The Queen's Bishop Attack Revealed
James Plaskett
BATSFORD
First published in 2005
© James Plaskett The right of J...
196 downloads
1140 Views
7MB 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
The Queen's Bishop Attack Revealed
James Plaskett
BATSFORD
First published in 2005
© James Plaskett The right of James Plaskett to be identified as Author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. ISBN 0713489707 A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form or by any means without permission from the publisher. Printed in Great Britain by Creative Print and Design (Wales), Ebbw Vale for the publishers B.T. Batsford Ltd, The ChrysaliS BUilding Bramley Road, London, WIO 6SP www.chrysalisbooks.co.uk Distributed in the United States and Canada by Sterling Publishing Co., 387 Park Avenue South, New York, NY 100 16, USA
An imprint of chrysalifBOokS Group pic
A BATSFORD CHESS BOOK Series Editor: Daniel King Batsford Chess Consultants: Malcolm Pein, Daniel King and Jimmy Adams
Contents Introduction
5
First Moves
7
Heroes and Zeros
12
Strategy
30
What's Hot?
75
Tricks and Traps
150
Test Positions
187
Solutions
199
Details
213
Before the Fight
217
Definitions of Symbols
219
4
Introduction
The Queen's Bishop Attack or Pseudo-Trompowsky is a great way to take your opponent out of his familiar territory. Indeed, if he has filled himself full of Slav or Queen's Gambit theory, he will probably be too bloated to respond with the necessary dexterity to 2 Bg5! In any case, one thing is for sure - you will be better prepared than your opponent, as this is the first book devoted to 2 Bg5. It follows the typical pattern of the 'Revealed' series. First of all we establish the starting moves of the Queen's Bishop Attack. Then we gaze with admiration at the work of its greatest exponents, giving our greatest bow to the arch maverick Julian Hodgson. In passing we might even have a quick laugh at World Champion Euwe losing in 10 moves. After that, it is time to get a bit more serious. The Strategy chapter deals with the basics of the struggle after White takes the black knight on f6; then there follows a detailed look at the cutting edge mainline in the 'What's Hot?' chapter. Next is 'Tricks and Traps' which discusses what happens when Black tries to embroil you in the sharpest lines that counterattack against d4. Finally, it is over to you how well do you understand the opening? Try your luck with the Tests section. Although most of the players who buy this book will be intending to learn how to play it from the white side, I have been objective in my assessments. I haven't pretended it is a forced win for White, in the style of some so-called 'Repertoire' books. Here you get the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Good luck with the opening - I hope you use it to score a lot of points!
5
6
First Moves
The Queen's Bishop Attack begins with the moves I d4 d5 2 .Jtg5 to stake out some central control and open up developmental pathways.
Wherein, you might say, White 'anticipates' the deployment of the knight to f6! It has been variously dubbed The Pseudo-Trompowsky, The Lewitsky and The Chameleon. The opening has not achieved the same level of popularity as the related idea of I d4lt)f6 2 .tg5: the Trompowsky. Nonetheless, it has often featured in the games of noted Trompowsky practitioners, such as Chepukaitis, Miles, Hodgson, Adams, Akopian, Lputian, Miladinovic, Rogers, Torre, Lobron, etc. Indeed, I once witnessed the late GM Eduard Gufeld play Black against the inveterate Hodgson in a rapid play event in Hastings, 1995. Knowing the Englishman's tendencies, he responded to I d4 with a grin and 1... d6. The chuckling Hodgson still trotted out his 2 .tg5 (!), and won. As with 'The Tromp', it may create lively and unusual 7
First Moves situations from the earliest moves. Players of the black pieces hoping for a Queen's Gambit may find their preparation sidestepped at move two. But, one of the problems with pinning a 'ghost' knight thus is that Black may manage to steer around any structural or tactical complications whatsoever which might result from ...tDf6, and engineer a solid formation akin to a Slav variation of the Queen's Gambit Declined. This has proven to be one of the most popular responses to the Queen's Bishop Attack. It has, however, been seen more in recent years than the not unrelated Veresov System: I d4 dS 2 tDc3 tDf6 3 ~gS. Here, for starters, is a recent victory in this opening by an 1M over a British Candidate Grandmaster.
N.Povah White A.Ledger Black 4NCl British Team Championship 2003
I d4 d5 2 ~g5 c5 One of several viable alternatives.
3 dxc5 3 e4!? has also been tried here, leading play at times into something akin to an Albin Counter Gambit with colours reversed. 3 c3 ought to be no big deal, although Miladinovic did beat the strong GM Tiger Hillarp-Persson with it at Ohrid, 200 I .
3......a5+ 8
First Moves This move has not fared as well in practice as either 3... ttJc6 or even 3.. .f6!? In the latter instance the game Chepukaitis-Aleksandrov, Petrov Memorial 2002, went 4 .i.h4 e5 5 e4!? dxe4 6 'ifxdS+ ~dS 7 ttJc3 .i.xc5 S ttJxe4 i.e7 9 0-0-0+ i.d7 with unclear play. 4 ttJcl
Much better than the 4 c3 of Miladinovic-Stanojoski, European Team Championship, Ohrid 200 I when 4 ...'ifxc5 left Black untroubled. 4 •••e6 5 e4!
S•••hcs On 5... dxe4? Black is lost because of 6 b4! when his queen must keep covering dS, and after 6 ... 'ifc7 7 ttJb5! 'ifd7 S 'ifxd7+. The fork at c7 may not be allowed either, so we would have 8. ..~xd7 9 0-0-0+ ~c6 10 %:tdS ttJd7 I I ttJxa7 + and wins.
6exdS If there is a route to equality for Black from here, then it is not obvious. 6•••'ii'b6 7 'ifd2 7 i.b5 + i.d7 was less promising.
7 •••.bf2+? The consistent move, otherwise how to regain the pawn? But Povah
9
First Moves now excellently exploits his development lead and attacking possibilities. 8 'iIIxf2 'iIIxb2 9 'it>d2!
9 •••'illxa I I 0 tiJfJ tiJd7 On 10... ii.d7 I I tiJe5 f6 12 dxe6 is strong.
II dxe6 Although here II tiJe5 is accurately met by 11 ... tiJgf6. 11 •••fxe6 12 :'gl! Moving the rook to a protected square so his king's bishop is freed to move. 12•••'ilfb2 13 ii.bS tiJgf6 On 13 ... 'illb4 White continues the strong pressure with 14 'iWe3. Now he insists on keeping the black king in the centre where it poses a natural object for attack, whilst simultaneously setting up threats to the queen. 14.bf6! gxf6 15 'iIIeS! Threatening 16:'b I . IS •••..t>f7 16 'ifd6! An accurate move. 16 .txd7 lId8 17 l:[b I does not snare the queen
because of 17...Ld7 + and 18... 'iIIxc2.
10
First Moves 16•••lDb6
17lDeS+! Another precise choice. Not 17 :bl? because of 17.. :iVxbS! and 18...lDc4+ and he escapes again. 17•••fxeS 18:fI + ~g6 19 .i.d3+ Wh6 20 :f6+ A blistering smash from Nigel Povah. 1-0
II
Heroes and Zeros
Grandmaster of Disaster Studying the praxis of an outstanding exponent of a particular system may prove one of the best ways for the student to deepen his own understanding of it, even with an opening like the Queen's Bishop Attack which can generate a whole variety of different types of middlegame. Four times British Champion, Julian Hodgson presents as heroic a figure as any in the pantheon of the Queen's Bishop Attack. He has beaten some of the world's best with it and frequently added interesting, innovative ideas to the theory. He has also left behind for us (he retired from active play in his early forties) an oeuvre of beautiful and often highly original and distinctive games. Many of these featured the Queen's Bishop Attack. Sometimes he is found on the white side of technical and strategical games. More often his name here is associated with wildly creative and speculative attacks. Here are two instances of the 'Grandmaster of Disaster' in action.
J.Hodgson White O.Kirsanov Black London Open 200 I
I cf4 dS 2.tgS c6 3ltJf3
.tfS 4 c4 dxc4?!
Unless Black is going to try to hang on to this pawn then ceding control of the centre in this manner makes little sense. But attempting
12
Heroes and Zeros to keep the pawn in such a Slavonic setting. where White is already ahead on development. is very dangerous. as Hodgson demonstrates in inimitable fashion. 5 ttJcl h6 6 ~h4 b5 7 e4 ~h7 8 a4 b4
All in Slav mode. But Julian did not obligingly shift his prodded horse. 9~xc4!
In the 19305. Alekhine once sprung a similar novelty in a World Championship match game against Euwe. that one being in a Slav mainline.
9 ••.g5 If 9 ... bxc3 then White has a strong attack with 10 ttJe5 .l\.g6 II 'iib3. amongst other continuations.
10 ttJe5! e6 II he6! Brilliant.
11 .••bxcl II...fxe6 12 ~5+ ~e7 13 'ii'f7+ ~d6 14 ttJc4 mate.
12 .bf7 + rJi;e 7 Il 'ii'bl Chess can be a fun game. Il ••JWc8 14 ~h5 Another mate threat. 13
Heroes and Zeros
14••JWe6 15 Wb4+ "'d6 16 ""'7+ 4:Jd7 17 4:Jxc6+ "'xc6 She either dies here or to a pawn fork at e5.
18 "'xc6 4:Jgf6 19.tf3 Not wishing to encounter any tricky nonsense after 19 20 "'xa7 cxb2.
"'xa8 .txe4
19•••cxb2 20 l::tbl l:tb8 21 .tg3 l:tb6 22 "'c2 g4 23 as! l:te6 24 dS! Non-stop tactics from this man.
24•••he4 25 .txe4l:txe4+ 26 ~I 'M7 27 "'xb2 .tcS 28 h3l:the8 29 hxg4 CiJxg4 30 "'bS 4:Jgf6 31 l:txh6.td4 32 d6 ~g7 33 "'gS+ cM7 34 "'g6+ We6 1-0 The next game is also a whirlwind of tactics from start to finish.
J.Hodgson White G.Roeder Black Bad Woerishofen 1995
I d4 dS 2 .tgS cS 3 e4 dxe4 4 dS h6 5 .tf4 4:Jf6 6 4:Jc3 a6 7 a4 e6 8 .tc4 .td6 9 4:Jge2 exdS? 9 ...e5 has to be a better bet. This allows White's men in.
10 4:JxdS .txf4 I I 4:Jexf4 O-O? 12 4:Jg6! 4:JxdS 13 lbxf8 Essentially this sequence wins the exchange, but Black hoped to find a clever way out.
13 ......aS+ 14 c3 4:Jb6? 15 .txf7+!
14
Heroes and Zeros IS ••• ~ 16 'ifhS+ ~ 17 b4 Trapped! Again and again one sees these unusual and viable ideas in the games of Hodgson. 17..•.tg4 IS 'ii'eS! Of course. The rest was not difficult. IS•••'ii'xa4 19 %ha4 ltJxa4 20 'ii'f4 + '.tgS 21 'ii'xg4 tbc6 22 'ii'xe4 ~hS 23 'ii'e3 cxb4 24 cxb4 tbxb4 25 0-0
as 26 h3 b6 27 l:td I tbcS 2S l:.d6
a4 29 'ii'd4 a3 30 l:txh6+ ~gS 31 'ii'c4+ Wf8 32 I:thS+ '.te7 33
:xaa
"The games of Julian Hodgson are rich and strange, like erotic dreams." Well, that one turned me on. 1-0
Having honoured its greatest champion, we shall now trace the history of the opening up until the present day.
Alekhine comes unstuck According to my database, I d4 d5 2 .tg5 was played for the first time in 1880 at the 5th US Congress at New York by Preston Ware against James Grundy. However, the first well known player to make a mark with it was future World Champion Alexander Alekhine, who used it to beat Fritz Englund at Scheveningen in 1913. Unluckily for Alekhine, his loss the following year against Bernhard Gregory was far more exciting and this is the game I've chosen to give here.
A.AIekhine White Gregory Block St Petersburg 1914 I d4 dS 2 .tgS 'iVd6!? 15
Heroes and Zeros
Perhaps a sensible response to the Queen's Bishop Attack, but still a rarity. llLlcl In my opinion, Hodgson reacted better against Andreas Schmidt in the German Bundesliga of 2002 with the gambit 3 c4. Indeed Black found himself very rapidly lost after 3... dxc4 4 lLlc3 eS? 5 dxeS 'iVxd I + 6 lb:d I i.e7 7lLln i.xgS (7... c6) SlLlxgS i.d7 9 e3 h6 10 lLlge4 lLlc6 I I lLlcS lLlxeS? 12 lidS! f6 13 f4 i.c6 (13 ... c6 14 lId6 maintains the attack on d7 and wins) 14 fxeS i.xdS 15 lLlxdS and soon 1-0.
l •••c6 I would prefer 3...i.f5 here, to avoid the effect of the 4 e4 gambit. This occurred in a 19S9 Nordic game, Bathke-Zahnelsen, where after 4 e3 cS 5 lLln lLld7 6 i.d3 play was balanced.
Torre-G.Giorgadze from the 2000 Istanbul Olympiad saw an extraordinary escapade following 4lLln i.fS 5 e3lLld7 6lLlh4 e6 (6 ...i.g6!?) 7 i.f4 'ii'b4 SlLlxfS 'iVxb2!? 9lLlxg7 + i.xg7 I0 ~d2 eSt? I I lib I 'iVa3 12 'iVg4!? 'iVf8 13 i.xeS lLlxeS 14 dxeS i.xeS 15 lb:b7 lLlf6 16 'iVfS i.xc3 + 17 ~c3 lLle4+ IS ~b2 'iVg7 + 19 ~c I 0-0 20 'iVf4 'iVa I + 21 lib I 'iVc3 22 lIb3 'iVa I with repetition. But not via your average route. Frankly, I am very surprised that neither Torre nor Alekhine ventured the gambit 4 e4 dxe4 SlLlxe4 'iVb4+ 6 c3, which obviously yields White loads of play. I am sure that was the best move here, and the one and only chance that was to come White's way in this game. 16
Heroes and Zeros 4 ••• ~f5 5 tLlfJ 5 f3!? e6 6 e4 .li.g6. 5 ...tLld7 6 0-0-0 e6 7 tLlh4 A1ekhine may have hoped to scare his opponent, but he gets hit by a whirlwind sequence of tactical, and strategical, surprises. 7 ...tLlgf6 8 fJ h6!? 9 .li.f4 'iib4 10 ttJxf5 exf5 II .e3+
11 ...~d8!! A superb recognition that White's clogging of his own pathways counts for more than the forfeiture of castling rights.
12 .d3 tLlb6! 13 a3 13 .xf5? tLlc4 annoys. 13....a5 14 e4 14 .xf5 ~xa3! also annoys. 14...tLlc4! Threatening 14....li.xa3!. 15 tLlbl Remarkably, there was no better move. 15 ...tLlh5!? 17
Heroes and Zeros
16.i.eS?! On 16 ~d2 'it'b6 17 .i.c3?? tiJf4 traps his queen. It would be better to continue 17 'it'c3 with a sharp game. 16...~e7! Threatening a disruptive check at gS. 17 h4 f4!? Strategically this move is fighting on the new weakness at g3. The less profound idea is to trap the bishop with .. .f6. 18 exdS cxdS 19 'it'fS Seeking salvation in complications. 19••• tiJgl 20
"'xf7 :tf8!
20 ... tiJxh I? 22 ~xc4 dxc4 23 ~xg7 was not so good. 21 'it'e6 tiJel!
18
Heroes and Zeros
Maintaining the grip. It is very rare to see knights sunk into sixth rank outposts with such effect. Only my game with Shipov from the 2000 Hastings tournament springs to mind: I e4 cS 2 ttJc3 d6 3 f4 ttJc6 4 ttJf3 g6 S .ltbS .ltd7 6 0-0 .ltg7 7 d3 a6 S .ltxc6 .ltxc6 9 '1t;h I 'iid7 10 'iie2 fS? I I ttJdS ftdS 12 ttJgS ttJf6 13 ttJb6 "ilc7 14 ttJc4 fxe4 IS ttJe6 "ilcs 16 fS ltgS 17 ttJb6
22 i.d6lte8 23 .ltd3 :le8! The bind is far more valuable than an exchange. 24 :lhe 1 'iib6! Forcing the reply. 25 i.xe7+ l:xe7 26 "ilxb6+ The only option was to hide the queen at h7. but that would have not have worked because of 26 'iigS+ '1t;d7 27 "ilh7 gS when White would. at least. suffer a loss of the exchange. 26•••axb6 27 :ld2 ttJxe2! 28 l:xe7 ttJxd4+ 29 ttJe3 '1t;xe7 30 '1t;d 1 ttJb3! 31 l:[c2 On 31 tiJxdS+ 'iiid6 32ltc2 :Xc2 White will lose on 33 hc2 (33 'iiixc2 ttJd4+) 33 ...'1f;xdS 34 i.xb3+ ~d4 when the still dominant black pieces decide. e.g. 3S ~e I ttJfS 36 hS ttJe3 37 '1t;f2 ttJc4. etc. 31 •••lte5 32 tiJa4 l:xc2 33 ~e2 ttJd4+ 34 ~e3 ttJdfS 35 ttJxb6 ~d6 36 .ltxf5 ttJxfS 37 h5 '1t;e6 19
Heroes and Zeros
The theme of domination extends right unto the end of this game. Now 38 ttJa4 bS traps the knight, so the future World Champion tries to hide it elsewhere, but unsuccessfully. 38 ttJc8 b5 With ... b7 coming. 39 ~b4 b7 40 xb5 xc8 41 a4 c7 42 as ~d6 43 b4 ttJd4+ 44 ~b6 ttJe6 45 a6 d4 46 b5 d3 47 ~a7 ttJc5 48 b6 ttJd7 49 b7 d2 50 aa dl ='ji' 51 a7 'ji'd5 0-1
An unknown victory over Alekhine which plays through like something from the modern era, and a game of deep and impressive originality where one might have been mistaken for thinking him the player of the black pieces. Black's ingenuity and wizardry put me in mind of the only other famous Gregory in St Petersburg around that time: Rasputin. A famous player who was to be a great rival of Alekhine fell victim to the opening in the following gamelet:
Future World Champion demolished in ten moves G.Oskam White M.Euwe Black Amsterdam, 1920 I d4 d5 2 ..tg5 ..tfS 3 ttJIJ ttJf6 4 c4 e6 5 e3 h6?
20
Heroes and Zeros Safer was 5 ...c6.
6.bf6 'ii'xf6? Now 6 ...gxf6 was imperative.
7 'itb3! Already Black is in deep trouble as there is no good way to defend b7 and d5. 7 •..'iJc6 8 'ii'xb7 ~d7 9 cxdS But not of course 9 "iixa8?? ..tb4+. 9 •••exdS 10..tbS 1-0 There is no good answer to the threat of I I ttJe5 +. Here we see the enormous value of taking a well prepared opponent out of his familiar opening channels. I doubt that Mr. Oskam would have beaten Euwe in ten moves in the Slav mainline.
The Welder from St. Petersburg The late Saint Petersburg Master, Genrikh Chepukaitis (1935-2004) who fIVe times won the Championship of his city, was a wondrous exponent of blitz chess, and also a great lover of I d4 d5 2 ..tg5 which he liked to call 'The Mongrel'. He was little known in the West as he was an amateur who worked his whole life as an electric welder, but he played many blitz games on the Internet Chess Club as SmartChip. 21
Heroes and Zeros
G.Chepukaitis White A.Praslov Black St Petersburg Championship 1999 I d4 d5 2 1i.g5 g6 3 e3 1i.g7 4 ttJci2 lL'ld7 5 c3 lL'lgf6 6 f4
White employs a Stonewall versus the fianchetto of the black king's bishop. 6 •••c5 7 lL'lgfl 'iVb6 8 l:tb I
8 •••lL'lg4
Sighting an odd tactic, he goes for it! 9
'ife2 'ife6 I 0 lL'le5 He could have tried 10 e4, I suppose, but elects for this.
IO •••lL'ldxe5 I I fxe5 f6 12 exf6 exf6 13 1i.f4 g5 14 1i.g3 ttJxe3 15 dxc5 f5 16 'iVh5 + ~d8
16 .. .'ii'g6 may have been a smarter alternative. 171i.f2
Cool as you like! SmartChip challenges Black to show that he can profit from the white king's current predicament. 17•••lL'lg4+ 181i.e2l:te8
22
Heroes and Zeros
190-0! The tables turn! At the cost of a bishop White is able to demonstrate that the black king has his problems too.
19•• .'ii'xe2 20 l:tbe 1 . 5 21 h3 liJf6 22 'ii'xg5 'ii'd7 23 ii.d4 A monster pin.
23 ...'ii'f7 24liJf3 l:[e4 25 he4 dxe4 26liJh4 h6 27 'ii'd2 xh7 19 'iWd3+ ~g8 20 'iWg6+. 19 'iWh5+ e6 20 'iWg6+ iLf6
73
Strategy in the Queen's Bishop Attack
20...ttJf6 21 'iff5+ <Ml22 iLg6+ ~g8 23l:[xc8 'iVai + (23 ...l:[axc8 24 'ife6+ 25 'ifxf7 mate) 24 ~e2 'iVxa2+ 25 ~d I 'ifa4+ 26.iilc2 'ifal + 27 :tel 'ifa4+ 28 ~el 'iWa5+ 29 ~fl 'iVa6+ 30 ~gl was better. But not much.
:f7
21 .i.gS+ %hgS22 'ifxgS+ ~ 23 'ifxd5+ ttJe5 24 e4+ ~g4 On 24 ... ~g6 25 'ifg8+ iLg7 26 'ifxg7 is mate. 25 :tel e6
26he5! Cute. On 26 ... exd5 27 f3+ does the business. A most uncharacteristic Kosten game. 1-0
74
Opening theory is always advancing and modifying itself, and systems come and go as ideas are honed and refined. The QBA exponent needs to be aware of what is most likely to be used against him, based upon current trends, and also to familiarise himself with the very sharpest lines, just in case they occur. In this chapter we consider Black's most popular and challenging response to the Queen's Bishop Attack: namely a quick c7-c6 followed in most cases by 'ii'b6 hitting the unguarded b2 pawn. We look at some of the currently theoretically significant games, as well as some highly topical ones, in order to facilitate the student's preparations for what will be the variation most likely to come his way after I d4 d5 2 iLg5. A typical sequence is
I d4 dS 2 iLgS h6 3 iLh4 c6 4 e3 (or 4 tbf3) 4 •.:iib6
75
What's Hot?
First of all Black kicks the bishop away to h4, so that there is no chance of it defending the b2 square. This rules out any nonsense similar to I d4 itJf6 2 1.g5 itJe4 3 1.f4 c5 4 d5 'iib6 5 1.c I !? in the Trompowsky. As will be seen, the position of the bishop on h4 can also generate a crucial tactical trick that facilitates a future space grab by Black with e7-e5. Having cleared the way with 3... c6, which also strengthens his centre in good Slav style, Black sends his queen to b6 to terrorise b2. If there is anything intrinsically wrong with 2 1.g5, this is the way players as Black usually seek to prove it. Indeed, the early 'ifb6 approach accounts for at least a third of the games played with the Queen's Bishop Attack, which makes it a white hot variation. White already has a big choice to make after 3 ... c6: namely whether to play 4 itJf3 or 4 e3. You might think there isn't much of a difference between the moves, but in fact they can lead to markedly contrasting middlegames.
Part One: White offers to gambit the b2 pawn with 4 itJfJ 'ifb6 SitJbd2 No examples from master praxis of Black taking the pawn that I found, except Parrasmaa-Sergiev, from the Heart of Finland Open of 1998, and two of mine ... One was a 2004 game played on the Internet site of the World Chess Network, with each player having twenty five minutes, plus slight increment, for all his moves and the other was against an expert player in a rapid play event from April 2005 in the Spanish village of Guadalest. So Rogozenko accepted the gambit after I offered it. S•••'ifxb2 6 e4 One can hardly give a concrete conclusion. Suffice to say that White has three of his men out and the black queen wandered off whilst development was neglected. A classical gambit.
6 •••e6 7 1.dl 1.e7 76
What's Hot?
The Guadalest game varied with 7... dxe4 Slbxe4 i.b4+ 9 ~e2!? Not such an indignity for his Majesty to lodge here. Spassky made a similar early improvisation in a Torre Attack game with Miles from Tilburg. I97S. 9... ttJd7 10 %lb I 'ilfa3 II :b3 'ii'aS 12 'ii'b I i.e7 13 i.g3 ttJgf6 14 ttJd6+ i.xd6 15 ii.xd6. and I was happy as the bishop slices his game in two. It ended 15 ...'ii'dS 16 c4 b6 17 :d I ii.b7 IS ttJe5 c5 An attempt to return the pawn for some freedom. but white need not oblige.
19 ii.g6!. Decisive. 19... lbxe5. There was nothing much better. 20 dxe5 ttJd7 21 :g3! 'ii'h4 22 ii.xf7 +! ~dS 23 i.xe6 :eS 24 ii.xd7 'ii'xc4+ 25 ~el i.a6 26 i.g4 'ilffl + 27 'iitd2 'ii'xf2+ 2S'iitc3 and Black resigned. B i.g3 Keeping pieces on when looking for an attack. as Gufeld advocated. In the aforementioned Finnish game White took on e7. which I find less natural. but he still went on to win. B.••ttJf6 9 0-0.6 10:b I Gaining a bit more time. 10•••'ii'dB I I 'ife2 By now I was feeling cheery. Lots of development lead. 11 •••ttJbd7 12 llfe I dxe4 13 ttJxe4 ttJxe4 14 'ifxe4 ttJf6 15 'ii'h4!? Provoking the crisis. 77
What's Hot?
Is...gs Taking the bait. 15 ... 0-0 was certainly safer, although White would keep a lot of play for his gambit pawn. 16 ttJxgs! lbds
On 16...lbh7 I also planned 17lbxe6! with similar variations, e.g. 17... fxe6 IS 'ifh5 + etcetera.
17 lbxe6! ~xe6
Or 17... ~xh4 IslbxdS+ and wins, or 17... fxe6 IS'ifh5+ 'iiiifS (IS ...'iiiid7 19 l:.xe6! 'iiiixe6? 20 'ii'f5 mate) and White keeps on piling up the pressure on Black's disorganised game with stuff like 19 ~e5 with a strong attack for the piece. I was even looking at 19 l::te3!? during the game, when after 19...lbxe3 20 fxe3 due to the newly opened f-line White is doing very well even though he is now behind a full rook, e.g. 20 ... ~f6 21 lifl with terrible threats. IS lIxe6! fxe6 19 'ifhS + ~ Neither did running the other way work as 19 ... 'iiiid7 20 l:.xb7+ 'iiiicS 21 ~a6 kills him, e.g. 21 .. :iiaS 22 l::txa7 + 'ii'xa6 23 lha6 l::txa6 24 'ii'e5 spearing a rook. 20~es
78
What's Hot?
20••• tbf6 On 20 ....id6 21 Jhb7 or 20 .. .1:[g8 White has various pleasant options, including 21 .tg6, 21 ltxb7 and 22 g3!? 21 i.xf6 .txf6 22lb:b7 .te7 23 'iWf3+ ~g7 24 'ii'g4+ ~ 25 .tg6+ <Me 26 .th5 White correctly passed over the draw by perpetual check to continue the attack a rook down. His threats soon proved too strong for Black to cope with. J.Hodgson White V.Smyslov Black Sochi 1986 ~ d4 d5 2 .tg5 h6 3 .th4 c6 4 tbf3 'ii'b6
5 tbbd2 Hodgson remarked that when Belyavsky, in this same event, attacked his b2 pawn with ...'iWb6, he defended it, as he felt certain that had he not then it would have been captured. In this game he explained that he did not bother, as he was sure that Smyslov would not. Play the man, not the board.
5 ....tfS Another way to decline, of course, is development with 5 ...tbf6 when Hodgson, in his game with Alburt from the 1995 PCA New York Qualifier, chose to take it and after 6... exf6 then protect b2 with
7 'ifcl. 79
What's Hot?
6e3 e6 Taking it now makes more sense to me - indeed I would not here have offered the gambit! Vassily continued to play it cool, but
6...'iVxb2, when c2 is hanging, was critical (and also mysteriously declined by several other players of the black pieces in this position!). 7 ~d3 tDd7 8
i.xf5 exf5
Kasparov told me he regards Smyslov as one of the greatest ever strategical minds. Here the ex-World Champion shows that the increased central control granted him by the exchange on fS compensates for the doubling of his pawns.
9 0-0 ~e7 Even here there are certain spirits who would take on b2 and boast of their extra pawn after 9 ...'iVxb2 10 .l:tbl 'iVxa2 II l:xb7. I think I am not amongst those. 10 c4
hh4
I I tDxh4 g6 12 cxdS cxdS 13 'ii'a4 tDgf6 14 'iVal
Stopping castling, but in so placid a setting that is not such a big headache for Black. 14•••a5 15 tDhfl 'iVe6 16 .l:tacl 'iVe7 17 'iVxe7+ ~e7 18 .l:tc7 I:thb8 19 l:.fc I ~d8 20 tDeS tDxeS 21 dxeS tDd7 22 f4 .l:tc8
80
What's Hot?
The end of getting his act together.
23 lhc8+ :Xc8 24 lhc8+ ~c8 25 tbb3 a4 26 tbd4 tbc5 27 c8 38 ttJc4 h5 39 ..te5 ..txe5 40 tZJxe5 a6 1 ~d5 h4 42 h3 ttJc743 %:tc5 'it>b7 44 ttJc4 ttJe6 45 %:.cf5 %:td7 46:xt7 1-0
Part Four: 4 e3 "ii'b6
At this point we switch from looking at 4 ttJf3 to 4 e3. It can amount to a mere transposition, with White throwing in a quick ttJf3 anyway; but sometimes it can make a huge difference, as we shall see. After either 4 e3 'ifb6 5 b3 or 4 e3 "ii'b6 5 "ii'c I it seems that Black should seize the chance for the liberating advance S... eS!? which has the cute point 6 dxeS?? 'ii'b4+ and Black wins a bishop. However, before looking at S... eS lines, we should briefly consider what happens if Black makes do with S.....tfS. Of course, it could be that your opponent plays like this as has never studied the theory of the Queen's Bishop Attack and doesn't even notice that S... eS is possible! 4a) 4 e3 "ii'b6 5 'ii'c 1 ..tfS Here play is similar to lines discussed in Part Two above where after 4 ttJf3 'ifb6 5 'ii'c I Black replies S.....tfS.
III
What's Hot?
Khalifman once spumed the opportunity of 5... e5 and played like this against Hodgson. He held the draw, but White looked slightly better throughout thanks to his customary queenside pressure.
J.Hodgson White A.Khalifman Black Hastings 1995-96
I d4 d5 2 iLg5 h6 3 iLh4 c6 4 e3 'ii'b6 5 'ifcl iLf5 6 ttJf3 e6 7 c4 iLe7 8 i.xe7 ttJxe 7 9 ttJc3 ttJd7 10 iLe2 0-0 I I 0-0 iLg4 12 b3 .l:tac8 13 ltd I ttJg6 14 'ilfa3 a6 15 .l:tac I ttJf6
The end of the beginning!?
16 h3 iLxf3 17 i.xf3 !:tfd8 Future PCA World Champion Khalifman would sometimes take a tactician very seriously when he had the black pieces. Despite his excellent tactical ability, here he plays very solidly.
18 iLe2 'ilc7 19 cxd5 exd5 20 b4 Hodgson switches to a minority attack. Twenty-three moves later it lands.
20•••'ile7 21 'ii'b3 ttJe4 22 ttJxe4 'ilxe4 23 iLd3 'ife6 24 a4 ttJe7 25 .l:tc5 112
What's Hot?
For all the effect it has when he eventually gets it in, it might have been better just to go b4-b5 right now! 25 •••'iVd6 26 ':'de I %:taS 27 ':'5e2 ':'e8 28 'ife3 :ted8 29 'iVe5 %:td7 30 ':'b2 'iti>f8 31 l:tbb I ~g8 32 'iVa5 :dd8 33 . 6 %:td7 34 %:ta I tDe8 35 'iVe5 tDe7 36 'ilaS 'ike7 37 'iVe5 'ikd6 38 :tal g6 39 l:tea I ~ 40 g3 h5 41 ~g2 :dd8 42 'ilxd6 :Xd6 43 b5 Finally! 43 ••.axb5 44 axb5 %hal 45l:txa2 cxb5 46 bb5 :b6 47 ~e2 ~e8 48 g4 hxg4 49 hxg4 f6 50 ~ Wf7 51 liaS :tb2 52 :tb8 'itte6 53 ~a6 :b6! 54 ~d3 :b2 55 :e8 ~d7 56 l:tf8 ~e6 57 :e8 He could have kept it going with 57 ~g3.
4b) 4 e3 'ikb6 5 b3 .tfS Play here can easily transpose to lines discussed in Part Three: ... tDf3 'iVb65 b3 above after Black's reply 5 ....tf5. Here is one brief example. A.Rakhmangulov White A.Miles Block Alushta 1999
I d4 d5 2 ~g5 h6 3 ~h4 e6 4 e3 'ifb6 5 b3 113
What's Hot?
S••• .tfS 6 .td3 .txd3 7 'ii'xd3 e6 Marcus-Bromann, Budapest 1999 ended 7... tDd7 8 tDfJ e6 9 0-0 .te7 10 .tg3 cS Draw Agreed, whereas Jugelt-Meijers, Nord West Cup 200 I saw an unusual fianchetto after 7 ... tDd7 8 tDe2!? g6!? 9 0-0 .tg7 10 c4 tDgf6 I I tDbc3 0-0 and was eventually a draw too. 8 tDfJ .te7 9 .txe7 tDxe7 10 0-0 Obviously games with the strongest parallels to Morozevich-Kramnik, and symptomatic of Black's equalising potential in this line.
4c) Black grabs space with 4 e3 'fib6 5 b3 eS!? 6 tDfJ e4 If S... eS is a useful move, does this mean that 4 tDfJ is to preferred to 4 e3, as it rules out the possibility? Well, first of all. 4 tDfJ has a downside of its own as it exposes White to the pawn grab of the Hodgson-Godena game above. And perhaps White is happy to provoke Black into setting up a pawn centre with eS and e4, as it can then be undermined. Even if Black is objectively OK, it leads to a far more interesting battle than lines in which Black is content to set up the Slav triangle of pawns on c6, dS and e6. First of all we see Michael Adams trying to start a direct attack, but Boris Gelfand spoils things by forcing off the queens.
114
What's Hot?
M.Adams White B.Gelfand Black
Chalkidiki 1993
I d4 dS 2 JtgS c6 3 e3 h6 4 Jth4 'ifb6 5 b3 eS 6 ttJO e4
7 ttJeS!? Like Skembris in a similar setting, Michael perceives that this is an option. Maybe a Greek motif!? Boris adopts a no nonsense approach to swiftly neutralise it. 7 ...ttJd7 8 'ifhS!? ttJxeS Forced, but quite adequate. 9 'ifxeS + Jte6 10 Jte2 'ifb4 +
IO ... cS!? II c3 'ifd6 Ultra solid. Those of the wilder disposition might have ventured IO... 'it>d7!? instead. 12 'ifxd6 ~xd6 13 ~g3 Jtxg3 14 hxg3 ttJf6 15 c4 'it>e7 16 ttJc3 l::thd8 17 %itc I :ac8 18 cxdS cxdS 19 'it>d2 l::tc7 20 ttJbS :Xc I 21 lhc I ~d7 22 a4 a6 23 ttJc3 as 24 0 exf3 25 gxf3 hS 26 e4 dxe4 27 fxe4 Jtg4 28 hg4 ttJxg4 29 ttJdS + Wf8 30 h7, etc. The game ended in a draw. In, by transposition, OrazicRadlovackl, Milivoj 2002, 7 Jie2 was seen and then 7...e4 SlDfd2 Jie7 9 Jig3 and Black once again went after the bishop at g3. 9 ... h5 10 h4?!. A dubious decision, I0 ...lDh6 and ...lDf5 left Black clearly better off. 6... Jie7!? Offering a true gambit?! Miles-Kramnik, Intel London 1995 saw the less enterprising 6 ... exd4 7 cxd4 Jie7 S Jixe7 lDxe7 9 lDc3 Jif5 10 lDn lDd7 I I Jie2 0-0 12 0-0 Jig4 13 'iVc2 !:tfeS when Black had quite equalised, even though Miles went on to win the game and receive the reward of a bear hug on stage from Ray Keene. Whatever turns you on ... 7 Jixe 7 lDxe7 8 dxeS lDd7 9 lDfJ
124
What's Hot?
Seems Miles did not think so, as 9 f4 4:Jf5 would have necessitated a king move to hang on to his pawn, and then Glenn would have gone to work with 10... ttJxe3! II 'ii'xe3 'it'xb2. 9 •••'ii'c710e6 Doing a little damage as he dies. 10•••fxe6 I I c4 0-0 12 4:Jbd2 'it'd6 13 .Jie2 eS 14 cxdS cxdS 15 'ii'c3 e4 16 4:Jd4 4:JeS 17 f4 An interesting moment, as Miles voluntarily weakens his kingside.
Could he have been worried that Flear would have gone over to the attack after the more regular 17 0-0 (?). 17••• exfJ 18 4:J2xf3 4:Jg4 19 0-0 V2-'/2 A short but valuable game, as Flear, solid as ever, dealt with the White opening with characteristic efficiency to equalise. Naturally the main battleground has been after 6 4:Jf3. If now 6 ... exd4 then 7 ttJxd4!? keeps up the tension.
S.Nguyen Ngoc Truong White A.Vajda Black First Saturday Grandmasters, Budapest 2004 I d4 dS 2 .JigS h6 3 .Jih4 c6
125
What's Hot?
4 e3 'ii'b6 5 'ii'c 1 No gambit today. Well, not yet anyway. S•••eS 6 ttJf3 exd4 7 tiJxd4 The boy likes piece play. 7 •••i.e7 Miiadinovic-I.Sokolov, Istanbul Olympiad 2000 saw 7 ... cS!? S ttJf3 i.e7 9 i.g3 i.f6. An unusual but viable way to fianchetto. 10 ttJc3 ttJe7 I I ttJbS O-O! 12 c3 (12 ttJc7? i.xb2! favours Black) 12...ttJa6 13 i.e2 ttJfS 14 i.f4 i.d7 IS ttJa3 :feS and Ivan took over control of the centre and developed an advantage which he pursued in characteristically powerful style to win a pawn and then, in face of dogged resistance, let the advantage slip and drew. S .tg3 hS?! One could hardly approve! S ...ttJf6 was rational and level. 9 c4!? dxc4 10 i.xc4 h4 1 1 i..xb8:XbS 12 ttJc3 White gave away the bishop pair for a development lead and some chances, he would surely have thought, against the weaknesses created by the advancing h-pawn.
12•••'ii'cS
126
What's Hot?
Both men were really going for it. Perhaps each was in pursuit of a norm!? 12...ttJf6 was sounder. 13 .tb3 'ifgS 14 'iVd2 The consistent follow up to his last move. 14•••'iVxg2 Normally in this line it is the queen's knight pawn which Black accepts as a gambit, but this time it was the king's! 150-0-0 'iVg6 16 :hgl 'iff6 17 f4 White continues in a direct and logical manner. He has strong compensation in the shape of development lead, active pieces, open lines and the black queen to kick around. I 7 ttJe4 'iVe5 IS 'iVc2 was also good, but the text is probably even stronger, since the f-pawn itself may become a useful unit. 17•••.tb4? To stop ttJe4, but the bishop will be missed by the king.
18:gS Missing a shot with the splendid IS !txg7!! 'iVxg7 19 ttJxc6! when the threat of mate decides. Black would do better with IS ....txc3 19 bxc3 ttJh6, but then 20 :g5 leaves the Black game greatly compromised through the loss of the g-pawn, and where is his king now to live?
127
What's Hot?
Also, if you are not going to take on g7, then I would have thought 18 e4 to be a more purposeful move, as that pawn then enters the fray. 18•.. ~ He is stuck for natural moves. 19 a3 ~xcl 20 'ifxcl g6 21 'ii'cs + 21 %:tfl, planning the advance of the e-pawn, was also strong. 21 ... 'ii'e7 22 'ii'cl?! What was that all about? We might as well say 'B' with 22 'ii'xa7 'ii'xe3 + 23 'iitb I 'ii'xf4 24 %:tgg I when White may be two pawns down but the black queen must take care of the rook at b8 and the threat of bringing a rook to the f-Iine is very hard to meet. 22 .. JlhS Dreadfully compromising, but 22 ... iDf6 would allow 23 %:te5 'ifc7 24 'ii'c5+ and 25 %:te7. 2l l:txhS gxhS 24 :gl 1.g4 25 hl!
2S ....txhl 26 11g7! Blasting his way in. Now, as 26 ...~7 27 iDf5+ wins on the spot, Black is finished. 26 ...c5 27 iDf3! c4 28 iDgS! iDh6 29 %:th7 1-0 128
What's Hot?
This brings us to the crux of the matter, which is 6 ttJf3 &4. In the first game Black allows himself to be provoked by White's unobtrusive play into a wild adventure. The verdict is perhaps 'unclear' but this is just the kind of fight White is looking for when he plays 2 ~gS. Y.Milov White A.Mikhaievski Black Biel 1999
I eM d5 21i.g5 h6 3 ~h4 c6 4 e3
'ii'b6 5 'ifcl
e5 6 ttJO e4 7 ttJfd2 J..e7
8 J..g3 h5 Another galloper. 9 c4 h4 10 ~f4 g5 1 1 J..e5 f6
12bbS Interestingly Milov has egged the black pawns on before conceding his bishop for the knight, although it is far from clear that those advances do constitute authentic weakening. 12•••:xb8 13 ttJc3 ~e6 14 'ifc2 f5 The usual stuff. Is White playing a French where he has rid himself of his problem bishop?! The rook on b8 is conveniently placed insomuch as White's offer now of a queen exchange with 15 'ifb3 may be declined, with the b7 pawn covered, by IS ...'ifd8.
129
What's Hot?
15 fl!? lbf6 160-0-0:c8 17 ~bl 0-0
The stage is set.
ISg4 Here he goes.
IS••. hxg3 19 hxg3 c5 Touche.
20g4! Again! The centre melts and, as so often in a middlegame with opposite sides castling, it turns out that king safety is the deciding feature.
20 •••cxd4 21 exd4 f4 21 ...e3 22 cS and lbb3 still leaves Black troubled by the fall of fS.
22 fxe4lbxg4 23 lbxd5 hd5 24 exd5 :f7 His king is open, and that is what counts most now.
25 lbe4 Wg6 26 .td3 'iWg7 27 d6 He surely had other ways to do the business, but this is strong.
27 •.•lbe3 2S 'ifh2lbxdl 29 dxe7lbe3 30 lbd6lhe7 31 lbxcS1!d7 32 'fIh5 :dS 33lbe7+ ~ 34lbg6+ ~eS 35 'iWxg5lhd4 36l:thS+ ~ 37lbe5+ 'fixeS 3S l::th7+ 1-0 130
What's Hot?
A popular alternative plan for Black is to go hunting the white bishop on h4 with tiJe7 and tiJfS. Everything else being equal, this is of course a strategical coup as the dark squared bishop is a valuable piece. Nonetheless, it takes time to carry out the plan and in the meantime White can build up pressure on the queenside. I.Miladinovic White P.Charbonneau Block
Match, Montreal 2000 I d4 dS 2 ~gS h6 3 ~h4 c6 4 e3 'iVb6 5 'it'cI eS 6 tiJf3 e4 7 tiJfd2
7 •••tiJe7 GaJyas-Postny, Budapest 2000, continued 7 ...~e6 8 c4 tiJe7 9 tiJc3 tiJd7 I0 ~g3 a6!? I I cSt? 'ifd8 12 h3. Meaning to hang on to his bishop. 12...gS 13 'it'c2 ~g7 14 ~e2 tiJfS IS ~h2 0-0 16 0-0-0 tiJh4 and just as the stage was set for something to happen, they stopped and agreed to a draw.
8 c4 tiJf5 Straight after it. Brumen-Petrov, Pula 2000, continued, by transposition, 8 ...tiJd7 9 cxdS!? A relatively rare option. 9... cxdS 10 tiJc3 gS I I ~g3 a6. To stop someone dropping in via bS. 12 f3!? exf3 13 tiJxf3 ~g7 14 ~d3 fS IS 0-0 and White won. 9 ~g3liJxg3 10 hxg3 ~e6 II tiJc3 ~e7 Charbonneau was probably expecting a3 and b4, but Miladinovic played more simply. 131
What's Hot?
12 'ifc2 0-0 Not troubled by the queen exchange. there was something to be said for 12...'ii'd8.
13 'ifb3 tiJd7 14 i.e2 f5 15 'ifxb6 tiJxb6?! Here the pawn recapture was right.
16 c5 tiJd7 17 b4 b5 17... a6 was another better strategy than the one he devised. Pascal explained to me that this was the final game of a match which he had already won.
18 tiJb3
Black is now faced with the problem of how to cope with White's projected a2-a4, and it's not easy. If he braces with 18... a6 then 19 a4 lIfc8 20 tbaS leaves him already vulnerable to a sacrifice at c6. So then 20 ...:ab8 21 ~d2 i.d8 was probably best. Instead he uncorked a counter sacrifice which proved just a bit too clever for his own good. The knight remains en prise to the end of the game.
18••.tiJb6?! 19 a4! 19 cxb6? i.xb4 and 20 ...axb6 gave Black two nice pawns and every chance of taking the third at a2 whilst White's activity has gone. But Miladinovic steamed on and Charbonneau's hanging knight just adds to his woes.
132
What's Hot?
19••• bxa4 20 liJa5! l:tfc8 21 i.a6! l:te7 22 i.b7 l:tb8 23 i.xc6 tbc4 24 i.xdS A smooth game, indeed.
1-0 In the last game in this section, White's plan of a queenside pawn storm is given a curious twist. The pawns become interlocked there, which provides a robust shelter for the white king on the queenside; meanwhile Black has been advancing pawns on the kingside looking for counterplay, but the wide open spaces created prove the undoing of his own king.
R.Ovetehkin White A.Lastin Black Chigorin Memorial, St Petersburg 1998 1 d4 dS 2 i.gS h6 3 i.h4 c6 4 e3 'ii'b6 S 'ii'e 1 eS 6 tbf3 e4
7 tbfd2 Another trick to avoid is 7 tbe5?? after which 7...g5 8 i.g3 tbe71eaves the guy at e5 right in the soup. Srientz-Gartner, Austrian Team Championships 1996 did not last much longer: 9 i.e2 h5 10 'ii'd I . Otherwise I0 .. .f6 traps the knight. But now Black went and won the bishop instead. 10... h4 II i.h5 i.e6 12 0-0 i.g7. No hurry. 13 tbg4
133
What's Hot?
hxg3 14 fxg3 ibd7 and White threw in the towel. An inglorious end to the queen's bishop. 7 ..•~e6 On 7... ~e7 White understandably preferred to keep the bishop on the nice h2-b8 line in Martin-Burgess, British Championship 2002, with 8 ~g3. After 8 ...ibf6 9 c40-0 10 ibc3 ~e6 II c5.d8 12 b4 ibbd7 chances were equal.
8 c4 ibd7 9 ibcl A similar situation developed in Short-Adams Brussels Activeplay, 1992, with 6 c3 ibd7 7 ibf3 e4 8 ibfd2 f5 9 ~g3 ibgf6 10 c4.
White has lost a tempo through his choice of c3 and a later c4, but the contours of the play are characteristic. 10...ibh5 I I ibc3 ibxg3. Nigel axes the very useful walker. 12 hxg3 ibf6 13 a3 ~e6 14 b4. The standard gaining of space. 14 ...'iWd8 Out of the way and towards his action zone. 15 ~e2 ~e7 Why ever not to d6? 16 c5. Further Lebensraum and removing d6 from the bishop. 16... 0-0 (16 ...g5!?) 17 ibb3 b6?! Probably unwise. I prefer prefacing expansion with 17.. .':Ji;h7. 180-0. The canny Cornishman deferred castling until a situation had arisen where the threats of black kingside advance were more easily contained and also where he had begun to make progress on the other wing. 18....:.b8 19 'iWc2 g5 20 b5!. Adams capitalises on Short's inaccuracies - he would have done better to have shorn up the queenside with ... b5 - and starts his break-in. 20 ... bxc5 21 dxc5 'iWc8 22 bxc6 ~f7 23 ibd4
134
What's Hot?
A splendid outpost from where the knight radiates influence. Short has been outplayed and starts to thrash in desperation, but Adams easily copes with the attack. 23 .. .f4 24 ttJcb5! f3 25 gxf3 'ifh3 26 I exf3 27 ..txf3. The black game is gone. He threw 27... ttJe4 at Michael, but it was just taken and Short resigned at move 44.
:fb
9 ••. ttJe7!? Threatening to nab the h4 bishop, hence White's next. 10 f3 exf3 Thus the structure shifts. I I gxf3 g5 12 ..ttl ..tg7 13 'iVc2 ':'c8 I 3 .. .f5 was a healthy alternative. 14 c5 Yi'd8 15 ..td3 b6 16 b4 f5 ? He ought to have taken his chance to flick in 16 ... aSL 17 ttJb3! Locking that out. 17••• 0-0 18 h4 Naturally. 18 •••ttJg6 19 hxg5 hxg5 20 0-0-0
135
What's Hot?
A rich and complex middlegame with plenty of opportunities for both sides as play develops across the whole board. 20•••a5 Black too tries to jemmy his way in. 21 iba4! Certainly preferable to grabbing out with 21 cxb6? 'ifxb6 22 bxa5 when after 22 ...'ifa7 a highly disruptive ... c5 will not be long in arriving. 21 ••• b5 22 ttJc3 axb4 23 ttJe2 It will be hard for Black to make much use of the temporary extra pawn, and White can cope with whatever is coming along the new a-file. 23 •• JIf7 24 .l:dg 1 ttJdf8 25 %:th5 ttJh7 26 f4 Jemmy number three. Now 26 ...g4? fails to 27 :xg4! fxg4 28 i.xg6 etc. 26•••.l:a8 27 ~b 1 'ifc8 28 fxg5 Not only winning a pawn and contributing to his attack, but also re-opening the h2-bS diagonal for his bishop. 28•••.l:fa7 29 ttJec 1 ttJhfB 30 i.g3 Ovetchkin later preferred the finesses of first 30 i.e I to force the rook to a worse square and only after 30 .. Jla4 to play 31 i.g3. 136
What's Hot?
30•• :ife8 31 :th2 ~c8 32 %:te2 Had he nothing better? Time pressure starts to affect the play. 32.••:e7 33 'iWd2 tiJh7 34 ~d6
Reaching its optimum capacity. 34 •••%:te4 Ovetchkin now thought this the only practical chance. 35 he4 dxe4 36 :tl? Another inaccuracy. 36 ':'h2! keeping the black horse out and with the intent of some breakthrough sacrifice with .:th6! was clearly winning. 36••• tiJh4! 37 'iWd 1 ~e6 38 ~e5 tiJo In a time scramble, the game spins out of control. 39.bg7 ttJxgl 40 d5 Reaching the time control, but as so often, the last move before was weak and simply 40 'iWxg I xg I 41 dS!, vacating d4 for the knight, ought to have done the job. 40••• tiJO! 41 dxe6 ~7 42 tiJd4 tiJhxg5 43 tiJce2 <M6 44 tiJf4 lId8 45 ~ 1 ~8 46 tiJh5+ ..ttg6 47 tlJxc6 tlJxe6 48 lIg2+ c:Jim 49 tlJxd8+ 'iWxd8 137
What's Hot?
50 'ii'cl? Short of time again, he throws his last clear win away. With 50 ttJf4! he would have covered the check on d3 and brought the knight also into the game with decisive influence, e.g. 50 ... ttJxf4 51 'iVh7 + 'it>e6 52 'ii'h6+ 'it>d5 53 'it'xf4 'it>xc5 54 'iWxf5+ 'it>b6 55 'iVxe4! ttJd2 56 lb:d2 'it'xd2 and the pawn ending is won after 57 'it'd4+. 50 •••'ii'd3 + 51 'it>a I ttJe5 52 :d2 'ifc3 + 53 'iWxc3 bxc3 54 J::tc2 b4 55 a3 ttJc4 56 axb4 ttJxe3 57 lhc3 ttJd5 58 :'c I White must be careful as the black passed pawns are also dangerous. He wisely let it all peter out. 58".ttJxb4 59 c6 ttJd5 60 :fI f4 Or 60 ...'it>g6 61 ttJg3. 61 ttJxf4 ttJexf4 62 lbf4+ 'it>e6 63 lhe4+ 'it>d6 64 l:tc4 'it>c7 '12- 11z
Part Five: White's Anti-'ifb6 Variations after 2".c6
Here we'll look at two of the off beat methods White has tried to take the sting out of Black's 'ifb6 idea. 138
What's Hot?
Sa) The Slav Treatment I d4 dS 2 .tgS c6 3 c4!?
Here the way is cleared to defend b2 along the second rank after l ... h6 4 .th4 'ifb6 with 5 'ifd2: a more economical method than the usual l el h6 4 .th4 'ii'b6 4 'ficl as it doesn't block in the rook on al and leaves the white queen seeing more daylight. Let's see how it might work in practice.
E.Meduna White Z.Szymczak Black Ceske Budejovice 1992 I d4 dS 2 .tgS c6 3 c4 The rarer method which angles play back towards a Slav.
3 •.• h64 .th4 'iWb6 5 'ii'd2 dxc4 6 e4 gS 7 .tg3 .tg78 4JO 4Jf69 4Jc3 .te6 Trying to hang on to it. There were no better moves.
10.te2 10 dS would have forced Black to give up defence of c4 but after either IO ... cxdS I I exdS .tg4 or IO ....tg4 he is comfortably placed.
10•••lZJa6 I I 0-0 0-0-0 Decidedly double-edged, and probably unwise!
12 l:r.fd I g4 13 lZJes 4JhS 14 llJxc4 .txc4 139
What's Hot?
15 iLxg4 +! .te6 16 bhS .txd4 16...':xd4 was wiser. 17 tiJdS!
17•••.txdS 18 exdS .txb2 Now 19 .tg4+ e6 19 dxe6! :Xd2 20 e7 + will win, so ... 1-0
Sb) Prie's Baby I d4 dS 2 .tgS c6 3 al!? A bizarre idea that has been championed by French GM Eric Prie:
Now 3... h6 4 .th4 'ili'b6 can be met with 5 ':a2 !? defending b2 without inconveniencing the white queen or weakening the pawn 140
What's Hot?
front with 5 b3. Though, of course, doubts can be expressed about the rook's role on a2. Prie dared to try 5lta2 against the former Russian Champion Mikhail Gurevich, who said to him with gentle irony in the postmortem "When I saw I:.a2, I began to understand I had to be cautious". On the positive side, you will notice that 3 a3 has also defended the b4 square, so that the 5 ...e5 trick that works after I d4 d5 2 J1.g5 c6 3 e3 h6 4 ~h4 'ii'b6 5 'ii'c I is here prevented as 5 ... e5?? 6 dxe5! is safe for White as Black win the bishop by checking on b4.
E.Prie White C;.t(o~cikBlock
French Team Championship 2004
I eM dS 2 ~gS c6 3 al!? h6 4 ~h4 'ii'b6 5 lta2!? ~f5 In Prie's game vs GM David from Montpelier 2004 play continued 5 ....i.g4 6ltJf3 .i.xf3 7 gxf3 e6 8 e4 J1.e7 8 J1.g3 ltJd7 with level play, although White later won. 6 e3 e6 7 c4 ltJd7 8 ltJc3 ltJgf6
A similar formation to lines arising from 5 'ii'c I , but with the rook unusually positioned.
9 cS "'d8 10 b4 .i.e7 II .i.d3 hd3 12 'ifxd3 eS 13 ltJge2 0-0 14 f3 ltJh7 15 .i.g3 .i.h4 16 0-0 hg3 17lLlxg3 exeM 18 exd4 g6 141
What's Hot?
An approximately equal middlegame.
19 b5 'iff6 20 f4 b6 Provoking a crisis. 21 fS A very useful tool to take apart the black structure. 21 ••• bxc5 22 fxg6 'iVxg6 23 lbfS \tth8 24 dxc5 lbe5 Of course 24 ...lbxc5 lost to 25 'ifd4+. 25 'iVd4 f6 26 lbe7 Just 26 bxc6 was good. 26•••'iVe8 27 lbxc6 lbxc6 28 bxc6 'ifxc6 29 lbe2 :tfe8 30 l:.c2 l:.e4 31 'iVd2 lbg5 32 lbg3 This knight is moving in the direction of the black king. Black's sundry weaknesses start to tell against him. 32 •••l:.c4 33 :Xc4 dxc4 34 'it'd4
Centralised and dominant. 34•••lbh7 35 'iVxc4 lIc8 36 l:.c 1 l:.e8 37 lbfS lle4 38 'it'd3 'it'e8? But he was lost. 39lbd6
142
What's Hot?
On 39 ...l:te 1+ 40 Wf2, so Black resigned.
1-0
Part Six: When 'irb6 is a strategical mistake. Finally in this chapter we look at some instances in which Black was wrong to put his queen on b6. In the first game White's relentless pressure on the queenside culminated in a piece sacrifice. Many players of the black pieces have underestimated the effect of the c4-c5 clamp in conjunction with a bishop on the h2-bS diagonal, and gotten s-q-u-e-e-z-e-d.
J.Plaskett White
M.Petursson Black Hastings 1986-87
1 d4 dS 2 iLgS c6 J lbfJ iLfS 4 c4 h6 S iLf4 e6 6 'iibJ 'iib6?! Fundamentally wrong, in my opinion. 6 .. :ifc8! I advocate.
7 cS
...a
la Vlado Kovacevic. Space can always come in handy. Not only do your men have more room for manouevre, but those pawns are just that bit further toward the queening squares.
7 ••:ifxbJ 8 axbJ
143
What's Hot?
The white queenside pawns are now set to launch. 8...bbl
A big decision, he stops the roller of ttJc3, b4-bS, but cedes his nice bishop. 9:xb1 g5 10 .te5 "Probe", as Mark Hebden would say. 10•••f6 I I .tg3 ttJd7 12 e3 ttJe 7 13 b4 a6 Stopping bS. 14 l:tal l:te8
Again stopping bS, and so now creating time to nab the g3 bishop with '" ttJfS. 15 h3
Preserving a prelate. 15 •••ttJf5 16 .th2 h5 17 .td3 <M1 18 ttJd2 Off to as - the familiar route through life for this knight in this structure.
18•••.te7 Off to eat him. There is little else Black could do about it now that ...eS is not possible. 19 ttJb3 .td8 20 ttJaS .txas 21 bxa5 144
What's Hot?
Straightened pawns, and b7 to hit.
21 ...tDfB 22 %:ta4 Naturally.
22•••:d8 Preparing defence.
23 :b4 l:td7 24 ~e2 :g8 25 g4 I read somewhere that when you have the two bishops it is well to keep open the option of play over as wide a front as possible. So I opened things up over here.
25 ••• hxg4 26 hxg4 tDe7 27 l:tal Another attacker against b7 comes up.
27 ...:g7 28 :a3 ~g8 29 :ab3 tDc8 Organised defence?
145
What's Hot?
Margeir plans to send a plug to bS.
30..txa6 I thought I had better exchange and that the consequences were certainly at least unclear.
30••. bxa6 31 ~b8 0,a7 32 ~3b6 ~gf7 33 lha6 Two down, and he is still tied up.
33 ...~g7 34 ..td6 Before ... eS shuts him out. So often in such lines we see White post his bishop at d6.
34...0,g6 35 ~ab6 e5 36 a6 More or less the kind of position that I had in mind when making the break-in sacrifice.
36... exd4 37 exd4 0,f4+ 38 ~e3 0,e6 39
~a8
With the unpleasant options of ..tb8 or ltbbB.
39 •••0,b5 40 lhc6 0,exd4 41 ~cc8 I sealed this after long thought. 41 :b6 may have been better.
41 •• ..l::tfe7+ He must try for activity, otherwise White's passed pawns and dominant pieces must win.
42 he7lhe7+ 43 ~d3 %lei 44 a7 %:tdl +
146
What's Hot?
Black sets out on a long series of irritating checks with his three remaining pieces against the lone white king. But they are - just insufficient, and the a pawn is going to queen. 45 ~e3 :tel + 46 ~d2 ttJf3+ 47 ~d3 ttJe5+ 48 ~c2 .l:.e2+ 49 ~bl l:el + 50 ~a2 ttJd3 51 :g8+ ~h7 52 :h8+ ~g6 53 :ag8+ cM1 54 1:[f8+ ~g7 55 :hg8+ ~h7 56 :th8+ ~g6 57 as=.l ttJcl + 58 ~bl ttJe2+ 59 ~c2 ttJbd4+ 60 ~d3 ttJf4+ 61 r,t;xd4:td 1+ 62 ~c3 And NOT to e3. 1-0 A similar story follows. Once the queens are exchanged, White's
queenside ascendancy is set in stone. Black's attempt to gain counterplay only makes matters worse.
A.Chemin White A.Kundin Black Biel Open 1997 I d4 d5 2 .i.g5 .i.f5 A sound but rarer reply.
3 c4
A position which could, I suppose, arise via the move order I dol dS 2 c4 .i.fS!? 3 i.gS! One of the more usual ways forward from there is 3 cxdS .i.xb I 4 'ii'a4 +!? 147
What's Hot?
3 •••c6 4 ttJc3 h6 5 1.h4 g5 6 1.g3 The bishop arrives at what may prove to be a very effective diagonal in this Slavonic structure.
6 ••• e6 7 ""3 ""6? Definitely wrong here. I say again that Black oUght to prefer 7...'ifc8, perhaps even followed by capturing at c4. What follows now is classic. 8 c5! 'ifxb3 9 axb3
The Yugoslav GM, Vlado Kovacevic, made a living out of such systems with White. The gain of queenside space, in conjunction with his excellent queen's bishop, won him many points.
9 ••• ttJd7 10 b4 Compare Plaskett-Petursson, Hastings 1986-87.
IO ••• e5 He did not want to come under the Kovacevic squeeze, so broke out now.
I I ttJf3 1.g7 Not liking bringing the knight with tempo to the nice d4 square after 11 ... exd4 12 tiJxd4, nor pushing it along the route to after 11 ... e4
as
12 ttJd2.
148
What's Hot?
12 ttJxeS ttJxeS 13 .i.xeS .i.xeS 14 clxeS d4 15 ttJb I 15 e4!? dxc3 16 exfS cxb2 17 lib I or 15 ....i.g6 16 ttJe2 was to be considered. IS ••• ttJe7 16 ttJd2 Eyeing d6. 16••• ttJdS 17 ttJc4! 0-0 On 17...ttJxb4 18 ttJd6 + ~f8 19 :a4 ttJc2 + 20 ~d2 .i.g6 21 e4 dxe3 e.p. + 22 fxe3 the knight is in trouble, and 22 ... a5 23 .i.c4 ttJb4 24 lIha I leaves the white pieces on dominating squares and Black floundering. 18 bS! ttJb4 19 'iitd2 cxbS 20 ttJd6 .i.g6 21 g3
Excellent strategical understanding by Sacha Chemin, who appreciates that the horse, the c5 pawn, the mobile phalanx of kingside pawns and the effect of the to-be-fianchettoed bishop combine to give him a big edge. 21 ••• ttJc6 22 f4 a6 23 .i.g2 l%ab8 24 .txc6! Killing the remaining black minor unit. 24••• bxc6 25 f5
A very Russian win from one of Mark Dvoretsky's students.
149
Tricks and Traps
In this chapter we'll concentrate on lines in the Queen's Bishop Attack that generate the most tricks and traps. These typically occur when Black arranges a direct challenge to White's control of the centre with moves like 2... c5 or 2.. .f6 or 2...tDc6. In essence, they all have the expansionist theme of e7-e5. But as regards thematic problems in the Queen's Bishop Attack, I refer again to the fluid nature of play and the many and varied situations which may arise. It is difficult to generalise, and the rich games of earlier chapters will have already given a feeling for the sundry hazards of the play. Here, by contrast with long term problems ensuing from a space disadvantage resulting from c4-c5, all of the examples demonstrate attacking play in the middlegame stage. Before we look at opening theory, here is a warning of the danger inherent in Black opening up the centre without exercising sufficient caution.
J.Hodgson White KArkell Black Watson Farley Williams, London 1991
I d4 tDf6 2 ii.g5 d5 3 ii.xf6 exf6 4 e3 ii.d6 5 c4 dxc4 6 ii.xc4 0-0 7 tDc3 After 7 tDn tDd7 8 tDc3 f5 9 0-0 tDf6 Black went on to equalise and then win a drawn rook ending in Timman-Kasparov, Hoogovens Blitz
150
Tricks and Traps
tournament I99S. Note the characteristic shift forward with .. .fS, increasing central control and vacating a nice square for the remaining knight.
7 •.,a68l:lcl
I also competed in the event, and at this point Hodgson commented to me, "There's a trick in this position." I soon saw what.
8 •••cS?! 9 dxcS .txcS? 8 ....teS!? was perhaps the last chance to strive for equality. IO~+!
This trick. White thus wins a clear pawn and there is no Black compensation whatsoever. Remarkably, the late ex-World Championship Candidate Lev Polugaevsky fell into exactly the same thing against Michael Adams at a rapidplay event in France in 1992, after 7... cS? 8 dxcS .txcS 9 .txf7+!. Equally surprisingly, Mickey only managed to draw from there. Things went even worse for French 1M Giffard against Sibarevic at the 1989 Lugano Open. He overlooked 9 .txf7+! entirely, played 9 iYhS? and went on to lose from that level position, as did Nelmann in his game from the French 2002 Championship with Beudaert. The moral may be not to grab on f7 in France?! Bogdan Lalic also missed his chance vs Boric in the 2000 Croatian Championship. He too went 9 'iWhS?, but the game shortly ended in a draw. In both Zlochevski-Quinto, A1mantea Open 1995 and Bezold-Vokanian, New York Open 1995, White grabbed and won. So, now you know! Make sure your name is never added to that illustrious list of plonkers. Hodgson, too, swiftly wrapped things up. lSI
Tricks and Traps 10••• ~ II 'iVhS+ Le point. I I ••• ~g8 12 'iVxeS iDe6 13 iDge2 .i.e6 14 0-0 iDeS 15 iDf4 ~f7 16 iDed5 b6
Fishing for counterplay. Julian kept control. 17 'iVd4 g5 18 ttJxb6 gxf4 19 ttJxaa 'iVxa8 20 exf4 White has transformed his advantage. 20 •••%ld8 21 'iVe3 iDe4 22 'iVe7 l:r.e8 23 'iVxf6 %:te6 24 'iVd4 :d6 25 'iVe5 %le6 26 'iVe7 %lg6 27 f3 Quashing his possibilities. 27•••iDd2 28 f5! :g7 29 'iVd7! iDe4 30 'ii'd4 'iVd5 31 .:xe4! As 31 ...'iVxc4 32 'iVd8+ mates, the game ended. 1-0 GM Keith Arkell also tried the plan of c7-cS in his next encounter with Julian Hodgson. Although there was no catastrophe on f7 this time, the liquidation in the centre didn't provide the easy equality he might have been hoping for. Instead, White was able to use the heightened mobility of his pieces to power up a decisive attack on the black king.
152
Tricks and Traps
J.Hodgson White KArkell Black Lloyds Bank Open 1991
I d4 tt)f6 2 ..tgS dS 3 .lbcf6 exf6 4 e3 ..td6 S c4 dxc4 6 hc4 0-0
7lbc3 a6
8a4 Ah variety! The spice of life!
8 .•.lbd7 9 lbge2 cS Certainly a rational move, but I think I would have preferred 9 .. .f5, like Garry against Jan.
10 dxcS ..txcS No trick on f7 now.
II 0-0 lbeS 12 ..tdS Interesting play; there is a hole at d5, but what kind of hole, and how much should it matter anyway?
12•••'iVb6
153
Tricks and Traps
13
as A quirky move. I would have preferred 13 'iWc2.
13 ••• 'iVe7?! There are several draws by repetition after 13 ...'ifxb2, e.g. 14 lIb I 'iWa3 15.lir.a I ifb4 16 .l:la4 ifb2 17 .l::[a2, etc, but no win nor clear advantage for White, even. So, that ought to have been given the preference. Perhaps Hodgson's intent was 15 liJa4, planning to take on b7!? 14 liJf4 .td7 I S 'iib3 liJe6 The black game is inherently sound, despite the d5 lacuna. Keith, who was disinterested in the as pawn at move 13, now went after what proved to be, in this instance, the somewhat more poisoned bait. 16 liJe4! An alarming shift of emphasis.
16•••ltJxaS 17 ife3 .tb6 Forced. 17... b6 18 b4 forks. 18ltJxf6+!
154
Tricks and Traps
18••• ~h8? Without a fight. Black was lost after IS ...gxf6 19 'iWxf6 :ae8 20 ttJh5 'iVe5 21 'ii'h6 threatening 22 ttJf6+. 21 ...~hS 22 ttJf6 ~f5 23 ttJxe8 Ib:e8 24 'iVxb6, or 21 ...:e6 22 ~xe6 fxe6 and White may keep the kettle boiling with 23 f4! 'iWxb2 24 :tab I be3 + 25 ~h I 'it'c3 26 :f3 with winning threats. Alternatively, there is a route to being a pawn ahead with 21 'it'xb6 'iVxh5 22 ~f3 (22 ...ttJc4 23 'it'b4). 19 'iWxc7 bc7 20 tiJxd7 Up a whole piece now. 20••JUd8 21 ttJcS Hodgson, who retired from active play in 2004, had a truly unique style. 1-0 Now that we have hopefully switched on your tactical radar with these sharp games, we should start looking systematically at ways for Black to stir up trouble - for himself and his opponent.
Part One: Black attacks the white centre with 2 •••cS A good place to begin. With 2... c5 Black plans to eliminate the d4 pawn or push it aside to c5, thus clearing the way for e7-e5. White is compelled to respond actively, as otherwise Black will set up a
155
Tricks and Traps
powerful centre at no cost. The appropriate riposte is the pawn thrust e2-e4: White can play it immediately as a pawn sacrifice, or first capture on c5. We shall consider both ideas.
la) The pawn sacrifice 3 e4!? Black's centre is split in half after 3... dxe4 4 d5. It is also awkward for him that the knight on bS is denied the natural c6 square. Here is a highly tactical game in which Black tried to solve his poSitional problems by launching a quick counterattack against b2.
E.Lobron White A.Nadanian Black European Championship, Saint Vincent 2000 I d4 dS 1 i.gS cS 3 e4!? Instead 3 e3 brought White little in Alburt-Adams, Newark 1995 after 3... cxdo404 exdo44:Jc6 5 co4 h6 6 i.e3 4:Jf6 74:Jc3 g6! S4:Jf3 i.g79 h3 0-0 10 i.d3 dxco4 I I i.xco4 4:JaS 12 i.d3 i.e6. But Eric strives to sharpen it up a.s.a.p!
3 ...dxe4 Many other ideas have been seen. 3... cxdo4?! 4 'ifxdo4 accelerates White's development and is almost certainly advantageous for him. 3... h6 4 i.fo4 cxdo4 5 'ifxdo44:Jc6 6 i.b5 'ifaS+ 74:Jc3 'ifxb5 S4Jxb5 4Jxdo4 9 4:Jxdo4 g5 10 i.g3 was good for White in Hodgson-Dlugy from a 1995 Blitz event in Las Vegas.
4 dS
156
Tricks and Traps
Shades of an Albin Counter Gambit (I d4 d5 2 c4 e5 3 dxe5 d4) reversed, with an extra tempo!?
4.. Ji"6 !? This was a new move, and an interesting experiment. It would seem that Black too was after a fight, certainly more than either player in the game from the 200 I French Team Championships between Giffard and Marciano where after 4 ... h6 5 ..te3 e5 they agreed to a draw. However, in the Heroes Chapter we saw Hodgson build up a winning attack versus Roeder after 4 ... h6 5 ..tf4.
5 ttJc3 .xb26 ..tbS+ ..td7 7..td2!?
7•..~ 7 .....txb5? 8 %:tbl was lousy, but he had here a quaint alternative in 7... e3!? 8 fxe3 'ii'b4, e.g. 9 lIb I 'fIh4+ 10 g3 'ii'f6 II ..txd7 + tiJxd7 12 llxb7 'ii'a6 with unclear play. In that line the e4 pawn dies in the good cause of messing up White's structure a little. 8 l:[b 1 'ii'aS 9 bd7 + tiJxd7 10 lhb7 'ii'a6 II 'fib I ttJgf6 12 ttJge2
157
Tricks and Traps
12•..0-0-0?! A mistaken concept. From now on it is king safety which is the most significant feature of the middlegame, and in that respect Black is never equal. He ought to have played 12 .. .tiJb6 when I 3 ""5 + 'iVxb5 14 4Jxb5 4Jxd5 15 4Jxa7 c4 leads to a perfectly acceptable position for him. Indeed, in view of this option, future games may see White trying 12l:.b I instead. 13 llb5 e6 14 dxe6 'iVxe6 15 0-0 lbb6 16 .i.f4 White's men move towards the attack squares. 16•••.i.d6 17 l::ta5 .i.xf4 Or 17... 'ittb8 Islbb5 and the king hunt is on. 18 tiJxf4 1i'e5 19 llxa7 lld6 20 tba4!
20•.•lbfd7 21 'ii'b5 158
Tricks and Traps
Sacrificing a piece to pursue the attack. 21 ...ttJxa4 Or 21 .. :iVxf4 22 tbxb6+ tbxb6 23 'iVxc5+ and the roof caves in. 22 'iVxa4 'iVxf4 23 g3
A useful nudge to cope with future back rank problems, before he returns to the prosecution of his attack, although 23 :b I and 23 'iVb5 were also powerful moves.
23 •••'iVh6? A weak defence in time trouble. Toughest was 23 ... 'ii'f6 with best play. Perhaps then 24 l:tbl lbb6 25 :as+ tbxaS 26 'iVxa8+ 'it>d7 27 'ilxh8 when Black would have to cope with the threat of the rook's incursion with 27... l:tb6 and then 28lhb6 'ilxb6 29 'iVxg7leaves White clearly better in the queen ending. 24 l:tbl? Inaccurate. The right way was 24 ~aS+! lbb8 25 'iVa7 l:tb6 26lhbS+! l:txbS 27 'iVxc5+ 'it>d7 28 l:td 1+ 'it>e8 29 'iVe5+ and bS gets picked off. 24•••'it>d8? And another error! Sharp positions demand precision! He had a route to an inferior, but not entirely hopeless, setting with 24 ... lbb6! 25 :as+! tbxaS 26 'ilxa8+ 'it>d7 27 :tb7+ 'it>e6 28 'ii'xh8 etc. 159
Tricks and Traps
25 ltaS+ cj;e7 26 l1xh8 e3 27 lte 1! Stopping all nonsense.
27•••l:te6 28 fxe3 g5 Or 28 .. Jlxe3 29 'iWh4+! 29 l:td 1 lbfB 30.aS 1-0 In contrast, Black developed his pieces quickly in the next game - as it turned out, too quickly. White gained a rampaging attack with absolutely no risk to his own king. Big name games don't often end so drastically.
I.Sokolov White
L.On Black Parnu 1996
1 d4 d5 2 i.g5 c5 3 e4 dxe4 4 d5 lbd7
A respected alternative, although Ivan was to show it little respect.
5 lbc3lbgf6 6 .d2 g6 7 0-0-0 i.g7?! If this line is seen in the future, then I imagine that here it would be 7...a6 or 7...•a5 that is tried.
8 i.h6 160
Tricks and Traps
Straight to work. again very much in the style of an Albin Counter Gambit (I d4 dS 2 c4 eS 3 dxeS d4) but with an extra tempo!
8 ....b:h6 8... 0-0 looks very dodgy after 9 h4. but was probably preferable. Bringing the queen to h6 prevents himself castling to any kind of safety. and the whole thing comes down like a pack of cards with frightening rapidity. 9 'ifxh6 a6 10 liJhl 'ifc7
II d6! exd6 12 liJgS
With great threats already. 12•••dS
12...liJeS lost to 13 'ifg7 and meanwhile White is threatening to just take on e4 and thus get into d6. 161
Tricks and Traps 13 ttJxdS ttJxdS 14 ltxdS 'iff4 + I 5 'it>b I tbf6 On 15 ...'ifxf2 16 .i.c4 threatens 17 1:.fl and on 15 ...'it>e7 16 g3 'jfxf2 17 .i.h3 with an unstoppable initiative. 16 l%dS+
Not often you get such a chance against a strong Grandmaster. 16...~dS 17 ttJxf7 + 'it>e7 IS 'jfxf4 'it>xf7 19 .i.c4 + 'it>g7 20 ~d I .i.f5
21 "ilc7+ ~h6 22 h3 1-0 I b) White delays the e2-e4 advance White isn't obliged to sacrifice a pawn at move three. In fact, it could be even more effective if he delays his stab against d5 for a move or so. As you can see, Hodgson has used 3 dxc5 to beat two strong Grandmasters. J.Hodgson White I.Sokolov Black Groningen 1996 I d4 dS 2 .i.gS cS 3 dxcS f6 Black decides to build a pawn centre. Instead 3...'ifa5+ came to grief in glorious style in Povah-Ledger in the First Moves chapter. Meanwhile 3 ...tbc6 features in the next game. 4.th4 eS 162
Tricks and Traps 4 ....e6 S e4 ~xcS 6 ttJc3 ttJe7 7 'ifhS+ g6 S 'iVh6 d4 9 0-0-0 ttJd7 10 liJa4 led to a White advantage in Hodgson-Strijbos, Dutch League 1996.
Se4 S ttJf3 is an interesting alternative. S•••~e6
A new move, but I am not sure that it is stronger than S... d4, when 6 ~c4 ~xcS 7 ttJe2 'ii'b6 S ttJd2 ~e6 was equal in Mohrlok-Beikert, Belgium 1993. Fans of H.G.Welis would appreciate why we would not wish to see a match between the player of the white pieces in that game and French GM Relange, whose first name is Eloi. S... dxe4 6 'iixdS+ 'it'xdS 7 ttJc3 bcS S 0-0-0+ ttJd7 9 ttJxe4 ~e7 was how Hodgson-Van Wely, Horgen 1995 began. Julian then enlivened it with 10 f4 exf4 I I ttJf3 ~c7 12 ttJc3 ttJb6 13 a4 ~b4 14 as ~xa5 IS ttJbS + and he eventually won, although there were many unexplored branches already even by that point in the game.
6 exdS 'ii'xdS 7 'iVxdS bdS 8 ttJc3 White now already gets an advantage in development and Black's defence is not easy. I do not believe that Sokolov repeated S... ~e6.
8 ...~e6 On S...~c6 it could get sharp after 9 b4 12 f4!? 163
as
lObS ~d7 I I ttJdS ~dS
Tricks and Traps
9 tDbS ttJa6 On 9...~d7 10 tDd6!.
IOf4
Very Hodgson, but for the more restrained amongst you, please note that 10 tDd6+ iLxd6 I I cxd6 tDb4 12 0-0-0 also looks very strong.
10•••iLxcs 11 fxeS fxeS 12 0-0-0 The active position of all White's pieces plus the terrible knight on a6 guarantee a clear advantage for Hodgson.
12••• tDf6 13
tDfl
0-0
On 13 ... iLxa2 14 b3 e4 15 tDe5 leaves White better, as he would also be after 13 ... e4 14 tDfd4 l:.d8 15 .te2. 14 tDxeS tDe4 Ivan lost a pawn, and his only chance now is activisation of his pieces.
164
Tricks and Traps
15 ttJd4 This keeps his advantage, but it was even stronger to continue 15 it.c4!? it.xc4 16 ttJxc4 ttJf2 I 7 it.xf2 %:txf2 18 %:td2 :afS 19 lie I. 15•••it.xa2! An alert grab!
16 .ba6 bxa6 17 :the I ttJf6 18 it.xf6! lhf6 19 ttJd7 bc14 20 lhd4
Nominal material equality, but White has the better pieces and pawns plus the threat of trapping the bishop with b2-b3. 20•••l:tc6 21 ttJe5 lic5 21 .. .l::tc7 was probably better. Hodgson makes use of a gift tempo to generate play on the queenside. 22 b4! lic7 23 'ittb2 it.e6 24 c4± 27 ttJc6 ':'c7 28 ttJa5
:f8 25 'ittc3 it.c8 26 :ed I :e7
Often also a good middlegame square for a knight when White has such play with his queenside pawns. 28•• JU2 29 ':'1 d2 IIfI 30 c5 h6 31 c6 'it>f7 32 'ittb2 'itte7 33 :e2 + 'it>f7 Sokolov tries to stay active whilst fighting the c-pawn, but 33 ...it.e6 may have been better there. 34 ttJc4 165
Tricks and Traps
34....tf5?! In time pressure Ivan allows a killer fork. There was a tougher defence in 34 ....te6 3S ttJd6+ rile7 36 %:tde4 rilxd6 37 :Xe6+ rildS 38 %:t2eS+ rilc4 39 ltd6. 35 ttJe3 :e7 The only alternative of 3S ...:bl + lost to 36 rila2 .tg6 37 ltd7+ %:txd7 38 cxd7 rile7 39 ttJc2+. This denouement indeed was to occur. 36 l::tdd2 The fork and the pawn mean that Black is now over the edge. 36•••%:tbl + Or 36.. Jn4 37 itJxfSlhfS 38lhe7+ rilxe7 39 :d7+ rile6 40 lhg7 wins. 37 rila2 .tg6 38 :d7 %hd7 39 cxd7 Now 39... rile7 40 ttJc2+ wins the rook. 1-0
In the next game Black eschews the f7 -f6 plan in favour of piece play which begins with 3 ... ttJc6 and culminates in a tactical slugfest. Two of the world's more creative Grandmasters clash, so it was bound to be an interesting opening.
166
Tricks and Traps
J.Hodgson White T.Hillarp Persson Black Vikings Grandmasters, York 2000 I d4 d5 2 ..tg5 e5 3 dxe5 ltJe6!? 4 e4!? h6 5 ..th4 dxe4 6 ltJc3 g5 7 ..tg3 'ilfa5!?
Not pushing his luck with 7... 'ilfxd 1+ 8 l:xd I f5 to drown out the bishop, as then White might have, for example, 9 .tc4!? f4 10 ltJbS, etc. S ..tb5!? ..tg7 9 ltJge2 ..tg4 10 'ii'd5! :teS I I ..te5!? .txe5 I think Black overestimated his chances in the minorpieceless
middlegame that arises. He would have done better here with I 1... ltJf6!. 12 'ilfxe5 ltJf6 13 ..txe6+ Ihe6 14 'ifbS+ %:teS 15 'iVxb7 'iVxe5 16 ltJxe4 ltJxe4 17 'ifxe4 ..txe2 IS 'ifxe2 'ifxe2
167
Tricks and Traps
The end of the beginning. 19 'iVe3 Meeker souls might have preferred 19:d I. 19•••'iVc4 20 b3 'iVa6 21 'iVe2 'iVaS+ 22
rMl
0-0
Hillarp-Persson naturally considered that he had come out of the opening with Black in a more than satisfactory condition, but he misses the STOP sign over the next ten moves, and tries too hard to win the game. 23 h4!
Luft and counterattack too. 23 •••:fd8 24 hxgS 'iVxgS 2S ..ttg 1 :d2 26 'iVf3 :cc2 27 :fI ...,S 28 g3 'iVc6 29 'iVf4
Timman once observed that only the greatest players were able to defend an inferior or even lost game whilst also keeping in mind the possibility of playing for a win. He mentioned Fischer, Karpov and Korchnoi as rare exemplars of this. I do not suggest that Mr J.M.Hodgson was ever of that stature, but I do believe that throughout all of his clever defensive footwork in this game he had in mind the prospect of going on to the front foot if Black overstepped. 29•••eS 30 'iVf5! Why not? 30 'iVxh6 led to a drawn ending, but he keeps the game alive. 168
Tricks and Traps
30... e4? 30... 'iIi'g6. 31 'ii'f4 cJi;g7 32 l:Ih4! The tide turns! It transpires that it is now the self-exposed black king who is the worse off. 32 •••.La2 33 l:[g4+ cJi;f8 34 'ili'bS+ cJi;e7 35 ltgS cJi;e6 36 l:Ie8+ cJi;dS 36 ...cJi;fS 37 'ili'eS+ was a quick mate too.
37 'ili'eS mate
Part Two: Black attacks the bishop with 2 •••f6
We have already seen the f7-f6 idea in conjunction with 2... cS, and 2.. .f6 can possibly transpose to these lines. It may look ugly, but Black intends to construct a pawn centre with e7-eS, and 2 .. .f6 is a useful building block. The pawn move also facilitates e7-eS in a secondary way by breaking the pin on the e7 square. As it comes with gain of time by hitting the white bishop, it is no Patzer move. There is, however, a drawback: the knight on g8 is disgruntled at finding itself deprived of its natural square on f6. Indeed, it is hard to think of a Queen Pawn Opening in which the knight doesn't almost automatically land on f6. 169
Tricks and Traps
2a) The bishop goes to the edge: 3 ..th4 Here Black normally decides to develop the horse via h6 and f5 which leads to a highly interesting struggle. As you can see from the notes to the illustrative game, some very highly powered players have taken this route as Black. J.Hodgson White J.Shaw Black East Kilbride Open 1996
I d4 dS 2 ..tgS f6 3 ..th4 tiJh6!?
A principled move, and quite possibly the strongest here. 4 e3 In Clarke-B.Lalic, Target Recruitment Masters 200 I, White tried 4 f3?! and 4 ..•c5 left Black standing well already. You cannot take too much licence in such openings. 4 •••tiJf5 I am not quite sure what Black was up to in Miladinovic-Ibragimov, Ano Liosia 1999, as he mixed his systems into a quite indigestible pottage: 4 ... c6 5 ..td3 'iWb6 6 b3 ..tf5 7 ..tg3 tiJd7 8 tiJf3 e6 9 h3! ..te7 10 0-0 0-0 I I c4 'iVaS 12 ..th2 b5 13 a4 bxc4 14 bxc4 'iWa6 15 ..te2 and White was clearly better. S ..tg3 170
Tricks and Traps
No mention here from any p~~s commentator of the possibility of S .Jld3!?~6 'i'hS+ g6 t.xh'" Must be worth a go.
5 ••.g6 In Gallagher-Crouch, Nottingham 1987, we saw some extraordinary stuff: S... hS!? Many people have commented that it is almost impossible to predict the play of 1M Colin Crouch. Actually this is the most critical move, as White may not move his f-pawn and certainly would not want the consequences of 6 h3ltJxg3 7 fxg3. 6 iLe2. Gallagher improvises: 6 ... h4 7 .JlhS + ~d7 8 iLg4 e6 More challenging than 8 ... hxg3 9 iLxfS + e6 10 .Jlh3 9 iLf4 gS 10 e4
The only way out, but I personally find it unconVincing. IO ... dxe4 II iLci ~e7. When this position arose in the game Adams-Van Wely from a Hoogovens Blitz tournament of 1998, Luke preferred I 1... c6 12 iLg4 ~c7, and after many adventures and many errors it all ended in a draw. Like many great players, Adams is also lucky. To return to 171
Tricks and Traps
Gallagher-Crouch. 12 c3 'it'd5!? 13 liJh3 liJd6. I think I would have preferred to have developed a new piece there. 14 0-0 ..td7 15 b3 liJc6. Somehow Crouch has not got his act properly together. 16 ..te3 b5 17 a4!. Now, as after 17... a6 IS axb5 a recapture with the pawn would be impossible, White guarantees himself the critical advance of c3-c4. 17... l:tbS IS axb5 "xb5 19 liJd2liJf5 20 liJxe4. 20 c4 was also strong. 20 .....xb3 21 'iWf3. As so often in the games of Gallagher, his pieces have gravitated to attacking posts. 21 ...a ~ 37 ':cI llgS3S ':'c2l::th239 gl l:lh340 lLlxf5 'ife6 41 %:te2 %:th5
42 e4! :laS 43 'ii'b5! :la7 44 c6 dxe4 45lLld6+! g6 46 f5+ :1xf5 47 'ifxfS + 'ii'xfS 4S lLlxf5
xfS 49 l::rc2 l::rc7
He could have resigned. 50 b4 e6 51 b5 d6 52 r,t>a l:tcS 53 e3 f5 54 f4 %:tf8 55 b6
In this game the Grandmaster of Disaster once again amply demonstrated his unique chess talent.. 1-0
174
Tricks and Traps
2b) The bishop goes to the centre: 3i.f4
Although White won the game above with the statistically most popular bishop retreat to h4, attention might be shifting to 3 i.f4. For one thing, 3... lbh6? can now be answered by 4 i.xh6 wrecking Black's kingside pawn structure (yes, it is White's third bishop move in a row, but such opportunities mustn't be missed!). Furthermore, the white bishop might have some joy aiming in the other direction towards the c7 square if Black is careless. Take a look at what happened to poor Black in the next game and you will see what I mean. S.Nguyen Ngoc Truong White T.Banusz Block First Saturday Grandmasters, Budapest, February 2004
I d4 dS 2 .tgS f6 3 .tf4 cS Nobody seems to have gambited here with 3... e5!? 4 dxe5lbc6. I think I might.
4 e3 Both Hodgson and Torre have played 4 .txbS lhbS 5
lbc3 here.
4 ••• lbc6 S lbfJ 'iVb6
As so often in the Queen's Bishop Attack, Black makes this probing move, arguing that the white queens ide is minus a key defender. But here White spotted that he could just carry on developing. 6lbc3!
175
Tricks and Traps
6•••e6? Losing the plot at move six. He ought to have preferred something like 6 ... cxd4 7 exd4 e5!? with interesting complications since White may not here win material with 8 dxe5 (8 ttJxd5? 'ifa5+ wins) because of 8 ... d4 followed by recapture at e5 with the pawn, with White still unable to take twice there as ...'ifa5+ at the end would win a loose piece. 7 ttJbS! Straight in. 7 •••'ifaS+ 8 c3 ~ 9 .ic7! I presume it was this that Barnusz underestimated. 9 dxc5 .ixc5 10 b4 ttJxb4 granted him good counterchances and 9 ttJc7 :b8 does not lead anywhere.
9...b6 9 ...'ifa6 10 ttJd6+ wins. 10 dxcS .txcS II al! The win with b4 is now unstoppable, so Black resigned. 1-0 Instead of counterattacking with c7-c5, Black can rapidly mobilise his queenside pieces and entrench himself in the centre, albeit at the cost of a disadvantage in space. However, here is how he was gradually outplayed by the Grandmaster of Disaster: 176
Tricks and Traps J.Hodgson White S.Dishman Black 4NCL British Team Championship 200 I I d4 d5 2 .ltg5 f6 3 .ltf4 The other way. 3 ••• ttJc6 4 ttJf3 Something had to be done about ... e5. 4 ••. .ltg4 Gouret-Geenen, Mans 200 I saw 4 ...g5!? 5 .ltg3 h5 6 h4. I prefer 6 h3. 6 ...g4 ? ttJg I ttJh6 8 e3 ttJf5 9 .i.f4 (9 ttJge2) 9... e5 10 dxe5 fxe5 I I .i.g5.lte? 12 he? 'fixe? 13 'fixd5 .lte6 14 'fie4 0-0-0 when Black went on to win it. 5 ttJbd2 e6 6 .i.g3 .ltd6 7 c3 f5!? Clearly there were lots and lots of alternative approaches for Black. Mr Dishman sets his mind on a kind of Dutch. S ttJe5 Typically inventive; Hodgson strives to make out that the bishop at g4 is misplaced. Most of us would have played 8 e3. S •••J.xe5 9 dxe5 ttJge7 10 ttJb3 0-0 II f4 Because of Black's excellent reply this was probably an inaccuracy, and he ought to have preferred II 'fid2. 1I •••g5! Inventive play. I 1... b6 and I 1... h6 were the more sober moves, but Dishman takes his chance to undermine the white centre. 12 ttJc5 'ficS 13 ttJd3 A unique player. 13••• ttJg6 14 'fid2 The curious effect of the bishop at g4 is to deny White the chance to bolster his centre with e3. 177
Tricks and Traps
14•••gxf4 15 liJxf4
15•••liJxf4? Dishman loses his nerve. He ought to have played IS ... liJcxeS! meeting 16 h3 with 16 ...liJc4 17 'ifc I liJxf4 when he will be better than alright after either 18 'ii'xf4 i&hS or 18 hxg4 liJg6. Instead, he allows Hodgson the chance to get his act together. 16 'ii'xf4 'ii'e8 17 i.h4 'ifg6 18 0-0-0 'ii'g7 19 i.f6 1:lxf6 Maybe the best chance, as h3 and g4 would come anyway, and that is an unpleasant house guest. 20 exf6 'ii'xf6 21 h3 i.h5 22 g4 i.g6 23 i.g2 liIfB 24 gxf5 i.xf5 25 e4 A simple move inflicts decisive structural damage. 25 •••i.xe4 26 'ii'xf6 1hf6 27 i.xe4 dxe4 28 l:!de I llf4 29 llhg I + rM7 30 llg4 lhg4 31 hxg4 The technical phase is not difficult, as the black passed-pawn poses no threat and there are plenty of open lines giving the rook scope to prove its superiority. 31 ...'itf6 32 lhe4 e5 33 'ii?d2 ~g5 34 llc4 h5 35 gxhS ~hS 36 b4 a6 37 a4 'ii?g5 38 bS axbS 39 axbS liJa7 40 l:.cS 'itf4 41 c4 c6 42 b6 liJc8 43lhc6! After 43 ... bxc6 44 b7 it's a girl, so ... 1-0
178
Tricks and Traps
Part Three: The Chigorin treatment 2 i.gS ttJc6
Black tries to live without c7-c5 or c7-c6: a controversial decision, as one of these pawn moves form the core of almost every black defence in Queen's Pawn Openings. In the first example, Black decides he needs the help of c7-c6 after all to safeguard d5, but arranging it disrupts the coordination of his pieces.
E.Prie Black
O.Renet White French Team Championship 2004
I d4 dS 2 i.gS ttJc6!? l el jLlS 4 c4 'ii'd7 S ttJcl e6 Some form of Chigorin's Defence to the Queen's Gambit?
6 l::tc I i.e7 7 cxdS exdS 8 i.f4!?
179
Tricks and Traps S••• ttJf6 9 .tbs 0-0 10 ttJf3 'WeS Avoiding ttJeS. 110-0 A lot of people would have taken the knight. 11 •••ttJdS Renet does not want the worry of the doubled c-pawns. 12 .tes!? ..te6 Not 12... c6?? because of 13 ..txf6 and 14 ttJxdS. 13 'We2 e6 14 ..td3 h6 15 h3 ttJd7 Black has some problems finding natural squares for his men. 16 ..th2 ttJb6 17 ttJes White has played skillfully and stands better. amongst other nice options he has here is the Pillsbury plan of advancing his f-pawn. 17••• ttJd7 IS e4
18 f4!? IS •••dxe4 19 ttJxe4 ttJb6 20 al!? ..tds
21 ttJg3!
180
Tricks and Traps Off to f5, where Garry Kasparov was always telling me you ought to send them. 21 ...ttJe6 22 ttJf5 'iWd8 23 'iWe2 g6 This does not work out, but he was under gathering pressure, and probably a bit frustrated at the little activity he had enjoyed so far in this game. 24 liJxh6+ <J;;g725 ttJhxf7 lhf726 'iWg4!
26•••%lf6 27 ttJxg6 <J;;f7 28 ttJe5 + <J;;fa 29 %lfe 1 With three healthy pawns for his knight and still dominant pieces, White is going to win this game. 29 ••• ttJg7 30 ttJg6+ :xg6 31 i.xg6 ttJd7 32 l:.c3 ttJf6 33 'iWg3 'iWd7 34 %lce3 .i.d8 35 'iWf4 <J;;g8 36 'ifh6 <J;;fa 37 .i.e5 Nothing to be done about further White incursions, so Black resigned. 1-0
Black is bolder in the next game: he accepts his pawn structure is never going to be perfect and so trusts in his piece activity. This is the only philosophy consistent with the move 2... ttJc6 and leads to an impressive draw against Hodgson. In fact he could have punished White's over zealous attempts to win by playing on in the final position.
181
Tricks and Traps
J.Hodgson White R.Baumhus Black Bundesliga 200 I
I d4 dS 2 .i.gS tbc6!? 3 e3 f6 4 .i.h4 .i.f5 5 .i.bS 'ifd7
Almost a do-it-yourself or mix 'n match approach to the opening moves. So, please do have some sympathy for your author in his efforts to provide explanatory material on so protean a system!
6 .i.g3 tbh6 7 tbe2 a6 8 iLa4 e6 9 tbd2 iLd6 10 iLxd6 'ifxd6 I I c4
The move which I feel confident White, broadly speaking, ought to be trying to work into his schemes after Black has compromised his structure with .. .f6.
182
Tricks and Traps
I 1..•dxc4 12 e4 .i.g6 13 liJxc4 'iVb4 + 14 liJd2 b5 15 'iWc2
15 ...'iVd6 16 .i.b3 0-0 17 'iVc3 :ad8 18 d5 liJe7 19 !:tel exd5 20 'iVxc7 ~h8
21 liJf4 Somehow one can detect the authorship of Hodgson. even were the identity of the player of the white pieces hidden. His playing style was quaint and highly original.
21 •••dxe4 22 0-0 'iVxc7 23 lhc7 ~fe8
Black rallies well.
24 liJb I .i.1S 25 liJc3 liJg6 26 liJh5 :d7 27 l:.c6 l:.d2 28 lha6 b4 29 liJd5 .i.g4 30 liJg3 .i.e2 31 ttJxe2 lhe2 32 ttJxb4 l:.xb2 33 liJd5 liJlS
183
Tricks and Traps
Activity holds the game for Black. His sleeping knights wake to cause some mischief of their own.
34lbc7 lIb8 35 h3lbf4 36lbdSlbxdS 37 bdS e3! Neutralising the position.
38 lIa8 lha8 39 .i.xa8 :Xal 40 fxe3 lbxe3 41 l:te I lIa3 IJ'z-lJ'z
Part Four: The double edged 2 iLgS h6 3 iLh4 cS
A more aggressive approach than 3... c6, which figured in the What's Hot? chapter. We have come full circle, as this line is clearly related to the 2 ...c5 variation with which we started the chapter. The sharp position that arises after 4 dxc5 'ii'aS + 5 lbc3 lbc6 needs investigation. It should be compared with the similar situation that arose in Povah-Ledger in the First Moves Chapter, but without the moves h7-h6/iLh4 thrown in. 184
Tricks and Traps
GoChepukaitis White So.vanov Black St Petersburg Championship 1999
• d4 One last genuflection to the master, with a game from his final years .
... odS 2 iLgS h6 3 iLh4 cS 4 dxcS 'ii'aS + 5 tbc3 tbc6
Already a very interesting moment.
6 'ii'd2 iLf5 7 e3 gS 8 iLg3 iLg7 9 tbge2 'ii'xcs Before White plays tbd4 .
•0 'ii'xdS 'ii'xdS • • tbxdS 0-0-0 12 0-0-0
12.. oiLxc2! 185
Tricks and Traps
Getting the pawn back, but still not quite equalising. 13 ~e2 lhd5 14 lb::d5 lbb4 + 15 b3 lbxd5 16 e4 lbb6 17 lbe3
he3
18 bxe3
Inexplicable. Classical rules say you never split pawns without good reason. Chepukaitis' chances of realising the advantage of the pair of bishops would have improved had he kept the pawns together. As it was, he probed and stretched for fifty-five more moves before they shook hands. 18•••lbf6 19 f3 I:[d8 20 'If.?e2 lba4 21 .tfl b6 22 h4 lbe5 23 .te4 e6 24 .td4 lbed7 25 hxg5 hxg5 26 .l:lh6 lbe8 27 :h7 e5 28 .te3 f6
A fortress of sorts goes up. 29 .te6 e7 30 e4 e6 3 I ,.U7 a6 32 .td5 + d6 33 .te I lbe5 34 .tal l:.d7 35 %:tfB 'If.?e7 36 :th8 :e7 37 d2lbd6 38 'If.?e3lbe8 39 g3lbd6 40 e2 lbe8 41
f2 lbd6 42 g2 'If.?d7 43 h3 lbd3 44 .:tfB lbe8 45
.tf7 lbd6 46 .tg8 lbe8 47 g4 b5 48 cxb5 axb5 49 :f7 + 'If.?d8 50 .tfB
lbe I 51 .tb4 lhf7 52 .txf7 lbe2 53 .te5 lbd4 54 f4 gxf4 55 gxf4 d7 56 f5 lbd6 57 .td5 lbe2 58 .tb4 lbf4 59 .ta8 lbd3 60 .td2 lbe4 61 .th6 lbb6 62 .tb7 lbe5 63 .te3 d6 64 h5 lbxb7 65 .txb6 e6 66 g6 lbd6 67 'If.?xf6 lbxe4 + 68 ~e5 lbd6 69 .td4 lbxf5 70 71 'If.?e4 b7 72 'If.?d5 'If.?a8 73 'If.?e6 'If.?b8 Ih_I/2
186
xfS b4
Tests
To help you to keep your tactical and strategical wits honed, here are some Test Positions, each of which began life as I d4 dS 2 .tgS or, in a few cases, as I d4 ttJf6 2.tgS.
B.Larsen - M.Bain US Open, Boston 1970
White to play Bent Larsen has turned a Trompowsky into a Queen's Bishop Attack into a Stonewall. Ms Mary Bain has seen her dark squared bishop traded off in a formation where the central pawns are now fixed on the same colour of squares as the remaining bishop. How ought things now to develop?
187
Tests
Y.Jansa - Z.Ribli Bucharest 1971
White to play A turgid and blocked situation. How did Vlastimil Jansa bring it to life? What is the best move here for White.
Y.Hort - H.Ree Wijk aan Zee 1972
White to play An early escapade in the Queen's Bishop Attack. Structurally Black stands well, but his queen has meandered away to a strange posting. What is going on here?
188
Tests
Y.Jansa - P.Ostojic Vmjacka Banja 1973
White to play Still very early in the game, and White is thinking about a plan. What is his best option now?
C.Oepasquaie - S.Byme Australian Championship, Melbourne 1991
White to play Chris Depasquale hit upon an enterprising plan from here. What was it?
189
Tests
M.Adams - A.Kovalev Osten de Open 1991
White to play Michael Adams' opponent here was a strong Russian GM. But he played the opening moves of what he must have dismissed as a non-serious system a bit too lightly. Instead of the standard 6 ... c6, his last move was 6...i.d6? How did Adams proceed?
J.Hodgson - A.Martin British Championship, Plymouth 1992
White to play Hodgson had played for initiative and Martin had made some very odd decisions, including saddling himself with a weak cS square and putting his queen bishop out in limbo. What is best play from here?
190
Tests G.Chepukaitis - G.Tunik St Petersburg Open 1994
Black to play As in so many instances where White has advanced with c4-c5 in this opening, he now plans to place the entire black queenside under a clamp with a knight on as. How may Black counter this idea?
S.Drazic - S.Skembris Cesenatico Open 2000
White to play How should he proceed with getting his act together?
191
Tests
M.Adams - VAnand PCNlntel-Grand Prix, London 1994
White to play Another situation where White has gained queenside space in the Queen's Bishop Attack through c4-cS. Any thoughts on how to continue to increase your pressure here with White?
J.Hodgson - M.Petursson Horgen 1994
White to play Black's decision to play an earlier ... hS was inexplicable, when the safer option of ... h6 existed. What is a good plan from White here?
192
Tests A.Miles - W.Janocha Cappelle la Grande 1995
White to play Miles liked to play for small technical edges with White. How did he continue here?
M.Adams - C.Lutz Wijk aan Zee 1995
White to play As so often in the games of Michael Adams (and of Speelman in his
prime) he has assured that his king has the safer placement. How now to proceed?
193
Tests
J.Degraeve - E.Neiman French Championship, Narbonne 1997
White to play Black has dithered a bit and White has progressed things on the queenside. What should he play now?
J.Fries Nielsen - J.Nilssen Copenhagen Open 1995
White to play Black thought his pawn sac had clogged White up due to a pin on the h6-c I diagonal should he try to unscramble with 24 f4 gxf4 25 tiJxf4? ~h6. How did Fries-Nielsen demonstrate that this is inaccurate? 194
Tests
B.Larsen - B.Birk Hedehusene Open, 1992
White to play Black had lost a pawn on the queens ide early on. But with an otherwise solid structure and opposite coloured bishops, his cause was far from hopeless until he made an inaccurate twenty-third move. How did Bent Larsen exploit it?
J.Hodgson - W.Huebner San Bernardino Open 1989
White to play The known idea of g4 but Hodgson gave playa quaint twist. How to continue with White?
195
Tests
Z.Rahman - Shetty Calcutta 1992
White to play Rahman is a dangerous dude. Here his structure is mangled. but how did he make the most of his attacking chances?
M.Adams - E.Sveshnikov Tilburg 1992
White to play How did Michael Adams make progress here?
196
Tests
J.Hodgson - J.Gokhaie British Championship, Dundee 1993
White to play Hodgson attacking. How did he carry on?
A.Romero Holmes - M. Palacios Perez Spanish Team Championship, Cala Galdana 1994
White to play What plan strikes you as best here?
197
Tests
MAdams - J.Lautier Groningen 1995
White to play Adams at it again. How did he continue?
198
Solutions
B.Larsen - M.Bain
us Open, Boston
1970
White to play
Larsen figured that the black knight is better here than her bishop, so he swapped it off. 12 liJxd7 'ifxd7 13 ttJc4 Off to the eS outpost. 13 .••0-0-0!? 14 'ife I 'iie7 15 b4 Larsen in the, for him, comparatively rare role of the middlegame attacker. 15 •••Jte8 16 a4 Carrying on the pawn storm whilst stopping ...JtbS. 16••.g5 The counter demonstration is nothing like as effective. 17 ttJe5 gxf4 18 lbf4 :tg8 19 c4 'iig5 20 'iif2 Jth5 Always the problem child in the Dutch Defence, here this bishop is not really outside of the pawn chain so much; more stuck on the board's edge. 21 b5 :g7 22 ~h I :dg8 23 1::[gl Coping with all of Black's stuff. 23 •••'iie7 24 c5 Grabbing space as well as prosecuting an attack. 24 ••.'iid8 25 'ilal 'iif6 26 as Jte8 27 c6 and White broke in and soon won. 199
Solutions
Y.Jansa - Z.Ribli Bucharest 1971
White to play Jansa tried 19 lbe5 +!? The idea is to open things up against an insecure black king. Ribli took it: 19•••he5 20 dxe5 'ifxe5. Had he declined with 19.. /it>c8. Jansa may well have shifted his attention to opening lines with 20 l:r.fb I !? intending b3. 21 l:r.fd I The extra black pawn is useless as his e6 bishop is so poor. Meanwhile White sets about getting at the black king. 21 •••c;t>c6 22 .l:.d4 ~gd8 23 'iffJ Shifting over to the action zone. 23 •••c;t>c5 Unlikely to live a happy life under such street circumstances. 24 'ifd I 'ifc7 25 b3 Opening lines. 25 •••a5 26 %:ta2l:r.d6 27 :ad2 :bd8 28 a4 b4 29 cxb4+ axb4 30 bxc4 dxc4 31 tDxe6 fxe6 32l:r.xc4+! c;t>b6 Or 32 ...c;t>xc4 33 'ifc2 mate. 33 a5+! and Ribli resigned. 1-0
200
Solutions
Y.Hort - H.Ree Wijk aan Zee 1972
White to play
V1astimil Hort showed that the black queen is in trouble with 16 l:.b3! Play continued 16•••'iVxa2 (16 ...'iVa4 17 tLlb I! threatening 18 l:.a3. 17... 'ii'xa2 18 tLlc I 'ii'a I 19 l:.a3 'iVb2 20 0-0 would transpose to the game.) 17 tLlcl 'iIIal (17 ...'iVa4 18 tLlbl) 18 tLlbl! as A rescue mission too late to help. 19 l:.al 'iVb2 20 0-0 and there is clearly no way out. 20•••axb4 21 l:ta2 bxc3 22 l:txb2 cxb2 23 tLle2 and White rounded up b2 and won the game. Y.Jansa - P.Ostojic Vmjacka Banja 1973
White to play
V1astimil Jansa could certainly have castled short, or played e4, amongst other ideas. But he actually chose 9 g4!? and after 9 •••tLlfB 201
Solutions
10 0-0-0 ~e6 I 1M!? l:lc8 12 Wb I he had set the stage for a dangerous kingside attack for himself.
C.Oepasquaie - S.Byrne Australian Championship, Melbourne 1991
White to play
Depasquale, perhaps appreciating that the horse on b6 is a bit out of it, opted for 12 f4! and the game went 12.•.'Wc7 13 e4 ~g4 It was probably better to have dealt with White's advances by 13 ... dxe4 14 ttJxe4 ttJdS. Now Depasquale steams on. 14 e5! ~xe2 Before White goes 15 ttJg3. 15 ~xe2 ~e7 16 'Wf5!? A cute way of swinging the queen across to the attack zone. 16••.'Wd7 17 'ii'h5 fxe5 18 fxe5 The new open f-file will be a useful avenue. 18••• ~g5 19 ~g4 'We7 20 ttJf3 ~e3 + 21 Wh I Intending 22 :ae I. 21 •..g6 22 'Wh3 h5 In view of the threat of :ae I, Byrne could dig up no better defence than this. But it invites an automatic and strong sacrifice of a bishop for two pawns. 23 ~xh5! gxh5 24 l:!ae I ~h6 25 'ii'xh5 'ii'e6 26 ttJh4 ttJd7 27 :f3 There are just too many of them. 27 .••Wh7 28 I!afl l:tad8 29 l:tf6! Even stronger than 29 .l:r.xf7 +. 29 •..ttJxf6 30 lhf6 'ii'xf6 31 exf6 l:tde8 32 g4 and ttJfS will follow. 32 •••lite I + 33 Wg2 :e2 + 34 Wli l:txa2 35 g5 l:tal + 36 Wg2 .l:r.a2+ 37 Wf3 and Black resigned.
202
Solutions
M.Adams - A.Kovalev Ostende Open 1991
White to play
Michael simply went 7 'ii'bS+ ttJc6 and then, not 8 'i!fxd5? ii.b4+, nor 8 'i!fxb7 ttJb4 when he must cover c2 allowing Black at least a draw with 9 .. Jitb8 and 10 ....l:r.a8. Instead he just played 8 ttJcl! and there was no way for Black to avoid clear loss of a pawn for no compensation.
J.Hodgson - A.Martin British Championship, Plymouth 1992
White to play
Hodgson continued with 16 ttJxi7! Wxf7 (16 ... 'ii'xf7 17 'ii'xc6 + ) 17 dS and Black's deficiencies are graphically illustrated as White carves into his game. 17 ... ii.eS Or I 7... exd5 18 lhd5 ttJe6 19 ':f5 +, or 17... ii.c8 18 d6 and 19 exf4 with an overwhelming grip. 18 dxe6+ 203
Solutions