:tg8+ �h6 28 .te l + 'i!kg5 29 .i.xg5#. l b) 23 ...'itg7 24 lt:Jd7+ �h6 25 lt:Je5 and White wins. l c) 23 ... .i.b5 24 lt:Jd7+ f6 25 lt:Jxf6 l:tf8 26 lt:Je8+ (26 l:tdl is a strong alternative) 26 ...�g8 27 l:g7+ 'i!kxg7 28 lt:Jxg7 with a two-pawn ad­ vantage. 2) 20...lt:Jg4 ! (this leads to a draw with best play) 21 lt:Jd5+ f6 22 .i.xf6+ �g8 (during the game I incorrectly thought that Black was win­ ning after this move) 23 .i.xh7+ ! (a nasty sur­ prise) 23 ...'i!kxh7 (not 23 ...�f8?? 24 .i.g7#) and now: 2a) 24 l:txh7 �xh7 25 lt:Jxb6 (25 lt:Jc7 lt:Jxf6 26 lt:Jxa8 lt:Jxa8 and Black has a clear advan­ tage) 25 ... axb6 26 .i.d4 l:txa2 and the black knight is superior to the white pawns. 2b) 24 l:te8+! �f7 25 l:te7+ 'itg8 ! (not 25 ...�g6?? losing to 26 lt:Jf4+ 'itxf6 27 l:txh7) 26 l:te8+ forcing a draw by perpetual check. 20 l:txg2+! Now it is Black's tum to sacrifice! White has no adequate way to defend against the mating threat on g2. 21 �xg2 .i.h3+ 22 �g1 'i!kf3 23 .i.xf6+ �g8 0-1 •••

w

Game Lessons:

20 lt:Je4?? I was surprised when John played this blun­ der after only a few minutes' thought - he had completely overlooked Black's next move. White should also avoid 20 fxg3? 'i!kc5+, but the patient recapture 20 hxg3 ! is correct. Black then has two options: 1 ) 20....i.f5 21 lt:Je4 'i!kg6 (after 2 l .. ..i.xe4 22 .i.xf6+ �g8 23 .i.xe4 'i!kh6 24 .i.c3 the raking bishops give White a strong attack) 22 lt:Jxf6 .i.xd3 23 l:.fel and now:

1) Black made too many pawn moves in the opening - the central liquidation beginning with 9 ... d5 ? ! only succeeded in opening the po­ sition for the better-developed white pieces. 2) Black intuitively rejected the queen re­ treat 1 7 ...'i!kd8 ! ? for subjective reasons, but it does not appear to be inferior to the game con­ tinuation 1 7 ...'ilkh5. 3) Do not underestimate the opponent's at­ tacking chances, particularly when you are not fully developed. White had hidden resources which worked because two of Black's queen­ side pieces were glued to their original squares - several later games also contain examples of this common attacking theme. 4) Even in the middle of the attack, the most important consideration is parrying the oppo­ nent's direct threats. White could have held the balance with the patient recapture 20 hxg3 ! in­ stead of the flawed 20 lt:Je4?? .

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

32

Slugfest A finger slip, a momentary lapse in concentration or the failure to see threats across the entire board are all part of the game and have an uncanny knack of occurring at the wrong time. The chess pieces do not know or care who is moving them - they are happy to distribute the bad moves to everyone. In his book The Road to Chess Improvement, Alex Yerrnolinsky discusses why some strong players keep theoretically questionable openings such as the Grand Prix Attack ( 1 e4 c5 2 lt::lc3 lt::lc6 3 f4 g6 4 lt::lf3 i.g7 5 i.c4) in their opening repertoire: "One day, in a particular tournament situation, against a particular opponent it might be a good idea to play it..." When I read these words I immediately thought of the following game because the same comment is applicable to the Morra Gambit. This opening was a leftover from my youth, one of my first chess loves. Of course there are some drawbacks to playing the Morra Gambit, but in those days one of the benefits of employing it was the fact that most of the published analysis concerning it was incorrect - the opening was a fer­ tile ground for home-cooking and experimentation. I had analysed many of the variations in depth and was years ahead of the theoretical learning curve. Now on to the game - it was a scorching hot summer afternoon in New York City, and I felt lucky.

Game 9: When Bad Things Happen i n B ig Games

James Rizzitano 2499 Igor Ivanov 2581 Continental Chess International, New York 1 982 -

82 1 Sici lian Defence, Morra Gam bit 1 e4 c5 2 d4 cxd4 3 c3! Vince McCambridge annotated this game in the Players Chess News: "While this is most certainly an unsound pawn offer, the exclama­ tion mark is appended here to applaud its heroic appearance and the insight that went into the decision to play such a move. If Ivanov has a weakness, it is in sharp openings - it's well known that to engage in any extended struggle with Igor is generally a dismal proposition." 3 dxc3 4 lt::lxc3 lt::lc6 5 lt::lf3 d6 6 .ic4 e6 7 0-0 lt::lge7 8 .ig5 h6?? After the game Igor said that he thought he had already played 8 ... a6 (see Game 57). 9 lt::lb 5! Igor thought for almost 45 minutes here. The sobering fact is that Black is busted after this move. 9 d5 10 exd5 I knew this was considered to be the text­ book refutation of Black's play, but 1 0 i.f4!? lt::lg6 1 1 i.c7 is also strong. 10 hxg5 (D) Or 1 0... exd5 1 1 .if4 followed by a devastat­ ing knight fork.

w

•••

•.•

••.

11 dxe6! Not 1 1 dxc6? lt::lxc6 and Black survives the attack. 1 1 .ixe6 An improvement over 1 1 ...lt::lg6 1 2 exf7+, when White quickly won in Nei-Koblencs, Tallinn 1 956. 12 .ixe6! Black has a fistful of pieces for the queen af­ ter 1 2 lt::ld6+? 'iVxd6 1 3 'iVxd6 .ixc4. 12 'iVxd1 •.•

..•

TACTICAL SKIRMISHES

Avoiding the exchange of queens offers no relief after 1 2 ... tLlg6 1 3 'ifb3 tLlge5 14 tLlxe5 tLlxe5 1 5 .l:tac I �d6 1 6 l:.fd I and Black can re­ sign. 13 .l:taxd1 fxe6 (D)

33

.l:txc6 bxc6 20 tLle5+ e2 �c5 ( l l ...�d4 I2 lLlf3 �xc4+ 13 'it>xf2 �xe4 I4 �d2 followed by

I) Be prepared for your opponent's favour­ ite openings - if he plays something once, he is likely to play it again. 2) When playing unusual or risky openings, be sure to understand the ideas behind the moves; one can easily run into trouble in unfa­ miliar territory. 3) Stay focused on piece activity even at the cost of material - checkmate always ends the game.

Game 1 3 : Exploiting the Wea kened Pawn-Structure

James Rizzitano 2479 - John Curdo 2425 Newton 1 983 D94 Gru nfeld Defence 1 lt::lf3 d5 2 c4 c6 Black can also play 2... dxc4 and after 3 e3 (3 lt::la3 retains the independent Reti Opening

flavour) 3 ...lLlf6 4 .i.xc4 e6 5 d4 c5 the game has transposed into the Queen's Gambit Ac­ cepted.

OPENING HITS

3 d4 lDf6 4 liJc3 g6 Black usually plays 4... dxc4 or 4... a6 (both main lines of the Slav Defence), or else 4...e6 (Semi-Slav Defence) here. 5 e3 i..g7 6 i..d3 0-0 7 0-0 i..g4 8 h3 i..f5!? More usual is 8 ...i..xf3 9 'i:i'xf3 e6 (9 ...dxc4 10 i..xc4 liJbd7 1 1 l:td 1 'i:i'a5 1 2 e4 with an edge for White, Van Wely-Timman, Wijk aan Zee 2003) 10 l:td1 liJbd7 1 1 b3 l:te8 12 i..f l 'ii'e7 1 3 i..b2 l:tad8 1 4 l:tac l lDb6 with equal chances, Lelchuk-Kuporosov, Berlin 1 995. The addition of the move h3 favours White because it pro­ vides an escape-hatch for his king and prevents Black from playing an eventual ... ltJg4. I'm at a loss to explain why Black would want to give White a useful move for free. 9 i..xf5 gxf5 10 cxd5 (D)

8

41

(Seirawan-Meduna, Olympiad, Moscow 1984 continued l l ...lDb6 12 'ii'c2 ! e6 1 3 e4! fxe4 14 lDxe4 with a clear advantage for White because of Black's compromised kingside and weak d6-square) 1 2 l:te1 lDxc3 1 3 bxc3 liJd7 14 e4 with a slight edge, Janosevic-Panov, Skopje 1967. ll e6 At first glance it would appear that Black is doing quite well; after all, he has exchanged his light-squared bishop and he can increase his grip on the light squares by continuing . . . liJd7-f6. 12 e4! White must act quickly before Black has the opportunity to implement his plan. 12...lDxc3 13 bxc3 fxe4 14 'i:i'xe4 Angling for ltJg5 to exploit the missing g­ pawn. 14...'i:i'd5?! Black offers a queen exchange to alleviate White's kingside pressure, but there is a tactical flaw. 14 ...liJd7 is stronger, although after 1 5 l:te1 lDf6 16 'ii'h4 White has good attacking chances against the weak black kingside. 15 'i:i'g4 �h8 16 i..a3 (D) ...

B 10...liJxd5?! Two weeks earlier John chose 10 ... cxd5 1 1 'ii'b3 b6: 1) 12 ltJe5 e6 13 i..d2 liJbd7 (interesting is 13 ...liJfd7 !? 14 f4 ! ? lDxe5 15 fxe5 f6 with equal chances) 14 lDc6 'ii'e8 1 5 lDb5 lDc5 16 dxc5 'i:i'xc6 with chances for both sides, Yusupov­ Slobodjan, Bundesliga 1 99617. 2) 12 i..d2 lDc6 1 3 l:tac 1 (with the white pawn on h2 and one less move, Trujan-Sham­ kovich, Lone Pine 198 1 continued 1 3 l:tfc 1 l:tc8 14 l:tc2 'i:i'd7 15 l:tac 1 e6 16 'i:i'b5 with a slight edge for White) 1 3 ...ltJa5 !? (opting for imme­ diate queenside expansion) 14 'i:i'a4 a6 1 5 lDe5 b5 1 6 'ii'c2 and White eventually converted his slight edge in Rizzitano-Curdo, Boston 1983. 1 1 'ii'c2! A novelty. With the white pawn on h2 and one less move, a more usual line is 1 1 'i:i'b3 b6

16...f5? Relatively best is 16 ...l:te8 17 ltJg5 �g8 1 8 'ii'f4 'ii'f5 (unpleasant, but White has strong pressure after 1 8 ...'i:i'd7 1 9 l:tfe 1 lDa6 20 l:tab1) 19 'ii'xf5 exf5 20 liJf3 with a very good end­ game for White. 17 'i:i'h5 liJd7 Moving the rook fails, since after 1 7 ... l:c8 1 8 ltJg5 h6 1 9 l:tfe 1 White has a winning at­ tack.

42

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

18 .i.xf8 l:.xf8 19 tLlg5 White has a material advantage and a raging attack. 19 h6 20 l:.fe1 iLlf6 Black obtains no relief by 20 .. .f4 21 iLlf7+ �h7 22 �xd5 cxd5 23 iLld6 and White is win­ ning. 21 �h4 l:.e8 22 l:te5 �d7 22 ...�c4 is also hopeless: 23 l:.ae l �xc3 24 iLlf7+ �h7 25 iLlxh6 and White wins. 23 l:.ae1 tLld5 24 l:.xe6 l:.f8 25 c4 tLlc3 26 l:.xh6+ .i.xh6 27 �xh6+ �g8 28 l:te6 1-0 •.•

Game Lessons: 1 ) Chess-players are creatures of habit and frequently repeat openings. Good preparation can yield useful opening novelties. The accu­ rate 1 1 �c2 ! and 12 e4! enabled White to crack open the centre and generate a strong kingside attack. 2) Black was unable to defend his kingside because his pawn-structure had been compro­ mised by the exchange of light-squared bishops on the f5-square.

Game 14: Gaining a Tempo

James Rizzitano 2482 - Maxim Dlugy 2506 World Open (rapid), Philadelphia 1 983 AOO Fla nk Opening 1 g3 d5 2 .i.g2 iLlf6 3 d3 .i.f5?! The most accurate move-order is 3 ...c6 4 iLlf3 .i.f5 ; for example, 5 0-0 h6 6 tLlbd2 e6 7 �el tLlbd7 8 e4 .i.h7 9 �e2 - notice how the white queen has had to move twice to achieve the e4 pawn advance. 4 tLld2! This move-order finesse enables White to gain a tempo by playing e4 in one move. 4 c6 5 e4 .i.g6 6 �e2 Another idea is 6 f4 .i.h5 7 tLlgf3 �b6 8 h3 .i.xf3 9 �xf3 and the bishop-pair gave White a slight edge in Gufeld-Kudrin, New York Open 1989. 6...e6 7 iLlgf3 .i.e7 8 0-0 .i.h5 9 h3 .i.xf3 This exchange favours White because he trades a knight that has moved once for a bishop that has moved four times. 10 iLlxf3 0-0 11 iLlh2!? The beginning of an aggressive plan to try to take advantage of the extra tempi by launching an immediate kingside attack. A similar idea is 1 1 b3 a5 12 a3 tLla6 1 3 .i.b2 iDeS 14 e5 iLlfd7 15 iLlh2 and White had the makings of a strong attack in Azmaiparashvili-Kuijf, Groningen 1 989. ll ...c5 12 f4 tLlc6 13 c3 b5 14 e5 tLld7 15 tLlg4 �c7 16 .i.d2 l:.ae8 17 l:.ae1 f5!? Maxim has seen enough of White's kingside build-up and decides to counter in the centre. ••.

18 exf6 .i.xf6 19 lLlxf6+? This exchange is too hasty. White should un­ leash the power of the bishop-pair by playing 19 f5 ! . Now: 1) 19 ...tLlb6 20 fxe6 �xg3 21 l:.f3 �d6 22 lLlxf6+ l:.xf6 23 l:.xf6 gxf6 24 �g4+ �h8 25 .i.f4 and White has a clear advantage. 2) 19 ...tLld8 20 fxe6 �xg3 (Black is pinned to death after 20 ...tLlxe6 2 1 .i.xd5 �xg3+ 22 �g2 �xg2+ 23 �xg2 �f7 24 d4) 2 1 l:.f3 �d6 22 l:.e3 and White has a comfortable advantage . 19 tLlxf6 20 g4 �d6 21 �f2 (D) ..•

B

21 b4 The central break only succeeds in opening the position for the white bishops after 2 1 .. .e5 •..

OPENING HITS

22 fxeS lDxeS (22 ... l:l.xeS loses to 23 .i.f4) 23 .i.f4 d4 24 cxd4 (clearer than 24 b4 ! ? dxc3 2S bxcS 1Wxd3 with complications) 24...cxd4 2S gS lDfd7 26 l:.e4 and White has a slight edge because of the bishop-pair. 22 cxb4 lDxb4?! Safer is 22 ...cxb4 23 fS !? leading to complex play. 23 .i.xb4 cxb4 24 1Wxa7 l:.a8 25 'ii'e3 Also possible is 2S 'iid4 l:.fe8 (2S ....l:.xa2? loses to 26 gS lDd7 27 l:.xe6 !) 26 gS lDhS 27 'lieS 'iixeS 28 l:.xeS and White has a slight edge. 25 l:.xa2 26 1Wd4? The remaining moves were played in ex­ treme time-pressure for both players. Stronger is 26 1Wxe6+ 1Wxe6 27 l:.xe6 l:.xb2 28 gS lDhS 29 .i.xdS 'ifi>h8 30 fS with a clear advantage for White. 26 'ifi>h8 27 f5 exf5 28 l:.xf5 h6 29 g5 hxg5 30 l:.xg5 l:laa8? Black must play 30 ...l:.aS although after 3 1 l:.fl White has a slight edge. 31 l:.fl? The immediate 31 .i.xdS ! l:.aS 32 1Wh4+ lDh7 33 l:.xg7 �xg7 34 l:.e7+ 1Wxe7 3S 'iixe7+ is stronger, and gives White a decisive advan­ tage. 31 ...l:.ae8 3� .i.xd5 'iid7 (D) 33 l:.xf6! l:.el+

43

w

•••

•.•

No relief is offered by 33 ...gxf6 34 1Wh4+ 'iih7 3S l:thS, when White is winning. 34 'ifi>f2 l:.xf6+ 35 �xel 'iixh3 36 l:.gl 'i!kh4+ 37 1Wxh4+ 1-0

Game Lessons: 1 ) Understanding move-order subtleties can yield a quick advantage. Most opening books ignore these flank openings in which White de­ lays playing lDf3 for several moves. 2) The hasty exchange 1 9 lDxf6+? gave away most of White's advantage; the direct 1 9 fS ! would have kept up the pressure and en­ abled White to exploit the advantage of the bishop-pair.

Game 1 5: Sleepless Night

James Rizzitano 2454 - Patrick Wolff 2369 Monadnock Marathon, Jaffrey 1 983 808 Pirc Defence, Classical New Hampshire chess organizer Olin Forman pioneered this unique form of extreme chess. The idea is simple - a 12-round event that be­ gins on Saturday morning at 1 0.00 a.m. and runs continuously for 30 hours until Sunday af­ ternoon at 4.00 p.m. If you know someone who enjoys playing chess and you would like to dis­ courage this behaviour, send them to a mara­ thon tournament - you won't regret it. After this encounter I looked forward to win­ ning another game or two with my opening novelty. Most of the tournament participants

were blurry-eyed and unable to focus on their own battles, never mind pay attention to any­ one else's struggles. I remember joking with Patrick afterwards: "You're not going to show this game to anyone, are you?", to which he re­ plied: "Of course not, I'd like to play this my­ self!". Imagine my surprise upon seeing this game quoted in the next issue of lnformator. A game played after the combatants have been awake for the previous 26 hours usually doesn't find its way into lnformator - unless one of the observers is the studious opening theoretician

44

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

John Donaldson, who showed it to Nikolai Minev.

1 d4 lt::lf6 2 lt::lc3 d6 3 e4 g6 4 lt::lf3 1L.g7 5 1L.e2 0-0 6 0-0 1L.g4 7 1L.e3 lt::lc6 8 'ifd2 e5 9 d5 lt::le7 10 .:ad1 (D)

After 1 3 ... f5, 14 'ife1 would transpose to Liberzon-Quinteros in the note to White's 1 1 th move with the addition of a3 and ... a5. Minev suggests 14 'i!t'd3 !? in his lnformator notes, which is what I had intended to play. He also gives 14 1L.g5 fxe4 1 5 fxe4 lt::lf4 1 6 lt::le2, when White has the upper hand, but I think Black should play 1 4.....tf6 instead. 14 .:g1 'ifh3 15 1L.e2 f5 (D)

B w

10 b5?! Six months prior to this game, Black's l Oth move was played by Zurab Azmaiparashvili to defeat then World Champion Anatoly Karpov. Black usually plays 1 0...1L.d7. 11 1L.xb5! This over-the-board novelty was played after thinking for ten minutes. I had seen the Karpov game but I had not analysed it carefully. Most of the time was spent checking to ensure that I wasn 't overlooking something simple because Karpov usually doesn't pass up free pawns. The stem game continued I I a3 a5 ?! (Black should transpose back into the main line of this varia­ tion with I I ...iL.d7 !) 1 2 b4? ! (stronger is 1 2 1L.xb5 ! 1L.xf3 1 3 gxf3 lt::lh5 1 4 'iii>h I f5 15 'i!t'e I ! and White had a slight advantage in Liberzon­ Quinteros, Netanya 1 983) 1 2...axb4 1 3 axb4 l:.a3 1 4 ..tg5 .:xc3 15 1L.xf6 1L.xf3 16 1L.xf3 .:a3 with equal chances, Karpov-Azmaiparashvili, USSR Ch, Moscow 1 983. 11 1L.xf3 The alternative is I I . ..lt::lxe4 1 2 lt::lxe4 f5 1 3 lt::leg5 f4 and now Nunn recommends 14 1L.c5 ! dxc5 1 5 1L.c4 as "the simplest way for White to gain an advantage". 12 gxf3 lt::lh5 13 �hl! Azmaiparashvili gave 13 lt::le2 f5 with com­ pensation for the pawn. 13 'ifc8 •..

16 'ifd3? Missing the opportunity to close the mouse­ trap on the black queen with 16 .tfl ! 'i!t'xf3+ 1 7 1L.g2 'i!t'g4 1 8 h3 lt::lg3+ 1 9 fxg3 and White wins. I had seen this idea on the previous move but then I forgot about it. 16 lt::lf4 Closing the kingside by playing 1 6 .. .f4? is futile after 1 7 iL.c 1 as Black lacks a constructive plan to generate counterplay. 17 1L.xf4 exf4 18 l"t::lb5 fxe4 19 'i!t'xe4 'i!t'd7 20 lt::ld4 White has consolidated his pawn advantage and sets his sights on the black king. 20 ..te5 21 lt::le6 .:r6 22 b3 .:es 23 1L.c4 �h8 24 a4 .:gs 25 .:g5 Af5 26 .:dg1 h6?! Also hopeless is 26 ...:xg5 27 :xg5. 27 :xg6 l:r.xg6 28 lbg6 .:h5 29 .:g2 1-0 •..

..•

•••

..•

Game Lessons: I ) Make your own judgements about the soundness of opening moves. The idea IO ...b5?! was successful in its debut because White avoided the obvious I I 1L.xb5 ! winning a pawn. 2) Good ideas can occur in any type of tour­ nament, at any hour of the day or night.

OPENING HITS

3) If you have the opportunity to attend a chess tournament with a well-known opening

45

theoretician - leave him behind so that he cannot publicize your novelties.

Game 16: Aggressive King

James Rizzitano 2485 - Christopher Chase 2391 Sturbridge 1 984 895 Sici l ian Defence, Najdorf 1 e4 c5 2 lL'lf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lt:Jxd4 lL'lf6 5 lt:Jc3 a6 6 i.g5 e6 7 'ikf3 A rarely-played alternative to the usual ? f4. 7 i.e7 8 0-0-0 'i!kc7 9 'i!kg3 lt:Jbd7 10 .i.d3 b5 11 i.xb5 axb5 12 lt:Jdxb5 'i!kb8 13 lt:Jxd6+ i.xd6 14 'i!kxd6 'i!kxd6 15 l:.xd6 Experience has shown that White's three connected passed pawns are stronger than the knight. 15 i.b7 (D) •.•

of investigation) 22 ...l:.a7 23 lL'lb5 repeats the position. 16 h6 17 i.e3 17 i.h4 is stronger, as in the previous note. 17 ... �e7 18 l:.hd1 l:.hc8 19 .:t.6d4 (D) •.•

.•.

w

19 lt:Je5 Chris is an experienced Najdorf player and if he had realized the danger, I think he would have opted for the thematic sacrifice 19 ...l:.xc3 !? 20 bxc3 l:txa2 21 �bl l:ta5 22 l:.b4 i.c6 with roughly level chances. 20 l:tb4 i.a6 21 b1 l:tc6 22 a4 l:.ac8 23 i.f4 lt:Jc4 24 lt:Jb5 e5 25 i.cl! The bishop will be more effective on the a3f8 diagonal. 25...:cs 26 b3 i.xb5 Black must eliminate the white knight as af­ ter 26 ... lt:Ja5 the reply 27 lL'ld6 is too strong. 27 axb5 lt:Jd6 28 c4 The caterpillar pawn-structure is very pow­ erful because the black knights do not have any targets to attack. 28 lt:Jb7 29 l:.a4 l:.5c7 30 l:.a7 lt:Jc5 31 l:.xc7+ l:txc7 32 i.a3 lL'lfd7 33 b2 �e8 34 i.xc5 :XeS 35 �c3 .•.

16 f3!? A new move designed to protect the e4-pawn. White's plan is to set his queenside pawns in motion without giving Black any targets for his extra piece. The alternative is 16 l:thdl i.xe4 (stronger than 16 ... 0-0-0 1 7 f3 h6 1 8 i.h4 lt:Je5 1 9 lL'lb5 lt:Jc6 20 i.f2 �b8 21 i.g3 �a8 22 l:t I d3 l:txd6 23 l:ta3+ �b8 24 lL'lxd6 e5 25 l:tb3 lt:Ja5 26 l:.b5 1 -0 Van Riemsdijk-Silva Sanchez, Zonal, Tramandai 1 978) 1 7 l:.xd7 lt:Jxd7 1 8 lt:Jxe4 l:txa2 (also possible i s 1 8 ... f6 19 i.e3 l:txa2 20 �bl .:t.a8 21 b4 with roughly level chances) 19 �bl l:.a7 20 lL'ld6+ �f8 21 lL'lb5 and a draw was agreed in Revenu-Bertola, corr. 1 994. After 2 1 ...l:.b7, 22 lL'ld6 (22 c4!? is worthy

•..

46

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

White's king will advance along with the queenside pawns in order to help shepherd them home. See Game 16. 1 for an extreme example of an active king. 35 f6 36 b4 l:tc7 37 c5 �e7 Returning the piece fails: 37 ...lbxc5 38 bxc5 l:txc5+ 39 �b4 l:tc2 40 �b3! llc5 (40...l:lxg2 41 b6) 4l l:td5 and the extra pawn is decisive. 38 �b3 lbf8 39 b6 l:tb7 40 'iti>c4 lbe6 (D) 41 �b5! White's advancing pawn-mass is unstoppa­ ble. 41 lbd4+ 42 'ifi>a6 l:tb8 43 b5 l:ta8+ 44 'iti>b7 l:ta4 45 c6 l:tc4 46 'it>b8 1-0

w

..•

.••

Game Lessons: 1 ) The new move 1 6 f3 ! ? was developed to protect the e4-pawn . Previous games had con­ tinued with 16 l:thd l , but for some unknown

reason Black was reluctant to play 1 6 ...�xe4, which gives him reasonable chances. 2) The king is a strqng piece - use it. After the exchange of queens and some of the major pieces, a king-march can be a very effective way of supporting a pawn advance.

Game 1 6 . 1

Evgeny Sveshnikov - Walter Browne Wijk aan lee 1 981 Upon playing through this game for the first time I was amazed that White's king could sur­ vive such a perilous journey, but he makes it look easy. This is one of my favourite examples of an active king in the endgame.

The white king mops up the queenside pawns after 30 ...�e5 3 1 �b6 �f4 32 �xf4 gxf4 33 �xb7. 31 �b6 l:tc6+ 32 �a7 l:tc7 33 �b6 (D)

B

w

30 'iti>a5! A very courageous idea. 30 lbd6 •..

33...l:lc6 White's bishops are too strong after 33 ...l:td7 34 �c5 (FCE suggests 34 �a8 !? I think Black should try to hang on with 34 ...�e8 35 -

OPENING HITS

i..c5 i..e7) 34...i..e5 35 .l:f.e l , when White has a clear advantage according to FCE. I think that after 35 ...�f6 White could consider heading for the opposite-coloured bishop endgame by playing 36 i..xd6!? i..xd6 37 'ili>b6 i..e7 38 l:d l and Black' s queenside pawns will fall as in the game. The active white king makes all the dif­ ference here. 34 i..a5 i.eS 35 i.f3 .l:f.cS 36 i..b4 l:tc7 37 �b6 The b7-pawn is doomed, so White makes a few tidying-up moves first.

47

37....l:f.d7 38 .l:f.el f6 39 a4 �d8 40 i..xd6 .l:txd6+ 41 'it>xb7 .l:f.d2 42 .l:f.dl! .l:txd1 43 i..xdl The opposite-coloured bishop endgame is hopeless for Black because White's king is per­ fectly positioned to escort the extra pawn home. 43 a5 44 'ili>b6 i.c7+ 45 'it>c6 i..f4 46 'it>b7 The idea behind this move is to prevent the black king from walking over to the queenside. 46 i..eS 47 i..e2 i..d6 48 g3 fS 49 'it>c6 i.. b8 SO i..c4 eS 51 b4 i..a7 52 'it>b7 i..xf2 53 bxaS i..xg3 54 a6 i.f2 55 i..e6 f4 56 i..dS hS 57 i..f3 1-0 •.•

••.

Game 1 7 : King Hunt

Lev Alburt 2560 - James Rizzitano 2485 New York Open 1 984 E73 Ki ng's I ndian Defence, Averbakh Tim Taylor annotated this last-round game in Chess Life: "The mystery about this game is why did Alburt, an expert in the Averbakh sys­ tem, play into a line where Black has a known, strong sacrifice. West German GM Wolfgang Uhlmann had already defeated then IM Ivan Farago with 1 3 ...tiJcxe4! in Leipzig 1 975 - and Rizzitano, a sharp player, would hardly miss that chance."

1 d4 tiJf6 2 c4 g6 3 tiJc3 i.g7 4 e4 d6 5 i..e2 0-0 6 i..gS h6 7 i..e3 eS 8 dS tiJbd7 9 h4!? As predicted by John Watson just prior to the game, Lev essays one of his favourite variations - even in the pre-database days the 'Wildman' was walking around with everyone's opening repertoire in his head. The quieter alternative is 9 'ii'd2. 9 tiJcS 10 'ii'c2 c6 11 hS cxdS Black can also consider maintaining the cen­ tral tension by playing l l ...g5 !? 12 f3 a5 1 3 g4 i..d7 14 tiJh3 a4 1 5 'ii'd2 cxd5 16 cxd5 'ii'a5 with equal chances, Bareev-Kasparov, Linares 1992. 12 cxdS (D) 12 g5 Alternatives: 1) 12 ...i..d7 13 hxg6 fxg6 14 i..xh6 !? (sev­ eral games have continued 14 b4 tiJa6 1 5 a3 h5 with a complex position) 14 ...i..xh6 15 .l:txh6 •••

••.

B

'it>g7 16 l:th 1 l:th8 17 .l:txh8 'ii'xh8 with compen­ sation for the material according to Bareev in ECO. 2) 12 ...1i'a5 1 3 'ili>fl i..d7 14 hxg6 fxg6 1 5 i..xh6 i..xh6 16 l:txh6 'it>g7 17 .l:th4 b5 ! ? with an unclear position, Raetsky-Golubev, Lucerne 1994. 13 b4 A safe alternative is 13 f3 a5 14 g4 i.d7 with equal chances. 13...ttJcxe4! 14 tiJxe4 tiJxdS Black has two mobile central pawns in ex­ change for the sacrificed piece. 15 'ii'd2 i..e6 16 g4? (D) The standard move to prevent the black pawn phalanx from expanding with ...f5, but it

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

48

appears to be an error. Several months after the game I discovered that White can continue de­ veloping with 16 ti::lf3 ! ; for example, 16 ... tt::lxe3 17 fxe3 g4 18 tt::lh4 d5 19 tt::lc5 and White has a clear advantage - perhaps this is why other players have preferred Black's 12th move alter­ natives.

No better is 30 'iii>g2 'ii'xg4+ 3 1 'iii>fl .l:.d8 and Black wins. 30...'ii'xg4+ (D)

w

B

16...a5! This novelty was suggested by Wolfgang Uhlmann after he played 1 6 .. .'ife7?! 17 tt::lh3 a5 in !.Farago-Uhlmann, Leipzig 1975. 17 .i.c4 Black has compensation for the material af­ ter 1 7 b5 tt::lxe3 1 8 fxe3 'ii'b6 according to Uhlmann. 17 tt::lxb4 18 tt::lxd6 Stronger is 1 8 ..ixe6 fxe6 1 9 a3 ti::ld5 with an unclear position. 18...e4 19 l:td1 No relief is offered by 19 %te l ..ixc4 20 tt::lxc4 ti::ld3+ followed by ...tt::lxc l , winning. 19....i.xc4 20 tt::lxc4 'ii'c7 21 'ii'e2 The knight cannot move because of ... .i.c3. 21 ...ti::ld3+ 22 ltxd3 exd3 23 'ii'xd3 bS! 24 ti::ld2 The material balance is roughly level, but Black has a strong initiative and the white knight does not have any safe squares; for example: 1) 24 tt::la3 llfd8 25 �b3 a4 and Black wins. 2) 24 tt::lb6 ltad8 25 'ii'b3 'ii'c6 26 llh3 ..id4 is again winning for Black. 24 ..'ii'c l+ 25 'iii>e2 llad8 26 'ii'xbS .ic3! The attacked knight cannot move because of the mate threat. 27 'ilfc6 llxd2+ 28 ..ixd2 'ii'xd2+ 29 'iii>f3 'ilff4+ 30 'iii>e2 ••.

.

31 ti::lf3 When you are directing the blatk pieces and your opponent is just getting around to devel­ oping his king's knight on move 3 1 , it is usually a good sign. Also futile is 31 'ii'f3 .l:.e8+ 32 'iii>d3 l:td8+ 33 'iii>c2 (33 'iii>xc3 loses to 33 ...'ii'b4+) 33 ...'ii'a4+ 34 'iii>xc3 'ii'b4+ 35 'iii>c2 .l:.d2+ 36 'iii>c 1 'ii'b2#. 31 ... ltc8 32 l:lg1 'ilffS 33 'ii'xb6 33 'ii'b7 is also hopeless: 33 ....l:.e8+ 34 'iii>f l 'ii'h3+ 35 .l:.g2 'ii'h l + 36 l:gl .l:.el +! 37 tt::lxel 'ii'xb7 and Black wins. 33...'ii'b5+ 0-1

Game Lessons: I ) The opening sequence is another exam­ ple of the Chapter I (Battling Goliath) theme 'Play what you know and know why you play it'. The aggressive 9 h4! ? is certainly dangerous and requires a sharp response, but this is the sort of variation a King's Indian Defence player looks forward to playing against. 2) The piece sacrifice l l ...cxd5 may be re­ futed by 1 6 ti::lf3 ! instead of the game continua­ tion 16 g4? - Black may have to switch to l l . . .g5 to maintain the balance. Some practical tests are needed. 3) Black was able to maintain the initiative for the entire game by including all of his pieces and pawns in the attack. White never found time to develop his kingside and safeguard his king.

OPENING HITS

49

Unexpected Moves Every chess-player loves to play unexpected moves - if they also happen to be good moves, even better. Opening novelties, hanging pieces and pseudo-sacrifices all fall into this category. Let's take a look at some unexpected moves and their stories.

Game 18: Desperado

Joel Benjamin 2596 - James Rizzitano 2569 US Open Ch, Ft Lauderdale 1 985 E94 King's I ndian Defence, Classical This was my 69th game in succession without a loss stretching back over the previous twelve months. The streak was broken in the next round when I lost to Danny Shapiro.

1 d4 g6 2 c4 i..g7 3 li:Jc3 d6 4 e4 li:Jf6 5 i.e2 0-0 6 li:Jf3 e5 7 i..e3 li:Jbd7 8 0-0 exd4 9 i..xd4 The usual recapture 9 li:Jxd4 is stronger be­ cause it makes it easier for White to support the e4-pawn with f3 . 9....:te8 10 li:Jd2 li:Jc5 11 f3?! (D) Safer is 1 1 i.f3 li:Je6 12 i.e3 li:Jd7 although Black has a comfortable game because of his control of the d4-square.

Joel thought for a long time here before de­ ciding to sacrifice the exchange. Alternatives: 1) 12 li:Jb3 li:Jxc3 13 i.xc3 i.xc3 14 bxc3 (so far this is the later game Halasz-Stoeber, Dortmund 1989) 14 ...li:Jd7 and Black has a slight edge because of his superior pawn-structure. 2) 12 li:Jdb l !? (a radical idea to avoid dou­ bled pawns) 1 2 ... li:Je6! 1 3 i.xg7 li:Je3 14 'ifc l li:Jxfl (14... ii'g5? 15 'it>f2! turns the tables) 15 .i.h6 li:Jxh2 16 i.e3 ii'h4 with murky complica­ tions. 12 li:Je3 13 i!Vcl li:Jxn 14 i.h6 li:Jxd2 15 ii'xd2 f6 15 ...i..e6 16 li:Jd5 li:Jd7 is preferable; White then has insufficient compensation for the ex­ change. 16 b4 (D) ..•

B B

11. li:Jd5!! One of the few consolations for long-suffer­ ing King's Indian Defence players - every once in a while you have the opportunity to play a move like this. I had utilized a similar motif two years earlier (see Game 1 8. 1 ). 12 i.xg7?! .•

16 li:Jd7?? ..•

An inexcusable blunder; after 16 ...li:Je6 1 7

%:td1 a5 White is hard-pressed to demonstrate sufficient compensation for his material deficit.

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

50

17 'iVd5+ Wh8 18 'iVf7 1:lg8 19 lt::ld5 lt::le5 (D)

w

are still undeveloped) 22 ....l:td7 (Black has diffi­ culty unwinding his pieces after 22 ...c6 23 lt::lc7 .l:tb8 24 .tg5 .l:td7 25 lt::le8 and therefore White has good compensation for the exchange) 23 .tg5 .l:tf7 24 f4 lt::lc6 25 .tf6+ Wg8 26 b5 and again White has good compensation for the ex­ change. 20 .te6 21 'iVxd8 .l:tgxd8 22 lt::lc7 White recovers the exchange and the posi­ tion dissolves into an equal endgame. 22....txc4 23 .txc4 lt::lxc4 24 lt::lxa8 .l:txa8 25 h4 Wg8 26 a4 Wf7 27 .l:tcl .l:tc8 28 Wf2 We6 ..•

lfz-1/z

Game Lessons: 20 'ii'xc7 White can try for more with the surprising 20 'iVxf6+ ! ? 'iVxf6 2 1 lt::lxf6 .l:td8 22 lt::ld5 (at first glance it appears unlikely that this idea could work, but there are weak dark squares around Black's king and his queenside pieces

I) Be alert for unexpected moves, particu­ larly when there are loose pieces in the centre of the board. 2) Always consider your opponent's possi­ bilities first - do not relax just because you have a material advantage.

Game 1 8. 1

Jan Smejkal 2560 James Rizzitano 2482 Con tinental Chess International, New York 1 983 -

Safer than 1 5 cxd5? i-xd4 1 6 dxe6 fxe6 17 'iVxh6 'iVf6, when Black is fine.

w

B

14 lt::ld5 Alternatives: 1) 14 .ta7 .l:ta8 15 .te3 'ii'c8 16 i-xh6 i-xh3 17 lt::ld5 lt::lxd5 18 cxd5 c5 is equal. 2) 14 c5 dxc5 1 5 i-xc5 .l:te8 1 6 .l:td 1 'iVc8 1 7 Wh2 i-f5 with roughly equal chances. 14 lt::lxd5 15 .txg7 (D) •.•

15 ...lt::lf4! ! This is stronger than the automatic recapture 1 5 ...Wxg7 16 cxd5 i-d7 17 'iVc3+ Wh7 1 8 .l:tac 1 .l:tc8 1 9 'iVb3 .l:tb8 20 .l:tfd 1 with a favourable

OPENING HITS

pawn-structure for White. Black' s desperado knight move prevents White from obtaining a space advantage by playing cxd5.

51

16 Vxf4 �xg7 17 l:tacl 'iVf6 The position is balanced, and the game was eventually drawn.

Game 18.2

Larry Christiansen - Vasser Seirawan Berkeley 1 9 7 8 White plays a very attractive combination which appears to materialize out of thin air.

Totally unexpected as White had moved his queen into the comer two moves earlier. The key to the combination is Black's lack of king­ side defenders. 29 �xh6 30 l:th4+ '3;g7 The white queen methodically climbs the staircase to deliver checkmate after 30... gxh4 3 I Vc I + �h5 32 11i'd I + �h6 33 11i'd2+ �h5 34 Ve2+ �h6 35 'ii'e3+ �h5 36 'ii'f3+ �h6 37 'ii'f4+ (or 37 11i'xf7) 37 ...�g7 38 11i'g5+ �f8 39 'iVh6+ �g8 40 'ii'h7+ �f8 4I 'ii'h8#. 31 l:th7+ �f6 Also futile is 3 l ...�f8 32 'iVdi g4 33 'ii'd2, when Black is defenceless against the threat of 'ii'h6+ with a mating-net. 32 l:th6+ White repeats the position to gain some time on the clock. 32 �g7 33 :h7+ �f6 Or 33 ...�g8 34 'ii'd i g4 35 11i'd2 and White wins as above. 34 lLle4+ �g6 Black's king becomes hopelessly exposed after 34 ...b8 (another idea is 1 3. . .g4 14 ll'lgl h5 15 ll'lge2 and surprisingly a draw was agreed in Spassky-Bronstein, Moscow 1 967) 14 'ifi>bl f5 with a balanced game in Rizzitano-A.Shaw, Chicopee 1 986. 11 a3!? A novelty at the time. White would like to develop his queen to a more active spot than the c2-square; the usual move is 1 1 g4. ll . 'iVe7 Also possible is l l .. .g4 1 2 ll'lgl (12 ll'lh4 !? h5 13 'iVa4 is worthy of consideration) 12 .. .f5 1 3 tlJge2 h5 with sharp play in Ravi-Marin, Calcutta 1 997. 12 'iVa4 12 'iVc2 transposes to note '2' to Black's 1Oth move. 12 a6? •.•

.

17 'iVf7 Also possible is 17 ...gxf3 1 8 ll'lxf3 .i.h6 19 d5 i.xe3+ 20 'iti>b l ll'ld4 21 l:tde l ll'lxf3 22 l:txe3 ll'ld4 23 c5 !, when White has some initiative on the queenside. 18 h6! l:txh6 19 l:txh6 i.xh6 20 d5! (D) .••

B

.

.•.

20...lt:'lb8! The knight is well-placed here and defends some key squares; this retreat also enables Black

OPENING HITS

to keep his pawn-structure relatively intact. The weaker alternative is 20 ...ltJe7 2 1 d6 ! cxd6 22 c5 ! (after 22 'i!Vb4?? �c7 23 ltJa4 ltJc8 Black consolidates his extra pawn) 22 ...dxc5 (22...d5 23 �xa6 keeps up the pressure) and now: 1) 23 �xa6 !? �b8 24 �xb7 �xb7 25 ltJb5 ltJc8 26 'ii'a7+ ! ! (Black survives after 26 ltJc4?? d5 !) 26 ...ltJxa7 (26 ...�c6 27 'ii'a8+ �xb5 28 a4+ �b4 29 �a6 mates) 27 ltJd6+ �c7 28 ltJxf7 and White has a clear advantage. 2) 23 ltJc4! d6 (White recovers his pawn with a crushing attack after 23 ...�c7 24 ltJd6 ! �xd6 25 �xa6+ ltJd5 26 �xb7) 24 ltJxb6+ �b8 25 ltJd7+ �c8 26 �xa6 ! l:.xd7 27 ltJb5 and White has a winning attack. 21 d6! White offers a pawn in order to cut Black's pieces off from defending the queenside. 21 ...�c6! Black declines the pawn as White has a strong attack after 2 l . ..cxd6 22 �b4 �xg2 23 'ii'xb6 �f8 24 ltJb3 l:.e8 25 ltJa5. 22 'ifb3 �f8 23 cS! bxcS 24 ltJc4 �xd6 25 �fl !? More dynamic than 25 ltJxd6+ cxd6 26 �b6 l:.h8 27 �xa6+ ltJxa6 28 �xa6+ �d8 29 �b6+ �c8 30 l:.xd6 l:.h 1 + 3 1 �d2 l:.h2 32 �xc5 (32 �d 1 l:.h 1 + 33 �c2 l:.h2 repeats) 32 ... l:.xg2+ 33 �c 1 (White could play on with the double­ edged 33 ltJe2!?) 33 ...l:.g1 + 34 �c2 l:tg2+ with a draw. 2S . �f8 (D) .

.

w

26 ltJa4!? The climbing knights manoeuvre is intrigu­ ing, but 26 l:.xd6 ! cxd6 27 'ii'b 6! is objectively best:

55

1 ) 27 ...l:.e8 28 'ii'a7 d5 29 ltJb6+ �d8 30 'ii'xb8+ �e7 3 1 'ii'c7 d4 32 ltJcd5+! ? (leading to a draw by perpetual check; White could con­ sider playing on with the calm 32 ltJd1 ) and now: 1 a) 32 ... �xd5 33 ltJxd5+ exd5 34 �e5+ �f7 35 �xf5+ �g8 (35 ...�e7 36 1i'e5+ �d8 37 �b8+ �e7 38 �e5+ is also a draw) 36 �g6+ �h8 37 �h5+ �g7 38 'il'g5+ with a draw. 1 b) 32...exd5 33 'ii'e5+ �f7 34 �xf5+ �e7 35 'il'e5+ �d8 36 'il'b8+ �e7 37 �e5+ with a draw. 2) 27 ...d5 28 ltJd6+! 'il'xd6 29 �xa6+ ltJxa6 30 'il'xa6+ �c7 (30... �b8?? loses to 3 l ltJb5 !) 3 1 �a7+ (the greedy move 3 1 �a5+?? allows 3 l ...�b7 ! 32 'ii'xd8 d4 and Black wins) 3 l ...�c8 32 'il'a6+ with a draw. 26...�d5 Black has several reasonable alternatives here: 1 ) 26...�e7 and now: l a) 27 ltJxd6+ cxd6 28 �b6 �xa4 29 �xa6+ ltJxa6 30 �xa6+ �b8 3 1 'il'b6+ (an­ other way to draw is 3 1 �xa4 d5 32 l:.d3 c4 33 'il'b5+ �c7 34 1i'a5+ �b7 35 1i'b5+) 3 l ...�c8 32 �a6+ with a draw. 1 b) 27 l:.xd6 �xa4 28 �xa4 cxd6 29 �b3 d5 30 ltJb6+ �c7 3 1 ltJa8+ �c8 32 ltJb6+ draws. 2) 26 ... �e7 27 ltJa5 �e4 28 �d3 and now: 2a) 28 ...�xg2 29 e4 d5 (White has a promising attack after 29 ...�xe4 30 .i.xe4 d5 3 1 �g2) 30 ..txa6+ �d7 (30 ... ltJxa6?? 3 1 �b7+ �d7 32 �c6+ �c8 33 ltJb6+ mates) 3 1 ..tb5+ c6 (3 l . ..�c8 32 ..tc6 mates) 32 ltJxc6 ltJxc6 33 ..txc6+ �xc6 34 'il'b6+ �d7 35 �b5+ �c7 36 �b6+ with a draw. 2b) 28 .....ta8 (the safest move) 29 'ili'b6! (not 29 ltJb6+?? cxb6 30 �xb6 c4! 3 1 �xc4 �c5 and Black wins) 29 ...cxb6 (not 29 ... c4? 30 �a7 ..tb4 3 1 axb4 �xb4 32 ltJxc4 and White has a clear advantage) 30 ltJxb6+ �c7 3 1 ltJxa8+ �c8 (3 l . ..�d6?? 32 ..txf5#) 32 ltJb6+ with a draw. 3) 26... l:.e8 (the sharpest winning attempt; Black creates a flight-square for his king) 27 ltJab6+ cxb6 28 ltJxd6+ �c7 29 �c3 (29 ltJxe8+ 'il'xe8 and Black's mobile centre pawns are reasonable compensation for the exchange) 29 ...�xd6 30 l:.xd6 �xd6 is unclear.

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

56

27 g3? White has clearly lost his objectivity with this move. Correct is 27 l:.xd5 ! exd5 28 liJcb6+ (the speculative 28 liJa5 !? l:.e8 29 �b7+ �d8 30 �xb8+ g7 32 'iie3 'it'e7 33 .:tel 'it>f6 34 g4? This terrible move exposes the white king and needlessly prolongs the game. White can initiate a mating attack by playing 34 'ii'h6+ 'it>xf5 35 l:lfl + 'it>e4 36 'it'c6+ 'it>e3 37 'iif3+ 'it>d4 38 l:.d I + 'it>c4 39 'ii'd5+. 34 'ii'd6 35 'ii'h6+ 'it>e7 36 'it'xh7+? White misses 36 'it'g7+, which wins imme­ diately. 36...'it>d8 37 'ii'g8+ 'it>d7 38 'ii'f7+ 'it>d8 39 'ii'e6 'ii'd3 40 'ii'g8+ 'it>d7 41 'ii'e6+ 'it>d8 42 'ii'xe5 'ii'f3+ 43 'it>gl 'ii'xg4+ 44 'ii'g3 'ii'd4+ 45 'ii'e3 'ii'g4+ 46 'it>f2 'ii'xf5+ 47 'it>e2 'ii'h5+ 48 'it>n 'ii'f5+ 49 'it>gt 'ii'g6+ 50 'ii'g3 'ii'b6+ 51 'it>hl 'ii'c6+ 52 'ii'g2 1-0 .•

B

•.•

cxd4 'ii'xd4+ 20 'ii'xd4 l:lxd4 with an equal end­ game. 14 'ii'd3 l:tad8 15 �g5 Also possible is I5 f6 !? .i.xf6 I6 .i.xh7+ 'it>h8 I7 'ii'e4 with a slight edge for White, Glatt-Hradeczky, Hungarian Team Ch I991 . 15 f6? This move is the decisive error. Black must play I 5 . . .'ii'c5+ 16 'it'e3 ( 1 6 �e3 'it'b4 is fine for Black) 16 ...'ii'xe3+ I7 .i.xe3 l:lfe8 I 8 l2Jg5 (or I 8 �xc6 l:lxe3 I9 .i.xb7 �xf5 20 l:tae1 l:lxei 2I lDxei with equal chances) I8 ... �xb2 ( I 8 . . . h6 I9 l2Je6 ! fxe6 20 f6 gives White a slight edge) I9 l:tabi �d4 20 .i.xd4 l2Jxd4 2I l:txb7 h6 (2l ...�e2 ! ? 22 l:l.f4 �a6 23 l:lxa7 l2Je2+ 24 'it>f2 l2Jxf4 25 l:txa6 with compensation for the exchange) 22 �f3 �xf5 with an equal end­ game. 16 'it'c4+ 'it>h8 17 �xc6 fxg5 White also secures a strong initiative after I 7 ...�xf3 I 8 l:lae l . 18 'ii'xg4 'ii'c5+ 19 'it>hl 'it'xc6 20 l2Jxg5 �xb2 21 l:labl (D) .••

B

.•.

Game Lessons: I) If you want to fight for an advantage in the early stages of an established opening, stick to the main lines. Despite the positive result, the dubious idea 8 .i.e3?! was deservedly shelved after this game. 2) This variation does not promise anything for White because Black can easily equalize by continuing I O . . .l2Jd4 instead of the sharper I O ...gxf5 . Black could have maintained the bal­ ance by heading for an equal endgame begin­ ning with I 5 ...'iic5+ - the game continuation I 5 ...f6? allowed White to take advantage of the a2-g8 diagonal and generate a strong kingside attack. 3) Proper technique is a must to be able to finish off your opponent - don't let up. White was only able to win this game, despite several inaccuracies, because he had a wide margin for error.

OPENING MISSES

65

Game 24: Open Files and Opposite-Coloured Bishops

Kenneth Regan 2354 James Rizzitano 2084 World Open, Philadelphia 1 9 77 -

822 Sici l ian Defence, 2 c3 Open Files: From an early age, chess-players are taught the importance of controlling open files. But when is it truly advantageous to do so? Seizing an open file when the opponent controls all of the entry points is merely win­ dow-dressing. The occupation of an open file is most useful when it can be used to create addi­ tional threats, such as infiltrating along the 7th or 8th ranks to attack the opponent's king. This type of assault can force the opponent to waste time redeploying his pieces to deal with the incursion. This game demonstrates both ex­ tremes. Opposite-Coloured Bishops: One of the key issues surrounding the evaluation of positions containing opposite-coloured bishops is to de­ termine which side is helped by the opposites. Other things being equal, the presence of oppo­ site-coloured bishops can be advantageous for the defender by negating an opponent's advan­ tage of an extra pawn or two. However, in posi­ tions where there is a structural imbalance, the opposites can be quite advantageous for the at­ tacker because they tend to magnify the effect of a particular advantage - in this game a weak­ ened king position. As always, the specific fea­ tures of the position must be considered before making an evaluation. 1 e4 c5 2 c3 tt:lf6 3 e5 tt:ld5 4 d4 cxd4 5 cxd4 d6 6 tt:lf3 tt:lc6 7 ..tb5?! A dubious alternative to the usual 7 ..tc4 tt:lb6 8 ..tb5. 7...'iVa5+ 8 tt:lc3 tt:lxc3 9 ..txc6+ bxc6 10 'iVd2 ..ta6 This move takes immediate advantage of the missing light-squared bishop by cutting a swathe through White's position and prevent­ ing him from castling. 11 bxc3 Black obtained a slightly favourable end­ game after I I 'iVxc3 'iVxc3+ I 2 bxc3 l:tb8 1 3 ..ta3 �d7 i n Castro Rojas-Adorjan, World Ju­ nior Ch, Stockholm I 969.

ll ...e6 12 l:tb1 dxe5 13 tt:lxe5 'iVd5 14 f3 ..td6 15 �f2 White sacrifices a pawn in an attempt to quell Black's initiative. I5 tt:lg4 0-0 I 6 tt:le3 'iVh5 leaves Black firmly in control as he has two powerful bishops and the white king lacks a safe haven. 15 ..txe5 16 dxe5 'iVxe5 17 ..ta3 l:td8 18 'iVb2 c5 19 l:thel 'iVc7! (D) Stronger than the greedy I9 ...'iVxh2 20 ..txc5, when White has some counterplay. ..•

w

After the queen retreat, how should the po­ sition be evaluated? Black has an extra pawn, but there are opposite-coloured bishops. Al­ though White's queen and rook look impres­ sively lined-up on the b-file, they threaten nothing because Black controls all of the entry squares. This is an important point - the occu­ pation of an open file is not dangerous unless it can be used to create threats. 20 �g1 0-0 21 'iVf2 l:td5 22 c4 l:td4 Here I trusted my higher-rated opponent and did not give enough consideration to 22 .....txc4! 23 l:tbc i , assuming that White would regain the pawn. I overlooked the tactical idea 23 ...'iVa5 ! 24 'iVe3 l:td3 25 'iVxc5 l:txa3 26 'iVxa5 l:lxa5 27 l:txc4 l:txa2, when Black easily wins the rook endgame. 23 l:te4 l:tfd8 24 l:txd4

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

66

Capturing the pawn backfires after the long but straightforward variation 24 �xeS? l:td2 (not 24 .. .'ii'xc 5? 25 l:txd4 l:txd4 26 l:tb8+ �c8 27 l:txc8+ 'ifxc8 28 'ifxd4 with equal chances) 25 'i&'e3 l:t8d3 26 'i&'g5 l:td l + 27 l:txdl l:txd l + 28 'iti>f2 f5 ! (attacking two pieces) 29 l::td4 'ifxeS 30 'ifd8+ 'iti>f7 3 1 'i&'d7+ 'iti>f6 32 'i&'d8+ 'iti>g6 33 'ii'e8+ �h6 34 'ifxe6+ g6 35 'ife3+ f4 ! 36 'ii'xf4+ (after 36 l:txf4 l:td2+ Black wins the queen) 36 ... 'iti>g7 and Black wins. 24 l:txd4 24 ...cxd4 ! 25 c5 e5 is better because Black's protected passed pawn is considerably stronger than White's passed pawn. I was so focused on the weak c4-pawn that I missed the opportunity to transform one type of advantage into an­ other. 25 �xc5 l:txc4 26 �e3 Necessary to defend the c l -square. 26 h6 (D)

29 Jli'b5! (D) ••

w

•..

•••

w

Many of White's problems stem from having his pawn on the f3-square instead of back on f2. Black is able to take advantage of this slight weakness by threatening to invade along the 7th rank with ...'ife2. 30 'i&'e4 White counters by threatening l:td8+. 30 l:txg2+! A small combination designed to soften up the defences around the white king. 31 'iti>xg2 Ve2+ 32 'iti>g3 'i&'xd1 33 �xa7 White recovers one of the pawns, but his re­ maining foot-soldiers are isolated and vulnera­ ble to attack. His most pressing problem is that his king has no pawn-cover and the opposite­ coloured bishops favour the aggressor in such positions because the attacking bishop can op­ erate unopposed. 33 'i&'d6+ 34 'iff4 e5 35 'ife3 'i&'g6+ 36 'iti>f2 'ifc2+ 37 'iti>g3 �fi ! 38 'ifxe5 38 'i&'gl is also hopeless: 38 ... 1Vxa2 39 Vxfl 'ifxa7 and Black wins the queen endgame. 38 'ifg2+ 39 'iti>f4 'ifxh2+ 40 'iti>e4 Vxa2? Black had some stronger options: 1 ) 40...'ifc2+ 41 'iti>f4 g5+ 42 'iti>e3 'ife2+ 43 'iti>d4 'ifb2+ 44 'iti>d5 'ifxa2+ 45 'iti>d6 'ifxa7 46 'i&'e8+ 'iti>g7 47 'ife5+ f6 and Black wins. 2) 40 ... �d3+! (thematic) 41 'iti>d5 (41 'iti>d4 'i&'b2+ 42 'iti>d5 'ifxa2+ transposes) 4 I . ..'i&'xa2+ 42 'iti>d4 'iVai + ! (I overlooked this move during the game) 43 'iti>d5 Vxa7 winning the white bishop. 41 'ife8+ �h7 42 �e3 1i'c4+ 43 'iti>e5 �g2 44 'ii'a8 f6+ 45 �d6 'ifd3+ 46 'ifd5 Vxe3 47 'iff5+ 'iti>g8 48 'ii'd5+ 'iti>h8 49 'ii'a8+ 'iti>h7 0-1 •••

••.

Black has a solid edge due to his extra pawn and well-placed pieces despite the opposite­ coloured bishops. Compare the power of Black's lined-up queen and rook to White's set-up in the previous diagram - Black is threatening to occupy the 7th rank and White is powerless to prevent it. 27 l:td1 White must concede the 7th rank because he would be mated after 27 l:tb2? l:tc l+. 27 l:tc2 28 'ifh4 'i&'e5! 29 'i&'d4 The endgame offers no relief for White after 29 l:td8+ 'iti>h7 30 'i&'e4+ 'ifxe4 3 1 fxe4 l:txa2 32 l:td7 .:te2 33 �xa7 l:txe4 and Black cruises to victory as he has indirectly protected his f7pawn. •••

•••

OPENING MISSES

Game Lessons: 1) Control of an open file is not dangerous by itself unless it can be constructively utilized. White's control of the b-file was not significant, whereas Black's later control of the d-file was decisive because White could not adequately defend the entry points along the 7th and 8th ranks. 2) When you have an advantage, try to avoid allowing any unnecessary counterplay. The re­ treat 19 ...11i'c7 ! minimized the effectiveness of the white pieces.

67

3) Never trust your opponent because every­ one makes tactical oversights. Calculate care­ fully and make your own evaluation. 4) Always be on the lookout for the oppor­ tunity to transform one type of advantage into a larger advantage. Black missed the idea of 22 . . . �xc4! leading to a winning rook end­ game; later 24. . . cxd4 ! would have created a powerful passed pawn. 5) When there is a structural imbalance, op­ posite-coloured bishops tend to favour the at­ tacker because the defender is often powerless to prevent the infiltration of his position.

Game 25: The I nvitation

James Rizzitano 2263 - Joseph Fang 2157 Danvers rapidplay 1 9 79 C30 Ki ng's Gam bit Decl i ned The King's Gambit is not the safest opening choice for a rapid tournament. White must spend considerable energy calculating variations to ensure that his king is safe. Although White prevails here, the lesson is that it is no fun to be on the defensive for the entire game.

1 e4 e5 2 f4 This game was played during my 'romantic gambit period' . 2 �c5 3 ltJfJ ltJc6 A rarely-played alternative to the usual 3 ...d6. 4 fxe5 Also possible is 4 ltJxe5 ltJxe5 5 d4 ltJf3+ ! ? ( 5 ... �xd4 6 11i'xd4 'ii'h4+ 7 11i'f2 11i'xf2+ 8 'it>xf2 gives White a slight endgame advantage ac­ cording to Zaitsev) 6 gxf3 11i'h4+ 7 �e2 �b6 8 lbc3 and White has the makings of a promising attack despite losing the ability to castle. Of course, you should not play the King's Gambit if castling is one of your priorities ! 4...d6 5 exd6 Another idea is 5 �b5 dxe5 6 'ii'e2 ltJf6 (6 ...ltJe7 !? 7 lbxe5 0-0 is also possible) 7 lbxe5 0-0 8 �xc6 bxc6 9 d3 l:r.e8 10 lbf3 �a6 with some compensation for the pawn in Pachman­ Keres, European Team Ch, Vienna/Baden 1957. 5 'ii'xd6 6 c3!?

White can also play 6 �b5 �g4 7 d4 0-0-0, and now: 1 ) 8 �e3? allows 8 ...�xd4! (Korchnoi) 9 �xd4 �xf3, when Black has the upper hand. 2) 8 c3 gives White an edge. 6...�g4 7 d4 0-0-0 (D)

w

•••

.••

8 liJbd2!? This novelty practically invites Black to sac­ rifice a piece. Alternatives: 1) 8 ..i.e2 ..i.b6 9 lbbd2 'fie7 10 'ii'c2 lbf6 1 1 e5 l:r.he8 12 lbc4 gives White a clear plus, Kav­ alek-Kupka, Czechoslovak Ch, Prague 1963 . 2) 8 ..i.b5 is the same as note '2' to White's 6th move.

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

68

3) 8 i.d3 i.xd4? (8 . . . i.b6) 9 cxd4 ll:lxd4 10 i.e2? ( 1 0 ll:lc3 ! refutes the piece sacrifice) 10 ...lLlxf3+ 1 1 gxf3 'ilt'xd l + 12 i.xd l .l:txd l + 1 3 �xd l i.xf3+ 1 4 �e l i.xh l and Black soon won in Thibault-Rizzitano, Jaffrey 1983. 8...ll:lxd4! ? Joe naturally obliges. 9 cxd4 i.xd4 10 'ilt'a4 Avoiding any tactical tricks along the d-file. 10....txf3 ll ll:lxf3 i.b6 12 .td2 White blocks the d-file and threatens to cas­ tle queenside. 12 'ilt'c5 13 'ili'c4 'ii'f2+ 14 �d1 lLlf6 15 �c2 ll:lg4 16 'ili'e2 'ili'c5+ 17 i.c3 lLle3+ 18 �b3 (D) .••

B

Black's initiative dries up after l 9 ...'ili'xb5+ 20 i.xb5 .l:txe4 2 1 .l:the l . 20 e5 'ifg6 White untangles his pieces after 20... 'ili'e6+ 2 1 ..tc4 ll:lxc4 22 'ili'xc4 .l:td5 23 a4. 21 ltcl a6 22 'ili'b4 JJ..a7 Preparing to add reinforcements to the attack, but this will also expose Black's king. 23 a4 c5 24 'ili'f4 24 ..td4 is also strong. 24 b5 25 �a2 25 axb5 is also good. 25 'ife6+ 26 �a1 ll:ld5 27 'ili'e4 ll:lxc3 28 bxc3 'ili'b3 Aiming for perpetual check. 29 'ilt'a8+ ..tb8 Black's king is 'hopelessly exposed after 29 ...�d7 30 'ili'xa7+ �e6 3 1 lLlg5+ �xe5 32 'ifxc5+ and White has two extra pieces. 30 'ili'c6+ i.c7 31 'ili'xa6+ 1-0 •••

•••

Game Lessons:

White's king has found safe refuge on an un­ likely square. 18 .l:the8 19 'ili'b5 'ilt'd6 .•.

1) White's choice of opening was poor be­ cause defending an exposed king position re­ quires accurate calculation; this was not a very practical opening choice with a fast time-limit. 2) Sometimes a move may be tactically jus­ tified although it appears visually uncomfort­ able. The white king was relatively safe after 18 'Otb3 even though it appeared to be somewhat exposed.

Dubious Opening Ideas Sometimes new ideas are developed which either do not work or are superseded by later games. Many times a move is a theoretical failure but a practical success because the opponent is unable to determine the refutation of the idea over the board. During a game anything can happen, even with objectively questionable moves. Let's take a look at some prepared and over-the-board opening novelties and their stories.

Game 26: Weak Dark Squares

James Rizzitano 2388 - William Kelleher 2366 Spring Futurity, Boston 1 98 1 840 Sici l ian Defence, P i n Variation 1 e4 c5 2 lLlf3 lLlf6 3 lLlc3 e6 4 d4 cxd4 5 ll:lxd4 i.b4 6 e5 ll:ld5 7 i.d2 ll:lxc3 8 bxc3 .ta5

The alternative is 8 ...JJ..e7 9 'ili'g4 0-0 10 i.h6 g6 1 1 h4 'ili'a5 1 2 'ili'g3 d6 1 3 exd6 (NCO gives

OPENING MISSES

1 3 �xf8 �xf8 14 exd6 �xd6 15 'ii'd3 and White is much better) 1 3 ...�f6 14 0-0-0 tiJd7 15 �c4 and White had the upper hand in Sziva­ Van der Linden, Belgian Team Ch 1995/6. 9 'ii'g4 0-0 10 .i.d3 d6 11 tiJf3 g6 (D) Black must avoid 1 l ...dxe5 ?? 12 .i.xh7+ �xh7 1 3 'ii'h5+ �g8 14 tLlg5, winning the house.

w

69

(during the game I prematurely stopped analys­ ing at this point) 17 r:l;e2 tLlxh4 1 8 �xh4 e5 1 9 hxg6 (or 19 .l:.ag1 d5 20 f3 �xc3 2 1 hxg6 �g7 22 �f2 with an unclear position) 19 ...fxg6 20 l:tag1 .l:.f4 2 1 .l:.xg6+ d3 'ii'x g5, with a clear advantage for Black) 28 ...'ii'xe3+ 29 �d 1 'ii'xg5 and Black has a slight edge because of his passed kingside pawns. 16 g6! .i.f6 Alternatives: 1) 16 ... ltJxd5 17 ltJxd5 (stronger than 1 7 gxf7+ �f8) 1 7 . . . .i.xd5 ( l 7 . . .exd5 1 8 gxf7+ �xf7 19 h6 with a strong attack) 18 :xd5 exd5 .•.

13 h4?! A novelty at the time, but it appears to be a little slow. ECO (2002) gives 1 3 llg1 .i.b7 14 f5 exf5 1 5 'ii'xf5 g6 16 'ii'f2 with an unclear posi­ tion according to Kasparov. 13 .i.b7 14 hS!? This was the·real novelty. One month earlier I was in Colombia at the World Under- 16 Cham­ pionship as Patrick Wolff's second, and Bats­ ford's then Technical Editor Paul Lamford gave me a copy of the just-published book Sicilian: ... e6 and ... d6 Systems by Kasparov and Niki­ tin. The authors gave 14 f5 ltJe5 15 'ii'h3 exf5 with an unclear position. During the long 'plane ride home I came up with the game continua­ tion; the idea is to prepare the g6 advance while retaining control over the e5-square. 14 d5! Black finds the most energetic response to take advantage of the line-up of white pieces along the diagonal. Alternatives: 1) 14 ...e5 15 fxe5 ltJxe5 16 'ii'g3 f6?! (16 ...0-0 17 h6 g6 is safer) 17 h6 ! with a strong attack in Czebe-Vandrey, Budapest 1993. •••

•••

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

74

19 'i!i'xd5 0-0 20 gxf7+ 'iii>h8 21 h6 and White has a winning attack. 2) 16 ...fxg6 17 hxg6 h6 1 8 'ili'h3 and White has a clear advantage. 17 gxf7+ 'ili'xf7 18 dxe6 Also possible is 1 8 lt:le4 0-0 19 lt:lxf6+ ( 1 9 lt:ld6 !?) 19 .. .'ilfxf6 20 l:lgl lt:lxd5 21 .i.d3 with roughly equal chances. 18 'i!i'xe6 White maintains some pressure in the com­ plications arising after 1 8 . . . ..txf3 19 exf7+ 'iii>xf7 20 l:lh3 ! .i.g4 2 1 l:lg3 ..txh5 22 .i.g2. 19 'ili'h3! Stronger than the lame 19 'i!i'xb7? 'i!i'xe3+ 20 l:ld2, and now: 1) 20 .....txc3 21 'i!i'c6+ 'iii>f7 22 'i!i'c7+ 'iii>f6 23 'ilfxc3+ 'i!i'xc3 24 bxc3 l:lad8 with a drawish endgame. 2) 20 ...0-0 2 1 lt:ld l 'ili'xf4 ! 22 'i!i'xb6 .i.g5 23 'i!i'a5 (23 'ii'e6+? loses to 23 ...'iii>h8 24 'ili'el l:lfe8) 23 ...l:lad8 24 .i.d3 l:lxd3! 25 cxd3 l:lc8+ 26 'iii>b l 'i!i'xd2 27 'ili'xd2 .i.xd2 28 lt:lf2 with an equal endgame. 19 'i!i'e7 White has a clear advantage in the endgame after 1 9 ...'i!i'xh3 20 l:lxh3 .i.xd4 2 1 .i.xd4 lt:ld5 22 lt:lxd5 .i.xd5 23 ..txg7 l:lg8 24 h6 ..tc4 25 .i.g2 as Black is getting skewered by the raking bishops. 20 l:lg1 b4 The tricky 20 ...lt:la4!? is well-met by 2 l lLld l ! .i.xd4 22 .i.xd4 and the attack rages on. 21 lt:ld1 lt:ld5 (D) 22 ..tg2?? Both players suffer a meltdown in mutual time-trouble. The rook should step aside with

w

•••

22 l:lc4 and White has an extra pawn and a promising attack. 22...l:ld8?? Black should play 22 .....txd4 23 .i.xd5 (after 23 .i.xd4 Black wins by 23 ...lt:lxf4 24 'i!i'g4 lt:lxg2) 23 .....txb2+ ! (White has fair compensa­ tion for the exchange after 23 .....txd5? 24 ..txd4) 24 lt:lxb2 .i.xd5 and Black has a clear plus. 23 l:le4 1-0

.•.

Game Lessons: 1) A wing attack is often best countered by activity in the centre. The opening novelty 1 3 h4?! and 1 4 h5 ! ? was well answered by 1 4. . .d5 !, but the follow-up 1 5 ...lt:lb6? was too slow 15 ...b4! should have been preferred . 2) Both players managed the clock poorly and were already in time-trouble by move 20 only seven moves out of opening theory. An ex­ treme example of the importance of playing at a more practical pace.

Game 29: Back- Rank Weakness

Joseph Fang 2254 - James Rizzitano 2440 Watertown 1 984 A68 Modern Benon i , Fou r Pawns 1 d4 lt:lf6 2 c4 g6 3 lt:lc3 ..tg7 4 e4 d6 5 f4 0-0 6 lt:lf3 c5 7 d5 e6 8 .i.e2 exd5 9 cxd5 ..tg4 10 0-0 lt:lbd7 U lt:ld2 More usual is 1 1 h3 or l l l:lel ; the voluntary retreat of White's knight eases Black's defen­ sive task.

ll ..txe2 12 11i'xe2 l:le8 13 'i!i'f3 a6 Alternatives: 1) 1 3 ... 'i!i'e7 (the provocative 13 ... 'i!i'b6 ! ? has also been played a few times) 14 a4 c4 15 'iii>h l l:lac8 with chances for both sides in Gallist­ Walinger, Germany corr. 1994. ...

OPENING MISSES

2) 1 3 ...l:tc8 !? 1 4 �h 1 c4 1 5 g4 (loosening, but I think Black already has a comfortable po­ sition) 15 ...h6 ! (Watson calls this "the conven­ tional line") 1 6 a4 (or 1 6 h4 lt::lc5 ! with sharp play according to Vai"sser) 1 6 .. .'il'e7 with sharp play in Sutter-Gallagher, Swiss Team Ch 2002. 14 lt::lc4? A novelty. The usual continuation is 14 a4 f!kc7 (White had a slight edge after 14 ...l:lb8 15 a5 f!kc7 16 lt::lc4 b5 1 7 axb6 lt::lxb6 1 8 lt::la5 in Fang-Paschall, USA 1 990) 15 lt::lc4 lt::lb6 with balanced chances. 14 lt::lb6? 14 ...f!ke7 ! is more accurate: 15 e5 ( 1 5 l:te1 b5 16 lt::la5 b4 17 lt::lc6 'flkf8 18 lt::la4 lt::lxd5 and Black has a clear advantage) 15 ...dxe5 16 fxe5 lt::lxe5 17 lt::lxe5 flkxe5 1 8 i..f4 'it'h5 and White has very little for the sacrificed pawn. 15 lt::le3? White should transpose back into the main line with 1 5 lt::ld 2! lt::lbd7 1 6 a4, but it is always difficult to admit a mistake. 15 f!ke7 16 e5 The standard Benoni pawn sacrifice is forced as there is no way to defend the e4-pawn. 16 dxe5 17 f5 (D)

75

Black has a decisive material advantage after 1 9 'flkh4 'it'e5 20 fxg6 fxg6. 19 lt::lxg4 20 'it'xg4 e3 21 'iff3 i..d4 22 �hl e2 23 .:tel i..xc3 24 bxc3 l:txd5 25 f6 (D) •••

•••

•••

•••

25 l:tdl! White's back-rank problems are a recurring theme throughout the game; Black is able to utilize this tactical idea several times to sim­ plify into a winning endgame. 26 i..b2 The black rook is immune because of 26 l:txd1 exd1'ili'+ 27 'i!Vxdl 'ili'el + 28 'i!Vxel l:txel #. 26 l:txal 27 ..txal 'ili'e4 28 'ili'h3 White has no hope in the endgame after 28 'i!Vxe4 l:txe4 29 g I lt::lc4 30 f2 l:te6 3 1 l:txe2 l:txf6+ 32 e1 l:te6 and Black wins. 28 'ili'bl! 29 'ili'h4 'i!Vxel + 30 'i!Vxel lt::lc4 (D) .••

.••

•••

17 e4! Black reacts energetically in the centre to counter White's kingside build-up. Note that the exchange of light-squared bishops has re­ moved the venom from White's set-up and eased Black's defensive task. Black's light­ squared bishop is usually his problem piece in this type of pawn-structure because it often has difficulty finding a suitable square. 18 'flkh3 l:tad8 19 lt::lg4 •••

31 �gl The stinger at the end of the combination is 3 1 h3 lt::la3 32 h2 lt::lc2 33 'ili'c1 e l 'ili' 34 'ili'h6 'i!Ve5+ 35 h 1 'ifxf6 and Black wins.

76

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

31...lba3 0-1 The pawn ending is hopeless for White after 32 'iii>f2 lbc2 33 11i'xe2 :Z.xe2+ 34 �xe2 lbxal 35 'iii>d2 'iii>f8 (one of several winning lines) 36 'iitc I 'iite8 37 'iitb2 'iitd7 38 'iitx al 'iite6 and Black wins.

Game Lessons: 1) White's novelty 14 lbc4? was ill-advised. Black's response 14 ... lbb6? (14 ...1!i'e7 ! is cor­ rect) should have been answered by 1 5 lbd2!

(instead of 1 5 lDe3?), transposing back into the main line. 2) The standard Benoni pawn sacrifice 1 6 e5 was ineffective because the early exchange of light-squared bishops enabled Black to de­ velop all of his pieces quickly. 3) When ahead in material, always be on the lookout for tactical opportunities to sim­ plify the position and increase your advantage. Numerous back-rank mating threats allowed Black to sustain the initiative and quickly finish off the game.

Game 30: Back-Door Pin

Patrick Wolff 2329 - James Rizzitano 2485 Newton 1 984 899 Sici l ian Defence, Najdorf 1 e4 c5 2 lDf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lbxd4 lDf6 5 lDc3 a6 6 �g5 e6 7 f4 �e7 8 11i'f3 11i'c7 9 0-0-0 One year later Patrick played 9 f5 ! ? lbc6 10 0-0-0 �d7 II fxe6 fxe6 1 2 lbxc6 11i'xc6 with equal chances in Wolff-Rizzitano, Cambridge 1 985; Black eventually won. 9 lbbd7 10 g4 b5 11 �xf6 lDxf6 12 g5 lDd7 13 f5 (D) .••

13 �xg5+ One week later I varied with the popular al­ ternative 1 3 ...lbc5 14 f6 gxf6 15 gxf6 �f8 16 lDf5?! (Patrick won a nice game in the main line after 1 6 :Z.gl �d7 1 7 l:tg7 �xg7 1 8 fxg7 l:.g8 1 9 e5 0-0-0 20 exd6 11i'b6 21 lbe4! lbxe4 22 11i'xe4 with a strong attack in Wolff-Browne, .••

World Open, Philadelphia 1 987) 16 ...exf5 17 lbd5 1!i'c6 (17 ...11i'a5 ! is now known to give Black a clear advantage) 1 8 exf5 and now: 1) 18 ...lDd7? 19 �g2 lbe5 (stronger than 19 ...�b7? 20 :Z.hel + 'iii>d8 2 1 11i'e3 lbe5 22 lDe7 11i'xg2 23 l:.xd6+ 'iite8 24 11i'xe5 �h6+ 25 'iii>b1 'iii>f8 26 :Z.ed 1 :Z.e8 27 :Z.d8 and Black resigned in Wolff-Ru.Gunawan, World Junior Ch, Kit­ java 1984; this was played after our game) 20 :Z.hel l:la7 ! 21 11i'f4? (Patrick's 1984 idea 21 11i'g3 ! gives White a clear advantage; in many variations the queen drops in on the g7-square with devastating effect) 2 l ...:Z.d7 22 :Z.d3 1!i'c4! with balanced chaos in Wolff-Rizzitano, Wor­ cester 1984; White eventually won. 2) 18 ...�b7 ! 19 'ilfe3+ �d7 20 �g2 :Z.e8 21 lbe7 (21 11i'f4 loses to 2 l ...:Z.e2) 2 I ...'ilfxg2 22 :Z.hg1 'ilfxh2 23 11i'xc5 �xe7 24 fxe7 :Z.c8 and White resigned in Ady-Gallagher, Lloyds Bank, London 1984. 14 'iitb1 lbe5 15 11i'h5 11i'e7 1 5 ...'ilfd8 is also popular. 16 lbxe6 Exchanging Black's light-squared bishop is more effective than 1 6 fxe6?! g6 1 7 exf7+ 'iitxf7 1 8 'ilfe2 �g4! 19 'ilff2+ 'ilff6 20 'ilfxf6+ �xf6 21 �e2 �c8 ! , when the bishop-pair gave Black a comfortable game in Shabalov-Hellers, New York Open 1 983. 16 �xe6 17 fxe6 g6 18 exf7+ 'iitxf7 19 11i'e2 .••

OPENING MISSES

1 9 'ifh3 is another possibility. 19 'iitg7 20 lLJd5 'iVdS Black has had success controlling the gl -a7 diagonal by playing 20 ...'iVa7 21 'ifg2 (21 h4!? has also been played) 2 l ...�h6 22 �e2 l:thf8 23 .l:thfl 'iith8 24 'ifh3 �g7 with a sharp struggle ahead in Ernst-Van Wely, Reykjavik 1994. 21 'ife1 �h4 22 'iVb4!? A novelty which applies immediate pressure to the d6-pawn. Worthy of investigation is 22 'iVc3 .l:ta7 (Black could try 22 ... .l:tc8, but 23 'iVa3 .l:tc6 24 �e2 is slightly better for White as the black rook is misplaced and White will seize the open f-file) 23 'iVa3 �f2 24 h4! (stronger than 24 lLlf4 'iff6 25 lbd5 'iVd8 26 lLlf4 and a draw was agreed in Hellers-Howell, European Junior Ch, Groningen 1984/5) 24....l:tf8 25 h5 .l:tf3 (some analysts stop here and conclude that Black has a satisfactory game) 26 lLlc3 !? 'iVc7 (26 ...gxh5 27 �e2 .l:tg3 28 .l:txh5 looks promising for White) 27 �e2 �c5 28 'ii'b3 and White has some ad­ vantage due to Black's exposed king. 22....l:tf8 23 lLle3 .l:tf3! (D) 24 'iVd4?? The tactical justification of Black's last move is 24 .l:txd6?? (best is 24 lbd5 maintaining equality) 24 ...'iff8 ! 25 'ifd4 (25 �g2 loses to 25 . . ..l:txe3 26 'ifd4 'iff4) 25 ...l:txe3 ! 26 �xb5 (the weakness of White's first rank is fatal after 26 'ifxe5+ �f6 27 .l:td7+ �h8 and Black wins) 26...'iff4! and Black retains the extra piece.

77

.••

w

24 �f2! 25 .l:td3 .l:txe3 26 .l:txe3 'ifg5 ...

The back -door pin wins a piece. 27 .l:tg3 'ifxg3 0-1

Game Lessons: 1) White played an opening novelty on move 22 of a well-known variation and Black re­ sponded with a sharp counterattack. White made a miscalculation which enabled Black to win a piece because of an unusual tactical idea. 2) There are plenty of interesting opening ideas waiting to be discovered, even in well­ analysed opening variations. White may want to consider 22 'ikc3 combined with the new idea of 26 lLlc3 ! ?, exerting pressure on the d6-pawn. Some practical tests are needed.

Game 3 1 : Relentless Attack

James Rizzitano 2485 - Hans Ree 2524 New York Open 1 984 C l l French Defence, Stein itz White plays a dubious opening novelty and is rewarded by an inaccurate response. A pawn plays a decisive role in breaking down Black's defences and enabling White's pieces to swarm around the black king.

1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 lLJcJ lbf6 4 e5 lLlfd7 5 f4 c5 6 lLlf3 lLlc6 7 �e3 cxd4 Black can also play for immediate queenside expansion with 7 ... a6 8 'iVd2 b5 . 8 lbxd4 'ii'b6

The sharpest response, aiming to exploit the momentary shakiness of White's set-up to win the b2-pawn. Black can avoid the double-edged tactics which follow in favour of completing his kingside development with 8 ... �c5. 9 'iVd2 'ikxb2 10 .l:tb1 'ifa3 11 lLlcb5?! A dubious novelty. This was an over-the­ board inspiration as the pawn-sacrifice varia­ tion was in its infancy and no main line had yet been established. Another early idea was 1 1 .l:.b3 'iVa5 1 2 lLlcb5, and now:

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

78

1 ) 1 2 .. .'ii'xd2+ 1 3 �xd2 .l:.b8 ! ? (since this game 1 3 ...�d8 14 lt:'lxc6+ bxc6 I S lt:'lxa7 has been played several times - now Black should consider l S ... cS !? 16 lt:'lxc8 �xc8 with sharp play ahead) 14 lt:'lxc6 bxc6 I S lt:'lxa7 .l:.xb3 1 6 axb3 ..tb7 with roughly equal chances. 2) 1 2 .. .'i!Vd8 1 3 'ii'c3 lt:'ldb8! (I guess Hans likes this move !) with an unclear position in Van Wijgerden-Ree, Dutch Ch, Hilversum 1 983. The most challenging continuation is 1 1 ..tbS, developing another piece. ll 'ii'xa2 12 .l:.b3 (D) ...

B

14 'ifa5 15 'ikb2 lt:'lxd4 16 lt:'lxd4 lt:'lc6 17 ..tbS 'ii'c7 Black has withstood the initial assault and can claim a two-pawn advantage. However, his king is permanently marooned in the centre of the board. 18 c4! Black has no suitable counter to this line­ opening lever. 18 dxc4 19 .l:.d1 �e8 The king moves again since after 1 9.....td7 20 lt:'lxc6+ bxc6 21 i..xc4 Black is defenceless against the threat of .l:.b7. 20 i.xc4 lt:'lxd4 Black is getting mauled after 20...lt:'lxeS 21 fxeS 'ii'xc4 22 .l:.c l 'ii'a4 23 lt:'lbS and the c7square cannot be defended. 21 'ii'xd4 (D) ••.

••.

B

12 �d8? Black should take advantage of the vulnera­ bility of White's king and disrupt the coordi­ nation between White's pieces by playing 12 . . .'ii'a l + ! 13 ""e2 (the white monarch reluc­ tantly steps in front of the bishop because 1 3 �f2 lt:'lcS ! i s too strong) 1 3 ... .l:.b8 with a clear advantage. 13 'ii'c3! A strong square for the white queen which creates an immediate threat on the c6-square and prevents both ...'iVai+ and ...lt:'JcS. 13 lt:'ldb8 At first glance an extravagant move, as Black is seriously lagging in development. The pur­ pose is to maintain control of the aS-square to use as a stepping-stone for the black queen. 13 ...lt:'lcS fails to 14 lt:'lxc6+ bxc6 1 S ..txcS ..txcS ( I S ...cxbS 1 6 ..txf8 .l:.xf8 1 7 ..txbS with a decisive attack) 16 'ii'xcS cxbS 17 'ii'c6 'iVai + 1 8 �e2 ..tb7 1 9 'ii'xb7 .l:.c8 20 'ii'xbS and White has an extra bishop. 14 ..tr>f2 Stepping off the dangerous e l -aS diagonal. .••

..•

2t. ..te7 More resistance is offered by 2 1 ...a6 22 ..te2, and now: 1) 22 .....te7 23 .l:.c3 'ii'd8 (White has a crush­ ing bind after 23 ...'ifb8 24 'ii'b6) 24 'ii'c4 ..td7 2S .l:.cd3 .l:.c8 26 'ifb3 and White wins. 2) 22 .....td7 23 .l:.c l ..tc6 24 ..tf3 and now: 2a) 24 .. Jid8 2S ..txc6+ bxc6 (2S ...'ii'xc6 26 .l:.xc6 .l:.xd4 27 .l:.xb7 wins for White) 26 'ii'a4 'ii'd7 27 'ii'xa6 with a strong attack. 2b) 24 . . ..l:.c8 2S 'ii'a7 'ifd8 (2S ... 'ii'd7 26 .l:.xc6! bxc6 27 .l:.b7 'i!Vd8 28 .i.b6 'ii'd2+ 29 �g3 gives White a decisive attack) 26 i.xc6+ bxc6 27 'ifxa6 with a strong attack. 2c) 24 ...'ii'd7 2S 'ifxd7+ �xd7 26 ..txc6+ bxc6 27 .l:.b7+ �e8 28 .l:.xc6 aS 29 fS ..ta3 30 fxe6 .l:.f8 3 1 �e2 again with a strong attack for White. .•

OPENING MISSES

It is important to note Black's inability to de­ velop his kingside pieces, even after the ex­ change of queens. 22 �b5+ 'i&?f8 23 l:.c3 'ii'a5 24 l:.dc1 1-0

Game Lessons: I) The novelty I I ltJcb5?! is dubious in hind­ sight, but sometimes it is not easy to deal with this type of move over the board. The sharp I 2...'iVai + ! was best.

79

2) One of the key ingredients in a successful attack is the ability to maintain the initiative be­ fore the opponent has a chance to consolidate his material advantage. White was able to break open the centre and home in on the black king by playing I 8 c4! . 3 ) Utilize all of your pieces and pawns to support the attack. When the opponent is be­ hind in development and his king is stranded in the centre, the opening of a central file is often the decisive blow which quickly ends the game.

Game 3 1 . 1

James Rizzitano 2485 - Hans Ree 2524 New York International 1 984 Hans had to wait only ten days for his sweet re­ venge.

Alternatives: 1 ) 22 'iff6 ltJe5 23 'ifxd6 'ii'xd6 24 l:.xd6 l:.xc2 25 l:.f2 l:.fc8 and Black has an endgame advantage because of his centralized knight and superior pawn-structure. 2) 22 'iff2 (relatively best) 22...ltJxb2 23 'iff6 'ikd8 (23 ... h6! ? is also possible) 24 l:.xb4 'ifxf6 25 l:.xf6 l:.xc2 26 l:.xd6 a5 and Black has a slight endgame edge. 22 'i&?b8! An unpleasant surprise. I had been expecting the cooperative 22...gxf5?? 23 1i'g5+ 'it>h8 24 1i'f6+ 'i&?g8 25 1i'g5+ with a perpetual check. 23 1i'h6 White has too many loose pieces after 23 'ifh4 f6. 23...l:.g8! 24 l:.f4 Black also consolidates his extra piece after 24 'i&?h l gxf5 25 1i'f6+ l:.g7 26 l:.xf5 'i&?g8. 24...gxf5 25 exf5 d5 26 'ifh3 l:.ce8 0-1 •..

22 ltJf5?? White is under the illusion that he still has a big attack, but 'it was time to reverse direction.

Game 32: Naked King

James Rizzitano 2549 - llya Gurevich 2438 MA Open Ch, Newton 1 987 E8 1 Ki ng's I ndian Defence, Sa m isch Opening selection was always difficult for both players because I had trained Ilya during the mid- 1980s. It was for this reason that I decided to sidestep Ilya's favourite Griinfeld Defence.

1 c4 g6 2 ltJc3 �g7 3 d4 ltJf6 4 e4 d6 5 f3 0-0 6 �e3 ltJbd7 7 1i'd2 c5 8 d5 ltJe5 9 �g5 White loses a tempo by moving the bishop again, but he ensures that an eventual central

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

80

break with e5 will be even stronger. Slower plans run into trouble; e.g., the game Beliav­ sky-Nunn, Wijk aan Zee I985 continued 9 h3?! ltJh5 10 �f2?! f5 I I exf5 .l:!.xf5 ! I2 g4 .l:!.xf3 13 gxh5 11i'f8 and Black had a strong attack. 9 a6 10 f4 liJed7 11 liJf3 b5 12 cxb5 axb5?! According to Nunn in John Nunn 's Best Games, Black should play I2 ... 11i'a5 ! 1 3 e5 (Nunn gives the instructive variation 1 3 bxa6 ..txa6 I 4 �xa6 11i'xa6, when I5 11i'e2 .l:!.fb8 I 6 11i'xa6 .l:!.xa6 I 7 .l:!.bi ltJh5 threatening both ... h6 and ... �c3+ favours Black) 13 ... dxe5 ( 1 3 ....l:!.e8 is interesting: I4 �e2 axb5 I 5 exf6 exf6 I6 �h4 b4 17 liJd 1 �a6 I 8 ltJe3 c4 with compen­ sation for the material in Wallace-Kovaliov, Olympiad, Moscow 1994) I 4 fxe5 ltJg4 I 5 �xe7 .l:!.e8 I6 d6 �h6 17 ltJg5 ltJgxe5 1 8 �e2 axb5 19 0-0 c4 with complex play in Karpov­ Nunn, Wijk aan Zee 1993. 13 �xb5 (D) •.•

B

17 liJd2 l:!.fa8 18 ltJc4 ltJxc4 19 �xc4 The exchange of a pair of knights has not eased Black's defensive task as White has cre­ ated a powetful knight outpost on the b5-square. 19 liJd7 20 liJbS 11i'b6 21 �xe7 .l:!.e8 22 �h4 f5 (D) •..

w

Black was counting on this pin to recover one of the pawns and to create some counter­ play. 23 'ifc2 White prepares to shift his forces to the king­ side to exploit the sidelined aS-rook. During the game I overlooked the interesting idea 23 e5 ! ? dxe5 24 �e1 .l:!.xb5 25 �xb5 11i'd6 26 �c3, when Black has inadequate compensation for his material deficit. 23 fxe4 White is the only one able to profit from the opening of the centre; after 23 ...l:!.xe4 24 .l:!.aei Black is forced to cede control of the e-file. 24 .l:!.ae1 e3 25 f5! The point behind the previous manoeuvre: the real target is the black king. Note how the h4-bishop dissects Black's position and pre­ vents him from using the d8-square for his queen. 25 ltJe5 Black has no choice but to jettison the e3pawn; two of his major pieces are unable to de­ fend the kingside. 26 l:!.xe3 l:taa8 27 fxg6 Ilya thought for a long time here as there is no adequate defence. 27 l:.f8 Other possibilities are even worse; for exam­ ple: •.•

13 �b7? A novelty of questionable value since the bishop is biting on granite. Stronger is 1 3 ...11i'a5 14 0-0 ltJxe4 1 5 ltJxe4 11i'xb5 I 6 �xe7 11i'xb2 17 11i'xb2 �xb2 1 8 .l:!.ae1 (another idea is I 8 �xf8 �xa1 19 .l:!.xa1 �xf8 20 ltJxd6 with a slight edge in Eslon-Gomez, Albacete Open 1992) I 8 ... �a6 I9 .l:!.f2 l:.fe8 20 ltJxd6 .l:!.eb8 and White had a slight endgame edge in Timman-Nunn, Wijk aan Zee 1985. 14 0-0 liJb6 15 11i'e2 Controlling the c4-square and supporting a potential e5 pawn steamroller. 15 11i'c7 16 a4! .l:!.a5 Misplacing the rook, but the a4-pawn must be stopped. ..•

.•.

•.•

..•

OPENING MISSES

1) 27 ... hxg6 28 l:txe5 ! .l:.xe5 (28 ...dxe5 loses to 29 .l:.f6!) 29 'ili'xg6 l:tf8 30 :xf8+ cJi>xf8 3 1 ll:lxd6 'ili'c7 32 ..tf6 with a decisive attack for White. 2) 27 ...ll:lxg6 28 :xeS+ l:txe8 29 'ili'f5 with a winning attack for White. 3) 27 ...h6 28 'ili'f5 cJi>h8 29 ..tf6 and again White has a decisive attack. 28 gxh7+ cJi>h8 29 l:teel l:tae8 30 b3 ..tc8 31 l:txf8+ :xes 32 :n l:te8 (D)

w

81

33 ..td7 34 cJi>ht 'ili'b8 35 ..tr6 :r8 36 ..txg7+ cJi>xg7 37 'ili'e4 l:txfl+ 38 ..txn 'i!i'f8 39 cJi>gl cJi>h8 40 ll:la3 Angling for the c4-square to offer an ex­ change of knights. 40 ..tr5 41 'ili'r4 ll:lg6 42 'ili'g3 'ili'r6 43 ll:lb5 ..te4 44 'ili'xd6 'ili'g5 45 'ili'xc5 Completing the total deforestation of Black's position for a rare six-pawn advantage. 45 cJi>xh7 The problem for Black is that his intended 45 ...ll:lf4 allows 46 'ili'd4+, winning. 46 'ili'f2 ..txd5 47 b4 ll:lh4 48 ll:ld4 ..te4 49 a5 ll:lg6 50 ll:le6 'ili'e7 51 ll:lc5 ..ta8 52 ..td3 1-0 •••

.•.

•.•

Game Lessons:

33 h3 The flashy 33 l:tf6 is also strong, but in mild time-pressure I decided to create some space for my king and eliminate any counterplay. This was a practical decision because Black's only chance here is some sort of random tacti­ cal idea.

1) The novelty 13 .....tb7? did not satisfy the sharp demands of the position - the standard 1 3 ...'ili'a5 is best. 2) White's queenside advance 16 a4! forced Black to misplace one of his rooks to prevent the further advance of the a4-pawn. This enabled White to shift his pieces to the kingside and pre­ pare a central breakthrough. Black was unable to bring his queen or the aS-rook back for defence. 3) When you have a material advantage, sometimes it is more practical to eliminate any potential counterplay rather than to expend time searching for the absolute quickest win. This becomes an important consideration as time-pressure approaches.

Game 33: Kn ight Outpost

James Rizzitano 2552 Richard Bauer 2357 US Open Ch, Boston 1 988 -

E 1 3 Queen's I nd ian Defence 1 d4 ll:lf6 2 c4 e6 3 lLlf3 b6 4 ll:lc3 ..tb4 5 ..tg5 h6 6 ..th4 ..tb7 7 e3 ..txc3+ 8 bxc3 d6 9 lLld2 'ili'e7 10 f3 ll:lbd7 11 e4 e5 12 ..td3 Also possible is 1 2 'ili'a4!? g5 1 3 ..tf2 Wf8 14 ..te2 ll:lh5 15 0-0-0 ll:lf4 1 6 ..tfl ll:le6 1 7 h4 with complex play, Florean-Parligras, Bucha­ rest 2000. 12...g5?! Theory now favours the less weakening 12 ...ll:lf8 1 3 lLlfl lLlg6 14 ..tf2 lLlf4 1 5 ll:le3 with

chances for both sides. One of the characteristics of this variation is the tendency of defenders to play the weakening ... g5 in these positions. 13 ..tf2 ll:lh5 14 ll:lfi The knight heads for the mouth-watering hole on the f5-square. 14 ll:lf4 Alternatives: 1) 14 ... exd4? (Black is unprepared for this) 15 cxd4 f5 1 6 ll:le3 ! fxe4 17 ll:lf5 ! 'ili'f7 1 8 fxe4 .••

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

82

and White had a clear advantage in Piket-Tiv­ iakov, Wijk aan Zee 1 994. 2) 14 ...f5 1 5 ll'le3 f4 1 6 ll'lf5 1i'f6 1 7 c5 (also possible is 17 g4 ! ? fxg3 1 8 hxg3 ll'lg7 19 ll'lxg7+ 1i'xg7 20 c5 !? with sharp play) 17 ...dxc5 1 8 dxc5 ll'lg7 1 9 ll'lxg7+ 1i'xg7 (Zakharevich-Bai­ rachny, Suetin memorial, Tula 2002) 20 1i'b3 !? gives White a dangerous initiative. 15 ll'le3 g4 (D)

w

w 21 c5! Obliterating Black's pawn-structure. 21 b5 22 'i!i'a5! So often in this variation the c7-square is the Achilles' Heel of Black's position. 22 ll'le6 22 .. Jtc8 fails to 23 cxd6 c5 24 dxe5 fxe5 25 ll'le7, when White wins. 23 cxd6 23 c6 .i.xc6 24 d5 is also attractive, winning a piece for two pawns. 23 c5 24 d5 ll'ld8 25 'it>b2 White has an extra pawn to go with his crushing bind, so he improves the position of his pieces before opening the position for the fi­ nal breakthrough. 25 c4 26 .i.f2 l:.h7 27 .i.e3 WI'S 28 ll'le7 11i'e8 29 fxg4 hxg4 30 .i.e2 1-0 .••

•.•

16 .tn This novelty had been prepared earlier for another opponent, but I overlooked an even stronger option: 1) 1 6 .i.c2 gxf3 1 7 11i'xf3 1i'g5 1 8 h4 11i'f6 1ed to sharp play in Razuvaev-Stoica, Nikea 1 986. 2) 16 0-0 ! (best) 16 ... gxf3 17 11i'xf3 exd4 (the point is that 1 7 ... ll'lxd3 allows the crushing 1 8 ll'lf5) 18 ll'ld5 ll'lxd5 19 exd5 ll'le5 20 1i'e4 gave White a strong attack in Khalifman-Eme­ lin, St Petersburg Ch 1996. 16 h5 16 ... gxf3 1 7 gxf3 is also possible, with just a slight edge for White. 17 ll'lf5 1i'g5 18 .i.h4 1i'g6 19 1i'a4?! White should play 19 1i'd2! with a slight edge as the black king is stranded in the centre. 19 a6? Stronger is 1 9 ... gxf3 ! 20 gxf3 ll'lg2+ 2 1 .i.xg2 'i!i'xg2 22 0-0-0 llg8 2 3 lldfl with equal chances. 20 0-0-0 f6 (D) .••

•••

.•.

.••

Game Lessons: 1 ) White had prepared the novelty 16 .i.fl , but 1 6 0-0! was later shown to be considerably stronger. 2) The less ambitious 19 'ifd2! was prefera­ ble to 1 9 1i'a4?!, which should have been an­ swered by 19 ... gxf3 20 gxf3 ll'lg2+. 3) White's fluid pawn-structure contained a lot of pent-up energy which was released by playing 2 1 c5 ! and 22 1i'a5 ! - the black king was pinned to the centre by the strong f5knight.

5 Opening Wars

Four Knights Game Stand-Off Around the time of the next three main games, all against John Curdo, I decided that I needed to play some more solid openings. John had recently been obtaining good positions against my usual Sicilian and Modem Defences, so I took a breather while I worked on repairing my primary king's pawn defences. Games 34, 35 and 36 were played within a time-span of seven weeks.

Game 34: Four Knights Part 1

John Curdo 2465 - James Rizzitano 2485 Newton 1 982 C48 Fou r Knights Game, R izzitano 1 e4 e5 2 ltJf3 ltJc6 3 ltJc3 ltJf6 4 �b5 �c5 In his book Play the Open Games as Black, John Emms accurately describes this move as "an underrated defence, which is definitely worth a second look." Of course, he had no way of knowing that this is what I call the 'Rizzitano Variation'. The most common move here is 4 ...�b4. Black can also play the aggressive 4...ltJd4, but then White has the option of the drawish 5 ltJxd4 exd4 6 e5 dxc3 (John Curdo has played 6 ...ltJg8 !? here to keep some life in the position) 7 exf6 'ili'xf6 8 dxc3 'ili'e5+ 9 'ili'e2 'ili'xe2+ 1 0 �xe2 �c5, with dull equality. 5 0-0 0-0 6 ltJxe5 A common motif in many double king's pawn openings; White employs a little combination to destroy Black's centre. 6 ltJxe5 7 d4 �d6 8 f4! More aggressive than 8 dxe5 �xeS with equal chances. 8. .ltJc6 9 e5 �e7 10 d5 ltJb4 11 exf6 Emms points out the interesting idea I I d6 ! ? cxd6 12 exf6 �xf6 adding "we have a position that is difficult to assess". I think White should consider 1 3 �e3 ( 1 3 ltJd5 ltJxd5 I4 'ili'xd5 'ili'c7 is fine for Black) 1 3 ... l:te8 I4 �f2 d5 !? with sharp play. ll . �xf6 (D) .••

.

..

w

12 �c4!? A novelty; the usual move is I2 a3. A later game continued I2 ltJe4 !? c6 1 3 ltJxf6+ 'ili'xf6 I4 �c4 'ili'd6 I S �e3 ltJxd5 I6 �xd5 cxd5 I7 'ili'd4 b6 I 8 .l:.ad I l:te8 and a draw was soon agreed in T.Taylor-Rizzitano, New York Inter­ national I 984. 12...d6 13 a3 ltJa6 14 �e3 l:te8 15 'ili'd2 ltJc5 The symmetrical pawn-structure and one open file could easily lead to a quick draw. Black was pinning his hopes on the slight looseness of White's position - White would prefer that his f4-pawn were back on the f2square.

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

84

16 l:tae1 i..f5 17 i..b5 White could consider expanding on the queenside with 1 7 b4. 17 i..d7 18 i..xd7 'iixd7 19 i..d4 i..xd4+ 20 'iixd4 l:txe1 21 l:txel :e8 22 l:txe8+ White offered a draw after playing this move. 22 'iixe8 I decided to play on, not because I thought that Black had any advantage, but because the white pawn on f4 has left some weak squares around White's king. 23 'itf2 a6 This useful move protects the a7-pawn and controls the b5-square. 24 b4 liJd7 25 ltJe4 25 'iie3 'iid8 is also level. 25 h6 26 c4 'iie7 (D)

w

••.

•••

••.

w

The tidying-up moves have been completed and Black finally has a threat. 27 'itf3? Safer is 27 g3 f5 28 ltJc3 lDf6 29 h3 with equal chances. There is no good reason to allow Black's queen to infiltrate behind the white pawns. 27...'iVh4 28 h3 'iie1 ! (D) 29 lDf2? The decisive error; after relentlessly exchang­ ing pieces for most of the game, White must switch gears and play aggressively to hold the balance. He should play the active 29 c5 ! dxc5 and now there is a choice of recaptures: 1) 30 ltJxc5?! lDf6 31 ltJxb7 lDh5 32 'iif2 'ii'd 1 + 33 'ii'e2 'iixd5+ 34 'ii'e4 'iid 1 + 35 'itf2 'ii'd2+ 36 �f3 'iic 1 37 'ii'e8+ (after 37 ltJc5 'ii'xa3+ 38 liJd3 liJf6 Black retains the extra pawn) 37 . . . 'ith7 38 'ii'e4+ g6 39 ltJc5 'iixa3+

40 liJd3 a5 41 bxa5 'iixa5 and Black has an ex­ tra pawn, although White has some drawing chances. 2) 30 bxc5 (safest) 30...'iic 1 31 a4 f5 32 lDc3 'iia3 33 c6 bxc6 34 dxc6 lDf6 and now: 2a) 35 'ite2 'iib2+ 36 'itf3 leads to equal chances. 2b) 35 g4 ! ? ltJe4 36 'iid5+ 'iti>h8 37 'ii'xf5 ltJxc3 38 'ii'c 8+ 'ith7 39 'ii'f5+ 'itg8 40 'ii'e6+ 'Oitf8 41 'iic 8+ �f7 42 'iif5+ with a draw by perpetual check. 29...'iVcl! An extremely annoying move for White as Black simultaneously exerts pressure on three pawns. 30 'iid3 liJb6 Black suddenly wins a pawn, a decisive ad­ vantage in this position. 31 c5!? dxc5 32 d6 cxb4 33 axb4 If 33 d7 then 33 ...'iic6+ wins the advanced pawn. 33...'iic6+ 34 'iVe4 34 ltJe4 loses to 34 . . .f5. 34 cxd6 35 'iixc6 bxc6 36 ltJe4 lDc8 37 'ite3 f3? - it was dangerous to allow the black queen to infil­ trate behind the white pawns.

85

3) White could have held the balance with the active 29 c5 ! ; the passive 29 li:Jf2? 'ilfc 1 ! en­ abled Black to win a pawn and the game.

Game 35: Four Knights Part 2

John Curdo 2465 James Rizzitano 2505 MA Open Ch, Worcester 1 982 -

C48 Fou r Knights Game, R izzitano This book contains several games featuring the piece configuration of queen plus knight vs queen plus bishop - actually I have been on ei­ ther side of this match-up many times. In my opinion, the queen plus knight have no particu­ lar advantage over the queen plus bishop in po­ sitions where the other factors are balanced. Positions in which the knight is triumphant typ­ ically contain certain characteristics which are responsible for the bishop's demise; for exam­ ple: 1 ) the bishop is bad (on the same colour squares as its own fixed pawns); 2) the bishop is defending split or isolated pawns; 3) the knight has a powerful outpost. It is impossible to conclude that queen plus knight are superior to queen plus bishop based upon a handful of cherry-picked examples the generalization lacks any semblance of sta­ tistical reliability or validity. I would advise the student to take a close look at the specific placement of the other pieces before drawing any sweeping conclusions about this particu­ lar piece match-up.

Years later I forgot this valuable lesson and I also succeeded in 'demoting' a bishop to a pawn (see Game 35.2). 9 �b6 10 li:Je2 �g4 11 �xb6 axb6 12 li:Jg3 li:Jh5! This standard equalizing manoeuvre must be played before White has the opportunity to play h3. 13 h3 li:Jxg3 14 fxg3 �e6!? (D) More ambitious than 14....txf3 1 5 'ilfxf3 d5 with equal chances.

1 e4 e5 2 li:Jf3 li:Jf6 3 li:Jc3 li:Jc6 4 �b5 �c5 5 0-0 0-0 6 d3 Varying from 6 li:Jxe5, which was played four weeks earlier. 6 d6 7 �xc6 bxc6 8 �g5 8 li:Ja4 �b6 9 li:Jxb6 axb6 offers equal chances. 8 h6 9 �e3! I avoided 9 �h4 because I was concerned about 9 ...g5 1 0 .tg3 �g4 with an edge for Black as White must take care to avoid having his g3-bishop transformed into a tall pawn as in one of the classic games (see Game 35. 1 ).

15 g4! White boldly moves another pawn onto the same colour square as the black bishop - the idea is that the manoeuvre li:Jh4-f5 will proba­ bly force Black to capture the knight. 15 c5 16 a3 f6 Supporting the e5-pawn in preparation for the central break ...d5; a pawn exchange on e4 will leave White with an isolated e4-pawn. 17 li:Jh4 d5 18 li:Jf5 dxe4 19 dxe4 lta4!? The beginning of a geometric attack on the e4-pawn; a safer option is 19 ...'i!fxd 1 with equal chances.

..•

.••

•.•

w

••.

86

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

20 'iVf3 'iVa8 21 l:tael 'Oti>h7 22 l:tf2 l:tf7 23 l:td2 l:td7 24 l:txd7 i.xd7 25 h4 i.c6 26 ll:lg3 Black has gone to great lengths to isolate the white e4-pawn, but now he realizes that there is no way to increase the pressure and it is proba­ bly time to defend the kingside against the g5 pawn-break. 26 1i'd8 27 c3 l:ta8 28 l:tdl 'iVeS 29 gS 'iVg6 30 gxh6 gxh6 This leaves Black with a backward f6-pawn and a hole on the f5-square, but 30 ...11Vxh6 al­ lows 3 1 ll:lf5 'iVg6 32 ll:le7 'iVe8 33 'iVf5+ 'Oti>h8 34 ll:lxc6 (34 'iVe6? i.xe4 35 l:td7 backfires af­ ter 35 ...11Vh5) 34 ...11Vxc6 35 'iVg4, when White has the advantage in the major-piece endgame. 31 ll:lf5 .:te8 32 .:tel?! There is no reason to abandon the d-file vol­ untarily. White can retain some advantage by playing 32 l:td2. 32 i.d7 33 ll:le3 i.e6 34 l:tdl Back again, but Black has succeeded in rede­ ploying his bishop to help defend the kingside. 34 ..t>hs 35 ..ti>h2 :tgs 36 :n ..ti>h7 37 :r2 l::t.g7 38 g3 l:tg8 39 l:td2 'Oti>h8 40 l:tf2 l:tg7 41 l:td2 l:tg8 42 l:tg2 hS 43 l:tf2 l:tg7 44 l:td2 l:tg8 45 l:td3 'Oti>h7 46 l:td2 'Oti>h8 47 ll:lfS White could consider maintaining the ten­ sion with 47 b4. •••

•••

•••

47 i.xf5 48 ext'S 'iVg4 49 'iVxg4 l:txg4 50 l:td8+ .:t.g8 51 :Xg8+ 5 1 l:td7 l:.g7 defends. Sl. 'Oti>xg8 The king and pawn endgame is drawn. White cannot wander too far from the passed black e5-pawn, and Black must be wary of a poten­ tially passed white h-pawn. 52 ..ti>g2 ..ti>f7 53 ..ti>f3 c4 54 'it>e4 c6 55 'Oti>e3 'Oti>e7 56 ..ti>f3 'Oti>d6 57 a4 ..ti>dS 58 'Oti>e3 ..ti>d6 Black cannot play 58 ... e4?? since after 59 g4! �e5 60 gxh5 �xf5 61 'Oti>d4 'ifi>f4 62 h6 e3 63 h7 e2 64 h8'iV el 'iV 65 'iVxf6+ �g4 66 'iVxc6 White wins the queen and pawn endgame. 59 �e4 'it>e7 60 �e3 �d6 1f2- If2 •••

••

Game Lessons: 1) The sharp 14 ...i.e6 !? and 19 ...l:.a4!? were aimed at unbalancing the position, but White could adequately counter Black's aggressive play. 2) The counter-intuitive pawn advance 1 5 g4! is worth noting. White put another pawn on the same colour square as Black's light-squared bishop because he correctly assessed that the potential knight outpost on f5 was a more im­ portant consideration.

Game 3 5 . 1

William Winter - Jose Capablanca Hastings 1 91 9 This game is the classic example demon­ strating the theme of 'demoting' a bishop to a pawn. White should play 10 ll:ld2 with equal chances. lO gS! l l ll:lxf6+ 1 1 ll:lxg5 loses to l l ...ll:lxd5 ! 12 'iVh5 hxg5 13 i.xg5 ll:lf4, with a decisive advantage for Black. ll 'iVxf6 12 i.g3 i.g4 13 h3 i.xf3 14 'iVxf3 'iVxf3 15 gxf3 The bishop has been transformed into a tall pawn. 15 f6 Black has a large advantage; he eventually won by carefully opening up the queenside. •••

•••

•••

10 ll:ldS?

OPENING WARS

87

Game 35.2

James Rizzitano 2563 - Marc Lonoff 2297 Midwest Masters, Chicago 1 988 Here is another game to think about the next time you are considering burying a bishop.

w w

13 ..ig3!? This is the beginning of an ambitious but risky plan. I was somewhat reluctant to play this move as I was quite familiar with the Capa­ blanca game and had even used it to demonstrate this theme to my students. In this particular po­ sition, I thought that I could break open the po­ sition for the bishop-pair. 1 3 ..ie3 ..ixe3 14 fxe3 is safer, with equal chances. 13 e5! Marc alertly transforms the pawn-structure into the familiar double king's pawn pattern. 14 b4 ..ib6 15 ..ic4 l:.f8 16 h4? This instructive error was caused by a failure to consider adequately the opponent's possible replies. My original intention was to play 1 6 f4 !, and now: 1 ) 16 ...exf4 17 ..ixf4 ..ixf2 1 8 ..id6 gives White a clear advantage. 2) 1 6 ... f6 17 fxe5 ll:lxe5 ( 1 7 ...fxe5 1 8 l:.d2 is also comfortable for White) 1 8 ..ie2 and White has a slight edge because of the bishop-pair. At the last moment I decided to 'improve' the strength of the f4 break by provoking the further weakening move ...hS by Black. See Game 1 1 .2 for a similar example of careless play. 16.....tc7! (D) .••

Now I realized that I had overlooked some­ thing important. The g3-bishop has been trans­ formed into a tall pawn. 17 �d2 1 7 h5 is nothing; Black simply plays 17 ...g5 followed by ...�e7 and ...f6, sealing in the g3bishop. 17 /i;e7 18 �e3 ..ib6+ 1 8 .. a5 is also good. 19 �e2 ..ic7 20 a4? Rather than repeat the position by playing 20 �e3, White makes an ill-advised attempt to play for a win with this weakening pawn advance. 20 ... a5 21 ..ib3 (D) •.

.

B

21 ...h6? !

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

88

Black should play 2 l .. .axb4! 22 cxb4 .i.d6 with a large advantage as White is effectively a piece down and Black will quickly infiltrate on the queenside.

22 'iti>e3 .i.b6+ 23 'iti>e2 .i.c7 24 'iti>e3 lfz-1/z Of course, Black should play on by continu­ ing 24...axb4 25 cxb4 .i.d6, as in the previous note.

Game 36: Four Knights Part 3

John Curdo 2465 James Rizzitano 2505 Boston 1 982 -

C48 Four Kn ights Game, R izzitano 1 e4 e5 2 l2Jf3 l2Jf6 3 l2Jc3 l2Jc6 4 .i.b5 .i.c5 5 0-0 0-0 6 .i.xc6 Varying from 6 d3, which was played three weeks earlier. 6... dxc6 7 d3 Emms points out the variation 7 l2Jxe5 l:te8 8 l2Jd3 .i.g4 9 11i'ei .i.d4, when Black regains the pawn. 7 .i.g4 8 .i.e3 Another reasonable plan is 8 h3 .i.h5 9 .i.g5 h6 I O .i.xf6 'ii'xf6 1 1 g4 .i.g6 1 2 h1! In my 1 982 Chess Horizons notes I wrote "The beginning of an excellent plan. Not 10

g4? l2Jxg4! 1 I hxg4 .i.xg4, followed by ... f5 with a clear advantage." However, White has the defensive idea 1 2 'iti>h I ! f5 I 3 l:tg 1 'ii'e8 ! ? I4 l:txg4 fxg4 1 5 l2Jh2 h5 1 6 'ii'g l 'ii'g6 and al­ though Black has a slight material advantage, the position is difficult to evaluate. 10 l2Jd7 There is still time for Black to bail out with IO... .i.xf3 I I 'it'xf3 l2Jd7. 11 g4 .i.g6 12 l2Je2 A standard manoeuvre known from many variations of the Ruy Lopez; the knight heads for the kingside. 12...l:te8 13 l2Jg3 l2Jf8 14 l2Jf5 l2Je6 15 l:tg1 l2Jf4? An instructive error; it is better for Black to control the f4-square rather than occupy it. Al­ ternatives: 1 ) I5 ....i.c5 (this attempt to exchange dark­ squared bishops has a tactical flaw) I6 l2Jxe5 ! ( I6 l:tg3 .i.xe3 I7 fxe3 l2Jg5 leads to equality) 16 ....i.xe3 I7 l2Jxe3 ! (17 fxe3 l2Jg5 I 8 l2Jxg6 fxg6 is fine for Black) I7 ...l2Jg5 I 8 l2Jxg6 l2Jxh3 19 g 2! ( l 9 l:tfl fxg6 is equal) I9 ... l2Jxgi 20 l2Jf4 'ii'f6 2I l2Jh5 'ii'xb2 22 'ii'xg i and the two knights are stronger than the rook. 2) 15 .. .f6 with equal chances. 3) 15 ...a5 !? grabs space on the queenside. 16 'iti>h2 'iti>h8 17 'ii'd2 .i.xf5? Black cooperatively opens the g-file for White's rooks. 17 ...l2Je6! is stronger, admitting the previous error and preparing to play ...c5 and ...l2Jd4 with a reasonable game. 18 gxf5 l2Jh5 19 l:tg4 g6 20 l:tag1 l:tg8 21 l2Jh4 'ii'd7 (D) 22 fxg6 Another plan is 22 'ii'c 3 ! ? l2Jf6 23 l:tg5; for example, 23 . . . h6 24 l:t5g2 g5 25 f4 ! ? exf4 ••.

OPENING WARS

w

(25 ... gxf4 26 ..ixf4 file? 27 ..i.xh6 ..ic5 28 .l:tfl looks good for White) 26 "fllxf6+ 'iti>h7 27 e5 with some advantage for White. 22 fxg6 23 f4! ? (D) This type of enterprising move is character­ istic of John 's style when he holds the initia­ tive.

89

"fllxh3+ 29 "fllh2 "fllxh2+ 30 'iii>xh2 ..i.xg7 3 1 J.xg7+ 'iti>xg7 and Black wins the rook end­ game. 2b) 24 J.xf4! exf4 25 "fllc 3+ .l:.g7 26 e5 .i.e? 27 e6 fllxe6 28 liJxg6+ hxg6 29 .l:txg6 .i.f6 ! 30 "fllxf6 "fllxf6 31 .l:.xf6 .l:te8 32 .l:txg7 �xg7 33 .l:txf4 .l:te2+ 34 'iti>g3 l:txc2 with a drawish rook endgame. 24 .l:tgS exf4 25 .i.d4! f3+? Losing, but White also has a ferocious attack after 25 ... ..te7 26 .i.c3. 26 eS .l:tae8 27 "fllf4 .l:tgf8 28 liJxg6+! hxg6 29 .l:txg6 Black's position is hanging. 29 liJg4+ 30 fllxg4 fllxg4 31 exd6+ 'iti>h7 The point is that 3 1 ..."fllxd4 allows 32 .l:th6#. 32 .l:t6xg4 1-0 •••

•••

B

23 liJf6?? Clueless. Alternatives: 1) 23 ...exf4? 24 ..i.d4+ .l:tg7 (24 ...liJg7 25 liJxg6+ hxg6 26 .l:.h4#) 25 liJf3 and White has a clear advantage. 2) 23 ... liJxf4! and now: 2a) 24 :Xf4? exf4 25 .i.d4+ .l:tg7 26 liJf5 f3+! (stronger than my 1 982 suggestion 26 ... J.f8) 27 �h l (27 e5 gxf5 wins) 27 .....i.f8 28 liJxg7 ..•

Game Lessons: 1 ) White carefully prepared a kingside build­ up by playing the patient 10 'iti>h 1 ! combined with 15 l:tg l . Similar ideas are often seen in other double king's pawn openings such as the Ruy Lopez. 2) The impatient 1 5 . . .liJf4? was premature; the knight was well-placed on the e6-square. The cooperative 1 7 ....i.xf5? ( 1 7 . . . liJe6! was stronger) also showed a lack of patience. 3) The enterprising 23 f4!? should have been met by 23 ...liJxf4!, maintaining the balance. The weak reply 23 ...liJf6?? led to the pretty fin­ ish, with 28 liJxg6+ ! destroying Black's king­ side. I annotated the Four Knights Game stand-off battles in my role as Chess Horizons Games Editor, and for many years I was often asked if we played any other games in the 4... .i.c5 varia­ tion. I switched back to the Sicilian Defence in our next game (see Game 5 1 ), but I did play l ... e5 against John once during 1 984 and 1 987. He essayed his usual Four Knights Game and I tried to surprise him with the main line 4 .....i.b4, but both games were uneventful draws.

Nimzo-lndian Defence Battles Most chess-players have favourite openings which they enjoy playing again and again. Both players succeeded in employing an opening novelty or an interesting strategic idea in each of the

90

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

following battles. Games 37, 38 and 39 were played within a time-span of five weeks. Joe Fang played many exciting games with the Leningrad Variation and I have included instructive frag­ ments from some of his later encounters within the notes to our games.

Game 37: Len ingrad Pa rt 1

Joseph Fang 2319 James Rizzitano 2485 Cambridge 1 984 -

E3 1 N i mzo-lndian Defence, Len i ngrad 1 d4 tt::lf6 2 c4 e6 A change of pace from most of our previous games, which had featured openings with a kingside fianchetto. 3 tt::lc3 J..b4 4 J..g5 This line is an occasional favourite of Spas­ sky and Timman. Leningrad Variation adherents typically accept doubled c-pawns in exchange for the bishop-pair and attacking chances. White must play accurately to avoid a poten­ tially difficult endgame; Black must defend carefully to avoid being checkmated. This vari­ ation is not popular with today's leading play­ ers because they are adverse to positions with static weaknesses and relatively fixed pawn­ structures. 4...c5!? A rarely-played alternative to the usual 4 ... h6, which occurred in the other games featured in this section. 5 d5 exd5 6 cxd5 d6 7 e3 tt::lbd7 8 J..b5 h6 9 J..h4 g5 10 J..g3 'S'a5 11 J..xd7+ J..xd7 12 tt::le2 J..b5 (D)

A novelty at the time; several games have continued 1 3 a3 J..xc3+ 14 tt::lxc3 tt::le4 1 5 'S'c2 tt::lxc3 1 6 'ii'xc3 'S'xc3+ 1 7 bxc3 0-0-0, with an equal opposite-coloured bishop endgaine. 13 J..xc3 14 bxc3 The exchange sacrifice 14 tt::lxc3 ! ? J.. xfl 1 5 'ii'f3 'ii'd8 1 6 l:txfl is worthy of attention; i t led to complex play in Krumpacnik-Justin, Porto­ roz 1 989. 14 0-0-0 15 f4 'S'a6 16 !tel J..xe2 This is the obvious way to win a pawn, but the patient 16 ... J..d3 ! is stronger: I ) 1 7 tt::lc I J..e4 1 8 tt::lb3 tt::lxd5 1 9 tt::ld2 'ifd3 with an extra pawn for Black. 2) 1 7 c4 'ii'xc4 1 8 !te l J.. xe2 ! ( 1 8 ...'ii'xd5 1 9 tt::lc3 'ii'c4 20 e4 ! ? with counterplay) 19 !txe2 'ifxd5 and again Black has won a pawn. 17 !txe2 tt::lxd5! 18 !td2 tt::lxe3 19 'ii'f3 tt::lc4 20 !td5 'S'c6 (D) .••

.••

w

w

13 0-0!?

21 lladl! More resilient than 21 fxg5 tt::le3 ! 22 l:txd6 (22 !td3 'ifxf3 23 gxf3 tt::lf5 gives Black a clear plus) 22 ...l:.xd6 �3 J..xd6 'ifxd6 24 'S'xe3 hxg5 25 g3 f6 and Black consolidates his extra pawn.

OPENING WARS

91

21 .l:.d7? Too passive. Black should play 2I ....:r.he8! 22 fxg5 (22 i.f2 lt:lb6 23 'i!kh3+ .l:.e6 24 .l:.f5 'i!ka4 and Black has a material advantage) 22 ...lt:le3 23 .l:txd6 'i!kxf3 (less convincing is 23 .. Jhd6 24 .l:txd6 'i!kxf3 25 gxf3 hxg5 26 .l:tf6 with coun­ terplay) 24 .l:txd8+ .l:txd8 25 .l:txd8+ 'ittxd8 26 gxf3 hxg5 27 i.f2 lt:ld 1 28 i.xc5 lt:lxc3 29 i.xa7 lt:lxa2 and Black has some winning chances. 22 i.f2? White should open lines for his bishop by playing 22 fxg5 hxg5 23 'i!ke2 'i!ka4 24 .l:txg5 with compensation for the pawn. 22 lt:lb6 23 :rs 'i!kxf3 24 gxf3 gxf4 2S lhf4 .l:tg8+ 26 'ittn 'ittc7 27 .l:th4 .l:tg6 28 ..te3 'i&i>c6 (D)

29 i.xh6 .:te7 30 'ittf2 lt:ldS 31 c4 lt:lc3 32 .l:td2 b5 Creating two unstoppable connected passed pawns. 33 cxb5+ lt:lxb5 34 ..te3 .:.ge6 35 .l:td3 d5 36 .:.h6 White would prefer to exchange pawns and not pieces, but the threat of ... d4 followed by a rook infiltration on the 7th rank must be par­ ried. 36 d4 37 .l:.xe6+ .l:.xe6 38 i.g5 c4 39 .l:.dl 'ittd5 40 h4 f6 41 i.f4 lt:lc3 42 .l:.d2 .l:.e7 43 h5 'ittc5 44 i.h6 .l:.e5 45 i.f8+ �d5 46 h6 .l:.h5 47 'itg3 d3 48 'itg4 .l:.hl 49 'itf5 lt:le2 Black can also play 49 ...lt:lb1 50 .l:.b2 d2 to force the pawn through. 50 'itxf6 lt:lf4 51 i.b4 'itd4 52 'ittg7 c3 53 .l:.f2 lt:le6+ 54 'itg6 'ite3 0-1

w

Game Lessons:

The knight is far superior to the bishop as it can target any of White's isolated pawns.

1) White's opening novelty 13 0-0!? should probably be followed up by 1 4 lt:lxc3 ! ? instead of the game continuation 14 bxc3. Some practi­ cal tests are needed. 2) Minimizing the opponent's counterplay is often more important than winning mate­ rial. In this game Black was impatient and grabbed a pawn with 16 ... i.xe2 instead of in­ creasing the pressure by playing the more re­ fined 1 6... i.d3 !. 3) Good endgame technique is a must to be able to finish off your opponent.

..•

•••

•..

Game 38: Len ingrad Part 2

Joseph Fang 2319 James Rizzitano 2485 Sturbridge 1 984 -

E3 1 Nimzo-lndian Defence, Len i ngrad 1 d4 lt:lf6 2 c4 e6 3 lt:lc3 i.b4 4 i.g5 h6 Varying from 4...c5, which was played one week earlier (see Game 37). 5 ..th4 c5 6 d5 d6 7 e3 i.xc3+ 8 bxc3 e5 9 i.d3 e4 10 i.c2 lt:lbd7 11 lt:le2 Fang-Yermo Iinsky, Woburn 1995 continued 1 1 'i!kb1 'i!ke7 12 a4 lt:le5 ! ? 13 i.xe4 g5 14 i.g3 lt:lxe4 1 5 'i!kxe4 f5 1 6 'i!kc2 lt:lxc4 with sharp play; the game was eventually drawn.

ll ...'i!ke7 12 'i!kbl 0-0 13 a4!? (D) A novelty at the time. Several games have continued with 1 3 ..txf6?! lt:lxf6 14 lt:lg3 'i!keS, when Black has a slight edge. 13....l:.e8 The immediate 1 3 ...lt:le5 ! ? is also possible: 14 i.xf6 'i!kxf6 1 5 i.xe4 lt:lxc4 1 6 'i!ka2 lt:le5 17 0-0 b6 18 .l:.ad 1 (Black has a slight edge after 18 c4 'i!kh4 1 9 f3 f5 20 g3 'i!ke7 2 1 i.c2 lt:ld3

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

92

their applicability depends upon the specific position of the other pieces. White should elim­ inate the centralized black knight by playing 26 .ixe5 'ii'xe5 with equal chances. 26 tbxg3 27 hxg3 h5 28 tbe2 'ii'f6 29 l:.cl ?! 29 l:.fl is safer, as above. 29 h4? Black should play 29 ... 'iti>h8 to prepare for the potential opening of the g-file. 30 gxh4 gxh4 31 tbf4 h3 32 gxh3 (D)

B

•..

•••

according to Sax) 1 8 ...'iib4 19 f3 .ia6 20 l:.fe l .ic4 2 1 'ifb 1 l:.ab8 with a slight edge for Black, Bangiev-Sax, Bundesliga 1992/3. 14 aS tbe5 15 .ixe4 tbxc4 16 .ih7+?! The black king is actually better placed on the h8-square. 16 .C�'h8 17 .id3 tbe5 18 c4 .id7 The exchange of one of White's doubled c­ pawns for Black's e-pawn has resulted in a bal­ anced position. 19 0-0 l:.ab8?! Losing a tempo; the immediate 19 ... ltad8 is stronger. 20 'ii'c2 .:lbd8 21 tbc3 'iti>g8?! Returning the favour; 2 l .. ..ic8 is preferable. 22 l:.tb1 White should play 22 l:.abl as there is noth­ ing happening on the a-file. 22 .ic8 23 tiJbS a6 24 tbc3 White has provoked a weakness on the b6square but it is difficult to see how he can in­ crease the queenside pressure. 24 g5 Black decides to advance on the kingside. 25 .ig3 tiJhS 26 .:lb6?! The rook advance conforms to many gener­ ally accepted chess principles (e.g., occupy weak squares, attack the base of a pawn-chain). During the game it seemed logical enough and I was not surprised when Joe played it. However, a deeper analysis of the position reveals that the rook is merely window dressing and that Black's attack is going to develop very quickly because of White's doubled g-pawns - another general principle that is relevant in this particu­ lar position ! This is a good example of the dan­ ger of relying upon rules and generalizations ••

.••

••.

32 'ith8 This is more subtle than the direct 32 ...'ii'h4 33 .ifl tiJf3+ 34 �h l (34 cj;;g2?? .ixh3+! 35 tiJxh3 'ii'g4+ 36 cj;;h l .:le5 intending ...lth5 gives Black a winning attack) 34...tbg5 35 'ii'e2!, and now: 1 ) 35 ....ixh3 36 'ii'h5 ! 'ii'xh5 37 tbxh5 lte7 38 .ixh3 tbxh3 39 �g2 tbg5 40 tbg3 and the knight outpost on the f5-square means White has a large advantage. 2) 35 ...tbxh3 36 .ixh3 .ixh3 (36 ...'ii'xf4 is strongly met by 37 'ii'h5) 37 'ii'h5 ! 'ii'xh5 38 tbxh5 gives White a clear advantage. 3) 35 ...l:.e5 (best) 36 cj;;h2 .:lf5 and Black has only marginal compensation for the minus pawn. 33 'ii'e2 Also possible is 33 .ie4 l:.g8+, and now: 1 ) 34 .ig2?? .ixh3 ! ! 35 tbxh3 'ii'f3 36 tbf4 :Xg2+ 37 tbxg2 l:.g8 38 �fl :Xg2 39 .:lxb7 (39 l:lxd6 loses to the same manoeuvre) 39 ... l:l.h2 40 l:.b8+ �g7 41 cj;;e l l:.h l+ 42 �d2 'ii'xf2+ 43 �c3 'ii'xe3+ 44 cj;;b2 l:.xc 1 with a winning posi­ tion for Black. 2) 34 cj;;f l ! l:.de8 35 'ii'c3 gives White a clear advantage. •.•

OPENING WARS

33 l:tg8+ (D) •.•

93

38 ....l:.xg1 39 .l:.xd6! l::.xd6 40 �xe5+ .l:.g7 4 1 �xd6 �xe4 42 �d8+ .l:.g8 (White wins the queen endgame after 42 . . . �h7?? 43 ltJg5+ l::.xg5 44 �xg5 �xc4 45 d6) 43 �f6+ l:.g7 44 �d8+ with a draw by perpetual check. 35 �h4+ 36 lDh3 lDxg4+ 37 �xg4 White must give up his queen as he is mated after 37 �g2 lDxe3+ 38 �f3 �xh3+ 39 �e4 .l:.de8+ 40 �f4 lDg2#. 37 �xg4 37 ... :xg4 is also strong. 38 .l:.gl �h4 39 :bbl l:.xgl 40 .l:.xgl .l:.g8 41 l::.bl �e7 42 liJf4 d8 The king heads for the relative safety of the c7-square; also possible is 1 l . ..g5 12 ..ig3 b5 13 cxb5 l2Jxd5 14 i.f2 a6 with roughly equal chances in Bagirov-Speelman, Baku 1983. 12 lDe2 (D)

B

B

12 �c7!? Timman-Andersson, Olympiad, Malta 1980 had continued l2 ...g5 13 i.g3 �c7 14 h4 .l:r.g8 15 hxg5 hxg5 16 'ifi>d2!? (the earlier game Tim­ man-Andersson, Tilburg 1977 saw 16 l:.h6 'fif8 1 7 .l:r.h2 lDb6 with equal chances) 1 6 ...'fif8 1 7 .l:r.afl .l:r.h8 with equality. I wanted to tread lightly and avoid the weakening ...g5 advance because I had another pawn-break in mind. 13 l2Jg3 'fie8! The immediate 1 3 ...g5 allows 14 lDf5 'fie8 15 i.f2, when White has some attacking chances. The game continuation forces White to ex­ change a set of minor pieces; this is advanta­ geous for Black because as the pieces come off the board, the weakness of the c4-pawn be­ comes more of a factor. 14 l2Je4 A novelty. The slightly earlier game Bagi­ rov-Nagy, Budapest 1 983 had continued 1 4 ..ixf6 lDxf6 1 5 0-0 h5 1 6 a4 h4 1 7 lDh 1 g6 with roughly equal chances. I was unaware of this game at the time of my game. 14...l2Jxe4 1S ..txe4 g6 Intending to expand on the kingside with ...f5. 16 g4 (D) 16...fS! ..•

The idea behind 1 3 ...'fie8 ! is revealed; Black is prepared to sacrifice a pawn to blast open the kingside. 17 gxfS gxfS 18 .txt'S 'fibS 19 ..tf2 White returns the pawn to complete his de­ velopment. More challenging is 1 9 'fie4 .l:r.g8 (with the idea of ...lDf6; the immediate 19 ...lDf6 backfires after 20 i.g6! 'iiig5 2 1 i.xg5 l2Jxe4 22 i.e7 l2Jxc3 23 'ifi>d2 l2Ja4 24 .l:r.hg1 and White's powerful bishops give him a clear advantage) 20 ..te6 lDb6 and now: 1 ) Black has a crushing attack after 2 1 'fih7+? i.d7 22 ..txg8 'fixf3 23 .l:r.fl 'fixe3+ 24 �d 1 l:txg8 25 l:tb 1 .l:r.g2. 2) 21 ..txc8 .l:taxc8 gives Black good com­ pensation for the sacrificed pawn; in some cases he is threatening to play ...'i/ig6 with a fa­ vourable endgame. 3) 21 �f2 ! i.xe6 22 dxe6 'fie8 23 'fih7+ �c6 24 'fie4+ (24 'fif5 ! ?) 24 .. .'�c7 25 'fih7+ with a draw by perpetual check. 19...'fixf3 The more accurate 19 ...lDf6 ! 20 i.xc8 'fixf3 21 .l:tfl .l:r.axc8 gives Black a slight edge because of his superior minor piece. 20 i.e4 Black has some advantage in the endgame after 20 'fie4 'fixe4 21 i.xe4 lDf6. 20 ..'fif7 21 .l:r.n l2Jb6 22 i.b4 'fibS 23 i.e7 i.d7! This was a good practical choice because it dramatically reduced the tactical workload. Al­ though I only saw a fraction of the variations over the board, it was clear that White had counter-chances after 23 ....l:r.g8 24 'fif2 i.h3 25 'fif6! (D) (not 25 .l:r.g1 ? .l:r.xg1 + 26 'fixg1 i.f5 27 i.xf5 'fixf5 an.d Black wins) and now: .

OPENING WARS

95

B

w

1 ) 2S ...ltJxc4 26 ..td3 ..txfl gives White a choice of recaptures: I a) 27 ..txd6+ and Black can try: l a l ) 27 ...'i!i>b6 28 l:bl + �aS 29 .l:.xb7 ltJxd6 30 'ii'xd6 'ii'h4+ 3 1 'it'd I ..txd3 32 'ii'xcS+ 'i!i>a6 33 'ii'c6+ �aS 34 'ii'cS+ with perpetual check. l a2) 27 ...ltJxd6 ! ? 28 'ii'e7+ 'i!i>c8 29 'ii'e6+ �d8 30 'ii'xg8+ 'ii'e8 3 1 'ii'xe8+ 'i!i>xe8 32 ..txfl We7 with roughly equal chances. l b) 27 ..txc4 (safest) 27 .....txc4 and now: l bl ) 28 ..txd6+?? �b6! 29 ..tc7+ �xc7 (not 29 ...WbS?? 30 a4#) 30 'ii'e7+ 'i!i>b6 3 1 'ii'd6+ 'i!i>aS (3 l .. .�bS?? 32 a4+ mates) 32 'ii'xcS+ bS 33 'ii'b4+ �b6 34 'ii'd6+ 'i!i>b7 ! (there is no per­ petual check) 3S 'ii'c6+ (3S 'ii'd7+ 'i!i>b8 36 'ii'd6+ transposes) 3S ... 'i!i>b8 36 'ii'd6+ �c8 37 'ii'e6+ (37 'ii'c6+ �d8 38 'ii'xa8+ 'i!i>e7 wins for Black) 37 ...'i!i>d8 38 'ii'f6+ (38 'ii'xg8+ 'l;c7 39 'ii'g7+ 'i!i>b6 40 'ii'f6+ �aS wins for Black) 38 . . .�e8 39 'ii'e6+ �f8 40 'ii'f6+ 'ii'f7 and Black wins. I b2) 28 'ii'xd6+ 'i!i>c8 29 'ii'e6+ 'i!i>c7 30 'ii'd6+ with a draw by perpetual check. 2) 2S ...ltJc8 ! 26 �d2 'ii'e8 27 ..tf8 ..txfl 28 .l:.xfl hS �nd White doesn't quite have enough for the exchange. We now return to 23 .....td7 (D): 24 .l:.f6? 24 'ii'f2 .l:.ae8 2S 'ii'f6 is stronger. Now: I ) 2S ...ltJc8 26 'ii'h4 'ii'xh4+ 27 ..txh4 ltJb6 28 ..td3 .l:.hg8 with a favourable endgame. 2) 2S ...ltJxc4 26 ..td3 and now: 2a) 26....l:.xe7 27 'ii'xe7 (27 ..txc4 l:.hh7) 27 ...'ii'xh2 28 ..txc4 'ii'b2 29 .l:.d l 'ii'xc3+ 30 .:d2 'ii'xc4 3 1 l:.f7 .l:.d8 is very good for Black. 2b) 26 ... 'ii'gS 27 'ii'xgS (27 ..txc4 l:txe7 costs White a pawn) 27 . . .hxgS 28 ..txgS ltJb2 29 ..te2 .l:.xh2 and Black has a clear advantage.

24 ltJc8 This unexpected retreat nets a piece and is considerably stronger than playing 24 ...ltJxc4 2S ..td3 l:tae8 26 ..txc4 .l:.xe7 and Black has won a pawn. 25 ..tf8 'ii'h4+ 26 'ii'f2 'ii'xe4 27 0-0-0 'ii'xc4 28 .l:.g1 'ii'xc3+ 29 �b1 ..tb5 29 ... a5, with the idea of ....l:.a6-b6+, is also strong. 30 .l:.g7+ 'i!i>b6 31 'ii'b2 'ii'd3+ 32 'i!i>a1 'ii'xd5 33 'ii'b1 �a6 34 a4 ..tc6?! There is no reason for Black to exercise his king; 34.....td3 3S 'ii'c I e4 is quicker. 35 .l:.xb7 'ii'c4 3S .....txb7?? 36 'ii'bS# would be embarrass­ ing. 36 l:.b2 ltJb6 37 ..txd6 .l:.ac8 38 ..txe5 .l:.hf8 39 a5 .l:.xf6 40 .l:.xb6+ �xa5 White has run out of tricks. 41 .:b2 :n o-1 .••

Game Lessons: 1 ) The moves I I . . .'l;d8, 1 3 . . .'ii'e 8! and 16 ...fS ! were part of a strategic plan to shelter the black king on the queenside and to become active on the kingside while avoiding the weak­ ening ... gS pawn advance. 2) The sharp 19 'ii'e4 was a more challenging threat to Black's plan; after the quieter 19 ..tf2, Black was able to begin operations against the weak c4-pawn. 3) Black reduced his tactical workload by playing the practical move 23 .....td7 ! instead of 23 ....l:.g8. His choice was quickly rewarded when White played 24 .l:.f6?, which allowed the retreat 24...ltJc8, winning a piece.

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

96

Game 40: Len ingrad Parts 4 and 5

Joseph Fang 2373 - James Rizzitano 2556 Watertown 1 985 E30 Nimzo-lnd ian Defence, Len i ngrad 1 d4 li:Jf6 2 c4 e6 3 lt:Jc3 .i.b4 4 .i.g5 h6 5 .i.h4 c5 (D)

w

10 lt:Je2 10 f4 !? is also possible: 10 ...'ife7 1 1 lt:Je2 g5 ! ? 12 fxg5 lt:Jg4 1 3 lt:Jg3 lt:Jxe3 14 'iff3 hxg5 15 'ifxe3 gxh4 16 li:Jf5 'iff6 17 0-0 with com­ pensation for the pawn in Miles-Polugaevsky, Tilburg 1 985. 10 'ife7 More usual is 10 ...e4 1 1 .i.c2 'ife7 1 2 'ii'b1 g5 13 .i.g3 0-0 14 h4 lt:Je5 15 hxg5 hxg5 16 .i.xe5 'ifxe5 17 c;t>d2 li:Jg4 1 8 'ii'g 1 .i.f5 with chances for both sides in Fang-Benjamin, World Open, Philadelphia 1 989; Black eventually won. 1 1 'ifh1 (D) Fang-Kopec, Manchester 1989 continued 1 1 lt:Jg3 li:Jb6 (or 1 l . ..e4!? 12 lt:Jxe4 g5 1 3 li:Jxf6+ 'ifxf6 14 .i.g3 'ifxc3+ 1 5 c;t>e2 lt:Je5 with sharp play) 1 2 .i.xf6 'ifxf6 1 3 O-O 'ife7 ( 1 3 ...0-0!?) 14 f4 with sharp play; White eventually won. •.•

6 d5 Joe has also played 6 .l:r.c I (harmless, but it is hard for Black to find a safe way to create im­ balance) 6 ...cxd4 7 'ifxd4 lt:Jc6 8 .i.xf6 and now: 1) 8 ...gxf6? (avoiding the exchange of queens is dangerous) 9 'ifd2 b6 1 0 a3 .i.xc3 1 1 .l:r.xc3 .i.b7 1 2 .l:r.h3 ! gave White a clear advantage in Fang-de Firmian, New York Open 1 993; White eventually won. 2) 8 ... 'ifxf6 9 'ifxf6 gxf6, with equal chances, has been played many times; however, from a practical standpoint there is no reason for Black voluntarily to accept doubled pawns which could become liabilities in certain endgames. 3) The fifth and final game in this series continued with 8 ...lt:Jxd4 (safest) 9 .i.xd8 c;t>xd8 10 e3 lt:Jc6 I 1 li:Jf3 b6 1 2 .i.e2 .i.b7 1 3 0-0 c;t>e7 14 .l:r.fd 1 .l:r.hd8 1 5 a3 ..txc3 1 6 lhc3 l:lac8 with equality in Fang-Rizzitano, Manchester 1 987; the game was eventually drawn. 6 d6 7 e3 .ixc3+ 8 bxc3 e5 9 .i.d3 White varies from 9 f3, which was played in Game 39. 9 li:Jbd7 And Black varies from 9 ... e4, which we saw in Game 38. •••

•..

B

ll c;t>d8!? A novelty. 1 1 ...g5 12 .i.g3 e4 13 .i.c2, trans­ posing into the previous note, is more usual. After thinking about Game 38 featuring the king rope-a-dope between the g8- and h8squares, I decided that the black king would be safest on the c7-square, as in Game 39. 12 lt:Jg3 Joe selects the most challenging continua­ tion. 12 'itc7 13 0-0 'ife8! ...

.••

OPENING WARS

Borrowing another idea from the previous game; now Black is threatening to trap the bishop with ... g5. 14 ..txf6 Stronger than 14 l'Df5 ? g6 1 5 ..txf6 l'Dxf6 16 l'Dg3 h5. 14 ...l'Dxf6 15 a4 g6 Supporting an eventual ...f5 thrust. 16 a5 h5 17 f4!? h4 (D)

97

B

w

18 fxeS? Logical but losing; stronger is 1 8 l'De4 l'Dxe4 1 9 ..txe4 f5 20 ..td3 .l:.g8 ! ? intending ...g5 with a sharp struggle ahead. 18 ...hxg3 19 .l:.xf6 .l:.xh2 20 'ifbs ..td7 21 exd6+ �d8 22 'ii'xcS 'ii'h8! Providing a flight-square for the king, threatening mate, and attacking the white rook. 23 11i'c7+ �e8 24 l:le6+ (D) 24 �f8 The ruthless 24 ...fxe6! is more precise: 25 .i.xg6+ �f8 26 .l:.fl + (26 �fl 'ii'f6+ mops up) 26 ...�g8!· (during the game I overlooked the strength of this move) 27 .i.f7+ cj;g7 28 .i.h5 .l:.h l + ! 29 �xh l 'ii'xh5+ 30 �gl 'ii'h2#. The game continuation takes a little longer but has the practical advantage of minimizing any at­ tack on the black king in the event of a tactical miscalculation. •••

25 �fl l:th1+ Black can also win by 25 ...11i'xc3 or 25 ...11i'h5; I chose the path of least calculation. 26 �e2 'ii'h5+ 27 �d2 .l:.xa1 Black has an extra rook, his king is safe, and he is threatening mate. 28 .i.c2 ..ta4 29 11i'e7+ �g8 Completing the horseshoe crab journey to the g8-square which began with l i ...cj;dS ! ? ­ so much for the attempt to seek shelter on the c7-square. 30 ..txa4 l:lxa4 31 l:tf6 White is caught in a mating-net after 3 1 d7 l:la1 32 d811i'+ (32 'ii'e 8+ �g7) 32 ...l:lxd8 33 'ii'xd8+ �h7. 31. ...l:.a2+ 32 �d3 11i'e2+ 33 �d4 .l:.d2+ 0-1 White is mated after 34 �c5 b6+ 35 axb6 axb6+ 36 �xb6 (36 �b5 l:lb2+ 37 �c6 11i'xc4+ 38 �d7 'ii'c8#) 36....l:.b2+ 37 �c5 .l:.c8+ 38 'ii'c7 'ii'xe3+ 39 �c6 l:tb6+ 40 �d7 'ii'e8#.

Game Lessons: 1) Black introduced the novelty 1 l ...�d8 !? and White responded aggressively by playing 12 l'Dg3. The retreat 1 3 ...11i'e8 ! forced a favour­ able minor-piece exchange for Black. 2) White had to play 1 8 l'De4 instead of 18 fxe5?, although Black had a comfortable game.

6 Power of the Initiative

Sometimes the initiative starts out as a cool breeze, gradually gaining in strength and eventually be­ coming a gale-force wind. At other times the finicky breeze dies out, the initiative passes to the de­ fender, and the inevitable counterattack is unstoppable. Both extremes are frequently seen in sharp openings such as the Sicilian Defence or the Botvinnik Variation of the Semi-Slav Defence. Sharp openings usually require the attacker to adopt the risky strategy of ruining his own pawn-structure and accepting some structural weaknesses in pursuit of the attack. Determining when. an initiative is real and when it is an illusion is a difficult skill to master.

Knight Outposts One of the classic chess battles is the struggle between advancing pawns on opposite wings. The ability of the defender to retain a flexible pawn-structure is usually advantageous because he can change the pawn-structure at the right moment to take advantage of an attacker's committal move. Sometimes an attacker will concede a knight outpost to the defender in order to pursue a kingside attack. This is a high-risk, high-reward strategy which usually culminates in a mating attack or a crushing counterattack for the defender. Let's take a look at some of the considerations involving the proper timing of pawn exchanges to create knight outposts. Game 41 is a struggle between a wing attack and a permanent centralized knight outpost. Game 42 highlights the use of an outpost as a focal point for exchanging pieces as part of the battle to retain the superior minor piece.

Game 4 1 : Central Counter-Attack

William Goichberg 2311 - James Rizzitano 2109 Boston 1 9 78 807 Pirc Defence 1 e4 g6 2 d4 J..g7 3 lt:Jc3 d6 4 J..e3 c6 5 'ii'd2 bS 6 f3 6 J..d3 is often chosen. The idea is to play h3 in response to ...lt:Jf6; this sometimes enables White to save a tempo by playing f4 in one move. 6 lt:Jf6 7 g4 hS 8 gS lt:Jfd7 (D) 9 h4 A novelty at the time; also possible is 9 f4 J..b7 1 0 J..g2 b4 1 1 lt:Jce2 c5 1 2 lt:Jh3 lt:Jc6 with an unclear position, Sveshnikov-Zakharevich, Russian Ch, Elista 2001 . 9 a6 Reinforcing the b5-pawn in preparation for an eventual ... c5.

w

..•

•••

10 J..h3 lt:Jb6 11 b3 tt:J8d7

POWER OF THE INITIATIVE

99

Also worthy of consideration is l l . ..�xh3 1 2 lbxh3 d5 ! ?, aiming for a French Defence type of pawn-structure in which Black has ex­ changed his troublesome light-squared bishop. 12 lbge2 �b7 13 0-0 c5 14 lbg3 'flc7 15 'itth2 Necessary sooner or later to avoid having to worry about Black playing ... d5. One of the dominant features of this position is that the white king has difficulty finding a comfortable square. 15 0-0 16 lbce2 aS Black continues to expand on the queenside and seize control of more dark squares. 17 f4 b4 (D)

23 fxg6 fxg6 24 i.e6+ (D) After 24 lbe6 fue6 25 �xe6+ Wh7 26 lbxh5 d5 27 lbg3 dxe4 Black's attack is faster.

w

24 'itth7? 24 ... lbxe6! 25 lbxe6 :Xfl ! 26 lDxfl (26 lbxc7 l:.xe l ) 26 ...'flc3 gives Black crushing threats. 25 lbxh5 d5! 26 liJf4 (D) 26 lbg3 lbxe4 gives Black the initiative.

B

.•.

...

B

During the game I remember thinking about how thematic it all seemed because on my third attempt at playing this opening I had achieved a position with a vague resemblance to one of the prototype Modem Defence games (see Game 4 1 . 1). 18 f5 cxd4! Now that White has advanced his f-pawn and relinquished control of the e5-square, Black ex­ changes pawns in order to create knight out­ posts on the c5- and e5-squares. 19 .i.xd4 Also possible is 19 lbxd4 �a6 20 l:.f2 �e5 with sharp play, but it appears logical to ex­ change Black's more active bishop. 19 �xd4 20 lbxd4 lbc5 21 l:.ae1 lbbd7 22 'fid1 lbe5 The pawn-structure resembles a Sicilian De­ fence in which White's attack has stalled and the black knights control more key squares than their white counterparts.

26...l:.xf4! 27 l:.xf4 lbed3 28 cxd3 'fixf4+ 29 �h3 dxe4 30 dxe4 30 �f5 'ii?g8 3 1 �xg6 i.c8+ 32 Wg2 lbxd3 gives Black a strong attack. 30 lbxe4 0-1 .••

Game Lessons:

•.•

1 ) Maintain the tension in the centre unless there is a compelling reason to release it, for ex­ ample to secure control over a key square. 2) Be prepared to counter a wing attack with a central counter-thrust.

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

100

Game 4 1 . 1

Laszlo Barczay - Duncan Suttles Interzonal, Sousse 1 967 This game made a big aesthetic impression on me when I first played it over during the late 1 970s, but upon closer examination it appears that White did not put up strong resistance. As we will see, he had several opportunities to sim­ plify the position and maintain equality.

Black is apparently serious about undermin­ ing White's pawn-chain. 15 i.xg7 White can exploit his slight lead in develop­ ment by playing 1 5 bxa3 !, and now: 1) l5 ....i.xh6 (risky) 16 ltJxh6+ 'iti'g7 17 axb4 �xh6 1 8 .i.e4 l:.a7 1 9 dxc5 with three pawns for the piece. 2) l 5 ...bxc3 16 ltJxc3 .i.xh6 17 liJxh6+ �g7 18 ltJg4 l:.xa3 19 liJb5 l:.a5 20 a4 with equal chances. 15 ...axb2 16 l:.b1 Stronger is 16 .i.xf8 ! bxa1 'iii 17 'ii'x a1 ltJxf8 1 8 ltJe3 with equal chances. 16 ..ti>xg7 17 cxb4 liJb6 18 ltJe5 cxd4 19 .i.b3? White should play 19 ltJxd4 with a reason­ able game; there is no reason to allow Black to construct a central pawn steamroller. 19...f6 20 liJdJ eS and Black eventually converted his slight edge into victory. ..•

14 a3! ••.

Game 42 : Exchanging Pieces

James Rizzitano 2263 - Thomas Stiers 2023 National High School Ch, Philadelphia 1 9 79 ABO Dutch Defence 1 d4 f5 I needed a victory in this last-round game to win the tournament, so I was happy to see a sharp opening. 2 .tg5 At the time the Bishop Attack and its close relative 2 ltJc3 were just starting to become popular. 2 liJf6 3 .txf6 exf6 4 e3 g6 5 c4!? A different flavour from the typical 5 i.d3 .i.g7 6 ltJe2 c6 7 liJd2 d5 8 liJf4 .i.h6 9 'ii'f3 with a slight edge for White, Bagirov-Rajkovic, Vrnjacka Banja 1974. 5 .i.g7 .••

.•.

The immediate activation of the bishop with 5 ....i.b4+ !? 6 ltJc3 0-0 is also playable. 6 ltJcJ c6 7 h4 A standard thrust which is often taken for granted in this variation, but there are times when White should play h3 with the idea of g4 (see Game 42. 1 ). The more restrained 7 .i.d3 'ii'e7 8 ltJge2 is also playable. 7 'ii'e7 8 i.d3 d6 Black could seize the opportunity to jettison his doubled f-pawns and open the long diagonal for his bishop by playing 8 ...f4 !? 9 e4 f5 10 ltJge2 fxe4 1 1 i.xe4 0-0, but White has a prom­ ising attack after 1 2 'ii'd 3. •••

POWER OF THE INITIATIVE

9 tt:lge2 .i.e6 10 1i'c2 tt:la6! (D) This standard Dutch Defence manoeuvre gives the black knight more flexibility than the pedestrian 1 0...tt:ld7.

101

White also has strong pressure after 17 ...fxg4 1 8 .i.xg6+ �d8 19 tt:lg3. Black has a number of terminal problems such as an unsafe king, weak kingside squares and a bad h8-bishop. 18 1i'xc3 fxg4 19 .i.xg6+ �d7 20 tt:lg3 (D)

w B

11 a3 tt:lc7 12 0-0-0 d5 13 cxd5 tt:lxdS 14 h5 aS?! This knee-jerk reaction is too slow; also prob­ lematic is 14 ...0-0? ! 1 5 hxg6 hxg6 16 g4! with a strong attack. Relatively best is 14 ...tt:lxc3 1 5 1i'xc3 0-0-0 16 tt:lf4, when White has a slight edge. 15 hxg6 hxg6 16 .l:.xh8+ .i.xh8 (D)

w

20 b5?! Black continues to flail away on the queen­ side, but now his king is even more exposed to attack. 20 . . ..l:.g8 is relatively best, although White has a large advantage after 2 1 .i.f5. 21 .te4 .i.d5 22 .txd5 cxd5 23 1i'b3 'ifilc6 24 �bl 1i'd7 25 .l:f.cl+ �b6 26 1i'c2?! More accurate is the thematic continuation 26 .:cs l::td 8 27 a4 b4 28 l:tb5+ �a6 29 1i'd3 ! (I missed this move during the game) 29 ...�a7 30 l:txa5+ �b8 3 1 1i'a6 with a mating-net. 26 �b7 21 tt:lr5 A 'knightmare' for any Dutch or King's In­ dian Defence player and an interesting mirror image of Game 29. 27 .l:f.a6 28 :hi l:tc6 29 1i'd3 More accurate than 29 .l:f.h7 .l:.xc2 30 .l:.xd7+ l1c7 3 1 .l:f.xd5, when Black survives to an end­ game. 29 .l:f.c8 30 l:tb7! 1i'xb7 31 tt:ld6+ �c6 32 1i'xh7 �xd6 33 1i'b7 .l:.g8 34 1i'xb5 f5 35 1i'c5+ �e6 36 1i'c6+ �e7 37 1i'xd5 1-0 .••

.•.

.•.

.••

17 g4! Shredding Black's kingside. White's plan is to attack the f5-square continually, and seek to trade the light-squared bishops and one set of knights. If these exchanges can be achieved, White will be left with a dominant knight out­ post on the f5-square vs a weak dark-squared bishop with limited mobility. 17 ...tt:lxc3

Game Lessons: 1) King safety should be carefully consid­ ered before making pawn advances on the flank. The pawn thrust 14 ... a5?! was not part of any logical plan and prevented Black from castling on the queenside. The later advance 20...b5? ! also needlessly weakened Black's position.

102

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

2) White safeguarded his king on the queen­ side before striking with 17 g4! ; the point of this

move was to force a favourable exchange of mi­ nor pieces and gain control of the f5-square.

Game 42 . 1

Walter Browne - Robert Byrne US Ch, Mentor 1 9 77 This game helped to popularize some of these anti-Dutch Defence systems. White starts out with an interesting strategic idea and finishes off with a model queenside attack.

w

ltJce2, when White has a slight edge because of his h-file pressure. 11 l:.b1 'ii'a3 12 gxf5 i.f7 13 lhb7 i.b4 14 0-0! 0-0-0? (D) The black king has no business being on the queenside. The last chance is 14 ...i.xc3 1 5 :b3 'ifxa2 1 6 liJxc3 'ii'a5 although White has strong pressure after 1 7 l:tfb 1 .

w

9 h3! Aiming for the g4 break is more effective than the stereotypical 9 h4. 9..Ji'b6 9 . . .h5? allows White to obtain a big attack after 10 g4! hxg4 1 1 hxg4 fxg4 1 2 .i.xg6+ ctJe7 13 'ii'g2 i.h6 14 0-0-0 as the black king is ma­ rooned in the centre. Black could consider al­ tering the normal course of the game by playing the radical but dubious 9 .. .'�Je5? ! 1 0 dxe5 fxe5 (Black has only one pawn for the piece at the moment, but White's minor pieces are stepping on each other's toes) 1 1 'ii'g3 ( 1 1 0-0-0 'i!Vd7 1 2 e4 dxe4 1 3 i.xe4 fxe4 14 'ii'xe4 i.h6+ 1 5 ctJb1 'ii'e7 with approximately equal chances) 1 1 . . .'ii'f6 12 0-0-0 ! ? e4 1 3 i.b5 cxb5 1 4 liJxb5 and White has a clear advantage be­ cause of his central knight outpost and Black's exposed king. 10 g4! 'ifxb2? This capture is too greedy. Safer is 1 0 .. .fxg4 1 1 hxg4 i.f7 12 0-0-0 0-0-0 13 liJf4 i.b4 14

15 l:lxb4! 15 i.a6 is also strong: 1 ) 15 ...'ii'xa6 16 l:txb4 is good for White. 2) 15 ...i.xc3 16 'ii'g3 ltJe5 (the only move to defend against the mate threat) 1 7 l:lxa7+ ctJb8 1 8 l:.xf7 'ii'xa6 1 9 ltJxc3 and White has a decisive advantage. 3) 1 5 ....i.d6 1 6 l:txa7+ ctJb8 1 7 l:txd7 l:txd7 1 8 l:tb 1 + 'i!ta8 19 l:.b6 with a strong attack for the exchange. 15 'ii'xb4 16 .i.a6+ ctJc7 17 l:tb1 'ii'd6 18 :!.b7+ ctJc8 19 l:.b3+ h2 'iVe2 3 3 'iti>gl i.g5, when Black has some advantage because of his more active bishop. ..•

riilf7 40 rtle3 'iti>xf6 41 rtld4 rtle6 and Black wins. 2b2) 37 'iVf4 ! with a drawn queen endgame. The above variations are a good example of some of the unusual tactical ideas that can be present in an apparently simple position. White's problems stem from the limited scope of his b2-bishop; this is why the queen plus knight combination seem so much more powerful than the queen plus bishop combination here. 29 l:.d2! (D) ••.

w

29 g3? White can maintain equality by playing 29 l:txd8+ 'iVxd8 30 'iVe2 'iVh4 3 1 'iVd2 (31 ..txg6 hxg6 is about equal) 3 I ...liJf4 and now: 1) 32 .i.xh7+? �xh7 33 'iVc2+ rtlg7 34 'iVxc5 and now Black can play: I a) After 34 ... li'le2+ 35 riilfl li'lf4 36 rtlgl ! (36 f3? loses to 36...li'ld3 !) Black has made no progress, and must play 36...'iVg4! (line ' 1 b'). 1b) 34...'iVg4! and now: 1b1) 35 'iVc6 'iVd1 + 36 'iti>h2 'iVh5+ 37 rtlg1 (37 rtlg3 li'le2#) 37 ...li'le2+ 38 riilf l li'ld4 ! ! 39 g4 (39 .i.xd4 'iVd l #) 39 ...'iVh3+ 40 'iVg2 'ii'd3+ 41 'iti>gl li'lf3+ and Black wins the queen on ac­ count of 42 riilh l 'ii'h7+. I b2) 35 g3 'ii'd 1 + 36 riilh2 ltJd3 37 'i!kd4 'ii'e2 38 .i.c3 li'lxf2 gives Black a decisive advantage. 2) 32 ..te4 and now Black can play: 2a) 32 ...li'lh3+ 33 gxh3 'iVxe4 34 'iVd8+ i.f8 (34 ...rtlg7 35 'iVf6+ �g8 36 'ii'd8+ repeats) 35 'iVg5+ 'iVg6 (35 ... .i.g7 36 'iVd8+ .i.f8 37 'iVg5+ repeats) 36 'iVxg6+ hxg6 37 .i.d4 with a drawn bishop endgame. 2b) 32 ....!Dh5 33 i.d4 (not 33 .i.f3?? .!Dg3 ! mating) 33 . . .lt'lg3 ! ? (33 . . .'iVxe4 34 .i.xc5 is fine for White) 34 fxg3 'iVd8 35 .i.d5 ! ! .i.xd4+ (35 ...'iVxd5 36 'iVg5+ with equal chances) 36 'iVxd4 'iVxd5 and now: 2b1 ) 37 'iVxd5?? exd5 38 riilf2 (38 g4 c:Ji;g7 39 riilf2 f6 also wins for Black) 38 ...f6 39 exf6

Another example of a collinear move (see Game 26) which can be difficult to see; the si­ multaneous attack on the b2-bishop and the f2pawn is decisive. 30 l:txd2 'iVxd2 31 .i.xg6 hxg6 32 .i.c3 'iVxa2 Vince pointed out an alternative win with 32 ...'iVc 1 + 33 rtlg2 b4. 33 b4 ..txb4 34 'iVa8+ Black wins the queen endgame after 34 .i.xb4 'ikbl + 35 c:Ji;h2 'ii'xb4. 34 .i.f8 35 'iVdS b4 0-1 ..•

Game Lessons: 1) Black committed an opening inaccuracy by playing 1 2...a6?! and White was able to ob­ tain some advantage by gradually building up in the centre. Black defended carefully and avoided creating any further weaknesses. White could have won a pawn for minimal compensation by playing 23 ..te4! instead of the hasty 23 hxg6?. 2) Black snuffed out any possibility of a white kingside attack by playing 24.....txf3 ! ; the follow-up 25 . . .'iVa5 ! took aim at White's weakened queenside.

POWER OF THE INITIATIVE

3) White could have maintained equality by playing 29 l:txd8+ instead of 29 g3 ?; there were many hidden tactical surprises despite the

105

seemingly harmless appearance of the position. The themes in the notes to White's 29th move are typical for this type of pawn-structure.

Game 44: Heavy Artillery

Nick de Firmian 2574 - James Rizzitano 2499 Continental Chess International, New York 1 982 C l l French Defence, Steinitz 1 e4 e6 Although I already had enough points for a grandmaster norm, none of my GM-candidate opponents in this Swiss-system event officially had the title yet, so I could not obtain a GM norm because of this technicality. I was one point ahead of the field and Nick needed to win this last-round game in order to force a tie for first place. The solid French Defence seemed like a good choice in this situation - let the opponent worry about creating an unbalanced game. I have a healthy respect for this opening as a result of having played just about every variation against it over the years without achieving much theoretical success. 2 d4 d5 3 lt:Jc3 lLlf6 4 e5 A sharp alternative to 4 .i.g5. 4 lLlfd7 5 f4 c5 6 lLlf3 lLlc6 7 .i.e3 cxd4 8 lt:Jxd4 lt:Jxd4 Current opening theory frowns upon this time-consuming manoeuvre and prefers the sharper 8 ... .i.c5; for 8 .. .'i!Vb6 see Game 3 1 . 9 i.xd4 lLlb8 (D) .•.

w

Three years later Nick played 10 ..li.f2 lLlc6 1 1 lLlb5 a6 12 lt:Jd4 .i.c5 13 c3 f6 with sharp play in de Firmian-Shirazi, USA Ch, Estes Park 1985. 10 ..li.d3 lLlc6 1 1 .i.f2 is also possible, when Black has a choice of: 1 ) 1 l ....i.e7 1 2 'ili'h5 ! 'ili'a5 1 3 0-0 g6 1 4 'ili'h6 .i.f8 1 5 'ili'h3 with a clear advantage for White, Nunn-Sutton, Peterborough 1984. 2) 1 l ...g6 12 a3 .i.d7 1 3 0-0 h5 14lLlb5 a6 15 lt:Jd6+ .i.xd6 1 6 exd6 'ili'b8 (Nunn-K.J.Schulz, Bundesliga 1 984/5), and now Nunn recom­ mends 17 i.h4! 'ili'xd6 1 8 .i.f6 l:tg8 19 'ili'e2 with a clear advantage. Black has problems on the dark squares but I think he can defend by playing 1 9...'ili'c5+ 20 �h 1 lLle7; for example, 21 b4 'ili'b6 22 i.xe7 �xe7 23 f5 gxf5 24 l:txf5 l:tg7 with an unclear position. 3) 1 l ...'ili'a5 1 2 0-0 .i.c5 1 3 lLlb5 .i.xf2+ 14 l:txf2 0-0 1 5 'ili'h5 g6 1 6 'ili'h6 ( 1 6 'ili'g5 ! ?) with a slight edge for White, T.Taylor-Barth, Marshall CC Ch 1 983. 10 lt:Jc6 ll lLlb5 .i.e7?! Inaccurate. Black can exploit White's mis­ placed dark-squared bishop by playing 1 l . ..a6 ! 1 2 lt:Jd4 'ili'b6 1 3 l:lb1 i.c5 14 c 3 lLlxd4 1 5 ..li.xd4 .i.d7 with equal chances. 12 .i.d3 a6 13 lt:Jd4 .i.d7 14 0-0 .i.c5 15 c3 'ili'b6 (D) 16 b4! Nick finds an imaginative way to fight for the initiative in a must-win situation. 16 i.xd4 17 cxd4 lt:Je7 A dual-purpose move which prepares to chal­ lenge White's powerful light-squared bishop and also inhibits the f5 break. In view of the tournament situation I didn't seriously con­ sider the risky pawn-grab 17 ...'ili'xb4! ? 1 8 l:.b1 'ili'a3; this was a practical time-saving decision •.•

•••

10 .i.e3

106

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

w

w

because I did not think that Black's position was inferior or required any extraordinary action. 18 .l:tel .tb5 Black has succeeded in activating his 'bad' light-squared bishop by manoeuvring it outside the central pawn-chain. I had successfully im­ plemented a similar plan earlier in the tourna­ ment (see Game 44. 1 ). 19 .i.c2 .i.c4 20 a4 li:\f5 21 .tf2 h5 2 1 .. .11i'xb4?! is risky due to 22 .l:tbl 'i!i'e7 23 .l:tb6 .l:tc8 24 'i!i'bl .l:tc7 25 .txf5 exf5 26 'i!i'xf5 0-0 27 'ili'h5 intending f5 with kingside attack­ ing chances. 22 'i!i'bl g6 23 'i!i'b2 'i!i'd8 24 .l:ta3 b6! Black gains the 'middlegame pawn opposi­ tion' with this prophylactic move. The idea is to give Black the flexibility to lock the queenside pawns depending upon which one White ad­ vances. During the game I remembered one of the most famous examples of this useful defen­ sive technique (see Game 44.2). 25 h3 'it>d7!? Black's king is reasonably safe here. The al­ ternative is 25 ...h4!? with the idea of ...'it>f8-g7 similar to a Caro-Kann Gurgenidze System. After the game continuation both sides roll their heavy artillery onto the c-file in preparation for the next battle. I have always been partial to these types of king moves; one of my favourite examples is shown below (see Game 44.3). 26 b5 aS 27 .l:tc3 .l:tc8 28 .l:tcl 'i!i'e7 29 .tdl .l:tc7 30 'i!i'c2 .l:thc8 31 g4 A minor victory for White as he gains some space and forces the knight to retreat. 31 ...hxg4 32 hxg4 li:\g7 33 .tel .l:th8 34 .i.e2 .l:thc8 35 .tdl .l:th8 36 .te2 .l:thc8 37 .tn f5!? (D)

38 exf6 This is the obvious move to open the position for the bishops, but 38 g5 !? could be consid­ ered. 38 ...li:\h5 39 .td2 li:\g3 ! ? 40 .l:txg3 .txfl and White must decide whether to exchange a set of rooks: 1 ) 41 .l:tc3 .l:txc3 42 .txc3 and now: I a) 42 ...1!i'h7 !? (speculative) 43 'it>xfl (43 .l:txfl ? loses to 43 ...1!i'h3) 43 ...11i'h 1 + 44 We2 'i!i'g2+ 45 We i 'i!i'g1 + 46 'iite2 'i!i'g4+ 47 We1 and now Black can try: 1 a l ) 47 ....l:th8 48 11i'f2 .l:th3 and here: . 1 a l l ) 49 'iitd2? .l:tg3 50 'i!i'e l .l:tg2+ 5 I 'iitd3 'i!i'h3+ 52 'i!i'e3 .l:tg3 53 .td2 .l:txe3+ 54 .txe3 'i!i'g2 and Black has a clear advantage because of the weak white a4-pawn. l a l 2) 49 .txa5 ! (the white bishop is inef­ fective, so let's sacrifice it to create a passed pawn) 49 . . .bxa5 (49 ....l:tf3 50 .txb6 is also drawn) 50 b6 llg3 5 1 .l:tc7+ ! (5 1 b7? loses to 5 1 ....l:tg l + 52 Wd2 .l:tg2) 5 l . ..'iitd8 52 .l:tc8+! Wxc8 53 'i!i'c2+ Wd8 54 'i!i'c7+ 'iite8 55 'i!i'c8+ 'it>e7 56 1!i'c7+ with a draw. l a2) 47 ...1!i'xf4!? 48 1!i'd2 1!i'g3+ 49 11i'f2 (49 'it>d l .l:th8) 49 ...:Xc3 50 'i!i'xg3 (50 .l:txc3 1!i'xc3+ 5 1 'i!i'd2 'i!i'b4 is winning for Black) 50 ....l:txg3 5 1 .l:tc6 .l:txg5 52 .l:txb6 .l:tg4 looks favourable for Black. l b) 42....tc4! (simple and strong) 43 'ili'h2 'i!i'a3 44 1!i'h7+ 'it>d8 45 .l:tc2 1!i'xa4 46 llc 1 (the black king runs away and hides after 46 'i!i'g8+ Wc7 47 1!i'f7+ �b8 48 1!i'xe6 'it>b7) 46 ...1!i'a3 47 llc2 'i!i'b3 48 .l:tc I .txb5 49 'ilkh8+ Wc7 50 .txa5+ .tc4 5 1 'i!i'h7+ 'iitb 8 52 .tc3 .ta6 gives Black a clear advantage. 2) 41 .tc3 (apparently best) and now Black has a choice of:

POWER OF THE INITIATIVE

2a) 4 l ...�c4 42 l:lh3 (42 'ii'h 2!? is also pos­ sible) 42...'ii'a3 43 l:la1 �b3 44 'ii'b 1 �c2! (the clinging bishop) 45 l:lxa3 �xb1 with equal chances. 2b) 4 l .. .'ii'h7 ! ? (contesting the h-file) 42 l:.xfl 'ii'h4 and White has a choice of: 2b1 ) 43 'ii'f2 l:.xc3 44 l:lxc3 'ii'xf2+ 45 �xf2 l:txc3 46 l:.h I is equal. 2b2) 43 'ii'd3 l:txc3 44 'ii'xc3 l:lxc3 45 l:lxc3 'ii'g4+ 46 'it>h2 'ii'e2+ 47 �g1 'ii'g4+ with a draw by perpetual check; Black must avoid 47 ...'ii'd2?? 48 l:lfc l 'ii'xd4+ 49 �g2 'ii'e4+ 50 �g3, when the black king is in a mating-net. 2b3) 43 l:lff3 l:lxc3 44 l:lxc3 'i!i'xg3+ 45 l:lxg3 l:txc2 46 .l:.h3 l:.c 1 + 47 �g2 :c2+ 48 �f3 :c3+ 49 �g2 l:lxh3 50 �xh3 gives new meaning to the expression 'dead drawn' . 38 'ili'xf6 39 'ii'd2 �xfl 39 ...tZ:le8 ! ? is also possible. 40 .l:.xc7+ l:.xc7 41 l:.xc7+ �xc7 42 �xfl tZ:le8 43 'ifc3+ �d8 44 �g3 The immediate queen infiltration leads no­ where after 44 'ifc6 'ii'xf4+ 45 �f2 'ii'xg4 46 'ifxb6+ �e7 47 'ii'a7+ 'iii>f8 48 'ifxa5 'ifd1 + with equal chances. 44 tZ:ld6 45 'ifc6 tZ:lc4 46 �g2 'iii>e7 Black must avoid 46 ...'i!i'xd4?? 47 �h4+. 47 'ii'c7+ 'iii>f8 48 'iii>h3 'iff7 Also sufficient is 48 ...'i!i'e7 (48 ...'ii'xd4? is risky: 49 'ii'd8+ 'iii>f7 50 'i!i'd7+ 'iii>f8 51 'ifxe6) 49 'ii'c8+ 'it>g7 50 �h4 'ii'a3+ 5 1 �g3 'ii'e7 with equal chances. 49 'ii'c6 'iii>g7 50 'ii'c8 (D)

107

51. gxf4 52 �xf4 'ii'g6 Simpler is 52 ...'iff6! 53 'ii'c7+ 'iii>g6 54 'ii'b 8 'iii>g7 55 'ifc7+, again with a draw by repetition. 53 ..te5+ �f7 54 'ii'c7+ 'ifi>e8 55 'iii>g3 tZ:le3 56 'ii'c8+ 'iii>f7 Black must remain alert and avoid 56 ...�e7?? 57 ..td6+! ! �f6 (57 ...'iii>xd6 58 'ifd8#; 57 ...'iii>f7 58 'ii'f8#) 58 'ii'h8+ mating shortly. 57 'ii'd7+ 'iii>g8 58 'ii'd8+ 'iii>f7 59 'i!i'd7+ 'iii>g8 60 g5 'ii'xg5+ 60...tZ:lc4 61 'ifd8+ �f7 is also possible; then White cannot make any progress. 61 �f3 (D) ••

B

•..

.••

61. 'ii'g2+ Black has a perpetual check provided he is careful to stay on the light squares. 62 'iii>xe3 'ifh3+ 63 'iii>f2 'ili'f5+ 64 'iii>g2 'ii'g4+ 65 �h2 'ii'h5+ 66 'iii>g3 'ii'g6+ 67 'iii>h3 'ifh5+ 68 'iii>g2 'ii'g4+ 69 �g3 'ii'e2+ 70 �h3 'ifh5+ 71 �h4 'iff3+ 72 'iii>h2 'ii'e2+ 73 �g3 'ii'd3+ 74 �f4 'ii'f5+ 1/z-1/z •.

B Game Lessons:

50 g5! 51 'ii'b8! Stronger than 5 1 fxg5 'ii'fl + 52 'iii>h2 'ii'e2+ 53 �h3 'iffl + with a draw by repetition. ••.

1) Select the opening appropriate to the tour­ nament situation. Here Black could afford to play solidly and put the onus of unbalancing the position on White. 2) Black's idea of manoeuvring the light­ squared bishop outside the central pawn-chain by playing 17 ...tZ:le7 and 1 8 ... �b5 is a common motif in the French Defence; a similar idea with the dark-squared bishop also occurs in the King's Indian Defence. 3) The defensive advance 24... b6! slowed down White's initiative on the queenside.

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

108

4) White had the interesting alternative 38 g5 !? instead of 38 exf6 - the resulting varia­ tions are very complicated but will repay care­ ful study. Although both players' pieces are

concentrated on the c-file, the real battle is over control of the h-file. 5) Remain alert at all times; the attentive 56 .. .'�f7 enabled Black to maintain the balance.

Game 44. 1

Walter Morris 2411 - James Rizzitano 2499 Continental Chess International, New York 1 982 Manoeuvring a bishop outside the pawn-chain can create some unusual tactical ideas. This game started out as a Pirc Defence and eventu­ ally migrated into a King's Indian Defence type of position in which Black was able to free his traditionally 'bad' dark-squared bishop.

55 'iti>g7 ! The white king is in a precarious position and the time has come to construct a mating-net. 56 ttJct White has no choice but to await develop­ ments. 56 'iti>h6 57 tiJd3 tiJf8! 58 'ii'b4 White can last a little longer by playing 58 ..tn tiJh7 59 ..te2 'fkg7 60 'fin ltJg5+ 61 �g2 (61 'iti>h4 'ii'f6 is winning for Black) 6 l ...liJxf3+ 62 'iti>h 1 (62 'iti>xf3 'fkg4#) 62...tiJd2 and Black wins. 58 tiJh7 0-1 White resigned in view of: 1 ) 59 'fke 1 'figS 60 ..th 1 ltJg5+ 61 'iti>h4 (6 1 'iti>g2 ltJxf3+ 62 'itr>xf3 'fkg4#) 6 l ...'fkd8 and Black wins the queen or mates. 2) 59 'ii'xg5+ ltJxg5+ 60 'ifr>h4 ..tg1 ! (a nasty little detail) 6 1 h3 ..th2 62 lDxf4 exf4 and 63 .....tg3#. •.•

•••

B

•••

Game 44.2

Boris Spassky - Tigran Petrosian World Ch match (game 7), Moscow 1 966 Having the ability to lock the pawn-structure is a useful strategic idea, particularly if it is in an area of the board where the opponent has a greater concentration of forces (see following diagram). 17 c4! At first glance it appears strange to cede the d4-square to the white knight, but Black's idea is to prevent White from exchanging pawns and opening the b-file. Black will have a free hand to attack on the open g-file after any potential white queenside attack has been eliminated. 18 ..te2 .•.

B

POWER OF THE INITIATIVE

1 8 i.f5 ! ? has been suggested as a possible improvement; now Black has: 1 ) 1 8 ... exf5 19 e6 i.d6 20 exd7+ l:txd7 21 'ifd4 .l:.g8 with attacking chances down the g­ file. 2) 1 8 ...d4! ? 19 cxd4 ( 1 9 liJxd4 ltJxe5 20 i.h3 a6 21 'ife2 i.d6 looks good for Black) 19 ...exf5 20 e6 'ifc6 21 exd7+ .l:.xd7 22 b5 'ifg6, again with attacking chances.

109

18...a6! Black has gained the middlegame pawn op­ position. The idea is to answer a5 with ...b5; conversely, b5 is met by ...a5 - Black keeps the queenside closed in either case, giving him a free hand on the other wing. 19 �hl .l:.dg8 20 .l:.gl .l:.g4 Black went on to win the first decisive game of the match.

Game 44.3

Vlatko Kovacevic - Vasser Seirawan Wijk aan lee 1 980 This game is a striking example of an opening­ phase king-march and how easily Black subse­ quently obtains a large advantage.

B

14 �d7! Black moves his king to safety and prepares to challenge White along the h-file. 15 liJbd2? This move i s too accommodating. White should prepare to contest the h-file by playing 15 Wd2! (extreme moves require an extreme re­ sponse) 1 5 ... l:th8 16 'it>c2 'it>c7 with roughly equal chances. 15 .l:.h8 Black seizes control of the h-file. 16 .l:.gl xg5 .l:.ad8 36 l:.e6 l:.fe8 37 l:.f6 �g7 38 l:.f4 l:.d3 39 ltJe4 l:.e5+ 40 �g4 h5+ 41 �h4 l:.d4 0-1 •.•

21 gxh3? Joe thought for several minutes before cap­ turing the bishop, and during the lull I suddenly noticed the patient response 21 �f2! i..xg2 22 'it>xg2 '6'h2+ 23 �fl ltJe6 24 i..e 3, and it ap­ pears that Black has nothing better than repeat­ ing the position by playing 24 ...'6'h3+ 25 �f2 '6'h2+ with a draw. The difference between this variation and the game continuation is that White retains his f3-pawn. Of course, it would have been nice if I had considered the king move before sacrificing the bishop! 21 'iVxf3+ 22 �g1 '6'xh3 (D) Black has three pawns and a raging attack for the piece. Defending this type of position with an exposed king is very tiring because the at­ tacker has various checking combinations which must be carefully calculated on every move. 23 '6'e3? Stronger is 23 i..f4 i..g7 ! ? (more ambitious than 23 ...'6'g4+ 24 'iti>f2 'iVh4+ 25 �g2 '6'g4+ 26 �f2 'iVh4+ with a draw), and now: •••

•.•

..•

Game Lessons: 1) Black should have preferred the patient 20... a4!, increasing the pressure. The bishop

POWER OF THE INITIATIVE

sacrifice 20... .ixh3? should have been answered by 2 1 �f2! instead of 2 1 gxh3? - the game would then most likely have ended in a draw by perpetual check.

111

2) Black had a raging attack after the accep­ tance of the sacrifice because White had no kingside pawn-cover. White's king was defence­ less after the line-opening 24...f5.

Game 46: I nelastic Pawn Structure

James Rizzitano 2485 Daniel Roos 2381 New York Open 1 984 -

8 1 6 Caro-Kan n Defence, Bronstein 1 e4 c6 2 d4 dS 3 lt:lc3 dxe4 4 lt:lxe4 lt:lr6 S lt:lxf6+ gxf6 6 lt:lr3 .irs 1 c3 e6 s g3 lt:ld7 9 .ig2 i!ic7 10 0-0 0-0-0 Also possible is 10....ig4!? 1 1 l:.el h5 1 2 .if4 .id6 1 3 .ixd6 i!ixd6 1 4 h 3 .ixf3 1 5 iflxf3 h4 with sharp play in Seitaj-Skembris, Kavala 1985. l l .ie3!? A novelty. The miniature Tal-Bronstein, Tbilisi (simultaneous match) 1982 is an example of how quickly White's attack can develop: 1 1 i!le2 .id6?! 12 c4 c5 1 3 b4! cxb4 14 c5 i..e7 1 5 lt:lh4 i..g6 16 lt:lxg6 hxg6 1 7 l:.bl lt:lb8 1 8 i..f4 i!ld7 19 i..xb8 �xb8 and Black resigned. ll �b8 12 ifle2 (D)

The idea behind this move is to prevent White from undermining the c6-pawn by playing a6, but the drawback is that now the b5 pawn-break will be even stronger. 17 c4 i..b4 18 i..d2 i..xd2 19 i!ixd2 eS (D)

w

•..

B

12 h5? Black must play 1 2 ...i..g4 in order to ex­ change the bishop for the knight. 13 lt:lh4! The proverbial knight on the rim is extremely powerful here because it stops Black's kingside counterplay and allows White's queenside at­ tack to develop unhindered. 13 i..g6 14 :ret :es 1S a4 .id6 16 aS a6 .•.

.••

20 b4! White signals his intention to attack on the queenside. The position is extremely nasty for Black as his pawn-structure lacks elasticity. Black cannot create counterplay as long as White refrains from playing dxe5. 20...exd4 Positional capitulation, but the alternative is to wait around and be checkmated. Black runs into trouble along the d-file after 20 ...i!id6 21 l:tad1 exd4 (2 l .. .i!ixd4? 22 i!le2 costs Black his d7-knight) 22 c5 l:.xe1 + 23 l:.xe1 'ilc7 24 'ilxd4 lt:le5 25 l:.d1 and White has a clear advantage because of his control of the d-file and threats involving the pawn advance f4. 21 'ili'xd4 lt:leS (D) Exchanging one pair of rooks fails after 2 1 ...l:.xe1 + 22 l:.xe1 lt:le5 23 l:.d 1 l:.e8 24 b5 with a decisive attack.

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

112

This is the Caro-Kann 5 ...gxf6 nightmare for Black: he now has five isolated pawns and a na­ ked king. 26 'ii'b4+ �c8 27 'ii'b3 1-0

w

Game Lessons:

22 bS l:td8 23 'ii'f4 l:td6 23 ... ltJd3 loses to 24 'ii'xc7+ �xc7 25 l:te7+. 24 c5 l:te6 25 bxc6 bxc6

1) Black's careless pawn advance 12 ... h5? ( 1 2 ...i.g4 was stronger) allowed White to re­ tain his strong knight by playing 1 3 lL!h4! Black was strategically lost because he had no reasonable way to create counterplay. 2) The pawn advance 20 b4! highlighted the problems with Black's position. White had a free hand to attack on the queenside and Black had no answer on the kingside because of his inelastic pawn-structure.

Intuition What is chess intuition? In their book Secrets of Chess Intuition, Alexander Beliavsky and Adrian Mikhalchishin give the following quote from Genna Sosonko: "Behind the word 'intuition' lies our subconscious experience or knowledge of games and ideas, either our own, or those of others." I particularly like this definition. Later they give an instructive quote from Lajos Portisch: "The best decisions in chess are always those that are supported by accurate calculation." Easy for him to say! I think of chess intuition as the 'weapon of last resort' or the 'tiebreaker' to be used in a position which cannot be completely resolved through sheer calculation. I have often seen an intuitive as­ sessment refuted by a concrete variation, but I have never seen a concrete variation refuted by an intuitive assessment. Beliavsky and Mikhalchishin also identify three types of intuitive deci­ sions in chess: combinative, positional and psychological. Let's take a look at some examples of in­ tuitive decisions and the stories behind them.

Game 47: Kingside Build-up

James Rizzitano 2532 - Lawrence Day 2425 Windy City International, Chicago 1 985 C85 Ruy Lopez, Deferred Exchange 1 e4 eS 2 liJf3 lL!c6 3 i.b5 a6 4 .ia4 liJf6 5 0-0 i..e7 6 i..xc6 Something a little different from the automatic 6 l:.e l . 6 dxc6 7 liJc3 7 d3 is more usual. 7 i..g4 8 h3 i..xf3 Also possible is 8 ....ih5 9 g4 i.g6 (Black can also sacrifice a piece for two pawns with the speculative 9 ...ltJxg4 1 0 hxg4 .ixg4 1 I •••

•••

�g2 0-0! ? with sharp play in Bender-Rizzi­ tano, US Open Ch, Chicago 1 989) 10 'ii'e2 liJd7 I 1 d4 exd4 I 2 lL!xd4 h5 1 3 liJf5 hxg4 14 'ii'xg4 .id6 again with sharp play, Sax-Ivkov, Inter­ zonal, Rio de Janeiro I979. 9 'ii'xf3 liJd7 After the alternative 9 ... 0-0 10 d3 liJd7 I I 'ii'g4 lL!c5 I 2 f4 White had a comfortable space advantage in Pietzsch-Barcza, Olympiad, Leip­ zig 1 960.

POWER OF THE INITIATIVE

10 �g4 .i.f6!? 11 d3 lDf8 12 f4 exf4 13 i.xf4 ltJe6 Worthy of consideration is 1 3 . . . .i.d4+ 1 4 �h 1 ltJe6 to activate the bishop and control the d4-square. 14 e5 i.e7 Black has a couple of reasonable alternatives here: 1 ) 14 ...�d4+ 15 �h1 i.e7 with equal pros­ pects. 2) 14 ....i.g5 15 .i.xg5 �xg5 16 1Vxg5 ltJxg5 17 .l:.f5 h6 1 8 l:af1 l:f8 is also equal. 15 i.e3 (D) The bishop takes a step back in order to con­ trol the d4-square and prepare for a kingside build-up.

B

15 0-0? This natural developing move is a mistake. Black should snuff out any potential white at­ tack by playing 15 ....i.g5 ! 1 6 .l:.ae1 (16 .i.xg5 �xg5 transposes to note '2' to Black's 14th move) 1 6 . . . i.xe3+ 17 .l:.xe3 'ii'd4 1 8 1Vxd4 ltJxd4 19 .l:.f2 .l:.d8 with equal chances. 16 ltJe4! The centralized knight prevents any further simplifying manoeuvres. 16...c5 17 .l:.f5 g6? 1 7 ...ltJd4 is preferable, although after 1 8 l:f2 White has a slight edge. The game continuation weakens too many kingside squares. 18 l:afl ltJg7 19 :Sf2 (D) 19...�d5 Black's most challenging defence is 1 9 ...h5 ( 1 9 ...b6 is strongly answered by 20 .i.h6) 20 'ii'f4 ltJe6 21 'ii'h6 'iid5 22 l:f5 ! ! (I was in the process of analysing this rook sacrifice when .•.

113

Lawrence played his 19th move, but I remem­ ber having a strong intuitive feeling that it had to be correct) 22...gxf5 23 .l:.xf5 f6 24 .l:.xh5 rj(f7 and now White has two paths leading to victory: 1 ) 25 exf6 and then: 1 a) 25 ...�xe4 26 dxe4 l:.h8 27 'ii'xh8 l:xh8 28 .l:.xh8 and White has a decisive material ad­ vantage. 1b) 25 ....l:.h8 26 �xh8 :Xh8 27 l:xd5 and White has three extra pawns. 2) 25 1i'h7+ and here: 2a) 25 ...ltJg7 26 exf6 1Vxh5 27 'ii'xg7+ rjje6 28 'ii'xe7+ 'iti>d5 (28 ...�f5 29 ltJg3+ 'itg6 30 'ii'g7#) 29 c4+ �c6 30 'ii'e6#. 2b) 25 ...'iti>e8 26 exf6 'ii'd7 27 'ii'g6+ llf7 28 fxe7 �xe7 29 l:.e5 �d8 (29 ...'itd7 loses to 30 llxe6!) 30 llxe6 and White wins. 20 .i.xc5! 'ii'xe5 The point is that 20...f5 1oses to 2 1 .i.xe7 because of Black's back-rank weakness. 21 d4 Overloading the black queen. 21 ...f5 22 dxe5 .i.xc5 23 lDf6+ 1-0

Game Lessons: 1) White employed a quiet sideline aimed at slowly preparing a kingside attack. Black had no adequate counter to White's central build-up after the careless 15 ...0-0? ( 1 5 ....i.g5 ! was best) 1 6 ltJe4!. 2) Black lost quickly after 19...'ii'd5, but even after the more challenging 19 ...h5 White could sacrifice a rook for a strong attack. The combi­ nation works because Black's aS-rook is a spec­ tator throughout the game.

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

114

Game 48: The Elusive Haymaker

James Rizzitano 2550 - Walter Shipman 24 71 Boston 1 985 C l O French Defence, Rubi nstein 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 ltJc3 dxe4 4 ltJxe4 .td7 5 ltJf3 .tc6 6 .td3 ltJd7 7 0-0 liJgf6 8 liJxf6+ Many games have continued with the more aggressive 8 ltJeg5 ! ? .i.d6 9 l:te 1 h6 1 0 ltJh3 .txf3 1 1 'li'xf3 c6 12 ltJf4 with sharp play ahead; White can also retain the knight by play­ ing 8 ltJg3. 8.. 'li'xf6 9 .te2 h6 Black can dispense with this defensive move and play the sharper 9 ... .td6!? 10 c4 .i.e4 ! (10 ...'li'f5 1 1 l:te1 0-0 12 ltJg5 .i.f4 1 3 .txf4 'li'xf4 14 d5 ! gave White a clear advantage in Timman-Bukic, Bugojno 1978) 1 1 ltJg5 .tg6 1 2 f4 !? l:td8! with sharp play in Leibovich­ Bianchi, corr. 1996. 10 c4 0-0-0 11 .te3 b6!? This is a novelty. An earlier game continued 1 l .. .liJb6 12 ltJe5 ( 1 2 'li'c2 !? is also possible, to control the e4-square) 12 ... .te4 1 3 'li'b3 c6 14 a4 with a queenside initiative for White in Kindermann-Spiridonov, Rubinstein memo­ rial, Polanica Zdroj 1984. 12 a4 a5 (D) .

16 l:txa5 gives White compensation for the two pawns) 1 5 bxa5 ltJxa5 16 ltJe5 White has com­ pensation for the pawn. 14 .txf3 ltJxc5 15 'li'e2 The pawn spike 15 b4! is more accurate: l ) 15 ...axb4 16 a5 and White breaks through. 2) 15 ...ltJd7 16 bxa5 bxa5 17 'li'd3 ltJb6 1 8 'li'a6+ 'iii>d7 19 'li'xa5 gives White a decisive at­ tack. 3) 1 5 ...ltJa6 1 6 bxa5 bxa5 17 'li'e2 ltJb4 1 8 'li'b5 'li'f5 19 'li'b7 + �d7 20 .te4 and White has a strong attack. 15 Jbd4 (D) ••

w

w

13 c5!? A bold attempt to refute Black's play. White could maintain a slight edge with 1 3 'li'c2. 13 .txf3? The immediate 1 3 ... ltJxc5 is stronger al­ though after 14 b4 ! ? ltJb7 (14 ...axb4 15 a5 bxa5 •.•

16 l:tfd1? One of the difficulties with chess is that the pieces don't tell you when there is a decisive combination. I consumed almost 30 minutes here searching for the elusive haymaker; intu­ itively I felt that White must have some crush­ ing continuation, but I couldn't find it. Later that evening I discovered the straightforward 16 .txd4 'li'xd4 17 l:tfd 1 , and now: 1 ) 17 ...'li'f4 1 8 'li'b5 .i.d6 19 l:txd6 'li'xd6 20 l:td 1 and White wins. 2) 17 ...'li'b4 18 l:tac l and now: 2a) 1 8 ....td6 19 llxd6 ! ! (I actually considered this move during the game, but I didn't see the follow-up because I was too focused on find­ ing a mating combination; the key is Black's

POWER OF THE INITIATIVE

unprotected h8-rook) 19 ... cxd6 20 'ii'a6+ Wd7 21 'ii'a7+! (this move is what I had overlooked) 2 1 ...Wd8 22 'ii'a8+ 'it>e7 23 'ii'xh8 'ii'xb2 24 l:.d1 and White has an extra rook. 2b) 1 8 ...b5 (best) 19 axb5 .i.d6 20 .i.c6 and White has a material advantage and a continu­ ing attack. John Curdo was playing on an adjacent board while this last-round game was being played. He caught up with me at a tournament on the following weekend and mentioned that he was annotating this game for his chess column - had I missed anything? After I showed him the decisive combination, he nodded know­ ingly and said something like: "Yes, I had a feeling that there was something there, but I couldn't put my finger on it." 16 Jlxd1+ 17 l:!.xd1 'ii'e5! I had only considered 17 ... .i.d6? 1 8 .i.xc5 bxc5 19 'ii'a6+ Wd7 20 l:!.xd6+ ! (a similar com­ bination to the previous note; here the goal is checkmate) 20 ...cxd6 21 .i.c6+ We7 22 'ii'b7+ 'it>f8 23 'ii'c8+ 'it>e7 24 'ii'd7+ �f8 25 'ii'e8#. 18 'ii'b5 .i.d6 19 g3 (D) ••

115

20 Wg2! A subtle move which protects the f3-bishop and avoids a back-rank check in some varia­ tions. This type of quiet move can be particu­ larly unnerving for the defender because the attacker pauses in the middle of the attack to improve the position of his king. White is effec­ tively saying 'I may have sacrificed two pawns but I don't need to do anything drastic because you don't have a constructive piece move. I'll take a moment to improve my position slightly.' 20 �e4 Black has a difficult position but tougher is 20. . .'ii'f5 21 b4 axb4 (White constructs a mat­ ing-net after 21 ...�e4 22 'ii'c6 �g5 23 .i.xg5 hxg5 24 .i.e2) 22 a5 �b3 23 'ii'a6+ �d7 24 axb6 with a strong attack. 21 'ii'a6+? The diagonal swap 2 1 'ii'c 6! f5 22 .i.e2 (22 .i.xb6 is also good) is stronger: 1 ) 22 ... �b8 23 .i.a6 �c5 24 .i.xc5 'ii'e4+ 25 'ii'xe4 fxe4 26 .i.e3 and White wins. 2) 22 ...�c5 23 .i.xc5 'ii'xe2 24 l:!.xd6 l:!.xd6 25 .i.xd6 'ii'e4+ 26 'ii'xe4 fxe4 27 .i.f8 and White will quickly mop up the black pawns. 21 'it>d7 22 .i.f4 'ii'xb2 23 .i.xe4 We7 24 .i.xd6+ l:!.xd6 25 l:!.xd6 Wxd6 (D) •••

..•

B w

19 l:.d8? Walter offered a draw after playing this move. Stronger is the creeping move 19 ...'ii'f5 ! (con­ trolling some light squares and leaving the d8square for the black king) 20 'ii'c6 (20 Wg2 'it>d8! 2 1 b4 �d7 is unclear) 20. . .l:ld8 2 1 .i.f4 (21 l:!.d2 !?) 2 1 . ..e5 22 .i.e3 (another idea is 22 h3 ! ? h5 23 .i.e3 e4 24 .i.g2 with a complete mess) 22...'ii'c2 23 l:!.d5 'ii'xb2 24 .i.xc5 bxc5 25 .i.g4+ 'it>b8 26 .i.f3 'it>c8 ! (26 ...'ii'b6?? loses to 27 l:!.xd6! , and 26...'it>a7?? to 27 l:!.xd6!) 27 .i.g4+ Wb8 with a draw by repetition. •.•

26 'ii'c4? White should infiltrate behind the black pawns by playing 26 'ii'c 8 ! : 1 ) 26 . . .'ii'c l 27 'ii'f8+ We5 28 .i.f3 Wf6 29 'ii'd8+ 'it>g6 30 'ii'd3+ 'it>f6 3 1 'ii'd4+ �g6 (after 3 1 ...'it>e7 32 'ii'xg7 White has a clear advantage) 32 .i.h5+! (I overlooked this move during the game) 32... �xh5 (32 ...'it>h7 loses to 33 .i.xf7) 33 'ii'xg7 'ii'c6+ 34 f3 (not 34 �h3? 'ii'f3 ! 35

116

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

Hastening the end. More resilient is the pa­ tient 29 ...�e7 30 Wa8 Wd4 3 1 Wg8 Wf6 32 Wh7+ �d6 33 g4, when White has just a slight edge. 30 'ii'd3+ �cS 31 'ii'h5+ �d6 The king must retreat, since 3 1 ...�d4 32 Wb2+ costs Black his queen. 32 'ii'c6+ �e7 33 ..txhS 'ii'd5+ 34 ..tf3 'i!Vxc6 35 ..txc6 �d6 36 h4 The passed pawn is decisive. 36...gxh4 37 gxh4 �e7 38 hS �f6 39 f4 �g7 40 �g3 �7 41 �h4 �f6 42 ..tbS c5 43 ..tc4 e5 44 fxe5+ �xeS 45 �gS �d4 46 ..te6 c4 47 i.xf5 1-0

'ii'g5+ hxg5 with an unexpected draw by stale­ mate) 34...'ii'c2+ 35 �h3 'ii'g6 36 g4+ �g5 37 'ii'e5+ and White wins. 2) 26 ... 'iif6 27 'ii'f8+ d7 28 ..tb7 e5 29 'iic8+ �d6 30 We8 c5 3 1 Wc6+ xe5 29 i.xc6, with a decisive advantage for White. 22 ...bxc4 23 .l:ta6 I thought this was the knockout punch but as usual Dmitry finds a resourceful defensive idea. White has a choice of strong alternatives: 1) 23 l:ta4 tbxg4 24 'ii'xf7+ g3 a4 44 'it>g4 'it>h6 45 l:.al Also hopeless is 45 h4 gxh4 46 �xh4 a3 47 'iii>g4 'it>g6 and Black wins. 45 :Xb7 46 l:txa4 l:.b3 White has no way to defend the e5-pawn. 47 :as l:.b4+ 4S 'iitf3 l:.f4+ 49 �g3 'iii>g7 50 l:.a3 l:.e4 51 �f3 l:.xe5 52 g3 l:.e4 53 %:ta7 l:.b4 54 l:.d7 'it>g6 55 l:.c7 f6 56 l:.d7 �f5 0-1 •••

•••

•.

•••

·

Game Lessons: I ) Quiet positions can easily be lost because of one or two inaccurate moves. White started to drift by playing 20 dxc5?!, which gave Black some activity along the g i -a7 diagonal. 2) The careless 3 I 'it>h2? allowed Black to simplify into a favourable rook endgame; White was eventually unable to defend his exposed e5-pawn.

Game 52: Queen in the Corner

Christopher Chase 2340 - James Rizzitano 2440 MA Open Ch, Wa tertown 1 983 83 1 Sici lian Defence, Rossolimo 1 e4 c5 2 lLlf3 lLlc6 3 i..b5 g6 4 0-0 i..g7 5 l:.el e5 6 c3 lLlge7 7 d4 cxd4 S cxd4 exd4 9 i..f4 d6 9 ... a6 is more usual. 10 lLlaJ White should prefer I 0 lLlxd4 0-0, with equal chances. 10 0-0 ll lLlc4 d5 12 exd5 (D) 12 lLlxd5?! •••

..•

Sharper is I2 ...1i'xd5 ! 1 3 lLld6 i..g4 I4 i..c4 i..xf3 and now: I ) I 5 i..xd5 i..xd I I 6 i..xc6 bxc6 and in the endgame the passed d4-pawn gives Black a clear advantage. 2) I 5 gxf3 'ifh5 I 6 lLlxb7 lLlf5 and Black has good attacking chances against the weak­ ened kingside.

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

122

1 ) 1 9 ...'ifxc6 20 'ifxd6 'ifxc4 21 'ii'b8+ .i.f8 22 'ii'xb7 lbf4 and the two pieces are superior to the rook. 2) 1 9....l:.e6!? (a zwischenzug - an in-between move - to exploit the weakness of White's first rank) 20 lb6e5 lbf4!? 21 lbf3 .l:.c6 22 'ii'e3 'ifxe3 23 lbxe3 �xb2 with an extra pawn. 20 'ifxdS 'ifc8 21 lbe3 .l:.cl+ 22 .l:.xcl 'ifxcl+ 23 lbd1 Black wins easily after 23 lbfl 'ifxb2. 23 .i.xb2 24 g3 (D) .••

3) 15 'ifb3 'ifh5 16 .i.xf7+ (White should prefer 16 'ifxf3 'ifxf3 17 gxf3, transposing to line '4') 16 ...�h8 17 'ifxf3 'ifxf3 18 gxf3 .l:.ad8 and White has too many loose pieces. 4) 15 'ifxf3 'ifxf3 16 gxf3 b6 and Black has a slight edge. 13 .i.d6 l:te8 14 l:txe8+ 'ifxe8 15 lbfeS?! White can maintain equality by playing 1 5 .i.e5. 1S .i.d7 16 .i.xc6 .i.xc6 17 'ifxd4 .l:.d8 18 'ifcs (D)

B

.•.

24 'ifa1! The exclamation mark is mainly for aes­ thetic reasons as there are several ways for Black to exploit his pawn advantage. The win­ ning plan is to burden the white queen with de­ fending the knight and then to advance the queenside pawns. By maintaining control of the long diagonal, Black also safeguards his king and eliminates White's main possibility of obtaining counterplay. 25 �g2 .i.d4 Black's bishop completely dominates the knight. 26 'ii'b3 The queen endgame after 26 lbe3 .i.xe3 27 fxe3 'ii'b2+ 28 �g1 h5 is an easy win for Black. 26 bS 27 h4 hS 28 �f3 aS 29 e2 'ifc1 30 f3 Simplification fails: 30 'ii'xb5 'ifc2+ 3 1 �el 'ifxa2 and the a-pawn runs through. 30 b4 31 g4?! Hastening the end. 31 hxg4 32 fxg4 'iff4 33 'ifh3 'ife4+ 34 d2 .i.eS 35· 'ii'd3 'ifxg4 36 'ii'd8+ g7 37 'ifxaS .i.f4+ 0-1 ..•

B

Both players were aiming for this position, but for different reasons. 18 .l:.xd6! 19 lbxc6 1 9 'ifxd6 .i.f8 snares the white queen in the centre of the board - note the strength of the centralized d5-knight. 19 .l:.xc6 I evaluated the position after Black's 23rd move as winning, so for practical reasons I did not spend a lot of time investigating the reason­ able alternatives: ••.

.••

•.•

••.

.•.

A CCUMULATING SMALL ADVANTAGES

Game Lessons: 1 ) Both players committed opening inaccuracies. The unusual tactical idea of 1 8 ...l:.xd6! enabled Black to win a pawn and retain the initiative.

123

2) The exploitation of a material advantage is much easier if the opponent cannot generate any counterplay. Black was able to safeguard his king, pin the white knight to the back rank and advance his queenside pawn-majority by playing 24...'ii'a 1 ! .

Game 53: Bishop-Pair

Patrick Wolff 2353 - James Rizzitano 2485 Rl State Ch, Providence 1 984 860 Sici l ia n Defence, R ichter-Rauzer 1 e4 c5 2 lLlf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 ltJxd4 lLlf6 5 ltJc3 a6 6 i.g5 lLlc6 Something a little off the well-worn path be­ ginning with 6 ...e6. 7 i.:xf6 This exchange doubles Black's pawns at the cost of conceding the bishop-pair. 7...gxf6 8 i.e2 (D) One month later Patrick varied with 8 'ii'd2 h5? ! (the immediate 8 ... 'ifb6 or 8 ...ltJxd4 ! ? 9 'ii'xd4 i.g7 is safer) 9 f4 'ii'b6 1 0 lLlb3 e6 1 1 0-0-0 i.d7 1 2 i.e2 0-0-0 1 3 h4 ! ? with an un­ balanced game. in Wolff-Rizzitano, New York Open 1 984. A draw was eventually agreed "af­ ter bad play by both of us", according to Patrick in his humorous 1984 Chess Horizons notes to these games.

B

8 l:.g8 9 g3 'ii'b6 10 lLlb3 Not 10 liJd5? 'ii'xd4 1 1 lLlc7+ 'iitd t 8 1 2 lLlxa8 'ii'a7, when Black recovers the knight with ad­ vantage. •••

10 e6 1 1 'ii'd2 i.d7 12 a4 Also possible is 1 2 f4 0-0-0 1 3 0-0-0 'iittb8 14 'iittb 1 ltJa5 with equal chances in Wedberg-Sig­ uijonsson, Esbjerg 1 983. 12 ltJa5 A standard manoeuvre in this type of posi­ tion to prevent White from obtaining a queen­ side space advantage by playing a5. 13 lLlxa5 'ii'xa5 14 'ii'd4 l:.c8 15 0-0 i.e7 16 i.d3?! This is an unfortunate square for the bishop. The queen tango manoeuvre 16 'ii'a7 !? is wor­ thy of consideration: 1 ) 16 ...'ii'b4 17 l:.a3 ! 1i'xb2 1 8 l:.b3 1i'xc2 19 l:.xb7 l:.d8 20 i.xa6 and White has a strong at­ tack. 2) 1 6...i.c6 1 7 i.b5 ! (a rare back-door pin) 17 ...'ii'c7 1 8 i.xc6+ 'ii'xc6 19 l:.a3 ! intending l:.b3; White has an edge. 3) 16 ...'ii'c7! 1 7 1i'e3 ( 1 7 a5 d5 ! 1 8 1i'e3 dxe4 1 9 'ii'xe4 f5 is fine for Black) 17 ...1i'c5 1 8 1i'h6 (the point of the previous diversion) 1 8 ...f5 !? 1 9 1i'xh7 i.f6 ! ? 20 1i'xg8+ 'iitet 7 2 1 1i'xc8 (stronger than 2 1 1i'h7 l:.h8 22 1i'xh8 i.xh8 23 exf5 i.xc3 24 bxc3 1i'xf5 and if 25 i.d3 then 25 ...'it'f3 intending ... i.c6 is advantageous for Black) 2 l ...i.xc8 22 exf5 i.xc3 23 bxc3 'ifxf5 24 i.d3 and now 24 ...1i'c5 yields a dynamically balanced game (instead, after 24...1i'f3, 25 l:.fe 1 i.d7 26 l:.e3 boots the black queen - this is why White should capture the black rook on the c8square). 16 h5 17 b4? 1 7 1i'a7 ! ? is interesting, as in the previous note. 17 Ji'e5 18 lLle2 •••

•.•

•••

••

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

124

After 1 8 'it'xeS fxeS 19 ltJe2 dS 20 c3 fS Black has a clear advantage because of his cen­ tral pawn phalanx and bishop-pair. 18 ...'ii'xd4 19 ltJxd4 (D)

37 ...�d6 38 .l:lfS 'itxe6 39 l:tf4 l:.h3+ 40 �f2 l:lgh8 41 l:.g4 'iteS and Black wins. 36 liJd4 (D) 36 �fS is also hopeless: 36....l:lh 1 37 b6 .:n + and Black wins.

B

19 f5! Patrick overlooked this move, which un­ leashes the dark-squared bishop to exploit the line-up of white pieces on the long diagonal. 20 exfS �f6 21 fxe6 fxe6 22 liJb3 White has no choice but to sacrifice the ex­ change. 22 �xal 23 l:lxal We7 24 bS axbS 25 axbS :as 26 .:tel White must retain his remaining rook for de­ fence as 26 %ha8? l:txa8 27 f4 l:ta4! is winning for Black. 26 l:ta4 27 liJd2 dS 27 ...l:tb4 28 c4 l:.a8 is also possible, and gives Black a clear advantage. 28 liJf3 l:tb4 29 l:teS h4 The greedy 29 ...�xb5 30 �xbS l:txbS 3 1 liJd4 l:.b4 should also b e sufficient. 30 liJgS hxg3 31 hxg3 l:lg4 32 f4 Black wins another pawn after 32 liJf3 �d6 33 'iii>g2 l:.b4. 32 .:.Xg3+ 33 xeS 39 liJf3+ 'iitd6 40 liJd4 l:tg3+ 41 Wd2 WcS 42 c3 l:.h3 The winning plan is to manoeuvre the black bishop to the c4-square. 43 liJb3+ 'iii>b6 44 liJd4 �g4 45 �n .l:lg3 46 ..td3 �n 47 .to ..te4 48 liJb3 ..tbt 49 liJd4 �a2 SO ..td3 ..tc4 0-1 ••.

Game Lessons: 1) Several standard Sicilian Defence ideas were demonstrated: a) Queenside defence: 1 2 ...ltJa5 prevented White from obtaining a queenside bind with aS. b) Queen centralization: the move 17 ...'it'e5 challenged the centralized white queen. c) Expansion of the small centre: 19 ...f5 ! led to the win of material because of White's loose d4-knight. 2) The exploitation of Black's exchange ad­ vantage was a slow but steady process; the win­ ning idea was to march the black bishop around the board to the c4-square so as to win the bS­ pawn.

A Question of Style The club player often describes himself as having either an 'attacking style' or a 'positional style'. When the sharp tactician falters in a quiet positional struggle, he blames it on 'not being my type of

125

ACCUMULATING SMAU ADVANTAGES

position' . Hyou think in this manner, you don't have a style, you have weaknesses. The reality is that you must learn to play in a manner appropriate for the position on the board. A player' s pref­ erence for a particular style of play may influence his initial choice of opening, or whether he chooses the sharpest variation within an opening. However, after the beginning phase of the game has been completed, let the position on the board dictate the correct style of play. For example, if your opponent has a development advantage and the position calls for patient defence, don't launch a premature attack. The problem can be summarized by the old construction expression 'If all you've got is a hammer, everything looks like a nail ' . Ensure that your chess toolbox contains the right tool for the job. Strong players are able to handle all types of positions well. A similar issue arises in the endgame. Club players frequently express a preference for one mi­ nor piece over the other without regard for the pawn-structure, yet it is often the pawn-structure which determines whether the bishop or knight is superior. During the transition phase from the middlegame to the endgame, aim for the pawn-structure which is most favourable for the pieces re­ maining on the board. If you have the two bishops, try to identify some suitable targets for them. The value of a knight can be enhanced by fixing the opponent's pawns on the same colour square as his bishop or by securing a suitable outpost square. Be objective about the relative strengths and weaknesses of the bishop and knight. Learn to handle both minor pieces well fall in love with people, not chess pieces. Let's take a look at some games featuring the transition into a favourable endgame for a particular minor piece. -

Game 54: Good Bishop vs Bad Knight

John Curdo 2446 - James Rizzitano 2532 Rl State Ch, Providence 1 985 830 Sici l ian Defence, Rossolimo, 1 e4 c5 2 lZJf3 lZJc6 3 .i.b5 e6 4 0-0 John has also played 4 .i.xc6 bxc6 5 c4 d6 6 0-0 (6 d4 cxd4 7 'ii'xd4 e5 8 'ii'd3 lZJf6 9 lZJc3 i..e7 1 0 0-0 0-0 is equal, Curdo-Rizzitano, Billerica 1 984) 6...e5 7 d3 i..e7 8 lZJc3 f5 9 exf5 i..xf5 1 0 lZJe4 lZJf6 with equal chances, Curdo­ Rizzitano, New England Open Ch, Cromwell 1 986. 4 lZJge7 5 c3 a6 6 .i.xc6 A harmless alternative to the usual 6 i..a4. White will spend the next 70 moves missing his light-squared bishop. 6 lZJxc6 7 d4 cxd4 Also possible is 7 ...d5 8 e5 .i.d7 9 l:te 1 l:tc8 10 dxc5 i..xc5 1 1 lZJbd2 0-0 12 lZJb3 i..e7 1 3 lZJbd4 'ii'b6 1 4 'ii'e2 lZJxd4 1 5 lZJxd4 f5 ! with equal prospects, Mortensen-Larsen, Grrested 1990. 8 cxd4 d5 9 exd5 exd5 10 lZJcJ Also possible is 10 l:te 1+ i..e7 1 1 i..g5 f6 12 .i.f4 0-0 1 3 lZJc3 .i.g4 with equal chances, Lag­ unov-Warszawski, Porz Open 1 99 1 . 1 0...i..e7 1 l 'ii'b3 .i.e6 1 2 i..f4 (D)

B

•.•

•..

12 lZJas!? A novelty; an earlier game featured immedi­ ate queenside expansion: 12 ...b5 13 lZJe2 0-0 1 4 lZJe5 l:tc8 15 l:tac 1 lZJxe5 16 i..xe5 l:tc4 is equal, Torre-Cobo Arteaga, Reggio Emilia 1972/3. 13 'W'd1 0-0 14 :tel l:lc8 15 lZJeS lZJc4 16 lZJxc4 l:txc4 17 .i.e5 'ii'd7 18 'ii'd2 .l:.fc8 19 l:tacl b5 20 b3 l:t4c6 21 lZJe2 f6 22 i..g3 i..f5 23 l:txc6 l:txc6 24 l:tc1 'ii'c8 25 :Xc6 'ii'xc6 •••

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

126

The exchange of both pairs of rooks has left Black with the bishop-pair and a slight but per­ sistent advantage in the endgame. Hal Terrie annotated this game in the 1 985 NHCA News­ letter: "Watching this game, I was surprised by all these exchanges, since it appeared that Curdo was playing solely for a draw - some­ thing I couldn't remember ever having seen him do, even against GMs. In any case, at this point in the game I thought he would soon achieve the draw. Little did I realize just how determined Rizzitano was." 26 h3 e8 3 1 'fi'h5+ e8 39 i.xc5 'i!i'e6 40 'ili'h8+ g2 i.b5 49 'it>f2 a5 (D) .••

w

•.•

•.•

B

50 ti::Jbl Black eventually breaks through after 50 f4+ �f5 5 1 'it>f3 i.c6+ 52 'it>f2 i.d5 53 'it>e2 �g4 54 'it>f2 f5 55 ti::Jf l h4 56 gxh4 g4 59 tl:Jc4 'it>xf4 60 tl:Jxa5 'it>g3 61 tl:Jc4 f4 62 ti::Jd2 ..tf5 and Black will queen one of his passed pawns. 5o r5 51 ti::Jd2 (vJ .••

B

35 'ili'd3 36 �n 'ili'c3 Black is trying to exchange queens under the most favourable circumstances. 37 'ili'd2 The passed d-pawn is unstoppable after 37 tl:Jel d4! 38 'i!i'xh5 d3 ! and Black wins. 37 i.d3+ 38 'it>gl The king moves away from the centre as af­ ter 38 'it>e l the reply 38 .....te4 is powerful. 38 'i!i'xd2 39 tl:Jxd2 'it>f7 40 f3 ..td6 41 'it>f2 ..tc5+ 42 'it>el 'ite6 43 i.f2 �xf2+ 44 'it>xf2 �e5 45 'it>e3 �b5 45 ... i.c2 is also strong. •••

.•.

••.

51 d3 In their NHCA Newsletter notes, Hal Terrie and Brian Warnock point out that Black can win more quickly by playing the immediate 5 l ...f4!. White then has: 1) 52 g4 h4 (during the game I overlooked the strength of this move) 53 �g2 d3 54 �h3 �d4 55 ti::Jfl 'it>c3 and Black wins. .••

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

128

2) 52 'itg2 d3 53 'ifi>f2 fxg3+ 54 'itxg3 'ifi>d4 55 �f2 h4 and Black wins. 52 'iti>e3 f4+! Creating a passed h-pawn to exploit the natu­ ral advantage of the bishop over the knight. 53 gxf4+ 'itf5 54 lL!e4 h4! 55 lL!d6+ �e6 56 lL!e4 The bishop is immune because 56 lL!xb5 h3 57 f5+ (57 lL!d4+ loses to 57 ... 'itf6) 57 . . .'�d7 wins for Black (as does 57 ...'ite7 58 f6+ �f8 ! ­ Black must be careful to avoid lLld6-e4 tricks). 56 �a6 57 lL!g5+ �f5 58 lL!e4 Black mops up after 58 lL!h3 d2 59 �xd2 �fl 60 lLlf2 'itxf4 61 �el �g2. 58...'iti>g6 (D)

B

•••

w

59 �f2 Also insufficient is 59 lLlf2 �b5 60 'iti>d2 �f5 6 1 lLlh3 �a6 62 'iti>e3 d2 63 'itxd2 �fl 64 lL!g1 h3 65 lL!xh3 �xh3 66 'ite3 �fl 67 �d4 �xf4 and now: 1 ) 68 a3 (trying to exploit Black's wrong­ coloured bishop and rook's pawn combination) 68 ...bxa3 69 'iti>c3 'itxf3 70 'itc2 �d3+! (king on a string) 7 1 'iti>c1 (7 1 'itxd3 a2) 7 1 ...'ite3 and the a-pawn queens. 2) 68 'iti>c5 'ite3 69 �b6 'iti>d4 70 'iti>xa5 'iti>c3 71 �a4 �d3 72 a3 (72 f4 �f5 73 �b5 �b1 is winning for Black) 72 ...�b5+! 73 �xb5 bxa3 and the a-pawn queens. 59...�c8 60 �e3 �f5 61 lLld2 �f6 The king heads for the queenside to prepare the decisive breakthrough. 62 lL!n 'ite6 63 lLlh2 hJ 64 lL!n �d5 65 d2 'iti>c5 66 'iti>e3 �b5 67 'it>f2 a4 68 �e3 a3 69 �f2 'it>c5 70 �e3 (D) 70...�h7

The flashy 70...�e6 is also good: 1 ) 7 1 �xd3 �c4+ (or 7 1 .. .�xb3) 72 'iti>e3 (72 bxc4 b3 wins for Black) 72 ... �xfl 73 'ifi>f2 h2 and Black wins. 2) 7 1 lLld2 h2 72 lL!e4+ 'itc6 73 lLlf2 �xb3 is winning for Black. 71 �d2 'iti>d4 72 f5 Or 72 lLlh2 �g8 73 f5 �xb3 and Black wins. 72...�xf5 73 lLlg3 �h7 74 f4 h2 75 lLlh1 Or 75 f5 �xf5 76 lLlxf5+ 'iti>e4 77 lLlg3+ �f3 78 lLlh 1 �g2 79 'itxd3 �xh1 and Black wins. 75...�e4 76 lL!g3 h1'fi' 77 lLlf5+ An example of John's wry sense of humour: capturing the knight would be stalemate. 77...r3;c5 0-1

Game Lessons: 1) The key to Black's success in this game was having the patience to accumulate a series of small advantages. A draw appeared to be the most probable result after White simplified the game early on by playing 6 .ixc6 (conceding the bishop-pair) and later exchanged a pair of knights by playing 16 lLlxc4. Black had a slight pull which grew stronger after 27 ...b4!, taking aim at White's vulnerable queenside pawns. 2) Both players made some inaccuracies during the middlegame. Black missed the op­ portunity to increase his advantage by playing 29 ...�g8 or 29 ...'ifi>f8 instead of 29 ...'itg7? White returned the favour several moves later by playing 32 h4? instead ofthe stronger 32 lLlc5 ! . 3) Black managed to spread out the board to exploit the natural advantage of the bishop over the knight. The pawn sacrifice 52 ...f4+! is a standard idea in this type of endgame; Black

ACCUMULATING SMALL ADVANTAGES

obtained a strong outside passed h-pawn for the small cost of giving White an extra doubled f-pawn. The decisive manoeuvre was fairly

129

straightforward although somewhat lengthy the winning plan was to create threats on both sides of the board.

Game 55: Good Knight vs Bad Bishop

John Curdo 2447 - James Rizzitano 2513 Rl State Ch, Providence 1 986 A03 Bird's Opening 1 f4 John played the white pieces in over 70% (43 out of 6 1 ) of our games; this is one of only two games in which he varied from his custom� � �. 1 ...d5 2 lt:Jf3 lt:Jf6 3 d3 lt:Jc6 More usual is 3 ...c5 or 3 ...g6 here; the game continuation aims for rapid development. 4 c3 i.g4 5 lt:Jbd2 e6 6 g3 i.c5 Black is willing to lose a tempo after an eventual d4 advance by White in order to create a hole on the e4-square. 7 i.g2 a5 8 d4 i.e7 9 0-0 0-0 10 'ilfel i.f5 11 lt:Jg5 h6 12 e4 (D)

B

12...i.g6! A subtle but important finesse to force the white knight offside. 13 lt:Jh3 lt:Jxe4 Stronger than 1 3 ... dx�. when 14 lt:Jf2 recy­ cles the knight back into the game. 14 lt:Jxe4 i.xe4 15 i.xe4 dxe4 16 'ilfxe4 'ilfd5 17 'i!fxd5 1 7 lt:Jf2 l:lfd8 1 8 'ilfxd5 .Uxd5 is also comfort­ able for Black.

17 exd5 18 f5 (D) .•.

B

18...lt:Ja7! The knight was Black's worst placed piece; now it can be redeployed by playing ... lt:Jc8-d6 and the d5-pawn can be defended by ... c6. 19 lt:Jf4 l:tfd8 20 l:te1 lt:Jc8 21 i.d2 c6 22 l:te2 i.f8 23 g4 lt:Jd6 24 lt:Jh5 l:te8 Black seeks to exchange one set of rooks in order to nullify any potential white threat along the open e-file. 25 l:tae1 l:lxe2 26 l:txe2 (D) 26...b5 The mechanical 26. . . l:te8 would lead to a quick draw, but Black can play for more be­ cause his bishop has more scope than its coun­ terpart. White has no way to take advantage of his control of the e-file because all of the entry squares are well-protected. 27 i.f4 lt:Jc4 28 h4 b4 29 b3? A positional error which creates queenside targets. White should hang on with 29 f6 g6 30 lt:Jg3. 29...lt:Ja3! 30 cxb4 axb4 31 g5 hxg5 32 hxg5 lt:Jb5

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

130

The only square available to avoid a devas­ tating knight fork. 38 li'lxf5 39 l:.h5 li'ld4 40 l:tg5+ �h7 41 l:tg7+ �h6 (D)

B

.••

w

The knight continues its rain dance which has left White's queenside pawn-structure in ruins. 33 l:tg2 Going for broke as 33 l:td2 li'lc3 costs White the a2-pawn. 33 li'lxd4 34 li'lf6+ gxf6 35 gxf6+ John offered a draw after playing this move. 35 ...�h7 36 l:th2+ (D) •••

B

42 .i.f4+ 42 l:txf7 is also hopeless: 42 ... �g6 43 l:tg7+ �xf6 44 l:tg2 c5 and Black wins. 42...�h5 43 �h2 li'le6 44 l:th7+ Wg4 45 .i.d6 l:txa2+ The black rook finally makes a move and it is a good one. 46 �g1 li'lg5 47 l:tg7 'iti>f5 48 ..txb4 l:tb2 0-1 Game Lessons:

36 ..th6!! John appeared stunned that Black could play this move and thought for a long time over his forced reply. The end result of the fireworks is that a set of minor pieces has been exchanged and Black is left with a dominant knight vs a bishop that can't seem to step out of its own way. 37 l:txh6+ Black wins after 37 .i.xh6 li'lf3+ 38 �h 1 lt'lxh2. 37 q;,g8 Threatening ...li'le2+. 38 ..tc7 •••

•.•

1) The opening phase of the game revolved around the balance between time and positional concessions. Black was willing to concede a tempo by playing 6 ....i.c5 because the later 8 d4 created a hole on the e4-square. The subtle 12 ... i.g6 ! regained some time by forcing White to retreat his knight to the edge of the board. 2) The strategic redeployment starting with 1 8 ..lt'la7 ! was part of a long-range plan to at­ tack on the queenside, where Black had a slight edge because of his superior bishop. Black sought to exchange only one pair of rooks along the open e-file because White's entry squares were covered (similar to Game 24) and Black's remaining rook could be used to facilitate a queenside pawn advance. 3) The unusual tactical idea 36 ... i.h6 ! ! worked because White's fixed pawns were vul­ nerable to attack from the black knight - the white bishop was ineffective because it did not have any targets. . .

ACCUMULATING SMALL ADVANTAGES

131

Game 56: Equal But Not Drawn

Aki Kanamori 2317 - James Rizzitano 2549 MA Open Ch, Newton 1 987 DlO Slav 1 ltlf3 d5 2 c4 c6 3 cxd5 cxd5 4 ltlc3 ltlc6 5 d4 .tg4 6 .tf4 e6 7 e3 .i.d6!? Surprisingly, this move does not appear to have been played previously. 8 .i.xd6 �xd6 9 .tb5 The bishop does not serve any purpose here; it is safer to break the pin with 9 .te2. 9...ltle7 The early exchange of dark-squared bishops and one open file could easily lead to a quick draw if the heavy lumber is exchanged along the c-file. The knight deployment to the e7-square slightly unbalances the position and supports an eventual pawn advance in the centre. 10 h3 .i.h5 11 0-0 0-0 12 .:tel White offered a draw after playing this move; the position may be equal but it is certainly not drawn. 12 :tac8 13 ltla4 The knight excursion leads to trouble; White should break the kingside pin by playing 1 3 .te2 with equal chances. The game continua­ tion is characteristic of an interesting phenome­ non which sometimes occurs - after having a draw offer refused, it is very common for play­ ers to become slightly steamed up and suddenly play more aggressively. 13...f6 Angling for an eventual ... e5 thrust. 14 ltlc5 l:tc7 15 l:tc3 l:tfc8 16 �e2 The most perceptive move is 1 6 .te2 break­ ing the pin, but White is operating under the il­ lusion that he has attacking chances on the queenside. 16 e5 17 g4 White was compelled to break the pin be­ cause of the threat of ...e4, but now Black has a target to attack. 17 .i.g6 18 l:tfcl (D) 18 ltld8! A dual-purpose move which contains a subtle tactical point and prepares an eventual ...ltle6 to exert pressure on the weak kingside squares. 19 llJh4 •••

.••

•••

.•.

B

19 llJa4 a6! embarrasses the white bishop. 19 b6 20 ltld3 l:txc3 21 l:txc3 l:txc3 22 bxc3 White is saddled with a pawn weakness on the queenside. 22...ltle6 23 f4? A bold attempt to alleviate the pressure by tactical means, but it allows Black to simplify into a winning endgame. A better try is 23 ltlxg6 ltlxg6 although Black has a slight edge because of White's weak kingside squares. 23 .txd3 24 .txd3 exf4 25 llJf5 llJxf5 26 gxf5 It is too late for 26 .txf5 g6, when Black consolidates his extra pawn. 26 ltlg5 27 h4 (D) .•.

•••

•..

B

132

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

27 f3! Stronger than 27 ...lt:le4? 28 .i.xe4 dxe4 29 'ii'c4+ 'ii>f8 30 'ii'c 8+ ®f7 3 1 'ii'b7+ 'ii'e7 32 'ii'd5+ ®f8 with equality. 28 'ii'h2 f2+! 29 �h1 Of course, the pawn is immune from capture because of the knight fork. 29 'ii'xh2+ 30 ®xb2 lt:le4 31 'ii>g2 Black mops up after 3 1 c4 lt:ld2. 31. ..lt:lxc3 32 a3 (D) ••.

The a-pawn cannot be caught after 4 1 axb5 a4 42 b6 a3 43 b7 ®c7.

B

•.•

B

41 lt:lxe4+ 42 'iii>e3 b4 43 .i.b5 lt:lc3 0-1 •••

Game Lessons:

32 lt:ld1! The knight manoeuvre forces White to lose several tempi to recover the f2-pawn. 33 �3 ®rs 34 .tn Or 34 �e2 f1 'if+ 35 ®xfl lt:lxe3+ and Black wins. 34 ®e7 35 �e2 lt:lc3+ 36 �xf2 lt:lb1 37 a4 lt:lc3 38 .i.b5 aS! The shortest path to victory is to create a passed pawn on the queenside. 39 .i.c6 �d6 40 .te8 b5! 41 e4 (D) ••.

•••

I) Black was able to unbalance the position slightly by playing 9 ...lt:le7, which retained the option of advancing in the centre with .. .f6 and ...e5. 2) White pursued an ill-advised plan of at­ tack on the queenside. The combination of the moves 9 .i.b5, 1 3 lt:la4 and 1 6 'ii'e2 led to diffi­ culties because of the pin of the f3-knight; White was compelled to play g4, which created kingside weaknesses. 3) The retreat 1 8 ...lt:ld8! prepared to saddle White with a weak pawn after the exchange of rooks on the c3-square. The overly-aggressive 23 f4? enabled Black to simplify into a winning endgame.

8 Runaway Tactics

Exchanging the Wrong Piece Sometimes piece exchanges arise out of the normal course of an opening. Many variations of the Sicilian Defence feature a white knight on d4 vs a black knight on c6, or a white bishop on g5 vs a black knight on f6. The situation may remain this way for many moves as neither player is eager to resolve the central tension. Another example occurs in the Nimzo-Indian Defence; in many varia­ tions the possibility of the black bishop on b4 capturing the white knight on c3 must be considered for many moves. The proper handling of middlegame piece exchanges is a critical part of improving your chess understanding. Let's take a look at a few of the typical piece exchange issues which may arise dur­ ing a game: 1 ) My opponent has only one piece defending his king - how can I exchange it or lure it to the other side of the board? 2) My opponent has only one piece that can defend a vulnerable square - is there a way to ex­ change it? 3) My opponent is trying to exchange his bishop for my knight - should I avoid the piece trade? 4) The endgame is approaching and the pawn-structure is relatively stable - which pieces, if any, should I seek to exchange? 5) The endgame is approaching and the pawn-structure is somewhat fluid - should I attempt to fix the pawn-structure, or should I improve the position of my pieces? Of course there is no way to answer these questions without having a specific position in mind, but the idea is to start thinking about the strategic planning that must be done during a game.

Game 57: Relentless Pursuit of a Bad Plan

Rodney Malpert 2050 James Rizzitano 1800 National Jr High School Ch, Waltham 1 9 76 -

82 1 Sici lian Defence, Morra Gambit Black repeatedly retreats a well-placed knight in order to facilitate kingside castling - when he finally has the opportunity to safeguard his king, he rejects it because of a tactical miscal­ culation. Neither player was up to the task of handling the sharp middlegame tactics. White misses a decisive combination and prematurely simplifies into an equal endgame.

1 e4 c5 2 d4 cxd4 3 c3 Rodney may have chosen a sharp opening because he was half a point behind me heading into this last-round game.

3...dxc3 4 lt:Jxc3 lt:Jc6 5 lt:Jf3 d6 6 .i.c4 e6 7 0-0 lt:Jge7 8 .ig5 a6 Necessary to prevent White from playing 9 lt:Jb5. See Game 9 for the dreadful 8 ... h6??. 9 'iie2 h6 10 .i.e3 lt:Jg6 U lt:Jd4 A standard manoeuvre which centralizes the knight and prepares the pawn advance f4-f5 in order to increase the pressure along the sensi­ tive a2-g8 diagonal. ll .i.e7 Also possible is 1 1 . ..lt:Jxd4 12 .i.xd4 'iih 4!? with a complex position. 12 f4 lt:Jxd4 ...

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

134

Black exchanges two sets of minor pieces in order to reduce White's attacking potential. 13 .txd4 ..i.f6 14 .i.xf6 White runs into trouble along the g1 -a7 diag­ onal after 14 l:tad 1 .i.xd4+ 15 l:.xd4 b5 1 6 ..i.b3 Vb6 and Black consolidates his extra pawn. 14 Vxf6 15 l:tad1 'iVd8 16 'iVd2 'iVb6+ 17 'ifr>h1 .i.d7 18 fS!? White understandably rejects the simplify­ ing 1 8 Vxd6 Vxd6 19 l:txd6 l:tc8 20 .i.e2 'it>e7 with equality. · 18 ltJe5 19 fxe6 fxe6 20 .i.b3 (D) •..

.••

Black also has difficulties after 22 ...d5 23 'ii'c 3 (23 ..i.xd5 ltJf7 24 .i.xb7 l:td8 { 24 . . .Vxb7 loses to 25 l:.xf7 } 25 Vc2 gives White a clear advantage) 23 ...ltJg4 24 Vxg7 0-0-0 25 l:.c 1 + .i.c6 (25 .. .'ifo>b8 loses to 26 ltJc5) 26 'ii'xg4 dxe4 27 Vxe4 'it>b8 28 'ii'xe6 and White has an extra pawn. 23 .tc2? (D) A sympathy blunder in reaction to Black's previous move. White should take advantage of his well-placed pieces by playing 23 l:txf7 ! 'ifr>xf7 24 ltJxd6+ 'it>g8 (24...'it>e7 loses to 25 ltJf5+ exf5 26 'ii'xd7+) 25 ltJc4 ! 'ii'c7 26 'ii'xd7 'ii'xd7 27 l:txd7 with a decisive advantage as Black is playing without a rook.

B

B

20 ltJf7? Of course the black knight was ideally situ­ ated on the e5-square. Black should step for­ ward to defend the d6-pawn and connect his rooks by playing the bold 20...'it>e7 ! 21 l:.f5 l:tad8, when the onus is on White to demon­ strate compensation for the sacrificed pawn. The reasoning behind the knight retreat was to block the f-file and prepare kingside castling. The standard Sicilian Defence idea of leaving the king in the centre to defend the d6-pawn was unknown to me at the time of the game. 21 e5! A common theme in many variations of the Sicilian Defence. White sacrifices his e-pawn so as to open lines of attack and vacate the e4square for a knight. 21. ltJxe5 Attempting to close the position with 21 ...d5? runs into the line-clearing sacrifice 22 ltJxd5 ! exd5 23 l:lxf7 0-0-0 (23 .. .'�xf7 loses to 24 Vxd5+ ..i.e6 25 'ii'd7+) 24 'ii'c 1 + 'ifr>b8 25 l:txd5 and White has an extra pawn. 22 ltJe4 ltJf7? •••

•.

23 l:lf8? Black has two stronger options: 1 ) 23 ...d5 24 'ii'c 3 ! and now: l a) 24...0-0 25 ltJf6+ gxf6 26 'ii'xf6 (threatening 'ii'g6+) 26 ...ltJe5 (26 ... ltJh8 27 'ii'xh6 l:.f7 28 l:txf7 Wxf7 29 Vh7+ 'ifr>f6 30 l:tfl + 'it>e5 3 1 'ii'xd7 with a decisive attack) 27 Vxh6 l:tf7 28 'ii'g5+ l:tg7 29 'ii'xe5 and White has some ad­ vantage because of Black's exposed king. 1 b) 24 ....tb5 25 'ii'xg7 .i.xfl 26 ltJf6+ 'it>e7 27 l:txfl l:taf8 28 .tg6 'ii'b5 29 .l:.c l with an un­ clear position. 2) 23 ... 0-0! (boldly castling into the attack) 24 'ii'd3 (24 .l:.xf7 l:txf7 25 ltJxd6 .l:.f2 26 'ii'd3 Vxb2 27 'ii'h7+ �f8 and Black wins) 24...ltJe5 and now White can try: 2a) 25 ltJf6+ (I was concerned about this move during the game, although at the time I could not accurately calculate the consequences) 25 ...l:txf6 26 'ii'h7+ 'ii;f7 27 .l:.xf6+ �xf6 28 l:lfl + h8 3 1 i...e 1 l:te7 32 i...f2 (with the idea of i...xb6) 32 ....if8 33 l:ta8 l:te8 34 gxh6 .ixh6 35 l:ta7 and White wins the c7-pawn. 1 b) 30... hxg5 3 1 .ih3 l:te7 32 .ic8 l:te8 33 'ii'xc7 'ii'xc7 34 l:txc7 'itr>h7 35 .ie6 and White has a decisive advantage. l c) 30 ...l:te7 3 1 i...h3 �f8 32 gxh6 i...xh6 33 l:ta8 l:e8 34 .ie1 .ig5 35 i...f2 and Black is hopelessly tied up. 2) 26 ...li:Jc5 (best) 27 l:ta7 li:Jb3 transposes into the game continuation without allowing White the option of capturing the c7-pawn with his queen as in the next note. 27 '5b7 li:Jd7 28 l:.a7 li:Jc5 29 11i'c6!? Also strong is the straightforward 29 'ii'xc7 'ii'xc7 30 l:txc7 l:ta8 31 l:tc6 l:ta2 32 .ib4 l:tb2 33 .ixc5 bxc5 34 l:txd6 and White has a deci­ sive material advantage. 29...li:Jb3 30 .ic3 li:Jd4 31 i...xd4 Not 3 1 'fixe?? 'ii'xc7 32 l:txc7 li:Jxb5 and Black escapes. .•.

·

RUNAWA Y TACTICS

31...exd4 32 :Xc7? Again passing up the superior endgame that was available by playing 32 'ikxc7 'ikxc7 33 lhc7 l:ta8 34 i.fl l:ta5 35 l:tc6 l:txb5 36 l:txd6. 32 d3! I played this line-opening move almost im­ mediately because it was clearly the only try for counterplay. Many times with somewhat obvi­ ous moves it is a real time-saver simply to play the move and proceed to analyse it on your op­ ponent's time. 33 exd3 Mike appears to be playing checkers in this game. 33 i.d4+ 34 �hl 'ikh4 35 'ikcl (D) •.•

137

36 l:ta8 37 .tn (D) •••

B

•..

37 l:tal? 37 ... 'ikel ! is correct: 1 ) 38 i.h3?? l:ta l 39 'ikxel l:txe l + 40 �g2 .id4 with a mating-net; for example, 41 l:tc8+ �f7 42 l:tc7+ �e8 43 l:tc8+ xh7 and Black survives to a lost rook endgame) 3 1 . . .1!kb5 32 .i.f5 'ilfxb3 33 :g7 'ilfd1 + 34 :xd1 ..t>xg7 35 :gl + and White has an extra bishop. 1 b) 30...'ilfd2 3 1 .i.f5 h5 32 :g7 (alternative plans such as 32 b4 are also promising as Black is hopelessly tied up defending against the mat­ ing threats) 32...'ilfh6 33 :h7+ 'ilfxh7 34 .i.xh7 �xh7 35 :n and White has a clear endgame advantage. 2) 26 .i.xc3 ! (simplest) 26...bxc3 (26 ... .ixc3 27 bxc3 bxc3 28 ..t>al and White wins) 27 'ilfe3 l:.b8 28 b3 and White has an extra rook. 26 .txe5 27 cxb4? There is no reason to allow the black rook into the game. Simpler is 27 c4! .i.c3 and after the creeping move 28 'ilfe3 !, White has an extra rook. 27...:b8 28 c3 'ilfa3 (D) ••.

w

2S....:tc3!? Played as though it were the most natural move on the board. After the 'normal' recapture 25 ... .txe5 26 .i.xc8 l:.xc8 27 :hn , White has won the exchange and Black has no counter­ play. At this point I happened to glance up and see John Fedorowicz observing the board with an expressive look of complete disbelief on his face. I was relieved when 'the Fed' moved on to the next game because I was afraid that I would burst out laughing if I looked up at him again. Sometimes in bad positions it is worthwhile radically changing the course of the game by playing an unexpected move (see Game 59. 1 ). 26 bxc3

29 l:.cl? Stronger is 29 'ilfc4 ! .i.xc3 (29 ...a5 loses to 30 'iWb3) 30 ..t>c2 :xb4 (30....i.xb4 3 1 'i!kb3 'i!ka5 32 :d4 with an extra rook) 3 1 'i!kc8+ ..t>h7 and now: 1) 32 l:.b1 l:.b2+ 33 l:lxb2 'i!kxb2+ 34 ..t>d3 'i!kd2+ 35 ..t>c4 'i!fd4+ (or 35 ... .i.e5 36 'ilff5+ g6 37 'ilfxf7+ .i.g7 38 e5 'ilfc2+ with a draw) 36 �b3 'i!kb4+ with a draw by perpetual check. 2) 32 'ilfxc3 'ilfxa2+ 33 ..t>d3 :b3 34 :c1 l:lxc3+ 35 ..t>xc� retains a material advantage

RUNA WA Y TACTICS

although Black will have plenty of annoying checks. 29 J:txb4+ 30 �c2 (D) ••

141

w

B

30 .'iia4+? I sensed that this was a critical moment and I thought for almost 30 minutes here before fi­ nally deciding to recover some material. Al­ though I was dissatisfied with this move, I couldn't find anything better during the game - later that evening I was stunned to discover what I had missed. Despite the rook deficit, Black can equalize by pinning the white king to the first rank and disrupting the communi­ cation between the white rooks by playing ei­ ther of the following: 1) 30 ....:tb2+ 3 1 �d1 ilia4+ (or 3 I ...i!Vxa2 transposing into the next variation) 32 �e1 (32 .:tc2 .:tb 1 + 33 �d2 l:.xh I is good for Black) 32 ...i.g3+! 33 �fl (33 ilixg3? ilixe4+ 34 �fl ilixh l + 35 iligl i!Vf3+ 36 �el ilie2#) 33 ... ilixa2 34 ilixg3 ilic4+ 35 �gl i!Vc5+ 36 'iii>fl ilic4+ with a draw by perpetual check. 2) 30 ...i!Vxa2+ 3 1 �d1 l:tb2 and now: 2a) 32 'iti>e l .:tf2 ! 33 l:.fl l:th2 34 'iti>d l i!Vb3+ 35 �e1 ilia2 and White must settle for 36 'it>d1 i!Vb3+ forcing a draw by perpetual check; not 36 .:tf3? i.g3+ 37 �d 1 ilib3+ 38 l:tc2 i.f4! and Black wins because of the threat of ...ilib 1 +. 2b) 32 :n l:th2 33 l:.f3 i!Vb3+ 34 �e1 ilib2 (D) and then: 2bl ) 35 ilie3 .i.f4! ! (I overlooked this move during the game) 36 .:txf4 (36 ilixf4 ilie2#) 36 .. J:txh3 37 ilixh3 ilixc l + 38 �e2 ilixf4 and Black has a clear plus in the queen endgame. 2b2) 35 �d l i!Vb3+ 36 �e l (36 .:tc2 .i.f4 ! ! and the opposite-coloured bishop strikes again) ..

36 ...i!Vb2 37 'iii>d l 'iWh3+ with a draw by repeti­ tion. A stunning example of the attacking power of opposite-coloured bishops. The dilemma Black faces on move 30 is typical of this sort of unbalanced position - how useful is the intu­ itive feeling that Black should have something? The solution is a question of calculation, not in­ tuition; either you see the idea of ....i.f4 or you don 't. See Game 59.2 for one of my favourite examples of a game featuring an endless com­ bination. 31 �d2 i.f4+ 32 �e2 .:txe4+ 33 'it>f2 Short of time, Orest avoids the murky 33 �f3 .:te3+ 34 ilixe3 .i.xe3 35 �xe3 ilixh4 36 c4, when again White has a material advantage but Black will have plenty of annoying checks. 33....i.xc1 34 l:txcl .:txh4 35 c4? White should safeguard his king by playing 35 �g1 ilixa2 36 l:.fl , with a clear advantage. 35 ilixa2+ 36 �g3 (D) •.•

B

36...l:.h5?

142

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

The black rook is well-placed on the h4square; stronger is 36 ...g5 ! 37 c5 'iia4 38 .l:!.fl dxc5 and now: 1 ) 39 'iif5 'iie8 is fine for Black. 2) 39 'iig6+ fxg6 40 i.e6+ e8?? 33 ..tb5+ mates) 33 1i'h8+ l:tg8 (33 .. .'�e7 34 'I'M+ c;t>f8 35 'i'h8+ with perpet­ ual check) 34 'i'h6+ with perpetual check. 2) 29 ..ti>e2 ..tM 30 'ii'f3 bxc3 with equal chances. 27 l:txc3 bxc3 28 f4 c2! The only move to stay on the board. 29 ..txc2 (D) 29...'ii'c8? Black overlooks White's crushing reply. The second rank must be defended by playing 29 ...1i'c7 !, and now: -

RUNAWA Y TACTICS

149

32 fxg5 'ii'xc2 33 'ii'xc2 l:txc2 34 l:r.xa7 The rook endgame is an easy win for White because of the connected passed pawns. 34 � 35 a4 d4 36 b4 l:.c6 37 ..ti>e2 l:.e6 38 b5 l:.xe5+ 39 �d3 1-0

B

...

Game Lessons:

1 ) 30 11i'xg5? 'ii'c5+ 3 1 �fl (3 1 �h2 l:th8+ 32 �g3 11i'e3+ 33 �g4 'ii'e2+ 34 �g3 'it'xa6 is good for Black) 3 1 ...11i'b5+ 32 �f2 'it'xa6 and White has inadequate compensation for the lost exchange. 2) 30 11i'f2? i.d8 (30 ... i.xf4? 3 1 'ii'xf4 'it'xc2 32 11i'f6+ �g8 33 �h2 gives White a slight edge) 3 1 g3 'ii'c3 32 �g2 i.b6 33 11i'e2 'iWd4 and Black has a strong attack as the white rook is out of play. 3) 30 fxg5 (best) 30 ...'it'xc2 3 1 'ii'e3 'ii'b l + 32 �f2 l:.e8 33 e6 l:txe6 34 l:txe6 (34 'ii'c3+ �g8 35 l:txa7 l:te8 is roughly equal) 34...'ii'f5+ 35 �g3 'it'xe6 36 'ii'd4+ �f8 37 'it'xa7 'it'e5+ 38 �f2 11i'f4+ 39 �e2 'it'g4+ with equality. 30 'ii'd3! Defending the bishop and renewing the threat of l:.xg6+. 30 11i'c5+ 31 'ittn l:.c8 Or 3 1 ...i.xf4 32 l:.xg6+ fxg6 33 'ii'xg6+ �h8 34 'ii'h7#. •.•

1) During the opening phase ofthe game, the central tension in this type of pawn-structure should usually be maintained as long as possible unless there is a compelling reason to release it. After the premature exchange 8 ...cxd4?, White was able to generate a powerful kingside attack by playing natural developing moves. Black did not obtain any benefit from the pawn trade be­ cause there was no line-up of major pieces along the c-file. 2) Before embarking upon an attack, try to eliminate any potential source of counterplay. White should have played the preparatory move 1 7 'ii'e3 ! to shore up the d4-pawn. White missed chances to end the game quickly with 24 l:td6 ! instead of 24 i.e5, and later 26 l:.d6 ! was supe­ rior to 26 l:.a6? - these tactical oversights were inexcusable because they involved direct at­ tacks on a major piece. 3) Always remain alert for a hidden defence based upon the weakness of the attacker's king position. Black overlooked the idea of 26 ...11i'e7 !, and later 29 ...11i'c7 ! would have maintained equal chances. In some variations White is the victim of blowback - the lines opened by the at­ tacker to initiate an assault are used by the de­ fender to launch a counterattack.

Game 6 1 : Runaway Train

James Rizzitano 2440 - Jonathan Schroer 2365 Heraldica International, New York 1 983 C l 6 French Defence, Wi nawer 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 ltJc3 i.b4 4 e5 ltJe7 5 lDf3 b6 Something a little different from the usual 5 ... c5; Black seeks to exchange his light-squared bishop. 6 i.d2 11i'd7 7 lDe2 i.xd2+ 8 'ii'xd2 .ta6 9 c3 c5 10 g3 lDbc6 11 lDf4 i.xfl 12 �xfl 0-0-0!?

Safer is 12 ...ltJg6 1 3 lDh5 0-0 14 'it'g5 f6 1 5 exf6 gxf6 1 6 11i'g4 ..ti>h8 1 7 l:.el l:tae8 1 8 �g2 'ii'f7 with equality in Sax-Vaiser, Szirak 1 985. 13 'it>g2 'it>b8 (D) 14 dxc5! White is able to develop some initiative after this unusual capture.

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

150

Safer is 27 ... 'ii'c6 ! 28 'iii>g l d4 29 cxd4 exd4 30 'ii'a3 with sharp play ahead. 28 l:.eb1 lDh4+? (D) 28 ... d4! is stronger: 29 'ii'e4+ 'ii'xe4+ 30 ltJxe4 l:lc6 with roughly equal chances.

w

w

14 bxc5 15 ltJd3 Forcing Black to advance the c5-pawn and cede control of the d4-square. 15 c4 16 ltJc5 1i'c8 17 b4 h6 18 .l::the1 g5 19 ltJd4?! White should avoid the exchange of knights by playing 1 9 b5 ! ltJaS 20 ltJa6+ 'iii>a8 21 lDd4 with a slight edge. 19 ltJg6 20 ltJxc6+ 'ii'xc6 21 'ii'd4 'iii>a8 22 a4 (D) •.•

••.

•••

B

22 f6! Jon temporarily sacrifices a pawn in order to generate some kingside counterplay. This move is a good example of the fuzzy science of chess intuition as it introduces complications which are beyond the ability of most players to calcu­ late accurately during a game. Both players are along for the ride over the next few moves as the position speeds out of control like a run­ away train. 23 b5 'ii'c8 24 exf6 e5 25 'ii'e3 .l::thf8 26 aS l:.xf6 27 b6 �g4?! .••

Now White has a choice: fight, flee or triangulate. 29 �h1? White chooses to fight. Alternatives: 1 ) Flee: White can head for the queenside by playing 29 'oti>fl 'ii'h3+ 30 'iii>e2 1i'g4+ 3 1 'it>d2 !? (White can repeat with 3 1 'iii>f l ) 3 I ...ltJf3+ 32 �c l d4 with a complete mess; for example, 33 cxd4 'ii'xd4 (33 ... l:.xd4 34 .l::ta3 looks good for White) 34 1i'xf3+ .l::td5 (34 ....l::txf3? 35 b7+ 'iii>b8 36 lDa6#) 35 l:.a2 and now: 1 a) 35 ...e4? (during the game I mistakenly thought this was fine for Black) 36 b7+! 'iii>b8 37 l:r.b6 ! ! (stronger than 37 'ii'xe4? 'ii'c 3+ 38 'ii'c2 'ii'e 1 + 39 �b2 'ii'e5+ with a draw) 37 ...axb6 (37 ....l::txb6? loses to 38 axb6 aS 39 1i'f8+ .l::td8 40 'ii'xd8+ 'i!Vxd8 41 .l::txa5) 38 axb6 'ii'b2+! ! (Black loses his queen after 38 ...1i'xc5 39 1i'xf6 'i!Vd6 40 'ii'h8+ �xb7 41 'ii'a8+) 39 �xb2 (39 l:.xb2?? loses to 39 ...exf3) 39 ....l::txb6+ 40 �c3 exf3 41 .l::ta8+ �c7 42 .l::tc8+ �d6 43 ltJe4+ 'oti>e5 (Black must continue to attack the knight) 44 l:.e8+ �f5 45 �xc4 .l::td I 46 g4+ ! �xg4 (46 .. .'itt f4 loses to 47 lDf6!) 47 b81i' .l::txb8 48 l:.xb8 l:.h I 49 �d3 .l::txh2 50 .l::tb6 and White should win the endgame. I b) 35 ...�b8 ! 36 bxa7+ (36 b7 .l::txc5 is good for Black since 37 'ii'xf6? 'ii'c 3+ mates shortly) 36 ...�xa7 37 'ii'xf6 (37 'ii'e4 'ii'c 3+ 38 .l::tc2 'ii'a3+ draws) 37 ...1i'c3+ 38 .l::tc2 'ii'a3+ with a draw by perpetual check.

RUNAWA Y TACTICS

2) Triangulate: White can avoid the ex­ change of queens by playing 29 �g1 ! t2Jf3+ 30 Wh 1 , and now: 2a) 30 .. .'ilkh3?? 31 'ii'xf3 ! .l:txf3 32 b7+ �b8 33 l2Ja6#. 2b) 30 ...'ii'h5 (this is the move I was afraid of) 3 1 b7+ Wb8 32 t2Jd7+! �c7 (32 ....l:txd7 33 'ii'xa7+ ! �xa7 34 b8'ii'+ Wa6 35 .l:tb6+ l:txb6 36 'ii'xb6#) 33 b8'ii'+ l:txb8 34 'ii'xa7+ �d6 35 'ii'xb8+ We7 (during the game I was unable to analyse this position accurately) 36 h4 and now: 2b 1) 36 ...'ii'g4 loses to 37 'ii'e8+ ! ; buy that knight a new set of horseshoes! 2b2) 36...t2Jxh4 37 'ii'xe5+ l:.e6 38 Vg7+ and White wins. 2b3) 36 ... gxh4 37 g4 'ii'xg4 38 'ii'e8+! and White wins. 2c) 30 ....l:tc6 (best) 31 t2Ja6! (D).

151

t2Jxf3 and it appears that White has nothing better than 3 1 t2Ja6 (31 Wg2 g4 32 t2Ja6 'it>b7 and 3 1 bxa7 :tc6 are both OK for Black) 3 l ...'itb7 32 l2Jc5+ �a8 33 t2Ja6 with a draw. 30 b7+ Also decisive is 30 t2Ja6 'ii'c 8 3 1 b7+ (or 3 1 'ii'c5 Vxa6 32 'ii'c7 .l:tb8 33 b7+ Vxb7 34 .l:txb7 :txb7 35 'ii'd8+ winning) 3 l ...'ii'xb7 32 l:xb7 Wxb7 33 l:b1 + 'itxa6 34 'ii'c5 and White wins. 30 'it>b8 (D) .••

w

B

Now Black has: 2c 1 ) 3 l .. .axb6 32 axb6 Wb7 33 l2Jc5+ Wb8 and White has several strong continuations including the boomerang manoeuvre 34 'ii'c l l::txc5 (34...'ii'h3 35 .l:ta8+ mates) 35 'ii'a3 with a mating attack. 2c2) 3 l ....l:td7 32 t2Jb8 (32 bxa7 d4 33 cxd4 is also promising; for example, 33 ....l:txd4 34 Va3 ! ! Wxa7 35 'ii'e7+ .l:td7 36 t2Jb8 ! ! and White wins) 32 ...'ii'h5 33 h4 'ii'g4 (Black loses his queen after 33 ... gxh4 34 t2Jxd7 hxg3+ 35 Wg2 'ii'h2+ 36 'itxf3 'ii'h5+ 37 �g2 'ii'h2+ 38 Wfl Vh3+ 39 We2) 34 'itg2 t2Jxh4+ 35 'itfl d4 36 t2Jxd7 and White wins. 29 t2Jf3?? Losing in spectacular fashion. Black must ex­ change queens by playing 29 ...Vf3+ 30 'ii'xf3 ••.

31 .l:tb6!! axb6 The powerful b7-pawn is too much after 3 1 ... l:txb6 32 axb6 axb6 33 :ta8+ 'it>c7 34 l:txd8 and White wins. 32 axb6 .l:txb6 33 t2Jd7+! .l:.xd7 Also hopeless is 33 ...'ii'xd7 34 'ii'xb6 'ii'xb7 35 'ii'xd8+ 'ii'c 8 36 .l:tb1 + and White wins. 34 'ii'xb6 l:txb7 35 'ii'd8+ Vc8 36 .l:ta8+ �xa8 37 'ii'xc8+ 'it>a7 38 'ii'c5+ 'it>a6 39 Vxd5 1-0 Game Lessons: 1) Black committed his king to the queen­ side by playing 1 2 ...0-0-0 !? before stabilizing the central pawn-structure - this gave White the chance to open the position by playing 14 dxc5 !. 2) Black initiated tremendous complications by playing 22 ...f6 !, breaking up the white cen­ tre. The variations in the notes to White's 29th move are a good example of the fragile balance between attack and counterattack. 3) The combination beginning with 3 1 l:tb6! ! enabled White to break through on the queen­ side and win the black queen.

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

152

Game 62: Ta ke My Rooks, Please

Murray Turnbull 2298 - James Rizzitano 2462 Watertown 1 983 A45 Trompowsky Attack Murray is better known as the Chess Master of Harvard Square in Cambridge, Massachusetts, where he has taken on all comers since 1982. This game features a rare double rook sacrifice.

1 d4 l2Jf6 2 .i.g5 c5 3 .i.xf6 See Game 1 2 for 3 d5. 3 gxf6 4 c3 'ii'b6 5 'ii'd2 White is left with doubled isolated b-pawns after 5 'ii'b3 'ii'xb3 6 axb3 cxd4 7 cxd4 l2Jc6. 5...d5 6 g3 More usual is 6 e3 .i.f5 with equal chances. 6 l2Jc6 7 .i.g2 cxd4 8 cxd4 e5!? The most aggressive continuation. 8 ... .i.f5 9 lbc3 e6 l O lbf3 .l::tc 8 is safer, with equality. 9 l2Jc3 .i.b4 10 a3 .i.xc3 11 bxc3 .i.e6 12 ltJf3 ltJa5!? I thought for almost an hour here as Black is committed to sacrificing both rooks after play­ ing this irresistible move. An important factor in my decision-making process was the possi­ bility of forcing a draw by repetition later on in the event of a tactical miscalculation; see Jon Speelman's post-mortem comments in the notes to Game 4 for a further explanation of this. In­ stead, 12 ...e4 l 3 ltJh4 ltJa5 14 'ii'h6 transposes to the note to White's 1 4th move below. 13 1i'h6 e4 (D) •.•

.•.

Murray snaps at the bait. The alternative is 1 4 l2Jh4 l2Jc4 (the aggressive 1 4 ... 1i'b2? back­ fires after 1 5 0-0 l2Jb3 16 'ii'xf6 .l::tg 8 17 .l::tabl 'ii'xc3 1 8 l2Jf5 .i.xf5 19 1i'xf5, when White has a clear advantage because of Black's exposed king) 1 5 'ifxf6 .l::tg 8 16 0-0 .i.d7 and Black has some compensation for the pawn. 14 exf3! The double rook sacrifice should lead to a draw with best play. The unappetizing alterna­ tive is 14 ....l::tg 8? 1 5 l2Jg5, when White is much better. 15 'ii'xh8+ c:j;e7 Giving White more opportunity to go wrong than 1 5 ...c:j;d7 16 1i'xa8 fxg2 1 7 l:tgl 'ii'b2 1 8 l:tdl 'ifxc3+ 1 9 .l::td2 1i'c l + ( 1 9...l2Jc4?? loses to 20 'ii'xb7+ 'it>d8 2 1 'ii'b4) 20 .l::td 1 'ifc3+ with a draw. 16 1i'xa8 fxg2 17 .l::tg1 'ifb2 18 l:ld1 'ifxc3+ The alternative is 1 8 ...l2Jc4 19 .l::txg2 .i.h3 20 'iftfl .i.xg2+ 21 �xg2 l2Je3+! (not 21 ...1i'xe2?? 22 'ii'xb7+ 'iii>f6 23 l:r.al and White wins) 22 fxe3 'ifxe2+ with a draw by perpetual check. 19 l:r.d2 .i.d7! (D) This retreat is more challenging than the al­ ternatives: 1) 19 ... l2Jc4?? (or 19 ... l2Jb3??) fails to 20 'ii'xb7+ 'iitf6 21 'ifb4 and White wins. 2) 19 ...1i'c 1 + 20 l:.d l 'ifc3+ repeats the po­ sition. .••

w w

14 1i'xf6

RUNA WA Y TACTICS

Now White must make a crucial decision how should he defend against the threat of . ..lt:'lc4? 20 'iVbS?? Right idea, wrong square. White should play 20 'iVg8 !, and now: 1 ) 20 ....i.a4 21 'iVg5+ ..t>f8 22 'ii'h6+ ..t>g8 (22 ... ..t>e8?? loses to 23 'iVe3+) 23 'ii'g5+ with a draw. 2) 20 ... lt:Jc4 2 1 'iVg5+ ..t>f8 (fleeing to the queenside fails after 2 l ...f6?? 22 'ii'g7+ ..t>d6 23 'ii'f8+ ..t>c7 24 'ii'c 5+ �d8 25 'iVb4 'ii'xd2+ 26 'ii'xd2 li:Jxd2 27 xd2 .i.h3 28 g4 and White wins) 22 h4! protects the well-placed white queen; now Black has a choice of either forcing or allowing a perpetual check: 2a) 22 ...'ii'c l + 23 l:td1 'iVc3+ 24 l:td2 'ii'c 1 + with a draw. 2b) 22 ...i.a4 23 'iVd8+ c6 25 f3 'ii'c l + and Black wins as in the game) 23 ...'iVc 1 + 24 'iti>e2 'ii'x gl 25 'ii'xd5+ �e7 26 Wc5+ xh7 1 9 'ifc2+ g6 20 ltJd5 'ifd6 ! 21 ltJxe7 .i.e6 and Black wins the stranded knight. 2) 16 'ifc2 ! ? g6 17 .i.xc7 'ifxc7 18 l:.e2 with chances for both sides. 16 h6 17 ltJge4 ltJe6 18 ltJg3 1 8 .i.c4!? is worthy of investigation. 18 ltJd7 19 ltJf5 ltJxe5 20 dxe5 .i.b4? (D) Black should eliminate the well-placed white knight by playing 20 ...ltJf4 ! 21 .i.e4 .i.xf5 22 .i.xf5 'ifh6 with equal chances. .••

•.•

w

21 'ii'g4! ! The right move, but for the wrong reason. Now Patrick began thinking ... and thinking ... and thinking. I left to obtain a beverage, re­ turned to the board and it suddenly dawned on me my bishop is hanging! 21 'ifxd3 Patrick finally snapped it off. Before my pre­ vious move I had been engrossed in the varia­ tions arising after 2 l . ...i.xc3? 22 ltJxh6+ 'iti>h8 23 'ii'h5 ! ! : 1 ) 23 ...iixd3 24 ltJf5+ 'iti>g8 25 ltJe7#. 2) 23 ... gxh6 24 'ifxh6+ 'iti>g8 25 'ifh7#. -

•••

16 .i.eS White can also try:

RUNAWAY TACTICS

3) 23 ... g6 24 lt:Jxf7++ �g8 25 'ii'xg6+ lt:Jg7 26 lt:Jh6+ �h8 27 'ii'h7#. 4) 23 ...f5 24 lt:Jxf5+ �g8 25 lt:Je7+ 'ii'xe7 26 'ii'h7+ �f7 27 .i.g6#. 5) 23 ...l::te8 24 lt:Jxf7++ �g8 25 .i.g6 �f8 26 lt:Jxd8 and White wins. 6) 23 ...lt:Jg5 24 lt:Jxf7++ �g8 25 lt:Jxd8 .l:.xd8 26 'ii'xg5 .l:.xd3 27 bxc3 and White wins. At this point I tucked my pulsating heart back into my chest and I realized that White's position was loaded with attacking possibilities. I relaxed for a few minutes and recalled Jan Timman's The Art of Chess Analysis annota­ tions to the game Gulko-Timman, Sombor 1 974. After Gulko played an unexpected move, Tim­ man wrote: "a too-quick response can be a sign of shock - to your opponent and to yourself." 22 lt:Jxh6+ �h7 (D)

155

4b) 24 ... �g8 25 'ii'xg5 .i.xf5 26 lt:Jf6+ �h8 27 .l:.ed 1 'ii'c2 28 .l:.ac 1 .i.d2 29 'ii'h4+ wins for White. 4c) 24...f6 25 exf6 .i.xf5 26 'ii'xf5+ �g8 27 .l:.ad 1 lt:Jxh3+ 28 gxh3 'ii'c4 29 lt:Jg5 .l:.xf6 30 'ii'h7+ �f8 3 1 .l:.d7 'ii'g 8 32 'ii'e4 is winning for White. 4d) 24...�h8 25 .l:.ad 1 and now: 4d 1 ) 25 ... 'ii'c2 26 'ii'h 5+ �g8 (26 . . . lt:Jh7 loses to 27 lt:Jd4) 27 'ii'xg5 .i.xf5 28 'ii'xf5 .i.xe1 29 lt:Jf6+ gxf6 30 'ii'xc2 and White wins. 4d2) 25 ... .i.xf5 26 'ii'xf5 lt:Jf3+ (26 ... 'ii'c2 loses to 27 .l:.c l 'ii'd3 28 .l:.e3) 27 gxf3 'ii'c2 28 .l:.c l 'ii'd3 29 .l:.ed 1 'ii'b5 30 'ii'h5+ 'iti>g8 3 1 lt:Jg5 with a mating attack. 4d3) 25 ...'ii'c4 26 .l:.d4 'ii'e6 (26...'ii'xd4 27 'ii'h5+ is winning for White) 27 lt:Jxg5 'ii'g6 (27 ...'ii'xf5 28 'ii'h5+ �g8 29 .l:.h4 with a mat­ ing attack) 28 'ii'h4+ �g8 29 g4 and White has a decisive advantage. 23 .i.xel 24 lt:JfS (D) ...

w B

23 lt:Je4?? A very disappointing blunder. White has a winning attack even without his bishop pro­ vided he plays 23 lt:Jf5 ! ! : 1 ) 23 ... .i.xc3?? 24 'ii'h5+ �g8 25 lt:Je7#. 2) 23 ... a5 24 .l:.ad 1 'ii'a6 (24...'ii'c2 25 .l:.e2 traps the queen) and now that the black queen has been booted away, White has several crush­ ing continuations such as 25 lt:Je4 'ii"b6 26 lt:Jf6+ gxf6 27 exf6 with a mating attack. 3) 23 ...'ii'd8 24 'ii'xb4 'ii'g 5 25 lt:Jd6 lt:Jf4 26 'ii'e4+ �g8 27 �h2 with a solid extra pawn. 4) 23 ...lt:Jg5 24 lt:Je4! (stronger than the pe­ destrian 24 'ii'xg5 'ii'xf5 25 'ii'h4+ �g8 26 'ii'xb4 with a solid extra pawn) and now Black has a choice of: 4a) 24....i.xf5 25 'ii'xf5+ �h8 26 .l:.e3 and White wins.

24 .i.b4? Alternatives: 1) 24... .i.d2? 25 lt:Jf6+ (25 'ii'h5+ .i.h6 26 lt:Jf6+ �h8 27 lt:Jxh6 transposes) 25 . . .�h8 (25 ... gxf6 26 'ii"h4+ mates) 26 'ii'h5+ .i.h6 27 lt:Jxh6 gxf6 28 lt:Jf5+ �g8 29 exf6 'ii'xf5 30 'ii'xf5 .l:.d8 3 1 'ii'g4+ �f8 32 .l:.e1 a5 (32 ... .l:.d4 loses to 33 'ii'h5 �e8 34 .l:.xe6+ .i.xe6 35 'ii'h8+ �d7 36 'ii'xa8) 33 f4 and White has a decisive advantage. 2) 24 . . ..i.xf2+ ! (the idea behind this move is to expose White's king to attack; it should lead to a draw with best play) 25 �xf2 (25 lt:Jxf2?? 'ii'd 8 26 lt:Je4 .l:.h8 and Black wins) and now: ..•

156

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

2a) 25 .. .'ii'c2+? 26 �g l .l:te8 27 .l:tfl i..d7 28 liJf6+ gxf6 29 'ii'h5+ �g8 30 lbh6+ �h7 3 1 liJxf7+ �g7 (3 l .. .�g8 loses to 32 liJh6+ cJilg7 33 exf6+) 32 exf6+ �f8 33 lbe5 'ii'c5+ 34 'iirh2 'ii'xe5+ 35 'ii'xe5 and White has a decisive ad­ vantage. 2b) 25 ...l:.d8 and now: 2bl ) 26 ltJe7?? (White's king is poorly placed for this) 26 . . .'ii'd4+! 27 �f3 (27 �fl loses to 27 ...'ii'e3) 27 ... 'ii'd2 ! 28 lbxd2 liJd4+ 29 'ii'xd4 .l:txd4 30 ltJe4 i.e6 and Black wins. 2b2) 26 'ii'h4+ �g8 27 ltJe7+ �f8 28 lbf5 'ii'c2+ 29 �gl �g8 30 ltJe7+ 'iii>f8 3 1 lbf5 �g8 32 lbe7+ with a draw by repetition. 2c) 25 ... .l:le8 (the sharpest try, but it also leads to a draw) 26 l:ld l 'ii'c2+ (Black is too un­ developed after 26...'ii'xdl 27 'ii'xdl liJf4 28 'ii'g4 liJg6 29 lbf6+! gxf6 30 'ii'h5+ 'iirg8 3 1 'ii'h6 i..xf5 32 exf6 with a mating-net) 27 lld2 'ii'c l 28 'ii'h5+ �g8 29 lbf6+ gxf6 30 liJh6+ 'it>g7 (30. . .'.ti>h7 3 1 liJg4+ mates) and now: 2c l ) 3 1 exf6+ 'it>xf6 32 lbg4+ (32 'ii'xf7+?? loses to 32 . . .'it>g5) 32 ...'it>e7 (32 . . .Citg7?? 33 'ii'h6+ �g8 34 liJf6#) 33 'ii'h4+ 'iii>f8 34 'ii'h8+ �e7 35 'ii'f6+ �f8 36 'ii'h8+ with a draw. 2c2) 3 1 lbf5+ �g8 32 liJh6+ �g7 33 liJf5+ with a draw. We now return to the position after 24 ...i.b4 (D):

w

25 liJf6+?? Another clunker. White has a strong attack even without his bishop and rook provided he plays the patient 25 a3 ! !, and now: 1 ) 25 ...i..d2 transposes to note ' 1 ' to Black's 24th move with the insignificant difference that White's pawn is on a3 instead of a2.

2) 25 ...ltJg5 (not as strange as it looks; the idea is to return some of the material in order to activate the queenside pieces) 26 lbxg5+ 'it>g8 27 e6! fxe6 28 liJxe6 and now: 2a) 28 ...'ii'd7 29 liJfxg7 i.d6 (29...'ii'f7 30 lbf5+ �h8 3 1 'ii'd4+ 'ii'f6 32 liJxf8 'ii'xd4 33 ltJg6+ �h7 34 liJxd4 i.c5 35 lbb3 i..xf2+ 36 'it>xf2 'it>xg6 37 .l:td l with a clear advantage in the endgame) 30 .l:td l .l:tf4 3 1 'ii'g6 'ii'f7 32 lbxf4 'ii'xg6 33 ltJxg6 gives White much the better endgame. 2b) 28 ...i..c 3 29 bxc3 'ii'xc3 and now: 2bl ) 30 liJh6+ 'it>h8 (30 .. .'�h7?? loses: 3 1 liJxf8+ 'iii>h 8 3 2 'ii'g6 'ii'x al + 3 3 'it>h2 'ii'e5+ 34 g3 i..f5 35 liJxf5 l:lxf8 36 'ii'h5+ �g8 37 lbh6+ gxh6 38 'ii'xe5) 3 1 liJf7+ l:xf7 32 'ii'h4+ �g8 33 'ii'd8+ 'it>h7 34 'ii'h4+ 'it>g6 35 'ii'g5+ 'iii>h7 36 'ii'h4+ with a draw. 2b2) 30 ltJe7+! 'it>f7 3 1 lbg5+ 'it>xe7 32 'ii'e2+ 'it>d8 33 .l:tdl + 'it>c7 (33 ... i..d7 34 liJe6+ 'it>e7 35 lbxg7+ 'iii>f6 36 liJh5+ with a strong at­ tack) 34 'ii'e7+ �b6 35 'ii'xf8 with a strong at­ tack. 3) 25 ...f6 26 exf6 and now: 3a) 26 ....l:txf6 27 lbxf6+ gxf6 28 'ii'h5+ �g8 29 'ii'g6+ �f8 30 axb4 'ii'd7 31 l:tel with a win­ ning attack. 3b) 26 ...gxf6 27 l:d l 'ii'xdl + 28 'ii'xd l liJg7 29 liJxg7 �xg7 30 axb4 and the white queen is superior to the black rooks. 3c) 26 ... g6 27 'ii'h4+ 'iitg8 28 liJh6+ �h8 and now: 3c l ) 29 lbf7+ �g8 30 liJh6+ with a draw. 3c2) 29 ltJg4+ �g8 30 axb4 with a strong attack. 3c3) 29 .l:te l i..xe l 30 liJf7+ �g8 31 'ii'h8+ �xf7 32 'ii'h7+ ltJg7 33 'ii'xg7+ �e6 34 lbc5+ �d5 35 liJxd3 and White wins. 4) 25 ...�h8 26 'ii'h5+ �g8 27 axb4 and now: 4a) 27 ...'ii'd8 28 lbf6+! gxf6 29 'ii'h6 ! l::.e8 (29 .. .fxe5 30 l:ta3 mates) 30 l:.a3 with a mating attack. 4b) 27 ...l:te8 28 lbf6+! (28 liJfd6 l:tf8 29 lbf5 repeats the position) 28 ...gxf6 29 exf6 'ii'd5 (29 ...'ii'xf5 loses to 30 'ii'xf5 l:ld8 3 1 'ii'g4+ �f8 32 f4) 30 'ii'g4+ (not 30 l:ta3?? 'ii'xg2+ ! ! 3 1 'iti>xg2 liJf4+ and Black wins) 30 ...�f8 3 1 l:tdl and now: 4bl ) 3 1 ...lld8 32 l::.xd5 l:txd5 (32 ... cxd5 loses to 33 liJg7 ltJxg7 34 fxg7+ 'iite7 35 'ii'g5+

RUNA WA Y TACTICS

f6 36 g8lt::l+ !) 33 'ii'h5 �e8 34 lt::lg7+ lt::lxg7 (34 ...'iitd7 35 'ii'xf7+ 'iitd6 36 'ii'e8 and White wins as Black is hopelessly tied up) 35 'ii'h8+ 'iitd7 36 fxg7 and White wins. 4b2) 3 1 ...'ii'xd l + 32 'iWxdU ld8 33 'iWh5 �e8 34 lt::lg7+ lt::lxg7 (34 ...'iitd7 35 f4 wins for White) 35 'ii'h8+ �d7 36 fxg7 and White wins. 5) 25 ...'ii'xe4 (Black exchanges his queen for a rook and two bishops, but his remaining pieces are unable to develop) 26 'iWxe4 ..id2 27 'ii'h4+ ..th6 28 lt::lxh6 (28 .l:.d1 lt::Jf4! 29 lt::lxh6 lt::lg6 is unclear) 28 ...gxh6 29 .l:.d l lt::lg7 30 'iWe7 'iitg8 3 1 .l:.d8 lt::le6 (3 1 ....l:.xd8 32 'ii'xd8+ �h7 33 'ii'f8 and White wins by advancing his king­ side pawns as Black is hopelessly tied up) 32 .l:.d3 b6 33 .l:.g3+ 'iith7 34 f4 ..ta6 35 'iWf6 .l:.ad8 36 f5 .l:.d l + 37 'iith2 .l:.fl 38 .l:.g6 ! and White wins. 6) 25 ....l:.d8 (this appears to be the best try) 26 axb4 and now: 6a) 26 ...'iitg8 27 lt::lf6+ �f8 28 'iWh5 'ii'xf5 29 'iWxf5 gxf6 30 exf6 and here: 6al ) 30 ...:td4 3 1 Wh7 'iite8 32 .l:.el is win­ ning for White. 6a2) 30 ...'it>e8 3 1 .l:.el .l:.d7 32 Wg4 'it>d8 33 .l:.xe6 fxe6 34 'ii'g8+ �c7 35 f7 and White wins. 6a3) 30 ....l:.d5 3 1 'ii'h7 .l:.g5 32 .l:.el .l:.g6 33 'ii'h8+ .l:.g8 34 'ii'h6+ 'ifi>e8 35 'ii'g7 ! .l:.f8 36 'ii'g3 ..id7 37 'ii'd6 �d8 38 .l:.xe6 and White wins. 6b) 26 ....l:.d7 and now: 6bl ) 27 lt::lc5 'ii'd5 and then: 6bl l ) 28 lt::lxd7 'ii'xd7 29 l:.dl 'ii'c7 30 'ii'h4+ �g8 3 1 lt::le7+ �f8 32 lt::lf5 'it>g8 33 lt::le7+ with a draw. 6bl 2) 28 lt::lxe6! fxe6 (28 ...'ii'xe5? loses to 29 Wh5+ 'Otg8 30 lt::lh6+ gxh6 3 1 'ii'xe5 fxe6 32 'ii'xe6+) 29 'ii'h5+ 'Otg8 30 'ii'e8+ 'it>h7 3 1 'ii'h5+ with a draw by perpetual check. 6b2) 27 'ii'h4+! (best) 27 ...'it>g8 28 .l:.a3 'ii'hl + 29 'Oth2 lt::lf8 (29 ...f6 30 .l:.g3 lt::Jg5 3 1 exf6 'ii'xe4 32 'ii'xg5 'ii'xf5 33 'ii'xf5 wins for White) 30 lt::lf6+ gxf6 3 1 lt::lh6+ 'it>h8 (3 1 ...�h7 loses to 32 lt::lg4+ 'Otg8 33 lt::lxf6+ 'it>g7 34 lt::le8+ �g8 35 'ii'h6 f6 36 .l:.f3 .l:.f7 37 l:.g3+) 32 'ii'xf6+ �h7 33 lt::lf5 'ii'xf5 34 'iWxf5+ lt::lg6 35 .l:.g3 .l:.c7 36 'ii'f6 ..ie6 37 h4 .l:.g8 38 llg5 with decisive threats; for example, 38 ...'it>h6 39 .l:.h5+ 'Otxh5 40 'ii'g5#. 25 gxf6 26 exf6 'iWd2 Black has two reasonable alternatives: .••

157

1) 26 ...'ii'xf5 27 Wxf5+ 'it>h6 28 g4 lt::lg5 29 'ii'f4 .l:.g8 (Black has four pieces for the queen so he can afford to give one back to complete his development) 30 'ii'xb4 lt::lxh3+ 3 1 'it>h2 ..ixg4 and Black wins. 2) 26 ... .l:.h8 27 .l:.e1 ..id6 28 'iWh5+ 'Otg8 29 'ii'g4+ 'iii>f 8! (29 ...'iii>h 7 30 'ii'h5+ repeats) 30 'iWg7+ �e8 (not 30...lt::lxg7?? when White mates by 3 1 fxg7+ 'iii>g8 32 .l:.e8+ 'Oth7 33 gxh8'iW+ �g6 34 'ii'h6+ 'Otxf5 35 g4#) 3 1 'iWxh8+ 'it>d7 and Black wins. 27 'iWh5+ 'it>g8 28 lt::lh6+ (D)

B

28 �h7?? In mutual time-pressure Patrick has the mis­ fortune of committing the last mistake; after 28 ... 'iWxh6 29 'iWxh6 .l:.d8 30 'ii'h5 .l:.d4 Black has a wheelbarrow full of pieces for the queen. 29 lt::lxf7+ 'iitg8 30 'iWg6+ 1-0 •••

Game Lessons: 1 ) The super-aggressive move 21 'iWg4 ! ! was really an accidental sacrifice; White over­ looked the fact that his d3-bishop was hang­ ing. The sacrifice would have been justified if White had followed up by playing the patient 23 lt::lf5 ! ! instead of the game continuation 23 lt::le4 ?? - the players later took turns exchang­ ing blunders. 2) This melee was long on tactics and short on strategy. The detailed notes contain many examples of how to conduct a kingside attack; in many variations White is several pieces down, but the attack succeeds because Black's queenside pieces are unable to participate in the defence of his kingside.

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

158

Game 64: King in a Box

Daniel Kopec 25 1 9 - James Rizzitano 2485 Manchester 1 989 806 Modern Defence When I originally annotated this game for In­ side Chess in 1989, I started at move 59 - a very practical decision. This epic last-round struggle was one of the final games from the first part of my chess career; in many ways it was a collage of the strengths and weaknesses of my play seen throughout the book: inaccurate opening play, patient defence, good handling of the ini­ tiative in the rniddlegame and reasonable end­ game play.

1 d4 g6 2 e4 il.g7 3 ltJc3 c6 4 ..i.c4 d6 5 'ii'f3 e6 6 ltJge2 ltJd7 The most popular move here is 6 ...b5, ex­ panding on the queenside. 7 a4 Another idea is 7 h4 ltJgf6 8 ..i.b3 b5 (J.John­ son-Fang, Nashua 1989 continued with the speculative 8 ... 0-0 ! ? 9 h5 ! ? ltJxh5 10 g4 ltJhf6 1 1 'ii'h3) 9 a4? ! (9 il.g5 !?) 9 ...b4 10 liJd1 il.b7 and Black had a slight edge in Rizzitano-Fang, Worcester 1985. 7 'i!Ve7? This opening novelty was casually played and long regretted. In Ljubojevic-Ciocaltea, Vrsac 197 1 , Black prevented the advance of White's a4-pawn by playing 7 ...a5 8 h4 ltJgf6 9 il.a2 h5 10 il.g5 e5 1 1 0-0 and White had a slight edge. 8 a5! White takes advantage of Black's inaccuracy by grabbing some space on the queenside. 8 e5 9 d5! c5 10 a6! (D) Danny's vigorous play has transformed the position into a kind of Serni-Benoni in which Black's pieces are misplaced. 10 ltJgf6 An easy choice in view of 10...b6? 1 1 ..i.b5 ! .l:.b8 1 2 il.c6 �d8 1 3 ltJb5 liJdf6 14 ltJec3 ! and Black is defenceless against the threat of ltJxa7. 1 1 axb7 il.xb7 12 h4 Also possible is 12 0-0 0-0 1 3 ..i.g5 with a clear advantage. 12 h5 13 ..i.g5 a6 •••

•••

•.•

•••

B

Necessary as Black is getting sliced and diced by the white bishops after 1 3 ...0-0 14 ..i.b5. 14 'i!Vd3 0-0 15 0-0 Danny uncharacteristically declines the chal­ lenge. I was expecting the kingside thunderbolt 1 5 g4!?, with the following possibilities: 1 ) 15 ...hxg4 16 h5 :tb8 17 h6 il.h8 ( 17 ...il.f8 1 8 f3 leaves White much better) 1 8 h7+ �f8 19 il.b3 with a clear advantage for White. 2) 15 ...'i!Ve8 ! 16 gxh5 ltJxh5 17 .:.a3 and White has some advantage. 15 ltJb6 The beginning of a logical plan to create counterplay with the ... f5 break. 16 l:.tb1 White can also consider retaining the light­ squared bishop with 1 6 ..i.a2. 16 'i!Vc7 17 .l:.a3 liJfd7 18 l:ba1 f6 19 ..i.d2 ltJxc4 20 'i!Vxc4 f5 Black finally has some counterplay. 21 exf5 gxf5?! More accurate is 2 1 ...ltJb6! 22 'i!Vd3 gxf5 with sharp play ahead; now White's queen is able to retreat to the stronger e2-square 22 ltJg3 ltJb6 23 'ii'e2 f4! During the game I remembered that Law­ rence Day had once described this pawn­ structure as the 'black umbrella' (see Game 64. 1 ). Also possible is 23 ...ltJxd5 24 ltJxd5 (24 'i!Vxh5 ltJxc3 25 :Xc3 f4 26 ltJf5 .l:.f6 is fine for .•.

•.•

.

RUNA WA Y TACTICS

Black) 24... .ixd5 25 tDxh5 f4 26 'ifg4 .ib7 with equal chances. 24 tDxh5 tbxd5 25 tDe4 tDf6 Seeking to exchange one of the knights, since after 25 ...tbb4 26 tbg5 White has attacking chances. 26 tDexf6+!? More adventurous than 26 tDhxf6+ .ixf6 27 'ifg4+ �h8 28 'ifh5+ �g7 (28 ...'ifh7? is weaker, as 29 'ifxh7+ �xh7 30 tbxd6 gives White some advantage) 29 'ii'g4+ (29 tbg3 ! ? �g8 30 tbf5 .ig7 is unclear) 29...�h8 with a draw. 26 .ixf6 (D)

159

w

•••

w

Black retains the powerful c-pawn after 38 .l:tf5 .ixc2 39 l1xf4 c4. 38 'iPr6 39 .l:tg5 c4 40 g4 fxg3 41 fxg3 (D)

27 .ixf4! exf4 28 'ife6+ �h8 More sensible than 28 ...'iff7 29 tDxf6+ �h8 30 'ifxf7 l:hf7 3 1 tbg4 and Black is left with weak pawns. 29 tDxf6 'ifg7 30 tbg4! Black has a promising attack after 30 tbd5 .l:tae8 3 1 'ifxd6 .l:td8 32 'ifxc5 l:txd5 33 'ifc3 .l:td4 34 'ifh3 .l:tg8. 30 i.c8! 31 'ifxd6 Stronger than 31 'ifh6+ 'ifxh6 32 tDxh6 �g7, when Black wins the knight under more favour­ able circumstances. 31. .ixg4 32 :Xa6 .l:txa6 33 .l:txa6 i.f3 34 'ifh6+ 'ifxh6 35 .l:txh6+ rl;g7 36 l1e6 i.d1 (D) Black has won a piece for three pawns but it is difficult to see how he can generate winning chances with only two pawns left. 37 l:te5? Simplest is 37 .l:td6 ! .ixc2 38 .l:tc6 .l:tb8 (after 38 ....l:tf5, 39 b4 eliminates the last queenside pawn) 39 .l:txc5 l:txb2 40 .l:tc4 f3 41 gxf3 with a draw. 37 .l:tc8 38 c3

41 l1e8? The following variations demonstrate the strength of Black's centralized king. The con­ cept of zugzwang - the compulsion to move plays a decisive role in many of the following lines. My original intention was to continue 41....l:tb8! 42 .l:td5 .ic2! (after 42 ....ig4 43 .l:td4 .ie6 44 .l:td2 White hangs on) 43 .l:td2 ! (43 l:td4 .id3 44 .l:tf4+ �e5 45 .l:tf2 �e4 and Black's king infiltrates) 43 ....l:txb2 44 �f2 .l:ta2 45 �e3 �e5 (during the game I thought that this posi­ tion was a draw, but now I think that it is a win for Black) 46 g4 (the rapid advance of the con­ nected passed pawns is the best try; after 46 l1f2 Black is able to immobilize White's pawns and infiltrate with his king by playing 46 ... .ib3 47 .l:txa2 .ixa2 48 �f3 .ib3 49 �e3 i.d 1 50 �d2 i.f3 5 1 �e3 i.g4 and Black wins) 46 ... i.b3 47 .l:txa2 i.xa2 (D).

.••

..•

.•

•••

..•

160

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

Now White has: 1) 48 g5 .ibl (the hasty 48 .. .'�f5? 49 'it>d4 draws as the black bishop is tied up defending the c4-pawn) 49 h5 (49 'iti>f3 .ic2 50 'iti>e3 {50 'iti>g4 loses to 50 ....id1 + 5 1 'iti>g3 .ih5 ) 50 ....ig6 5 1 'iti>f3 'iti>f5 52 'iti>e3 'iti>g4 53 'it>d4 .if7 54 g6 .ig8 and Black wins) 49 ....ic2 (D).

Another critical position; now White has: 1 a) 50 h6 .ie4 (D). We shall call this Position Z an important zugzwang position which can be reached from several variations. 5 1 'iti>d2 'iti>f4 52 'iti>e2 .id3+ 53 'ifi>d2 'iti>xg5 and Black wins. I b) 50 'iti>d2 .if5 51 'iti>e3 .ig4 52 h6 .if5 53 'ifi>f3 .ig6 54 'iti>g4 (54 'ite3 .ie4 transposes into Position Z above) 54 ...'iti>e4 55 Wg3 'ifi>f5 56 'iti>h4 'iti>f4 and Black wins. 1c) 50 g6 .ie4 (Black must deny White's king access to the d4-square until his bishop has been transferred to the d5-g8 diagonal; the hasty 50...'it>f6? only draws after 5 1 'iti>d4 .id3 52 �d5 'it>g7 53 Wd4 'i!?h6 54 'i!?d5 'i!?xh5 55 g7

.ih7 56 Wxc4) 5 1 g7 .ih7 52 h6 .ig8 (Black has the opposition and it is decisive as White's king is forced away from the d4-square) 53 'i!?f3 'i!?f5 54 'i!?e3 'i!?g6 and Black wins. 2) 48 h5 .ib1 49'itf3 (49 g5 .ic2 transposes to the diagram in line ' 1 ' above after 49 ... .ic2) 49 ....ic2 50 'i!?g3 (50 'i!?e3 .id 1 5 1 h6 .ic2 52 'it>f3 .ig6 53 We3 .ie4 54 g5 .ig6 55 'i!?f3 .if5 56 We3 .ie4 transposes into Position Z above) 50 ...We4 5 1 h6 We3 52 g5 (the kingside pawns are also blockaded after 52 'ifi>h4 'it>f4 53 'it>h5 .ih7 54 'ifi>h4 .ig6 55 g5 'i!?f5, and Black wins) 52 ....ig6 53 'iti>g4 We4 54 'i!?g3 'i!?f5 55 'i!?h4 'ifi>f4 and Black wins. 42 l:.d5 .ig4 43 l:td4 .ie6 44 'ifi>f2 l:tb8 The next few moves are easy to understand as Black centralizes his king and White mobi­ lizes his kingside pawns. 45 l:.d2 'i!?e5 46 l:te2+ 'i!?d6 47 l:td2+ .idS 48 g4 We5 49 'it>g3 .ie4 50 l:tf2 l:td8 51 h5 l:td3+ 52 Wh4 l:lf3 (D)

-

53 l:td2

RUNA WA Y TACTICS

Simpler is 53 .:txf3 .ixf3 54 �g3 i.e4 (54...�e4?? 55 h6 is embarrassing) 55 h6 i.g6 56 �f3 i.e4+ 57 �e3 i.g6 58 g5 .ie4 59 �d2 �f4 60 b3 ! cxb3 61 �c 1 �xg5 62 �b2 i.c2 63 h7 i.xh7 64 'it>xb3 with a draw - this is why Black should have eliminated the b2-pawn by playing 4 1 . ..l:tb8 !. 53 .td3?! A bold and foolish attempt to bend the laws of chess physics. The safe alternative is 53 ...l:.d3 54 .:tf2 with equality. 54 �g5 l:l.f8 55 b3 .:tg8+ 56 �h4 Safer is 56 �h6 l:xg4 57 bxc4 with a draw. 56 �f4 57 .:tf2+? Passed pawns must be pushed! Stronger is 57 g5 ! �e3 (not 57 ... .:txg5?? 58 l:tf2+ �e3 59 �xg5 �xf2 60 bxc4 .ixc4 61 h6 .id3 62 c4 and White wins) 58 .:tb2 l:tb8 59 b4 l:h8 60 .:th2 �f3 61 l:th3+ �f4 62 l:.h2 with a draw. 57 �e3 58 l:tb2 �f3 (D) .••

.•.

161

70 �g5 �e5 7 1 �g6 �e6 72 h6 .l:.g1 + 73 �h7 �f7 and Black wins. l b) 63 �h4 �f4 64 �h3 (64 l:tf2+ .i.f3 65 l:txf3+ �xf3 66 h6 �f4 67 �h5 �f5 is winning for Black) 64....tf3 (zugzwang) 65 c5 (65 l:td2 l:tg5 66 .:td4+ .ie4 67 �h4 l:tg1 wins for Black) 65 ....1:.g5 66 l:b4+ .i.e4 67 �h4 l:tg1 68 .:txe4+ 'it>xe4 69 h6 �f5 with a winning position for Black. 2) 61 .:tb5 .:tf4+ 62 �h2 (62 lhf5 l:txf5 63 �h4 �f4 64 h6 l:.f7 65 �h5 �f5 and Black wins) 62 ...l:.h4+ 63 'it>gl .ie4 64 l:.b2 (64 l:g5 loses to 64...�e2) 64 ...'it>e3 65 l:.h2 l:.g4+ 66 �fl .i.d3+ mates. See Study 64.2 for another example of how an extra pawn can interfere with a lateral check­ ing defence. 59 .:tb8 60 b4 l:th8 (D) •••

.••

w

59 g5! Danny thought for a long time here and made the correct decision even though it allows Black to retain his last pawn. The obvious pawn cap­ ture loses because White's two extra c-pawns get in the way of his lateral checking defence: 59 bxc4? l:xg4+ 60 �h3 .i.f5 and now: 1 ) 61 'it>h2 .i.e4 62 �h3 (62 h6 l:.h4+ 63 �g1 'it>e3 64 l:th2 l:g4+ 65 �fl .id3+ mates) 62 ....:tg1 and now: 1 a) 63 �h2 .:tg5 64 .:tb5 .:tg2+ 65 �h3 'it>f4 and then: 1 a l ) 66 c5 l:.g5 67 'it>h2 (67 �h4 l:tg1 mates) 67 ....:txh5+ 68 'it>g1 �e3 and Black mates. 1 a2) 66 l:tb4 l:td2 67 c5 l:td5 68 �h4 l:td 1 69 .:txe4+ (the only way to avoid mate) 69 ...�xe4

61 b5? White can hold the draw by playing 61 l:.h2! .i.g6 (6 1 . ..l:te8 62 l:th3+ �f4 63 l:th2 �f3 64 l:th3+ with a draw) 62 .:th3+ �f4 63 h6 .:te8 64 .:.h 1 .:te3 65 :n + �e5 66 .:tf7 ! ! l:e4+ 67 �g3 .i.xf7 68 h7 .:te3+ 69 �h4 (or 69 �h2 l:te2+ 70 �g3 l:te3+ with a draw) 69 ....1:.e4+ 70 �g3 l:te3+ and Black must be content with a perpet­ ual check. 61 i.g6 62 h6 :es 63 �h3 White's king is in a mating-net after 63 b6? l:te1 64 �h3 (64 l:th2 l:te4+ 65 �h3 i.f5#) 64....:th 1 + 65 l:th2 .i.f5+ 66 �h4 l:.xh2#. 63 l:te5! 64 b6 .:.xg5 65 �h2 .:th5+ Black should play the immediate 65 ... i.e4! 66 b7 (66 h7 l:th5+ 67 �g1 'it>e3 is similar) 66 ...l:th5+ 67 'it>g1 �e3 (threatening to play 68 ....:.h1#) 68 l:.h2 (68 .:tg2 i.xb7! wins for •.•

..•

162

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

Black; I overlooked this move during the game) 68 ...l:tg5+ 69 �fl i.d3+ with a mating-net. 66 �gl i.e4? Black should play 66 ....:tg5+ ! 67 �h2 (67 �fl i.d3+ 68 �ei �e3 mates) 67 ...i.e4!, win­ ning as in the previous note. 67 l:th2! Avoiding 67 b7? �e3 with the familiar mat­ ing-net. 67 l:tb5? Black was so focused on constructing a mat­ ing-net in the comer that he overlooked a study­ like win beginning with 67 .. J:tg5+! 68 �fl .:tg8 (threatening ...i.d3+) 69 l:lh3+ �g4 70 l:lh2 �g3 !, and now: I ) 7 I l::th5 l:.d8 ! leaves White defenceless: I a) 72 h7 l:tdi + 73 �e2 i.f3+ 74 �e3 l:td3#. See Study 64.3 for another unusual checkmate in the middle of the board. I b) 72 �ei i.f3 73 l:tg5+ i.g4 with a mat­ ing-net. I c) 72 l:tg5+ �f3 73 �gi l:td i + 74 �h2 �f2 75 �h3 i.f3 again with a mating-net. 2) 7I .:tb2 �f3 72 l:th2 (72 �ei �e3 73 l:te2+ �d3 wins for Black) 72 ...�e3 73 l:th3+ �d2 74 h7 (74 �f2 l:tf8+ 75 �gi i.h7 and Black wins) 74...l:th8 75 �gi i.xh7 76 �h2 (avoiding ...l:tg8+) 76 .. .h5 l:tg3+ 76 b8 20 'ii'xc3 White has won a pawn because of the pin, but now it is Black's tum. 20...ltJg5 21 ltJh5 l::tf3! (D)

B

w

15 f4! In his Learnfrom the Grandmasters notes to this game, Lawrence Day points out that White was threatening to play f4 here. I think the alter­ natives are unappetizing for Black; for exam­ ple, 1 5 ...ltJf6 16 ltJxf6+ 'ifxf6 17 f4 and White has some advantage because of the bishop-pair. 16 ..tc4 The centralizing 1 6 l::ta d1 is also reasonable. 16 ltJc5 17 ltJxf4! ltJe4 •••

•••

22 11i'd2! Much stronger than 22 gxf3? ltJxh3+ 23 'it>g2 (23 'it>h2 loses to 23 ...'ii'h4) 23 ...ltJf4+ (23 ... 11i'h4 24 i..f7 ltJf4+ is similar) 24 ltJxf4 'ii'g5+ 25 'it>h l 'ii'h4+ 26 'it>g1 (26 ltJh3?? loses

RUNAWA Y TACTICS

to 26 ... i.xh3 27 l:lfdl i.e6+) 26 ... 'ii"g5+ 27 �h l (27 lt:Jg2?? allows 27 ...i.h3, mating) 27 ...'ii"h4+ with a draw by perpetual check.

165

22 J:txh3 23 i.e2 l:lh4 24 l:lad1 and White eventually won after further complications. ••

Study 64. 2

Genrikh Kasparian t.:lta/ia Scacchistica 1 982 I

This instructive study features an extra pawn interfering with a lateral checking defence.

Black's king is in a mating-net after 2 ...'it>xa3 3 ..tl>c3: 1 ) 3 ... ..ti>a2 4 l::ta5+ ..ti>bl 5 i.f5+ 'ittc l 6 :at#. 2) 3 .. :a6 4 i.b5 l:lf6 5 l::tg 8 :f3+ 6 i.d3 :f4 7 i.e2 l:le4 (7 ... h3 loses to 8 :gl ..ti>a2 9 i.c4+) 8 i.c4 :e3+ 9 i.d3 and Black must give up his rook to avoid mate. 3 l:b5+ Kasparian notes that 3 l:ld5? fails to 3 ...h3 4 l:td3+ 'it>b2 5 i.xh3 l:a6, with a draw. 3 'it>a2 ! Black's king is trapped against the edge of the board after 3 .....ti>xa3 4 ..ti>c3 :a6 5 :b7 ..ti>a2 6 i.b5 l::ta3+ 7 ..ti>c2 :as 8 i.c4+ 'ita3 9 'itc3 'ita4 1 0 :b2 and White wins. 4 'itc3 h3 5 :b2+! 'it>xa3 Or 5 ...'it>al 6 :h2 and White wins. 6 :b7 and White wins. A possible finish is 6 ...l:la6 7 i.b5 h2 8 l:h7 l:la8 9 i.c4 ..tl>a4 10 l:xh2 with a mating-net. .

w

•••

1 :gS+! In 'CSGK' , Kasparian points out 1 :h2? h3 2 i.xh3 'it>a4 3 i.d7+ 'it>a5 ! 4 l::txh6 with a draw by stalemate. 1 �a4 2 i.d7+ 'it>b3! •..

Study 64.3

Genrikh Kasparian Sovetskaya Rossiya 1 9 60 I

w

Simple but elegant. 1 :a7+ �b5 2 c7 :b7 3 lt:Jxc8 'it>c6 4 lt:Jd6! :xc7 5 l:la6#

166

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

Study 64.4

Richard Reti 1 92 9 This study highlights the importance of having an extra file between the passed pawns.

1 l:lg8! White's goal is eventually to fight the black b- and g- pawns, not the b- and f- pawns. I .:tf8?? loses to l ...f3 2 l:lf4 b4 3 l:lxg4 b3 4 l:lgl b2 5 1;g7 f2 6 l:ld l �c4 7 �f6 1;c3 8 l:lf1 1;d3 (threatening ...1;e2) 9 l:lbl �c2 and Black wins.

l g3 2 l:lg4 b4 An equivalent option is 2...�d4 3 l:txf4+ 1;e3 4 l:tg4 �f2 5 .:tb4 g2 6 l:lb2+ !, again with a draw. 3 :xr4 b3 4 :n b2 s 1;g1 g2 6 .:tgt �d4 1 1;f6 �e3 (D) •••

8 l:lbl! �d3 9 l:lgl! with a draw by repetition.

9 Endgame Adventures

Many club players do not like to study the end­ game, but it is usually a very efficient use of chess study time for the following reasons: 1 ) Most players have a higher percentage of games involving rook endings than games with their favourite opening variations, yet they con­ tinue to spend an ever-increasing amount of time trying to memorize opening theory. The study of rook endgames provides the most ben­ efit per hour of study for the typical club player. 2) Endgame theory is relatively stable and recent advancements have been made with the help of computer tablebases. The accuracy of endgame analysis has improved in recent years in comparison to some of the classic endgame textbooks. Unlike specialized opening knowl­ edge, endgame knowledge does not have to be constantly relearned or discarded. 3) Certain types of endgames will inevita­ bly appear in your games - it is just a question of when. Opening knowledge is often a wasting asset; specific variations come in and out of fashion quickly and the time spent studying them may never be utilized. The dynamic na­ ture of opening theory naturally involves con­ stantly trying to hit a moving target.

King and Pawn Endings Game 65: Breakthrough

James Rizzitano 24 1 7 Louis Mercuri 2227

-

Leominster 1 981 An apparently simple pawn endgame has arisen

in the following diagram; in fact the game did not continue much farther beyond this point. 49 b6?? At first glance this move seems plausible; Black attempts to create an outside passed pawn. 50 bS!! 1-0 ...

B

The finish is 50 .. /�d6 (50...axb5 5 1 a6) 5 1 axb6 cxb6 (5 l . ..axb5 5 2 b7) 52 bxa6 rJ;c7 53 h4 gxh3 54 'ii?xf3 'ii?b8 55 g4 and the pawn queens. My opponent took a lot of abuse from the spec­ tators for losing the game in this fashion, but this type of accident can happen to anybody if you are not familiar with the underlying theme. During the game I recalled an earlier battle in which this breakthrough idea was overlooked by two strong players (see Game 65.2). The re­ ality is that it is not such a bad thing to lose a game like this once - you are unlikely to allow anything remotely similar again. Let's return to the diagram and take a look at the alternatives: 1 ) 49 ...c5 and now: 1 a) 50 rj;d3?? loses to 50...c4+! 5 1 �e3 �f5 52 h4 gxh3 53 rj;xf3 rj;g5 54 g4 h2 55 �g2 'ii?xg4 56 rj;xh2 'ifi>f3. 1b) 50 bxc5 'ifi>f5 (50 ...�d5?? allows White to undermine the pawns with 5 1 h3 ! gxh3 52 �xf3 rj;xc5 53 g4 and White wins) 51 rj;d3 (5 1 h3?? gxh3 52 �xf3 'it>g5 53 'ifi>f2 rj;g4 54 c4 h2 55 �g2 h 1 'ill'+ 56 'it>xh 1 �xg3 57 �g1 �f3 and Black wins the remaining pawns) 5 l . ..�e5 52 'ii?e3 with a draw. 2) 49 ... b5 50 h4 gxh3 (50 ...�f5 5 1 'ifi>d3 holds the balance as neither king can stray out­ side the square of the opponent's passed pawn) 5 1 'ii?xf3 'it>f5 (51 ...c6 52 g4 h2 53 �g2 'it>f4 54

168

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

�xh2 �xg4 55 �g2 is also drawn) 52 g4+ �g5 53 �g3 h2 54 �xh2 �xg4 55 �g2 'ili>f4 56 �f2 'it>e4 57 ®e2 �d5 58 �d3 c5 59 bxc5 ®xc5 with a draw; for example, 60 �d2 �c4 61 'ili>c2. 3) 49 ...�d5 ! (the best try) 50 h4! (White must act quickly as after 50 �d3? b6 5 1 ®e3 bxa5 52 bxa5 'it>c4 53 h4 gxh3 54 ®xf3 �xc3 55 g4 �d4 56 'itg3 c5 Black queens first) 50 ...gxh3 5 1 'it>xf3 'it>e5 52 g4 h2 53 'it>g2 'ili>f4 54 �xh2 'it>xg4 55 �g2 ®f4 56 �f2 �e4 57 'ili>e2 c5 ! (here the b5-square is open for Black's king) 58 bxc5 (58 'ili>d2 cxb4 59 cxb4 �d4 scoops up the remaining pawns) 58 ... ®d5 59 'ili>d3 ®xc5 60 c4! �b4 61 'it>d4 (D).

saying that with an a-pawn, the pawn needs to be on at least the sixth rank in order to have de­ cent winning chances." 3b3) 62 ... b5 (the best try) 63 'itd4 (63 �d5?? loses to 63 ...'itb6) 63 ...b4 64 c5 �b5 65 �d5 b3 66 c6 b2 (66 ...'it>b6 67 'i!i>d6 b2 68 c7 b1 'iV 69 c8W is also drawn) 67 c7 b1 'ii 68 c8'ii, again with a drawn queen endgame despite Black's extra a-pawn. So the apparently simple pawn endgame is drawn after all; however, it took another twenty moves of analysis to prove it.

Game 65. 1 Norman Weinstein ­ M ichael Rohde Lone Pine 1 9 7 7 Black misses a golden opportunity i n a pawn endgame.

B

Now Black has: 3a) 6 l ...®a4 62 ®d5 (62 'itc5?? loses to 62 ...®xa5) 62 ...�a3 (62 ...'it>b4 63 �d4 repeats the position; 62 ...�xa5 63 'iii>c5 transposes to line '3b') 63 c5 (63 �c5 �b3 64 'iii>d5 ! �b4 65 'it>d4 returns to the previous diagram) 63 ...�b4 64 c6 bxc6+ 65 �xc6 'it>xa5 66 'it>c5 draws be­ cause the black king is pinned against the edge of the board. 3b) 6 1 ...'ili>xa5 62 'itc5 and now there is a further branch: 3b1 ) 62 ...�a4 63 'ili>b6 �b4 64 'it>xb7 a5 65 'it>b6 a4 66 c5 with a draw. 3b2) 62 ...b6+ 63 �d6 b5 (63 ...�b4 64 �c6 b5 65 c5 a5 66 �b6 a4 67 c6 a3 68 c7 a2 69 c8'ii a1 'iV 70 'iic5+ with a draw) 64 c5 b4 65 c6 b3 66 c7 b2 67 c8'ii b1 'iV 68 'iic 5+ with a drawn queen endgame despite Black's extra a-pawn. The technical details are beyond the scope of this book, but John Nunn does an ex­ cellent job of explaining it in his book Secrets of Practical Chess: "We can summarize by

40 h4?? Black overlooks 40...f4 ! ! : 1 ) 41 a5 bxa5 42 bxa5 h4 wins for Black. 2) 41 gxf4 gxf4 42 'it>d4 e3 ! (not 42... f3?? 43 g3 !) 43 fxe3 f3 ! 44 gxf3 h4 and the h-pawn queens. 41 gxh4 gxh4 42 �d4! Now White is able to gobble up the remain­ ing black pawns. Not 42 a5?? bxa5 43 bxa5 f4! and Black wins. 42...'it>e6 43 aS bxa5 44 bxa5 �d6 45 a6 ..ti>c6 46 �e5 'it>b6 47 �xf5 'it>xa6 48 �xe4 1-0 FCE has an instructive related example (Breakthroughs: Ree-Ftacnik, Kiev 1 978). •••

ENDGAME ADVENTURES

Knight Endings Game 66: Active Knight

John Curdo 2426 - Ja mes Rizzitano 252 1

169

38 �c3 liJg5 39 liJc4 h4 40 liJd2 40 h3 is also hopeless: 40 ...f3 41 liJe3+ �e5 42 gxf3 exf3 and the h3-pawn is doomed. 40 b3 41 gxh3 liJxh3 42 liJb3 liJxf2 43 h4 n 44 liJd2 liJg4 45 h5 r2 46 ttJn r4 o-1 After 47 �d2 e3+ 48 �e2 �e4 there is no defence to ... f3+. .••

Providence 1 985

Game 67: Positional Sacrifice

John Curdo 2436 - James Rizzita no 2569

w

Fitchburg 1 985

B

21 l:td1? White overlooks something important in his eagerness to exchange all of the major pieces. The patient 21 �fl ! l:td2 22 l:tc 1 is correct, with equal chances as Black will be unable to maintain his rook on the seventh rank. 21 l:txd1+ 22 liJxd1 liJb5 Black wins one of the queenside pawns. 23 a4 More defensive chances were offered by 23 liJe3 liJxa3 24 f4, keeping White's pawn­ structure intact. 23 liJd4 24 liJeJ f4 25 liJc4 liJxc2 26 'it>n �f8 27 liJa5 liJd4 28 �el �e7 Black has won a pawn and his king can quickly take up a dominating position in the centre of the board. 29 �d2 �d6 30 �d3 �d5 31 b4 e5! 32 liJb7 The knight is out of play here, but after 32 liJc4 e4+ 33 �c3 liJe2+ 34 �b3 liJc 1 + 35 �c3 liJd3 36 f3 f5 Black has a decisive advantage. 32 f5 33 �c3 liJe6 34 liJa5 b5! The idea behind this pawn advance is to create a weakness in White's kingside pawn­ structure. 35 liJc4 liJd4 36 liJb2 e4 37 �d2 liJe6 Threatening ...�d4 followed by ...liJc7-d5. ..•

•••

.••

29 liJd4! An unusual tactical idea which enables Black to contest the open d-file. 30 liJg1 The rook endgame after 30 liJxd4 l:td7 3 1 c5 l:txd4 is advantageous for Black. 30...l:td7 31 �h5 �e7 32 l:d3 l:td8 33 liJh3 liJe2 34 l:txd8 Retaining the rooks does not help after 34 l:te3 l:td2 35 a3 liJd4; for example, 36 �h6 liJc2 37 l:tc3 liJxa3 38 �xh7 liJc2 and Black has a clear advantage. 34...�xd8 35 �h6 �e7 36 �xh7 �f7 37 �b6 (D) 37 a5! The idea behind the temporary pawn sacri­ fice is to exploit White's inability to defend his queenside pawns. 38 �h5 b5 39 cxb5 cxb5 40 f4 liJc3 41 fxe5 fxe5 42 a3 �6! 43 f3 liJb1 44 liJf2 liJxaJ 45 liJd3 liJc2 46 �g4 liJd4 47 liJc5 �e7 48 f4 liJe6! 49 liJb7 •••

•••

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

1 70

Bishop Endings Game 68: Bad Bishop, Good Blockade

James Rizzitano 2457 Roman Dzindzichashvi li 2555 Con tinental Chess Interna tional, New York 1 981

Black also wins after 49 l2Jd3 exf4. 49 a4 50 bxa4 bxa4 51 l2Ja5 l2Jxf4 5 l ...a3 is also strong: 52 l2Jc6+ (52 fxe5 loses to 52 ... l2Jd4) 52 ... �d6 53 l2Jb4 exf4 54 �f3 �c5 55 l2Ja2 �c4 with a winning position for Black. 52 l2Jc4 l2Jd3 53 �f3 l2Jb2! (D) ..•

Breaking the blockade. 54 l2Ja3 Alternatives: 1) 54 l2Jxb2 a3 and the pawn queens; a fian­ chettoed knight has great difficulty stopping a passed a- or h-pawn. 2) 54 l2Jb6 �d6 55 l2Jd5 �c5 56 c;i;>e3 (56 �e2 �d4) 56... l2Jd 1 + 57 �d2 a3 and Black wms. 3) 54 l2Jxe5 �d6 55 l2Jf7+ (55 �f4 a3) 55 ...�c7 56 l2Jg5 �d7 57 e5 a3 58 l2Je4 l2Ja4 59 l2Jd2 l2Jc5 and the pawn queens. 54 �d6 55 �g4 �c5 56 'itfS 'itb4 57 l2Jc2+ �c3 58 l2Ja1 l2Jc4 59 'ite6 a3 60 �d5 a2 0-1 •••

w

37 .l:.gl! During the game I had difficulty evaluating this position. At first glance it may seem strange to simplify into a pure bishop endgame in which Black has the superior bishop, but there are some unusual factors present in the position: 1) White has a protected passed pawn on e5 to offset Black's protected passed pawn on d3 . 2) White has a passed h-pawn to offset Black's extra d-pawn. 37 :Xg1 White is able to maintain the balance after 37 ... l:.h8 38 .l:.g3 i..e7 39 i..e 3. 38 i..xg1 i..h6 39 i..e3 Necessary to defend the f4-pawn. 39...Wc6 The black king feints toward the queenside, but White's passed pawns will prevent him from straying too far away. 40 i..d2 aS 41 a3 41 bxa5 bxa5 42 a4 is also possible, but I could not envisage a variation in which I would be able to capture the aS-pawn with my bishop; •••

ENDGAME ADVENTURES

also I did not want to give the black bishop ac­ cess to the c5-square. 41 .i.f8 42 �e3 .i.e7 43 .i.el axb4 112-lfz A possible continuation is 44 axb4 b5 45 h4 (not 45 �d4?? .i.h4!, when Black wins). Now Black has: 1) 45 ... d4+ ! ? 46 cxd4 (46 �xd4?? loses to 46 ....i.xh4 !) 46 ...�d5 47 h5 .i.f8 48 .i.d2 .i.h6 49 .i.c3 .i.f8 50 .i.d2 .i.h6 repeating the posi­ tion. 2) 45 ....i.f8 (safest) 46 h5 .i.h6 47 .i.d2 (47 .i.h4?? fails to 47 ....i.xf4+) 47 ....i.f8 48 .i.el .i.h6 49 .i.d2 repeating the position. ••.

Game 69: Fortress

James Rizzitano 2499 lan Rogers 2452

-

Continental Chess International, New York 1 982

B

1 71

3) 55 ...�xf3 allows White a choice of equal­ izing continuations: 3a) 56 hxg6 fxg6 57 .i.xg6 �xg4 58 �c2 h5 59 �dl .i.a5 60 'iii>e2 h4 61 f2 with a draw. 3b) 56 g5 (the now-familiar idea in a slightly different form) 56 ...gxh5 (56 ...hxg5?? 57 h6) 57 gxh6 .i.h4 58 .i.xf7 g4 59 .i.e6+ f4 (59 ...'iii>g 5?? 60 h7) 60 .i.f7 g4 61 .i.e6+ with a draw. 55 gxh5 xh5 55 ...�f4 56 .i.e8 transposes to line '2' of the previous note. 56 �c2 �h4 57 .i.e8 f6 Heading for the f3-pawn is also insufficient after 57 ...�g3 58 .i.xf7 �xf3 59 �d3 �g4 60 �e2 .i.a5 61 �fl h5 62 �g2 h4 63 .i.e6+ �f4 64 .i.f5 with a draw. 58 dl .i.f2 59 �e2 �g3 60 .i.f7 .i.b6 61 .i.e8 �f4 62 .i.f7 .i.a7 63 .i.e8 �g3 64 .i.f7 �h4 65 �fl �h3 After 65 ... h5 66 �g2 there is no way for Black to make progress. 66 .i.e8 .i.c5 67 .i.f7 �g3 68 �e2 'iii>f4 69 .i.e8 112-112

Game 70: Tri umph of the Doubled Pawns

Zoran Gaj ic 2350 Ja mes Rizzitano 2454 Chicago International 1 983

Black appears to have the advantage because of his superior king position, but the opposite­ coloured bishops enable White to defend his position. 54 gxh5 The most challenging variation is 54 .. .'it'f4 55 .i.e8, and now: 1 ) 55 ... g5?? 56 .i.d7! (the black f-pawn is ir­ relevant; White must protect both his e4- and g4-pawns) 56 .. .'i�'xf3 57 .i.f5 followed by a king march to capture the black pawn on h6. 2) 55 ... gxh5 56 gxh5 �xf3 57 .i.xf7 'iii>xe4 58 �c2 �f3 59 �dl .i.a5 60 .i.c4 leads to a draw. ••.

62 c;i;>b4 g5 63 lt:Jd2 After 63 lt:Jd6 Black can play 63 .. .'ifi>f4, since 64 lt:Jxf5? .i.g6 costs White a piece.

1 72

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

63 �f4 64 lDc4 i.a7 65 lbd2 i.d4 The quickest win is 65 ... i.e2 ! 66 �c3 (66 i.xe2 fails to 66 ...�e3) 66 ... .txd3 67 �xd3 �g3 68 �e2 �g2 69 b4 f4 and Black wins. 66 �c4 .ta7 67 lDn? White should play 67 �b4 repeating the posi­ tion - Black would then have to find 67 ...i.e2! as in the previous note. 67 i.f3 68 �c3 Also hopeless is 68 b4 i.g2 69 b5 i.xfl 70 i.xfl �g3 7 1 �d3 �h2 72 �e2 �g1 73 i.h3 f4 74 �f3 i.b8 75 �e2 i.c7 and Black wins. 68 i.g2 69 �d2 i.xfl Black wins easily by heading for the oppo­ site-coloured bishop ending because he controls the queening square and the doubled pawns can­ not be blockaded. 70 .txn �g3 71 �d3 �h2 72 �e2 �gl 73 i.hJ .tcS 74 i.n f4 75 i.h3 i.d6 o-t I should have remembered this simple win­ ning idea while playing the following game: •••

•••

...

Game 7 1 : Wrong Diagonal

Jarod Bryan 2276 James Rizzitano 2485 -

Manchester 1 989

2) 49 i.e 1 �d3 and then: 2a) 50 �f2 �c3 5 1 �e1 �b3 52 �f2 �a2 53 �e1 �b1 and Black wins. 2b) 50 i.b2 �c4 51 �d2 ..ti>b3 52 i.c l (the c-pawn queens after 52 i.d4 f2! 53 i.xf2 �b2) 52 ...�a2 53 �e1 �b1 and Black wins. 3) 49 i.g5 �d3 50 i.h6 �c3 (threatening .. .b2) 5 1 i.g7+ �b3 52 i.d4 �a2 53 i.e3 (53 �d2 �b1 ) 53 ...�b1 and Black wins. The key to Black's success is that by sacrific­ ing the e-pawn, he is able to carve a direct path to the b1-square for his king. The disappointing aspect of this position is that I actually consid­ ered the pawn sacrifice, but I failed to realize that White would be unable to maintain the blockade. After failing to make any progress over the next few moves, I should have come back to this position and analysed it further as it is clearly the only reasonable winning attempt. Reuben Fine stated the applicable rule in his classic Basic Chess Endings: "Here there is a general rule that is applicable in all cases: if the pawns are two or more files apart, they win; if they are only one file apart they draw." In his book Analysing the Endgame, Jon Speelman devoted a chapter toward reviewing these types of opposite-coloured bishop endgames and demonstrated that Fine's rule was incor­ rect; Speelman gave some examples where the pawns are three files apart, yet the weaker side is able to draw. Fine's rule holds true in our game because the b6-pawn is merely a distrac­ tion and White is unable to establish a block­ ade. See Example 7 1 . 1 for another instance. 47 .te3 �e6? Black can transpose into the previous note by playing 47 ...�g4 48 i.e 1 e3+ 49 i.xe3 �f5 . 48 'iii>el eMS 49 oit>t"2 i.b7 Again, Black should play 49 ...�g4. SO 'iii>el i.a6 Last call for 50...c;j;>g4 5 1 �f2 i.d5. 51 �2 �eS 52 �el (D) S2 �d6?? Of course the black bishop was perfectly positioned on the long diagonal, preventing the advance of White's b-pawn while simulta­ neously defending Black's f-pawn. Black's de­ cision to shorten the range of his bishop and burden his king with preventing the advance of the b-pawn is inexplicable. Despite the previ­ ous floundering, there is still time for 52 .. .f5 ••.

46 �fS? After the game Danny Kopec pointed out that Black should vacate the e4-square for his king by playing the straightforward positional sacrifice 46 ...e3+! 47 i.xe3 (47 �xe3 loses to 47 ...�g3) 47 .. .f5 48 �e1 'itte4, and now White has: 1 ) 49 �d2 c l 'iV+. .••

ENDGAME ADVENTURES

53 'iii>f2 (53 �d2 �g4 54 i.f2 'ifi>f4 55 i.e3+ 'it>g3 wins) 53 .. .r.t;>g4 54 .i.e I i..b7 55 i..e3 i..d5 56 .i.c l e3+! winning as above. In his book Technique for the Tournament Player, Mark Dvoretsky analyses some similar endgames with opposite-coloured bishops and states a law he calls the one-diagonal principle: "Both for the stronger and the weaker sides it is extremely important for the bishop to defend its own pawns and hold up the opponent' s along the same diagonal, without being tom in two direc­ tions." Where was his book when I needed it? 53 'iti>d2 i.d3 An amusing variation on the theme of trans­ forming a bishop into a tall pawn. 54 i..f2 'it>c6 55 .i.e3 'it>b7 56 i..f2 'it>c6 57 i..e3 112-112 Without question this was the worst endgame I had played in at least a decade; paradoxically, it helped to set up the must-win last-round end­ game featured in Game 64.

1 73

3 'ifi>b5 'it>d8 After 3 ... 'iii>d6 4 f6 i.d8 5 f7 'iti>e7 6 i..e6, the decisive manoeuvre 'iti>a6-b7 cannot be pre­ vented. 4 .i.d7 'it>e7 5 'it>a6 i.e5 6 'iti>b7 'ifi>d8 7 f6! and White wins.

Bishop vs Knight Endings Game 72 : Knight Blockade, Split Pawns

Joseph DeMauro 2 1 1 6 James Rizzitano 2085 Boston 1 9 7 7

Example 7 1 . 1

Karsten M uller & Frank Lamprecht Fundamental Chess Endings ,

2001

A n instructive example o f the winning tech­ nique with opposite-coloured bishops and split pawns (see following diagram). 1 'itr>c5 i..d8 Black must continue to guard the b6-square. 2 i.c8! i.c7 The black king must stay put as White infil­ trates after 2...'ifi>f6 3 'ifr>d6.

I have been unable to find any advice con­ cerning this specific position in the usual end­ game resources; the closest example is in Basic Chess Endings in which Fine states: "Black can draw with a knight against bishop plus two

1 74

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

pawns in one of two cases: 1 ) blockade, 2) rook' s pawn plus bishop of the wrong colour. Neither of these, however, is foolproof." In this example White has the right colour bishop to go with his rook' s pawn, but Black is able to maintain an unusual blockade. 67 a4 tt::la2 68 i.g8 Black is able to maintain the blockade after 68 �a6 tt::lb4+ 69 �b7 tt::lc6. 68 tt::lb4 69 i.dS t2Jd3 70 i..f7 tt::lb2 71 i..e6 tt::ld3 72 i..d7 tt::lb2 73 i.bS Winning attempt number 1 : White has ma­ noeuvred his bishop to what superficially ap­ pears to be the optimal location. 73 tt::ld3 74 'it>a6 tt::lc l! 75 'it>b7 After 75 a5 tt::lb3 we have an unusual posi­ tion in which a knight has succeeded in putting a bishop and two pawns in zugzwang. No mat­ ter how White replies, Black's next move is ...ltJxa5 with a draw. This is another example of the problems which can occur if you limit the range of your bishops by placing them on short diagonals in the endgame. 7S tt::lb3 76 �a7 tt::laS 77 'it>a6 tt::lb3 78 i.e8 Winning attempt number 2: White obtains some elbow room for his bishop by shifting it to the other side of the c-pawn; he also prepares to sacrifice his a-pawn in order to break the block­ ade. 78...tt::ld2 Not 78 ...�xc4?? 79 i..f7+ �b4 80 i.xb3, when White queens the a-pawn. 79 i.f7 tt::lb3 80 aS The only reasonable winning attempt. 80 �b4 81 'it>b6 tt::lxaS 82 cS (D) •••

•.•

Also sufficient is 82 . . .'�a4 83 i..e 8+ �b4 84 i.b5 tt::lb7 85 c6 tt::ld6 86 c7 tt::lc 8+ 87 'it>b7 tt::le 7, when White is unable to break the block­ ade. 83 c6 tt::ld6 84 ..te6 White cannot make progress after 84 c7 tt::lc8+ 85 'it>c6 tt::la7+ 86 'it>d7 (86 �b7 tt::lb5 draws) 86...'it>c5 87 ..te6 'it>b6, with a draw. 84 tt::le8 Black can also hold the balance by playing 84...tt::lb5. 85 i.d7 tt::lf6 86 �b7 Another way is 86 �c7 �c5 87 �d8 tt::ld5 with a draw. 86 tt::ld5 87 i..e6 tt::le7 88 c7 �cS The position is a known theoretical draw, but White understandably tries a few more ideas before calling it quits. 89 i.g4 �bS 90 i..h3 'ifi1cS 91 i..g2 �bS 92 i.e4 �cS 93 i.c6 �d6 94 i..e8 �cS 95 i.c6 �d6 96 i.f3 �cs 97 'it>b8 'it>b6 98 ..tb7 'iti>cS 99 xg4 98 h6) 97 Wd5 lt:ld8 98 'iite4 lt:lc6 (98 ...'iti>g5 99 i.d5 traps the black knight) 99 'iitf4 followed by g5. 96 lt:le6 97 i.b5 The alternative is 97 h6 lt:lg5 (97 ...lt:lf4?? loses to 98 g5+) 98 �d5 lt:lh7 99 �e4 �g5 with a draw. 97 lt:lf4 Threatening to play ...lt:lxh5, which would leave White with the wrong-coloured bishop and rook's pawn combination. 98 i.e8 Also insufficient is 98 h6 'iitg6 99 'iti>e5 lt:lh3 with a draw. 98 Wg5 99 'iite7 'ifi>h6 100 'iitf8 lt:le6+ 101 'iitg8 lt:lg5 Black has established an iron blockade; White is unable to force the black knight into zugzwang. 102 i.a4 lt:le4 103 i.d1 lt:lg5 104 'iitf8 lt:le6+ 105 'iitf7 lt:lg5+ 106 'iite7 lt:le4 lfl.lfl FCE has some instructive examples related to this endgame: Knight Blockade: Ki.Geor­ giev-Van Wely, Groningen FIDE 1 997; Bishop + Pawns vs Knight: A.Mikhalevski-Av.Bykhov­ sky, Beersheba 1996. •.•

90 h5 Another winning technique is to lead with the g-pawn by playing 90 g4 'it>g7 91 g5 lt:lb7 92 'iite 5, and now: 1) 92 .. .g6 93 .i.e8+ 'iitg7 94 h5 lt:lc5 95 h6+ Wf8 96 i.b5 Wf7 97 'iitf5 lt:lb7 98 g6+ and White wins. 2) 92 ... lt:ld8 93 .i.c4 lt:lc6+ 94 �f4 'iitg6 95 h5+! (the key idea in several variations; White diverts the black king by means of a pawn sacri­ fice and queens his remaining pawn) 95 ...'it>g7 (95 ...�xh5 96 .tf7+ Wh4 97 g6 lt:le7 98 g7 'iith3 99 �g5 and White wins) 96 h6+ 'it>g6 97 i.d3+ Wf7 98 g6+ 'it>f6 99 g7 lt:le7 100 �g4 lt:lg8 1 0 1 'iit h5 'iite7 102 i.c4 and White wins. 90 'iitgl 91 g4 lt:lb7 92 'iite5 lt:ld8 93 .i.e8 'iitf8 94 i.a4 'iitgl (D) 95 'iitd6 This move does not jeopardize the win, but White has two alternative methods: 1) 95 i.b3 lt:lc6+ 96 'iit f4 lt:ld4 (96 ...�h6 97 g5+ 'iitxh5 98 i.f7+ 'iith4 99 g6 lt:le7 100 g7 'iith 3 1 0 1 'iitg5 is winning for White) 97 i.c4 'iith6 98 g5+! (the now-familiar pawn sacrifice) 98 ... 'iitxh5 99 i.f7+ Wh4 100 g6 lt:lc6 101 g7 lt:le7 102 i.e8 lt:lg8 103 �f5 lt:le7+ 104 �e6 lt:lg8 105 'iitf7 lt:lh6+ 106 �g6 lt:lg8 107 i.f7 lt:le7+ 108 'iitf6 and the pawn queens. .••

•••

•••

•••

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

1 76

Study 73 . 1

Gleb Zakhodiakin

1st Prize,

'64',

w

1 93 1

w

The stronger side can win this endgame with only the g-pawn if the black knight is poorly placed. 1 �c5! l?Jc7 White wins the knight after l ...�g7 2 �c6. 2 'ito>d6 l?Je8+ 3 rt;e7 l?Jg7 Or 3 ... l?Jc7 4 �f7. 4 .i.g6! 'ito>g8 5 .i.f7+ �h7 Black also loses his fianchettoed knight after 5 ... �h8 6 �f6 �h7 7 �e5 �h8 8 �f4 �h7 9 �g4 �h8 10 g6. 6 �f6 �h8 7 �e5! The impatient 7 �g6?? allows 7 ...l?Je6! with a draw. 7 �h7 8 �e4! The key idea; White must lose a move. 8 'ito>h8 9 Wf4 rt;h7 10 'ito>g4 'ito>h8 1 1 g6! and White wins. ••.

•••

Game 74: Knight + Active King vs Bishop

Dmitry Gurevich 2 557 James Rizzitano 2505 National Phone League, Manha ttan vs Boston 1 982 The contrast in king activity is the decisive fac­ tor in the following position.

27 b3 White's bishop and passed d-pawn never move after this, but the attempt to activate the rook with 27 l:!.h3 fails to 27 ...e3 28 .i.d3 e4! 29 .i.e2 (29 .i.xe4 e2 30 .l:th I .l:te8 wins for Black) 29... �e5, when Black has a clear advantage. 27 l?Je3 28 .l:tcl li:Jxg2 29 ltfl+ li:Jf4 29 .. .f4 48 .te3+ �e5 with a draw. 43 �xhS gxf4 44 �h6 44 g4+?! is too incautious: 1) 44... fxg3 45 'ikxg3 ltJxc5 46 Wg4+ 1i'xg4+ 47 hxg4+ cJi>e5 48 bxc5 �d5 49 �g6 f5 (49 ...e5 also draws) 50 gxf5 exf5 5 1 �xf5 �xeS with a draw. •••

The critical position in a typically complex queen endgame. Now White has: 2a) 46 'ikxd5+?? (this lemon was the only move I considered during the game) 46 ...exd5 47 b5 �e6 48 �h5 f3 ! (an important diagonal­ blocking trick) 49 gxf3 d4 and the d-pawn queens. 2b) 46 �g7 (attacking the black pawns from behind) 46 ... 'iti>g5 47 cJi>f7 (the queen exchange leads nowhere after 47 'ii'xd5+ exd5 48 b5 d4 49 b6 d3 50 b7 d2 5 1 b8'ii' d 1 'if 52 We8 'ikc2 53 'ikf7 'ii'f5 with equality) 47.. .f5 and now: 2b1 ) 48 'ii'e 7+ cJi>h5 49 'ikxe6 'ikxg2 50 'ii'xf5+ 'ii'g5 (50 ... cJi>h6?? 5 1 'ikf6+ costs Black his queen) 5 1 'ii'h7+ 'ii'h6 and Black is able to maintain equality; for example, 52 'ikb1 'ii'g 5 53 b5 'ii'd5+. 2b2) 48 'ii'xd5 exd5 49 b5 d4 50 b6 d3 5 1 b7 d2 52 b8'ii' d1 'ii' 53 'ikg8+ �h4 54 �f6 'ikd4+ 55 cJi>xf5 and now Black can maintain equality by playing either: 2b2 1 ) 55 ...'ikc5+ 56 �xf4 'ikd4+ 57 �f5 (57 e4 'ii'c2+ results in a draw by perpetual check. 2b22) 55 ...1i'd7+ 56 'it>e5 (56 'it>xf4 'ii'f7+ ! 57 'ii'xf7 is stalemate) 56 ...1i'c7+ again with a draw by perpetual check. 2c) 46 'iii>h5 (moving the white king within the square of a potential black passed pawn) 46...�e4+! (and not 46 ...1i'xc5?? 47 bxc5 e5 ( 47 ...'iii>e5 48 'iti>g6 } 48 c6 We6 49 'it>g4 'it>d6 50 h4 and the h-pawn queens) and now: 2c 1 ) 47 1i'xd5+ exdS 48 b5 d4 49 b6 d3 50 b7 d2 5 1 b81i' d11i'+ 52 �g6 'ii'c2 53 'ii'b7+ 'it>e3+ 54 'it>h6 and a draw is the most likely out­ come. 2c2) 47 Wg6 e5 and now White has: 2c2 1 ) 48 1i'xd5+ 'it>xd5 49 'ifi>f5 e4 50 'iii>xf4 'it>d4 5 1 b5 e3 52 'it>f3 'it>d3 53 b6 e2 54 b7 e11i' 55 b81i' 'ii'e3+ 56 'it>g4 'ii'g5+ 57 �f3 'ii'e3+ with a draw by perpetual check. 2c22) 48 'ifi>xf6 1i'd8+ 49 'iti>e6 1i'e8+ 50 Wd6 1i'd8+ 5 1 �c6 'ii'c8+ 52 'iii>b5 1i'e8+ 53 'ii'c6+ 'ii'xc6+ 54 �xc6 f3 55 gxf3+ �xf3 56 b5 e4 57 b6 e3 58 b7 e2 59 b81i' e11i' with a draw. 2d) 46 h4 (the most direct move) 46 ...'it>g4 47 'ii'xd5 exd5 48 b5 d4 49 b6 d3 50 b7 d2 5 1 b81i' d11i' 52 'ii'c8+ �g3 (D) (forced because 52...f5?? allows 53 'ii'g8+ Wxh4 54 'ii'g5# and 52...�xh4?? allows 53 1i'h3#).

Now White has: 2d 1) 53 'ii'f5 'ii'g4 54 'ii'xg4+ �xg4 55 h5 Wg3 56 Wg6 Wxg2 57 h6 f3 with a draw. 2d2) 53 1i'h3+! (the most challenging move) 53 ...'it>f2 54 h5 with an interesting choice: 2d2 1 ) 54...Wg1 55 'it>g7 1i'fl 56 h6 1i'xg2+ 57 'ii'xg2+ Wxg2 58 h7 f3 59 h81i' f2 60 'ii'a8+ Wg1 6 1 'ii'a7 'it>g2 62 'ii'b7+ Wg1 63 'ii'b6

(White climbs down the staircase to bring his queen closer to the action) 63 ... 'iii>g2 64 1i'c6+ 'it>g1 65 1i'c5 'it>g2 66 1i'd5+ 'it>g 1 67 1i'd4 'it>g2 68 1i'g4+ 'it>h2 69 1!i'f3 'it>g1 70 'ii'g3+ (D).

B

Without the extra f6-pawn, Black could play 70 ...'iii>h 1 ! here with an immediate draw. The lack of the stalemate defence enables White to win by bringing his king back into the game: 70 .. .'�fl 7 1 �g6! 'iii>e2 72 1i'g4+ 'iii>e 1 73 1i'e4+ 'iii>d2 74 'ii'f3 'it>e1 75 'ii'e3+ 'ifi>fl 76 �h5 (note that if the black pawn were on the f5-square and the white king were on the g5-square, we would have a variation with colours reversed from the game Belkadi-Pachman, Olympiad, Mu­ nich 1958, analysed by John Nunn in his book Tactical Chess Endings; Nunn points out that Black could play 76 ...'it>g2 with a draw, since without a check on the g4-square Black cannot force the white king to the fl -square; the tacti­ cal trick 77 1i'd2 Wg1 78 Wf4 fl'iV+ 79 �g3 is foiled by 79 ... f4+ with a draw) 76 ...'it>g2 77 'ii'e4+ 'it>g l 78 'ii'g4+ 'ifi>h2 79 'ii'f3 'it>g1 80 'ii'g3+ (the same position as in the previous diagram, but the white king is a step closer) 80 ... Wfl 8 1 �g4 'iii>e2 82 1i'f3+ 'it>e1 83 1i'e3+ 'ifi>fl 84 �g3 and mate follows. 2d22) 54 ...1i'd5 ! (best) 55 'ii'h4+ 'it>xg2 56 'ii'g4+ �h2 57 1i'xf4+ 'it>h3 and a draw appears to be the most likely outcome. 45 1i'd5 46 h4 Not 46 1i'xd5+ ?? exd5 47 c6 �e6 48 c7 'it>d7 49 �h5 f3 ! (there it is again) 50 gxf3 d4 and the d-pawn queens. 46 1i'xg2 47 1i'd3+ 'it>eS This move allows a draw by perpetual check; the alternative is 47 ...'it>g4 48 'ii'g6+ 'it>h3 49 •••

•.•

ENDGAME ADVENTURES

1Wxg2+ (49 1Wxf6 is also equal) 49 .. .'�xg2 50 c6 f3 5 1 c7 f2 52 c81W fl 'iV 53 1Wxe6 1i'f4+ with a draw. 48 1i'd6+ 'it>f5 49 'ii'd3+ llz.llz

Game 76: Knight + Pawns vs Bishop

J ames Rizzitano 2532 Boris Belopolsky 23 5 1

-

Sturbridge 1 985

White has an extra pawn, but it is difficult to formulate a winning plan because of the re­ duced material. 59 'it>d6 .tn 60 'it>c5 'iti>e6 61 li:Jxb5 The best practical try as White is unable to make progress after 6 1 li:Jd5 .tc4 62 h6 gxh6 63 gxh6 �f7 64 h7 �g7 65 li:Jf6 .tfl with a draw. 61 �f5 62 h6 gxh6 63 gxh6 'iti>g6 (D)

1 79

64 li:Jd6 .ta6

Boris thought for a long time here; the sim­ plest continuation is 64 .. .'�xh6 65 lt:Jc4 'iti>g5 66 b5 �f6 (66 ...�f4 67 b6 .tg2 68 �d6 .ta8 69 �c7 �e4 70 li:Jd6+ �d5 7 1 li:Jb7 transposes) 67 b6 .tg2 68 �d6 .ta8 (68 .. .'�f7?? 69 lt:Je5+ 'iti>e8 70 lt:Jc6 and the pawn queens) 69 �c7 'iti>e6 70 lt:Ja5 �d5 7 1 lt:Jb7 (7 1 �b8 lii>c5 draws) 7 l ...'iti>c4 72 'iti>b8 �b5 73 �a7 lii>c6 74 li:Jd6 �c5 with a draw as White cannot make any progress. During the game I incorrectly thought that White was winning because I had miscal­ culated some of these lines. 65 li:Jf5!? .td3 Not 65 ....tc8?? 66 lt:Je7+ winning the bishop. 66 lt:Je3 .ta6 Black can still play 66 ...lii>xh6 67 lt:Jc4 �g5 68 b5 lii>f4 69 b6 .te4 70 ..ti>d6 .ta8 transposing into the previous note. The only try for White is to give Black the opportunity to play something else. 67 lt:Jg4!? (D)

••.

67 .'iilh7?? Alternatives: 1) 67 ... .tc8?? 68 lt:Je5+ lii>xh6 69 b5 .tb7 (69 ...�g5 70 'iti>d6 wins for White) 70 �d6 �g5 7 1 lii>c7 J.d5 (7 l ....ta8 loses to 72 lt:Jc6 followed by 'iti>b8; this shows the advantage of having the pawn on the b5-square to support the knight) 72 lt:Jc6 .tc4 73 b6 .ta6 74 lt:Jb4 and White wins. 2) 67 ....te2 ! (Black stays on the fl -a6 diag­ onal until White plays b6) 68 lt:Je5+ �xh6 69 lt:Jc4 �g5 70 b5 �f6 7 1 b6 .tf3 and now: 2a) 72 lt:Ja5 .ta8 (72 ... rt;e7?? 73 lt:Jc6+ �d7 74 b7 and the pawn queens) 73 �d6 �f5 74 .•

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

180

c4 76 '1ilb8 'it>b5 77 'iti>a7 ..tc6 78 liJd6 'iti>c5 with a draw as shown in the note to Black's 64th move; White cannot make any progress. 68 b5 i.c8 69 b6 .i.b7 70 ..td6 1-0 White will win the bishop and then walk over to the kingside and queen the h-pawn.

w

Game 77: Second Chance

Bruce Leverett 240 1 Ja mes Rizzita no 2 5 1 7 Midwest Masters, Chicago 1 989

B

White's resignation appears slightly prema­ ture as he may not have realized that there is a trick that Black must be careful to sidestep. White's options are: 1) 88 i.fl + 'it>g3 89 'iti>b3 g4 90 i.e2 'ifi>h3 91 i.fl + �h2 92 �c3 g3 93 'ifi>d3 g2 94 .i.xg2 'iti>xg2 transposes into the following diagram. 2) 88 'iti>b3 g4 89 .tf5 'iti>g3 90 'iti>c4 'iti>f4 91 .i.e6 g3 92 i.h3 'iti>f3 93 'iti>d3 g2 94 i.xg2+ ..txg2 (D).

w

The white bishop is firing blanks with noth­ ing to attack, but it is not immediately clear how to exploit this. The same position was on the board 24 moves earlier and Black played 58 ...liJc2+? - after a long-winded knight's tour Black obtained a second chance to play the winning idea. 82 �5! The black king will walk a crooked line to gain some tempi and attack the h3-pawn. 83 'it>c3 'it>e4 84 'iti>b2 �e3! Clearer than 84... liJxb5 85 i.xb5 'iti>xd5 86 'iti>c3. 85 .i.n xa3 �xh3 (D) 0-1 ..•

Now White can try: 2a) 95 g3 ! (not 95 ...'iti>f1 ?? 96 'iti>f3 'iti>e1 97 �e3 �dl 98 'iti>d3 'iti>c l 99 'iti>c3 'iti>bl 1 00 'itrb3 with a draw as White is able to maintain the op­ position) 96 'iii>e4 �g4 97 a3 'it>g5 98 a4 'it>g4 99 'iti>e3 'itrf5 100 'iti>d4 'ifi>f4 101 '1ild3 e4 and Black wins the d5-pawn and the game. 2b) 95 c;i;>e4! is the best try because it sets a subtle trap. Now Black has: 2bl ) 95 ...'iti>f2?? 96 'iti>f4 'iti>e2 97 'itre4 'itrd2 98 'it>d4 �c2 99 �c4 �b2 1 00 ..t>b4! ( 1 00 a4??

181

ENDGAME ADVENTURES

loses to 100.. .'�a3) 100 .. .'iii>xa2 1 0 1 �a4 and White is able to draw by maintaining the oppo­ sition despite Black's two extra pawns. 2b2) 95 ...�g3 ! 96 �e3 (or 96 �f5 �f3 97 'ii>e6 �e4 98 �d7 �xd5 99 �xc7 'it>c5 and Black wins) 96 ...g4 97 �e4 �g5 98 a3 'it>g4 99 a4 g5 (gaining control of the critical f5square) 100 e3 f5 1 0 1 'iti>d4 'iti>f4 102 'iti>d3 �e5 103 'it>c4 �e4 and again Black wins the d5-pawn and the game. The key idea in these variations is that Black wins the d5-pawn by challenging White along the g-file; Black's d6-pawn controls the e5square and takes away White's ability to main­ tain the opposition. White's reserve tempi with a3 and a4 do not help as his king is eventually forced to give way.

Game 77. 1

Jan Timman ­ Roman Dzindzichashvi li Geneva 1 9 7 7

B

w

The best choice in a bad situation; other moves are worse: 1 ) 53 .td3 liJxd3 54 �xd3 �f4 55 e5 �xeS 56 �e3 f5 and Black wins. 2) 53 .tn liJg4+ 54 'it>e2 (54 �f3 lDh2+) 54...'it>f4 wins for Black. 53...liJxc4+ 54 � f5 55 exf5 �xf5 56 ..t>e2 'it>f4 57 .tb3 liJb2 58 �d2 c4 59 �a2 The d5-pawn falls after 59 .tc2 �e5 60 'iti>c l liJd3+ 61 �b1 �xd5 and Black wins. 59...�e4 60 'iti>c2 ltJxa4 61 �xc4 ltJc5 62 �b2 Or 62 �d2 �e5 63 �e3 ltJe4 64 'iti>d3 liJf6 and Black wins the d5-pawn. 62...lDd3+ 63 �a3 liJe5 64 .ta2 b5 0-1

Rook Endings Game 78: Wrong Pawn

Pal Benko 2 5 1 0 James Rizzitano 2457 Con tinental Chess International, New York 1 981 White i s hampered by a pair of doubled pawns and a bad bishop. Black makes the win look easy. 46 ltJg4 47 e4 ltJe5 48 �dl a5! Preventing White from obtaining any queen­ side counterplay. Now both players rush their kings over to the other side of the board for the next confrontation. 49 .te2 �d7 50 �c2 c8 48 b6 .l:.el 49 �b5 and the white pawns cannot be stopped. 45 �d6 46 �c4 .l:.xg5 47 .l:.e6+ �c7 48 l':[e7+ �b6 49 .l:.xh7 (D)

50 l':[d7 .l:.gl 51 �d5 l:.dl 52 �c4 .l:.cl + 53 �b4 l:dl The alternative is 53 ... g5 54 lt:Jb3 .l:.c2 (my original intention was to play 54....l:.xc6 but then I saw 55 lt:JaS ! l':[cl 56 lt:Jc4+ .l:.xc4+ 57 �xc4 with a draw) 55 l':[g7 .l:.g2 56 lt:Ja5 l:tb2+ 57 lt:Jb3 .l:.g2 with a draw. 54 lt:Je6! .l:.bl+ Not 54...l:txd7?? 55 cxd7 g5 56 d8'ii'+ .l:lxd8 57 lt:Jxd8 g4 58 lt:Je6 g3 59 lt:Jf4, when White stops the g-pawn and wins. 55 e4 6 1 .l:lxc4) 60 gxf3+ 'iti>d3 6 1 �e 1 and the pawns are blockaded; for example, 6 l ...c3 62 'iti>d l �e3 63 �c2 'it>xf3 64 �d3 'it>g2 65 �xd4 f3 66 'iti>e3 f2 67 .l:lg5+ �fl 68 .l:lf5 'it>el 69 .l:lxf2 'iti>dl 70 'it>d3 and White wins. 59 .l:lc2 The point is that Black cannot play 59 ...d3 because of 60 .i.f3+ 'it>d4 61 .l:ld5#. 60 .l:lxc4 lhc4 61 .i.xc4 d3 62 i.xd3+ 'iti>xd3 63 �f3 1-0 The finish is 63 ...�d4 64 �xf4 �d5 65 �f5 �d6 66 'it>f6 �d7 67 �f7 �d6 68 g4 �e5 69 g5 �f5 70 g6 and the pawn queens. •.•

Game 80: Duelling Pawns

David G riego 2457 James Rizzitano 2540 New England Open Ch, Waterville Valley 1 988 The initial position resembles some sort of Rus­ sian endgame training exercise. Black is in a desperate situation because of his pawn deficit and poor king position.

l a) 43 ...f3+ 44 �fl g4 45 .l:lxh5 g3 46 .l:lg5 g2+ 47 �f2 �e7 48 b4 .l:lf4 49 .l:lg4 and White wins. l b) 43 ....l:lc6 44 b4 .l:la6 45 a4! l:txa4 46 c6 .l:.a2+ (46....l:lxb4 47 c7 wins the rook) 47 �f3 .l:.a3+ 48 'iti>e4 l:tc3 49 c7 �e8 50 b5 f3 5 1 b6 and White wins. 2) 42...l:te6 43 b4 and then: 2a) 43 ...h5 44 b5 l:te2+ 45 'it>fl l:tc2 (45 ...f3 loses to 46 b6) 46 b6 l:txc5 47 b7 .l:.b5 48 .l:la8+ �e7 49 b811i' l:txb8 50 l:txb8 is winning for White. 2b) 43 ....l:le2+ 44 �fl l:tc2 45 b5 and now: 2bl ) 45 ....l:lc l + 46 'it>e2 l:tc2+ 47 'it>f3 l:tc3+ 48 �g4 .l:lg3+ 49 �f5 f3 50 �f6 �g8 51 �g6 'iti>f8 52 b6 and White is winning. 2b2) 45 ...:Xc5 46 b6 .l:lc l + 47 'iti>e2 .l:lc2+ 48 'it>f3 .l:lc3+ 49 �g4 .l:lg3+ 50 'iti>f5 and White wins. The key idea to note in the above variations is how quickly White's queenside pawns ad­ vance; also note how White's king is perfectly placed to stop Black's kingside pawns. 42 h5 The defender's strategy is simple in this type of position - push and pray. 43 c5? Stronger is 43 .l:lb5 ! g4 (43 ....l:lg6 fails to 44 h4) 44 .l:lxh5 f3+ (44... g3 45 �f3 blockades the pawns) 45 �fl g3 46 l:tg5 g2+ 47 �f2 �e7 48 b4 .l:lf4 49 l:lg4 and White has a decisive mate­ rial advantage. 43 g4 44 hxg4 hxg4 45 .l:.b6 White clears a path for his c-pawn. 45 :rs (D) •••

•••

w

42 l:tb7?! Time is of the essence in most rook end­ games. White should get on with it by playing 42 c5, giving Black a choice of: 1 ) 42 ...h5 43 l:th7 and now:

183

•.•

46 c6!?

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

184

This is more interesting than 46 b4, when Black has this choice: 1) 46 ... g3 47 c6 and now: 1 a) 47 ...f3+ 48 rt>xg3 f2 49 c7 l::r.f3+ (don't even think about promoting to a knight !) 50 �g4 l::r.f4+ 5 1 �g5 :l.c4 52 l::r.f6+ �e7 53 :l.xf2 l::r.xc7 54 a4 and White wins. 1b) 47 ...�e7 48 c7 �d7 49 l::r.c6 �c8 50 l::r.c 1 l::r.f7 5 1 a4 l::r.xc7 52 l::r.xc7+ �xc7 53 a5 �c6 54 a6 �b6 55 b5 �a7 leads to a draw as both kings must baby-sit the opposing passed pawns. 2) 46... f3+ 47 'ifi>fl l::r.f4 (47 ...g3 48 l:.g6) 48 a3 (48 c6 l::r.c4) 48 .. J:tc4 49 l:.g6 �f7 50 l:.g5 'ifi>f6 5 1 l::r.g8 �f7 52 l::r.g 5 �f6 with a draw. 46 Jlc5 47 :l.b8+ White can also play 47 l:.b4 l::r.c2+ 48 �fl �e7 49 :Xf4 l:txa2 50 l::r.xg4 (50 l::r.c4 �d8 5 1 b4 �c7 52 b5 l::r.b2 53 l:.c5 g3 is drawn) 50 ... l::r.c2 5 1 l::r.g6 l:.b2 52 l:.g3 l:.c2 with a draw. 47 'iti>e7 48 l::r.b7+ White can secure the draw by playing 48 l::r.g 8 l:.c2+ 49 �g l , and now: 1) 49 ... g3 50 c7 l::r.xc7 5 1 l::r.g7+ �d6 52 l::r.xc7 �xc7 53 �g2 �b6 54 a4 �a5 55 �f3 with a draw. 2) 49 ...l::r.c l + 50 �f2 l::r.c2+ 5 1 �g1 with a draw by repetition. When one player has had an advantage for an extended time-period and subsequently loses it, the greatest challenge is the ability to shift gears and think about heading for a draw. Most players can identify with White's dilemma in this game; it is easy to be carried away by the earlier momentum and continue playing for a win. This type of sharp endgame is frequently won or lost around these shifts of momentum at this point I felt the 'big mo' coming over to my side of the board. 48 �d6 (D) 49 l::r.b4? The decisive error. Alternatives: 1 ) 49 l:.g7? (too late !) 49...:tc2+ 50 �g1 g3 5 1 c7 �e5 ! 52 b4 �e4 and Black wins. 2) 49 c7 ! (when in doubt, push) 49 ... .l:lc2+ 50 �g1 g3 5 1 :tb6+ �e5 (5 l ...�xc7 52 l::r.f6 l::r.f2 53 a4 with equal chances) 52 l::r.b 5+! and now: 2a) 52...�e4 53 .l:lb4+ �f3 54 .l:lc4 l:.g2+ 55 �fl .l:lf2+ 56 �e1 l::r.e2+ (56 ... g2?? loses to 57 :l.c3+ - but not 57 l::r.xf4+?? �e3 ! 58 l:te4+ •.

•.•

.••

�f3 ! with a draw) 57 �d 1 g2 58 l:.xf4+ �xf4 (58 ...�g3 59 l:tg4+) 59 c8'ii' g 1'ii'+ 60 �xe2 'ii'g2+ 61 �d3 'ii'xa2 with a theoretically drawn endgame. 2b) 52 .. .'�e6! (simplest) 53 l:tb4 f3 54 l:tc4! l:.xc4 (not 54 ...l:tg2+?? 55 �fl l:.f2+ 56 We1 :te2+ 57 Wdl and the c-pawn promotes) 55 bxc4 (surprisingly, the king and pawn endgame is a draw) 55 ...�d7 56 a4 �xc7 57 a5 �c6 (57 ...�b7 58 c5 �c6 59 a6 �c7 draws) 58 �fl Wc5 59 �g l f2+ 60 Wg2 �c6 61 �fl �c5 62 �g2 with a draw. 49 .l:lc2+ 50 00 .:tel+ 51 �f2 White's king is also driven away after 5 1 �g2 (5 1 �e2 f3+ 5 2 Wf2 transposes to line ' 1 ' ) 5 l ...f3+ and now: 1) 52 �f2 l:tc2+ 53 �g3 l:tg2+ 54 �h4 f2 55 l:tf4 Wxc6 56 a4 g3 57 b4 :l.g1 and Black wins. 2) 52 Wg3 (the best try) 52 ...:tg1 + 53 Wf2 l:.g2+ 54 Wfl g3 55 l:tf4 l:tf2+ 56 �g1 Wxc6 57 a4 �d5 and Black appears to be faster; for ex­ ample, 58 b4 �e5 59 l:.g4 l:.g2+ 60 �fl �f5 6 1 l:tg8 �f4 62 l:.f8+ �e3 6 3 l::r.e8+ �d2 64 l:tg8 �d l 65 b5 l:.f2+ 66 �g1 l::r.d2 67 l::r.xg3 �e2 and Black wins. 51 g3+ 52 �g2 l:.c2+ (D) The black pawns have made considerable progress since the initial position. 53 �gl White's king is trapped on the back rank af­ ter this, but other moves are also hopeless: 1 ) 53 Wh3 :l.h2+ 54 Wg4 g2 55 l::r.d4+ �xc6 56 :l.d1 l:.h 1 and Black wins. 2) 53 �f3 :tf2+ 54 �e4 g2 55 l:.d4+ �xc6 56 :l.d1 .:tfl and Black wins. 53 f3 54 l:.c4 :l.xa2 55 l::r.cl l:lg2+ 56 �n •.•

•.•

••.

ENDGAME ADVENTURES

No relief is offered by 56 'iti>h I .l:.h2+ 57 g l (49 �h i ll:le4 50 .l:.g6 ll:lg3+ mates; 49 c.li>h3 lLle4 50 %lg6 lLlf2+ 5 1 h2 ll:lg4++ 52 h3 l:.h2#) 49 ...ll:le4 (49 ...l:lg2+ also wins as above) 50 l:.a6 ll:lg3 5 1 .!:.a3+ c.li>g4 and White is helpless against the threat of ...h3 and ...l:lg2#. These variations are an interesting twist on some of the possible lines in the rook plus bishop vs rook endgame featured in Game 64; in both cases White succeeds in eliminating Black's last pawn, but his king is trapped in a mating-net by his own two extra pawns. 44...'iii>xf4 45 l:.d7 ll:lxb7! 46 l:.d4+ �e3 47 l:lb4 (D) Adrian was counting on this move to tie up Black's pieces.

.•.

Game 8 1 : Transparent Pin

Adrian Casillas 2263 James Rizzitano 2540 Wa tertown 1 989

44 b7 The idea behind this move is to utilize a pin to try to prevent Black from realizing his extra piece, but there is a tactical flaw. The alterna­ tive is to aim for a rook plus knight vs rook end­ game by playing 44 l:lh6 .l:.xb6 45 g4+ fl ll:lc4 5 1 l:.e6 l:.b2 52 l:.el ll:ld2+ 53 �gl c.li>g3 with a mating-net.

47...l:.d8! An unpleasant surprise for White; Black is able to utilize the back-rank threats to break the pin in safety. 48 l:.b3+ lld3 49 llxd3+ 49 ltbl is also hopeless since after 49... ll:ld6 Black will gradually realize his material advan­ tage. 49...'iti>xd3 (D) 50 h2 �g4 and Black wins. 50 .�e4 51 f5 52 c.li>f3 ll:ld6 53 h4 ll:le4 54 g4+ 'iti>e5 55 f3 t:Dg6 59 h5 The extra piece is decisive after 59 �g3 �e4 60 g5 f5 6 1 h5 f4+ 62 �f2 t:De5, when Black is winning. 59 t:Dh8 60 'iti>e3 t:Df7 61 f3 t:Dh6 62 'iti>g3 �e4 0-1 •••

•••

Game 82: Active King

Gabriel Sanchez 2330 James Rizzitano 2542

-

US Open Ch, Chicago 1 989

Black chooses to activate his king rather than defend the a6-pawn or attack the h4-pawn. 7t :a7 The black pawns are too strong after 7 1 h5 f5 72 h6 :h3 73 h7 f4 74 �e2 e4, when Black has a decisive advantage. 71. �e4 72 .l:txa6 This allows Black to construct a mating-net, but even worse is 72 c4 .l:txa3. 72...l:tf2+ 73 �el �e3 (D) ••

B

w

67 'it>c6!? The idea behind this move is to control the d5-square to prevent the white king from infil­ trating. Other reasonable continuations include 67 ...�b5 68 :xg7 Wc4, and 67 ....l:tf4+ 68 �d5 J:.xf5 69 .l:txg7 l:th5. I chose the game continua­ tion because I have always found it easier to •••

Black has focused exclusively on improving the position of his king. The combination of Black's superior king position and connected

ENDGAME ADVENTURES

passed pawns are too much for White's isolated pawns. 74 .l:td6 e4 75 .l:te6 f5 76 l:e5 l:h2! Not 76...f4?? 77 .l:txe4+ and White wins. 77 � Black queens first after 77 l:.xf5 .l:th1 + 78 :n :xn + 79 �xfl 'itd2. 77 f4 78 .l:txc5 f3 The f-pawn cannot be stopped. 79 �g1 l:lg2+ 80 �h1 .l:lg4 0-1 •••

Queen Endings Game 83: Four Queens

Ja mes Rizzitano 2037 Keith Hayward 1 989

-

Boston 1 9 78

187

2a3) 59 ... �e5 60 'i!fe7+ 'itf5 6 1 'ilff6#. 2b) 58 ...'ilff5+ 59 'ilfxf5+ �xf5 60 g8'ilf e1 'if 61 'i!kg4+ �f6 62 'ilfh4+ and White wins. 3) 57 ...'ilfg5 (relatively best) 58 g8'ilf 'i!kxg8 59 'ilfxg8 e1'ilf 60 'i!fd8+ �f7 6 1 'i!fd7+ �f6 62 'ilfxc6+ 'ite7 63 'ilfd6+ f2 The alternative is 62 ... �d3 63 'iif5+ �d2 64 'iif4+ 'iiee3 (stronger than 64 ...'itc2 65 Wxc6 'ii'h 8+ 66 Wch6 'ii'xh6+ 67 'ii'xh6 d4 68 'iff4 'ifc3 69 c6, when White has a clear advantage) 65 'iffxe3+ 'ifxe3 66 'ifxc6 'iie5+ 67 g3 'ife2+ 68 �h3 'ifxf3 69 �h4 and White has some win­ ning chances because of his extra pawn. 63 'ifh4+ � 64 'ifexe1+ 'ii'xe1 (D) 65 'ifd4? •..

188

UNDERSTANDING YOUR CHESS

The last chance is 6S 'i!kxel + 'it>xe1 66 f4 d4 67 fS d3 68 f6 d2 69 f7 d 1 'ilk 70 f8'ilk (the sixth queen) 70 ... 'i!khS+ 7 1 'iti>g1 and again White has some winning chances because of his extra pawn. 65 'i!ke7 66 'i!kdl+ cotr2 67 'i!kd2+ ..t;>n lf2. 1f2 There is no easy way to avoid the repetition; for example, 68 cotg3 'i!kg7+ 69 'iti>h3 'i!kh7+ 70 'it;>g4 'i!kg6+ 7 1 coth3 'i!khS+ 72 'iti>g3 'i!kg6+ with a draw by perpetual check. •••

black king back by playing 88 'i!kdS+ cote7 89 'i!kxa5 because of 89 ...'i!kg2+ 90 Wh6 'i!kc6+ 91 cotgS 'ilkf6+ 92 �g4 'i!kd4+ with a draw by per­ petual check. 88 'i!kg3+ 89 cotf6 'i!kc3+ 90 'it;>g6 'i!kc2+ 91 'i!kfS This is White's only try to avoid perpetual check. 91 Wxa2 92 'i!kdS+ cotc7 (D) •••

•••

Game 84: Eleven Hours

Joel Benjamin 2608 James Rizzitano 2501 World Youth Team Ch, Chicago 1 983

USA 'P\ vs USA 'B', Board 1 The United States fielded multiple teams in this event because of its role as the host nation. The 2nd round contest between the United States 'A' and 'B' teams was tied with Ph points apiece pending the result of this game. The battle raged on for eleven hours spread out over four days. 'B' team captain Tim Taylor did a tremendous job organizing the analysis sessions, document­ ing variations and finding unexpected resources to keep Black's position together. The entire team assisted with the analysis and it was a given that for the first half of this event various team members could be found in my room in­ vestigating one of the four adjourned positions. 88 'i!kxaS This was the beginning of the fourth playing session. There is no advantage in driving the

93 c5 During the previous adjournment Tim Tay­ lor discovered that Black could deliver perpet­ ual check after 93 'i!kcS+ cotd7 94 'i!kxb4 'i!kg2+ 9S 'ifi>fS Wf3+ 96 cotes 'i!ke3+ 97 WdS 'i!kd3+ 98 �cS 'i!kd6+ (the white king is trapped in a cage) 99 'it;>bS Wc6+ ! (99 ...'i!kb8+?? loses to 100 cota4 WaS+ 101 WaS) 100 'it>a5 'i!ka8+ 1 0 1 cotb6 'i!kb8+! ( 1 0 1 ...1i'c6+?? loses to 102 'it;>a7) 1 02 'it;>cS 'ii'd6+ with a draw. 93 'i!kh2 Also possible is 93 ...1i'h1+ 94 'it;>f6 1i'fl + 9S cote6 (9S cotgS Wc l + 96 �fS 'i!kc2+ 97 cotes •••

ENDGAME ADVENTURES

'iic3+ 98 �f4 'iic 1 + is a draw) 95 ...'ii'h 3+ 96 �e5 'iic3+ with a draw. The game continuation was chosen because it is difficult to see how White can improve his position. 94 �g5 'iig3+ 95 'iii>fS 'iih3+ 96 'iti>e4 (D)

97 ..ti>c6 98 'i!kd6+ 'iti>b7 99 'i!kd7+ (D) ...

Black can draw the king and pawn ending af­ ter 99 c6+ 'i!kxc6+ 1 00 'i!kxc6+ �xc6 1 0 1 '1td4 '1tb6 102 'i&?c4 ..ti>a5 103 ..ti>c5 �a6 1 04 �xb4 '1tb6 with a draw.

99 'i&?b8 1h.-lfl The fourth sealed move; the players agreed to a draw before the fifth playing session. After 100 c6 'i!kc2+ 1 0 1 ..ti>e5 'i!kb2+ White has two winning attempts: 1) Go left: 1 02 �d5 'i!kxb3+ 1 03 'iPc5 'i!ke3+ 104 '1tb5 'i!ke2+ 105 �b6 'i!ke3+ 1 06 'iPa6 ( 1 06 '1ta5 'iia7+) 106 ...'i!ke2+ 107 'iPa5 'i!ka2+ 108 '1txb4 (108 �b6 'ikf2+ 109 '1tb5 'i!ke2+ 1 1 0 '1txb4 'iib2+ transposes) 108 ...'i!kb2+ 1 09 ..ti>c4 'i!kc2+ 1 1 0 '1td5 'i!kd3+ 1 1 1 �e6 'i!kg6+ 1 1 2 �e7 'i!kg7+ with a draw. 2) Go right: 102 �f5 'ikf2+ 103 �e6 'i!ke3+ 1 04 '1td6 'iid4+ 105 'iPe7 'ikh4+ 106 'iii>e8 'i!ke4+ 107 �f7 (107 �d8 'ikh4+) 107 ...'i!kf4+ 108 �g6 'i!kg3+ 109 �h5 'i!ke5+ 1 1 0 ..ti>g4 'i!ke4+ with a draw. •••

96 'i!kc3! We discovered the strength of this move dur­ ing the previous adjournment; one of the ideas is to prevent the white king from travelling to the b5-square. White is able to avoid the perpet­ ual check after the weaker 96 ...'i!kg4+? 97 �d3 'i!kd1 + (97 ...'i!kf4 98 'i!ke4) 98 ..ti>c4 'iic 1 + 99 �b5 'ikfl + 100 'i!kc4 and White has a decisive material advantage. 97 'i!ke5+ White cannot improve his position by play­ ing 97 'iid6+ �c8 98 c6 because of the cling­ ing stalemate defence 98 ...'i!kf3+ (also good is 98 ...'i!ke3+) 99 Wd4 'i!kd3+ 100 'iti>e5 'i!kf5+ 101 �d4 'iid3+ 1 02 '1tc5 'i!kb5+ 103 'iti>d4 'i!kd3+ with a draw. ••.

189

Index of Players and Analysts

Numbers refer to pages.

List of James Rizzitano's Opponents Where a page number appears in bold, the named player had White. Where it appears in italic, it is a partial game, rather than a complete game. Alburt, Lev Bauer, Richard Belopolsky, Boris Benjamin, Joel Benko, Pal Bisguier, Arthur Bryan, Jarod Casillas, Adrian Chase, Christopher Christiansen, Larry Curdo, John

Day, Lawrence de Firmian, Nick DeMauro, Joseph Dlugy, Maxim Dzindzichashvili, Roman Fang, Joseph Fedorowicz, John Gajic, Zoran Goichberg, William Griego, David Gurevich, Dmitry Gurevich, Ilya Hayward, Keith Ivanov, Igor Kanamori, Aki

13, 47 81 1 79 49, 63, 188

1 1 , 181 52 1 72 185

45, 121 57 28, 29, 40, 83, 85, 88, 120, 125, 129, 169 (2) 1 12 105 1 73

42 36, 1 70 67, 74, 90, 91, 93, 96, 109, 1 1 8 1 74 1 71

98 183

1 1 6, 143, 1 76, 1 77 79 187 32, 33 131

Kelleher, William Kopec, Danny Larsen, Bent Leverett, Bruce Lonoff, Marc McCambridge, Vincent Malpert, Rodney Mercuri, Louis Miles, Anthony Morris, Walter Nickoloff, Bryon Popovych, Orest Ree, Hans Regan, Kenneth Rogers, Ian Roos, Daniel Sanchez, Gabriel Schroer, Jonathan Shaw, Alan Shipman, Walter Smejkal, Jan Speelman, Jonathan Stiers, Thomas Stopa, John Tal, Mikhail Turnbull, Murray Valvo, Michael Wolff, Patrick

39, 68 158 19 180

87 103 133 147, 167 15 108

72 139 77, 79 65 1 71 111 186

149, 182 53 59, 1 14 37, 50

18 100 71 24 152 135 35, 43, 76, 123, 154

INDEX OF PLA YERS AND ANALYSTS

191

Games by Other Players When a player's name appears in bold, that player had White. Otherwise, the FIRST-NAMED player had White. BARCZAY, LASZLO - Suttles, Duncan 100 BENKO, PAL - Suttles, Duncan 1 64 BROWNE, WALTER - Byrne, Robert 102; Sveshnikov, Evgeny 46 BYRNE, ROBERT - Browne, Walter 102 CAPABLANCA, JOSE - Winter, William 86 CHRISTIANSEN, LARRY - Seirawan, Yasser 5 1 DZINDZICHASHVILI, ROMAN - Thoman, Jan 1 8 1 FILIP, MIROSLAV - Tal, Mikhail 145 KOVACEVIC, VLATKO - Seirawan, Yasser 1 09 PETROSIAN, TIGRAN - Spassky, Boris 108 ROHDE, MICHAEL - Weinstein, Norman 1 68 SEIRAWAN, YASSER - Christiansen, Larry 5 1 ; Kovacevic, Vlatko 1 09 SPASSKY, BORIS - Petrosian, Tigran 108 SUTTLES, DUNCAN - Barczay, Laszlo 1 00; Benko, Pal 164 SVESHNIKOV, EVGENY - Browne, Walter 46 TAL, MIKHAIL - Filip, Miroslav 145 TIMMAN, JAN - Dzindzichashvi1i, Roman 1 8 1 WEINSTEIN, NORMAN - Rohde, Michael l68 WINTER, WILLIAM - Capablanca, Jose 86

Endgame Studies Kasparian, Genrikh 52, 1 65 (2) Muller, Karsten & Lamprecht, Frank 173 Reti, Richard 1 66 Zakhodiakin. Gleb 1 76

Index of Openings

Numbers refer to pages. Flank Opening A00 42, 52

Scotch Opening C25 1 9

Bird's Opening A03 129

King's Gambit Declined C30 67

Reti Opening A05 1 16

Petroff Defence C42 154

English Opening A26 135

Four Knights Game C48 83, 85, 88

Trompowsky Attack A45 39, 152

Ruy Lopez C80 71 ; C85 1 12

Modem Benoni A67 13; A68 74

Torre Attack D03 147

Dutch Defence A80 100

Slav Defence D I O 131

Modem Defence B06 18, 158

Semi-Slav Defence D46 33, 59

Pirc Defence B07 98; B08 43; B09 63

Griinfeld Defence D94 40

Caro-Kann Defence Bl6 Ill

Queen's Indian Defence E l 2 53; E l 3 81; E l 4 103

Sicilian Defence B21 JJ, 32, 133; B22 15, 65; B28 28; B30 125; B3 1 121 ; B40 29, 68; B52 120; B60 123; B61 139; B82 72 ; B93 24; B95 45; B99 76

Nimzo-Indian Defence E30 96; E3 1 90, 91, 93

French Defence CIO 1 14; C I I 77, 105; C l 6 149

King's Indian Defence E6 1 1 18; E73 47; E8 1 79; E9 1 35, 57; E94 49; E96 109

MAI�IBIITI James Rizzitano, an experienced international master, has reassessed games from the whole of his career, and in this book presents the lessons from them that will be most relevant to club and tournament players. A common problem for the typical weekend competitor or club player is that his time available for studying chess is very limited. What should he study? Grandmasters from Botvinnik to Yermolinsky have stressed the importance of reviewing and annotating your own games. Rizzitano shows how by doing that you can gain a greater understanding of your strengths and weaknesses, and drawing upon his own experiences, explains how to shape your approach to chess to make the most of your abilities. Major topics include: •

•

Developing a reliable and coherent opening repertoire The importance of understanding opening theory rather than simply memorizing it

•

Theoretical novelties: finding your own, and facing the opponent's

•

Opening selection depending upon the nature of the game and event

•

Risk management and 'playing for a win'

•

Competing successfully against higher-rated opposition

•

•

Accumulating small advantages: a safe method when the opponent plays for a draw The power of the initiative: lighting a fire and keeping it burning

The book contains more than 60 deeply annotated instructive games. James Rizzitano is a strong international master who dominated chess in the New England region

during a 14-year period from 1976 to 1989 - he won 157 out of 336 events in which he competed. His career highlights include victories over Alburt, Benjamin, Benko, Christiansen, Dlugy, I. Gurevich and Wolff, and exciting draws with de Firmian, Larsen, Speelman, and the legendary former world champion Tal.

Other titles from Gambit Publications include: Chess Strategy in Action

Fundamental Chess Endings

John Watson

Karsten Muller and Frank Lamprecht

Secrets of Chess Defence

Understanding Chess Move by Move

Mihail Marin

John Nunn

Decision-Making at the Chessboard

The Seven Deadly Chess Sins

Viacheslav Eingom

Jonathan Rowson

The Road to Chess Improvement

Secrets of Positional Chess

Alex Yermolinsky

Drazen Marovic

Instructive Modern Chess Masterpieces

Creative Chess Strategy

Igor Stohl

Alfonso Romero

Gambit Publications Ltd is: Managing Director: Murray Chandler GM Chess Director: Dr John Nunn GM Editorial Director: Graham Burgess FM

For further information about Gambit Publications, write to us at: Gambit Publications Ltd, P.O. Box 32640, London W14 OJN, England.

Or send an e-mail to: [email protected] http://www.gambitbooks.com

$24.95

£15.99 ISBN

1

904600 07

7