The Magic of Chess Tactics © Copyright 2002 Claus Dieter Meyer & Karsten MUller All Rights Reserved ISBN: 1-888690-14-3
Published by: Russell Enterprises, Inc. P.O. Box 30 Milford, CT 06460 USA http://www.chesscafe.com
[email protected] Cover design by OutExcel! Corp., Al Lawrence, President; Jami Anson, Art Director.
Printed in the United States of America
TM
scanned by tekendama w/tutelage from mmw; email:
[email protected]; programs used: VueScan, Photoshop, ScanKromsator, Adobe Acrobat
Table of Contents Foreword by Alexei Shirov
3
Introduction
4
Acknowledgements
6
Code System
7
Photo Credits
7
About the Authors
8
A) Middlegame Tactics AI) Tactical Motifs AlA) Pin and Cross-Pin
10
Exercises/Solutions E l.l-I .4
14
A IB) Knight Moves
18
Exercises/Solutions E2.1-2.2
18
AI C) Trapped Pieces/ Loose Pieces Drop Off
19
Exercises/Solutions E3.1-3.2
21
A2) Sacrificial Attacks
22
Exercises/Solutions E4.1-4.7
60
A3) Magic by the Magician
63
Exercises/Solutions E5.1-5.6
66
A4) "ltJ + .£l Duo
69
Exercises/Solutions E6.1-6.2
74
A5) Attack and Defense
76
A6) Co nj unctio n of Tactical Met hods
133
Exe rcises/So lutions E7.1-7.5
144
A7) The Bishop Pair
147
A8) Pawn Levers and Breakthrough s
150
Exercises/So lutio ns E8. 1-8 .2
153
A9) Comb inatio ns
155
Exercises/So lutions E9. 1-9.8
159
B) Tactica l Endga mes B I) Opposite-Co lored Bishops B IA) With Rooks and /or Queens
164
B I B) Pure Oppos ite-Co lored Bishop Endings
174
B2) Same-Co lored Bishops
179
B3) Fortr ess or Not ?
192
Exerc ises/So lutions E I0.1- 10.2
20 7
B4) The Bishop Pair
228
Exercises/So lutions E 11.1-11. 3
231
B5) Rook + Minor Piece Endings B5A) Rook Endings
233
B5B) Rook + Min or Piece Endings
243
Exe rcises/So lutions E 12.1-12.2
247
B6) Thr ee Cunning Quee n Endings
249
Bibliograph y
252
Index of Players
254
Foreword Still the World of Magic When I was asked by my good friend OM Karsten MUller to write a foreword for his and C.D. Meyer's new book about tactics, I thought that nothing would be easier. Combinations and tactics, the books of Alexander Koblentz, the games of Mikhail Tal - all these were synonymous with my first steps in chess. So, I start reading through the present book, which has almost same name as the Magic World of Combinations by Koblentz (issued more than two decades ago in the Soviet Union). And ... what a surprise! It is no longer a matter of simple tactical motifs and combinations but in fact deep analysis and refutations of concepts that seemed to be axiomatic by definition of tactical play. Suddenly the reader is forced to look at everything with a critical eye, evaluating which tactics are erroneous and which are good.
But times have changed. The authors take us from the world of magical dreams to cruel reality with impeccable analysis by humans and computers. When I started playing chess, I believed in combinations and highly complicated tactical play. Time went by, I became a strong grandmaster and some of my views on chess were changed by down-to-earth players. Computers got involved and refuted other ideas. However, in the heat of battle I was able to sometimes find things that neither computers nor humans could refute. I am proud ofhaving kept faith in my childhood ideals of complications and tactics. And now having the manuscript of this new book in front of me I ask myself - do genuine tactics really exist? The answer is Yes! You need to seek perfection. Perfection is brilliancy. My move against Topalov (sorry for being immodest) is brilliant because it's the best move in the position and in fact it is the only move to win. And when in this book I see the analysis of the game Alekhine-van Mindeno (which completely shocked me at first) I realise that '§h2! is more brilliant than '§h5 because '§h2! lets White continue his attack while '§h5 even loses against Black's best defense. ~h3!
I have come to realise that there are basically two types of chess tactics. First, simple kinds of combinations you need to know when you start to play chess. I still believe they are the basis of everything. Things that computers see in a half-second. But the book is not about them. For those simple tactics, old Koblentz books are more than enough. This book is about complicated chess tactics, the kind you sometimes need hours of analysis just to discover the truth ofthe position. It's hard to see and calculate perfectly on the board; one needs intuition, imagination and precision. It's not easy to develop these qualities but I believe that the present book, full of examples and high quality analyses, will help you achieve that objective. Welcome to the magical world of tactics ! Alexei Shirov, Riga October 2002 3
Introduction "Chess is 99 perc ent tactics." This opinion of the German ches s master Richard Teichmann (1868- 1925) is certainly conte stabl e, but every chess friend know s that perm anent tactical vigilance at any stage of the game is of decisive importance. But what does the term ' tactics ' actually mean '! In a modern dictionary of chess you may read a definition like this: "Tactics is the theory of the reali sation of spec ific aims by short term operations based on concrete and clear vari ations ." (quoted from Mey ers Schach Lexikon by Otto Borik and others) The English Grandmaster Dr. John Nunn defines it more comprehensively thereby emphasizing the calculation of varia tions in endgames: "Tactics is something far more general than such methods like forks, pins, discovered attacks, skew ers etc., which are more properl y described as combinations, would indicate. We can say, that an idea is tactical if it is nece ssary to calculate specific variations to ensure its corre ctnes s. With this definition, it is clear that tactics can occur at any stage of the game. Indeed , simplified end games are especially prone to be tactical , since in such positions it is possible to calculate every worthwhile variation and hence to be absolutel y cert ain whi ch is the best move." (from Nunri 's Tacti cal Chess Endings) . But, in chess, matters are rarely simple and cIearcut. In practice tactic s often exist in close conjunction with technique and then these elements cannot do without each other. To determine which element is prevalent at one particular moment is rarely possible. On the other hand it is difficult to define the term ' technique' in chess as it tends to contain both strategical and tacticalelements. Let's start with two defmitions:'T echnique is the knowledge and experience that enables a player to achieve a win mechanically and without undue exertion. The possession of technique is one of the fundamental differences between the expert and the amateur." (from An illustrated Dictionary of Chess by Edward R. Brace). 'Technique is the awareness ofthe functions ofthe pieces and of their peculiar resources ... and methods of exploiting these things in recurring situations." (from Technique in Chess by Gerald Abrahams) Generally the subj ect of technique con sists of methodical treatments and lines of direction in order to exploit material/positional advantages or to prevent them . The Germ an master Kurt Richter ( 1900- 1969) once wrote: "Technique in ches s is the art of what can be learned," which seems to be a good attempt to define the term . Furthermore, if there is an area in chess where concrete knowl edge and experien ce are most significant, then it is certainl y the endgame. Many examples in this book are of both a tactic al and technic al nature and what dominates at any particul ar moment may be a matter of opinion, but plenty of 4
tactica l ideas and combinatio ns - "the heart ofchess" (A. Alek hine) - always make things lively. " It is simply not sufficient only to play - yo u have to train yo urse lf always to deve lop qua lities and abilities which help yo u to come to decisions dur ing the course of a game." (fro m Moderne Scha chtakt ik by Ma rk Dvoretsky). By mea ns of thorou gh ana lysis we learn to esti mate positions integrally and more often we will find the moves that the postion demands. In addition we de velop an "instinc t or feeling for positio n and danger" (which the Ge rmans call Posi tionsgefiihiy. The more comp lica ted the position , the grea ter the importance of co mbining this " instinct" and analytica l sk ills. The grea t Eman uel Lasker wrote: "For some roman tic enthusiasts the game of ches s has been pro moted to a science or an art. In fact chess does not stand that high. Its subs tantial characteri stic is that which the human nature takes most de light in it: the fight." (fro m Gesunder Menschenverstand im Scha ch) There is still an awful lot to discover and the borders be twe en kno wl ed ge, expe rience, calculation and int uition are fluid. But in over-th e-board-pl ay, the hor izon is not so wide; her e nervo us energy is requi red and the e lements of figh t with a ll its peculiarities dominate. Ofte n a player has to trus t his intuitio n, no matter the price . And in a sharp, com plex position, whe n the variations grow hazy or the arithmetic fails, the adve nt ure starts. In this book, the authors present a manifo ld co llec tion of tactical discourses on the middle- and endgame. It shows such a dra matic sharpening, but also hidden resources and astonishing new turns. Last but not least this work is abo ut chess erro rs, their detection and refutation, since people learn best from mistak es. At the critical points the readers may sharpen thei r tactical vision , test their abil ity to calculate concrete variations and to evaluate positions. Be sides all this it 's also a wonde rful thing to take time and j ust play over and enjoy the exa mples. Primari ly this book is aimed at aspi ring players from club to master level who seriously wan t to improve the ir chess understanding. Here the readers wi ll not find a logical progre ssio n from the begi nning to the end; the examples have been se lected for entertai nment and , above all, for instruct ional and training va lue. Although we have gro uped the games and fragmen ts in cha pters, sometimes the arrangement see ms arbitrary beca use there is a cons iderab le varie ty within the examples. Short exe rcises - easy and diffic ult - are added to help the readers to improv e analytical abilities.
The Magic ofChess Tactics is base d on ana lysis , articles and traini ng sessions of the German che ss trai ner and journalist FM Claus Diet er Meyer (Bremen). Sev era l positio ns were analysed dur ing the period 1989 to 1998, when he worked at the Hamburg training base where (then future grandmas ter) Karsten Muller, FM Stefan 5
Sieve rs and other yo ung Candidate Masters regul arly participated . GM Muller also acts now as co-a uthor of this book with some origi nal contri butio ns.
Combinatio ns ( 1980- 1993) and Tactical Disco urses ( 1993- 1998) were two rubric s of C D. Meyer publ ished in the Germ an Schoch Magazin 64. At that time he was co nsta ntly on the lookout for fres h material appropriate for both journa listic and training purpo ses. However when detailed analytical wor k had to be done , this was ju st the very thing for the ambitiou s Hamburg training group. And so some ofthe extraord inarily dense and difficult material in this book like Kunnemann vs N N and the Never-Ending StOlY has its origin in the very productive Hamburg period. Many articles were published in Scho ch Magazin 64 and Chess Base Magazine, but a great deal of the material, mostly taken from German Bund esliga praxis, is new. The old remarks have been thoroughl y revised, improved and tra nslated into Eng lish. Due to the large amo unt of origi nal ana lysis , eag le-eye d readers may find mistakes, for which we apologise in adva nce. As the contrast betw een practice and ana lysis som et imes is strikin g, we would like to remind the readers of the word s of Mikhail Tal, the unforgotten chess magic ian from Riga ( 1936- 1992): "Years of analysis and a few minut es in a practical game - they are abso lute ly not one and the same ." The authors hope , that fans of tact ics wi ll dive into and enjoy The Magi c, and, last but not least, learn a lot. Claus Dieter Meyer and Karsten MUli er Bremen/Ham burg October 2002
Acknowledgements We wish to thank many peopl e for the analytica l support and some or igina l contributio ns, espec ially the Hamburg trai ning gro up and seve ral chess colleag ues of th e SV Werder Bun desl iga team . Chess Base deserves specia l thanks for develop ing the program s that made this book possible and allowi ng us to use photos from their archives . Thanks also to Alexei Shirov for his Foreword and Edward Winter for his kind permission to use photos fro m his exc ellent gallery at ChessCafe.com. Ingol f Stein scanned several photos and caricatures. Finally we thank the publisher Hanon Russell for his friendly att itude tow ards the whole proj ect.
6
Code System + # x ! !! 'I
') '1
I? ' /1
+± ~
-+ +' +'
1-0 Y2-Yi 0-1 Ch 01 zt simul mem CBM COM KM
check checkmate ca pture good move excellent or beautiful move bad move blund er interesting move dubi ou s move White has a decisi ve advanta ge White has the upper hand White stands slightly better the position is equ al or drawn Black has a decisive advanta ge Black has the upper hand Black stands slightly bett er the game end s in a win for Whit e the game end s in a draw the game end s in a win for Bla ck championship chess olympiad zonal tournament simultan eous displ ay memori al tournament ChessBase Magazine Claus Dieter Meyer Karsten MUlier
Photo Credits Chess llase : Vlastimil Babul a (12) and Alexei Shirov (165)
Edward Wint er Collec tion: Wilh elm Stein itz (35) , Mikhail Tal (63 ), Rudolf Spielmann (76), A .A .Lilienthal (86) , Bobb y Fischer (92), Anthony Miles ( 131) and Tigran Petro sian (153)
C D. Meyer: Zbynek Hracek (99), Rainer Knaak (142) , Alexa nder Khalifm an (160), Loek van Wely ( 183) , Jan Timman (204) , Sven Joach im (237), Gerl efM eins (241) , the caricatures (page 8) by an unkn own art ist on the Moscow Arb at and by Al fred Hennsdorfer (210 , 227 ).
7
Claus Dieter Meyer
Es irrt der Mensch, solang er strebt. (Man will err while yet he strives.) Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, Faust1 (1808)
About the Authors Claus Dieter Meyer was born August I, 1946 in Bremen, Germany. Formerly an insurance broker by trade, then a chess-journalist and FIDE-Master (1983), he is now well known in Germany as analyst and chess trainer. C.D. Meyer is the author of 1m Spiegel der Analyse (1987) and Die Jahrhundert-Meisterschaft im Schach (200 I, with Robert Hubner and others) and has also translated several chess books into German from English. He is the official chess trainer of SV Werder Bremen and long-time captain of Werder's Bundesliga chess team. Karsten MUller was born November 23, 1970 in Hamburg, Germany. He earned the grandmaster title in 1998 and is the co-author with Frank Lamprecht of the highly acclaimed Secrets ofPawn Endings (2000) and Fundamental Chess Endings (200 I). His popular column Endgame Corner has appeared at www.ChessCafe.com since January 200 I.
8
Middlegame Tactics Relative Pin
Middlegame Tactics
Horwitz - Bledow Berl in 1837
Before we del ve into th e jungle of speculative sac rifices, deep defens ive resources and attacks, we would like to remind the reader of some more basic tactical notions first:
AI) Tactical Motifs We start with the most important tactical weapon, which occurs in almost every game: Black to move (-+)
AlA) Pin and Cross Pin The knight f6 is pinned, but In Secrets ofSpectacular Chess , Levitt and Friedgood introduced a theory of chess aesthetics with Parad ox, Depth , Geometry and Flow as the four main in gredients. We want to explore a special motif of geometry: the cross pin. A piece is pinned if it is between the king (or, say, the queen) and a less valuable piece of the opponent (such as a bishop). In the first case it is pinned "absolutely", because it is not allowed to move away from the line or diagonal. In the se cond c as e it is pinned " relatively", because if it mov es awa y, a more valuable piece will be attacked. Nevertheless, it is sometimes possible to mo ve out of a relati ve pin with advantage, as the next exampl e shows:
1... .£)xe4!! 2.A xe7 Axf2+ 3.\tlfl .£)g3 # mates . On the other hand a pin can be a deadly weapon, as the following two exampl es illustrate: Threat and Parade
Shagalovich - Levin Min sk 1997
White to move increases his pressure . The basis of a tactical operation is a threat. In this case the pin ofthe bishop at c7 and the missing link between the IO
Tactical Motifs
2.Ac5!+- 1-0
black roo ks m ay be ex p loite d by increasing the pressure on the weakness at e7.
2. Bd e 3? wo u ld b e weak du e to 2 .. . E! xd 4 3. B xe 7 Bd l+! 4. Bxdl Wxe7.
1.El.d3! With the deadly threats A e5 and TIde3. The defender has to reali ze th e cri sis immediately and should try to solve his problems in the best possible way.
L A e5! co mbines a doubl e attack wit h a deadl y pin . It threatens 3.B xd8# as we ll as the simple capture of the bishop by 3 ...\l xe 7 + or 3 .Bxe7 . Bl a ck is overl oaded. Fo r e x a m p le, 2... B e 8 (2 .. .B xcl3 is re fute d by th e zwisc he nz ug 3.A xe 7+ 'tt'e8 4.e xd3 , winning a piece) 3.E!xe7+-. A simple yet instructi ve example.
I Th e follow ing alternatives also lose: A) 1... E!d5? 2.E!de3 E! xd 4 3.E! xe7 + w d 8 4 .Bx b7 +- 'tt'c8 5 .B e e 7 B) 1.. .E! d7? Ba) 2.E!de3 +Bal) 2 w f8 3.Ac 5 C3. E! xe 7) Ba2) 2 'tt'd 8 3.Ab6 + We8 4.Ae5 Ba3) 2 B xd4 3.Bxe7+ transpos es to 1...E! d 5? Bb) 2.Ac5 B e7 3. B de3+ C) 1.. .b6? 2. E!de 3 (2 .Axb6? Bxd3 3.e xd3 W d 7 ~ ) 2 ... B xd 4 3 .E! xe7+ w d 8 4. Ba7+ -.
Overloading J. Asendorf (2297) - P. Wiebe Ham burg (German Amateurs-C h) 2002
II Th e only co rrect mo ve is 1...E!d6! with the idea of bolsterin g the defense with ...B e6: A ) 2.Ae5? B e 6 3. B e d l f6 B) 2. E!b3? Bxd4 (2 ... b 5?! 3.B be3 E! e 6) 3.B xb 7 E! d 7 4 .E! b 8+ Bd8 5. B b7 B d 7 6.Bb8 += C) 2.E!de3 E! e 6 3 .Bxe6 fxe 6 4 .B xe 6 wf7 ~ .
White to move (+-) (Pos ition after 24 ... A d6-e 7?)
With pressur e on e7 and e8, this move expl o it s the p in on the e-fil e convincingly. 25.'It1e7 is not so stro ng: I 25 ...'It1 f6 26 .a3! ( t h rea t a xb4+ -) 26...A cl6 (26 .. .b xa3? 27 .Ac3 'It1c16 28. Bx e 7 'It1 xe7 29 .E!xe7 B xe l + 30 .Axe l axb2 31. Bb7+ - ; 26 ... 'It1 d 6? 27 .E! xe7+ -) 27 .B xe8 + II
Middlegame Tactics § xe 8 28.§xe8+ 'xh8 22 ..£Ig6+ \t>h7 23 ..£Ixe7 f!xe7 24.~xf5+ \t>g8 25.~xf2+-. Ac3) 15 ... f!f6 (the only move) 16.f!dhl f!xg6 17.f!h8+ \t>f7 18.f!xa8 f!xg2 19.~c4+! d5 [l9 ~e6 (19 ... ~f6? 20.~g8; 19 ~g6? 20.§ah8) 20.§f8+ ~e7 21.~xe6+ ~xe6 22.4:Jd4+ ~e7 (22 ... ~e5?? 23.§xf5+ ~xd4 24.§dl + ~c4 25.b3+ ~c3 26.§d3+ ~b4 27.§d4+ ~a3 28.§a5+ M,a4 29.§axa4 mate) 23.§xf5 M,d7 24.f3! 4:Jf6 25.§a5 a6 26.§a3::!;] 20.~d4 (Now White can exploit the weakness of e5) 20 ... .£Ixf2 [20 ... §xf2? 21.4:Je5+ ~e6 22.4:Jd3 §f3 23.~e5+ ~f7 (23 ... ~d7?? 24.§el!) 24.§c8±] 21 ..£Ie5+ \t>e6 22. f!el! .£Ie4 23. .£Id3 with an enduring white initiative.
22.f!xg6+ \t>f5 23.b4! f!hl+ 24.\t>b2 \t>xg6 25.b5, and White's prospects seem slightly better (25...l"!e8 26.bxc6 b6 27.g3 §h5 28.4:Jh4+ ~f7 29.f3 4:Jf6). Ab3) 16...\t>f717.f!h4 (with the threat 18.fxg7 §g8 19.§f4+ ~e7 20.§xe4+ M,xe4 21.~xe4+ ~d7 22.~xb7+-, while after 17.fxg7 §g8 18.§h4 §xg7 19.§f4+ ~g8 20.§fu4 ~f7= there seems to be only repetition) 17...f!g8 [All the alternatives seem to lose, e.g. 17...4:Jxf6? 18.4:Jg5+ ~g6 19.~d3+!+-; or 17 ... g xf6? 18.§h7+ ~g8 (18 ... ~e6 19.~c4+ d5 20.4:Jd4+ +-) 19.~c4+ d5 20.~b4!+- with transposition to the line AbI.] 18.fxg7 [18. §xe4 is probably too optimistic: 18 ... M,xe4 19.4:Jg5+ ~g6 20.4:Jxe4 (20.f7?! ~c6 21.4:Jxe4 §h8) 20 ~e5 21.~d3 d5!?] 18... f!xg7 (18 4:Jf6?? 19.4:Jg5+ ~xg7 20.§h7+ followed by mate in three) 19.f!f4+ \t>g8 20.f!fh4 and we have again reached the draw mentioned above.
sm-.
Ad) A Solid and Safe Way is 14... .£Ixg5!? (This is a way to simplify the position before the complications get too hot) 15.f!h8+ (15.~h4?? f6) 15 ... \t>xh8 16.~h4+ \t>g8 17..£Ixg5 ~xg5+ 18.~xg5 f!fe8;;l;;/=. After this forced sequence the position is approximately level, e.g. 19.§hl (19.f4 §e2 20.g4 M,e4) 19 ... §e6 20.f3 §ae8 21.~f5 f6 or 20.~h5 §h6 21.~dl §g6 22.~h5.§h6. Back to the game:
Ac) A Tough Fight Arises After 14... f5!? the black monarch is forced to leave his castle and enter the open field. [After 14...f6?, on the other hand, he would be dead soon: 15.g6 ~e8 16. ~c4+ d5 17.§xd5 ~xg6 (17 .. .'?tfe6 18.§dh5) 18.§dh5+ followed by mate.] 15.g6
Ac 1) 15... ~e6?/~f6? allows 16.f!dhl ~xg6 17..£Ie5!!+-
B) The Game Continuation 14.f!h5?
Ac2) 15... .£Ixf2? 16.~c4+ d5 17.f!xd5 j;txd5 (17 ... ~e6 18.§h8+! ~xh8 19.~h4+ ~g8 20.~h7 mate; 17 ... ~e4 18.§d4+
Alekhine's obvious ("Protects g5 and threatens to double the rooks", Tarrasch) but faulty response. On this
28
Sacrificial Attacks e5, so that ~c4+ can't be answered by d6-d5 " (Blumich). 16... d xe5 [After 16 ... ~ x e S White w in s w ith e ith er 17 . ~xeS ( d xe S 18 .g 6) or 17 .g6 ~ f4 + 1 8 . ~ e 3 08 ... ~ h 6 19 .§ xh 6 gxh6 20 . ~x h6 fo llowe d by mate in one)] 17.g6, and Black resigned - 1-0 (\ 7 ... ~ x g 6 1 8 . ~ c 4+ plu s §h 8#). This exciting game set an example for "might goes before right", but as a relic ofthe romantic era it remains inspiring!
forward post the rook can be bothered and so the attacker faces problem s at an unpleasant moment. Nevertheless, Kotov pronounced the verdict: " Black has no satisfactory defense against the doubling of the rooks on the h-file. A nice finish follows."
Bb) Further Bad Ideas are shown by the following collect ion: - 14... .£lxg5?? l S.4JxgS+- with the threat § h8+ and mate 14... .£lf6?? l S.gxf6 ~ x f6 16. §dh1+- 14... Ae8?? lS .§ dh1 fS 16. ~dS+ and mate on h8 - 14 §fe8?? lS .§ dh1+- 14 .£lxf2? l S.§ e1 ! (l S . ~h4? fS; l S . ~ x f2?! g6!?) l S... ~ x e 1 + OS,.. 4Je4 ?? 16. § eh1 +- ; l S,. .Ae4?? 1 6. ~ xf2 g6 17.§ h 4 d S 18 .§ eh1 +) 16. 4Jxe1 4Je 4 1 7. ~ e 3 § fe 8 1 8 . ~h 3 ""'f 8 19. 4Jf3 ""'e 7 20 .4Jd4 g6 21. 4Jxc6 + b xc6 22 .E! h 7 dS 2 3. ~ h2 4Jd 6 ± - 14... .£lg3? l S.fxg 3 ~ e 4 OS,.. f6 16 .E! e1 ~ fl 17. ~ h4 ~g 6 18 .E! e7 +- ; l S... A e 4 16 .E! dhl f6 17. g 6 A xg6 1 8. ~d S+ Afl 19. E!h8 mate; lS .,. Ax f3 16 .g xf3) 16 .E!dh1 f6 17 .g 6! ~ x g 6 1 8 . ~ c 4+ dS 1 9. ~f4 ~ e 8 09 ... E! a c8 20 .E! h8+ ""'f7 21 .4JeS+) 20 . ~ x c7 ~ d 7 21.4Je S! fxeS 22. ~xeS ~ g 4 23 .E! h 8 + ""'f7 24.E!f1 + ""'g6 2S .E!hxf8+- .
Ba) 14... ~e6? (game) was remarkably branded as a mistake by Tarrasch ("Black had to use th is temp o for careful and circumspect defense, instead of threaten ing mate in tw o with ~ x a 2 and ~ a 1 , as White already threatens mate in one. ") and much later by Larsen, but both made di fferent suggestions to impr ove on Black 's play. The text move allows the well-kn own final 15.§dhl f5 16..£le5!!+-
!~t ~~~~~~ ~I
~~ ~ ~~/~ .~. . ,~:l~~~,.
~ ~~{ 3~ r~1fj a
~~~~~~"~ ~ ~.Y ~
'~1fj'~~~ '/~ ~~" d~~ a
"A surprising sacrifice by the help of which White occupies the black king 's only flight square f?" (Kotov). "The knight move shall lure the pawn d6 to
Be) The Shaky Candidates 14... f6?!/ 14 ... ~e8?! Bel) 14...f6?! with the idea of ~e8 g6 is insufficient, as White can increase
29
Middlegame Tactics his control over the weak square g6. Tarrasch tried to improve the defense in this way: "With f7-f6! gS-g6 ~e8! Black had to attack the dangerous pawn, that threatens to occupy the only flight square of the king." The exclamation marks are given, but unfortunately the appropriate proofs are missing. So we continue: 15.g6 ~e8 16.4Jh4! [16.i£tc4+? dS 17.ElhxdS C17.EldxdS ~xg6-+) 17 ... ~xg6 18.:zjh4 ~xdS 19.ElxdS
Bd) The Best Defense 14... f5! strengthens the outpost e4 and allows a flexible resistance on the sixth rank. After 15.g6 Black's monarch nevertheless is under pressure again. [After 15.Eldhl(?) wt7! he could breath freer: 16.g6+ C16.~xg7+ ~xg7 17.Elh7+ ~gS 18.l''lxe7 Elf7 19.ElhS+ ~xhS 20. Elxf7 ElgS-+; 16.Elh7 Elg8 17.g6+ ~fS-+) 16 ... ~e8 17.Elh7 c:.Jf6 lS.Ele1 ~e4 -+.]
C19.\~xdS+ ~f7 20.~xe4 ~xa2-+)
.E~
19... t~Yh6+ -+ respectively 17 ... ~e6 18.ElhS ~xc4 19.Elclh1 ~fl+ 20.Elxfl ~eS-+] 16... 4Jg3!? [l6 f5? 17.Elh1 plan ~xf5+-; 16 ElclS? 17.~f5! (also 17.Ele1 f5 lS.Elh1 ~f6 19. ~xf5+-) 17 ... Eld7 lS.~c4+ cl5 19.~b4!+-] 17.fxg3 ~e2 18.fIh7 J1,e4 19. ~c3 J1,xg6 20.4Jxg6 ~xh7 21.4Jxf8+ fIxf8 22.~xc7 ~xg2 23. xd6 fIc8 24. ~d3+ ~g8 25. ~g6 + =.
w
8.8:
'~.~'~~~ ~~ it ~ ~.a.f.'
~
~
~
~
~~d'·i 'r$.··.".~~~~~ ~g~~ ~. ~
d.1 :p~ d.1 ~
~~ d.1 ~
Analysis Bdl) 15... ~e6!? (forms, together with 14 ... f5 1 , a remarkable defense originating from Larsen. It is much more clever to make the moves ~e6 and [5 in the other order, compared with the game, but the play remains complicated) 16.4Je5 [The best chance. Alternatives are 16.Eldhl? ~xg6 17.~c4+ C17.c:.Je5 ~xh5 18.Elxh5 dxe S -+) 17 ... d5 18.~d4 C1S.ElhS+ ~f7 19.~e5+ ~f6 20.~xg6 ElxhS 2l.Elxh8 ElxhS 22.~d4+ ~xg6 -+) 18 ... ElaeS 19.~e5 Elxe5 20.~xeS ~d6-+; 16. ~c4?? ~xc4 (also 16 ... d5 17. Eldh1 ~ x g 6 , see previous line) 17.Eldh1 ~fl+ lS.Elxfl ~e8 C18 ~f6-+) 19.~h4 Elf6-+] 16 fIfe8!? [16... ~ x a 2 ! is much stronger (probably even winning) as the reader can verify.
Bc2) 14... ~e8?! 15.fIdhl f6 16.gxf6! 4Jxf6! (This attack on the rook h5 leaves White little choice, whereas the alternatives (16 ... gxf6?/~f7?/~e6?/~g6?), in contrast to the 14.Elh2-variation, all play into White's hands) 17.fIh8+ ~f718.4Jg5+~g619.fIxf8~xf8 20.~d3+!! 4Je4! [20 ... ~xg5?
(21. .. ~g4 22.Elh4+ mate) 22.Elfl + ~g5 (22 ... ~e5 23.~f5+ followed by mate) 23.~f5+ ~h4 24.Elf4+ ~g3 25.~g5+ ~g4 (25 ... ~h2 26.~h4+ ~gl 27.~f2+ ~h2 2S.Elh4 mate) 26.i:1xg4 ~h2 27.~h4+ ~xg2 28.~f2+ ~h3 29.Elh4 mate] 21.4Jxe4 ~f4+ 22.lf)d2+ ~f5 with an unclear position. 21.f4+
~
... r~ ~ ..L ~..L0 ~
~xf4
~xh4 23.~h3
30
Sacrificial Attacks 21.\'f e7 .cZlfl-+) 18...wfl 19.4:1e5+ w f6
We give a sample variation: 17.b3 ~f6! 0 8.4Jxc6 0 8 .8 h2 A e 4!) 11:>...bxc6 19.B h4 8 th 8! 20. 8 d h 1 w f8 21.8h8+ We 7 22.B8 h7 '&a3 + plan .. .8 b 4!)] 17.§dhl ~ f8 18.4J xc6 [18.8 h8+ We 7 19 . cZl xc6 + Wel7 0 9 .. .b xc6?? 20.'&xg7+ +- (The line " 14...f5! 15.g6 \if e6 1 6 . ~ e 5 8 fe l:> 17 .8 elh 1 w f8 18 .8h8+ We 7 19 ...£J xc6 + w d 7 and Bl ack has a ll th e c ha nce s" was advocated by Larsen in his booklet Why .VOI th e Phi lidor D ef en s e ? C hess Digest. Dall as. Texas 197 I). There co uld follow 20.8 xe8 8 xe8 21.cZla 5 (2 1...£J xa7? '&xa 2 n .b 3 ( 5) 21. ..'&xg6 + J 18 ~xg6 [18...b xc6?? 19 .Bh8+ ; 18 4Jf6? 19 .Bh l:> + 0 9. '&xf6+?? gxf6 20. 8h 8+ ~l g l:» 19 .. .4Jg8 20.4:1a 5 b6 21. cZl c4 '&xg6 22 .GZl e3 ;!; ] 19.4Ja5 09. 8h8+ w f7 20 .\ifd5+ iiie6 2 1.iifxe6 + Wxe 6 + ) 19 b6 20.4Jc4 (20 AJc6 'i¥f e6 ) 20 4Jf6+ , and White's compensation fo r th e sac rifice d pawn aga in is insufficient.
2o ...£J xg 6 2:xh 8 - +.1 16... §fe8 17.§dhl ~f8-+ 0 8 . ~f3 'ii'txg6 or iiixel4). and White's attack has petered out.
ITI The Offense Is Stopped by 13... 4Jd7!?, and Black retain s a healthy extra pawn at the end. Let us spring all the mines!
Analysis A) 14.§h4? f5 !, a nd now e ithe r lS. ~c4+ ~f7 16.g6 ~x c 4 17.§dhl ~fl+ 18.§ xfl §fe8 19.e xf5 0 9 .Bfh l w f8 20 .exf5 We7-+) 19... A xf3 20.g xf3 4Jf6-+ o r 15.§dhl ~ f 7 16. ~ xg7+ 06 .8 h 7 8 g8 17 .\if c4 + '&e 6 18 .,& xe 6 + Wxe6 19 .4Jel4+ We 5- +) 16... ~ xg717.§h7+ ~g8 1 8 . § x e7 §ae8 19.§ xe8 0 9 .8 e h 7 B xe 4) 19... § xe8 20.e xf5 A xf3 21.g xf3 §eS-+
Bd2) 15... ~f6 ! [Most preci se: Wh ite 's qu een is attacke d and g7 remain s prot ected . 15 ... 8 f6? (after 15...'i¥fe8?? fo llow s aga in th e brilli ant 16 .4Je 5!!+- ) 16 .8d hl 8 xg6 17 .8hl:> + w f7 18 .8 xa8 B xg 2 19 .iiic4+ d5 20 .iiid 4 tran sp ose s to th e li ne 14.8h 2! f5?! ; see the remark s to the game continuation 14.8h5?] 16.4Jes [16. Bd h1 iiixg6 again transposes to 15. .. .iiie6 16. 8 d h l? iiixg6 (s ee und er Bd I). 16.iiic4+ is refuted by ideas we have already discus sed (see und er 15...iiie6 ): 16 .. .d5 17 .8 dh1 0 7 .8xel5 ?? iiie6 18. Bel 1 iiixc4 19 .8el h l iiifl + 20 .E!x fl 4Jf6 -+ ) 17 ... iiixg6 18 .8h8+ 0 8 .iiid4 8 ae8 19 .4Je5 8 xe5 20 .iiixe 5 4:1el6
B) 14.§h2? ~ xe4 15.§dhl f6 16.gxf6 ~xd4 17.4J xd4 4Jxf6-+ 08. 4:1e6 8 a e 8 ) C) 14.e5! With the necessary verve and
the aim to transfer the queen to the hfile. Ca) 14 ...A xf3? 15. ~h4 f516.e xf6! g xf6 06...4Jxf6? 17 .g xf3! and now 31
Middlegame Tactics After 19 ..."l¥If6! Sl ack has a health y extra pawn, but there's still a tough fight in s to re fo r hi m ( 20.iilh 7+ 'll'tf7 21. "l¥Ih 5+ / "l¥I d 3 'll't e7 ).
e .g . 17 ...'t!1e5 18 .g6 't!1 h5 19.'t!1 xh5 -tlxh 5 20.8x h 5 8 fe8 21.8 d h 1 w f8 22.8f5+! +- ) 17.g xf3 f xgS , and White has to deliver perpetual che ck, e.g . 18. 'l!Yh8+ C1 8 .8 d g 1?? 't!1 e1+) 18 f8 -e 7 ~ /=
f6
18 . ~d h 1
~ fcl8
17.El,hl+ ~ h6 18.El,xh6+ ~ x h6
Th is happened in the early days when Steinitz used to play in the "traditional tactica l style... "
the chances are about equal (19.f3 f5!? or 19 .\¥If6?! ~ a e 8 pl an ~ e 6 ) . So if White would pass in the position after 10...h6 , accepting the sac rifice with ...hxg5 would lead to a dynamic balance.
1v. Steinitz (Vienna) - A. Mon gr edien (London) London 1862 Scandinav ian Defense (BO I )
Appendix 2 regardi ng the ga me B. Lengyel - van Bommel:
l.e4 d5 2.exd5 ~xd5 3.4jc3 ~d8 4.d4 e6 5.4jf3 4jf6 6.,1ld3 lte7 7.0-0 0-0 8.Ae3 b6 9.4je5 ,1lb7 10.f4 4jbd711.~e2lzld5 12.lzl xd5 e xd5 13.El,f3 f5 14.El,h3 g6 15. g4!? f xg4?
The second chance was again 14... 4jh7!!-+ as White's attac k is fended off.
had been obviously Black's intention to continue his development unhindered
" It
15.g6
34
Sacrificial Attacks sac rifices on g6 and h7 . 16 ...4Jf6? 1 7. ~ e 6+ rJJg7 18 .f5 +-) 17.d xe5! C1 7.fxe5?? Ac8 18.e6 S f6) is the most c1earcut way, according to Kasparov in th e Germ an new spaper Welt am Sonntag. There could follow: 17...Ac8 18.e6 and now:
Wilhelm Steinitz Analysis by 4Jd 7-f6 but he was completely surprised by the enemy's raid. Black should have played 15...4Jxe5 along with 16...Ah7-c8." (Schachmeis ter Steinitz by Ludwig Bachmann.) So 15...4Jxe5 and now 16.fxe5 [not 16.dxe5?! 06...d4 1 7 .~d2 ~h8 18.g xf5 ~d5 !? , unclear) 16...A c8!'i= ] 16...A c8, unclear C1 6...f4?! 17.Ad2; 16...fxg4? 17.8 xh71 transposes to the game).
A) 18... E!f6 Aa) 19.f5 Aa 1) 19 ... ~f8 and White has a choice: Aall) 20.~h1!? Aalll) 20 ... Ab7 21. Ad4 c 5
22 .fxg6 C2 2.Ax f6) 22 ... h 6 C22...cxd4 23 .gx h7+ '.t'h8 24 . ~g8 + ~ x g 8 25 .h x g 8 ~+ '.t'xg8 26 .8 g1 + and mate will follow; 22 .. .h xg6 2 3 . ~xg6+! ~g 7 2 4. ~xg7+ rJJ xg7 25.Sg 1+ '.t'f8 26. 8 h 8 #) 23 .g7 C23..l1xf6) 23 ... ~ x g 7 24. 8g 1 ~ x g 4 25. 8xg4 + ~ f8 26 .Jlx f6 A xf6 27. 8 xh6+Aall2) 20 ... cs 21.S g1 Aa1121) 21. .. d4 22 .Ag 5 .l1b 7 + -Y>. Cri me : White 1.17h: 1.40h Black ) It was a surprise for both players that
19.f5 was indeed correct (at least it seems so after all). "During the game 1 didn't believe very much in this move, but now in the calm of home analysis it looks to me as the mo st ' log ical' one . An y a lte rna tive would ha ve be en ve ry comfortabl e for Black ." (Hracek) And Jonathan Speelman remarked at the postmortem analysis, "I was lucky in the end."
25 ... Ae4-+ 26.~xh6+ We8 27.E!,el 27 .'&h 5 § c8 ( 27 ...f5) and 27 .Axf7+ Wxf7 28.§el § e8 are not better.
Cut the Gordian Knot!
R. Schone (2435) - G. Meins (2460) German Bundesliga 1998
27... f5? But the top player of Werder Bremen can 't stand the enduring pressure and makes a mi st ake . 27 .. .§ h 7 ! w a s cor rect: 28 .'&f4 f5 I 29.g4 § h4-+ II 29. A d5 .Q, xd 5 30 .§ xe 7+ § xe 7 3 1. '&xf5 f1. d 8 - +
Black to move (-+) (The previous moves are 1. c4 e 5 2. .£Jc3 .£Jf6 3. g3 .I1b4 4. .I1g2 0-0 5. .£Jf3 .£Jc6 6.0-0 e4 7 . .£Je l A xc3 8 . d xc3 h6 9. h3 § e8 10. c5 b6 11. A e3 § e7 12. 41
Middlegame Tactics cxb6 axbo 13. 5Lic2 d6 14. b3 bS IS. .ad §eS 16. c:=Jd4 4:Jxd4 17. cxd4 §hS 18. e3.) Now the game continued 18... v~xdl? 19.§xcll 4:JclS 20 ..\lcl2 ilcl7 21.a3 and was drawn after a few more moves (1/2-28). Instead (in the diagrammed position) Black could have cut the Gordian knot by 1. .. Ag4!! This splendid sacrifice (which, as shown, must be accepted) would have revealed the vulnerability of White's kingside in a startling manner. Certainly the attack is speculative and its realization in overthe-board play would evidence mastership. Because of the so-called horizontal effect, chess computer programs also have problems handling such a position. The evaluation of the sacrifice is based essentially on some plausible possibilities to increase the pressure, whereas the white monarch in the narrowness of his chamber is more or less just a spectator.
CbI) 7.§f1
~c2+ 8.~h3
~g6 1O.~f3 (lO.~g2
":=Jf6 9.~cll 4:Je4) 10... c:=Je4
11.~g2 §e6-+ Cb2) 7.§el 4:Jf6 8.§e2 4:Je4 9.§ea2 C9.aS 4:JgS) 9...bxa-l 10.bxa4 (lO.§xa4 §ab8) 1O...§aS-+ plan §fS and/or §gS II 2.~c2 ilxh3-+ 3.f4 ,\ixg2 4.~xg2 C4.~xg2 b4) 4...4:Jg4 S.~gl CS.§hl?? c~xe3+ 6.ilxe3 ~f3+) S...b4
2... .£lxg4 3.§el §e6!-+
Analysis This reinforcement is the point: White is powerless against the threats 4 §h2+ S.~f1 4:Jxf2!-+ and 4 §f6 S.§e2 ~h2+ 6.~f1 ~xg3 and so on, e.g.:
2.hxg4 Otherwise Black gets a technically winning position, e.g.: I 2.f3 i.txh3-+ A) 3.fxe4 ~xcll 4.§xcll i.txg2 S.~xg2 4:Jxe4 6.ilb2 C6.a4?? bxa-i 7.bxa4 4:Jc3) 6 ... clS!? 7.§clcl §e6 8.§xc7 §g6 B) 3.ild2 ~xg2 4.~xg2 exf3+ S.~xf3 ~xf3+ 6.~xf3 4:Je4-+ C) 3.a4 ilxg2 4.~xg2 e xf3+
4.§e2 Altematives: I 4.a4 §f6 A) S.§e2 ~h2+ 6.~f1 ~xg3 Aa) 7.§aa2 4:Jh2+ 8.~gl C8.~el ~xg2-+) 8 ... 4:Jf3+ 9.~f1 ~h2-+ Ab) 7.'ltic2 4:Jh2+ 8.~gl 4:Jf3+
S.~xf3
9.~f1
Ca) S... ~xf3+!? 6.~xf3 bxa4 7.bxa4 cS -+ C7...4:Je4) Cb) S... 4:Jg4! 6.§hl ~g6 keeps the queens on board and exploits the weak squares in the enemy's camp most energetically:
Ac) 7.~gl §xf2-+ B) S.§a2 ~h2+ 6.~f1 ~xg3 7.§ee2 4:Jh2+-+ II 4.ild2 'ltih2+ S.~f1 4:Jxf2!-+ III 4.'ltic2 'ltih2+ S.~f1 §f6 6.§e2 transposes to the main line.
42
~h2-+
Sacrificial Attacks 4 ... Y¥'I h 2+
5.~f1
Analysis
§.f6 6.Y¥'Ic2 9... Y¥'I h4!
6 .Ax e 4?? 4:J xf2- + 7 .Ah7 + ~ x h 7 8 . ~c 2 + 4Jd3 + 9 . ~ f2 ~x f2 + 1 0 . ~ x f2
Also good is 9...~ g6! with the simple thr eat ctlf6: I 1O . ~xc7 bxa-i (l0...~Zlf6) 11. ~h7 cZlf6 12.f4 e xf3 13. ~xf3 ctle4-+ II 1O. ~c6 ctlf6! (l0 ..:0' xg2+!?) 11.f4 exf3! 1 2 . ~ xf3 02 .A xf3?? ~ g l * ) 12...ctle 4!-+ [th reatenin g ~ f6 ( +)] 13.E! c2 ~ f6 1 4. ~ x f6 c;Zlg3+ 1 5 . ~f2 gxf6 16. a xh 5 ctlf5 III 10.f4 e xf3 II .A xf3 ~ h 3 + 12.A g 2 ~ g 3 1 3 . ~ f2 03. Wg l g f6 al ong with mate) 13...4Jxf2-+ 03 ... g xe 3-+)
~x f2 *
Analysis Prote cts the e4 pawn very calmly as does not hurry off.
10. ~ a2
~xg 3
4Jh 2 + Il. Wel
10...d5 1l.§.a2 Y¥'Ih2
7.a4
12 .Afl
7 .Axe4 ?? ~ xe 4- + 8. We 1 (8 . ~ x e 4 ~ xf2 +) 8 ... 4Jxf2
~g4 - +
12.~f1
~g l
12...§.g6! 13.f4 13 .axb5 4Jf6 - + The only playable move in view of the th re at 8 .. . 4Jh 2+ 9 . ~gl ~Zl f3 + 10.w fl ~ h 2 Il.A xf3 ex f3 and th e e-paw n changes on G to a gravedigger.
13... e xf314.A xf3 Now White's king is dep rived of the shelter of his pawns and falls victim to Black 's powerful attack. 14... Y¥'Ih3+ 15.Ag2 Y¥'Ig3-+ Threatening g f6 + and/o r 4Jh 2 +, ctlf3 + plus g h 2. If 16.~gl then 16... Y¥'Ih2+ 17.~fl §.f6+ 18.~el Y¥'Ig1+ 19.~d2 §. xe3 and so on.
43
Middlegame Tactics On the Sacrificial Altar (Domination of White Squares)
20.4Jb5!? plan 4Jc3 (4Jd6) 20... Elc8 2l.Ad2 h5!? 22.g5 4Jh7 23.f4?
J. Heiss/er (2450)-
R. Kasimdzhanov (2595) German 8undesliga 1999 Pirc Defense (807)
Already since 19.94 White has to pay distinct attention to the safety of his king's wing, but with this weakening of the light squares he goes definitely too far. Instead 23.agl!? (23.h4? ~c7! threatening ~xc4 and ~g3) with an unclear game should have been tried.
The winner of this spectacular game, Grandmaster Rustam Kasimdzhanov, at that time was a 19-year-old new talent from Uzbekistan. l.e4 g6 2.d4 Ag7 3.c3 d6 4.4J0 4Jf6 5.4Jbd2 0-0 6.Ad3 cs 7.0-0 cxd4 8.cxd4 4Jc6 9.a3 (9.h3) 9 ... 4Je8 lO.d5 4Je5 ll.Ae2 e6 l2.dxe6 02.4Jxe5 dxe5 13 .'~b3=) l2...Axe6 13.4Jd4 Ad7 l4.4Jc4 4Jxc4 l5.Axc4 4Jf6 d5!?
rs.rs
23... Ele4!! Cuts the Gordian knot with wonderful creative play! 24.Ac3 Or: I After 24.~xe4 axc4 25.Ae3 Af5-+ the white queen is overloaded.
An interesting pawn sacrifice designed to hinder the development of the enemy's queens ide (~c 1) and to exploit the weaknesses around the white king (diagonal b6-g 1).
II 24.4Jc6 ~e8 25.aael ~f5-+ 26.4Jxa7 axel 27.axel ~xel+ 28.ibel ~xd3 29.4Jxc8 ~xc4
17.exd5 Ele8!? l8.c2 'l::"tb2+ 32.\t>d3 'l::"tb5+ 0-1.
Bagirov resigned in view of 33.Wc2 '&e2+ 34.Wb3 '&b2+ 35.Wc4 ,§,b5#.
Anderssen's "Evergreen"
26.J}.xe6 {)d3!
A. Anderssen - J. Dufresne Berlin 1852
26 ... c2+? 27.wb2 cxdl'§' 28.gxdl ~d3+ 29.gxd3 gxd3 30.Wc2 gh3 31.,§,f7 would be dangerous for Black.
White cannot accept the sacrifice due to ... ,§,b8+. 27...'l::"tb8+ 28.J}.b3
28.Wc2 4Jb4+ 29.wbl 0:Jd5+ 30.Wc2 ga2+ 31.Wd3 '§'b5 # White to move (+-) After wild complications Anderssen now justifies his play brilliantly:
28...E!.xb3+ 29.\t>c2
20.E!.xe7+! {)xe7
Now comes the final blow ...
20 wd8 21.gxd7+! Wc8 (21 Wxd7 22.Af5+ We8 23.Ad7+ wd8 24.Axc6+ Wc8 25.Ad7+ wd8 26.Ae7 #) 22.gd8+! Wxd8 (22 ... gxd8 23.g xf3+-; 22 ... ~xd8 23.,§,d7+!! Wxd7 24.iH5+ Wc6 25.Ad7#) 23.Ae2+ 0:Jd4 24.Axf3 cIlxf3 25.g3 Axdl 26.~xdl "with a boring but winning endgame" (Kasparov).
29...{)b4+! 30.\t>xb3
21.'liYxd7+!! \t>xd7 22.J}.f5+ \t>e8
23.J}.d7+ \t>f8 24.J}.xe7# 1-0
Or 30.Wcl gbl + (or 30 ... 0:Ja2+ 31.Wc2 gb2+ 32.Wd3 '§'b5+ 33.We3 ~e2+ 34.wf4 '§'f2+-+) 31.Wxbl 0:Jd5+ and Black mates.
To close our "miniature classic collection" we have selected a masterpiece of the great Akiba Rubinstein (1882-1961): 58
Sacrificial Attacks
Rubinstein 's Immortal
£ xh 3 + 24. 'f;Yx h3 'f;Yxh 3+ 25 .gx h3 26 .Wh2 g cl2+ 27.Wg3 1"!g 2+ 28 .w h 4 id,cl8 + 29 .w h 5 A g 6 # ) 23.. .A xe 4 24 .'f;Yxg4 (24 . ~ xe 4 ~g 3 +) 24 ...~ x g4 25 .h xg4 g d 3 26 .Wh 2 g xc3 - +. ~x e4 +
G. Rotlewi - A . Rubinstein
Lodz 1907 Tarrasch Defense (040) l.d4 cl5 2.{lf3 e6 3.e3 c5 4.c4 c:Jc6 5 .4,j c3 {lf6 6 .clxc 5 ~x c5 7.a3 a6 8 .b 4 ~d6 9 ..~ b 2 0-0 1 0 . ~ cl 2 Yfi e7 I l. Acl 3 d xc4 12 .A xc4 b5 13. Acl 3 1"! cl8 1 4 . ~e 2 A b 7 15 .0-0 {l e 5 16 .{l xe5 A xe 5 17 .f4 A c7 18. e 4 1"! a c 8
Now Rubinstein uncorks one stroke of geni us after another.
22 ... E!xc3!! 23.gxh4
19.e5? Blac k is bet ter in an y ca se due to White's somewhat loose center, but this allows a devastating comb ination.
19 ... Ab6+ 20. hl 4)g4! 21.Ae4 I 2 1. {le4 ~ h 4 22 .h 3 g xcl3 23. Yfi xcl3 ( 23 . ~xg4 'f;Y xg4 24 .hx g4 A xe 4 - +) 2 3 .. .i h e4-+ II 2 1.Ax h7 + Wxh 7 22 . ~xg4 g d 2 23 .1"! a b l A cl4 24 .gf3 A xf3 25 .'f;Y xf3 g xb2 - + III 21. ~ x g 4 g xcl3 22. g fd 1 1"! clxc 3 - +
The powerful coordination of rooks and bishops mak es a strong impr ession .
21 ...l\th4! 22.g3
24. ~ xd2
22.h3 doesn ' t help either : 22 ...1"! xc3! 23 . ~xc3 (23 .i:lxb 7 1"! xh 3+ 24 .gx h3 'f;Y xh 3 + 25. 'f;Y h2 'f;Y xh 2 # ; 23 .'f;Yx g 4
I
u
2 4 . ~x g4
g xh 2 # 59
i b e4+ 25. £f3 g xf3- + .ll,xe 4 + 25 .'f;Y xe 4
2 4. ~ x c 3
Middlegame Tactics III 24.itxb7 §xe2 25.~g2 §h3-+
E4.3 V. Anand (2770) - O. Touzane (2368) Moscow (FIDE W-Ch) 2001
24... jtxe4+ 25.t:tg2 §h3 0-1 [26.§f2 (26.§f3 ~xf3 27. i:¥xf3 §xh2#) 26 ... ~xf2 27.i:¥xe4 §xh2#].
Exercises E4.1 K. Muller (2513) S. Wehmeier (2390) Lippstadt 2000 White to move (+-) Then-FIDE World Champion Viswanathan Anand misses a beautiful win. Can you do better? E4.4
White to move. How to continue his attack? E4.2 K. Muller (2513) -L. McShane (2480) Lippstadt 2000
White to move (+-) How did Smimov continue his attack?
60
Sacrificial Attacks
White to move (+-) Here the black king does not get off lightly!
E4.5 G. Kasparov (282 7) - N. Short (2676) Zurich (Korchnoi's Birthday) 2001
Solutions: E4.1: 25.2£l xh6+! \t7h 7 [25...g xh6 26 .'&g4 + '!¥tg5 (2 6 . ..'it>f7 27. '&g7 + We 6 28. '!¥te 7 *) n .'!¥txd 7+-) ] 26. ~g4g6
1 26 .. ..t\ xf6 27 J h f6! gx f6 28 . ~ f5 '&f7 29.4:Jcd 6 '&g 6 30 .'&h 4 + 'it'g8 31. ~ e 7 + + -
II 26 .. .4Je 6 27.4Jf5 4Jxf6 28 .'!¥t h3+ 'it'g 6 29 .4Je7 ++ -
White to move (+-) How did Kasparov demolish the black king's shelter?
27. ~h3
2£l xf6 28. .§ xf6 ~ h 5 30.2£lf5 1-0
29.~xh5 g xh5
E4.6 E4 .2: I 19...2£le7? 20.A xb7 2£lg8 (20 ...'&xb 7 21. 4Jd6 '&c6 22. 4Jxe 8 E1 xe 8 23. 4Jf3± as 23 ... g 5? ru ns into '&xd 6 25. 4Jxg5 +-) 24 .E1d 6 21.2£l xg 6 + 2£l xg 6 22. ~ h 3 ! f5?! (22 ... '&xb 7 23 .E1 d7 +- wi n ning Black's queen was missed by Luke in his ca lc ulat ions ) 2 3.e xf5 2£lf4 24. ~f3 2£lf6 25 ..§d6 .§g8 26..§ xf6 e 4 [26 .. .4Jxg 2 27 .'&xg2 E1 xg 2 + (2 7 .. .'&xb 7 28 .B g 6!+-) 28 .A xg2 '&g 7 29 .E1 e6 E1 g 8 30. 4Je3 +-] 27..§xe4! .§d8 (2 7...'&xb7 28.E1xe8 '!¥t xf3 29. E1 xg 8+ 'it'xg 8 30 .g xf 3 +-) 28.2£le3 2£l xg2 29.2£l xg2 ~ x b 7 30..§fe6 1-0.
CD. Meyer (2315) - E. Wellner (2200)
Berlin (open) 1984
White to move (+-)
II 19 . .. 4Jd 8 ! wi th a c om plica te d position was called for, e.g. 20 . ~d6 A xd 5 ( 20 ... '&xd 6 2 1.A xb7 '!¥t e6 22 .£ld 5 '&g 4 2 3 .g 3) 21. 4Jxe8 E1 xe 8 22 .4Jxg 6 + 4J xg 6 23 .E1xd5. E4.3: 21. ~d3? (game) I 21.cxb7?! is not so clear, e.g . 21.. .E1b8 22.'&h5 f5 23.Ax h6 '§Ie8 24.'&f3 gxh6 25.'&d5+ Bf7 26.'&xa5 Be7 27.h3 c5 61
Middlegame Tactics 28.1";xa7 cxd-i 29.'&xd4 2:exb7 30.],hb7 2:xb7 3L~xf5±. II 21.~1h5! is winning according to D. Poldauf in the German magazine Schoch (No. 1/2002): A) 21...1'5 22.11xh6 '&e8 23.'&g5 1"11'7 24.itb3 \t'h8 25 ..\1.xfl \i1xf7 26.exb7 2:b8 27«\hg7+ '4xg7 28. xf5+B) 21...b6 22 ..\hh6 gxh6 23.'ci1xh6 1'5 24.itb3+ 2:fl 25.'&g6+ \t'h8 26.itxf7 +C) 21 ... 'i'';fxd4 22.'&xa5 (22.exb7? 'ffte3! 23.itxh6 ,&xe2 24.2:e1 2:ae8 25. \¥txa5 '&b2) 22 ... bxe6 (22 ... b6 23.'&1'5 g6 24.'{;yf3+-) 23.itb2±(+-) D) 21...2:e8 22.itxh6! gxh6 23.'tftxh6 .\lel2 24. '&xd2 '&h 4 25.exb7 2:ab8 26.d5+-. But the game continued: 21 ...g6 22.cxb7 §bS 23.11.xh6 §eS 24. ~f3 §e6 25.11.b3 §f6 with counterplay.
occupying the dark squares) lS gxh6 19.~d2 f5 20.exf611.dS (20 llel6 makes no essential difference) 21.~xh6 §a7 22 ..I£)g5+- ~xb5 (22 ... §e7 23.fxe7) 23.f7+ §xf7 24 ..I£)xf71-0 E4.6: 21.d5! [21.ita6! wins as well, e.g. 21...\frel7 (21...b6 22.el5! §xel5 23.c2'Jd4ug7 24.t;Jxe6+ 4:1xc6 25.§c4 plan §bc1+-) 22.§xe6 c2'Jxe6 23.'W'a4 (;l.g7 (23 ... §e8 24.d5!+- exel5 25 ..Q.xa7+) 24.itb5 §e8 25.el5' vlxel5 26.itxe6+\i1xe6 (26 ... §xc6 27.'tftxa7+ \t'e8 28.'tftxb7+ \t'd8 29. \¥txf7) 27.'tftxa7+ \t'e7 28.§xb7+ 'tftxb7 29..\1,b6+ \t'e6 30. w2'Jd4+.] 21 ... exd5 [21...4:1xel5 22.itb5! (22.\lxcl5 §xel5 23.4:1d4 §xd4!? 24 ..\hcl4 l1g7 25.\¥te3±) 22 .. «\lxb5 (22 ... 4:1b6 23.itxe6 bxe6 24.l1xb6 axb6 25.\¥txb6+ \¥t xb 6 26.§xb6+ \t'a7 27.§bxe6+-; 22 ... \t'a8 23.4:1e14+-) 23.§xe7 6;;']xe7 24.4:1e14 §el5 25.a4 ita6 26."~c6+ \t'c8 (26 ... \t'a8 27.11xa7+-) 27.4:1xa7++-] 22.11.b5+- ~d7 23.e6 1-0 (23 ... \¥tc8 24.'tfta4 (24A:Je5); 23 ... fxe6 24.4:1e5; 23. \¥ta4!).
E4.4: 29 ..I£)g4!! [29.2:h1! wins as well: 29 ... '&xa2 (29 ... 2:xh1 30.\t'g5 v~e1 31.\t'f6+-) 30.2:xh2 '&xf2+ 31.\t'g5 '&g3+ 32.\t'f6 ,&xg6+ 33.\t'xg6 \t'g8 34.2:h7 ite6 35.2:d3+-.J 29 ... §xg2 (29 ... fxg4 30. \t'g5+-) 30. ~f6+ Iit>gS [30 ... \t'e8 31.'&h8+ \t'fl C31...\t'e7 32.'&g7+ \t'e8 33.4:'11'6#) 32.'&h7+ \t'f8 33.\t'g5 2:xg4+ 34.\t'f6+-] 31..I£)h6+ Iit>h7 32.§hl 1-0 C32... 2:g4+ 33.4:1xg4+ itxh1 34.\¥th6+ \t'g8 35.4:11'6+ \t'f7 36.\¥th7+ \t'f8 37.'tftg8+ \t'e7 38.'&g7#)
E4.7 23.11.xh6+!! Iit>xh6 24.~h3+ [24.§f7? \¥tel5 25.§afl (25.'tftf4+? \¥tg 5 26.'W'c7 4:1cl8 27.§f2 §f8-+) 25 ... \¥th5 26.the6 6~el8 27.\¥te3+ \¥tg 5 28.\¥th3+=] 24 ... lit>g7 (24 \t'g5 25.g3+-) 25.§f7+! 1-0 (25 \t'xf7 26.\¥th7+ \t'f6 27.§fl + \t'g5 28.h4+ \t'g4 29. \¥txg6+ \t'xh4 30.§f4 #)
E4.5: lS.11.h6!! (A splendid way of weakening the king's shelter and then
62
Magic By The Magician
M. Tal - A. Koblentz Riga 1957
Black to move Th e prev ious moves were (Sici lia n Defense/B63) l. e4 c5 2.4Jf3 d6 3.d4 cx d -l 4. 4Jxd 4 4Jf6 5. 4Jc 3 4Jc6 6 . ~g 5 e6 7. 'i¥Y d 2 .~ e 7 8.0-0- 0 0-0 9 .4Jb3 'i¥Yb 6 10 .f3 a 6 11. g 4 g d 8 12 .ile3 'i¥Yc7 13.h4 b5 14 .g 5 4Jd 7 15 .g6 h xg6 16 .h5 gx h5 17 .g xh 5 4Jf6 18. g h 1 d5 19 .e S 4Jxe 5 zo.a« il d 6 21. 'i¥Y h 2 'il'f f8 22 .'i¥Y h 8 +.
Mikhail Tal
A3) Magic by the Magician The style of former World Champion Mikhail Ta l ( 19 36 - 1992) was c ha racterize d by wild tactical co mp li cat io ns. "Central iz e and sacrifice" and "T hey can onl y take one at a time" we re two of his fam ou s principles. Euwe once rem ark ed, " In power s of co mbina tio n Tal perhaps outdoes even A lekhine . Sac ri fic e is second nature to him." His games were a na lyse d man y tim e s an d seve ra l sacrifices proved to be incorrect by later analysis. But over the board many of his opponents were so stunned that they j us t could n 't keep a c lea r head. Completely correct or not, his play has inspired co untless players and has won chess many followers. Here is one very typical, complicated strugg le against his trainer Alexa nder Koblentz (* 1916):
22....£lg8? Koblentz wants to trap Tal's queen , but underestimates the danger to his own king . 22...'il'f e7! wo u ld have refut ed Whi te ' s attac k o u tr ig h t : 23 .'i¥Y h3 C23. 'i¥Y xg7 ? g g 8 24. 'i¥Y h6 4Jd 3 + 25 .'il'fb1 ~ x f4 - +) 23 .. .il d7 -+
23.E!h7 rs Car ry in g th e d ea d ly thr eat 4Jg6 winning the queen.
24 ..1lh6 E!d7 24... gxh6 25.gxc7 I1.xc7 26 .4Je2 very complicated .
63
IS
Middl egame Tactics
Ana lysis Del ayi ng the sacrifi ce with 25 .&b5 22.e4 >&a4 C22.. .'&xc4 23.c£Jf6+ Axf6 24.§xd8++-) 23.§a3 §xd5 24.§xa4 §xdl + 25..u 'xdl +-] 22.E!.a3 E!.xd5 23.exd5 e4 C23 ...'ii"xb4+ 24.§ b3+-) 24. ~c3 Af6 25.E!.xa4 1-0
(White's attack crashes through) 29 ... ~xd5 C29...Axh6 30.c£Jh7+ 'l¥1xh7 31.'l¥1xh7 Ag7 32.'i';1xf5+ Af6 33.g4+-) 30.E!.h8+ and Black resigned 1-0 C30...gxh831.c£Jh7#)
E5.3: 29.E!.b7+!! C29.'&a4? Axe7 30. >&xe4 §xa5 3L>&xf7 ho r ) 29...eJ;}xb7 30.~d7+ eJ;}b8 31.e8~+ E!.xe8 32.~xe8+ eJ;}b7 C32... '!1Je7 33.'i';1 xa8+-) 33.~d7+ eJ;}b8 34.~xc6 1-0
E5.6: 34. ~h6!! (This double attack on h8 and a6 decides the issue as 34 ...§xh6? leads to mate: 35.§xe8+ Bb8 36.§e xb8+ '!1Ja7 37.§3b7#) 34... E!.d8 35.Axa6 Ad2 C35 ...Ae7 36.u'xc8 § xe8 37.d6+-) 36. ~f6 ~d7 37.Axc8 1-0 C37... §xe8 38.§a6++-)
E5.4: 19.~xf7! Obviously a good choice: I 19.c£Jg5? >&al+ 20.'!1Jd2 c£Jxh5 2Lc£Jgxf7+ §xf7 22.4Jxf7+ '!1Jg8+
68
Qu een and Kni ght Duo
A4)
i1!I and 4J
47.8e5 . un clear/= II 4 5 .8 e3! ? 8 d 7 C4 5 . .. fl xc 5? 4 6 .t1x f7 + w h6 4 7 .t1 f8 + +- ; 4 5 .. .'&f5 4 6 .t1 d S t1 xc5 47 .t1x h4 + Wg 7 4 8 .fl e 4 = ; 4 5 . .. 4Jf5 4 6 .8 d 3 , un cl ea r) 46 .flg 3 fl xd 5 C46 .. .t1 d l + 47 . '~ x d l fl xd l + 4 S .We 2 ;l; ) 47 .Elxg 4 8 xc 5 4 8 .fl xh 4 + Wg 7 49. We2 = .
Duo
(Capablanca's Theorem) Q uee n a nd kn ight ar e a ren o w ned attacking force . The y complem ent eac h o the r we ll , le ad in g C apa b la nca to fo rmu late hi s th eorem : Queen and kni ght are str onger than queen and bishop. John Watso n cast doubt on this th eorem in Secrets of AIm /ern Chess Strategy. presenting statistics showi ng no superiori ty in a pure ending. Th is sou nds reas ona ble, but in th e attac k aga inst the king '~ + 4J form a powerful du o.
Both alternatives give the imp ression that White ca n fight on. Instead, aft er the frivo lous ga me co ntinuation Black 's attac k become s very dan gerou s.
45 ...E!xc5!
Missed Counter (Cal culation of Variations)
The only real chance to w in. Not so strong are: I 4 5 ... fl xe 7?! 46. Axe7 t1 h 3 + C46... Wg7 47 .A xh 4) 47 .We2 t1g4+ 48 .w d 2 t1 f4 + 49 .Wc3 a nd II 45 ... t1 h 3 +?! 46 .We2 t1g4+ 4 7 .w d 2 .
H. Pfleger - P. Keres Bamberg 1968
46.t"tx c5? I 4 6 .t1 xf7+ ? w h 6 47 .t1g 7 + Wg 5 4S.8e 5 + fl xe 5 4 9 . ~xe 5 + 4Jf5- + is bad II but th e sur pris ing co unte rs tro ke 46 .fl xf7+! had to be ca lculated:
(position after 44....£lf5 xfth4) In Chess Inf ormant No .5 ( 1968, with a shor t ana lysis by B. Ivkov) , Black 's position was evaluated as winning. But although the white king is more exposed th an Bl a ck's , we doubt th at thi s judgment is jus tifi ed.
45.E!e7?! Analysis I
45 .8 e 4 !? t1g2+ 46 .We2 4Jf5
69
Middlcgame Tactics
A) 46... ~ h 6 47. g h7 +! (47 . ~)(e5? ? ~ d l # ) 47 ... ~ x h 7 48 . ~f7+ ~ h 6 49. B fS+ wit h perp etu al c hec k : 49...Wg5 (49 ... Wh 5 SO . ~h8+ Wg5 5 1 . ~d8+= ) SO. ~e 7+ w f4 (SO WfS S1. ~xeS + w f6 S2 . ~f8+ ; SO Wh S S 1. ~ h 7 + WgS S2.'&e7 +) 51. ~ e 3+ ~ fS 52. ~xeS+ w f6 5 3 . Bf8+ = B) 46... Wg8 47 .g f8 +! (47 .gf4 +? ,8 xd 5 48 .g xg 4 g h S 49. e5 ~ f7 SO.e6 g h8 S1.ge4 4Jf5 S2.e7 g c8+) 47 ... ~ x f8 48. '&xeS+ a nd agai n White has perpetual check : 48 WgS (48 ...We 8 49. '&e 5+ ; 48 Wf7
Dynamic
M. Rivas Pastor (2450) 1. Dorfman (2600) Logrono (Spai n vs. USS R) 1991
49 . ~ e7 +) 49. ~ d 5 +
Ba)
49 .. .Wg7
5 1. ~ f6+
50. ~e5 +
(51. ~b8+;
Black to move
w rs
S1. ~ d 6+)
1...E!xe5!!
5L .WeS 52 . ~ e 5 + Ba 1) 52 .. .Wd 8 53. ~d 6 +
~d7
5 4 . ~ f8+
55 . ~d 6 +
We8
S6. ~ e 5 + ()6. ~ a 6 + ) B a2) 52 .. .~ d 7 S3 . ~d5+
Spe ed in g up th e attac k is more important than material here.
We 7
S4 . ~e5+
SS . ~g 7 +
~ f7
2.fxe5,,£\xe5
50 . ~d8 +
w f7
~e8
~e6
56 . ~ e S + = 49 .. .Wf8
Bb)
3 . ~a4
d4 I 4 .ex d4? ~ e 4 + S.Wfl (S. Wd2? '&d3+ 6.Wcl g c8+ 7 . ~ c 2 ~ x e 2 # ) 5.. . ~ )( h l + - + II 4 .f4 d xe 3 5.0-0 4Jd 3 6 . ~e6 ~ g 4 + 7 . ~ g 2 ~ )( g 2 + 8 .Wxg2 e2 9.gfe l 4Jxf4+ 1 0 . ~ f3 g5 =+=
51. ~ c 7+ =.
46... ~d l + 47.E!el ~d l + 49.E!e l
~d3+
3.~dl
48.E!e 2
~:·:·Z~ ~
~~~ ~~~ft~~~~.
~~~~1fl~~ ~~~:~B%~~
49 ... ~d3 + 50.E!e2 ~h3+ 51. \tlel "£\f3+ 0-1 in view of 5 2 .~dl ~fl + 53 .We2 ~ x e 2 + - +
70
Queen and Knight Duo "Perhaps 4...8C2 5.~xc2 ~xc2 6.fxe5 7.0-0 ~xe5 would have been a cleaner finish." (1. Dorfman in The Method in Chess)
Both teams from North Germany had 3Y2 points and this last game was to decide the issue. After almost seven hours, exactly one minute before the end, tragicomic things happened:
~xb2
5.0-0 ~xe3+ 6.\t>g2 ~e4+ 7.\t>g3? 76... ~d2? 7.~gl! 9.~xf2 11.~g2
8c6 C7 ... 8C2 8.8f2 8xf2 4Jd3+ 10.~g3 ~xf4+ ~f2+
12.~hl
Exchanging to an elementary pawn ending would have made short work of it: 76 ... 4Jxg2 77.~xg2 ~xf1 + 7fL ~xf1 ~h3-+.
~xb2
transposes to the 7... 8C6 line) 8.f5 8c.2 9.8f2 8xf2 10.~xf2 4Jd3+ 11.~f1
~xf5+
13.~hl ~xb2
12.~g2
~f2+
77.~f3 ~xg2+??
14.~bl ~e5
and Black is better, but White can still fight.
draw agreed YZ-YZ.
The critical line instead runs: 77 ... ~el+ 78.Afl and now:
7 ... E!c6 8.f5 E!h6 9.E!f2 ~h4+ 10.\t>g2 ~xh2+ 11.\t>f1 ~h1+ 12.\t>e2 ~e4+ 13.\t>d2 4)c4+ 14.\t>c3 0-1 and White resigned, not waiting for 14...8h3+-+. The following endgame decided the match between the authors' Bundesliga teams: Dramatic
Analysis D. Sebastian (2361) J. Heiss/er (2437) German Bundesliga 2001 (Hamburger SK - Werder Bremen)
I 78 ... g2+? 79.~h2 C79.~gl? ~g5 zugzwang -+) 79...gxfl4J+ (only move; 79 ...gxfl ~? 80. ~g4+ ~xg4 stalemate) 80.~xfl ~d2+! (80 ...~xfl?! stalemate; 80...~g3+ 81.~hl=) 81.~hl (81.~gl? ~g3-+) 81...~g3 82.~gl + ~f3 A) 83.~h2? ~d5!! 84.~c2 (84.~gl
86.~g3
~e2+
~g5+
84 ... ~g3+
85.~h2
87.~h2
~h5+
~h4 "*')
85.~gl ~d4+ 86.~f1
~al+ 87.~dl ~xdl,,*,
B)
83.~f1
+=
II 78 ... ~g5! 79.~gl g2-+ and again the zugzwang decides.
Black to move (-+)
71
Middlegam e Tact ics Now we see how dang erous the 'i'iY+.£l duo is:
In Kasparov's Hands
Analysis (27 ..£lf7 +? 'it'g 8 27 .'i'iY f3! !+28. 'i'iYf3 'i'iYe8 29 .'i'iYd5 'i'iY h 8 ) 27 .. .'i'iY g 8 28 .4::If7 + 'i'iY xf7 29. 'i'iYxf7 B) 2 5 .. .'~ d 8 26 .4)f7 + 8 xf7 27 .'i'iYx f7 8 e8 28 .8e4! ( 28. 'i'iYxa7?? 'i'iY d 5 + =; 28 .8 xe8? 'i'iY xe8 29 .'i'iYxa7?? 'i'iYe6+ ) 28 . . .a5 29 .8 e 7 'i'iYg8 30.'i'iYxg8+ 'it'xg8 3 1.8 h 7 8e6 32 .h4 h5 33 .a 3±/+- 03 .a4)
Black to move (Pos it io n aft er 22 A:Je4-d6) Black's position is bad, but not lost.
22 ... l£le6? 24.~e4 f xe6 25.~xe6+ \t>h7
"A blunder, doubtless 22 ...8 ad8 was ca lled for, e .g . 23 .8 e d 1 4::I e 6 24 .84 d 2 8 d 7 25. 4::I b 5 'i'iY e6+ 26 .'i'iYf3 'i'iY xf3 + 2 7 . ~x f3 8x d2 28 .8 xd 2 a6 29 A:Je3 and admittedly White stands slig htly better, but thi s isn't comparable to what happens now." (Schoch Weltmeisterschaft 84/85 by V. Budd e and L. Nik olaic zuk)
23.E!xe6! h5!
25 .. .'~ h 8 ? 26 .8d5! ( a lso 26 .8e 4!) 26 .. .8 xf 2 + ( 26 ... g6 27 .'i'iYxg 6+ - ) 27 .'it'xf2 8 f8 + 28 .'it'g2 \':¥ e 2 + 29 .'it' h3 g6 30 .4::If5 +- ( 30 ..£le 8 +-) 3 0 .. .8 xf5 0 0 .. .'i'iY e3 3 1. 'i'iY xg6) 3 1. 8 d 8 + ~h 7 32.'i'iYe7+ ~ h 6 3 3 .8 h 8 *
23 . ..fxe 6 ( 23 .. .8 a d 8 ?? 24 .4::Ib5 !+) 24.'i'iY xe6+ I 24 ...8 f7 ?? 25 .8f4 +A) 25 .. .'i'iY e6+ 26 .f3 'i'iY d 7 ( 26 ...'i'iY e2+ 27. ~ h 3 ) 27. 'i'iYxf7 + 'i'iY xf7 28 .4::I xf7 B) 25 ... 8 a f8 26 .4::Ix f7 8 xf7 27 .'i'iYe8 + 8 f8 zs.e-ra-
26.E!d5!? 72
Queen and Knight Duo " If 26... ~ c 6 then White star ts with 27. Wh3! , a pat ient but irres ist ible mating attack." (BuddelNiko laiczuk) : 27...g6 28. ~e7+ and now:
" l : White is winning, but does not see
it." (CBM-Blunders). In our opinion the game continuation is not worse than the proposal of C BM, namel y 26.8c4!? (26 .-iJe4!? is interesting as well), e.g.:
I 28...'it'g8 29.8 g5 f5+- (BIN)
I 26 .. .'~ b 8? 27 . ~ e 4 + A) 27...Wg8 2 8. ~d5 ++- and mate in five B) 27 ... Wh 6 28. 8c6! +g6 (2 8 ...8 f6 29.-iJf7 # ) 29. 4::\f7+ 8 xf7
~c 2
30 .f4!! plan
II 28 ...'it'h8 29.4::\ f7+ Hxf7 30 . ~xf7 \¥Ye8 3 1.\¥Yf6+ \t' h7 32.8 d6+ -
3 0 . ~xg 6 #
28 .. .w h 6 29 .-iJf7+ 8 xf7 (" +- " an d e nd in BIN ) 30 .. .\¥Ye8 OO .. .8 e8? 31. 8d7 ~ e6 + 32 . ~x e6 H xe 6 33 .8 xa 7 +-) ~c8+ 32.'~ g 2 \¥Y b 7 31. ~ f6 III
g6 28 . ~e7 + Wg8 29.8 c7+D) 27 Wh8 28 . ~d5 +-
3 0 . ~x f7
C) 27
II 26 ... ~ c 8 ? 27. J"ld7 w h8 2 8 . ~e7 J"l g8 29. J"l d 5 (29. ~ g 5 ~c6 30. ~x h5 + ~ h 6 31. ~d5 J"l gf8±) A) 29 ... ~ e 8 30.4::\d6 OO. ~h 4 g6 31. 4::\f6 ~ c 6 3 2.~ g 5 + -) 30 ... ~ g 6
33 . ~ f4 +
A) 33 ... 'it'h7 34. ~e4 'it'g7 35.f3 ~c6 05 ... J"l f8 3 6. ~ d 3 + - ) 36 .\¥Ye 7 + 'it'h6 37 . ~f7 Aa) 37 ... ~ e 8 38. ~f6 +- Wh 7 ( 38 .. .\¥Y f8 39 .8x h5 + Wxh 5 4 0. ~ h 4 # ) 39 .8e5 Ab) 37 .. . ~ c 2 + 38 .Wh3 ~ c 8 + 39 .Hd 7 +34 . ~e 5 + Wf7 B) 33 .. .Wg7 04 'it'h 7 35. ~e 4 tra ns poses to 33 Wh 7) 35 . ~e 4 Wg7 (35 ... 8 b8 36 .f3) 36.f3 ~ c 6 tr an sp oses to 33 .. .Wh 7 .
3 1. ~ h4 + -
B) 29...~g4 30.h 3 8 ge8 Oo...~g6 3 1. ~xe8+ 8 xe8 32. h xg 4 8 xe 4 33. Wf3 +3 1. ~ h4 + -)
III 26.. .~ d8 2 7. ~e4 + (2 7. ~ e5 g6 28. 4::\ e 4 Hc8 29 .-iJg5+ Wg8 3 0 . ~e 6 + Wg7 3 1. 8 xc8 ~ x c 8 3 2 . ~e7 + Wh 6 33 .4::\f7 + 8 xf7 3 4 . ~ xf7±) 27...g6 28 . ~b7 + ( - and end of the analysis in CBM, but there are still ope n qu esti on s) 28 .. .w h6 ( 28 ... Wg8?? 29 .8 c7 ~ f6 3 0 . ~ d 5 + Wh 8 3 1. 4)f7 ++-; 28 .. .\t' h 8?? 29. 8c7 ~ f6 30 .4)f7 ++- ) A) 29. Hc7? ~ x d 6 30. Hh7+ \t' g 5 3 1. h4 + (3 1. 8 d 7 J"l xf2+ 32. Wxf2 ~c5 + 33 .\t'g 2 ~c2+ 34 .Wh3 ~ f5 + = ) 31.. .'it'f6 32. ~f3+ 'it'e 5 33 . ~ e2+ 'it'f6 34. ~f3+= B) 29. 4::\f7 + J"l xf7 30. ~ xf7 8 c8±
27.4Je4 .E!ad8 28 .4Jg5+ 29 . ~e4 .E!fe8
~g7
Or 29... J"l de8 and now: I 30 .4::\e6 + 'it'fl 31. 4::\g5+ 01. J"l e 5?l ~ x e 5 32. ~x e5 8 xe 6 ; 3 1. J"l f5 +? gxf5 32. \¥Yxf5+ 'it'e 7 33 . ~ h7 + J"l f7 34 .~ x f7 + 'it'xf7 3 5 .4::\ xc7) 31...'6'g7 32..i:!fd4+ with transposition to II is correct. II 30. \¥Y d4 + Wh 6 (3 0 ... Wg8? 32 . ~d5+ w h8 3 1.8 d 6 ~ c 2 33 .4::\f7 + Wg7 34 .8d7!+-) 3 1. ~ d 2 (3 1.8 d 7?! ~ c 6 + 32 .Wh3 8 xf2
IV 26...Wh8 27 .8 d7 ~c1 , un clear
26...g6 73
Middlegame Tactics 36.~g2 '[;1e2+ C36... ~h6?? 37.'[;1f4++and mate in three; 36... ~h7 37.E\d7+) 37.'[;1f2± Bb) 32.'[;1xe5+ '[;1xe5 33.E\ xe5 ~f6 34.E\e2± C) 31...~f7 is very dangerous for Black: 32.E\xd8 '[;1c6+ 33.~h3 E\f6 34.f3! Ca) 34 ... a6 35.~h4 C35.E\d7+
33.l~Xh7+ ~xg5
34:[;1h4+ ~f5 35.)":\[7+ 36.E\xf2 '[;1d7+ 37.~g2 '[;1c6+=) 31...'[;1c6 32.c£Je6+ C32.~h3?? E\xf2; 32.~f1 ~g7) 32... ~h7 33.c£Jxf8+ E\xf8 34.f3± ('[;1f6 35:[;1d3).
~e5
~g8)
Cb) 34 ... E\xf3 35.E\d7+ CbI) 35 ... ~e8 36.E\d6+- '[;1c8+ 37.~g2 E\f5 (3 7 . . . E\ f 7 38.'[;1h8+; 37... E\f8 38.'[;1e5+ ~f7 39.E\f6+) 38.'[;1h8+ Cb2) 35 ... ~e6 36.E\ xa7+- E\f6 37.'[;1e3+ ~d5 38.'[;1d3+ ~e6 39.'[;1e2+ ~d5 40.E\e7 '[;1c8+
I In the game happened 30. \':td4+?