Averbakh's Selected Games

CADOGAN CHESS BOOKS Averbakh's Selected Games CADOGAN CHESS SERIES ChiefAdvisor: Garry Kasparov Editor: Murray Chan...

Author: Yuri Averbakh

314 downloads 2318 Views 6MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!
Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

CADOGAN CHESS BOOKS

Averbakh's Selected Games

CADOGAN CHESS SERIES

ChiefAdvisor: Garry Kasparov Editor: Murray Chandler Russian Series Editor: Ken Neat Other chess titles from Cadogan include:

The Application of Chess Theory

Paul Keres Best Games Vol.2

Yefim Geller

Egon Varnusz

The Art of Chess Analysis

Smyslov's 125 Selected Games

Jan Timman

Vasily Smyslov

Bobby Fischer: His Approach to Chess

Sokolov's Best Games

Elie Agur

Ivan Sokolov

Chess in the Fast Lane

Studies and Games

Bill & Michael Adams

Jan Timman

Fire on Board: Shirov's Best Games

The Sorcerer's Apprentice

Alexei Shirov

David Bronstein & Tom FUrstenberg

The Genius of Paul Morphy

Taimanov's Best Games

Chris Ward

Mark Taimanov

Half a Century of Chess

Timman's Selected Games

Mikhail Botvinnik

Jan Timman

The Life and Games of Mikhail Tal

Uncompromising Chess

Mikhail Tal

Alexander Belyavsky

Paul Keres Best Games Vol.l

Vasily Smyslov: Endgame Virtuoso

Egon Varnusz

Vasily Smyslov

For a complete catalogue of CADOGAN CHESS books (which includes the Pergamon Chess and Maxwell Macmillan Chess lists) please write to: Cadogan Books pic, 27-29 Berwick St, London, WIV 3RF Tel: (0171) 287 6555 Fax: (0171) 734 1733


by Yuri Averbakh

Translated and edited by Ken Neat

CADOGAN LONDON, NEW YORK

English Translation Copyright © 1998 Ken Neat

First published 1998 by Cadogan Books pic, 27-29 Berwick St, London WI V 3RF.

Distributed in North America by The Globe Pequot Press, 6 Business Park Rd, P.O. Box 833, Old Saybrook. Connecticut 06475-0833, USA

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior permission in writing from the publishers.

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

ISBN I 85744 548 5

Typeset by Ken Neat, Durham

Printed in Great Britain by BPC Wheatons Ltd, Exeter

Contents

Foreword

7

My Chess Career

9

Biographical Details

12

Selected Games 1943- 1975 Averbakh- Simagin, Moscow Championship Semi-Final 1 943 Averbakh-Botvinnik, Moscow Championship 1 943/4 Mikenas-Averbakh, Moscow Championship 1 943/4 Averbakh-Zak, 2nd Match Game, Moscow 1 947 Taimanov-Averbakh, Trades Un ion Team Championship, Leningrad 1 947 Averbakh-Veresov, Sem i-Final 1 6th USSR Championship, Moscow 1 947 Averbakh-Lil ienthal, Moscow Championship 1 948 Kotov-Averbakh, 1 6th U S S R Championship, Moscow 1 948 Averbakh-Bondarevsky, 1 6th USSR Championship, Moscow 1 948 Averbakh-Szabo, Moscow v. Budapest 1 949 Averbakh-Goldberg, Sem i-Final 1 8th U S S R Championship, Tula 1 950 Averbakh-Ravinsky, Moscow Championship 1 950 Averbakh-Moiseev, Moscow Cham pionship 1 950 Golovko-Averbakh, Moscow Championship 1950 Averbakh-Suetin, 1 8th U S S R Championship, Moscow 1 950 Petrosian-Averbakh, 1 8th U S S R Championship, Moscow 1 950 I1ivitsky-Averbakh, Sem i-Final 1 9th USSR Championship, Svedlovsk 1 95 1 Novotelnov-Averbakh, 1 9th USSR Championship, Moscow 1 95 1 Averbakh-Bondarevsky, 1 9th USSR Championship, Moscow 1 95 1 Averbakh- Smyslov, 1 9th USSR Championship, Moscow 1 95 1 Averbakh-Kholmov, Sem i-Final 20th USSR Championship, Minsk 1 952 Unzicker-Averbakh, Interzonal Tournament, Saltsjobaden/Stockholm 1 95 2 Averbakh-Stah lberg, Interzonal Tournament, Saltsjobaden/Stockholm 1 952 Gligoric-Averbakh, Interzonal Tournament, Saltsjobaden/Stockholm 1 952 Pilnik-Averbakh, Interzonal Tournament, Saltsjobaden/Stockholm 1 952 Averbakh-Tolush, Training Tournament, Gagra 1 953 Keres-Averbakh, Candidates Tournament, Neuhausen/Zurich 1 953 Averbakh-Szabo, Candidates Tournament, Neuhausen/Zurich 1 953 Euwe-Averbakh, Candidates Tournament, Neuhausen/Zurich 1 953 3 0 Averbakh-Taimanov, Candidates Tournament, Neuhausen/Zurich 1 95 3 3 1 Najdorf-Averbakh, Candidates Tournament, Neuhausen/Zurich 1 953 32 Averbakh-Euwe, Candidates Tournament, Neuhausen/Zurich 1 953

I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

13 17 20 22 25 31 34 36 40 45 49 51 52 54 57 60 64 66 69 72 75 79 81 86 90 95 97 99 101 1 05 1 06 1 09

33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Averbakh-Ragozin, 2 1 st U S S R Championship, Kiev 1 954 Averbakh- Suetin, 2 1 st USSR Championship, Kiev 1 954 Averbakh-Bannik, 2 1 st U S S R Championship, Kiev 1 954 Korchnoi-Averbakh, 2 1 st U S S R Championship, Kiev 1 954 Averbakh-Panno, U S S R v. Argentina, Buenos Aires 1 954 Averbakh-Aronin, U S S R Team Tournament, Riga 1 954 Averbakh-Botvinnik, Training Match, Nikolina Gora 1 956 Averbakh-Botvinnik, Training Match, Nikolina Gora 1 95 7 Polugayevsky-Averbakh, 23rd USSR Championship, Leningrad 1 95 6 Averbakh- Spassky, 23rd U S S R Championship Play-Off, Leningrad 1 95 6 Golz-Averbakh, International Tournament, Dresden 1 956 Averbakh-Fuchs, International Tournament, Dresden 1 956 Uhlmann-Averbakh, International Tournament, Dresden 1 956 Vasyukov-Averbakh, Moscow Championship 1 957 Averbakh-Polugayevsky, 25th USSR Championship, Riga 1 958 Averbakh-Fischer, Interzonal Tournament, Portoroz 1 958 Averbakh- Larsen, Interzonal Tournament, Portoroz 1 958 Korchnoi-Averbakh, 26th U S S R Championship, Tbilisi 1 959 Bronstein-Averbakh, 26th USSR Championship, Tbilisi 1 959 Roizman-Averbakh, Semi-Final 28th USSR Championship, Odessa 1 960 Averbakh-Petrosian, Moscow Team Championship 1 96 1 Averbakh-Taimanov, Moscow v. Leningrad Match 1 962 Averbakh-Aronin, Moscow Team Championship 1 956 Averbakh-Estrin, Moscow Championship 1 964 Khasin-Averbakh, Moscow Team Championship 1964 Averbakh-Platonov, 36th USSR Championship, Alma-Ata 1 969170 Averbakh-Hug, International Tournament, Palma de Mallorca 1 972 Averbakh-Plachetka, International Tournament, Polanica Zdroj 1 975

III 1 13 1 16 1 19 1 22 1 25 1 27 131 1 34 1 37 1 42 1 44 1 46 1 49 151 1 54 1 56 1 58 1 62 1 64 1 66 1 68 171 1 74 1 76 1 78 1 81 1 84

Tournament and Match Results

1 88

Index of Opponents

191

Index of Openings

1 92

Foreword

This book should have been published at least quarter of a century ago, when my generation was still highly placed in the chess world and was creating chess history. However, journalism, work for the USSR Chess Federation, as well as research on the endgame and the origins of chess diverted me from this: there simply was not sufficient time. Therefore, just before my 75th birthday, I gratefully accepted the offer of Cadogan Chess to publish a collection of my games. However, every cloud has a silver lining! When working on games that were played many years ago, I not only experienced as though anew the events that occurred in them, but at the same time I gained the opportunity to look at myself from the side, effectively from a future viewpoint, to look critically, and that means on the whole to evaluate more objectively my chess playing. It is considered that present-day chess differs greatly from the chess of the 1950s, when the peak of my successes occurred. Of course, today chess has become more competitive, more severe, more professional. Thanks to Informator, the Internet and computer programs, grandmasters and masters now obtain an incomparably greater amount of information than in my time. As a consequence of this, opening theory develops more rapidly and intensively, and the role of opening knowledge is growing. However, the longer playing sessions, stricter time controls and, finally, the abolishment of adjournments have left their mark and affected the quality of play. This is especially noticeable in the concluding phase of the game, the endgame. One other important factor must be mentioned. The information language of symbols, which stems from Informator and is now employed in many publications, has led to the fact that commentaries written with the help of these symbols completely lack the most important thing that is always present in a chess encounter - the conflict of personalities, the clash of plans, the battle of ideas. As is said nowadays, the human factor is lost. The soulless symbols do not, and are unable to reflect anything of this. And for me the battle of ideas, the clash of plans, and also the various psychological nuances associated with the play, have always been a significant element in the creative process at the chess board, sometimes simply determining the result of the game, irrespective of who had the better or worse position. It is for this reason that in my notes I have endeavoured to devote the greatest attention to them. In selecting these games I have aimed to give not only those that I consider my best, the most memorable, but in the main those that reflect my personality as a grandmaster, and reflect my understanding of chess. Moreover, in some games I wanted to convey my experiences at the board. The knowledgeable reader may be surprised that, although I am considered an expert on endgame play, here I have given relatively few examples of my play in this field. This can be explained as follow. Firstly, in my books devoted to the endgame a sufficient number of such examples can be found, and I did not want to repeat them. Secondly, and

8


perhaps more important, I wanted to show, contrary to the 'top technician ' tag, ascribed to me by chess journalists for my comparatively good techn ique, that I was on the whole a player with a style that, although positional, was universal, and that I was quite strong both in attack and defence, in positional manoeuvring, and in sharp combinational complications. How well I have succeeded in demonstrating this, the reader can judge. Only in my later years, when I had stopped being a chess professional and had ceased working on trying to im prove, when I no longer had ambition and lacked both strength and nervous energy, I sometimes used to play on techn ique, and incidentally, also not without success. I sincerely hope that this collection will not only enable the reader to make the acquaintance of my games, but will help him to understand better that great game CHESS. A game in which, in the words of the ancient sages, victory is gained by intellect, but I would add that in which, as in life, the factor of chance and luck also plays a considerable role. Yuri Averbakh

My Chess Career

I learned to play chess at the age of seven, but I became fascinated by it only much later, when I was already thirteen. The first chess book that accidentally came into my hands was My System by Aron Nimzowitsch. It was hard to think of a worse choice! After all, in chess you must first learn to attack, and only then to defend, you must gain a mastery of tactics, and only then strategy. My System is a good book, only not for beginners. It is a textbook on positional play, and first you must learn to make combinations. As will be seen, with me it all happened the other way round, and it is not surprising that later, to a significant extent, I had to relearn. Late in 193 5 I visited the Moscow Chess Club for the first time, and there I was fortunate enough to listen to a lecture by the great endgame expert Nikolai Grigoriev. It made an indelible impression on me. When Grigoriev explained his pawn studies, moving the pieces on the demonstration board with his thin, artistic fingers, I sensed, rather than understood, the great depth and beauty of chess, observing with my own eyes how human thought spiritualises these little wooden pieces, and they, like real actors, begin performing miraculous spectacles, capable of touching the most sensitive parts of the human soul. It was this perception of chess as an art that finally linked me with it. I wanted to understand chess and study it, which is what I earnestly began doing. My first major chess success was victory in the USSR Cadet Championship (for juniors up to 1 6 years old). Although among the participants there were probably lads more talented than me, such as Mark Stolberg who met an untimely death during the Second World War, my broader understanding of chess bore its fruit. In 1 93 9 I finished school and at the same time, after passing through the sieve of elimination events (quarter-final and semi-final), I qualified for the final of the adult Moscow Championship, where I met some of the acknowledged masters of chess. Finding myself in such impressive company, I initially lost my head. The responsibility so pressed, that in almost every game I ended up in time trouble, in the middle of the tournament I suffered seven successive defeats, and I finished in last but one place. It is true that there were also objective reasons for this slump - the Championship coincided with the examination session, so that for preparing for the games and for relaxation there was no time. I was naturally very upset by my failure, and, on noticing this, the Chief Arbiter of the tournament, Nikolai Ryumin, gave me some good advice: 'If you want to become a master', he said, 'you must learn to lose, you must learn to withstand a blow, so that in the game following a defeat you play as if nothing had happened!' I remembered this wise advice all my life and endeavoured to follow it, although, to be honest, I did not always manage to. A major role in the forming of my chess outlook was played by two other men - Pyotr Romanovsky and Benjamin Blumenfeld, both well known masters. Romanovsky taught

10


that in chess, as in any other form of creative activity, there is a battle of ideas, a battle of different tendencies. Every genuine master should develop his chess philosophy and follow it. These words of his forced me to think about my play, determine my creative attitudes, and to pick out those ideas that I intended to carry out in my games. Blumenfeld drew my attention to the psychological aspect of chess. He emphasised that chess was played by people, each with their own character and cast of mind, with different virtues and defects. In the struggle at the chess board one must learn to exploit all this, one must be able to create those situations in which your skills and talent display themselves to a greater degree than the skills and talent of the opponent. After gaining the master title and finishing at the Institute, for five years I tried to combine engineering work with participation in tournaments of various standards. However, at the end of the 1940s I had to consider my future. I was at the cross-roads. I had interesting work as a research engineer, and my candidate dissertation was progressing. In chess I had become Moscow Champion, and had reached the final of the USSR Championship, although I did not have any great success there. I could not help feeling that in the creative sense I was standing still in chess: time for improvement, and even for preparing for competitions, was practically not available. It was becoming increasingly obvious that the attempt to sit simultaneously on two chairs did not promise well: work interfered with chess, and chess interfered with work. I had to make a choice. And I chose in favour of chess. I decided for a time to give up work in order to try to become a grandmaster, and to raise my chess playing to a higher standard. At that time it was much more difficult to gain the grandmaster title than it is now. To do this I first had to finish in the first four in the USSR Championship Semi-Final. This I did. The next stage was the 19th USSR Championship, which was simultaneously a zonal qualification tournament for the World Championship. I managed to finish in the first five, who gained the right to play in the Interzonal Tournament. The culmination was this Interzonal Tournament, where I became a Candidate for the World Championshp and was awarded the grandmaster title. My experiences associated with this tournament are described in detail in my notes to the games. The Candidates Tournament was the most significant event in my chess career. I prepared quite thoroughly for it, but my practical experience before it was slight, and this told on the final outcome.On the other hand, a couple of months later, with an exceptionally high score (in these events only Botvinnik had done better) I won the USSR Championship. On becoming a grandmaster I began participating regularly in tournaments, but finished with my scientific work. However, my investigative character forced me to make a serious study of the endgame, that phase of chess where individual pieces battle against each other. Initially I published several articles, and then I thought about a book devoted to various types of endings. Since I was not capable of carrying out this work on my own, I gathered a small group of masters, and we enthusiastically got down to work. After a study had been made of endings in which neither side has more than one piece, I initially had the idea of moving on to endings with a greater number of pieces, but, thank God, I stopped in time. It became clear to me that such a work would kill chess, as the game would be transformed into a competitioin in which the one who won would not be the one who plays better, but the one who knows more.


II

I should mention that this protracted work on the endgame had an adverse affect on my further chess successes. After all, a man's creative energey is not unlimited. When I stopped studying the endgame, my passion for research forced me to turn to another interesting topic - the history of chess, which, after all, is full of unexplored territory. The resolving of many mysteries of its history is a task no less enticing than the solving of various problems at the chess board. I hope also to write a book about this. I have spent a long life in chess, and have been not only a player, but also a trainer, arbiter, journalist and publisher; I have been an administrator of my own country's federation and internationally. And I am eternally grateful to the royal game, for the fact that it has brought me so much joy, the joy of creativity. I should like to repeat the words of Siegbert Tarrasch, that chess, like love and music, can make man happy!

Biographical Details (added by the Translator)

Yuri Lvov ich Averbakh, born 8.2.1 922 in Kaluga International Grandmaster ( 1 952) I nternational Judge of Chess Compositions ( 1 956) International Arbiter ( 1 969) President of the USSR Chess Federation 1 972-77 Holder of several posts in FIDE since 1 97 8 Editor- in-chief o f several Russian magazines, including Shakhmatny Bulletin and

Shakhmaty v SSSR since 1 962 Author of numerous books, of which English translations have been published of Chess Endings: Essential Knowledge (first published by Pergamon, 1 966), the 5-volume series Comprehensive Chess Endings (Pergamon, 1 983-87), and Chess Middlegames: Essential Knowledge (Cadogan 1 996)

Selected Games 1943-1975 The USSR Championship was not held in either 1942 or 1943 . This role was essentially fulfil led by the Moscow Cham pionship of 1943 /4. This tournament was preceded by qualifying events and semi finals, in one of which I took first place, ahead of Ragozin and Zubarev, who were already masters, and Simagin, who was soon to become one. Game I Averbakh-8imagin Moscow Championship Semi-Final 1 943 Benoni Defence Of the chess players of my generation, one of the most striking and unusual was undoubtedly Vladimir Simagin. A rather pale, freckled face with high cheek-bones, glasses with a thin metal frame, light, straw-coloured hair, protru ding in unruly fashion from his crown that is how I remember him from when I first saw him back in 193 5. During the war, when he was exempted from service in the army on health grounds, Vladimir worked as a fitter in an aircraft factory. He laboured for twelve hours a day, with little to eat and with little sleep, but all the same he contrived to find time for chess. He went about in a quilted jacket, crude boots with wooden soles, and a shabby cap with ear-flaps. It so happened that for a long time my chess career and that of Vladimir took a parallel course: we used to participate in the same tournaments. We were rivals but also members of the same team; we played together abroad and often shared a hotel room.

I played not less than twenty, and perhaps even as many as thirty games with Simagin. He was a player of original, far from routine style, an artist-researcher, who sought new, untrodden paths. It was always interesting to play against him. d4 1 �f6 1 c4 c5 3 d5 e5 4 g3 d6 5 R.gl R.e7 e4 6 � 7 �el �bd7 � 8 �e8 9 �bc3 'itfh8 10 R.e3

White has played the opening un pretentiously. 1 0 �hl should have been considered, to answer 1 0 ...g6 with 1 1 .i.h6 �g7 12 1i'd2. 10 R.g5 The usual plan in this opening is IO ...g6 followed by Il...�g7 and I2 .. f5 . The bishop move is the start of a system which at the time was successfully played by Simagin. He provokes 1 1 f4, in order after I I . exf4 12 gxf4 .i.f6 to play 1 3 ...g5 and, by sacrificing a pawn, gain control of e5. .

. .

14


�xe3 11 'ifd2 12 'ifxe3 Strictly speaking, the exchange of bishops favours B lack. Firstly, he is cramped, and every exchange facil itates the manoeuvring of his pieces. Secondly, he rids himself of a bishop which, with its restricted mobility, often proves 'bad ' . However, these are general arguments, and everything, of course, depends on the further development of events. 12 g6 13 f4

13 �g7 The natural continuation was 1 3 ...fS, with a roughly equal game, but Simagin was not one for following familiar paths. Here he chooses an original, but risky plan - he invites the opponent to play f4-f5, so as then to try and establish his pieces on the dark squares. White accepts the challenge. gxfS 14 fS B lack consistently carries out his idea. 1 4 ...g5 IS f6! �h5 1 6 1Ifxg5 �dxf6 1 7 'ifh4 :g8 18 h3 would have led to an opening of lines, favourable to White. �f6 15 exfS :g8 16 �h3 17 hl Avoiding a little trap - 17 g4? �xf5 ! 1 8 'iff3 �xg4! 19 �xg4 1i'h4 20 h3 h5.

17 �g h 5 Black was hoping for 1 8 'iff3 'ife7 1 9 g4 e4! 20 'ifg2 �d7 and 2 1 ...:ae8 with a complicated game. But White is by no means obliged to follow this path. He has a strong move that essentially refutes the opponent' s plan.

18 'ifh6! 'iffS Because of the threat of 1 9 g4, this reply is forced. :x fS 19 'ifxfS Now it is apparent that, for the successful completion of his original plan, B lack is short of just one tempo. Were his bishop at d7, he would be able to take on f8 with his other rook. �g7 20 g4 21 �g3 Wh ite is not in a hurry to launch an offensive. I was afraid that after 2 1 g5 �g8 22 lDe4 lDe8 with the threat of 23 ... f6 Black would gain counterplay. 21 �d7 22 lDge4 In my notes at that time I suggested that 22 lDce4 lDge8 23 lDxf6 lDxf6 24 g5 lDe8 25 a4 was stronger, although then 25 ...f6 26 lDe4 fxg5 27lDxg5 lDf6 28 lDe6 :g8 is possible. Instead of 25 a4, 25 lDe4 is good, since if 25 ... b5 White has the counter 26 b4! cxb4 27 c5, when B lack ' s position is on the point of col lapse.

15

Averbakh 's Selected Games 29

22 �ge8 :g8 23 a4 24 :gl a6 I don't want to attach a question mark to this move, although here it was quite essential to play 24 ... h6. However, as I have already mentioned, Vladim ir Simagin very much disliked making natural moves. �xe4 25 g5 If 25 ... �h5 26 �e2, threatening 27 �g4. 26 �xe4 :b8

27 :a3 ! Intending 2 8 f6 with a very strong attack. Black's desire to obtain at least some counterplay is therefore quite under standable. 27 b5 28 axb5 axb5

16

In the resulting sharp ending White has every chance of winning, thanks to the more active placing of his pieces. He is aim ing to decide the game by an attack on the kings ide and consistently pursues this course. However, with 29 :a7 he could have achieved his aim more simply, for example: (a) 29 ... :d8 30 :g3 bxc4 3 1 f6 �xh3 3 2 :xh3 :f8 33 g6! �g8 34 g7 �xg7 3 5 :g3 etc.; (b) 29 ... �c8 3 0 :xf7 bxc4 (3 0 ... :g7 3 1 :xg7 �xg7 32 f6+ �g6 3 3 �xc8 :xc8 34 :fl �f7 35 g6+! hxg6 3 6 �g5+ �f8 3 7 f7 etc.) 3 1 g6! hxg6 3 2 fxg6 :g7 3 3 :f8+ :g8 34 :xe8! �xh3 3 5 g7+ �h7 3 6 �f6+, and wins. 29 �xh3 :g6 30 :xh3 Now White's task is greatly simplified. After the more critical, but also sharper 30 ... bxc4, I would have had a choice of two continuations: (a) 3 1 :g4 :g6 (3 1 ...:xb2 32 g6! fxg6 33 :xh7+! �xh7 34 :h4 mate) 32 :gh4 h6 33 Lh6+ :xh6 34 :xh6+ �g8 3 5 g6 fxg6 (3 5 ... :xb2 36 :h8+! �xh8 3 7 gxf7, or 3 5 ... :b7 36 �xd6! �xd6 37 g7) 36 :xg6+ �f7! (3 6... �h7 3 7 f7) 3 7 :h6 (3 7 :g2 c3! 3 8 bxc3 :bl + 3 9 :gl :xgl + 40

16

Averbakh IS Selected Games

�xgl c4! and Black can resist) 3 7...�g8 3 8 lDg5 lDxf6 39 :g6+ �h8 40 IIxf6 IIxb2, and White still has to win this ending. During the game this did not appeal to me, and I was intending to play: (b) 3 1 g6! :xg6 3 2 :xg6 fxg6 33 f7 lDc7 (3 3 ...lDg7 34 lDf6 h5 3 5 :'g3 ! :'fS 36 :'xg6 :'xf7 3 7 :h6 mate) 34 lDg5 h5 (34...�g7 35 :'xh7+ �f6 3 6 lDe4+ �fS [36...�e7 3 7 fS1I'+!] 3 7 lDxd6+ �f6 3 8 fS1I'+ :'xfS 3 9 :'xc7 etc.) 3 5 :'0 �g7 3 6 h4! (not immediately 3 6 lDe6+ lDxe6 3 7 dxe6 �fS 3 8 :'f6 g 5 3 9 :'g6 �e7, when if 40 :'xg5 Black has 40 ... c3! 4 1 bxc3 �xe6, after which ... White loses) 36...e4 3 7 IIf4 e3 3 8 �gl , and Black has no useful moves. Thus 3 8 ... lDxd5 is met by 3 9 lDe6+ �h7 40 fS 1I' :'xfS 4 1 IIxfS c 3 42 bxc3 lDxc3 43 :'f7+ �h8 44 :'e7, and White must gradually be able to realise his material advantage.

31 :b3 ! In this simple way White eliminates any possible counterplay by the opponent. 31 b4 32 :al The invasion of the rook on the open file leads to a forced win. Black no longer has any satisfactory defence. 32 h6 33 h4 :g8 34 :a7 :f8

34 ...�h7, trying to break free with the king, would have been met by the crushing 3 5 :'g3 hxg5 36lDxg5+. 35 :'g3

Now if 3 5 ...�h7 White has the decisive 36 g6+. hxg5 35 hxg5 36 :c8 37 :h3+ �g8 38 �g2 lDc7 39 lIal Aiming to conclude the game with mate. lDe6 39 40 dxe6 fxe6 41 g6 Black resigns The Moscow Championship of 1 943/4 attracted a truly brilliant entry. The Muscovites Smyslov, Alatortsev, Kotov, Panov and Yudovich were joined by the Leningrad players Botvinnik, Ragozin, Tolush, Lisitsyn and Ravinsky, as well as Mikenas from the Baltic Republics. They were opposed by the youth of Moscow Simagin, Lyublinsky, Khachaturov and me. Although I lost in the first round to my colleague and constant rival Simagin, this is no way affected my fighting spirit. By defeating the master players Alatortsev, Yudovich, Lisitsyn and Mikenas, and

Averbakh's Selected Games holding my own in the games with grand masters Botvinn ik, Smyslov and Kotov, I took sixth place and achieved the master norm. An important competitive barrier, which I had approached closely before the war, had been overcome. The tournament winner was Botvinn ik, playing hors concours, and the Moscow Champion became the second-placed Smyslov. Game 2 Averbakh-Botvinnik Moscow Championship 194314 French Defence I do not recal l for what reason, but my game with Botvinnik took place in his room in the National Hotel, where he was then staying. I should rem ind the reader that in the days of my youth Botvinnik was the idol of our young generation. We passionately supported him, intently followed his successes, and learned from his games. Botvinnik ' s outstanding chess successes had brought him enormous authority and extraordinary popularity. He was known throughout the country. Botvinnik was admired, and he was followed and imitated. And here I was playing against Botvinn ik, one of the strongest grand masters in the world, who had beaten Alekhine, and Capablanca, and Lasker and Euwe. When I sat down at the board and wrote on my scoresheet: White - Averbakh, Black - Botvinnik, I wondered if I was dream ing. I even secretly pinched myself on the hand. No, it was not a dream. Before me sat Botvinnik himselfl I remember that when in 1 93 7 Botvinnik played a match for the title of USSR Champion with Grigory Levenfish, the sympathy of the Moscow lads was on

17

the side of the latter. Perhaps this was because Botvinnik was considered the favourite, although the match ended in a draw. Incidentally, it was then that I ended up for the first time in the National Hotel. It happened like this: a group of young chess players was walking along Gorky Street (now it is cal led, as it was in the past, Tverskaya). Sudden ly Boris Vaksberg (I defin itely remember that it was he) suggested: 'Lads! Levenfish is staying in the National. What if we call in and show him our analyses in the Sicil ian?' I should explain that at that time a variation, that subsequently even became known as the Moscow Variation, was being intensively analysed in Moscow 1 e4 c5 2 lLlf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lLlxd4 lLlf6 5 f3 e5 6 �b5+. It was no sooner said than done! After making over way, not without some difficulty, past the heavily-moustached doormen in uniform at the entrance to the hotel, we went up in the lift, and Vaksberg cautiously knocked on the door of the required room. I recall that the door was opened by Yakov Rokhlin. 'We need to see Grigory Yakov levich!' , said Vaksberg boldly, and we hesitantly followed him into the room. That which we saw threw us into utter confus ion. On a sofa, lean ing over a chess board, sat Levenfish and ... Botvinn ik! We said hello, and then there was a pause. The first to find his tongue was again Vaksberg. 'Grigory Yakovlevich!' , he said to Levenfish, 'we would like to invite you to visit the Stad ium of Young Pioneers! And you too, Mikhail Mois eev ich!', he added. And with that we proudly trooped out. But let us return to my game with Bot vinnik. I played, as you will see, extremely cautiously and, to my surprise, I gained a -

18

Averbakh 's Selected Games

draw without particular difficulty. Inci dentally, in that Championship Botvinnik dropped only two points - he lost to Smyslov and drew two games. e4 1 e6 2 d4 d5 3 lDd2 c5 exd5 exd5 4 lDc6 5 �b5+ 6 lDgfJ cxd4

'A new move, that has not been considered by theory', wrote Baturinsky, the co-author of the three-volume work on Botvinnik that was published in the 1960s. Now, many years later, it can be said that it does not in fact deserve particular consideration. The best that Black can hope for here is a draw. 7 lDxd4 1Ife7+ 8 1Ife2 1Ifxe2+ 9 �xe2 �d7 10 lDlfJ a6 �d3 11 �d6 The attempt to gain the advantage of the two bishops by 1 1...lDb4 could have been answered by 12 lDeS. 12 lDf5 �xf5 �xf5 lDge7 13 14 �d3 White should have considered 14 �h3 , with the idea of playing the bishop to g2, aiming at the dS pawn.

14 lDb4 Botvinnik did not like to leave his opponent with the two bishops.

c3 15 A draw in this game was the limit of my dreams, and so I consistently aim to simplify the position. However, I S :dl would have been much stronger, in order to recapture with the rook. There is nothing for the king to do at d3 . 15 lDxd3 �d7 16 �xd3 17 f6 �g5 18 �e3 A timely change of m ind. Initially I was evidently intending to play 1 8 �h4, but then I rejected this because of 1 8 ... lDfS 1 9 �g3 �cS, when it i s White who may have difficulties. :ac8 18 19 l:the8 :ad l 20 :c4 g3 11 lDd4 �e5 l:tec8 22 lDc2 At last Black shows his teeth. He threatens 23 ... �xc3 . 23 �e2 a5 Black prevents the knight from going to b4. l:td3 24 24 :d2! was much more subtle. Then if 24 . . . bS there could have followed 25 lDa3!

Averbakh 's Selected Games l:ta4 26 tiJxb5 l:txa2 (26...l:tb8 27 b3!) 27 f4! l:tb8 (27 ...�b8 28 b3) 28 c4 with complications favourable to White.

19

cxb4 30 �xb4 tiJxb4 l:txb4 31 l:tal 32 l:tb7 l:ta5 'ii7d 6 33 34 �e3 l:tc4 g5 35 'ii7d l 36 'ii7e2 Short of time before the control, both sides manoeuvre harm lessly, aimIng mainly not to spoil their positions. 36 'ii7e6 l:txc5 l:tc5 37 �xc5 38 tiJc6 b4! d4 39

24 b5 25 a3 Now 25 tiJa3 l:ta4 26 tiJxb5 l:txa2 would have led to an advantage for B lack. 25 �d6 26 �d4 l:t4c6 l:tb8 l:thd l 27 28 l:t3d2 b4

Despite the fact that I have played extremely timidly, completely conceding the initiative to B lack, Botvinnik has not managed to achieve anything real. In his notes to this game Baturinsky remarked: 'Black's initiative enables him to equal ise completely'. axb4 axb4 29

Why did Botvinnik not try to exploit the weakness of the b4 pawn by 3 9...l:tb5? Then after 40 l:tb2 d4 4 1 'ii7d3 'ii7d 5 White has to defend against the unpleasant 42 ... tiJe5+, and if 42 f4 l:tb8, when the threat of 43 ... l:te8 looks dangerous. The whole point is that after the rook's retreat White was planning an unexpected and spectacular combination - 43 b5! �xc5 44 bxc6! l:txb2 45 c7 when the pawn cannot be stopped. I do not know if my opponent sensed the danger, but he decided not to tempt fate and immediately forced a completely drawn ending. tiJxb4 40 �xd4 Draw agreed

20

Averbakh 's Selected Games Game 3 �ikenas-)lverbakh Moscow Championship 194314 Catalan Opening

1 d4 tiJf6 2 c4 e6 3 g3 At the time when this game was played, the Catalan was a comparatively new opening. It was introduced into tournament play by Saviely Tartakower at the inter national tournament in the Catalonian capital of Barcelona in 1 929. 3 d5 4 .i.g2 dxc4 5 "'a4+ tiJbd7 6 tiJd2 If 6 .xc4 Black usually used to continue 6 ... a6 followed by 7 ... bS. The idea of taking on c4 with the knight was successfully employed in the late 1 93 0s by the Latvian master Vladimir Petrov. If, for example, 6...a6 7 tiJxc4 bS , then 8 "'c2 :b8 9 tLJas .i.b4+ 1 0 .i.d2 with the better chances for White.

6 c6 One of my first theoretical ideas, which I initially employed in a game with Panov (Moscow Championship Sem i-Final 1 940). Because of the threat of 7 ...bS , White is obliged to take the pawn with his queen.

e5 7 "'xc4 In this way Black tries immediately to solve the problem of the centre. 8 tiJgfJ Nowadays theory considers 8 dxeS tiJxeS 9 "'c3 to be more accurate, aiming to exploit the knight's insecure position. Now, however, it is White who has to be concerned about the insecure position of his knight. tiJb6 8 exd4 9 "'d3 .i.e7 10 0-0 I did not want to defend the pawn by 1 0 ...cS , as this would have opened the diagonal for the white bishop and delayed the development of my pieces. 11 tiJxd4 0-0 12 tLJ2b3 :e8

White's plans include setting up a pawn centre by e2-e4, which Black intends to counter with piece play. A conflict situa tion is thus created - who will be proved right? 13 "'c2 The queen has to move because of the threat of . . . c6-cS. 13 tiJbd5 Black continues his active play in the centre. I was intending to answer 14 e4 with 1 4 . . . tiJb4 1 5 ...e2 cS 1 6 tiJbS .i.g4 17 f3 .i.e6.

Averbakh 's Selected Games 14 a3 White consistently carries out his plan. He endeavours to restrict the opponent's pieces, not allowing them to take up active positions. But this prophylaxis takes up valuable time, which Black exploits to regroup his forces. 14 'it'b6 e4 CiJc7 15 16 .i.e3 If White's pawn were already at h3 , it could definitely be said that his position is better. But the absence of this restricting move, combined with the insecure position of the knight at d4, gives Black excellent possibilities for counterplay. 16 CiJg4 .i.d2 17 as h3 18 a4

The s ituation has become extremely sharp. Just as in an aerial battle the oppos ing fighter planes rush headlong towards each other, so here the adversaries, without deviating, go in for a sharpening of the struggle. Mikenas was a player of active, com binational style. With the following blow, prepared in advance, he was hoping to refute the opponent's plan. 19 .i.aS Black appears to be in a critical position. If, for example, 1 9 ... axb3 20

21

.i.xb6 bxc2 2 1 .i.xc7, and White remains a pawn up. 19 l:lxaS! This essentially forced exchange sacri fice leads to an amusing position, in which the white knights are extremely insecurely placed. However, for the moment no immediate combinations are apparent. CiJeS 20 CiJxaS 21 'it'c3 If 2 1 'it'xa4 'it'a7!, and the pin on the knight immediately bears fruit. 21 .i.cs

22 CiJ t'S? The knight has to move, as 22 l:tad 1 .i.xd4 23 l:txd4 CiJb5 is completely bad. But it should have moved so as to cover the approaches to the white position. Therefore 22 CiJe2! was the only correct continuation, and if 22 .. .CiJb5 23 'it'c2! It is true that in this case by 23 . ...i.xf2+ 24 l:txf2 'it'xa5 Black would have achieved a good game, but that is all. Now, however, his attack becomes threatening. 22 CiJbS 23 'it'c2 .i.xt'S ext'S 24 CiJd4 The black pieces rush forward, and the white queen still has to worry about the defence of its knight, while in the mean time the main events are developing on the opposite wing.

22

Averbakh 's Selected Games 25 .xa4 There is nothing better. 25 lLle2+ 26 � h2 �xtl 27 "'c2

If 27 ...•e3 White was intending 2 8 •e4, including h i s queen i n the defence of the kingside. Analysis shows that in this case too, by replying 28 ... "'xg3 + 29 �hl h5! with the threat of 30 ...lLlg4!, Black retains winning chances, although with 3 0 .xe2 lLlg4 3 1 .xe8+ �h7 3 2 "'b8! White gains a chance to prolong the resistance: 32 ... "'xb8 33 hxg4 .g3 34 :xf2 .xf2 3 5 b4 "'b2 3 6 :n .xa3 3 7 lLlxb7 "'xb4 3 8 lLld8. However, Black has a stronger reply. 27 lLlg4+! 28 hxg4 If 28 �h 1 lLlxg3 mate.

28 The culm ination of Black's attack! His queen approaches the enemy fortress with decisive effect. Mate in three moves is threatened, and White can defend against it only at the cost of heavy loss of material. 29 :xtl .xg3+ .h4+ ! 30 �hl 31 .xtl �h3 The threat of 3 1 ...lLlg3 mate can be parried only by giving up the queen. Therefore White resigned. Perhaps the most interesting feature of this game is that the black knight, which created the deadly threat of mate at g3 , made a truly heroic journey: b8-d7-b6-d5c7-b5-d4-e2, whereas its opposite number, on reaching as , was stuck there to the end of the game . Game 4 Averbakh-Zak 2nd Match Game Moscow 1947 Ruy Lopez In 1 946 the Al l-Union Chess and Draughts Section granted the right to a number of candidate masters, who had gained good results, to play qualification matches for the master title. It was mainly young masters who were chosen as examiners Petros ian, Taimanov, and myself. Not one of the hopefuls managed to become a master, which in general was not sur prising: we were al l progressing, rapidly developing in the chess sense, and within a few years were to become grandmasters. It fell to me to play a match with Vladimir Zak, an experienced player and well-known trainer, who was later to coach Spassky and Korchnoi. There was an interesting prelude to this match. Towards the end of 1 946 I took part in the Sem i-Final of the 1 5th USSR

Averbakh's Selected Games Championship, which was held in Lenin grad. In the first round I had White against Semyon Furman, and in reply to 1 e4 he chose the Open Variation of the Ruy Lopez. Sitting at the board and considering my next move, I noticed that the same position had been reached in the Kopaev Levenfish game. I had heard that Leven fish had prepared for this tournament together with Furman, and the idea occurred to me of delaying my move a l ittle, in order to see what plan the two Leningrad players had prepared. And so I began waiting. And my clock ticked. Kopaev meanwhile was sunk in thought. Ten minutes passed, then twenty, and still Kopaev did not make a move. He final ly did so only after 40 m inutes (II), and more over he deviated from the main theoretical continuation and won the game. But I followed the theoretical path, fell into a prepared variation, and as a result lost, overstepping the time limit on the 3 8th move. And in subsequent games, when in the Ruy Lopez 4 ...lDf6 was played against me, I repl ied 5 d3 , not allowing the capture on e4. Zak was present at the tournament and it was there that he challenged me to a match. He undoubtedly made a careful study of my games and, of course, would have noticed how I had lost helplessly to Furman and how I had subsequently avoided the Open Variation. Before the encounter with Zak I decided to look at my recent games, in order to imagine to myself what sort of impression my play would make on my future opponent. Of course, it immediately became clear that in the first instance I needed to improve my opening preparation in the Open Variation of the Ruy Lopez. And this was done. Zak clearly did not expect me to prepare seriously for this match, and

23

therefore the innovation I employed was for him a strong psychological blow, which to some extent influenced the final outcome. e4 1 eS 2 lDfJ lDc6 �bS 3 a6 4 lDf6 �a4 5 0-0 lDxe4 d4 6 bS �b3 dS 7 dxeS �e6 8 c3 9 �e7 �e3 10 Th is old move, which had been employed by Alekhine, used to occur com paratively rarely, and did not bring White good results. 10 0-0 11 lDbd2 lDxd2 12 .xd2 lDaS �c2 13 lDc4 .d3 14 g6 �h6 lDxb2 IS A theoretical position, given in many books, has been reached.

16 .e3 ! ? The opening books considered only 16 .e2, which threatens to regain the pawn, but diverts the queen from participating in the attack on the kings ide. The plan with 16 .e3 was specially prepared by me for

24


the forthcoming match. I do not think that it leads to an advantage for White, but certainly it seriously sharpens the play, which in combination with the surprise factor plays a considerable role. 16 :'e8 If 1 6...lLlc4 1 7 "'f4 :'e8 I was pro posing to play 1 8 lLlg5. 17 lLld4 White has created two threats. One is obvious - to exchange the opponent's dark-square bishop by 1 8 lLlc6, while the other is a latent one - to begin a pawn attack on the kingside with 1 8 f4. If Black disregards the first threat and plays 1 7...c5, there follows 1 8 lLlc6 "'d7 1 9 lLlxe7+ .xe7 20 �g5 .fS 2 1 �f6 followed by 22 f4. During the game I con sidered the strongest reply to be 1 7 ...�fS, when I was intending 1 8 �xfS :'xfS 1 9 .h6, and if 1 9 •d7 20 f4 f5 (if 20 ...c5 2 1 f5!, threatening 22 f6) 2 1 g4 :'ae8 22 gxf5 �xf5 23 lLlxf5 gxf5 24 �h I with an attack on the g-file. However, Black could reply 1 9 ...c5!, when after 20 �xg6 hxg6 2 1 lLlxe6 fxe6 22 .xg6+ h8 it is doubt ful if White has more than perpetual check. But Black's genuinely strongest reply, which I noticed only when preparing this book, was 1 7 ...�d7, when White still has to demonstrate that his initiative is worth the sacrificed pawn. 17 .d7 Guided by the spectacular fin ish, the commentators considered this natural move to be virtually the decisive mistake. In fact even after it Black has quite adequate resources for parrying the attack. lLlc4? f4 18 Only now, when Black helps the queen to switch with gain of tempo to an attack ing position, does White's attack become threatening. It was essential to play 1 8 ...c5, and if 19 f5 cxd4 20 cxd4 �xf5 2 1 �xf5 "'a7, gaining time for the defence. Perhaps . . .

I would have had to reply 1 9 lLlxe6 fxe6 20 f5, again with sharp play. c5 19 .g3

White's attack can no longer he halted. Now comes a forcing combination. cxd4 20 f5 hxg6 11 fxg6! Or 2 1 ...fxg6 22 �xg6 �g4 23 �f5. h8 22 �xg6 Black was hoping for 23 �x.f7 :'g8 24 �xg8 :'xg8, but White had prepared in advance the concluding blow!

�xg7 23 �g7+! �h8 �xt7+ 24 Or 24 ...�g4 25 e6. �f8 25 "'g6 If 25 ...�g5 White has a mate in four moves with 26 "'h5+ �g7 27 "'xg5+. 26 .g8 mate

25

Averbakh 's Selected Games This match, which concluded with a score of +5- 1 =5 in my favour, sticks in my memory because of a curious incident involving the arbiter. The blame for it lay with the scoresheets used for one of the last games of the match. They had been printed on a typewriter. After we had made the control moves, and Zak was consider ing his next move, the match arbiter Pyotr Romanovsky, who was recording the moves separately, asked if he could check our scoresheets. So, my opponent was con sidering his next move, and I was looking around. Suddenly came a heart-rending cry from the arbiter: 'Make another move each!' Zak calm ly made the move that he had been considering. Turning to the board, out of the comer of my eye I saw that the last few seconds on my clock were ticking away, and I feverishly made the first move that came to hand. It turned out that the typist had missed out one move on the scoresheets! The move I made was a bad one, and as a result I lost a pawn, although I was able to save the draw.

It seems to me that the most purposeful way of opposing Black's plan is the one I employed as White in a game with Estrin (Moscow Championship 1 950) 8 a3 i.aS 9 'it'c2 a6 1 0 b3, and it is far from easy for Black to equal ise. 8 a6 l:td l 9 'it'e7 i.dl dxc4 10 i.xc4 11 b5 i.d3 12 i.b7 13 a3 -

Game S Taimanov-Averbakh Trades Union Team Championship Leningrad 1947 Nimzo-Indian Defence

d4 lDf6 c4 e6 3 i.b4 lDc3 4 e3 0-0 5 lDf3 d5 6 i.d3 c5 7 lDbd7 0-0 This move was first employed in the game Ravinsky-Ragozin, Moscow 1 942. The idea of it is to retain both the dark square bishop, and the tension in the centre. 8 'it'el 1

1

13 cxd4 Hardly a good move: now Black gets into difficulties. He should have retreated his bishop to as, and if 14 lDdS lDxdS IS i.xaS cxd4 with roughly equal chances. The game Krogius-Bondarevsky from the 17th USSR Championship Semi-Final

26


(Leningrad 1 948) went 1 3 ....i.aS 1 4 :lacl .i.b6 I S .i.b 1 :lac8 1 6 lbeS cxd4 1 7 exd4 .i.xd4 1 8lbxd7lbxd7 1 9 .i.xh7+ �xh7 20 'ifd3 + �g8 2 1 'ifxd4 lbcs with advantage to Black. 14 exd4 .i.d6 IS .i.gS A very unpleasant pin. 1 6 lbe4 is threatened, as well as 1 6 lbeS , and in addition White can carry out the standard plan with 1 6 .i.c2 and 1 7 "'d3 . Black must now play very precisely. IS h6 'ife8 16 .i.h4 'ifb8 17 lbeS

By intensifying the pressure on eS , Black provokes 1 8 f4, after which the play becomes markedly sharper, for example: 1 8 ...:le8 1 9 .i.c2 .i.e7!, and if 20 'ifd3 I would be able to reply 20 ...lbfS. However, by continuing 20 fS White would retain a dangerous initiative. Taimanov prefers a less committing plan. 18 :leI :a7 19 :lac l After 1 9 .i.c2 Black was intending to play 1 9 ...:le8, and if 20 "'d3 lbxeS 2 1 dxeS .i.xeS 22 .i.xf6 .i.xf6 23 "'h7+ �fS. 19 .i.a8 :e8 20 .i.b l lbe4 21

Having convinced himself that the direct attack on the king by 2 1 "'c2 lbxeS 22 .i.xf6 lbg6 23 .i.eS lbxe5 24 dxeS .i.xeS 25 "'h7+ �fS does not promise anything, White tries to clear the situation . However, the move played is a mistake. 2 1 :lcd 1 , maintaining the tension, was correct.

21 .i.xe4 This secures Black a positional advan tage. After 2 1 ....i.xeS 22 dxeS lbxe4 23 .i.xe4 "'xeS 24 .i.h7+ �h8 (24 ...�xh7 25 "'d3 +) 25 'ifxeS lbxeS 26 :lxeS �xh7 he would have won a pawn, but the opposite colour bishops would have seriously hampered its realisation. 22 .i.xeS .i.xe4 lbxe4 23 dxeS 24 "'xe4 %:tc7 25 f4 :lxcl :lxc l %:tc8 26 27 :ld l Black's chances are also better after 27 :lxc8+ 'ifxc8, as queen and knight are nonnally stronger than queen and bishop. Here the bishop is restricted by its own pawns, whereas the knight has a number of strong-points (dS , fS). In addition the invasion of the queen on the c-file is threatened. "'c7 27 h3 lbfS 28 :ld6 29

Averbakh 's Selected Games This activity merely worsens White's position. 29 tlJg6 30 �g3 'ifc 1+ 31 �h2

'iffl.! 31 The murderous 32 ... l:c 1 is threatened, so that the opponent is forced to exchange queens. I should mention that the next part of the game, right up to move 40, took place in a severe time scramble. 'ifxd3 'ifd3 32 33 l:c2 :'xd3 This allows the opponent good counter chances. Correct was 33 ... h5!, aiming to restrict the bishop sti ll further, for example: 34 h4 tlJe7!, and after 3 5 l:d6 l:c2 3 6 b4 tlJf5 3 7 l:xa6 tlJe3 , in view of the threat of 3 8 ... tlJfl +, Black has a clear advantage. :'d8+ 34 �h7 35 �g8 l:d7 l:d8+ �h7 36 l:xb2 :'d7 37 Throwing caution to the winds. l:b3 l:xf7 38 39 h4! �g8? Here I was obliged to play 39 ... h5 40 fS exfS 4 1 :'xfS l:xa3 42 l:xh5+ �g8, when Black's chances are at any rate no worse. Now, however, the advantage passes to White.

27

40 :'a7 :'xa3 If 40 ... h5 there would have followed 4 1 l:xa6 �f7 42 fS! exf5 43 e6+ �g8 (43 ... �f6 44 e7+ �xe7 45 l:xg6) 44 �d6 l:e3 45 �b4, when the white e-pawn is very dangerous. 41 h5 tlJf8

In this position the game was ad journed. Analysis showed that, despite Black's extra pawn, White's chances are better, since the knight is restricted and White is threatening to win it. However, I was able to find a clever trap, and much depended on whether my opponent had seen it. The reader will no doubt have noticed how greatly the character of the position has changed during the last ten moves. Whereas earlier the knight was stronger than the bishop, now, on the contrary, the bishop has become stronger. �tl 42 The sealed move. 42 l:a4! Switching the rook to a more favourable position with gain of tempo. 43 �g3 If 43 g3 , then 43 . . . l:a2 44 �gl b4. 43 b4 �c5 44 This move slightly raised my hopes. After 44 l:b7! b3 45 l:xb3 l:c4 46 l:b7 a5

28


47 :a7 a4 Black would have faced a difficult struggle for a draw. 44 45

51 52

fxe6 :xb3

:xe5 :xe6

b3 :a8

Here Taimanov, assuming that the game was decided, looked at me sympa thetically, but an unpleasant surprise awaited him. 45 :b7 was essential, when I was intending to play 45 . . . :a5 ! 46 .i.xfS (46 .i.d6 :b5) 46 . . . �xfS 47 :xb3 :b5 48 :d3 :b8 ! 49 :d6 :a8 ! 50 :xe6 a5 5 1 :d6 a4 52 :d2 a3 5 3 :a2 �e7 54 �O �e6 with a probable draw. The storm that has swept over the board has removed a number of pieces and pawns, and as a result Black is a pawn up with good winning chances. 53

45 :b4 ! ! A surprise for the opponent and a

counter-blow, prepared long in advance, on the purely problem-like theme of inter ference. Both black pieces are en prise, but the b3 pawn has been transformed into a powerful force, and after 46 :xfS+ �h7 47 .i.xb4 b2 it cannot be prevented from queening. The situation has again changed sharply, and it is now White who has to seek a way to save the game! 46 47 48 49 50

::d8+ .i.d4 :b8 �fl f5!

�b7 :xd4 :d3+ a5

In this way White succeeds in eliminating his main enemy - the b3 pawn. 50

:d5!

:a3

:e5

In this type of purely technical ending the rook should normally be placed behind the passed pawn. Therefore here 53 . . .:a6 was more accurate. Black tries to carry out a rather different plan - he intends to send his king to the support of the passed pawn, and to place his rook at g5, defending the a5 and g7 pawns. 54 55 56

g4

�g8

� g3

�f7

:b3

White tries to hinder the king's progress, but now I am able to improve the position of my rook. 56 57 58 59

:a3 �f4 �e4

a4 :a5 �f6

This greatly simplifies Black' s task. More tenacious was 59 �O �g5 60 �g3 :a7 6 1 :0 g6 62 hxg6 �xg6 63 :a3 �g5 64 �f3 (64 �h3 �f4 65 �h4 :a5) 64 . . . �h4 65 �f4 :g7 ! 66 :al :xg4+ 67 �f5 (67 �O a3 ! ) 67 . . . :g5+ 68 �f4 (68 �f6 :a5) 68 ... �h5 when Black wins.

29


59 :a6 But why not 59 . . . �g5 60 �f3 �h4 6 1 �f4 :g5 ! when White can resign? However, I was obsessed with the idea of taking my king across to the a-pawn. 60 61

�f4

�f6 :h3 72 �g6 �e6 ! 73 h6 :g3+ etc. There is nothing else for White to do, but to check - 69 :d2+ �e5 70 :e2+ �f4 (if 70 . . . �d6 7 1 :a2 ! ) 71 :£2+ �g3 72 :a2 �h3 ! 73 �h7 (after 73 :xa3+ :xa3 74 �xg7 �g4 75 h6 �g5 76 h7 :a7+ 77 �g8 �g6 a well-known theoretical position is reached, where even the promotion of his pawn to a knight does not help White - 78 h8c!£l+ �f6) 73 ... �g4 74 �g6 :a6+ 75. �xg7 �xh5 76 �f7 �g5 77 �e7 �f5 78 �d7 �e5 79 �c7 �d5 80 �b7 :a4 and Black wins. 73 �f5 (instead of 73 �h7) also does not help in view of 73 . . . �g3 74 �g6 �f3 75 �f5 :a6 76 �g5 (76 �e5 �g4) 76 . . . �e3 and, by taking his king across to the a-pawn, Black wins.

:a7

�f3 �e5 Here too 6 1 . . .�g5 62 �g3 :a5 was possible. 62 g5! The last chance ! 62 hxg5 This is possible, but simpler was 62 . . .�f5 63 gxh6 gxh6, when Black wins a second pawn. 63 �g4 �d4 As if bewitched, I follow my fixed idea. Meanwhile after 63 . . . �f6 64 :f3+ �e7 ! 65 �xg5 :a5+ 66 �g6 a3 67 �xg7 a2 68 :e3+ �d6 69 :d3+ �c6 70 :c3+ �b6 7 1 :c l :xh5 Black would have won easily. 64 �xg5 :a6 During the game 64 . . . �c4 65 �g6 �b4 66 :g3 a3 seemed insufficient to me because of 67 :g2, and if 67 . . . a2 68 :xa2 . However, when many years later I began analysing this ending, I established that Black has no reason to hurry with the advance of his pawn, but should move his king back. After 67 . . . �c4 ! 68 :a2 �d5 ! the opponent can no longer play 69 :xa3 :xa3 70 �xg7 because of 70 . . . :g3+! 7 1

�c4 �fS :g3 Being in time trouble, I had overlooked this natural move and now became ner vous: after 66 . . . a3 67 :xg7 a2 68 :g l the game ends in a draw. However, by calmly playing 66 . . .:a7 and if 67 �g6 �d5 ! 68 :a3 �e4 69 �g5 (69 �h7 �f5) 69 . . . :a6 70 �g4 :a5 7 1 �g3 �f5 72 �h4 �f4 Black would have won very easily. 65 66

66 67

:f6+

�e5 67 �g5 :a6 68 �f5 :a7 could have transposed into the variation given in the note to the previous move.

30

Averbalch 's Selected Games

error-ridden game should have ended in a draw. But my opponent misses his chance and immediately commits the final and decisive mistake. 73 74

l:txg7? l:ta7

a3 !

No better is 74 l:tb7+ �a5 75 l:ta7+ l:ta6 76 l:tc7 a2 77 l:tc l l:th6 78 l:ta l (78 �d4 �b4 ! ) 78 ... l:txh5+ 79 �d4 l:th2 80 �c3 �a4, when White lacks just one tempo to save the game.

67

:h6

A mistake which throws away the win. The correct continuation was 67 .. .IU7 ! 68 l:tg4+ �b5 69 :g3 l:ta7 70 �f5, and here the simplest was 70 . . . a3 7 1 �g6 a2 72 l:tg l �c4! 73 :fl (73 �h7 g5+! 74 �g6 a l " 75 l:txa l l:txa l 76 �xg5 �d5 etc.) 73 . . .l:tb7 74 l:tf4+ �b3 75 l:tfl l:tc7 ! 76 �h7 �b2 77 :f2+ �b l 78 l:tfl + l:tc l , and Black wins. 68 69 70 71 72

:g4+ :g3+ :g2+ :g3+ :g4+

74 75 76 77 78

l:tb7+ l:tg7 �f6 l:tg4+

:a6 �a4 :a5+ al �b3 !

Only not 78 . . . �b5 79 l:tg l with a draw. 79 80 81 82

:g3+ :g4+ :g3+ :g4+

�c4 �d3 �e4

�b3 �c2 �d3 �c4 �b5

�e3

82

82 . . . �f3 was simpler.

The time trouble mist, in which the two players have been wandering about, has finally lifted. The black king has been forced to return, and after 73 �d4! this

83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90

:gl :g3+ :a3

:xh5 �d4 :h2 �f5 :fl+ �g4 �c4 :c2 �g3 �b4 :a8 :e2 �f4 White resigns

31


Despite the numerous mistakes, or per haps because of them, this tense game, interesting in all its phases, caused great anxiety both to the participants themselves, and to the members of their teams. The rook ending that arose turned out to be full of various subtleties, which the players, particularly in time trouble, were unable to fathom.

active pieces and transposing into an endgame.

Game 6 Averbakh-Veresov Semi-Final 1 6th USSR Championship, Moscow 1 94 7

Sicilian Defence 1 2 3 4 5

e4 ll)f3 d4 ll)xd4 c4

c5 �6 cxd4 g6

At that time the opening books asserted that allowing c2-c4 gave Black a bad game, as he had no way of opposing White's strong centre. In the present game my opponent carries out an unusual plan, devised by the Swedish player G6sta Stoltz (who was later to become a grandmaster), involving attacking the enemy centre with . . . f7-fS . 5 Jtg7 6

11 12

�5 ll)de3

e6 'iWh4

Dreaming of an attack, Black switches his queen to the kingside. Of course, it could have been driven away immediately by 1 3 g3, when 1 3 . . . 1Ifh3 is bad because of 1 4 Jtg4, but I considered that at h4 the queen did not present any danger. 13

l:tbl

Preparing 14 b3 and 1 5 Jtb2 with exchanges to follow. 13

ll)cd4

Falling in with White's intentions. 14 15

ll)xd4 b3

ll)xd4 h5

ll)cl

For me Black' s idea was a new one, and so I decided to move the knight out of harm ' s way. 6

7 8 9 10

Jte2 ll)c3 0-0 exfS

d6 ll)h6 0-0 fS ll)xfS

On encountering an innovation, I have played cautiously, and my opponent has obtained an active position. However, his pawn structure has been weakened, and so I devised a plan aimed at exchanging his

Against the immediate 1 5 . . . Jte5 White had the reply 1 6 ll)g4. Continuing to think

32


about an attack, Black further weakens his pawn structure. 16

i.b2

.te5

Finally Black has created his first serious threat, but it is easily parried, and White finnly seizes the initiative. 17

g3

"'e4

If l 7 . . . lbxe2+ 1 8 "'xe2 "'gS 1 9 .txeS "'xeS 20 "'d3 �g7 2 1 l:bd 1 with strong pressure. 18

i.xd4!

"'xd4

If 1 8 . . . .txd4 1 9 i.d3 . 19 20

"'c2 :bd l

�g7

26 27 28

'ii'x d4 l:xd4 fxe5

'ii'xd4+ eS l:xfl +

28 . . . dxeS 29 Ihf6 �xf6 30 l:d6+ was worse for Black than the game continuation. 29 30

�xf1 l:d6

dxe5

White's main trump in the ending is the possibility of creating an outside passed pawn on the queenside. 30 31

l:f8+ �el

During the game I made this natural move almost without thinking. But now, analysing the position fifty years later, I managed to discover the stronger move 20 lbg2 ! By threatening lbh4-0 White could have set his opponent difficult problems. 20 "'c5 11 22

"'e4

23 24

lbd4 f4

l:b8

lbcl .td7 Against 22 . . . bS, attempting to com plicate the game, I was intending to reply 23 b4. 31

An important moment! The white rook is restricting the enemy king, and so Black considers that the exchange of rooks will ease his defence. 32 33

White has achieved his aim : further exchanges are inevitable. 24 25

"'e3

i.c6 .txd4

:xf6 �f2

h l (28 ci>f1 "f6 29 "d3 l:te3 ! ) 28 . . . ..f6 29 l:tf1 l:td7 with a strong attack. Now, however, Black's knight comes into play with great effect. 26 27

�4

"0

Perhaps in his preliminary calculations White had been intending to play 27 "g4 here, but then saw that there would have followed 27 . . . l:te4 ! 28 "xe4 �2+ 29 ci>f1 l:txd 1 + 30 ci>xe2 l:txa l . 27

"c8?

Short of time on the clock, Black in tum goes wrong. 27 . . . �f3+ 28 ci>h l l:txd l 29 l:txd l "a8 ! would have won immediately. I of course saw this

69


possibility, but I overlooked that after 30 .xh3 lOes+ I would win the white knight. Now, however, White immediately elimin ates the dangerous knight. 28 29 30

..txd4 l:d2 l:ad l ?

..txd4 .g4

The things that happen in time trouble ! My opponent decided that his rooks should defend each other, but this move allows Black to conclude the game with a spectacular combination. 3 0 l:e l would have lost a pawn to 30 . . . l:xe l 3 1 .xe l .txf2+ and 32 . . .• xc4, but 30 l:c l , securely defending the knight, would have prolonged the resistance. 30 ..txtl+! 31 .xtl .xd 1+ White resigns. After 32 :'xd l :'xd 1 +

3 3 .fl l:ee 1 it i s pointless for him to continue.

Averbakh-Bondarevsky 19th USSR Championship Moscow 1951

King's Indian Defence d4 c4 �c3 d5

�f6 d6 e5 g6

e4 h3

..tg7

The so-called Averbakh Variation was still then in the process of development. I first employed it a year later in a game with Matanovic (Interzonal Tournament, 1 9S2). The modest advance of the rook's pawn signifies that White is planning a later g2-g4. 6 7 8

..td3 .te2

9

..tg5

�bd7 �5 a5

This bishop sortie is one of the components of my variation. Black faces a dilemma - whether to weaken his position with . . . h7-h6, or to reconcile himself to an unpleasant pin. 9

h6

Black prefers the former option. Of course, both have their pluses and minuses. 10 11

Game 1 9

1 2 3 4

5 6

..te3 g4

0-0 �h7

Defending the h6 pawn in good time. The attempt to play . . . f7-fS immediately is unfavourable: 1 1 ... �e8 1 2 h4 fS 1 3 exfS gxfS 1 4 gS and White has an excellent position. 12 13

�f3 :'gl

�g8 �7

Now too if 1 3 . . . fS there follows 1 4 exf5 gxfS 1 S gS with a strong attack.

70


1i'd2

c6

good for White. But I did not like 20 . . . .i.g4 and if 2 1 gxh6 .i.f6 22 lbg5+ .i.xg5 23 .i.xg5 f6 24 .i.e3 :g8 with a sharp game. 20 lb g8 If 20 . . . :g8 2 1 .i.c2, and it is dangerous to play 2 1 . . . f5 22 exf5 lbxf5 (22 . . . .i.xfS 23 .i.xf5+ lbxfS 24 1i'd3) 23 :g6, threatening to capture with the bishop on h6, while 2 1 . . . .i.f6 can be met by 22 �e2 .i.g4 23 .i.xh6. 11

White has prevented . . . f7-fS, but now Black begins play on the queenside. If 1 5 0-0-0 there could have followed 1 5 . . . cxd5 1 6 lbxd5 lbc6, and the attempt to win a pawn by 1 7 lbc3 leads to complications favourable for Black after 1 7 . . . lbe6 1 8 1i'xd6 lbed4. Therefore I decided to throw caution to the winds and leave my king in the centre. 15 16

h4 cxd5

cxd5 b5!

Black aims for a counterattack, for which he is prepared to sacrifice material. If 1 7 lbxb5 he was intending 1 7 . . . :b8 (but not 1 7 . . . .i.xg4? 1 8 :xg4 1i'd7 because of 1 9 1i'e2 ! ) 1 8 a4 .i.a6 1 9 .i.xc5 dxc5 20 .i.d3 1i'b6. 17 18 19

h5 lba4 .i.xa4

b4 lbxa4 gxh5

A committing move. My opponent opens up the defences of his own king. However, this bravery is forced: 20 g5 was threatened, and 1 9 . . . g5 would have led to a positional advantage for White. 20

:g3

White could have retained a good game by 2 1 .i.c2, for the moment not allowing 2 1 . . . f5 on account of 22 exfS .i.xfS 23 .i.xfS+ :xfS 24 1i'd3 1i'f6 25 :g6 1i'f7 26 lbh4. Now, however, the initiative is seized by Black.

gxh5

Here I considered the pawn sacrifice 20 g5 . If, for example, 20 . . . hxg5 , then 2 1 lbxg5+ �g8 22 1i'e2, while 20. . .lbg8 2 1 gxh6 .i.xh6 (2 1 . . .lbxh6 22 :xg7+) 22 .i.xh6 lbxh6 23 lbg5+ �h8 24 lbe6! is

21

3!

Of course! Bondarevsky, a splendid attacker, makes use of the opportunity offered to begin active play. White must play very accurately to avoid immediately ending up in a lost position. 22 23

exfS �e2 !

.i.xfS

The correct decision. In the first instance the rooks must be connected. It is true that after 23 . . . e4 24 lbd4 1i'h4 25 l:ag 1 1i'xh5+ Black can win a pawn, but by continuing 26 �e 1 and if 26 . . . .i.e5 27 lbxfS :xfS 28 :g4 White gains sufficient counter-chances.

71


lle8

Preventing the exchange of light-square bishops, which would favour White. llt7 24 llagl .t e4 25 � el In this double-edged position both players are as though walking a tight-rope, afraid at any moment of falling off. Thus if 25 ... lDf6 there could have followed 26 llxg7+! llxg7 27 llxg7+ �xg7 28 .txh6+, with a very strong attack in view of the threats of 29 'it'g5 and 29 lDg5 . 'it'e7 ! 26 .td l

Bondarevsky sees through his oppon ent's cunning plan. Against the natural 26 . . .lDf6 I had prepared a spectacular com bination: 27 .txh6 ! ! .txh6 28 'it'xh6+! ! �xh6 29 llg6+ .txg6 30 llxg6+ �xh5 (30 . . . �h7 3 1 lDg5+ �h8 32 lDxf7+ �h7 33 lDxd8) 3 1 lDxe5+ lDg4 (the only move; if 3 1 ... �h4 there follows 32 llh6+ �g5 33 �f7+ �f5 34 lDxd8 llxd8 35 .tc2+ �e5 36 f4+, winning the knight) 32 .txg4+ �h4 33 llh6+ �g5 34 lDxf7+ �xg4 3 5 lDxd8, when White i s a pawn u p with good winning chances. Alas, however, all this brilliance remained off-stage, and now I again had to think how to defend against 27 . . . lDf6. 27 'it'e2 .tfS White was intending to answer 27 . . . lDf6 with 28 .tg5 ! .txd5 (28 ... .txfl 29 'it'ill

hxg5 30 'it'f5+ and 3 1 'it'xc8+) 29 .txf6 .txf6 30 'it'd3+ e4 3 1 'it'xd5 exfl+ 32 �fl with a sharp game, in the complications of which Black' s material advantage does not play any part. However, Black's last move too provokes serious doubts. 27 ... .tbl was probably stronger. 28 29

llg6 ll6g3

�h8

.th7

If 29 ... lDf6 there would have followed 30 lDh4. To defend against this threat my opponent moves his bishop out of the line of fire, but he leaves his rook at c8 undefended, which White exploits. It should be mentioned that the two players were already short of time. 30

'it'a6!

'it'd8

In the time scramble Bondarevsky loses the thread. It was probably better to abandon the queenside pawns to their fate and reply 30 . . . llcfS 3 1 'it'xa5 lDf6, aiming for activity on the kingside. For example: 32 lDh4 lDe4 33 lDg6+ .txg6 34 hxg6 (34 llxg6 lDxf2) 34 ... lDxg3 35 gxf7 lD5 36 'it'xb4 lDxe3 3 7 fxe3 'it'xf7, and the opposite-colour bishops give Black good chances of saving the game. 31

lDh4

lla8

Black could not reply 3 1 . . .lDe7 because of 32 .tg4 with the threat of 33 .te6. lDf6 32 'it'e4 33 lDg6+ .txg6

72


Black's misfortune is that he is forced to take on g6. 3 3 . . . �g8 would have been met by the spectacular 34 c!t)xe5 ! dxe5 3 5 d6 ! , when White has a decisive attack: (a) 3 5 ... c!t)e8 36 �b3 ! "d7 37 J.xh6 �f8 (3 7 . . . �h8 38 'ilxf7 "xf7 39 �xf7 J.xh6 40 :g8+) 3 8 �xg7+ :xg7 39 :£3+ �f5 40 "g8+! :xg8 4 1 :xg8 mate; (b) 3 5 . . . �f8 36 d7 ! "xd7 (36 . . . c!t)xd7 3 7 Lg7 :xg7 38 J.xh6) 3 7 �c5+ �e8 3 8 Lg7 :xg7 39 :xg7 "xg7 4 0 "e6+ �d8 41 J.b6+. It is interesting that all White's pieces take part in the attack, apart, of course, from his king. 34

lbg6

:c8

If 34 . . . �h7 3 5 �c2. 35

1Ifd3

e4

The only way to offer any resistance was by 3 5 . . ...f8 . 36 "d2 c!t)g8

37

�g4!

The entrance of this bishop into the play crowns the attack. 37 38 39 40

J.e6 �xg8 l:xh6+

l:c4 l:e7 "xg8

The prosaic 40 J.xh6 would also have won, but the last few seconds were ticking away on my clock. 40

J.xh6

41 42

:xg8+ � xg8 �xh6 Black resigns

Game 20 Averbakh-8myslov 19th USSR Championship Moscow 1951

Ruy Lopez 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

e4

e5

c!t)f3

c!t)c6

J.b5 �a4

a6 d6 J.d7 c!t) r6 �e7 0-0 exd4 c!t) b4

c3 d4 0-0 :e1 c!t) bd2 cxd4

This was first played by Romanovsky against Yates (First International Tourna ment, Moscow 1 925). After 1 1 J.xd7 "xd7 1 2 c!t)fl c5 1 3 b3 d5 ! 1 4 a3 c!t)c6 1 5 �5 "d8 ! Black achieved an excellent position. Since then the variation has often occurred in tournament play. 11 12

J.xd7

"xd7

c5 lila 1 2 . . . d5 1 3 �5 ! "d6 1 4 a3 lilc6 1 5 lilxc6 "xc6 1 6 e5 c!t)e4 is less good because of 1 7 c!t)e3 .

73

Averbakh 's Selected Games 13 14

a3 d5

�c6

1 4 �g3 is more flexible, as yet not fixing the position in the centre. 14 15

�xe5

�e5 dxe5

19

A problematic position has arisen. White has a protected passed pawn and the possibility of an attack on the kingside with f2.-f4. Black has three pawns against two on the queenside. 16 � g3 Bronstein suggested 1 6 �e3 here, and if 1 6 . . . �e4 1 7 �c4, but Keres showed that after 1 7 . . ...fS 1 8 f3 �d6 1 9 l:xes "g6 ! 20 l:xe7 �xc4 2 1 l:xb7 l:fd8 Black has a reasonable game. 16 �e8! f4 17 � d6! Trying to force the opponent to declare his intentions. 1 7 . . . f6 would have created a new weakness in Black's position - the es pawn. 18 �f5 f6 Of course, not 1 8 . . . exf4 1 9 �xd6 "xd6 20 es "h6 2 1 ..g4 with the initiative for White. 19

g3

This idea of maintaining the pawn tension leads to a loss of time. 1 9 "f3 was more accurate, when if 1 9 . . . exf4 20 �xf4 i.xf4 2 1 "xf4 White has a good game.

g6

The commentators considered this to be a poor move, but in my opinion it is not at all bad. Smyslov's aim of initiating play on the kings ide is positionally well-founded: White has delayed the development of his pieces. After the recommended 19 ... :n there could have followed 20 b3 , and if 20 . . . �f8 2 1 fxes fxes 22 �b2. 20

�b6+

21

f5

�b8

A committing advance, which during the game I thought to be obligatory, as otherwise Black would play . . . f6-fS . How ever, after 2 1 "f3 the move 2 1 . . . fS would have been premature because of 22 exfS ! (22 fxes i.xes 23 exfs i.d4+) 22 . . . exf4 23 fxg6 ! , and if 23 . . . fxg3 , then 24 �n+ �g8 25 l:xe8! :axe8 26 gxh7+ is possible, with

74


a strong attack, while if 2 1 . . ....g7, then 22 fS gS 23 "'hS is good. It has to be admitted that 2 1 "'0 would have been more in the spirit of the position than 2 1 fS . 21 22

f-file, on which he is counting, does not prove possible.

c4 h4

White has no option other than to continue in the same vein. The idea of the plan with 2 1 fS and 22 h4 is to gain control of fS after 23 fxg6 hxg6 24 hS . However, against accurate defence White is not able to carry this out, and therefore 22 :fl came into consideration, and if 22 . . . �cS+ 23 �g2 lDd6 24 "'e2 . 22 23

�c5+ �g2

27 28 29

�h6 exfS "'c2 !

:f7 :xfS

Apparently this simple reply was not anticipated by Smyslov. Unexpectedly his position becomes critical .

23

:xn

31

"'fS!

:xn :g8

gxfS

Smyslov is let down by his sense of position. By 23 . . . lDd6 ! he could have set White serious problems. If 24 fxg6 hxg6 2S hS, then after 2S . . . gS he would have to reply either 26 g4 "'h7 27 lDfS lDxfS 28 gxfS, or 26 lDg4 "'h7 27 "'e2, but in both cases Black has fair prospects. 24 2S 26

29 30

lDxfS lDxd6 :n

lDd6 .*.xd6 fS

After consistently pursuing his strategy of opening lines on the kingside, Black fails to take account of the fact that after the exchange of knights the situation has changed sharply, and that the seizure of the

Having taken the initiative, White consistently exploits it. After 3 1 "'xc4 :g4 32 "'d3 (or 32 "'e2) 32 . . . e4 Black would have gained strong counterplay. 31 32

:xfS

"'xfS :g6

Hardly better was 32 . . . e4 33 .*.f4 .*.xf4 34 Lf4 :d8 3 S :fS, when White should

75


win this ending, as it is not easy for the opponent's king to take part in the battle against the d-pawn. For example, 3 5 . . J �d6 36 �f2 l:tb6 37 �e3 l:xb2 38 d6 l:tb3+ 39 �e4 l:txg3 (39 ... l:d3 40 l:dS) 40 d7 l:tg8 4 1 l:teS . Probably 3S . . . e3 36 �f3 l:te8 3 7 �e2 �g7 was the best defence, but after 38 d6 l:td8 39 l:tdS �f6 40 �xe3 �e6 4 1 �d4 bS 42 l:teS+! White wins. 33 �g5 � g8 34 h5 l: g7 35 36 37 38

�fJ �h6 �xe4

b5 e4+ l: xg3

l:f6

38

�c5

This loses immediately. 38 . . . �e7 39 l:txa6 �f7 would have prolonged the resistance. 39 40

d6 �h8 �d5 Black resigns

Game 2 1 Averbakh-Kholmov Semi-Final 20th USSR Championship Minsk 1 952

Queen's Gambit 1 2 3

c4 lDc3 d4

e6 d5 lDf6

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

.i. g5 lDfJ "'c2 .i. h4 cxd5 �xe7 lDxd5

�e7 0-0 h6 b6 lDxd5 "'xe7 exd5

l:tel A standard position of the Tartakower Magogonov-Bondarevsky variation has been reached. White's plan is to force . . . c7-c6, restricting the opponent' s options, but Black is able to avoid this. 11 12

lDa6 e3

12

c5!

Excellently played! It transpires that the acceptance of the pawn sacrifice by 1 3 .i.xa6 .i.xa6 1 4 dxcS bxcS 1 5 "'xcS leads to difficulties for White after I S . . . 'ii'b 7 ! 13

"'a4

On encountering for the first time the variation played by Black, I chose an incorrect order of moves. 1 3 dxcS bxcS and only then 1 4 ...a4 was more accurate, although even in this case Black has a good game. 13

c4!

In my preliminary calculations I had been intending to answer this with 1 4 b3 , but only now did I notice that after 1 4 . . . bS ! 1 5 "'xbS "'a3 White faces serious

76


difficulties. It has to be conceded that the queen move to a4 was an empty threat, leading to the complete loss of the initiative. 14 15 16

.i.e2 "'c2 0-0

&iJc7 bS "'f6

positional mistake, allowing White again to take the initiative and to develop his offensive on the kingside. After the correct 1 8 ......d6 1 9 g4 the bishop could have retreated to h7, and if 20 f4 Black could have replied 20 . . . f6, driving back the knight, while 1 9 "'as could have been answered by 1 9 . f6 20 &iJf3 "'b6. . .

19

g4!

This is the point! The bishop has to retreat to c8, and this means that playing it to fS was merely a waste of time. 19 20 21

Now the position can be assessed. Black has good possibilities on the queen side, where he has an extra pawn. White must seek chances on the kingside and in the centre. With his last move Kholmov aims to develop his bishop at fS, in order to eliminate White's possible play with e3-e4. 17 18

&fJes "'d2

.i.f5 as

Kholmov made this natural move, depriving the white queen of the as square, almost without thinking, but in fact it is a

f4 f5

.i.c8 "'d6

White consistently carries out his pawn offensive on the kingside, the goal of which is His Majesty the enemy king. Black must try to defend his kingside while continuing his attack on the queenside. 21 22

&iJg6

f6 l:d8

With the intention of playing his bishop to f7, Kholmov leaves the e8 square free for it. 23 24

.i.f3 &iJf4

25

:tl !

.i.d7 .i.e8

White places his rooks on the second rank, so that they defend the queenside and help the offensive on the kingside.

77


25 26 27

.iLf7 h4 l:t g2

l:te8 l:t e7

Black intends to attack the weak e3 pawn with his rooks. Perhaps he should have left one rook on the queens ide and played 27 . . . b4, threatening 28 . . . a4. 28 29

l:tel l:tee2

White is aiming to include his queen in the attack, but Black does not allow it to go to h4. 35

.iLh5

c3

l:tae8 b4

White is all ready to advance g4-g5, and therefore Black should have made the important defensive move 29 . . . �f8.

Black can no longer delay the advance of this pawn. bxc3 bxc3 36 37 "'h4 l:td6 If 37 . . . �f8 I was intending to play 3 8

30

l:tg6 ! "'h7 39 l:txg7 tDxg7 (39 . . ....xf5 40 tDg6+! ) 40 f6 tDf5 41 fxe7+ tDxe7 42 "'f6 l:tc8 43 .iLg6 tDxg6 44 tDxg6+ "'xg6 45 l:txg6 c2 46 "'h8+ and wins.

g5 !

With the start of the pawn storm the position becomes considerably sharper. 30 31 32

hxg5 l:txg5

fxg5 hxg5 l:td8

Kholmov saw that on 32 . . ....f6 there would follow 33 l:teg2 ! , and if 33 . . . l:txe3 34 l:txg7+ "'xg7 3 5 f6 with a very strong attack. If Black does not take the rook, but replies 34 . . . �f8, then very strong is 3 5 l:txf7+! �xf7 (3 5 . . ....xf7 36 tDg6+) 3 6 .iLh5+ �f8 3 7 tDg6+ and wins. Finally, if 34 . . . �h8 White plays 35 l:t7g3 ! (threat ening 3 6 l:th2+ or 36 l:th3+), and if 35 . . . l:te l + 36 �h2, when there is no defence against 37 l:th3+. Therefore Black has to regroup, in order to defend g7. 33 :eg2 tDe8 34

"'12

"'h6

38

l:txg7+!

�f8!

Black's entire defence rests on this move. 38 . . . tDxg7 39 "'xe7 is bad for him.

39

l:t7g5?

With the last few seconds ticking away on the clock, and moves having to be made

78


instantly, it was not easy to find the correct continuation of the attack, as the position was still very sharp. Not seeing anything forcing, I simply decided to protect once more my bishop at h5 . Subsequent analysis showed that White would have retained a strong attack after 39 :7g6 ! .txg6 40 lDxg6+ :xg6 4 1 fxg6, for example: (a) 4 1 . . ....xe3+ 42 :f2+ �g8 (42 . . . �g7 43 .td l ! ) 43 .tf3 ! lDc7 44 "'f6 with the threat of 45 .txd5+; (b) 4 1 . . .:xe3 42 g7+! lDxg7 43 :f2+ �g8 44 .tf7+ �h7 45 .tg6+! and wins. The move played by me is a mistake, after which the roles are reversed, and it is now White who has to find a way to save the game, as the initiative again passes to my opponent. 39 :xe3 Black returns the compliment. Although he had quite sufficient time for thought, he in tum does not make the strongest move. 39 . . . lDf6 was correct, tying up even more tightly the clump of white pieces on the kingside, after which the c3 pawn could have played the decisive role. Now, however, I gain the opportunity to disentangle my pieces. 40

"'a

calmly. It is clear that the situation has become extremely sharp, both kings lack pawn protection, and a piece attack is possible from both sides. 41 � e7 ! lDe6+ Mate would have followed after 4 1 . . . .txe6 42 fxe6+ lDf6 43 "'xf6+ ! "'xf6 44 :g8+ and 45 :e8. 42

.txt7

e2 !

Kholmov defends resourcefully. If 42 . . . �xf7 there would have followed 43 l:th2 c2 ! 44 :xh6 ! c l "'+ 45 �h2, when Black has no defence, while after 42 . . . :h4 43 .th5 :xh5 44 :xh5 "'xh5 45 "'e l l White retains every chance of winning. 43 44 45

"'xe2 :5g3 �a

46

:g4

"'h4 :e1+ "'hl

:e4

Here White's time trouble ended, and at last it was possible to evaluate the position

During the game I considered this to be the best move, as I assumed that after 46 "'d3 :b6 47 .txe8 :b2+ 48 �f3 :fl + 49 �g4 :xg2 Black would have definite counter-chances. But in subsequent analy sis it was discovered that with 50 "'a3+ White gives mate in six moves: 50 . . . �xe8 5 1 "'f8+ �d7 52 "'d8+ �c6 53 "'c7+ �b5 54 "'b7+ �c4 55 "'b3 . And if Black tries to bring his knight into play 46 . . . lDf6, then 47 :g7 ! and if 47 . . . lDe4+ 48 "'xe4 ! , when taking the queen allows 49 -*.g6+ with mate next move.

79


"0+

46 . . . lbf6 can be met by 47 :g7 ! lbe4+ 48 "xe4 ! , while if 47 . . ...h4+ White replies 48 lUg3 "h2+ 49 �xe 1 , and after 49 . . . "xc2 he gives mate by 50 .i.g6. 47 48 49

�g3 lbg5+ lba

�xt7 �e7

Now that the knight has come to the aid of the white king, Black' s attack quickly peters out. 49 50

:a

:e3 "d3

After the exchange of queens the realisation of the advantage becomes straightforward. If 50 .....g 1 + White would have won by 5 1 �f4 ! , and the same move would have followed after 50 . . ...h 1 5 1 :h4 "g 1 +. Comparatively best was 50 . . ...e l 5 1 �g2 "c3 , exchanging queens with the white king less actively placed. 51 52 53

"xd3 :e2+ �f4

:xd3 �f8 lb g7

If 53 . . . lbf6 54 :h4 ! :c6 5 5 :g2 with a decisive attack. However, a similar attack also develops in the game.

If 56 ... lbf6, then 57 :g7 mate. 57 :h7+ Black resigns in view of inevitable

mate. A mind-boggling, extremely tense game, in which both players displayed considerable resourcefulness. Game 22 Unzicker-Averbakh Interzonal Tournament SaltsjobadeniStockholm 1 952

Ruy Lopez 1 2 3 4 5

e4 lba .i.b5 .i.a4 0-0

e5 lbc6 a6 lbf6 d6

This move, often employed by Rubinstein, is not as well studied as the usuaI 5 . . . .i.e7 6 :e l b5 7 .i.b3 d6. 6

:el

Fearing a prepared variation, for which Soviet players were renowned, Unzicker avoids the theoretical continuation 6 .i.xc6+ bxc6 7 d4. 6

.i.g4

Rubinstein usually played 6 . . . b5 7 .i.b3 lba5, but I carry out a plan involving the exchange of the dark-square bishops. 7

lbe8 :h2 ! 54 After 54 . . . lbxf5, which Black initially planned, White wins a piece by 5 5 lbe5 . 55 56

:h8+ :gg8

�e7 :d8

c3

lbd7

80


h3 !

The correct reply. After 8 d3 "f6 Black would not have had any problems. 8 9 10 11

�xf3 "xf3 d4

�e7 0-0

�g5 �e3 A well known strategic idea. Since 1 2 �2 loses a pawn to 1 2 . . . exd4 1 3 cxd4 lDxd4, Black provokes d4-ds, in order after the exchange of dark-square bishops to demonstrate that in such positions a knight is no weaker than a bishop. However, this plan is slow and does not lead to complete equality. 12 13 14

d5 lDd2 "xe3

Only here did I realise just how dangerous my position had become. The unpleasant c3-c4-cs is threatened. 16 17 18

Of course, not 1 8 "xf4 exf4, and with his control of es Black gains counterplay. 18

lDb6

A serious positional mistake, after which the opponent' s advantage becomes obvious. Since White is intending an offensive on the queenside, Black should aim for counterplay on the kingside, and this must be done energetically. 1 4 . . . h6 and I s .....gs was probably better, or even 1 4 ...""4. Black's desire to develop his second knight is quite understandable, but in so doing he puts it on a bad square, where it subsequently comes under attack. 15 16

�c2 b4

%tac8

lDcb8 �xe3

19

14

c4 "c3

1Ih4 1If4

lD8d7

lDb3

If 1 9 cs there would have followed 1 9 . . . dxcs 20 bxcs lDxcs 2 1 "xcs "xd2, and therefore White's desire to remove his knight from the attack by the queen is quite understandable. However, due to this loss of an important tempo . Black now has counterplay sufficient for equality. Unzicker rejected 1 9 a4 because of the following variation : 1 9 . . . cs 20 dxc6 ':'xc6, and if 2 1 as lDxc4 22 lDxc4 bs 23 axb6 lDxb6 24 �b3 lDxc4 25 �xc4 %tfc8, when Black regains his piece. However, in a joint analysis after the game we established that by 26 ':'xa6 ! ':'xa6 27 �xf7+ �xf7 28 "xc8 White could nevertheless have gained a decisive advantage. Therefore Black would probably have had to answer 2 1 as with 2 1 . . . lDc8, going totally onto the defensive. 19

15!

Black' s counterplay is based on tactics. If 20 exfS "xc4, while after 20 cs I was

81


plann i ng 20 . . . fxe4 2 1 cxb6 Wxf2+ 2 2 �h l cxb6 and the bishop is lost. 20 21 22 23

B

fxe4

.i.xe4 lLlaS cS

lLlf6 l:l b8

26 27

cxd6! dxc7

l:lxb7

White has consistently carried out his plan, and appears to have achieved his aim . With a swift advance his c-pawn has reached the penultimate rank, and it cannot be stopped by normal means with 27 . . . ':'c8 because of 28 d6 l:la7 29 Wc6, when White must win. The attempt to launch a counterattack by 27 . . . lLlg4 28 hxg4 Wf2+ 29 �h2 l:lb6 also fails after 3 0 ':'e3 . However, the dangerous pawn can be eliminated, and this leads by force to a draw.

White has finally managed to play c4c5, but by now Black has sufficient tactical resources for a successful defence. 23 24

lLlxe4 fxe4

24 l:lxe4 could have been met by 24 . . . lLlxd5 25 'ii'c4 'ii'f7 . 24

lLld7 27 28

':'xc7 ! Wxc7 lLlg4 Draw agreed

After 29 hxg4 'ii'f2+ 30 �h 1 Wh4+ Black gives perpetual check. Game 23 Averbakh-Stahlberg Interzonal Tournament SaltsjobadeniStockholm 1952

French Defence 2S

lLlxb7

Now a fierce tactical battle commences. 25 . . . l:lxb7 would be met by 26 c6 l:lbb8 27 cxd7. 2S

lLlf6

1 2 3 4 S 6

e4 d4 lLld2 exdS lLlgB .i.c4

e6 dS cS WxdS cxd4 Wd8

S2


6 . . ....d6, as often occurs nowadays, is preferable. �c6 7 0-0 8

�b3

J.e7

1 4 J.xb5+ �f8 1 5 J.d2 'ii'b6 1 6 J.b4+ J.e7 1 7 'ii'e3 'ii'xb5 ! I S ':'dS+ 'ii'e S and Black defends, but possible is 1 3 J.d2 'ii'e 5 14 �b5 ! "'xe2 ( 1 4 . . . �e7 1 5 J.c3 ! ) 1 5 �c7+ �d7 ( l 5 . . .�dS 1 6 J.a5+) 1 6 J.f4+! ! "'xd l + 1 7 ':'xd l + �c6 I S �xaS with a strong attack. 12 13

J.e3 J.xd4

�ge7

1 3 �xd4 would have been met by 1 3 . . . ...c7 14 �xc6 'ii'xc6, and if 1 5 J.f4, then not 1 5 . . . 0--0 1 6 J.d6 ':'eS 1 7 J.xe7 ':'xe7 I S ':'dS+ ':'eS because of 1 9 J.d5 ! , but 1 6 J.b3 J.b7 1 7 f3 0--0 with a satisfactory game for Black.

9

13 14 15

"'e2 !

This is stronger than 9 �bxd4 �xd4 1 0 �xd4 a6, as in Smyslov-Stahlberg, played a little earlier at the Olympiad in Helsinki. White does not hurry to regain his pawn, but first develops his pieces. 9 10

:d l

�xd4 :xd4 :ad l

'ii'c7 0-0

Black has finally castled, but in the meantime White has completely mobilised his forces and gained control of the d-fiJe.

J.f6 a6?

A mistake that allows White to develop a strong initiative, although even after 1 0 . . . �ge7 1 1 c3 it would not have been easy for Black to equalise.

16

"'eS!

1 6 �e5 was possible, for the moment keeping the queens on, but going into the endgame is also good. 16 17

11

�bxd4!

J.xd4

After 1 1 . . .�xd4 1 2 �xd4 "'a5 the reply 1 3 �b5 ! ? is not so clear: 1 3 . . . axb5

�xeS

'ii'xeS �g6

By also exchanging the knights, Black tries to simplify the defence. However, 1 7 . . . b5 I S J.b3 �g6 was probably more accurate (but not I S . . . J.b7 1 9 ':'d7 �c6 20 �xfl, winning a pawn).

83


lLlxg6 a4!

agreeing to the draw tacitly offered by the opponent.

hxg6 e5

The only way of bringing the black bishop into play, but now the scope of White's bishop is extended. 20 21 22

:d6 ..i.b3 c3

jus

In the resulting ending White's positional advantage is more significant than might appear at first sight. He can easily strengthen the placing of his pieces, whereas for the opponent to do this is not at all simple. Thus, for example, White's king can easily move to the centre, which cannot be said about the opponent's king. 23

f3

:c7

24 25 26 27

�n g4 :d8 :xd8

24

g4

by

g5 ..i.c8 :xd8 �g6

Black's king is aiming for e7, but naturally White prevents this. 28

:d6+

�h7

Worse is 28 . . . f6, when it is hard for the king to come into play. 29 30

:d8 :d6+

as ..i.d5 c4

g6 t;j;g7

By advancing his queenside pawns, White further strengthens his position. If now 3 3 ... c,i(fS, then 34 c,i(e3 c,i(e7 35 :b6 :d7 36 c,i(e4, and Black loses material. Therefore his next move is the only way of creating counterplay.

:ac8 �h7

Black defends against vacating c8 for his bishop.

31 32 33

�g6 �h7

White repeats moves to gain time on the clock. There was little justification for

33 34 35

fxe4 b4

e4! ..i.xg4 ..i.c8

The immediate 3 5 ... f5 would have lost to 36 :b6. 36 37 38 39

c5 �e3 �f3 :d8

f5 f4+ �h6 ..i.d7

White was threatening 40 :xc8 and 4 1 ..i.xb7, transposing into a purely technical ending with an easy win. 40

:h8+

The last move before the time control and, as often happens, an inaccuracy. By continuing 40 e5 ! ..i.f5 (40 . . . ..i.c6 4 1 c,i(e4 :f7 42 ..i.xc6 f3 43 e6 ! ) 4 1 e6 :e7 42 :d6 White could have won without any great difficulty, for example: (a) 42 ...�g7 43 :d7 ! :xd7 44 exd7 ..i.xd7 45 ..i.xb7 ..i.b5 46 c6;

84


(b) 42 . . . .i.h3 43 �e4 ! .i.g2+ 44 �e5 .i.xd5 45 :xd5 :e8 46 :d7. Now, however, the play becomes slightly sharper.

40 41

�g7

44 4S

:b6

46

:xa6?

bxe6 :d7!

:g8+

The game was adjourned in this position and Black sealed his next move. He had to choose between playing his king to h7 or g6, as 4 1 . . .�f6 would have lost to 42 :£8+! �e5 43 :f7, when he is completely helpless, e.g. 43 . . . g4+ 44 �f2 g5 45 :g7 �f6 46 :h7 �e5 47 :f7 ! �d4 48 .i.e6 etc. Analysis showed that White's advantage was enough for a win, but that the way to it lay via a sharp rook ending that demanded accurate play. 41 � h6 42 43 44

me that Black had no defence against 48 a7 followed by moving away the rook with check. What was I to do? Choose the new path, discovered at the board, or that which had been considered in the analysis? After much hesitation, I nevertheless chose the second path. This decision was correct, if only because in the last variation, by playing 47 . . . �e5 48 a7 :e7 ! , Black would have parried the threat of the a-pawn' s advance. However, the consideration of the variations associated with 44 b5, and especially my doubts, cost a great deal of time, and I ended up in time trouble.

:h8+ :b8 .i.xe6

�g7 .i.e6

I examined this move in my night-time analysis. However, during the adjournment session the following morning, I noticed the possibility of the pawn breakthrough 44 b5 and feverishly began calculating variations: 44 . . . .i.xd5 45 exd5 :xc5 46 d6 :d5 47 :xb7+ �f6 48 d7 �e7 49 bxa6 :xa5 50 a7 and wins, or 44 . . . axb5 45 .i.xc6 bxc6 (45 . . . :xc6 46 :xb7+ �h6 47 :xb5) 46 a6 �f6 47 :a8 and it seemed to

This is what time trouble means! White captures the wrong pawn. 46 :xc6 would have won, for example: (a) 46 . . .:d2 47 e5 ! :xh2 48 :c7+ �h6 (48 . . . �g8 49 b5 ! ) 49 :f7 ! , and Black has no defence against the advance of the a and c-pawns; (b) 46 . . . :d3+ is no better: 47 �g4 ! f.3 (47 . . . �h6 48 :xa6) 48 �xg5 f2 49 :xg6+ and 50 :f6. A justification for my mistake was that in my night-time analysis I did not establish which pawn it was better to take,

85


although on the most general grounds I should have taken the c-pawn, as then the rook would have taken part in the play on two fronts. 46

:d3+!

A strong move, which I underestimated. In my preliminary calculations I thought that I could reply 47 �g4 f3 48 �g3 g4 49 :Xc6 49 . . . :d2 50 e5 :g2+ 5 1 �h4 f2 52 :f6, when I suddenly noticed that after 52 . . . �h6! there was no defence against 53 . . . 0 =. and 54 . . . g5 mate. In such double-edged positions it is extremely important to remain calm and composed, but I began to panic and lost the ability to evaluate the position objectively. However, the win was no longer there. Thus, for example, if in the last variation instead of 49 :xc6 White plays 49 h3 gxh3 50 �3, there follows 50 . . . g5 ! 5 1 :xc6 g4+ 52 �g3, and now not 52 . . . :d2 53 e5 ! :g2+ 54 �h4 f2 5 5 :f6 g3 56 a6 :g l 57 �h3 ! 0 .+ 5 8 :xO :xfl 59 c6 when White wins, but 52 . . . :d I ! with counter play sufficient for a draw. If 53 e5 Black replies 53 . . . :g 1 + 54 �f2 (54 �h4? g3 5 5 :f6 g2, and it i s Black who wins) 54 . . .:g2+ 5 5 �O g3 56 :f6 :f2+ 57 �g l with a draw.

47 4S

:h3 b5

If 48 :xc6 the simplest is 48 . . . :xh2+ 49 �f3 :h3+ 50 �g2 :g3+ 5 1 �f2 g4. 4S 49 50

�d3 � d4?

:xh2+ :h3+

There was still a draw by 50 �e2, and if 50 . . . :e3+ 5 1 �d2. 50

g4

51 :a7+ Black would also have retained winning chances after the comparatively better 5 1 bxc6 g3 52 c7 :h8 (52 . . . g2 53 c81i' g l .+ 54 �d5 is less clear) 53 :b6 :c8 54 e5 :xc7 5 5 �e4 g5 . 51 �f6 52 e5+ �g5 53 54

55 56

bxe6 e7 :b7 :bl

g3 :hS

g2 �g4

White's time trouble is over, but his position is hopeless. f3 57 a6 5S

47 �e2 White loses his head. 4 7 �f2 was the simplest way to draw.

a7

tl

Whereas only fragments remain of White's powerful pawn trio, Black' s con nected pair of pawns advances irresistibly to the queening rank. :xaS 59 as. 60

:bS

:xbS

86


cxbS'" White resigns

After signing the scoresheet, I shook my opponent's hand and set off for the hotel. It was just coming up to lunch time. However, on entering the restaurant, I felt that I was incapable not only of eating, but even of sitting down at the table. We were playing and living in Salts jobaden, a suburb of Stockholm. Going out into the fresh air, although there was a strong wind and a light Autumn rain was falling, I wandered around a forest, not following any paths, until I found myself on the banks of a small lake, edged with boulders. I sat down on a bench that opportunely appeared, and began gazing at the water. I sat there for at least half an hour . . . Strangely enough, this calmed my nerves that had been so angered by the vexing defeat. Incidentally, realising that water had a pacifying effect on me, on more than one subsequent occasion I got myself back into a normal state after an especially nervy encounter, by observing the surface of water. ' What are you getting so hysterical about?' , I persuaded myself. 'After all, the tournament is not over, and your chances have not yet been lost. There are still nine rounds to go. ' On returning to the hotel, I set up a plan for the coming battles. In order to finish in the first five, which would give the right to participate in the Candidates Tournament and also the grandmaster title, I needed to score at least 7 points out of 9. And I succeeded in fulfilling this difficult task. I will not describe what effort and nervous energy this cost me. As the unforgettable Grigory Levenfish once said: ' Major successes do not happen without a major expenditure of nervous energy! ' .

Game 24 Gligoric-Averbakh Interzonal Tournament Saltsj6badeniStockhoim 1 952

Nimzo-Indian Defence 1 2 3 4

d4 c4 lDc3 a3

lDf6 e6 .i.b4

Undoubtedly the most critical continuation . White shows that he does not consider the exchange on c3 to be a threat. On the contrary, in order to gain the two bishops he is ready to waste a tempo. 4 5

bxc3

.i.xc3+

6

f3

0--{)

This desire to advance e2-e4 In one move is perfectly understandable. 6

d5

In other games played at that time, Black tried to manage without this move. Thus Szabo against Bronstein (Budapest 1 950) played 6 . . . lDh5 7 lDh3 f5 here, and slightly later Taimanov with Black against Szabo (Szczawno Zdroj 1 950) chose 6 . . . b6 7 e4 lDe8 followed by . . . lDc6-a5 and . . ..i.a6, attacking the c4 pawn. 7

cxd5

If 7 e3 c5 8 cxd5 Black has the satisfactory reply 8 . . . lDxd5, as played in

87


the game Lilienthal-Botvinnik (Moscow 1 935). 7 8

exd5 e3

lLl h5

11

This move marks the start of a new plan, which I prepared specially for the Interzonal Tournament. 9 10

'ifcl g4

l:te8

After prolonged thought Gligoric decides on the immediate advance of his g pawn. The whole point is that the usual plan of development in such positions, involving kingside castling and the preparation of e3-e4, is difficult to carry out here. Thus if 1 0 �d3 there can follow 1 0 . . . 'ifh4+ 1 1 'iff2 lLlf4! 1 2 �f1 'iff6, and Black successfully regroups his forces. Therefore White takes the risk of beginning an immediate pawn offensive on the kingside. 10 11

c5

Black should not have been in a hurry to make this move. The correct contin uation was 1 1 . . . lLld7, and if 1 2 �f2 lLle6 1 3 �d3 lLldfS with a good position. 12 13

�fl h5

lLlg6

An inaccuracy in reply. After 1 3 �d3 lLlc6 14 lLle2 �e6 1 5 g5 ! it is bad to play 1 5 . . . l:tc8 because of 1 6 h5 lLlfS 1 7 g6 ! with an attack for White (Gheorghiu-Fischer, Havana Olympiad 1 966), although 1 5 . . . lLlfS is quite possible, with equal chances.

lLlf4 h4

This position clearly deserves a diagram . In the course of the first eleven moves White has succeeded in moving all his pawns ! And yet, because the position is a closed one, this has not caused him any serious difficulties. After all, the white pawns constitute a kind of barricade, through which for the moment the black pieces are unable to break.

13 14 15

lLlfS lLlel lLlf4

lLlc6

Black also has a good game after 1 5 lLlg3 i.. e6 1 6 i.. d3 I:tc8.

88

Averbakh 's Selected Games 15 16 17 18

lDxe6 �d3 �d2

lDe6 �xe6 h6 l:c8

has a psychological basis. Unable to mount an attack on the kings ide, Gligoric tried to begin active play in the centre, but the insecure position of his king prevented this. After the exchange of queens my opponent decided that he no longer had to worry about his king. 25 26 27

"'xb6 �fS e4

lDxb6 �e6

The situation has clarified. Whereas for the moment White's initiative on the kingside is not making any progress, on the queenside Black is able to begin active play. 19 20 21

'ifb2 :agl :el

lDa5 f6

Realising that there is nothing he can do on the kings ide, Gligoric reverts to his initial plan of advancing e3-e4. Indeed, the attempt to continue the pawn offensive by 2 1 f4 :c7 22 g5 would merely have weakened White's position, since his king is insecurely placed. 21 22 23 24

"'bl :e2 �c1

�f7 :e7 lDc4

After 24 �xc4 dxc4 White's position would be inferior, despite the opposite colour bishops, since to 25 "'b2, with the threat of 26 e4, Black would have the strong reply 25 . . . ...c7! 24

"'b6

In view of the vulnerable position of the white king, perhaps Black should not have exchanged queens, but the move played

The irony of fate! Back on the 6th move White played f2-fl , preparing e2-e4, but then for a certain time was forced to reject this move. On the 2 1 st move he again began preparing it. And now, when the move is finally made, it turns out to be a mistake, as it completely hands the initiative to the opponent. 27 28

�xfS gxfS

28 exfS would probably have simplified the defence, but at this point Gligoric was thinking of more. 28 lD a4! Beginning a deep cavalry raid into the opponent's rearguard. 29

�d2

:ce8

White's premature activity has led to his pieces being tied up. 3 0 :he l , which he was planning earlier, would have been met, as in the game, by 30 . . . lDb2. 30

:h4

89

Averbakh 's Selected Games 35 36 37 38 39

J.xh6 J.d :exe4 :xe7 �a

�xf5 �xd4 �xf3 :xe7 �e5

The knight, which has completed a lengthy manoeuvre: b8-c6-a5-c4-b6-a4-b2c4-d6-fS-d4-f3-e5, has not done badly! The win for Black, who is two pawns up, is not far off. 40 41 30 31

:d4 �e3

:d7

�b2 ! �fl

3 1 J.e l �c4 32 dxc5 was hardly any better. After 32 . . . dxe4 3 3 :hxe4 l:xe4 34 fxe4 (34 l:xe4 l:xe4 35 fxe4 �xa3) 34 . . . l:c8 Black would have gained the bette r ending. 31 32

�c4 J.d

Here the game was adjourned, and Black sealed his next move. 41 42 43 44

:d l :gl �e4

l:c7 �f7

l:el :h2

Now White loses a third pawn, but Gligoric, evidently hoping for some stroke of luck, continues to drag out this quite hopeless ending. The decisive mistake. Here too 32 dxc5 dxe4 33 J.c l (33 fxe4 l:xe4 34 l:hxe4 l:xe4 3 5 J.c l :h4) 33 . . . l:c8 34 l:hxe4 l:xe4 3 5 l:xe4 :xc5 would have led to an advantage for Black, but even so this was better than the game continuation, which loses material. 32 33 34

cxd4 l:g4

cxd4 �d6! dxe4

45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54

h6 �d5 �d6 l:g3 �d5 J.d2 J.c3 l:h3 J.d2 �e4

gxh6 l:h5 b5 l:h4 86 l:h5 l:g5 h5 :15 �e6

90


�f4 �e3 f3 e2

filg6 l:te5+ l:td5

file5! �f2 Or S9 l:txhS filc4. file:4 59 60 a4 l:te5+ 61 b4 f3 62 a5 g2 White resigns 58 59

In accordance with the rules of the Interzonal Tournament, the players oc cupying the first five places gained the right to participate in the Candidates Tournament and automatically became grandmasters. And before the last round I had at last moved up to clear fifth place. My main rivals - Gligoric, Szabo and Stahlberg, were half a point behind. To the cherished goal - the grandmaster title there remained just one more step. Even a draw would guarantee me a share of fifth place. In this case preference would be given to the player with the higher tie-break score, which was calculated as follows: the total number of points gained by opponents against whom the player had won was added to half the total of points gained by players with

whom he had drawn. Preference was given to the player with the higher overall sum. For such arithmetic calculations even my engineering education was not necessary. I quickly established that, in the event of a tie, neither Szabo nor Gligoric was a danger to me: my tie-break score was much higher. But with Stahlberg the situation was worse. Strangely enough, the difference in our scores would depend on the result of the game between the two English players who were occupying places at the very bottom of the tourna ment table. If Golombek were to win, I would be ahead of Stahlberg by quarter of a point. But if Wade were to win, then by the same quarter of a point Stahlberg would be ahead of me ! This was if in the last round I were to draw, and my rivals were to win. And so the last round began. Game 2S Pilnik-Averbakh Interzonal Tournament SaltsjobadenlStockholm 1 952

Ruy Lopez 1 2 3 4 5 6

e4 fil f3 �b5 �a4 0--0

e5 file:6 a6 fil f6 d6

c:3

This move forced me to think seriously. According to the theory of the time, if I were to play 6 . . lilxe4 the game would embark on a course of great simplification, leading to a roughly equal ending, where a draw - the quite logical outcome - would guarantee me at least a share of fifth place. The old proverb runs 'A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush' , and I decided to act in accordance with popular wisdom . .

91


when castling leads to the loss of a pawn after 1 3 �xd7 lDxd7 1 4 .i.xc7, as does 1 2 . . .�xa4 1 3 'ii'xa4+ 'ii'd7 because of 1 4 'ii'xd7+ �xd7 I S �xc7. I n this latter variation 1 3 . . . bS 1 4 'ii'f4 � ( 1 4 . . . lDdS I S 'ii'g3 ! ) I S �xc7 .d7 is comparatively best, with some play for the pawn.

6 7 8 9

d4 l:lel dxe5

lDxe4 �d7 lD f6

The game Geller-Lipnitsky (Kiev 1 9S0) continued 9 . . . lDxeS 10 lDxeS dxeS 1 1 l:lxeS+ �e7 1 2 �gS ( 1 2 �xd7+ 'ii'xd7 1 3 'ii'e2 O--O-O ! ) 1 2 . . .�xa4 1 3 'ii'xa4+ 'ii'd7 1 4 'ii'xd7+ �xd7 I S lDd2 h 6 1 6 �h4 l:lae8 1 7 lDo �d8 ! with roughly equal chances. In an earlier game Ryum in-Ragozin (Moscow 1 93 8) White first played 9 �xc6 �xc6 and only then 1 0 dxeS dxeS 1 1 'ii'xd8+ l:lxd8 1 2 lDxeS .i.e4 1 3 iDd2 �e7 1 4 lDxe4 lDxe4 I S �f4 iDes with a quick draw. Before my game with Pilnik I asked Geller what he thought about this variation, and he replied very evasively. It was only five years later that I discovered why. In the game Geller-Weltmander (Gorky 1 9S4) there followed I S �h6 ! with advantage to White. I, of course, remembered the Geller Lipnitsky game, and without thinking I played: 9 10

lDxe5 �f4!

This move looks much stronger than 1 0 lDxeS . While developing, White intensifies the pressure in the centre. If 1 0 . . . i.e7 there now follows 1 1 lDxeS dxeS 1 2 i.xeS,

After examining these variations I came to the sad conclusion that I did not even have my one bird in the hand, and, gritting my teeth, I prepared to defend desperately. On my way to the grandmaster title I had encountered so many barriers, and now, when the goal was within reach, everything had collapsed like a house of cards ! 10 11 12

'ii'xa4+ 'ii'd 4!

�xa4 .d7

92


Avoiding a subtle trap. Against the natural 1 2 "'b3 I had prepared the reply 1 2 . . . 0-0-0 ! , and if 1 3 .i.xeS dxeS 1 4 lLlxeS "'f5 ! , when after I S lLlxf7 .i.cs Black has a strong attack. Here I was again obliged to think. At first I was intending to play 1 2 . . . 0-0-0, but I rejected this because of 1 3 .i.xeS dxeS 1 4 "'a7, after examining these variations:

1 4 . . . c6 ! (evidently the best reply; 1 4 . . ....dS is bad because of I S "'a8+ �d7 1 6 lLlxeS+ "'xeS 1 7 "'xd8+ and 1 8 :xeS) I S lLlbd2 ! (this is much stronger than I S lLlxeS "'dS, when both 1 6 . . ....xeS and 1 6 . . . .tcS are threatened). Now if I S . . ....c7 there follows ' I 6 lLlc4 "'b8 1 7 "'xb8+ �xb8 1 8 lLlfxeS and the f7 pawn is lost, while if I S . . . �c7 1 6 lLlc4 "'dS 1 7 "'b6+ �c8 ( 1 7 . . . �b8 1 8 lLlaS :d7 1 9 lLlxeS :c7 20 lLlexc6+ �c8 2 1 "'a7 ! bxc6 22 "'a8+ �d7 23 l:tad l ) 1 8 "'b3 ! �c7 ( 1 8 . . . .i.cS 1 9 :xeS) 1 9 :ad l "'bS 20 %txd8 �xd8 2 1 lLlcxeS . Since 1 6 lLlc4 is a threat, Black can play I S . . ....dS . This did not appeal to me because of 1 6 :xeS "'d3 1 7 lLlb3 , threatening 1 8 lLlaS . Forty-five years later I subjected this position to a thorough analysis, but was still unable to find any tolerable defence. For example: 1 7 . . ....c2 1 8 lLlaS "'xb2 1 9 :ee I ! and there is no defence against 20 l:eb 1 , or 1 7 . . . .td6 1 8

lLlaS l:d7 1 9 "'a8+ .i.b8 20 l:ae l , when if 20 . . ....c2 2 1 lLlxc6 bxc6 22 "'xc6+ l:c7 23 "'xa6+ d8 24 lLld4 with a powerful attack, or 20 . . . l:c7 2 1 lLld4 l:d8 (2 1 . . . cS 22 l:xcS ! is strong) and White has the convincing 22 l:Se3 ! "'g6 (22 . . ....d2 23 lLlc4 ! ) 23 lLldxc6. It should be mentioned that including the bishop in the defence of the queenside also does not help: I S . . . .i.d6 1 6 lLlc4 .i.b8 is met by 1 7 "'cS ! ( 1 7 lLlb6+ �c7 1 8 lLlxd7 .i.xa7 is not dangerous) 1 7 . . . .i.c7 1 8 lLlfxeS "'fS 1 9 "'a7 ! with numerous threats. It must also be added that Black cannot answer 1 2 "'d4 with 1 2 . . . cS 1 3 .i.xeS ! cxd4 because of 1 4 .i.xf6+. However, in reply to 1 2 . . . 0-0-0 1 3 .i.xeS it would seem possible to interpose 1 3 . . . cS, for example: 1 4 "'c4 bS ( 1 4 . . . dxeS I S lLlxeS "'e8 1 6 lLla3 ) I S "'b3 , and then not I S . . . c4 1 6 "'a3 , but simply I S . . . dxeS 1 6 lLlxeS "'fS with counterplay. The most difficult thing in chess is choosing, out of two evils, the one which causes less damage. I rejected queenside castling, and played instead: 12 13 14

is

.i.xe5 "'xe5

.i.e7 dxe5

Black has a difficult position. Castling impossible, and the initiative is

93


completely with White, who can quickly mobilise all his forces. I had to go totally onto the defensive. 14 �f8 l:e8 15 lDbd2 16 lDe4 b6 The c5 square has to be defended. After 1 6 . . . .i.d8 White has the unpleasant reply 1 7 .c5+ .i.e7 ( 1 7 . . .• e7? 1 8 lDxf6) 1 8 .a7. 17 l:ad l .c8

lDxf6 This exchange favours Black, as it eases his defensive problems. After 1 8 .f4 lDxe4 1 9 l:xe4 he would not have replied 1 9 . . . .i.f6 20 l:xe8+ �xe8 2 1 lDe5 .i.xe5 (2 1 . . .•e6 22 lDg4 .i.d8 23 .d4) 22 . •xe5+ �f8 23 .d4 with a decisive " advantage, but 1 9 . . . .i.d6, although after 20 lhe8+ .xe8 he would have to reckon with the exchange sacrifice 2 1 l:xd6. 18 .i.xf6 19 .f4 l:xe1+ l:xel 20 The situation has clarified - whereas the white forces are fully mobilised, Black still requires time to bring his rook into play. 18

20

21 .b4+ At first sight 2 1 l:e4 h4 22 l%c4 looks dangerous here, but this is not so. Black replies 22 . . . •d8! 23 h3 c5 24 b4 l:h5 ! , retaining possibilities of a defence. 21 �g8 22 .a4 b5 Apparently Black has to play this. After the game I thought that 22 . . .c�h7 would have been more accurate, as if 23 lDe5 Black has the good reply 23 . . . l:e8 ! (weaker is 23 . . . .i.xe5 24 l:xe5 g6 25 .f4 ! .f8 2 6 l:e l c 5 27 .f6) 2 4 .d l �g8, and 25 .xh5 is bad because of 25 . . . g6 ! , winning a piece. However, 23 .c4 (instead of 23 lDe5) is stronger, and only after 23 . . . l:f8 - 24 lDe5 .

h5!

After 20 . . . h6 White had the very strong 2 1 h4, and if 2 1 . . . �g8 22 g4, in order to answer 22 . . . �h7 with 23 g5 .

23

.f4

l:h6

94


h3 'ife4 Wd5! :e4

:g6

�f8 h4 :h6

32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

Wxc7 �h2 b3 'ifx17 'ifh5+ Wd5+ c4

�h7 Wel+ Wxfl 'ifxal Wc2 �g8 �h7 bxc4

It was probably simpler to take on b3 , but the last few seconds were ticking away on my clock. 40

bxc4

Black had been in time trouble since move 20, and so I made the last few moves very quickly. 28

�g5

In this way White wins a pawn, but play goes into a queen ending in which he has only minimal winning chances. 28 29 30 31

Wxg5 :xh4 'ifxh4

.txg5 �g8! :xh4 'ife6

41 42 43

32

'ifd8+

This further simplification favours Black, but even after 32 a3 'ife l + 33 �h2 'ife2 White has little chance of winning.

a5 !

40

Now the exchange of the a- and cpawns is unavoidable. Wh5+ 'ifd5+ 'ifxa5

�g8 �h7

No better is 43 cS a4 44 c6 a3, when Black's passed pawn is no less dangerous than White's. The game was adjourned in this position, and after sealing my next move I got up from the board and went over to the arbiter's desk, where precisely at that time the FIDE President Folke Rogard, together with the arbiters, was working out the tie break scores: all three of my rivals had won their games. My question: ' Excuse me, how did the Golombek-Wade game finish?' , caused them considerable surprise.

95


' Golombek-Wade?' , repeated Rogard in astonishment, and they all looked at me as if I were mad. But I knew what I was asking! After ending up in a difficult position, I had not got up from the board for a second, and had not seen what was happening on the remaining boards. It transpired that Golombek had won, and so a draw in my game would guarantee me fifth place. The following morning, over the course of several hours, Pilnik tested me, but he was unable to achieve anything significant. 61

"e5

Strictly speaking, 6 1 . . .Wxfl+ would have led to a drawn pawn ending, but I thought that in the queen ending it was easier to defend. 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61

"e5 h4

"t5+ �h3 "f3 g4 "a8+ "a7+ "b8+ "c7+ "c3 �g3 "d2 �h3 ..a �g3 �g2 "f3

"xc4 "d3 "c4 �g8 "b3+ "e6+ g6 �h7 �g8 �h7 �g8 "e4 �h7 "e5+ "e4 �g7 "e5+ "e4+

"b7+ �g8 "c8+ �g7 "d7+ �g8 "d8+ �g7 �f3 "c3+ �a "c2+ �e3 "c3+ Draw agreed

On the results of the tournament, I, along with Petrosian and Taimanov, was awarded the title of grandmaster. Game 26 Averbakh-Tolush Training Tournament Gagra 1953

Modem Benoni A training tournament of ten grandmasters was arranged by the USSR Sports Committee to prepare for a match against the USA, which was due to be held that year. All the strongest players in the country, with the exception of Botvinnik and Bronstein, took part in it. The match, however, did not take place, but the tournament remained.

96


1 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 10

d4 e4 dS

tDe3 exdS e4 .i. e2

tDf3 0-0

tDf6 eS e6 exdS d6 g6 .i. g7 0-0 %te8

1i'e2

At that time the theory of this opening, then called the Indian Defence, was only just beginning to develop. Nowadays 1 0 00 i s considered the strongest. 10 86 At one time I O . . . tDa6 was very popular. Thus the game Averbakh-Tal (25th USSR Championship, Riga 1 95 8) went 1 1 .i.f4 tDb4 1 2 1i'b 1 tDxe4 1 3 tDxe4 .i.fS 1 4 tDfd2 tDxd5 1 5 .i.xd6? tDf6, and Black emerged a pawn up. However, by continuing 1 5 J.. g3 ! White would have retained the advantage. 1 5 . . . .i.h6 1 6 .i.b5 ! is good for him, while if 1 5 . . . 1i'e7 1 6 .tf3 %tad8 1 7 :e 1 , as suggested by Kholmov. 11 12

84 .i.f4

tDbd7 1i'e7

The alternative is 1 2 . . . 1i'e7. 13 14

tDd2 h3

tDes

White intends to retreat his bishop to e3 and then play f2-f4.

14 tD fd7 This move was later condemned by the theorists, but the more active 1 4 . . . h6 1 5 .i.g3 g5 1 6 f4 ! , as occurred in the game Malich-Browne (Amsterdam 1 972), also leads to an advantage for White. It would seem that the plan chosen by Black altogether fails to equalise. f6 .i.e3 IS 16 f4 tDr7 17 .i.tl 15?

My opponent tries to seize the initiative by forcible means, for which, it has to be said, he had purely psychological grounds. When I was still a master, I played Alex ander Tolush four times, with a dismal outcome for me one draw and three defeats. The point was that I simply could not adapt to his exceptionally aggressive, -

97


forceful style, and even reckless, risky play brought him success. But on this occasion he met his match ! 18

exfS

j,xc3

This is the point of Black's idea - he wins a piece. 19 20

fxg6 bxc3

hxg6

This allows a spectacular finish. How ever, even after the more tenacious 23 ...•d8 24 lLle4 lLlh8 25 'ii'h 5 �g8 26 j,h4 .fS 27 :e3 Black has no defence against the combined attack of the enemy pieces. 24 25

Of course, not 20 Wxg6+ j,g7 2 1 j,d3 lLlfS, when Black has everything in order. 20 lbe2 21 Wxg6+ �f8

�xe8 :e8+! .g8+ Black resigns

After 25 . . . �e7 26 j,h4+ he is mated in two moves. Game 27 Keres-Averbakh Candidates Tournament NeuhausenlZurich 1 953

Nimzo-Indian Defence

22

Itael !

The entry of the second rook into the battle refutes the opponent's combination. If 22 . . .ltxd2 there follows 23 j,h4 lLlb6 24 :e8+ with the same mate as in the game. 22 23

lbe1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

d4 c4 lLlc3 e3 j, d3

lLlo 0-0 a3 bxc3

lLlf6 e6 j, b4 0-0 d5 c5 lLlc6 j,xc3

:xe1 lLlb6

In the 1 950s this was one of the most common 'tabiyas' of the Nimzo-Indian Defence, in which the theoreticians tested the most varied plans for both White and Black, and every tournament introduced

98


something new. The Candidates Tourna ment was no exception. 9 10

b6 llJeS

A continuation that Keres had prepared specially for this tournament. If now I O . . . llJxeS 1 1 dxeS dxc4 1 2 lLxc4, and White's position is preferable. However, Black has a better reply. 10 11

lLb7 f4

This is the point of White's play. After supporting his knight with the pawn, he intends to begin active play on the kingside. Therefore both 1 1 . . . 11Je4 and 1 1 . . . 11JxeS would be playing into his hands. 11

llJaS

17 18 19 10 11

fS lLxfS e4 :f4?

'ii'd 6 exfS %le7 :d8

To defend his d4 pawn Keres does not want to move his rook off the f-fiIe, and so he makes this move, which effectively proves to be the decisive mistake. The drawback to it is not that a pawn is lost, but that it leads by force to the exchange of queens, so that the weakening of Black's kingside, caused by his next move, is not dangerous.

12

exdS

Keres decides to relieve the situation in the centre, but in so doing he loses one of his trumps - the advantage of the two bishops. 12 13 14 15 16 17

"'e1 exd4 :bl %lbxd "'b1

"'xdS exd4 llJb3 llJxd :ae8

If White's bishop were at b2, his central pawns would be very strong. But here, even after c3-c4, they are likely to become weaknesses, which need to be defended.

11 11 13

:a

gS "'xd4

"'xd4

There is no choice. If 23 "'e2 %le7 24 %le I :de8, and Black wins.

99


:cfi

:xd4 :d6

the resulting rook ending, whereas now he wins without any difficulty. 31 32

h3 ! gxh3

If 32 g3 there follows 32 . . . h2+ 33 �h 1 J.b7+ 34 J.e4 :xc4 3 5 J.xb7 :c 1 +.

When he played 2 1 . . . g5, Black had to evaluate this position precisely and con vince himself that there was no way for the opponent to exploit the insecure position of his knight. 25 26 27

h4 :f4 lbg4

32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41

:xh3 :d4 :d8+ :gd4 �gl �f2 :b8 J.e2 �el :d l

J.c8 t:i;e7 J.e6 :g5+ :a5 :xa3 :h2+ :a1+

gxh4 :c5

If 27 J.xh7+, then 27 . . .ri;g7 . 27 28 29 30 31

:xg4+ J.xh7 :ff4 J.d3

lbxg4 �f8 i.a6 :h6 41

:xe2+ White resigns

Game 28 Averbakh-8zabo Candidates Tournament NeuhausenlZurich 1953

Ruy Lopez

Probably more tenacious was 3 1 J.g6 J.xc4 32 :xc4 :xc4 33 :xc4 :xg6 34 :xh4, when Black would still have to win

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

e4 lbfJ J.b5 J.a4 �

d4 J.b3

e5 lbc6 a6 lbf6 lbxe4 b5 d5

1 00


dxe5 c3

�e6 �c5

li)g5 1 8 b4 ! White gained the advantage. Although half a century ago there was not such an extensive exchange of information as there is now, the Hungarian grandmaster had learned of my game and had prepared an improvement. 15 16

1i'd l

c5 f4

Of course, I was prepared for this move. 17

f3

Szabo shows that he is ready to engage with me in a theoretical argument in this, a variation of the Ruy Lopez that was then very popular. 10 11 12 13 14 15

li)bd2 �c2 li)b3 li)fd4 li)xd4 1i'xd4

0-0 f5 �a7 li)xd4 �xd4 17

li)g5

On 1 7 . . . li)g3 White was intending 1 8 hxg3 fxg3 1 9 1i'd3 , and if 1 9 . . . 1i'h4 20 1i'xh7+ 1i'xh7 21 �xh7+ �xh7 22 �g5 with advantage, while after 1 9 . . . �fS 20 1i'xfS l:xf5 21 �xfS 1i'h4 22 �h3 , in contrast to the 1 5 cxd4 variation, Black cannot capture on d4. 18

At that time the theoretical continuation 1 5 cxd4 had been so thoroughly analysed by the theoreticians, that in a game with Sokolsky (Trades Union Team Champion ship 1 95 1 ) I tried deviating from the familiar path in favour of the queen capture. After 1 5 . . . c5 1 6 1i'd l l:a7 1 7 f3

a4

The knight on g5 is not too well placed, but for the moment the attempt to transfer it to e6 does not succeed. If 1 8 . . . �fS there follows 1 9 �xf5 l:xfS 20 axb5 axb5 2 1 l:xa8 1i'xa8 22 1i'd3 and White wins material. I had established all this earlier in my analysis of 1 5 1i'xd4. 18 19

b4 h4

When analysing this position earlier, I was proposing to reply here 1 9 cxb4, and if 1 9 . . . cxb4 20 1i'd4, but during the game I

101


noticed the dangerous pawn sacrifice 1 9 . . . c4! , and after 20 "d4 there could follow 20 . . . .i.fS ! 2 1 .i.xfS :xf5 22 :d l lDe6, and if 23 "xd5 1i'b6+ 24 �fl :dS. Unsettled by this discovery, I decided to risk a sharp continuation, in which Black has nothing better than to force a draw.

Having convinced himself that his attack is threatening to peter out, with a rook sacrifice my opponent forces perpetual check. 24 25 26 27

:xeS "xeS .g3+ �hl .xfJ+ �gl Draw agreed

Game 29 Euwe-Averbakh Candidates Tournament NeuhausenlZurich 1 953

Nimzo-Indian Defence

19 20 21 22 23 24

gxh3

:a

: h2 "xd5+ .i.d2

lDh3+ .xh4 .i.xh3 :ae8 �h8

It appears that White has managed to stabilise the position. If 24 . . . :e6 he had prepared 25 .i.xf4, while after 24 .....g5+ 25 �h l :XeS he has 26 "d3 ! .i.fS 27 "d6, winning.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

d4 c4 lDc3 e3 .i.d3 lDfJ 0-0 a3 bxc3 cxdS lDd2

lDf6 e6 .i.b4 0-0 dS cS lDc6 .i.xc3 b6 exdS

The former World Champion demon strates his preparation for the tournament. He intends to play his rook to e I , transfer his knight via fl to g3 and, after supporting his d-pawn by moving his bishop to b2,

1 02


play f2-f3 and e3-e4. However, all this requires time, and I decided to oppose my opponent's plan with a rapid pawn offensive on the queenside. 11 .te6 12 13

.tb2 .te2 f3 %tel

e4 b5 as

14 15 After the immediate 1 5 e4 I would hardly have gone in for the unclear complications arising after 1 5 . . . dxe4 1 6 fxe4 ltJg4, as recommended by several commentators, but would have replied 1 5 . . . b4, pursuing my own strategy. 15 1Vb6 16 ltJn b4

17 1Vd2 One has to admire Euwe's composure. Here he could have played 1 7 lIc 1 , so that after I S . . . b3 his rook would not be shut in. However, he did not want to waste time on the rook move - he thought that within a few moves all the same it would come into play. 17 b3 18 a4 .tbl Thus Black has achieved his aim by creating a strong protected passed pawn on the queens ide, but now he has to withstand his opponent's offensive in the centre, and later his attack on the kingside.

19

e4 ltJe7 ltJg3 �h8 ltJfg8 21 lIe2 Black sounds the retreat too early, allowing White to activate his pieces. My plan, after the opening of the centre, was to transpose into a favourable ending. However, I could have tried to do this differently. For example, 2 1 . . .lIaeS was good, and if 22 e5 ltJfgS 23 ltJh5 only then 23 . . . f5 . fS 22 ltJh5 20

And this move, which I had planned far in advance, is in fact a serious mistake, after which White should have developed a strong initiative. 22 . . . 1VdS ! was correct, and if 23 1Vg5 ltJg6. %tt7 23 1Vg5 24

exfS

.txfS

1 03


26

.i.xfS

ttlxfS

:ael

The queen ' s rook has been offside for so long that White's desire to bring it into play immediately is quite understandable. However, 26 :e5 ! , tying down Black' s forces, would have been much stronger. In this case I would have had to reply 26 . . . ttlfe7 27 :ae l (27 :xd5 ttlxd5 28 "xd5 "g6 ! 29 "xa8 :e7 ! ) 27 . . ...d8, going onto the defensive, although if 28 ttlf4 I would have had the simplifying exchange 28 . . . :xf4 29 "xf4 ttlg6. 26

"d8!

Consistently aiming for simplification. 27

"xd8

28

:e8

Euwe condemned this move, since it only leads to the exchange of rooks and an inferior ending for White, and thought that after 28 :e6 ! he would still have retained the better chances. However, this is not altogether so. As Stahlberg showed, Black can reply 28 . . . :dd7, and if 29 :a6 :fe7 ! 30 �t2 :xe 1 3 1 �xe 1 :e7+ followed by 32 . . . ttle3 with strong counterplay. Of course, 29 :a6 is not the best move, but after 29 �t2 g6 30 ttlg3 ttld6 Black can again maintain the balance. In addition I had an interesting possibility - 28 . . . :c8 ! , with the idea of sacrificing my knight for the d4 pawn and then playing . . . c4-c3 . In reply to 29 :b6 there would have followed 29 . . . :e7 with a complicated game. 28 29 30

:xe8 :xe7

:xe8 :e7!

Alas, White is forced to exchange rooks, otherwise he loses his bishop. 30 31

ttlgxe7

31

�g8

�tl Black was threatening 3 1 . . . ttle3 with an immediate win. This same move would have followed on 3 1 .i.e 1 .

No better was 27 "d2 "h4, or 27 "f4 ttlge7 with the threat of 28 . . . ttlg6. 27

:xd8

32

g4

Could the former World Champion have saved this ending? In order to win,

1 04


Black needs to break through on the kingside or to create a second weakness there. However, for the moment the position is blocked, and to open lines or create weaknesses, time is required. Could not White have regrouped transferred his knight to b l and freed his bishop from the duty of guarding the a3 and c3 pawns? Bronstein thought that he could, and to demonstrate this he gave the following variation: 32 lDf4 �f7 (defending against 33 lDe6) 33 g3 lDd6 34 lDg2 lDbS 3 S lDe3 lDc8 36 lDfl lDcd6 3 7 lDd2 with good chances o f a successful defence. However, by playing 3 3 . . . gS ! 34 lDg2 lDg6! Black does not allow the knight to go to e3 . If 3 S g4 he has the decisive manoeuvre 3 s . . . lDg7 36 �e3 (36 lDe3 lDf4) 36 . . . lDe6 followed by . . . lDgf4, and the exchange of knights by 3 S lDe3 also does not help: after 3 S . . . lDxe3 36 �xe3 he plays his king to fS and then, by advancing his pawns, opens lines on the kingside. Therefore it is hardly correct to condemn the advance of the g-pawn. 32 33 34

lDd6

�e3

lDb5

lDxa3 ! .txa3 Black also wins elegantly after 3 7 lDxdS lDc2+ 3 8 �d2 lDe4+! 39 �c l lDf2, for example: 40 lDb6 lDd3+ 4 1 �b 1 a3 42 lDxc4 a2 mate, or 40 lDb4 lDxb4 4 1 cxb4 lDd3+ 42 �b l lDxb4 followed by 43 . . . lDdS and 44 . . . c3 . lDb5 37 lDxc3 .tel 38 36 37

39

lDe2

If 39 �d2, then Black wins by 39 . . . lDb l + 40 �d l c3 4 1 lDxdS c2+ 42 �e2 a3 43 lDb4 a2 .

f4?

After moving his knight to an active attacking position, Black was considering the combination with a piece sacrifice that did in fact occur in the game. Therefore White should have urgently brought his knight to the aid of the bishop. After 34 lDf4 I would still have had to demonstrate that Black's advantage was sufficient for a win. Now, however, events develop by force. 34 35 36

fS lDf4

lDc8 lDcd6

My opponent assumed that with this move he was forcing the knight to return to c7, but Black has a better option.

lDbl ! But not 39 . . . lDxe2? 40 �xe2 c3 4 1 �d l b2 42 .txb2 cxb2 43 �c2 a3 44 gS ! with a draw. 39

White resigns.

l OS


Game 30 Averbakh-Taimanov Candidates Tournament NeuhausenlZurich 1953

'ilh3

If I S 'irf2 Black can sacrifice a piece: I S . . . 0-0! 1 6 g4 lDxb3 1 7 axb3 'ilxeS 1 8 gxhS 'irxhS with an attack.

Sicilian Defence 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

e4

lDf3 d4 lDxd4

lDc3 .i.c4 0-0 .i.e3 .i.b3 f4

'irf3

c5 lDc6 cxd4 lDf6 d6 e6 a6 'ilc7 .i.e7 lDa5 b5 'ilxe5?

15

It was this capture that I was counting on ! In the later game Bannik-Taimanov (23rd USSR Championship, 1 9S4) Taimanov showed what Black should play - I s . . . lDxb3 1 6 lDxb3 'ilxeS 1 7 lDaS b4 1 8 lDc4 'irc7 1 9 'irxhS g6 20 'ile2 bxc3 with the better chances. 16

.i.xe6!

fxe6

If Black declines the sacrifice by 1 6 . 0-0 , White has the decisive 1 7 %Irs lDf4 1 8 %lxeS lDxh3+ 1 9 .i.xh3 . ..

17

lDxe6

Taimanov quickly made these opening moves: he had already played this on more than one occasion. Moreover, in his notes to his game with Lipnitsky ( 1 9th USSR Championship, 1 9S 1 ) he criticised White's next move, declaring that the entire variation was unfavourable for him. It was this assertion that prompted me to play it. The point was that in my preparations I had discovered an interesting trap, and I was hoping that my opponent would fall into it. 12 13 14

e5

'irg3 fxe5

.i.b7 dxeS lDhS

An amazing position has arisen. It is Black to play, but in one move he is unable

1 06


to defend against the two threats of 1 8 �d4 and 1 8 'it'xhS, as 1 7 . . . �f6 is met by 1 8 .tf4, and finally, on the desperate 1 7 . . . �d7 there follows 1 8 l:tad l + �d6 ( 1 8 . . . �c6 1 9 'it'0+) 1 9 �cS+ (or 1 9 �f8+) 19 . . . �c7 20 l:tf7+ when White has a crushing attack. 17

.te8

This is essentially an admission of defeat. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

"xh5+ �xg7+ �xh5 � d4 � d5 �hf6+ �xf6+ �xh7

'it'xh5 �d7 �e4 :g8 l:tg5 �xf6 �e6 l:tg6

It would have been simpler to resign, but through inertia Black continues his hopeless resistance and plays on to mate. 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36

:ael

b4

b3

�a3

:e5

�b5

�e3

�c3

�m :f6+ .th6 :e7+ :h7 � :m mate

:g7 �e7 :g4 �d8 :b8 .txe6

Game 3 1 Najdorf-Averbakb Candidates Tournament NeuhausenlZurich 1953

Queen 's Indian Defence 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

e4

�f3 g3

� g2 0-0 d4

�c3 'it'd

�f6 e6 b6 � b7 � e7 0-0 �e4 � xc3

bxc3

This move, which has currently gone out of fashion, is much better than its reputation, although it is not able to set Black any serious problems. 9 10

�e6

�e5 The start of an unfortunate strategic plan that hands the initiative to the opponent. After 1 0 �d2 ! �aS 1 1 .txb7 �xb7 1 2 e4 c6 1 3 l:tb l the play would have taken on a positional, trench-warfare character. 10 11 12

�xb7 'it'a4

�a5 �xb7

Continuing in the same spirit. I would have preferred 12 e4 �aS 13 'it'd3 d6 1 4

1 07


li)g4, when, after placing his knight at e3 , White has a solid enough position.

considers here the variation I S . . . ...c6 1 6 li)b4 "'b7, although after 1 7 �e3 li)c4 1 8 c6 the situation would have become more complicated. 16 17

llbl h4

llec8

In this way White prepares 1 8 �f4, as on the immediate bishop move he was afraid of 1 7 . . . gS . 17 18

�f4

d5 f6

With the obvious threat of exchanging on cS and playing . . . e6-eS .

12 13

d6 li)d3

Hardly better was 1 3 li)c6 "'d7 1 4 li)xe7+ ( 1 4 dS �f6) 1 4 ......xe7, when the pattern remains the same - the game reduces to a battle of knight against bishop. 13 14 15

c5 "'xe8

li)a5 "'e8 llfxe8

19

li)b4

A clever attempt to complicate matters. Now after 1 9 . . . bxcS there would have followed 20 li)a6, and if 20 . . . cxd4 2 1 li)xc7, e.g. 2 1 . . . 11ab8 22 llxb8 llxb8 23 li)xdS or 21 . . . eS 22 li)xdS with unclear complications. However, Black has no reason to go in for such play. 19 20

The result of White's pseudo-active play is that there are weaknesses in his position, and the initiative is completely in the hands of his opponent. Of course, Najdorf could have retained the queens by playing IS 'ii'c 2, but it is doubtful whether this would have improved his chances of a successful defence. Euwe, for example,

a6! cxb6

If 20 li)d3 , then good is 20 . . . bxcS 2 1 li)xcs e S 22 �e3 �xcS 2 3 dxcS llab8 24 llfd 1 llxb 1 2S llxb 1 q;f7 with a favourable ending. 20 21

cxb6 �d2

All the commentators at the time condemned this move, suggesting instead 2 1 li)d3 , but after 2 1 . . . bS 22 llfc l �a3 23

l OS


:c2 lLlc4 White's position would have remained difficult.

29 30

Itxc8+ f3

lLlxc8 lLle7

30 . . . lLld6 was perhaps simpler, but I considered it important to forestall any possibilities associated with e3-e4 (30 e4 would now be met by 30 . . . lLlc6, winning at least a pawn). 31 .tfl 3 1 : f2 :c l 32 :e2 lLlfS 33 � f2 came into consideration. 31 �ti Of course, not 3 1 . . .:b2 32 Itc l Itxb4 33 :c7 �f7 34 l:a7 when White acquires serious counter-chances. 32 Itbl lLlfS 21 22

lLlc4 .tel

22 .tc l was no better. Black would not have replied 22 . . . .txb4 23 :xb4 bS 24 :d l , when White holds on, but 22 . . . lLld6 ! with the unpleasant threat of 23 . . . lLle4. 22 23

33 34 35

�f1

:b3 �g2

lLld6 lLlc4 fS

.txb4 cxb4

After 23 :xb4 the second rook would be unable to take part in the defence of the c3 pawn. 23 lLla3 24 Itb3 lLlbS 25 e3 ltd 26 27

a4 as

lLld6

bS The logical conclusion to such endings. White simply has no useful moves. 36 f4 is met by 36 . . . lLld2 and 37 . . . lLle4, while if 36 e4, then 36 . . . fxe4 3 7 fxe4 00 and 3 S . . . lLlxe4. Finally, if 36 hS h6, or 36 Itd3 lLlb2, winning the bishop. There is nothing for White to do, but to give up his e-pawn. 36 :bl lLlxe3+ 37

28

1tc3

Itc8

�gl

f4

Of course, there were also other ways, but this is probably the simplest. lLlfS 38 gxf4 39 �f1 g6 �e7 40 Itb3

1 09

Averbakh 's Selected Games 41 l:t bl White resigns :

�d7

his

position

is

completely hopeless. Game 32 Averbakh-Euwe Candidates Tournament NeuhauseniZurich 1953

14 15

�xe5 l:tel

"xe5 i.d7

If 1 6 e4 Black was intending the tactical blow 1 6 . . . i.a4 ! 1 7 "xa4 "xc3, when the best White can hope for is a draw after 1 8 i.gS "xd3 1 9 i.xf6 gxf6 20 l:ad 1 "c3 2 1 l:e3 "eS 22 l:dS "a 1 + 23 l:d l . 16

i.b2

Nimzo-Indian Defence 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

d4 c4 �c3 e3

�f3 i.d3 0-0 a3 bxc3

�f6 e6 i.b4 c5 0-0 d5 �c6 i.xc3

c4!

16

A pawn sacrifice specially prepared for this tournament by the former World Champion. It creates considerable prob lems for White, and they have to solved directly at the board. 17

i.xc4

Declining the sacrifice by 1 7 i.e2 would have given Black a comfortable game after 1 7 . . . i.c6. But now White must play very accurately to avoid losing. Exactly this position was reached in the game between the same opponents from the first cycle of the tournament, only with reversed colours. I played 9 . . . b6. Euwe prefers the more popular plan, involving . . . e6-eS . 9 10 11 12

i.xc4 i.d3 "c2

dxc4 "c7 e5 "e7

Here 1 2 . . . l:te8 is usually played, and if 1 3 e4 c4. 13

dxe5

�xe5

17 18

�g4 f4

1 8 g3 "hS 1 9 f4 (but not 1 9 h4 �eS 20 i.e2 i.g4) 1 9 . . . ..cS would have come to roughly the same thing. 18 19

"c5 "d3

White is obliged to calculate exactly at every step. Thus if 1 9 i.d3 there could have followed 19 . . . �xe3 20 "f2 l:fe8, when 21 i.c l is bad because of 2 1 . . ...xc3 , while 2 1 l:e2 "b6 22 l:ae 1 �dS is good for Black.

1 10


:e7

25 :ed2 also promises little because of 25 . . . :c8. 25 26 27 28

19 20

:xd8 �xe6 :xb7

�e6 :xd8 fxe6

:ad8 :ad l !

After 2 0 .d4 Black has the unpleasant 20 •h5 2 1 h3 �c6, while if 20 �d5 �e6, immediately regaining the pawn. . . .

20 21 22

.e2 Wxe3

.b6 lLlxe3 .xb2

28 29 30

:xb6 :a6

:c8 :xel

The only chance of retaining at least some practical winning chances. 30 31 32 33 34 35

23

:e2 !

This modest rook move, which I anticipated back on move 1 7 when I took the c4 pawn, is the whole point: because of 24 :a2 Black is unable to take on a3 , and he is forced to exchange queens. 23 24

.xb6

.b6 axb6

As a result of the interesting tactical complications, White has a favourable ending, but here this is not enough to win.

35

cka a4 h4 :a5 �e2

�f7 h5

:a3 �f6 g6

III


Incredible! - that such an experienced player as Max Euwe should make such an obvious mistake. Evidently a part was played here by the fatigue that he experienced during the second half of the tournament, being the oldest participant. After 3 S :a.2+ 36 �f3 �f7 it would have been time to agree a draw, since taking the king across to the a-pawn would involve a great risk. Here is an interesting observation: Botvinnik once said to me that Euwe, with his great height (more than 1 .9 metres), liked making long moves. Perhaps it is this that explains this long, although extremely unfortunate rook move.

Game 33 Averbakh-Ragozin 21st USSR Championship Kiev 1954

Dutch Defence 1 2 3 4 5 6

...

36 37

:g5! a5

:a3 �f1

Now, with the kingside pawns defended, White's king goes to the support of his passed pawn. 38

�d2

38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45

�e7 �cl �d6 �b2 :a4 �c6 g3 �b3 :a1 1%b1+ �b4 �c4 1%a1 �b3 Black resigns

tLla

f5 tLlf6 e6 .i. e7

0-0 d4

0-0 d6

c4 g3 .i.g2

In the end, a well known position from the Ilyin-Genevsky Variation has been reached by transposition of moves. 'ii'e8 7 tLlc3 8 1%e1 A standard idea. White prepares e2-e4 and this is not prevented by 8 . . ..g6 9 e4 ! fxe4 1 0 tLlxe4 tLlxe4 1 1 1%xe4 'ii'xe4 on account of 1 2 tLlh4, when the queen has no retreat square. .

8 9 10

tLle4 'ii'c2 .i.e3

'ii'g6

1 0 tLlxe4? fxe4 1 1 tLld2 would have lost to 1 l . e3 ! Now, however, White is threatening to take on e4. tLlxc3 10 tLld7 'ii'xc3 11 The game Averbakh-Sokolsky, played later in the same tournament, went .

.

1 12


1 1 . . .�f6 1 2 :ad 1 lDc6 1 3 'it'b3 a5 1 4 c5 with a slight advantage for White, but 1 2 b4 ! , employed later by Furman, i s even better.

should first have played 1 5 . . . l:b8, and after 1 6 l:ec 1 �d7 1 7 lDe 1 �c6 he would have had a solid game, although I was intending 1 8 lDd3 and considered the resulting position to be favourable for White. However, Ragozin was already in an optimistic mood, which explains his following move, after which Black's position collapses like a house of cards. 15 16

�g5!

b6? �xg5

1 6 . . . �b7 loses a piece to 1 7 �xe7 lDxe7 1 8 lDh4. 17

12

c5

This move is justified: White has completed his development and can embark on active play. At the same time he is obliged to hurry, otherwise after 1 2 . . .�f6 and 1 3 . . . e5 Black will have a good game. 12 13 14 15

cxd6 'it'b3 �d2

lDxg5

�b7

After 1 7 . . .• xg5 1 8 �xd5 exd5 1 9 .xd5+ �h8 20 .xa8 Black has no compensation for the lost material. If now the knight were obliged to retreat, Black would gain a reasonable game, but White has a new possibility.

lDf6 cxd6 lDd5

18 19

It may seem that Black has successfully solved his opening problems. His knight at dS is well placed, and it only remains to develop his queen' s bishop. To do this he

e4! lDxe4

fxe4

During the last four moves the position has changed radically. My opponent has managed to develop his bishop, but at what a price ! His central pawns are weak, and the knight at d5 is insecure. Passive defence was not to Ragozin' s taste. He initiates a tactical skirmish, but apparently miscalculates. 19 20

lDxd6

lDe7 �xg2

1 13


Game 34 Averbakh-Suetin 21 st USSR Championship Kiev 1954

Slav Defence

21

"xe6+!

Perhaps Black had been counting on 2 1 :xe6 1.dS, when White loses a piece. 21 22 23 24 25

l:xe6 l:xe7 lOe4 l:el

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

d4 c4 lOc3 1Of3 a4 e3 1.xc4 0-0 .e2

dS c6 lOf6 dxc4 1.rs e6 1.b4 0-0 lObd7

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

e4 :d l h3 "xf3 dS 1.b3 as axb6 bxd bxa7

1.g4 .e7 1.xf3 eS lOb6 cxdS d4 dxd 1.cS

.xe6 1.h3 l:ad8 l:xd4 h6

In time trouble, Black gives up a second pawn in order to retain his bishop and activate his second rook. If 2S . . . aS I was intending to play 26 lOgS 1.rs 27 1Oe6 1.xe6 28 l:7xe6 :d2 29 l: l e2. 26 27

l:xa7 f3

l:c8 :c2

Black still overlooks the impending danger.

28

lOf6+ Black resigns

At that time this variation of the Slav Defence had been extensively analysed, and, had Black played 1 9 . . . :xa7, after 20 :xa7 1.xa7 a position could have been reached from the game Lilienthal-Aronin ( 1 6th USSR Championship, 1 948), where after 2 1 1.gS :d8 22 1.dS White gained a

1 14


slight advantage. Alexei Suetin was always well prepared theoretically, and he makes a new move, preventing the bishop from going to gS .

19 20

.i.e3

:xa7

24 25

f5

:xd5 2S exdS would have led to unclear play. 25 fxe4

h6 b6

If 20 . . . bS there would have followed 2 1 l:aS, winning a pawn. .i.d5 21 l:ba7 By first playing 2 1 . . .�xdS Black would have maintained material equality, but by replying 22 exdS White would have created a dangerous passed pawn. 22

This intermediate move is the whole point.

"'xa7

26

.i.e3

I made this move, defending the f2 pawn, without particular thought. But now, studying this position many years later, I noticed the strong reply 26 "'g4 ! with the unpleasant threat of 27 l:d7. If Black replies 26 . . . .i.xf2+ 27 �h2 l:n, then 28 l:d8+ �h7 29 J.xg7 is decisive, while if he plays 26 . . . ...n, then 27 cJa>h2 "'f6 28 .i.e3 with the better chances for White. 26 27

cJa>h2

"'al+ .i.xe3

27 . . ....xc3 28 J.xcS "xg3+ 29 cJa>xg3 bxcS 30 l:xeS would have led to a lost rook ending, e.g. 30 . . . c4 3 1 l:xe4 :c8 32 l:e2 c3 33 l:c2, and the king goes across to the c3 pawn. 28 29 30 23

.i.xh6!

This combination opponent's innovation. 23 24

refutes . � xd 5

"'g3 !

the

"'xe3 l:d2 l:d7

Black seeks salvation in a queen ending, but in so doing he gives up a pawn. Much better was 30 . . :.e6 ! 3 1 l:b7, and here not 3 1 . . :.f6 32 "'xe4 "'xf2 33 "'xeS, but 3 1 . . . ... f5! 32 "'g3 "'f6, when White's advantage is insufficient for a win.

1 15


'ife2

In such positions, where there are no passed pawns, White's plan is to penetrate with his king into the opponent's position and weave a mating net. 42

g4

Opening the way for the king. 42 43 44 45

31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

l:txf7 .xe4 'ifb7+ .xb6 .d8+ 'ifd7+ .e6+ .f7 g3

�g1 �h2

.f5+

�xf7 'ifxc3 �g8 'ifcl �f7 �g8 �h7 .e4

39 g4 was possible, but I did not hurry, aiming to begin the realisation of my advantage only after adjourning the game and analysing it at home. 39 40 41

�g3 �h4

'ifd2 'ifc3+ 'ifd4

�h6 �h7

45

g6

This makes things slightly easier for White. Had the black king retreated to the back rank, after f2-f.3 and �h5 White would have played g5-g6 and again set up a mating net, but in this case Black would have acquired stalemating chances, and the win would have been not at all simple. Now, however, White's king quickly invades the enemy position. 46 47 48 49

.f7+ .f6! �g5 f4!

�h6 �h7 .d2+ exf4

Going into the pawn ending is no better - 49 . . ..xf4+ 50 .xf4 exf4 5 1 �xf4 �h6 52 �e5 �g5 53 �e6 �h4 54 �f6 and White wins. In this position the game was adjourned, and Black had to seal his next move.

50 51

�h8 .f7+ �h6 Black resigns

1 16


Game 3 S Averbakh-Bannik 21st USSR Championship Kiev 1954

English Opening 1 2 3 4

5

c4

eS

lDc3

lDc6

g3 R.g2 e3

g6 R.g7

10 R. c8 In his notes to the game with Resh evsky, Botvinnik attaches an exclamation mark to this move, whereas Konstantin opolsky, in his notes to the present game in the tournament book, thinks that the retreat to d7 is more natural . However, then White is not obliged to play d4-dS . 11 12

In the 1 93 0s this was Botvinnik' s favourite continuation. However, in his last book of collected games, published in the 1 980s, he himself points out that S d3 or even S e4 sets Black more difficult problems. 5 lDge7 6 7 8 9

lDge2 � d4 exd4

d6 � exd4 R.g4

The well-known game Botvinnik-Resh evsky (AVRO Tournament 1 93 8) went 9 . . . lDfS 1 0 dS lDeS 1 1 b3 as 1 2 R.b2 lDd7 1 3 a3 lDcs 1 4 b4 with a positional advan tage. Botvinnik thought that by the bishop move to g4 Black could ful ly equalise. 10

f3

If 1 0 h3 Botvinnik gives 1 0 . . . R.xe2 1 1 lDxe2 lDfS 1 2 dS lDeS 1 3 'ii'c2 :e8 with an acceptable game for Black.

dS b3

lDeS

In the same notes Botvinnik asserts that the continuation chosen by me also achieves nothing, although he does not give any variations to demonstrate this. The question arises: if this variation is so unpromising, why did I choose it? Firstly, I did not consider it to be unpromising. Secondly, and this is the main thing, the variation employed gives White a fairly solid position, and at this moment, two rounds before the end of the tournament, I was leading my nearest rival by a whole point, so that I did not need to aim for the maximum . My main task was not to allow the opponent active play. 12

a6

This move was recommended by Botvinnik, reckoning on 1 3 R.b2 bS ! with good counterplay for Black, but my plans included a different way of developing the bishop. Black could have considerably sharpened the play by 1 2 . . . c6, but Bannik,

1 17


a player of strictly positional style, did not make such moves.

Being cramped, Black is glad of every exchange, but this does not improve his position. 22 23

%:txel

.f8

ci>a

Anticipating the transition into a minor piece ending, White improves the position of his king. 23 24 25

13 14 15 16 17 18

-*.g5! -*.e3 -*.a .d2 �d4 -*.xd4

:xe8 �e2

%:te8 j,xe8 �d8

h6 �f5 %:te8 %:tb8 �xd4 -*.d7

White has a spatial advantage, and also a slight lead in development, so that Black has to play very cautiously. The more active l B . . . bS also has its drawbacks. White replies 1 9 cxbS axbS 20 f4 �g4 2 1 j,xg7 ci>xg7 22 %:tfe 1 with a good game.

Tarrasch in his time said that if one piece stands badly, then the entire position becomes bad. In our case the black knight is poorly placed, and this later plays the decisive role. Whereas White gradually strengthens his position, Black is unable to find any possibilities for counterplay. 26 27

.e3 b4!

q;n

Beginning to cramp the opponent on the queens ide. 27 28 29

19

h3

f5

Defending against the threat of winning the knight. 20 21

f4 %:tfel

�n :xe1+

1.0

-*.d7 -*.xd4

�xd4

White was threatening c4-cS, so Black decides to exchange the dark-square bishops, but now the white knight has taken up a strong position. 29 30 31

j,e2 j,dl

j,c8 j,d7 .g7

1 18


By removing his control of c5, Black allows the opponent to make an important pawn advance. 32 "'f6 cS! -*. b3 �g7 33 34

cxd6

knight. However, this was the last move before the time control, and he had only seconds left on his clock. Now his position becomes hopeless.

cxd6

41

With the queens on the board it is easier for Black to defend, so White decides to exchange them, after which he acquires new possibilities for strengthening his position - the centralisation of his king and the advance of his queenside pawns. 3S

"'c3!

gS

This move was condemned by the commentators, as it weakens the f5 pawn, but on the other hand it could have allowed Black to markedly improve the position of his knight. 36 37

�e2 ! �xc3

"'xc3 gxf4

Black should not have been in a hurry to make this exchange. After 3 7 . ./ijiJ followed by 3 8 . . . �h8 and 39 . . . �g6 he could have hoped to save the game. However, the move played is not a fatal mistake. 38 gxf4 �f6 39 -*.c4 �f7 40

a4

�e7

The last opportunity for a successful resistance was 40 . . . �h8, when B lack succeeds in improving the position of his

h4!

The only move that leads to a win. White no longer allows the knight manoeuvre. �h8

41

This move was sealed by my opponent, but it is already too late. 42 �f7 hS! 43

as

�d8

43 . . . �5 would have offered some practical chances, but after 44 fxe5 dxe5 45 b5 -*.c8 46 �4 ! axb5 47 -*.xb5 -*.d7 48 -*.xd7 �xd7 49 �c5+ �d6 50 �b7+ �xd5 5 1 a6 �c6 52 �5+ �b6 53 �4+ �xa6 54 �xe5 White wins.

1 19


b5!

White's plan is crystal-clear. He needs to open lines on the queens ide and then try to penetrate with his king into the enemy position. 44 45 46 47 48

�e3 �d4 Jld3 �a4

Jlc8 �e8 �e7 �f7 axb5

Because of the threat of 49 �b6, this exchange is forced. 49

Jlxb5

Jld7

This move too has to be made, after which the win for White becomes a matter of simple technique. 50

Jlxd7

�xd7

59 60 61 62

�d4 �8 �b5+ �d7 �e7 �b6 �c7 Black resigns

By my victory in this game I won the title of USSR Champion with a round to spare. Game 36 Korchnoi-Averbakh 21st USSR Championship Kiev 1954

Sicilian Defence

51 52 53

�c4 �b5 �c3

�c7 �d8

Now the knight heads towards the fS pawn. 53 54 55 56

�e2 �d4 �xf5

�f7 �d8 �f7

In conclusion Black finds himself in zugzwang, and he is forced to allow the advance of the enemy king. 56 57 58

�b6 �a7

�d7 �c8 �c7

This game was played in the last round of the Championship. I was already out of reach of my rivals, as I was leading my closest pursuers, Korchnoi and Taimanov, by one and a half points. For me the battle was over, and I was in a very benign mood, naively assuming that my opponent would be similarly inclined. All the same he could not catch me, and a share of second place was more or less assured. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

e4 �f3 d4 �xd4 �c3 Jlg5 'iVd2

c5 �c6 cxd4 �f6 d6 e6 a6

1 20

Averbakh 's Selected Games 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

0-0-0 f4 �h4 'iVel

It)f5 It)xd6+ ':xd6

�d7 h6 It)xe4 It)f6 'iVaS �xd6 0-0-0

1 7 'iVxf6 It)d5 1 8 'iVd4 It)xc3 1 9 'iVxc3+ 'ifxc3 20 bxc3 with a quick draw. Later an analysis by the Soviet master Grechkin was published, showing that, instead of 1 6 . . . lt)e7, stronger is 1 6 . . . lt)b4, and if 1 7 a3 lt)xc2 ! 17

':d2 !

After this improvement, specially prepared by Korchnoi, I should have realised that my opponent was by no means peacefully inclined, but I was still in a benign mood and simply could not develop any fighting spirit. 17 'iff5 This falls in with White's plans. Even here, by replying 1 7 . . . �c6 and if 1 8 'ifxf6 It)d5 ! , Black could have achieved a reasonable game.

This variation had been analysed in detail and was considered by theory to be difficult for B lack, but I had employed it against Gligoric in the 1 953 Candidates Tournament, and after 1 5 'ifd2 It)e7 1 6 .i.d3 .i.c6 1 7 ':xd8+ ':xd8 1 8 ':d 1 'ifh5 1 9 g3 It)f5 I achieved a good game. 15 16

�xf6 'iVh4

18 19 20 21 22 23

�d3 'iffl �xg6 ':xfl ':xf6 It)e4

It)g6 'ifxf4 'ifxfl fxg6 gS

gxf6 It)e7

I knew the game Lyskov-Bonch Osmolovsky ( 1 9th USSR Championship Semi-Final, Lvov 1 95 1 ), which continued

Black's position is markedly inferior. He has a weak pawn at e6, his dark squares are weakened, and here the knight is stronger than the bishop. Now I should probably have parted with a pawn, but activated my pieces by 23 . . . .i.c6, and if 24 ':xe6 ':hfS 25 ':e I ':d4, but I did not yet sense that I was on the verge of losing.

121

Averbakh 's Selected Games 23 24 25

l:thfl l:txf6

l:tdfS l:txf6 b6

Defending against the threat of 26 lLlcs 26 27 28 29

ci>d2 l:tt7 ci>e3 c4

.

ci>c7 ci>c6 .i.c8

Korchnoi has gradually strengthened his position, and I now realised that I was losing. ' So what?' , I thought to myself. 'What does it matter? All the same he can 't catch me ! ' However, quite unexpectedly the spec tators came to my aid. The tournament was being held in the region of Kiev called Podol. The spectators attending the event, especially the youngest ones, openly sup ported the youngest competitor Korchnoi, and, to put it mildly, did not distinguish themselves by their good manners, and were not ashamed to loudly express their sympathies. And here, when I ended up in a critical position, a group of youths, sitting in the gallery, began chanting in a whisper: 'Averbakh, resign ! Averbakh, resign ! ' This chanting acted on m e like a call to arms, aroused my desire to fight, and forced me to gather my strength. 'I'll give you resign ! ' , I whispered to myself, and, gritting my teeth, I began

seeking the slightest saving chances, setting myself the modest goal of not losing before the 40th move, in order to adjourn the game and not give pleasure to Korchnoi's most ardent supporters. 29 30 31 32

c5 ci>d4 �c4

32

b5 b4 g4

g3 !

In order to gain at least some counter play, Black must activate his rook, and for this he sacrifices a pawn. 33 34 35

lLlxg3 lLle4 lLld6

as l:td8

If 3 S l:ta7 I was proposing to reply 3 S . . . eS, threatening a check at e6. 35 36 37 38

�d4 g3 lLle4

.i.a6+ :g8 :g4+

3 8 :f4 is worse because of 3 8 . . . :gS, threatening both to capture on cS, as well as . . . e6-eS . 38 39 40

b3 l:tf4

.i.c4 .i.d5 l:tg8

Strictly speaking, I had fulfilled my task, by lasting out to move 40. However, the position remains cheerless for Black, despite the slight activation of his pieces.

1 22


But here to my aid came. . . Korchnoi himselfl Instead of adjourning the game, and then at home, in a calm atmosphere, clarifying the way to win, he decided to finish me off without adjourning, seeing as we still had time on our clocks. And so the battle continued with its former intensity.

And here 49 �f6 was more accurate, and only if 49 . . . �a4 50 g4. 49 50

:a3 ! �xe6

That's it. The win is no longer there! After 50 h4 ! l:g3 5 1 �f4 l:h3 52 h5 l:h l 53 l:e2 ! l:a l 54 g5 White would still have retained winning chances. 50

l:h3 !

But now, as often occurs in rook endings, the active placing of the black pieces prevents White from realising his extra pawn. 51 �f5 �a4 52 53 54 55

41 42 43 44 45

�f6 �e5 :d4 bxa4 �e4+

g5 �xg5 :e2 �g4

hxg5 l:c3 l:c5+ l:c4+

:d8 �xc5 a4 :a8

Of course, simpler was 45 �xd5 exd5 46 :xd5+ �c4 47 :d2 :xa4 48 �f6 etc. 45 46 47 48 49

:xe4 :e2 :c2+ g4

Jtxe4 :xa4 :a6 �b5

Here the game was finally adjourned and declared a draw without being resumed. After 56 �g3 l:c3+ 57 �g2 :c4 5 8 h3 �a3 59 �g3 Black plays 59 . . . l:c l 60 h4 :a l 6 1 h5 :xa2 with an easy draw. Game 3 7 Averbakh-Panno USSR v. Argentina Buenos Aires 1954

King's Indian Defelice 1 2

d4 c4

�f6 g6

1 23


�c3

i.g7

e4

5

i.e2 i.g5

d6 0-0

6

8 9

"'a5 i.d2 !

9 "'d2 is not in the spirit of the variation in view of 9 . . . bS ! , with the initiative for the sacrificed pawn. Incidentally, it should be mentioned that the retreat of the bishop by no means loses a tempo: the black queen will also have to abandon the as square. 9

This game with Panno was one of the first in which I employed the variation with S i.e2 and 6 i.gS , which soon became known as the Averbakh Variation. White's last move appears to contradict one of the basic principles of opening play - without yet completing his development, White crosses the demarcation line. Besides, did not the great Lasker say that at the start of the game the knights should first be brought out, and only then the bishops? Nevertheless, this bishop development is positionally well-founded. White en deavours to forestall his opponent's activity, by restricting his actions. Incidentally, the move 6 i.gS involves a quite concrete trap - the routine 6 . . . eS is met by 7 dxeS dxeS 8 "'xd8 l:xd8 9 �dS, winning material, while if 6 ... h6 the bishop retreats to f4 or e3 , and then by 8 "'d2 White gains a tempo for his development. c5 6 a6 d5 7 8

a4

This move also comes into White's strategic plan - it forestalls Black's play on the queenside.

e5

Strangely enough, this pawn advance is a serious mistake. By closing the centre, Black frees the opponent' s hands for an attack on the kingside. The correct continuation is considered to be 9 . . . e6 1 0 �f3 exdS 1 1 exdS i.g4 1 2 0-0 with a slight advantage for White. Therefore modem theory thinks that instead of 8 . . . "'as Black should play 8 . . . e6 immediately.

10

g4!

The centre is closed, and White immediately launches a pawn stonn on the kingside. 10 11

h4

�e8 f5

As is customary in the King's Indian Defence, Black tries in this way to create counterplay. However, here this plan has an obvious drawback - it seriously weakens the black king' s position. f4 h5 12

1 24

AverbaJch 's Selected Games

Seeing that the opening of the kings ide will only favour the opponent (White was threatening 1 3 hxg6 hxg6 1 4 gxfS gxfS 1 5 .i.hS �f6 1 6 .i.g6 with an attack), Panno tries immediately to close the position. 13

18 19 20

:h4 hxg6 "hI

�d7 hxg6

g5!

Threatening by hS-h6 to shut the g7 bishop completely out of the game, and at the same time preparing the exchange of light-square bishops, after which a number of light squares in the opponent' s position will be weakened. 13 14

:17

.i.g4

"d8

Black sounds the retreat over the entire front and goes completely onto the defen sive. However, the attempt to counter attack on the queenside could only have turned out badly, for example: 1 4 . . . .i.xg4 1 5 "xg4 "b4 1 6 hxg6 hxg6 1 7 "c8 ! :e7 1 8 b3 ! , and if 1 8 . . . ..xb3 there follows 1 9 :b l and 2 0 :xb7. 15

.i.xe8

"xe8

16

�fJ

.i.f8

17

�e2 !

Solid barriers have been set up in the middle of the board, and so here White's king feels completely safe. To continue the offensive it only remains for him to switch his heavy pieces to the h-file and then to open it. 17

:tg7

White has regrouped his heavy pieces and deployed them at active posts. All is ready for the invasion of the enemy position . 20

21

.i.e7

:h8+

c:j;t7

�f8 After evacuating his king from g8 and defending the g6 pawn with his knight, Black thought that he had stabilised his position. However, the security of his king is imaginary, since the pieces crowding round it do not defend it well. White only needs to blow up the enemy fortress, and with his next move he prepares this explosion. 22

"h6

1 2S


l:th l !

Now it i s difficult for Black to defend against the destructive bishop sacrifice at f4. For example: 23 . . . i.d8 24 i.xf4 exf4 2S l:th4 �e7 26 :xf4 with a decisive attack. 23

With the desperate 23 . . . bS Black could have tried to reduce the tempo of the attack, for example 24 axbS axbS 2S cxbS li)c7 26 i.xf4 ! li)xbS, but after 27 i.xeS dxeS 28 li)xeS+ �e8 29 li)xbS 1Wa6 30 1I'xg7 1I'xbS+ 3 1 'i>f3 White has an easy win. 24

i.xf4!

1I'c7

As 24 . . . exf4 loses to 2S :h4, Black has to defend against the threat of 2S i.xeS ! If, for example, 24 . . . li)d7, then 2S 1Wh3 li)b6 26 i.xeS ! , winning material.

29

li)h4!

White's mating attack develops very smoothly. 29 30

i.d8 � g7

li)xg6+ 30 . . . :xg6 would have allowed mate in two moves - 3 1 :h8+ 'i>g7 32 1I'g8 . 31

li)xe5 Black resigns

Game 3 8 Averbakh-Aronin USSR Team Championship Riga 1954

King's Indian Defence

25

1Wh2 !

Again threatening to capture on eS . 25 26

li)d7 1Wh3

The triumph of White's plan. The queen succeeds in invading the weak squares in the enemy position. 26 27

li)fS :xfS+!

The only defender of the e6 square has to be eliminated. 27 28

1I'e6

'i>xfS :g8

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

d4 c4

li)c3 e4 i.e2 i.g5 d5

li)f6 g6 i.g7 d6 0-0 c5 h6

At that time the theory of this variation, which later became known as the Averbakh Variation, was only just being developed, and my opponents tried various plans against me. 8 9

i.f4

li)bd7

li)g4 li)f3 Black immediately tries to begin active play in the centre.

1 26


The natural reaction to Black's previous move. Now his commander will feel uncomfortable. 16

dxeS

1 6 . . . gxf4 1 7 exf6 fxg3 would have lost immediately to 1 8 i.. d 3+. 17

fxgS

i.. xgS

Just one mistake by Black has led to this difficult position, where it is already hard to offer any good advice. 1 7 . . . hxgS was no better because of 1 8 i.. d 3+ �g7 1 9 lDc3 with the threat of 2 0 lDe4. rlilg7 18 i.. d3+ 10 1i'd2 Having provoked 7 . . . h6, White gains an important tempo for his development. 10

�h7

1 0 . . . gS is dangerous. Since White has not yet castled, after 1 1 i.. g3 he will be threatening 1 2 h4. 11 12 13 14 15

i.. g3 lDxeS f4 lDbS 0-0

19

"'e2

:'h8

In defending against the threat of 20 1i'e4, Black weakens his control of fl, which White immediately exploits. 20 21

d6 lDc7

22

lbt7+!

e6 :'b8

lDgeS i.. xeS i.. d 4 i.. f6 gS

Black resigns

After 22 . . . rlilxfl 23 1i'hS+ rlilg7 24 "'g6+ �f8 2S lDxe6 he is mated.

In this way Black tries to wrest control of the eS square for his pieces, but in so doing he weakens the position of his king. After the more logical I S a6 1 6 lDc3 i.. d4+ 1 7 �h l eS I was intending to continue 1 8 dxe6 fxe6 1 9 f5 . •.•

16

eS!

In the summer of 1 9S5, before the USSR USA match, Mikhail Botvinnik suggested to me that we play a couple of training games. I readily agreed: who would not be interested in doing battle with the champion of the world? Before this we had met only in official competitions (with a score of + 1 =2, not in my favour).

1 27


As a sparring-partner I evidently suited Botvinnik, and over the next two years we played about 25 training games. The time control was the standard one of two and a half hours for 40 moves. If a game remained unfinished, it was not normally resumed. An exception to this occurred in two matches. One was played in August 1 956, when the World Champion was preparing for the Olympiad in Moscow and for the Alekhine Memorial Tournament, and the second was in January 1 95 7, at the con cluding stage of Botvinnik' s preparations for his second world championship match with Vasily Smyslov. In these matches, games were adjourned after 40 moves and then resumed. In the first match we played five games with an overall score of + 1 =4 in Botvinnik's favour. Three of these games were adjourned and played on right to the finish. In all of them I had an advantage, and I was reckoning to pick up at least two points. Alas, I only managed to score one point. What happened? First of all one has to acknowledge the World Champion 's analytical skill, and his resourcefulness and tenacity. My analysis, on the other hand, left much to be desired. Not in self-justification, but for the sake of the truth, I should say that there were also objective reasons for this: a couple of days before th� ill-fated adjournment session, I received the proofs of my book How to Solve Chess Studies, and instead of 'polishing' the adjourned positions, I was obliged to work on the proofs, which had to be returned to the typesetter as quickly as possible. When the adjournment session came to an end, Botvinnik did not conceal his joy, and smilingly remarked: 'You know, Yura, out of three equal adjourned positions I normally always win one ! '

Game 39 Averbakh-Botvinnik Training Match Nikolina Gora 1 956

French Defence 1 2 3 4 5 6

e4 d4 �d2 eS .*.d3

c3

e6 dS �f6 �fd7 cS b6

A favourite continuation of Botvinnik, the aim of which is to exchange the c8 bishop for the active one at d3 . 7

�e2

In a game S .Abramian-Botvinnik (Leningrad 1 93 8) White tried to prevent the exchange of bishops by 7 We2, on which there followed 7 . . . cxd4 8 cxd4 �c6 with two threats - 9 . . . �xd4 and 9 . . . �b4. 7 8 9

.*.xa6

.*.a6 �xa6

�

The desire to quickly remove the king from the centre is understandable, but 9 h4 came seriously into consideration, aiming to seize space for active play on the kingside. To 9 . . . h5 White could reply 1 0 �g3 g6 1 1 �f3 , when he obtains a similar position to the game, but with less expenditure of time.

1 28


9 tDc7! This is more accurate than 9 ... i.e7 1 0 f4 f5 I I exf6, when the pawn has to be taken with the bishop (if 1 1 . . . tDxf6 1 2 Wa4+ winning a piece), as occurred in the game Botvinnik-Petrov ( 1 2th USSR Championship, Moscow 1 940). h5 10 tDg3

A similar position had already occurred in Botvinnik's game with Tolush (20th USSR Championship, Moscow 1 952), in which he carried out the same plan as he does here. Keeping his king in the centre for the moment, the World Champion aims to restrict White's possibilities on the kingside and to mount a pawn offensive on the queens ide. However, White too has his trumps. 11 tDa i.e7 12 i.e3 tDb8 The knight is transferred to a more active position, from where it will be able to support the advance of Black' s pawns. g6 13 tDel 14 tDd3 Inviting Black to block the centre. If I had tried to exchange the dark-square bishops immediately by 1 4 tDf3 tDc6 I S "'d2, there could have followed 1 5 . . . .:tc8, and if 1 6 i.g5 i.xg5 1 7 tDxg5 cxd4 1 8 cxd4 tDxd4 1 9 tDxf7 tDf3+ 20 gxf3 tj;xf7. 14

c4

15

tDel

16

Wd2

17

tDa i.g5

18

tDc6 b5 a5

White has finally achieved his aim - the exchange of bishops, but the initiative has already been lost: the black pawns have advanced. Perhaps here he should first have played 1 8 a3 . 18 i.xg5 19 tDxg5 b4 h4 We7 20 The unpleasant 2 1 . . . a4 is threatened, so that White's next move is forced. a4 21 tj;d7

.:tfel The opponent was intending 22 .l:thb8, and probably I should have prevented him from connecting his rooks by 22 "'f4, and 22

..

1 29


only then transferred my rook to 0 . For example: 22 . . J lhfS 23 :fe l llabS 24 :e3 bxc3 25 bxc3 :b3 26 :0 . 22 23 24 25 26 27 2S

:e3 bxc3

llf3 "'f4 lb h7

lbg5

31 32

lbe3 :f6

lbg7

llhbS bxc3 ll b3 lb dS �eS � d7 � c6

Setting a clever trap, into which my opponent falls. Now Black should have moved his king to c7 . If 32 . . . lbfS I was intending 33 lbxf5 gxf5 34 :h6, and after 3 5 :xh5 the h4 pawn becomes very dangerous. 32 lbeS? 33

Black has a clear positional advantage, and so he avoids repeating the position. Now if 29 lbxf7 there could have followed 29 . . . lbxf1 3 0 "xf1 "xf1 3 1 :xf1 :xc3 with a sharp and unclear ending: (a) 32 lbe2 can be met by 32 . . . :b3 3 3 lbf4 :abS 34 lbxg6 :b l + 3 5 :xb l :xb l + 36 �h2 c 3 3 7 :0 :b3 ! 3 s lbf4 c2 39 lbe2 :xf3 40 gxO lbeS with advantage to Black; (b) 32 :g7 (probably best) 32 . . . :d3 33 lbe2 :bS 34 :xg6 (34 lbf4 :d2 ! ) 34 ... :b2 3 5 �fl , and if 3 5 . . . c3 36 :g3 c2 3 7 :xd3 :b l + 3 s lbc l llxa l 39 :c3+ and 40 :xc2 . Of course, all these sharp variations are not obligatory, but they do show just how complex this ending is. In short, I avoided the capture on f1 and played instead: llabS 29 lba 30

"ct

lbes

Black tries to transfer his knight to f5 .

lbxd5!

When the king lacks pawn cover, one always has to watch out for unexpected blows such as this. Botvinnik's usual vigilance was evidently dulled by the preceding quiet manoeuvring play. �xd5

33

If Black had declined the knight sacrifice by playing 33 . . ... b7, the game could have gone as follows: 34 "'f4 ! lbxf6 3 5 "xf6 :b l + 36 :xb l "xb l + 3 7 �h2 "d3 3 S lbe3 1i'xc3 39 d5+ �b7 40 lbxf1 lbxf1 4 1 1i'xf1+ �aS 42 1i'xe6 and White has quite sufficient compensation for the exchange. 34 35 36 37

"f4 d5+ "xc4 :f4

�c6 �b7 � aS 1i'c7

White has two pawns and an attack for the piece, so it is quite understandable that the defender should aim to exchange queens. In fact, by playing 3 7 :0 (instead

1 30


of 3 7 l:tf4), and if 3 7 . . . ..c7 3 8 "d3 , White could have retained all the advantages of his position, without exchanging queens.

42

:'cS

42 d7 &£jc7 43 &£je4 suggests itself, but after 43 . . . :'d l 44 &£jd6 :'d3 it is doubtful whether White can win. 42

:'b7 !

Black's No. 1 enemy is the passed d pawn, and so he prepares to undennine its defences by . . . f7-f6. 43

&£je4

By continuing 43 f4 f6 44 &£jf3 White would still have every chance of winning. 43 44

f6 exf6?

A mistake. Here too 44 f4 was stronger, maintaining the powerful pawn phalanx. 44 &£jrT 38

45

d6

Of course, I wanted to keep the queens on, but after 3 8 'tWa6+ 'tWa7 39 "d3 &£jc7 the black pieces would have occupied active positions. 38 39 40 41

:'xc4 l:lxbl �h2

"xc4 :'b1+ :'xb1+ �b8

The game was adjourned in this position, and White sealed his next move. He no longer has an attack, but his strong protected passed pawn and the active placing of his pieces give him the advantage. The question is - can it be converted into a win?

l:lxaS

l:ld7 !

I overlooked this move, assuming that after 45 . . . &£jfxd6 46 &£jxd6 &£jxd6 47 l:te5 White would win the e6 pawn while retaining his f6 pawn. Now, however, he must lose both d- and f-pawns, and with them his winning chances, although the advantage remains on his side. 46 47 48

l:tbS+ &£jcS as

�c8 :'xd6

&£jc7 !

48

Black defends very accurately. After 48 . . .&£jxf6 49 a6 his position could again have become critical. 49

IIb6

IIxb6

131

Averbakh IS Selected Games 50 51 52 53 54

axb6 �xe6 c4 c5 f3

55

�f8+

�e8 �xf6 �e5 �c6 �d7

This leads to further simplification and a quick draw, but there is nothing better. 55 56 57 58 59 60

�e8 �xg6 �d7 �f4 �xc5 �xh5 �d7 b7 �f7 g4 �c5 Draw agreed

The concluding stage of Botvinnik's preparations for his second match for the World Championship with Smyslov was to be our match of twelve games, in which the World Champion intended to 'run in' the opening variations prepared for Smyslov. We were intending to begin playing immediately after the 1 957 New Year, but I caught an unexpected cold and was ill for a week. This somewhat inter fered with our plans: Botvinnik definitely wanted to finish the match in January. As a result we restricted ourselves to ten games, and the adjourned ninth game was not in fact resumed. The match score was +3-2=4 in favour of Botvinnik, but in the

unfinished game I was the exchange up, and hence had winning chances. This was an extremely tense match. I remember that we battled with a fierceness that was unusual for training games. In several games there was a severe time scramble, which often led to blunders. Now, playing through these games, and experiencing as if anew all the changes of fortune in those encounters, I suddenly realised that such training games use up too much strength and nervous energy. It is quite possible that, when a month and a half later Botvinnik sat down at the board with Smyslov, he had not managed to recover fully after our battles, and to some extent this may have affected the outcome of the match. Game 40 Averbakh-Botvinnik Training Match Nikolina Gora 195 7

Dutch Defence 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

d4 �f3 g3 i.g2 0-0 c4 b3

e6 f5 �f6 i.e7 0-0 d5 �c6

132


The Dutch was always one of Botvinnik's favourite defences as Black. In this game he tries a new idea - the rapid development of his queens ide minor pieces. 8 9 10 11

�b2 �e3 exd5 �xc3

�d7 �e4 �xc3 exd5

Nothing good comes of 1 8 �xb4 1i'aS 1 9 a3 "'xa3 20 �d3 "'xb3 2 1 :b l :a2 ! , when Black remains a pawn up. 18 19 20 21 22

f4 �f3 :tl :g2

"'b6 g6 :f7 :e7

The dS pawn is unprotected, and White could have exploited this factor to develop his queenside initiative by 1 2 b4 ! Instead he chooses a slow knight manoeuvre, after which he effectively loses his opening advantage.

White demonstrates his intention to attack on the kingside either with an immediate g3-g4, or with h2-h3 followed by g3-g4. With the aim of forestalling his opponent, Black immediately counter attacks in the centre, but this leads by force to a better ending for White. 12 13

�el �d3

�e6 a5!

Now Black prevents b3-b4. 14

22 23 24

dxe5 �xe5

25

1i'd4!

:c1

Played without any pretensions. Here 1 4 a3 came into consideration, for example 1 4 . . . �d6 1 S e3 (defending against a possible . . . fS-f4) I S . . . 1i'e7 1 6 b4 ! , temporarily sacrificing a pawn in order to fight for the initiative. 14 15

e3

�d6 �b4

Finally extinguishing any possibilities for the opponent on the queenside. 16 17 18

�xb4 1i'd2 :e2

axb4 e6

e5? �xe5 :xe5

1 33


Botvinnik clearly underestimated this move, which leads to exchanges favour able for White. 2S :.e8 26

lheS

.xeS

If 26 ... :xc5, then 27 :c2 :c6 28 .xb6 l:[xb6 29 :c5 :c6 3 0 :b5 leads to the same ending that occurs in the game. 27

:d2

.xd4

By 27 . . .•c l + 28 :d l .c2 Black could have kept the queens on, but with 29 .i.xd5 White immediately wins a pawn. 28

:xd4

34 .i.n If 34 ... �f7 35 :xb7+ �f6 there follows not 36 :xh7 because of 36 . . . d4! 3 7 .i.e2 .i.xb3 38 exd4 .i.f7, when it is doubtful whether White can realise his material advantage, but 36 .i.e2 :xh2 37 b4. 3S 36 37

28 29 30 31

�a �el :xb4

�d2 �d3

:.2+

:a If 3 3 . . . :xh2 34 :xb7 :h3 , then 35 �e2 :h2+ 36 �e 1 transposes into the variation given in the note to Black' s 3 1 st move, since if 3 5 . . .:xg3 White has the un pleasant 36 �f2 :h3 37 �g2, when the black rook is out of play. 34

:b6!

gS gxf4

:d+ :e2+ :xal :.7

The defence in inferior positions such as this one is especially difficult, in that out of several evils one has to choose the least. The alternative was 3 1 . . . :xh2 32 l:[xb7 :b2 3 3 b4 h6 34 b5 g5 with a sharp ending. 32 33

b4 .i.e2 gxf4

d4

37

A desperate attempt to bring the bishop into play. If 37 . . .:xh2 3 8 :xb7 :h l then 39 b5 :b l 40 b6, e.g. 40 . . . h5 4 1 �c2 :b4 42 �c3 :e4 (42 . . . :b l 43 .i.d3 ) 43 :xf7 ! �xf7 44 .i.xh5+ �f6 45 b7 and the pawn cannot be stopped. 38

:xb7

dxe3

It is no better going into a rook ending: 38 . . . .i.d5 39 :b8+ �g7 40 �xd4 :xe2 4 1

1 34


�xd5 l:xe3 42 b5 l:e4 43 b6, and White must win. �xe3 39 :xh2 40 bS .tdS

Game 4 1 Polugayevsky-Averbakb 23rd USSR Championship Leningrad 1956

Nimzo-Indian Defence 1 2 3 4

S

d4 c4 �c3

�f6 e6 .tb4

a3 bxc3

.txc3+ cS

Despite the equal material, it is hard for Black to combat the opponent' s outside passed pawn. For example: 40 . . . l:h3+ 4 1 �d4 l:h2 (4 1 . . . :b3 4 2 l:xf7) 4 2 l:e7 �f8 43 l:e5 l:h6 44 �c5 .te8 45 .tn and wins. 41 42 43 44

:c7 �d4 .tc4+ �eS

:h6 .te4

�f8

The triumph of White's plan. 44 . . . l:b6 is met by 45 .te6 ! :xb5+ 46 �f6, while if 44 . . . l:h2 45 .te6 �e8 46 b6 �d8 47 l:c8+ �e7 48 b7 .txb7 49 l:c7+. Therefore Black resigned .

The most natural and popular way of countering the Samisch Variation, although I often played 5 . . 0-0 , aiming for less well studied continuations. However, in the given case my choice was based on the fact that the trainer of the young Polugayevsky was International Master Lev Aronin, who I had played several times, and who was well familiar with my opening repertoire. 6 e3 b6 .tb7 7 .td3 .

8 9 10 11 12

f3 �e2 0-0 e4 �g3

�6 0-0 �a5 �e8

Judging by the speed with which my opponent made these moves, I realised that I would have to face an opening innovation, as we were following the well

135


known Geller-Euwe game from the 1 953 Candidates Tournament. However, there was already no way of deviating.

should have closed the centre by 1 7 d5, so as then to begin an attack on the kingside with 1 8 �h5 and g2-g4-g5 . However, it seems to me that a concretely-thinking player like the young Lev could hardly have made such a move, unless it was prepared beforehand. Probably more to his taste were the tactical complications that arose in the game. 17 18 19

12 13 14 15 16

exd4 f4 fS a4!

eS

In the first instance I decided not to allow the rook to go via f4 to h4. 17

l:txe4 fxeS

exd4 l:te8 �xe4 f6

And here is the important improvement. The afore-mentioned game went 1 6 l:tf4 b5 ! 1 7 l:th4 "'b6 with strong counterplay. By not allowing . . . b6-b5, White seriously restricts Black' s possibilities.

16

dxeS "'b3

.i.xe4+

The commentators criticised Polu gayevsky for this move, reckoning that he

19

dS

As the 'post-mortem ' showed, 1 9 . . ....c7 ! was also good. Polugayevsky was intending to reply 20 f6 �xf6 2 1 �fS, threatening 22 �e3 or 22 �d6. Then if 2 1 . . .d5 there could have followed 22 .i.a3 l:td8 (22 . . . l:ta8 23 .i.d6) 23 .i.e7 l:td7 24 �h6+ �h8 (or 24 . . . gxh6 25 "'g3+ �h8 26 .i.xf6+ l:tg7 27 .i.xe5) 25 l:txf6 (with 25 �f7+ White can force a draw) 25 ... gxf6 26 .i.xf6+ l:tg7 27 "'a3 "'c5+ 28 "'xc5 l:txc5 29 �f5 with a material advantage in the ending. But Black has a better defence - instead of 2 1 . . . d5 he should play 2 1 . . . .i.xe4 ! 22 .i.a3 .i.xfS 23 .i.xfS �xfS 24 l:txfS "'c5+ 25 �h l l:tc l + 26 l:tfl l:txa l 27 l:txa l with three pawns for the exchange, although the insecure position of the opponent's king leaves White with some saving chances.

136


�a3 :ad l

:n

Trying to exploit the resulting pin. 21 22 23

exd5 �b2

:fc7 �xd5 :7c5

An unnecessary move. After 23 . . . :d4 ! 24 :xd4 (24 'iVe3 :c2) 24 . . . exd4 the white queen has no good square. Thus 25 "b4 :c2 or 25 . . . :c4 is good for Black, while after 25 "d l �c4 26 :f4 d3 he has the advantage. 24

f6!

Polugayevsky exploits the very first opportunity to obtain serious counter chances. 24

25

lLIxf6

In the 23rd Championship of the country, which took place early in 1 956 in Lenin grad, the battle for first place was mainly between Spassky and me. Only at the finish were we caught by Taimanov, who won his last three games. Such a conclusion had not been provided for in the regulations, and at the Closing Cere mony the chief arbiter Igor Bondarevsky announced the decision of the Sports Committee - we were to be given one day's rest, and then we would again join battle, contesting a three-way play-off, the winner of which would become the champion. After a tiring, almost month-long event, we were faced with playing a further four exceptionally important games. If one draws an analogy with athletics, it could be said that at the finish of a marathon the athletes were being asked to run an extra one hundred metre race. The games from the play-off showed that the three of us played in a state that can in no way be called normal. In almost all the games there were wild adventures and numerous mistakes. For example, during the resumption of my first game with Taimanov (White), the following position was reached:

�xe5

The decisive mistake. Now the game concludes, whereas 25 lLIfS ! would have led to complications, Black's best reply probably being 25 . . ...c7. 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

:c2 ! �xf6 :xg2+ �hl :d2+ lLIe4 :xd l :xd l "e8! "xe4+ "g3 "hl+ �gl White resigns After 32 �f2 there follows 32 . . . :c2+

33 :d2 "g2+ 34 "xg2 :xd2+.

Despite White's extra pawn, the position is drawn. To maintain the balance

137


B lack needs to manoeuvre accurately with his king and bishop, in accordance with the rule of corresponding squares. Thus with the white king at c7 or cS, Black' s king should be at e7, and when the white king is at b6 it should be at fS. Taimanov tried his last chance, and played: 71

�b8

Now 7 1 . . . �fS would be a mistake because of 72 �c8 �e7 73 �c7, when White wins. The correct reply was any bishop move along the e4-h I diagonal, and only if 72 �a7 �fS. If now the white king moves between a6 and as, the bishop keeps on the same diagonal, but as soon as the white king goes to b6 or b4, the bishop returns to dS . And White cannot win by exchanging his f-pawn for the c-pawn, as then Black gives up his bishop for the d pawn. I was in slight time trouble: I still had to make two moves before the time control. And suddenly the idea came to me that I could immediately give up my bishop, and transpose into a little-known study by Rauzer, which I had examined when I was writing a book on bishop endings. And, without a moment's doubt, I took the pawn: 71 72

.i.xt7

.i.xt7?? �d6

The spectators gasped. No one could understand what was going on, as after the retreat of the bishop to c4, b3 or a2, 73 . . . cS can be met by 74 dS, when White wins. Taimanov sank into thought and found virtually the only move that leads to a draw: 73

h3??

Now after 73 74 75

dxe5+ � e7

e5 �xe5 �b5!

a theoretical position was reached, in which White cannot simultaneously achieve two things - win Black's pawn and prevent his king from reaching the h8 comer. However, the worst was still to come! Real miracles occurred in my second game with Spassky. Game 42 Averbakh-Spassky 23rd USSR Championship Play-Off Leningrad 1956

King's Indian Defence 1 1

3 4 5 6 7 8 9

e4 tbe3 e4 d4 .i.el .i.g5 d5 .i.dl a4

tbf6 g6 d6 .i.g7 0-0 e5 "a5 a6 e5?

The first miracle! Spassky either forgot about, or did not know of, my game with Panno (cf. No.3 8), after which this move came to be regarded as a serious strategic mistake, depriving Black of any chance of active play in the centre. The correct continuation, of course, is 9 .. . e6.

138


10 11 12 13

g4 h4 hS gS

lDe8 IS

f4

Up to here I did not have to think about my moves: all this had already occurred in the afore-mentioned game with Panno. 13

here I sank into thought. For a whole hour! On what did I waste all this time? It turns out that my thoughts were occupied by the following problem : what was better - to try and continue the attack or to concern myself with realising the material advantage? And, after much hesitation, I chose the first option. Strictly speaking, this was not the best decision, and was at the least a double-edged one: the position in the centre and on the queenside would be opened up, and my king could then also be in danger. But from the practical view point there was nothing at all to think about. I should have taken the knight, and only then decided what to do next. However, as I said earlier, my state was far from normal, and my tired brain found it hard to withstand the resulting load. 17

dxc6

18

lDh4

bxc6

"d8

Finally, the paths diverge. Panno played 1 3 . . .:.n, defending against the threat of 1 4 h6. .

14 15 16

16

.i.g4 .i.xc8 lDa

lDc7 "xe8

lDc6

Realising that he has lost the opening battle, Spassky decides on a desperate step - he sacrifices a piece, in order to gain at least some chance of counterplay. And

Thus, White has decided to continue the attack. Meanwhile, after 1 8 as ! lDe6 1 9 hxg6 hxg6 20 lDa4 he need not have feared 20 . . . lDd4 2 1 lDb6 ..g4 22 lDxd4 f3 23 lDc2 "xe4+ 24 lDe3 , while after 20 . . ...d8 2 1 lDb6 ':'a7 22 .i.c3 lDd4 23 .i.xd4 exd4 24 "d3 followed by 25 0-0-() the extra piece would be bound to have its say. 18 19 20

hxg6 "g4

"e8 hxg6 lZ.b8

1 39


lDd l l:a3 l:ab3

lDe6 lDd4 11fT

The black pieces have become much more active, whereas for the moment White's attack does not look dangerous. l:fe8 �c3 24 25

l:3b2

The third miracle ! Spassky does not see the threatened combination. 27

�xd4

The fourth miracle! Here White could have won with the following spectacular combination involving the sacrifice of both rooks: 27 :h8+! �xh8 (if 27 . . .fi;fl, then 28 .i.xd4 ! is decisive) 28 :xh8+ �g7 29 :h7+! �xh7 (29 . . . �g8 30 .i.xd4 :xg6 3 1 1Ih5) 30 'ilh5+ �g7 3 1 'ilh6+ �g8 32 'ilh8+ �fl 33 1Ih7+ �e8 34 1Ig8+ �d7 35 1Ifl+ �c8 (3 5 . . .�d8 36 �a5+ with mate in two moves) 36 lDe7+, and to defend against the mate, Black has to give up his queen by 36 . . . :xe7. If he plays 36 . . . �b7, there follows 37 lDd5+! �a8 3 8 lDc7+ �b7 39 lDb5+. However, i n view of the extreme situation, neither I, nor Spassky was capable of calculating all these forcing variations. l:xg6

27 1Ixc4?

25

The second miracle! Spassky goes in for a sharpening of the play, which leads to White developing a very strong attack. To 25 . . .:b7 ! , defending the seventh rank, I was intending to reply 26 fl , when there could have followed 26 . . . d5 with a complicated game, in which for the moment White ' s extra piece does not play any particular role. 26

lDxg6

I was counting on 27 . . . exd4 28 "'fS with the threat of mate in four moves by 29 :h8+ .i.xh8 3 0 :xh8+ �g7 3 1 :h7+! and 32 "fl. 28 29 30

1115 1Ixe6+

11e6 l:xe6

.i.c3

l:e6

It would seem that, after exchanging queens, White should quickly realise his extra piece. However, Black's strong pawn centre enables him to create counterplay,

1 40


and, in addition, by now I was in severe time trouble. 30 31 32

f3 :h3

d5 :b3 !

39 40 41

:gh4 �a5

c5 �g7 c3 !

Too passive. 32 :c2 came into consideration, e.g. 3 2 . . . d4 3 3 �a5 :xf3 34 :xc5 :g3 3 5 �d8, or 32 . . . c4 33 �f2. 32 33 34 35 36

�d2 :gl

c4 :g6 d4

�a5 �f8 :g4 Why not 3 6 �c7, forcing the bishop to return to g7, as 36 . . . �b4+ 3 7 �c l is not dangerous for White? 36

:d6

Black exploits the fact that White's rook has left the first rank, and sets a trap. If 3 7 l..c 7 there could have followed 3 7 . . . c3+ 3 8 bxc3 dxc3+ 39 �c2 :d2+! 40 �xb3 c2 or 39 �c l :d2 40 t£Jxc3 :bb2 with a dangerous attack. 37 �c2 :d7 38 39

g6 l.. e 1

:db7

With my last few seconds ticking away, I made this essentially pointless bishop move. However, even after the more active 39 l.. d 8 l.. g7 (defending against 40 ... l.. f6) 40 as :7b5 it is doubtful whether White can win.

I had not managed to catch my breath after the time scramble, when in this position I was faced with having to seal a move. I sorrowfully considered the adjourned position. The opponent' s avalanche of pawns and active rooks look threatening. There was no question of winning, but perhaps, God willing, it might be possible to draw. I thought for 45 minutes over my sealed move. Spassky's trainer, Alexander Tolush, thought that by 42 �xc3 dxc3 43 bxc3 White could have gained a draw. However, I did not see this, and I sealed a different move, after which, as analysis showed, I should have lost. 42

bxc3

On the resumption there followed: 42 43 44 45

cxd4 :xf4 �d3

:a3 exd4 :a2+

If 45 �c l , then 45 . . . d3 with the threat of 46 . . . :c2 mate is decisive. 45 46 47

:h 1 �c2

:b1 :xa4

47 t£Jc3 was a tougher defence, although it too would not have saved the

141


game for White after 47 . . . c4+ 4 8 �c2 :xh l 49 l2)xa4 :a l 50 l2)b6 d3+ 5 1 �d2

:a2+ 52 �e l c3 53 l2)d5 :a l + 54 �f2 .i.d4+ 55 �g2 :xa5 56 l2)e7+ �g7 57 :f7+ �h6 5 8 f4 .i.g7 59 l2)fS+ :xfS when B lack wins. 47 48

':b5 e5

The last chance. If the bishop moves there follows 48 . . . c4 with an irresistible attack.

54

l2)f5

55 56 57

:h5 �e4 :h3

':f8 ':e8 ':gl

The simplifying 57 l2)xg7 �xg7 58 e6+ �g6 59 :xc5 :xe6+ would have favoured Black.

48

d3+

57 58 59 60 61

�d5 �e4 �d5 �e4

.i.f8 :d 1+ :ct :d 1+ :d7

62

l2)h6+

.i.xh6

The fifth miracle ! Spassky wins a whole rook, emerging the exchange and a pawn ahead, but in so doing he allows White to activate his pieces and, in the end, to save the game. As Tolush showed, 48 ... .i.xe5 ! would have won. If 49 .i.d2 or 49 :e4 there follows 49 . . . c4, and it is not apparent how White can defend against the numerous threats. 49

�xd3

50

.i.c3

51 52 53

�e4 �f4

:xf4 :xf3+ :g3 :xg6 :b8

l2)e3 Black decides to switch to defence. The active 53 . . . :b3 could have been met by 54 �5, e.g. 54 . . . :e6 55 �f5 �f7 56 l2)c7 and White's initiative is sufficient for a draw.

But here the exchange favours White, since his pieces remain active. However, it was dangerous for Black to avoid it because of 63 l2)g4. 63 64

:xh6 :g6+

:h7

�f7

1 42


� e7 l:t f6+ �d7 l:tc6 If 66 . . . %lh4+ 67 �d5 c4, then 68 %lxa6 %ld8+ 69 %ld6 ! l:tc8 (or 69 . . . l:tb8 70 %lc6) 70 %lf6 with the unpleasant threat of 7 1 .i.b4+. l:t xcS 67 l:th6 65 66

68 69 70

�dS .i.aS l:txbS

1

3 4 5 6 7

c4 lLlc3

e3 .i. d3 lLlo

0-0

e6

.i. b4 0-0 dS cS lLlbd7

l:tb6 l:tbS axbS

The opening variation with the development of the knight at d7 was very popular in the 1 950s, until is drawbacks were disclosed. 71

e6+

8

This move was by no means obligatory. Also possible was 7 1 �c5 %lb8 72 .i.b4 �e6 73 �c6 ! , again with a draw. 71 72 73

l:txe6 l:tes+ �cS �b6 Draw agreed

After 74 .i.b4 and 75 .i.c5 White eliminates the enemy pawn. The final result of the play-off was: Taimanov 3 points out of 4, Averbakh 2�, Spassky �. Game 43 Golz-Averbakh International Tournament Dresden 1 956

Nimzo-Indian Defence 1

d4

lLlf6

a3

dxc4

Modem theory considers that this move is insufficient for full equality because of 9 axb4 ! cxd4 (9 . . . cxd3 1 0 bxc5) 1 0 .i.xh7+! lLlxh7 1 1 "xd4, but in my time this was not yet known. 9 10 11 12

.i.xc4 exd4 bxc3 "el

cxd4 .i.xc3 1i'c7

This is better than 1 2 1i'd3 e5 ! , when Black has an excellent game (Kluger Furman, Bucharest 1 954). 12

b6

It is dangerous to win a pawn by 1 2 . . . lLlb6 1 3 .i.d3 "xc3 , as after 1 4 .i.d2 Black is behind in development. 13

.i.bl

Here the bishop is badly placed; it would have been better to develop it at d2. 13 14

.i.b7

.i.a2

1 43


probably have had to reply 1 7 . . . j,a6 1 8 :fe I j,c4, occupying the c4 square. Instead of the move played, 1 6 . . . lLlg4 also looks quite good. 17

c4?

White heads towards his own doom . Now events develop by force. 17 lLlf4 18 1i'd2 j,xO eSt 19 pO 20

At last White's original plan has taken shape: if 1 4 . . . lLld5 he was intending I S c4 lLlf4 1 6 "e3 . However, Black has a more interesting possibility, involving an attack on the kingside. Initially I was intending to reply 1 4 . . . lLlg4 IS g3 "c6 1 6 d5 exd5 1 7 lLld4 ..g6 1 8 :fe I "h5 1 9 0 lLlgf6, but this seemed too small an achievement, and I preferred to sacrifice a pawn myself, in order to gain time for the attack. 14 15 16

"xbS "e2

dxeS

Black was threatening both 20 . . . 1I'b6 and 20 . . ... b7, so White is forced to take this pawn. 20 lLlh3+ 21

�g2

lLlxeS

bS! ? :ab8 lLldS

1 6 ... .i.xO 1 7 gxO lLld5 did not appeal to me because of 1 8 .i.xd5, although in fact in this case Black would have had a good game. But now, by playing 1 7 "d2 lLlf4 1 8 .i.c l ! , my opponent would have retained possibilities of a defence. I would

The strength of Black's attack is illustrated by the following variations: (a) 22 �xh3 lLlxo 23 1i'c3 1i'xh2+ 24 �g4 "g2+ 25 �f4 g5+ 26 �e3 (26 �fS "h3+ 27 �e4 :fe8+ 28 �d3 "fS mate) 26 . . . :fe8+ 27 �d3 :bd8+ 28 �c2 :e2+ 29 �b3 lLld4+ 30 "xd4 1I'b7+ 3 1 �a4 "a6+ 32 �b4 :b8+ 33 �c3 "a5+ 34 �d3 "d2 mate; (b) 22 "d4 :xb2 23 "xb2 (23 �xh3 lLlxO ! 24 "xb2 "xh2+ 25 �g4 "g2+ 26 �f4 :e8 ! 27 :h l lLlg5 28 :ae l "O+! 29 �xg5 f6+ 30 �h4 g5 mate) 23 . . . lLlf4+ 24 �h l (24 �g3 lLled3 25 1I'b5 "c8 ! or 25 "d2 "d6) 24 . . ...c6 25 1I'b3 lLled3 .26 "d l "g6 27 :g l lLlxf2 mate.

1 44


Of course, I did not calculate all these spectacular variations at the board, but intuition suggested to me that, with White's king so open and his pieces badly placed, a tactical solution would always be found. 22 23

.txe5 �xh3

have to play 28 "g5, and after 28 . . . :xg5 29 hxg5 'ii'xfl Black wins easily.

"xe5

White does not believe in the correctness of White's combination. 23 :fe I was relatively best, when I was intending to reply 23 . . . "h5 with the threat of 24 . . . :b2 ! 23 24

:b6

� gl There is nothing better. After 24 :g l there would have followed 24 . . . "h5+ 25 �g2 :g6+ 26 �fl "h3+ 27 �e2 :e8+, when major loss of material for White is inevitable, while if 24 :fe I :h6+ 25 'ii'xh6 (25 �g2 :xh2+ 26 �g l "h5 with a quick mate) 25 . . ... f5+ 26 �g2 gxh6.

Therefore White resigned. Game 44 Averbakh-Fuchs International Tournament Dresden 1 956

King's Indian Defence 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

24 25

:h6! h4

If 25 f4 "h5 with decisive threats. 25 26 27

:g6+ �h3 �h2

"f5+ "f6!

The final finesse. It was not yet too late to go wrong: after 27 . . ... h5 White would save himself by 28 "f4. But now, to de fend against the mate, my opponent would

c4 ttlc3 d4 e4 .te2 .tg5 d5 a4 "d2

g6 .tg7 ttlf6 d6

0-0 c5 a6 e6 "a5

1 45


:a3 !

One of the new ideas that I tried to put into practice in this variation - firstly, now it is extremely difficult for Black to play . . . b7-b5, and secondly, the rook may be switched, as in the game, to h3 for an attack on the kingside. 10 11 12

exd5

13

0-0

exd5 �bd7 �b6

�f3 The opponent' s plan is clear - he intends to attack the c4 pawn with his knight and queen.

13

Jlg4

Sharp play would have resulted from 1 3 . . . ..,,4 1 4 "'c l ! ( 1 4 as �xc4 1 5 Jlxc4 "xc4 1 6 :a4 "'b3), for example 1 4 . . . �e4 ( l 4 . . . �xc4 1 5 �a2 "xb2 1 6 Jlxc4) 1 5 �xe4 Jlxb2 1 6 �f6+ �h8 ( l 6 . . . �g7 1 7 Jlh6+!) 1 7 "'f4 "xa3 1 8 "'xd6 with complications favourable to White. However, the move played is no better. It would appear that Black's entire strategy is dubious. 14 15

"'f4! "'xf3

16 �e4! Unexpectedly the black queen finds itself in a dangerous position, and in addition the d6 pawn is hanging. If 16 ... �e5 there would have followed 1 7 "'h3 ! �bxc4 1 8 �f6+ Jlxf6 1 9 Jlxf6 "'d2 ! (the only defence; if 1 9 . . . �d7 White gives mate in three moves - 20 "xh7+ �xh7 2 1 %lh3+ �g8 22 %lh8 mate) 20 %le3 ! �d7 2 1 Jlc3 �xe3 22 Jlxd2 �xfl 23 �xfl with a considerable advantage for White. Having decided that nothing good will come of active play, my opponent begins retreating over the entire front, but now White markedly strengthens the placing of his pieces. 16 �c8

Jlxf3 �fd7

Probably B lack should have admitted the faultiness of his plan and played 1 5 . . . �bd7, but instead he persists, allowing White to develop a sudden attack on the king.

17

"'h3 !

"c7

1 46


The attempt to drive the knight from e4 by 1 7 . . . fS would have been unsuccessful because of I S .i.d2 "ikc7 19 ltJg5 and 20 ltJe6. l::te8 18 "ikh4 There is nothing better. If, for example, I S . . . f6, then 1 9 l::th 3 h5 20 .i.xh5 fxg5 2 1 ltJxg5 gxh5 22 ltJe6 "ikb6 23 ltJxg7 �xg7 24 "ikxh5 with a decisive attack. 19

%th3

h5

1 9 . . . ltJf8 does not help: 20 ltJf6+ .i.xf6 2 1 .i.xf6 ltJe7 (2 1 . . . h5 22 .i.xh5) 22 .i.g4 ! h5 23 .i.xh5 ltJf5 24 "ikg5 ltJh7 25 .i.xg6 ! and wins.

A voluntary fork! 22 ... gxf5 is met by 23 1.f6 .i.xf6 24 "ikxf6, and if 24 . . . 'ike7 25 .i.xf7+! "ikxf7 26 l::th S mate. 22

gxh5

This loses quickly. 22 ... ltJh7 was the most tenacious, when 23 1.g4 ltJxg5 24 'ikxg5 was possible, with a continuing attack. 23 24 25 26

20

ltJg3 !

White has no reason to hurry, and so he calmly prepares the sacrifice on h5 . After the immediate 20 .i.xh5 there could have followed 20 . . . l::txe4 ! 2 1 "ikxe4 gxh5 22 l::txh5 ltJf8 and Black holds on. 20 ltJrs Against the attempt to neutralise the opponent's attack by 20 . . . l::txe2 2 1 ltJxe2 .i.xb2 I was intending to reply 22 .i.dS ! .."S 23 l::te 3 . 21

1.xh5!

1.xb2

The acceptance of the sacrifice 2 1 . . .gxh5 could have led to the following finish: 22 ltJxh5 ltJg6 23 ltJf6+! .i.xf6 24 .i.xf6 ltJxh4 25 l::txh4, when mate cannot be avoided. 22 ltJf5!

1.f6 ltJg6 "ikg5 ltJce7 ltJh6+ �rs .i.xb2 Black resigns

Game 45 Uhlmann-Averbakh International Tournament Dresden 1956

Nimzo-Indian Defence 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

d4 c4

ltJc3 e3 ltJge2 a3 cxd5 ltJg3

ltJf6 e6 .i. b4

0-0 d5 .i.e7 exd5 c5!

In my games with Reshevsky and Kotov from the 1 953 Candidates Tourna ment I tried to manage without this move, but both times I had an inferior game.

1 47


Meanwhile, this continuation, which occurred back in the 1 937 Euwe-Alekhine Match, is the simplest way to equalise. 9

dxeS

J.xeS

14

IS 16

10

13

0-0 lLlee2

lLle6 J.e6 J.d6

lLld4

By giving up attempts to exploit the weakness of Black' s isolated pawn, White even ends up with a slightly inferior game. 13

:e8

lLlfS J.xfS

-*.xfS 'it'b6

J.d3

Here Euwe played 1 0 b4, but after I O . . . d4 ! he ran into difficulties. For example, if I I lLla4 there could have followed I I . . . dxe3 ! 1 2 'it'xd8 ( 1 2 lLlxc5? exf2+ 13 �e2 J.g4+) 12 ... exf2+ 13 �e2 -*.g4+ and Black wins. 10 11 12

exd4

1 4 . . . lLlg4 I S h3 lLlxf2 was premature because of 1 6 J.xh7+! (but not 1 6 �xf2 'it'h4 1 7 'it'o f5 ! with an attack) 1 6 . . . �xh7 1 7 :xf2 J.xg3 1 8 'it'd3+ and 1 9 'it'xg3 .

lLlxd4

Black has a lead in development and now begins active play. 17 18

b3 J.h3

g6

Uhlmann intends to play his bishop to g2, to attack the d5 pawn. 18 19 20 21 22 23

'it'd3 g3 J.e3 :ac1 :fd l

lLle4 J.e7 J.f6 :e7 :ae8 'ii'd 6

1 48


The initiative is completely in Black's possession. White has to defend weak nesses on both wings. 24

.i.g2 !

The incautious 24 b4 would be met by 24 . . . 1L1xg3 ! 2S hxg3 ':xe3 26 fxe3 "xg3+ 27 .i.g2 .i.gS with a powerful attack. 24

hS!

Continuing to intensify the pressure on the kingside. After 24 . . ...xa3 I did not care for 2S .i.xe4 ! dxe4 (2S . . . ':xe4 26 ':cS ':d8 27 :XdS :xdS 28 "xe4 "xb3 29 ':b 1 "c4 30 "e8+ r:iil g 7 3 1 ':xb7) 26 "c4 "d6 27 dS when White seizes the initiative. 2S 26 27

"bS "as g4

33 "xe2 lLlxh3+ 34 .i.xh3 ':xh3 3 S "eS was possible, with drawing chances. 31

:xg2+!

Of course, not 3 1 . . ...g3 32 "xdS lLlxh3+ 3 3 �h l lLlf2+ 34 :xf2 ':xf2 3S ': fl or 33 . . . 1L1gS 34 ':c8+ �h7 3 S ':xf7+. 32 33 34

r:iilxg2 �hl �gl

"g3+ "xh3+

a6 h4

If 27 .i.f4, then 27 . . . ..e6 28 .i.eS h3 . 27 28 29

.i.xgS h3

.i.gS! lLlxgS

29 "xdS would have lost to 29 . . . lLlh3+ 30 �fl (30 r:iil h l 1L1xf2+ 3 1 �g l "xdS and 32 . . . 1L1xd l ) 30 . . . ':e2 ! 29 30

:0

':e2 ':8e3 !

34

"xe3+!

An important finesse. It seems incredible, but now Black manages to win both enemy rooks! 3S

�h l

If 3 S ':f2, then 3 s . . . 1L1h3+ 3 6 �h l "xc 1 + 3 7 �g2 "g 1 + and wins. 3S 36 37

31

he3

Uhlmann risks accepting the sacrifice, assuming that Black' s attack will lead only to a draw. He could have defended suc cessfully only by declining the sacrifice with 3 1 ':c3 . Then 3 1 . . . b6 ! 32 "xa6 ':xc3

�gl �hl

"h3+ "g3+

lLlfJ

1 49


"'d8+

3 S :'cS+ does not save the rook: 3 S . . . �g7 39 :'xfl "'xfl+ 40 �h2 "'g3+ 4 1 �h 1 "'h3+ 42 �g 1 "'xg4+ and 43 . . ....xcS. 38 39 40 41

�g7 "'xt3+ "'f4+ "'xg4+

to be in White's favour. Since then this type of sacrifice has to a certain extent become a standard idea. After this brief introduction the follow ing game will be more understandable. Game 46 Vasyukov-Averbakh Moscow Championship 195 7

Sicilian Defence 1 1

3 4 5 6

e4 lDt3 d4 lDxd4 lDc3 .i.g5

c5 lDc6 cxd4 lDf6 d6 a6

I frequently used to employ this defence against the Rauzer Attack 6 .i.g5, trying to manage, initially, without the move . . . e7-e6, and aiming for the rapid development of play on the queenside. Here the game was adjourned, and White resigned without resuming. After

7 8

"'dl

9

.i.xf6

�

.i.d7 b5

42 �t2 "'f4+ 43 �e2 "'xc 1 44 "'xd5 "'c2+ 45 �e3 "'c6 46 "'e5+ "'f6 Black realises his advantage without difficulty. Which is stronger, a minor piece or three pawns? Experience shows that in the middlegame the piece is usually stronger than the pawns. But in the endgame, on the contrary, the pawns, if they are connected, can easily be superior to either a knight or a bishop, although, of course, the outcome depends on the concrete situation. Thus, for example, in the 1 954 USSR-Argentina Match, Bronstein won an excellent game against Najdorf, after sacrificing a piece for three pawns. Here is how it began: I e4 c5 2 lDfl d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lDxd4 lDf6 5 lDc3 a6 6 .i.g5 e6 7 "'fl lDbd7 S 0-0-0 "'c7 9 ...g3 b5 1 0 .i.xb5 axb5 1 1 lDdxb5 "'bS 1 2 lDxd6+ .i.xd6 1 3 "'xd6 "'xd6 1 4 :'xd6 h6 1 5 .i.d2 .i.b7 1 6 fl and this ending proved

Falling in with the opponent' s plan, which is in fact to force White to capture on f6. However, after 9 f4 he would have had to reckon with 9 . . . b4 1 0 .i.xf6 bxc3 1 1 "'xc3 gxf6 1 2 lDxc6 "'c7 1 3 lDb4 "'xc3 1 4 bxc3 as 1 5 lDd5 :'bS ! 1 6 .i.d3 .i.g7, threatening 1 7 . . . e6.

1 50


�bl

gx!6 e6

Yevgeny Vasyukov is a player of com binational style, and so I quite deliberately provoked him into sacrificing a piece. Besides, I wanted to test in practice the resulting ending.

- to exchange rooks, then activate his king, and begin advancing his pawns. What can Black do to oppose this plan? 16

:a7!

Of course, not 1 6 . . . l:thd8 and 1 7 . . . �e8, which would have been playing into White's hands. Black must succeed in creating play on the queenside and in the centre. At the same time he sets his opponent a positional trap - the invasion of the knight at d6 looks very tempting. 17 18 19

�bS :6d2 b3

:b7 :hb8

1 9 c4 was more accurate, but White did not yet realise that, after reaching d6, the knight might end up in a dangerous position. 19 20 11 12 13 14 15

�xbS �dxbS �xd6+ Wxd6 :xd6

axbS Wb8 �xd6 Wxd6 �e7

The absence of the opponent's dark square bishop allows Black to deploy his king comfortably at e7. 16

�d6

�aS :c7

White has achieved his aim - his knight has been established at d6. But what of it? The capture on f7, which he had planned in advance, would have led to difficulties after 2 1 �xf7 �c4 22 l:td4 es 23 :4d3 �bs . 21

�al

�c6

:hd l

Thus the game has gone by force into a complicated ending, where White has three pawns for a bishop. His strategy is simple

22 fJ A serious mistake, which leaves White in a critical position. 22 c4 was still correct, and if 22 . . . l:td7 23 cS . Then in reply to 23 . . . l:tbd8 White has the brilliant

151


resource 24 I:tc l ! , e.g. 24 . . . .i.xe4? 25 l£lxe4 I:txd2 26 l£lxd2 :xd2 27 c6 and if 27 . . . �d8 or 27 ... l:td8 - 28 b4, winning the knight, while 24 . . . l£lb7 is very strongly met by 25 I:tdc2, when the knight is immune. Evidently I would have had to answer 22 c4 with 22 . . . l£lb7, with an unclear game. 22 23

I:td7! c:4

Too late, although it does set a clever trap. If 23 . . . l:txb3 there would have followed 24 l£lc8+! �d8 25 I:txd7+ .i.xd7 26 axb3 . However, Black has something better. 23

30 31 32 33 34

a4 b4 a5 �b3 b5+

l£lxe4 f5 �c:6 h5 �c:5

Black' s active king and knight in com bination with his passed pawn in the centre enable him to combat successfully the op ponent's outwardly dangerous pawn trio. Thus, for example, if 35 a6 there would have followed 35 . . . �b6 36 �b4 h4 37 h3 (no better is 37 c5+ l£lxc5 38 a7 l£la6+ 39 bxa6 �xa7 etc.) 37 . . . f4 38 c5+ l£lxc5 39 a7 �xa7 40 �xc5 e4 4 1 �d4 e3 etc.

:bd8

It transpires that after 24 c5 l£lb7 White loses a pawn, although this was probably the most tenacious defence. 24

e5

Vasyukov aims at all costs to maintain the pride of his position - his three connected passed pawns, but this weakens his central pawns. 24 25 26 27 28

l£le4 :xd7+ :xd7+ fxe4

fxe5 .i.xe4 :xd7 �xd7 35 36 37 38

�c:2

l£ld6 l£lb7 b6 a6 �xb6 �xb7 axb7 White resigns

Game 47 Averbakh-Polugayevsky 25th USSR Championship Riga 1958

Modem Defence

28

l£lb7 !

Here too this manoeuvre leads to the win of another pawn, and with it the game. 29

�b2

l£ld6

1 2 3

c:4 d4 e4

g6 .i.g7 d6

By choosing this move order, Black retains the option of developing his king's knight at f6 or e7, or even at h6.

1 52


ltJc3

ltJc6

�e3 dS

eS

1 2 ltJb5 �d8 1 3 ltJxa7 �xfS 1 4 ltJb5 �e4 1 5 fl ltJxfl+ 1 6 ltJxfl �xfl 1 7 :g l in the game Ivkov-Notaros (Novi Sad 1 976).

6 ltJge2 can be met by 6 . . . exd4 7 ltJxd4 ltJge7 8 �e2 0-0 9 0-0 f5, although the immediate 6 . . . f5 is also probably quite good. 6

ltJce7

After 6 . . . ltJd4 7 ltJge2 ltJxe2 8 �xe2 �7 White has the same move 9 g4 ! as in the game.

�h3! An important move, the aim of which is to exchange the light-square bishops. 10 ltJf6 10

11

7

g4 !

This aggressive advance has the aim of restricting the opponent' s activity. If 7 fl there could have followed 7 . . . fS, or alter natively 7 . . . �h6, exchanging the dark square bishops. 7

fS

To 7 . . . h5 I was intending to reply 8 g5 fS 9 fl . Not wishing to reconcile himself to the cramping of his pieces on the kingside, Polugayevsky nevertheless makes the thematic advance of his f-pawn, even though it involves losing the right to castle. 8

gxfS

Here 8 g5 is no longer effective: after 8 . . f4 9 �d2 h6 ! Black frees himself. .

8 9

gxfS

�f8 1i'hS+ 9 . ltJg6, trying to avoid the loss of castling, led to a favourable ending for White after 1 0 exf5 1i'h4 1 1 1i'xh4 ltJxh4 .

.

"0

a6

Black probably has better chances of equalising after 1 1 .. .f4 1 2 �d2 h5, as in the game Portisch-Ree (Amsterdam 1 967), but my opponent persists in trying to avoid the exchange of bishops. With the move played he plans to switch his queen to the kingside, by freeing it from having to defend the c7 pawn. 12 13 14

exfS

ltJge2 1i'xhS

1i'e8 "hS ltJ xh S

I S3


Polugayevsky had aimed for this position when he played 1 1 . . . a6, thinking that he would equalise. However, White has an elegant way to retain a positional advantage. First he forces Black to take on fS with his knight. lDxfS 15 .t g5 ! If I S ... .tf6 I was intending 1 6 .txf6 lDxf6 1 7 f4 ! exf4 1 8 :fl , retaining my extra pawn.

22

c6

When in a cramped position, one should not create unnecessary weaknesses. This attempt to open lines, in order to gain counterplay, merely hastens Black's defeat. It was probably better to stick to waiting tactics with 22 . . . :g8 23 lDef6 :h8, keeping the threat of . . . c7-c6 10 reserve. 23

lDg3 ! This knight move, which had to be foreseen earlier, is the whole point. Now Black faces a difficult choice. If 1 6 . . . lDfxg3 , then 1 7 hxg3 .txh3 1 8 :xh3 lDf6 1 9 �e2 or 1 9 .txf6 .txf6 20 lDe4, while after 1 6 . . . lDhxg3 there would have followed 1 7 fxg3 ! lDd4 1 8 0-0+ �e8 1 9 .txc8 :xc8 2 0 lDe4, in each case with advantage to White. 16

16 17

.txc8

lDd4 :xc8

Black also has a difficult position after 1 7 . . . lDxg3 1 8 fxg3 lDf3+ 1 9 �e2 lDxgS 20 :afl + �e7 2 1 h4 ! lDfl 22 .te6 lDd8 23 .tfS, but this would evidently have been the lesser evil. 18 lDxh5 lDf3+ 19 20 21 22

�e2 :agl h4 lDe4

lDxg5 .th6

lDf1

�d3

cxd5

23 . . . bS would have merely led to the activation of the white king: 24 lDhg3 ! bxc4+ 2S �xc4 cxdS+ 26 �xdS :c2 27 lDfS, and if 27 . . . :xb2 28 :b l . 24

cxd5

.tr4

The last chance of a defence was 24 . . . :g8, and if 2S lDhg3 :g4. Now, however, there is no defence against the transference of the knight to fS . 25 lDg7 :a8 There is nothing better. If 2S ... :g8 26 lDfS l:txg l 27 :xg l :d8 (defending against the threat of 28 :g8+! �xg8 29 lDe7+ �f8 30 lDxc8, winning the d6 pawn) 28 lDf6 lDh6 29 lDxh6 .i.xh6 30 :g8+ �e7 3 1 :xd8 �xd8 32 lDxh7 and White wins . :d8 26 lDfS 27

:g4!

The concluding finesse. By the threat of 28 :xf4 White prevents 27 ... lDh6, and the threat of doubling rooks on the g-file decides the outcome in a few moves.

1 54


youth, almost still a child, showed himself to be a fully developed chess fighter, demonstrating amazing composure, precise calculation, and truly devilish ingenuity. I was especially staggered not so much by his very extensive opening knowledge, as by his striving everywhere to seek new paths. Fischer's play displayed not only his enormous talent, but also hinted at the enormous amount of work he had done on the study of chess. However, judge for yourself: 27 28 lbg8+ 29 :gl+ 30 :g7 Black resigns: if

:g8 �xg8 �h8

30 . . . �h6 there follows 3 1 �f6 with inevitable mate.

Game 48 Averbakh-Fischer Interzonal Tournament Portoroz 1 958

King's Indian Defence 1

I played against Robert James Fischer on only one, single occasion. This occurred at the very start of the brilliant career of the future eleventh Champion of the World. Fischer was just 14 years old when he won the USA adult Championship, a whole point ahead of the second-placed Samuel Reshevsky, and gained the right to take part in the World Championship Interzonal Tournament. This tournament took place in the Autumn of the following year in one of the Yugoslav seaside resorts. It was there that I saw Fischer for the first time. He turned out to be a skinny teenager in jeans and sweater, rather shy and even unsociable in his dealings with others. Bobby, as the participants and journalists quickly began calling him, gazed without the slightest interest at the colourful countryside of the sunny Adriatic. He was not attracted either by the golden sand, or the deep blue sea. All his thoughts were concentrated on chess. Chess comprised his inner life, and he was completely absorbed in it. And at the chess board this

1

3 4 5 6

d4 c4

�c3 e4 .i.e2 .i.g5

�f6 g6 .i.g7 d6 0-0

Without particular thought I decided to employ my variation against the young American. It now seems to me that this decision was not altogether correct. By that time, when the Interzonal Tournament took place, the variation had become firmly established in tournament play. Fischer undoubtedly knew it, and had prepared specially for it. 6 7 8

.i.e3 d5

h6 c5

Only in the mid- 1 970s was it estab lished that after 8 e5 ! White can count on an opening advantage. For example: 8 . . . �fd7 9 exd6 exd6 1 0 �f3, or 8 . dxe5 9 dxe5 "'xd 1 + 1 0 :xd I �g4 I I .i.xc5 �xe5 1 2 �d5 . The move made by me in the game does not promise White much. .

.

1 55


.*.xfl lLlbd7 1 5 �f4 lLlb6 1 6 'it'd3 lLlfd7 ! gave Black good play. 13 14

8 9

e6 h3

Before developing his knight at fl , White has to defend against the threat of 9 . . . lLlg4. 9 10 11

lLlbd7 lLld2

exdS

exdS :e8

lLlo

�f5

14

a6!

My opponent accepts the challenge, although the less sharp 1 4 . . . g5, preparing a retreat for the bishop, was also possible. 15

h4

Throwing caution to the winds. Perhaps 1 5 a4 would have been less committing, and if 1 5 . . . b5 1 6 axb5 axb5 1 7 :xa8 "'xa8 1 8 lLlxb5, also with great complications. 15

bS

Now commences forcing play, as a result of which White succeeds in winning a piece, but Black acquires dangerous threats.

12

g4

I reckoned that after 1 2 0-0 lLle4 1 3 lLlxe4 �xe4 White has not even a hint of an advantage, and I devised an extremely double-edged plan involving a pawn attack on the kings ide, using up a considerable amount of time in the process. 12 13

�e4 :gl

Much later in a game with Geller I played 1 3 0-0 here, but 1 3 . . . �xfl 1 4

16 17 18 19 20 21

gS gxf6 lLlxe4 fxg7 �f1 :bl

b4 bxc3 ':xe4 "'xh4 cxb2

In this wild position, where we each had about ten minutes left for our remaining moves, I suddenly heard almost in a whisper: 'Draw? ' . I would not like playing such a position in time trouble either with White, or with Black; besides, my tournament position was quite good,

1 56

Averbakh IS Selected Games

and there was no point in taking a risk. Therefore I accepted the offer. As is well known, later Fischer himself very rarely used to offer draws. And when on one occasion he was asked about this game, he replied: 'Averbakh was afraid of losing to a child, and I was afraid of losing to a grandmaster. And so we agreed a draw! '

subtleties. My opponent, who was evid ently aware of this, deviates from the theoretical 9 . . . d5 in favour of a less well studied continuation.

9 10

To be fair, I should mention that after 2 1 . . . •h3+ 22 :81 .h l + 23 1%g l .h3+ the game could have ended in a draw by perpetual check. Game 49 Averbakh-Larsen Interzonal Tournament Portoroz 1958

�bl

.i.e6 "'a5

But here Larsen shows himself to be not very well versed in the chosen variation . The move played is a strategic mistake, condemning Black to a difficult defence. Geller' s recommendation of 1 0 . . . ttJe5 was better. 11 12 13 14 15

ttJxe6 .i.c4 ttJd5! ttJxf6+ 1%xd2

fxe6 ttJd8 .xd2 .i.xf6

Sicilian Defence 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

e4 ttJa d4 ttJxd4 ttJc3 .i.e3 a .d2

c5 d6 cxd4 ttJf6 g6 .i.g7

0-0 ttJc6

�

In the 1 950s I myself happily played the black side of the Dragon Variation, and I think that I had a fair understanding of its

Thus the game has gone by force into an ending in which, because of his weak

1 57


pawn at e6, it is difficult for Black to coordinate his forces. 15

26 27

jtd5 jtc1

28

g4!

�c4 b5

jte5

Black intends by 1 6 . . . jtf4 to exchange bishops, in order to ease his defence. However, White easily prevents this, and it turns out that Black has merely wasted precious time. 1 5 . . . �g7 followed by . . . e6e5 was probably stronger, aiming to bring the knight into play as quickly as possible. 16 17 18

l:d3 ! jtb3 jtd2

l:c8 b6

White's plan is to advance his kingside pawns, also exploiting the unfortunate position of the black bishop. � g7 18 19 20 21

g3 h4 lin

jtf6 h6

The immediate 2 1 f4 came into consideration, but White is not in a hurry. 21 22

f4

l:c7 h5

By opening lines, White destroys the black king's fortress. 28

hxg4

After 28 . . . jtxh4 29 g5 the bishop is trapped. 29 30 31 32 33

l:g3 l:xg4 l:xg6+ jtg8+ jte6

l:h8 l:xh4 �h7 �h8 �b6

After 33 . . . �h7 the simplest way to win was 34 l:gg l followed by 35 l:h l .

23

l:df3 !

Threatening 24 e5 . To defend against it, Black aims for play on the queens ide, but this only leads to White's initiative on the kingside developing into a powerful attack. 23 24 25

c3 f5

�c6 e5 �a5

34 35

l:h6+! jtxh6

l:xh6 l:c4

There is no other defence against 36 l:h l .

1 58

Averbakh 's Selected Games 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43

lLlxc4 i.xc4 lLla5 b3 i.e3 lLlc6 a5 l:tgl �h7 a3 a4 �c2 lLld8 b4 l:td l Black resigns

However, 7 lLln came into consideration, and if 7 . . . i.b4 8 i.d3 lLlf6 9 0-0 with rapid development. 7

d6

Game 50 Korchnoi-Averbakh 26th USSR Championship Tbilisi 1 959

Sicilian Defence 1 2 3 4

e4 lLlo d4 lLlxd4

c5 lLlc6 cxd4 .c7

I decided to switch to normal lines of the Scheveningen Variation, although here Black had a wide choice of continuations, such as 7 . . . b5 or 7 . . lLlxd4 8 "'xd4 b5 etc. However, here my opponent departs from the routine, and adopts what seems to me to be a fairly rational piece set-up, aiming for an attack against Black's kingside. .

8 9 10

lLlb3 i.d3 "'0

lLlf6 i.e7

An old continuation, that is occasion ally employed in modem tournaments. Knowing Korchnoi to be a player who aims for the maximum, I invite him to try and refute this move, but he prefers not to deviate from the familiar paths. 5 lLlc3 e6 f4 6 a6 If 6 . . . i.b4 there would have followed 7 lLldb5 and 8 a3 . 7 a3 Not allowing the bishop to go to b4.

10

lLld7

If 1 0 0-0 I was afraid of 1 1 g4, and for the moment I decided not to be in a hurry to castle. ...

1 59


0-0 �d2 tLlxd4

�f6 tLld4 �xd4+ tLlc5

�hl A poor move, which is essentially a loss of time. I should have castled, and only after I S .h3 played I S . . . tLlcS .

18 19

�b6

f5 White immediately launches an attack on the kingside. If 1 9 ... f6 there could have followed 20 tLlf4 eS 2 1 tLlg6 ! , when the strength of his attack is demonstrated by the following variations: 15

:ac t !

This simple move refutes Black's idea, since, with him being behind in develop ment, the exchange on d3 favours White. 15

0-0

I 5 . . . �d7 did not appeal to me because of the same move 1 6 b4, for example 1 6 . . . tLla4 1 7 tLle2 �b2 1 8 :b l , and it is not possible to capture on a3, as there follows 1 9 :b3 �b2 20 c3 . However, 1 8 . . . .i.f6 was possible, and if 1 9 c4 tLlb2. At any event this was the lesser evil, as after the move in the game Black has no counterplay at all. 16 17 18

b4 cxd3 tLle2

tLlxd3 .d8

When I chose 1 4 . . . tLlcS I was pro posing in this position to retreat my bishop to f6, but it was only now that I noticed that after 1 9 tLlg3 .i.d7 ( 1 9 . . . g6 20 fS) 20 tLlhS .i.c6 2 1 .g3 ! Black has serious problems. However, the move played in the game is no better.

(a) 2 1 . . .hxg6 22 fxg6 :e8 23 .hS �e6 24 .h7+ �f8 25 �h6 .e7 26 .h8+ �g8 27 �xg7+ .xg7 28 :xf6+; (b) 2 1 . . .:e8 22 .h5 �e6 23 :0 �fl 24 .xh7+!

Averbakh's Selected Games

One Hundred Selected Games

Botvinnik: 100 Selected Games

Taimanov's Selected Games

Taimanov's Selected Games

William Steinitz: Selected Games

Smyslov's 125 Selected Games

One Hundred Selected Games

Botvinnik: One Hundred Selected Games

Selected Chess Games of Mikhail Tal

Selected Chess Games of Mikhail Tal

Selected Chess Games of Mikhail Tal

Rubinstein's Chess Masterpieces - 100 Selected Games

Rubinstein's Chess Masterpieces: 100 Selected Games

Victor Bologan: Selected Games 1985-2004

Timman's Selected Games: Chess the Adventurous Way

Games

Games

Games

Games

Games

Dating Games (Dating Games #1)

Cowboy Games

Skin Games

Mind Games

Mind Games

Night Games

Shadow Games

Averbakh's Selected Games

One Hundred Selected Games

Botvinnik: 100 Selected Games

Taimanov's Selected Games

Taimanov's Selected Games

William Steinitz: Selected Games

Smyslov's 125 Selected Games

One Hundred Selected Games

Botvinnik: One Hundred Selected Games

Selected Chess Games of Mikhail Tal

Selected Chess Games of Mikhail Tal

Selected Chess Games of Mikhail Tal

Rubinstein's Chess Masterpieces - 100 Selected Games

Rubinstein's Chess Masterpieces: 100 Selected Games

Victor Bologan: Selected Games 1985-2004

Timman's Selected Games: Chess the Adventurous Way

Games

Games

Games

Games

Games

Dating Games (Dating Games #1)

Cowboy Games

Skin Games

Mind Games

Mind Games

Night Games

Shadow Games

Recommend Documents