Vishy Anand: My Best Games of Chess

Vishy Anand: My Best Games of Chess Revised and expanded edition Vishy Anand (in collaboration with John Nunn} CdAI�I...

Author: Vishy Anand | John Nunn

2252 downloads 7036 Views 12MB Size Report

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

DOWNLOAD PDF

Vishy Anand: My Best Games of Chess Revised and expanded edition

Vishy Anand (in collaboration with John Nunn}

CdAI�IBIITI

First published in the UK by Gambit Publications Ltd 200 I Reprinted 2004, 2008 Original edition published by Gambit Publications Ltd 1998 Copyright© Vishy Anand and John Nunn 1998, 2001 The right of Vi shy Anand and John Nunn to be identified as the authors of this work has been asserted in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. This book is sold subject to the condition that it shall not, by way of trade or otherwise, be lent, re-sold, hired out or otherwise circu lated in any form of binding or cover other than that in which it is published and without a similar condition including this condition being imposed on the subsequent purchaser. ISBN-13: 978-1-901983-54-8 ISBN-10: 1-90 1 983-54-4 (First edition: ISBN-13: 978-1-90 1 983-5 ISBN-10: 1 -901983-00-5) DISTRIBUTION: Worldwide (except USA): Central Books Ltd, 99 Wallis Rd. London E9 5LN, England. Tel +44 (0)20 8986 4854 Fax +44 (0)20 8533 5 8 2 1 . E-mail: [email protected]

Gambit Publications Ltd, 99 Wallis Rd, London E9 5LN, England. E-mail: [email protected] Website (regularly updated): www.gambitbooks.com Edited by Graham Burgess Typeset by John Nunn Printed in Great Britain by The Cromwell Press, Trowbridge, Wilts. Cover photograph by Dagobert Kohlmeyer. 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 Gambit Publications Ltd

Managing Director: GM Murray Chandler Chess Director: GM John Nunn Editorial Director: FM Graham Burgess German Editor: WFM Petra Nunn Webmaster: Dr Helen Milligan WFM

Contents Introduction

5

I V. Anand- v. Inkiov, Calcutta 1986 2 V. Anand- K. Ninov, World Junior Championship, Baguio City 1987 3 V. Anand- S. Agdestein, World Junior Championship, Baguio City 1987 4 V. Anand -J. Benjamin, Wijk aan Zee 1989 5 M. Thl- V. Anand, Youth vs Veterans, Cannes 1989 6 V. Anand - B. Spassky, Youth vs Veterans, Cannes 1989 7 M. Kuijf- V. Anand, Wijk aan Zee 1990 8 M. Petursson - V. Anand, Manila Interzonal/990 9 V. Anand - I. Morovic Fernandez, Novi Sad Olympiad 1990 10 A. Beliavsky - V. Anand, Munich 1991 1 1 A. Karpov - V. Anand, Candidates match (6), Brussels 1991 1 2 V. Anand - G. Kasparov, 1ilburg 1991 1 3 G . Kasparov - V . Anand, Reggio Emilia 199112 14 V. Anand -E. Bareev, Dortmund 1992 15 V. Anand - R . Hiibner, Dortmund 1992 16 V. Anand- I. Sokolov, SWIFT rapid, Brussels 1992 17 V. lvanchuk - V. Anand, Match (1), Linares 1992 18 V. Anand - G. Kamsky, Alekhine Memorial, Moscow 1992 19 V. Anand - V. Ivanchuk, Linares 1993 20 B. Gelfand - V. Anand, Linares 1993 21 V. Anand- E. Bareev, Linares 1993 22 V. Anand - F. Izeta, Madrid 1993 23 V. Anand - L. Ftacnik, Biel Interzonal 1993 24 L. 011 - V. Anand, Biel Interzonal/993 25 M. Adams - V. Anand, European Clubs Cup Final, Hilversum 1993 26 V. Anand - A. Be1iavsky, PCA Qualifier. Groningen 1993 27 J. Benjamin - V. Anand, P CA Qualifier. Groningen 1993 28 V. Anand - G. Kamsky, Linares 1994

7 12 16 23 29 34 40 43 49 54 59 67 74 81 87 90 92 98 102 106 1 10 1 15 1 19 126 130 1 36 1 42 148

VISHY ANAND: MY BEST GAMES OF CHESS

4 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57

V. Anand- J, Polgar, Linares 1994 V. Anand-G. Kamsky, PCA Candidates (3), Las Palmas 1995

153 157 V. Anand- G. Kamsky, P CA Candidates (9), Las Palmas 1995 1 64 V. Anand-G . Kamsky, P CA Candidates (1 1), Las Palmas 1995 171 V. Anand - J. Timman, Tal Memorial, Riga 1995 176 V. Anand - G. Kasparov, PCA World Championship (9), 1 84 New York 1995 189 V. Anand - B. Gelfand, Wijk aan Ze e 1996 V. Anand - J. Po lgar, Amber Rapid, Monte Carlo 1996 198 V. Anand-V. Topalov, Donmund 1996 202 V. Anand-V. lvanchuk, Las Palmas 1996 207 V. Anand-A. Karpov, Las Palmas 1996 2ll V. Anand - J, Lautier, Biel/997 216 J. Lautier - V. Anand, Biel/997 220 225 V. Kramnik - V. Anand, Belgrade 1997 234 P. Nikolic- V. Anand, FIDE World Ch., Groningen 1997 238 V. Anand -A. Shirov, FIDE World Ch., Groningen 1997 V. Anand- A. Karpov, FIDE World Ch. Final (6), Lausanne 1998 244 V. Anand-V. Topalov, Wijk aan Zee 1998 249 253 V. Ivanchuk-V. Anand, Linares 1998 2S7 V. Anand-V. Kr amnik, 1ilburg 1998 262 V. Anand-L. 011, European Clubs Cup, Belgrade 1999 D. Reindennan-V. Anand, Wijk aan Zee 1999 269 273 V. Anand -J. Piket, Wijk aan Zee 1999 277 V. Anand-P. Svidler, Linares 1999 283 V. Topalov-V. Anand, Linares 1999 291 V. Anand-P. Nikolic, Wijk aan Zee 2000 297 V. Anand-A. Khalifman, FIDE World Cup, Shenyang 2000 V. Anand- M. Adams , FIDE World Ch., New Delhi 2000 304 V. Anand - A. Shirov, FIDE World Ch. Final (4), Teheran 2000 3ll

Combinations Solutions

316 326

Index of Opponents Index of Openings Symbols

335 336 336

Introduction I don't want to spend too much time on biographical details, because this is a book about my games, so I will be content with a brief sketch.

I was born on 11th December 1969 in Chennai (Madras), and learnt chess

at the age of six from my mother. A year later I joined the TaJ. Chess club in Chennai. A couple of years later I went to Manila when my father had an as signment there and got caught up in the Philippines chess fever resulting from the 1978 Karpov-Korchnoi World Championship match. Returning to India, it was not until 1983 that I achieved a real breakthrough. In that year I won both the national Sub-Junior (under- 16) and Junior (under- 19) titles, and qualified for the (adult) national championship. The championship itself was held the following year, and I finished fourth. In 1985 I gained m y Inter national Mastertitle; at the time I was the youngest Asian ever to achieve this distinction. In 1986 I won the National Championship and became India's youngest champion. The following year, 1987, was special. After having played three times be fore in the World Junior Championship, finishing lOth, 5th and 7th, I finally won

this title. In December of the same year I became the world's youngest

grandmaster (at that time).

In July 1990, I broke through the 2600 barrier. In the same month, I quali fied for the Candidates from the Manila Interzonal. The first round of the

Candidates was held in January 1991, and I won my match against Dreev, but

in the quarter-finals I lost narrowly to Karpov in a match that hinged on the fi nal game. After this disappointment, I concentrated on tournament play with

some success: I won outright at Reggio Emilia 199 112 (ahead of Karpov and Kasparov) and in Moscow (November 1992).

In 1993 I qualified for both the FIDE and PCA Candidates cycles. The fol lowing year I was successful in the PCA Candidates cycle, defeating first Ro manishin and then Adams to reach the Final of the Candidates. In the FIDE cycle I was less fortunate, losing to Kamsky after having been two games up with three to play. In early 1995 I defeated Kamsky in the Final of the PCA Candidates and gained the right to face Kasparov for the PCA World Championship in New York. As everybody knows, I started well but faded in the second half.

6

VJSHY ANAND: MY BEST GAMES OF CHESS

However, losing this match was not the end of the world and in 1996 I was back on the tournament trail, finishing joint first with Kramnik at Dortmund and beating Kasparov in the Final of the Geneva Quickplay. However, the most important event of 1996 had nothing to do with chess: on June 27th I married Acuna in Chennai. 1997 was a successful year. In April I finished joint first with Kramnik at Dos Hermanas and in May I became the first person to win the Amber tour nament in Monaco twice. There followed a win in the Frankfurt Rapid, sec ond place in Dortmund and outright first in Biel. Finally, I tied for first place with Ivanchuk at Belgrade in November. At the end of 1997 I participated in the FIDE World Championship held at Groningen, and since I qualified for the final at Lausanne this event spilled over into 1998. I reached the final against Karpov, but then tiredness took its toll and, despite a 3-3 result in the match itself, I lost the tie-break. Despite this early disappointment, 1998 was my most successful year up to that time. I won the chess Oscar, and took first place in five major tournaments at Wijk aan Zee, Linares, Madrid, Frankfurt and Tilburg.

1999 started well, since I scored +6 at Wijk aan lJ!e to finish half a point behind Kasparov, but the rest of the year was rather disappointing. The prob lems started at Linares, where I lost a crucial game to Kasparov. Whether this was the sole cause is hard to say, but at any rate I struggled with my form for several months thereafter. The new millennium began with a modest success at Wijk aan ZJ!e, Where I finished joint second, but once again Linares proved discouraging. How ever, from this point on my form rapidly improved, and my play regained the freshness and vigour which had been the foundation for my run of succes in 1998. First I won the advanced chess event in Leon and the Frankfurt rapid, and then I was joint first at Dortmund. A further win in the FIDE World Cup

in Shenyang left me in excellent shape for the crucial event of the year- the FIDE World Championship. This time there was no disappointment at the last hurdle, and I achieved my greatest triumph to date with a decisive 3112-'h victory in the final against Shirov. Now I will sign off and leave the readers to enjoy the games.

Vishy A nand

Collado. Spain June

2001

Game 1

V. Anand - V. lnkiov Calcutta 1986 Sicilian, Richter-Rauzer 1 2 3 4 s 6

e4

lLi3

d4 �d4 00 i.gS 7 'l'd2 8 0-0-0 9 ll:lb3

cS d6 cxd4 .!M6 �

e6

it will be difficult for Black to get at White's c-pawns, whereas White will attack the d5-pawn. The move l l ...ll:lb4 had been played before, in Vitolins-Inkiov, Jurmala 1985.

12 l:the1 (D)

i.e7 0-0

In 1986 this move was in vogue thanks to the efforts of Mikhail Tal.

9 10 a4 11 i.bS

aS dS

A move first played in Tal-Sis mega, Taxco Interzonal 1985, even though Tal ascribes the move's in vention to Vitolin�. Tal won that game and scored an even greater success when he beat Korchnoi with it at the 1985 Montpellier Candidates Tour nament. I figured that I could do worse than to follow in Tal's foot steps.

11

ll:lb4

Sisniega played l l ...lt:lxe4 and Kon:hnoi l l ...dxe4. l l ...i.b4 is an other possibility; after 12 exd5 exd5 13 'l'f4, followed by exchanges on c3 and f6, both sides will end up with fract.•red pawn structures, but

12

.•.

dxe4

After 12...'illc7 13 e5 ll:le8 14 ll:ld4! Black is in a bad way. Due to the weakness of the e6-pawn, Black can't play ...f6 and his e8-knight is badly placed.

13 'ii'xd8 Really the first new move of the game. Vitolins played 13 ll:lxe4lllxe4 14 11rxd8 �xg5+ 15 'ii'xg5/t:\xg5 16 h4, regaining the piece with an un clear position.


8 13 ...

l:l.xd8

Mter l 3... ..txd8 14 lllxe4 ..te7 (l4...lllxe4 15 ..txd8 lllxf2 16 l:l.d2

17 l:l.d1 Everything with tempo.

17

..te7 (D)

is very promising for White; Black has no reasonable defence to the threats of 17 ..txa5 and 17 ..te7) 15 lllxf6+ ..txf6 (l5 ...gxf6 16 ..th6 is similar to the game) 16 ..txf6 gxf6 17 l:l.d6 Black can play neither ...b6 nor ...e5, and so has serious prob lems developing his queenside. lllbd5 (D) 14 lllxe4

18 ltlxf6+?! White retains the advantage after this move, but Black could have put up more resistance. It was probably stronger to play 18 llld6!. I would not claim that this is a forced win (Larsen once observed that all long variations are wrong!), but Black is definitely in real trouble: l ) 18...b6 19 ..tc6! (not 19 ..te3

15 c4 A positionally ugly move, but the main thing is to exploit White's lead in development. To this end, White must keep the d-file open. 15 !i:Jc7 15...lllb4 occupies the 'hole' cre ated by White's previous move, but then 16 l:l.xd8+ ..txd8 17 l:l.d 1 ..te7 18 llld6 e5 ( l 8...b6 19 ..te3! also nets a pawn) 19 lllxc8 l:l.xc8 20lllxa5 wins a pawn.

16 l:l.xd8+

..txd8

because now Black can reasonably play 19...lllxb5! with a satisfactory position after either 20 cxb500!

or 20 axb5 transposing to line 2a be· low) 19... l:l.b8 20 ..tf4! and White's

pieces occupy dominating positions. 2) 18 ...lllxb5 and now there are two possible lines:

2a) 19 axb5 b6 (best; 19. . . a4 20 llla5! and 19...h6 20 ..t xf6 ..txf6 2 1 lllc5 are more promising for White) 20 ..te3 a4 21 llla 1 llld5! 22 cxd5

ANAND

-

INKIOV, CALCUITA 1986

.bd6 23 dxe6 i.e? 24 exf7+ �xf7 with fair compensation for the pawn. 2b) 19 cxb5! (this concedes the d5-square, but Black can't make full use of it) l9... b6 20 ltlc4 (20 i.e3 �!as in line l) 20... llb8 21 ltld4 (intending lLlc6) 2 I ...i.b7 (2l...i.d7 22 ltle5 is also good for White) 22 l0xb6 i.xg2 23 ltlc4! (although Black has the two bishops, the mass of pawns on the queenside is the most important factor in the posi tion; 23 ltld7 is less accurate since after 23...llc8+ 24 �bl i.e4+ things are getting quite messy) 23... llc8 24 b3 (White only needs to play �b2 and ltlxa5 to decide the game with his queenside passed pawns; how ever, Black can try to win a pawn) 24... i.d5 25 �b2! i.xc4 26 llc l ! (when I checked this position with

9

i.c5. 20... e5 is worse, as after 21 i.c5 i.xc5 22 ll:lxc5 i.g4 23 lld5 :lc8 24 b3 Black's queenside pawns are in trouble.

21 &s (DJ The alternative 21 f4 ambitiously attempts to squash Black, but he can free himself by sacrificing a pawn: 2l...e5! 22 i.c5 (22 fxe5?! i.e6 23 li:ld2 a4 prevents White supporting his c4-pawn by b3, and then the c4pawn itself is attacked by .. .i.b4 and ... :lc8) 22...i.f6 (not 22...i.xc5?, when 23 ll:lxc5 gives White exactly what he wants) and now 23 fxe5 fails to 23...i.g5+ 24 �c2 i.e6 and Black is doing well as White cannot hang on to all the pawns (for instance 25 �c3 :lc8, followed by some combi nation of ...a4 and ... b6).

Fritz, it said that Black was winning! Surprised, I looked to see why) 26.. .:C5 (this is the reason, but after some thought I found a solution) 27 llxc4 llxg5 28 :lc8+ i.f8 29 b6! (Black is helpless) 29.. .:c5 (after 29... ltld7 30 b7 :ld5 31 ltlc6 Black has no defence to both 32!De7+ and 32 :ld8) 30 b 7 ltld7 31 ltlb5! and Black cannot meet the threat of 32 :ld8.

18 19 i.e3

gxf6

lLlxbS

fS! 20 axbS Black fights back. This gives his bishop some air and prevents White forcing the exchange of bishops by

21

•••

eS?

The best defence was 2 l... f4! 22 i.d4, and now: I ) 22. ..e5 23 i.xe5! i.xc5 24 lld8+i.f8 25i.d6 and White wins.


10

2) 22. . .a4 (by not allowing lt:la4, Black gets some counterplay) and now: 2a) 23lt:ld3 i.d7 (23 ... f6? is very good for White after both 24 i.c5 and 24 tt:lxf4 e5 25 tt:ld5) 24 tt:lxf4 .:.C8 25 i.c3 i.e8 and Black has suf ficient counterplay. 2b) 23 tt:le4 f5 (23 ... e5? 24 i.xe5

White also wins after 26... i.�f2 27 :xb7 :ds 28 :bS! (not 28c5? i.xc5 29 i.xc5 .Z:.c8) 28..J[xb829 i.xb8 �f7 30 i.e? and the threat of 3 1 b6 forces Black to approach with his king, whereupon 3 1 i.xa5 gives White an overwhelming mass of passed pawns.

27 :xd6 (D)

i.e6 25 c5) 24 i.c5 and White re tains some advantage. 3) 22... f6 (a solid and sensible defence; Black prepares ...e5 fol lowed by ... �f7) 23 tt:la4! e5 24 i.c5

�n 25 i.xe7 �xe7 26 tt:lb6 .Z:.b8 with a slight advantage for White. Thus 2 l ...f4, while not equaliz ing, would have restricted White's advantage. The importance of driv ing the bishop to d4 becomes clear after the text-move. 22 tt:ld7! From this excellent square the knight virtually paralyses Black's whole army. The game is already al most over. f4 22 Too late, as now the bishop need not block the d-file.

23 i.b6 24 i.c7!

f6

Since 25 tt:lb6 is threatened, Black can no longer delay capturing the knight; the result is that White's rook occupies the seventh rank. 24 i.xd7 25 lbd7 i.cS

26 i.d6

i.xd6

Black's position is lost. The active rook, combined with White's queen side pawn majority, guarantees a straightforward win.

27 28 b3 29 �b2 30 �xb3

a4 axb3

� Just abandoning the b-pawn, but 30 ...f5 31 :d7 :bs 32 c5 is also hopeless.

31 :d7+ 32 lbb7 33 :a7 34 fxe3 35 �c3

�e6

e4

e3 fxe3 :ds

ANAND

-

INKIOV. CALCUTTA /986

11

36lW

40 b81t'

lba2

37 bC'i! 38 b7 39 �b4

41 1tb7+ 42 'i!t'dS+ 43 c5

�d3 �e2 1-0

The 1987World Junior Championship was a b reakthrough for me. It was already my fourth World Junior Championship; 1 had played in every one

since 1984, finishing lOth in my first appearance, 5th in 1985 and 7th in 1986, a fairly zigza gging pattern. I started the 1987 event in fairly good shape

but I drew 3 out of my first 4 games, and at that point I didn't ima gine that I

might win the tournament However, the following game was a turning point.

Game 2

V. Anand

-

K. Ninov

World Junior Championship, Baguio City 1987 Sici lia n , Ka n 1 2 3 4 s 6 7 8 9

e4 lbf'3 d4 liJxd4 �d3 lbb3 lbc3 'ife2 h3

cS e6 cxd4 a6 �cS

fLa7 lbc6 d6 �xe3

As a result of this game, playel'll with Black started delaying this ex change so as to leave the white queen on e2 and thereby prevent the �e2 line mentioned in the note to Black's 13th move. In time, this led to the development of a whole new branch of opening theory. 10 'if xeJ lbf6 (D)

w

11 g4! I found this innovation over the board. PreviouslyWhite had contin ued I I 0-0-0, but after 11...0-0White either has to prepare this advance with llhgl, or play g4 as a pawn sac rifice. The idea behind the immedi ate g4 is quite simple: if you play it when g7 is undefended, then it isn't a sacrifice.

11

•.•

bS

Black thought for a while, and then decided simply to proceed with his qutenside counterplay. However, the tempo White saves by missing out llhgl is quite important, and he should have tri ed l l ...lDxg4. After 12 'ifg3 lbf6 13 'ifxg7 llg8 14 'ifh6 �d7 Black will play ...'ife7 and both sides will castle queenside. How ever, when Black castles queenside in the Sicilian, White is better unless there is some mitigating factor, which is not the case here. Indeed, after 'ife3 by White there is an awkward weakness on b6 and the d6-pawn it· self may become vulnerable later.

12 0.0.0 13 gS

0-0 lbe8

A poor square for the knight, but after 13 ...lbd7 14 �e2 Black has

ANAND - NINOV, BAGU/0 CITY 1987 immediate problems with his d6pawn, due to the exchange of dark squared bishops and White's extra tempo. Usually White doesn't go af ter d6 in a Sicilian, but that doesn't mean you should forget about the possibility altogether! After the text-move, there is no point to :bgl, which would throw away the advantage gained as a re sult r:i White's innovation, so White has to come up with an alternative attacking plan. One possibility is h4-h5 followed by :dgl. The arrangement with rooks on gl and hi is very desirable, be cause they will break through almost any kingside defence, but it is very time-consuming to set up. Unlike many similar positions in the Sicil ian, Black's queenside counterplay is rather slow here, which is the only reason White can consider this plan, but in the end I decided on a more conventional approach.

14 f4 15 lDe2

b4

15 � would be a more posi tional formula. White stops ... a5-a4 and threatens to invade on b6. After l5... llb8 White can continue 16 e5, in order to clear the c5-square for the Imight However, I preferred to play for the attack, and for that the knight is needed on the kingside.

aS 15 ltlxd4 16 ltlbd4 17 ltlxd4 (D)

13

White has the advantage. Nor mally in the Sicilian, Black's the matic queenside pawn advance gains time because it hits minor pieces on b3 and c3, but here White has evacu ated these squares quite quickJy. Moreover, the knight on e8 is very badly placed for supporting the at tack. Just about the only useful thing it can do is to shore up the kingside by ... g6 and ...ltlg7.

17 'ilfb6 At the time I felt that Black should have gone in for 17 ... a4, but now I don't think so. The line that worried me was 18ltlc6 'iWc7 19 o!l'!xb4 a3 (if Black doesn't play this, then White plays a3 himself, followed by lilbl and c3, and Black will never break through) 20 b3 (threatening to cen tralize with 'il'd4) 20...'iWc3 (after 20.. .llb8 21 o!i)a6 .>\.xa6 22 .>\.xa6, followed by .>\.c4, White's queen side position is solid since the poorly placed knight on e8 cannot displace •••


14

White's bishop), but in fact 21 Wei! ifh2+ 22 'it>d2 is clearly better for White- Black has surprisingly little compensation for the pawn. These were still the pre-computer days, when players were much more intuitive. Nowadays everybody goes home and checks everything with Fritz. The use of computers has made people more sceptical and now they are more prone to go pawn-grabbing unless there is definite compensa tion.

18 eS 19 mtfi (D)

20 fxeS l:td8? (D) Allowing a pretty finish. 20... g6! was best, when White could con tinue 21 �S 'llrxe3+ 22ll'lxe3 with a pleasant endgame- his knight could head for either f6 or d6. Still, Black has some chances by playing his knight to fS, and he shouldcertainly have gone for this.

.i.b7

21 .i.xb7+! 22 g6+

�xb7

Once again Black suffers because of his miserable knight position Here it prevents Black from playing 22 ...fxg6.

19

dxeS

Or 19...a4 (1 9...:d8 20 fS! is simi lar) 20 fS! dxeS (20 ...exfS 21 e6 is very good for White) 21 fxe6! (not 21 'ibeS :aS!) 2l ... exd4 221Fh3 g6 (22 ...fS 23 l:txfS! gives White a win ning attack) 23 exf7+ :xt7 (23...�h8 24 'i'h6 �g7 2S :C6 wins) 24 :Xf7 �xf7 25 'i'xh7+ winning the black queen.

22

•••

�g8

Or 22 ...'>1i>xg6 23 'i1Vd3+ (stopping ... �h7) 23...fS (23...�h6 24 'i'h3+ �gS 2S :gl + �f4 26 :del with mate next move) 24 exf6+ with a de cisive attack.

23 'i1Vb3

.!ffii

23 ...fxg61oses to 24 l:txfl!+ 'iPxfl! 2Sll'lxe6+.

24 exf6 (D)

ANAND- NINOV, BAGU/0 CITY 1987

8

15

It isn't every day you see two at tacking pawns on f6 and g6! When you get a position like this, you go away feeling very pleased and have a warm glow for the next few games. fxg6 24 •••

25 fxg7

1-0

Since 25 ...\ii>xg7 26 ltlxe6+ and 25 ...llxfl 26 'l'h8+ �f7 27 :Xn + are decisive.

After this game, which was from round 5, there was a free day and the players went on an excursion. I still hadn't broken free from the pack. The following day, however, saw another good result. I was facing Agdestein, who at 2565 was the highest-rated player in the tournament, although he was not the only grandmaster (Ivan Sokolov was also participating, although he was not very successful). I prepared as well as I could because Agdestein is very unpredictable in the openings, and sat down hoping to play a good game.

Game 3

V. Anand

-

5. Agdestein

World Junior Championship, Baguio City 1987 Ruy Lopez 1 e4

tt'lc6

A provocative move. At the time it was felt that this move had little in dependent significance because so long as White knew he should play 2 tt'lf3, Black had nothing better than 2 ...e5, thereby transposing into stan dard king's pawn openings. Subse quently it was discovered that Black could wind White up even more by playing 2...d6, but I don't trust this for Black! eS 2 tt'lf3

3 i.bS 4 i.a4 5 i.b3

f6 i.b7

I recalled that Spassky had played

lO tt'lh4 in the above- mentioned

game, with dxe5, 11Vf3 and l:tdl fol lowing in some order, and that later. Spassky sacrificed a piece by means of lL!xb5. 10 tt'lb4 tt'le7 (D)

a6 b5 tt'la5

Agdestein is fond of offbeat sys tems. I didn't know much about this one, although it is popular amongst Norwegian players. I could only re member a game between Spassky and Taimanov (in fact from the 1955 USSR Championship, held in Mos cow). Nevertheless, I was quite happy to see it on the board. White can play natural moves and there is not much risk even if he commits a slight inac curacy - a pleasant situation when facing the top seed!

6 0-0 7 d4

8 axb3 9 tDc3

d6 tt'lxb3

11 dxe5!

dxe5

If Black plays 11...fxe5, then White can strongly reply 12 f4, opening the position up while Black's king is still stuck in the centre. However , taking back with the d-pawn retains control of gS, so that f4 can be met by ...exf4 followed by the fork ... gS· 12 1Wf3

17

ANAND - AGDFSTE/N, BAGU/0 CITY 1987

White avoids the exchange of queens as most of his chances lie in exploiting Black's poor develop ment and centralized king.

12 13 l:.dl

'i'd7 'i'e6

•.•

By now I had worked out that this was indeed what had happened in the Spassky game, and that he now continued with 14 i.e3. For a mo ment I wondered what Taimanov had played that allowed the sacrifice on b5, then! realized that it was 14 ... g5. After 15 �xb5! axb5 16 W'h5+ 'ilf7 (16...�g6 17 �xg6 'l/lf7 18 l:.xa8+ .baS 19 1Wg4! also wins) 17 ltxa8+ .ixa8 18l:.d8+ �xd8 19 'il xf7 gxh4 20 'l'xf6 White had a winning posilion. However, I was worried by the idea of 14... h5! ? intending .. .'I'g4. I mulled over this for some time, but couldn't see an easy answer. If White plays 15 h3, then 15... g5 is now possible because White has no queen check on h5. If 15 li:ld5, then Black just castles queenside. It ap peared to me that if White was going to play 00, then it would be better to do it straight away, before Black bad time to set up the threat of ...'l'g4. 14 li:ldS li:lxdS If 14.. 0-0-0, then 15 c4 and White is already starting to make Black's king feel insecure. IS exdS 'l'f7

A slight inaccuracy which gives Black the chance to sideline the knight on h4. 16 li:lf5 would have been more accurate, because White can play c4 at any time- Black can't prevent it. Then 16... g6 17 li:lh6 .ixh6 18 .ixh6 0-0-0 19 c4 ltd? would have led to a position in which White has an edge, since Black has no really constructive plan.

,

.

16 c4?! (D)

16

.ie7?

Black misses the opportunity he has been given. 16...g6! would have left the h4-knight misplaced It is true that after 17 'l'e2 .ig7 18 f4 0-0 19 f5, follow� by 'l'e4, White has a good centralized position and Black's bishops are hemmed in. However, after 18...0-0-0!? Black would have chances of puhing his two bishops to work. The b7-bishop functions as a kind of 'Dragon' bishop, in that it makes it hard for White's attack down the a-file to strilce home prop erly. Moreover, playing cxb5 will


18

leave d5 hanging. White is certainly not worse, but Black would have far more counterplay than he obtains in the game. 11 lbrs (DJ

The exchange of inaccuracies has favoured White, because Black's in accuracy is actually quite serious his bishop doesn't belong on e7 at all. Now White is clearly better. 17 ... J:d8 17 ...0-0 is impossible because of 18 ..th6.

18 ..te3

g6 (D)

More or less forced, because oth erwise Black lacks a constructive move. 18 ...0-0? still fails to 19 ..th6 while after l 8 .....tc8 White has a choice of promising lines: l ) l 9 l:ac l 0-0 20 lbxe7+(not20 cxb5 ..txf5 21 'i'xf5 axb5 22 J:xc7 J:xdS! and Black escapes) 20...'i'xe7 21 cxb5 J:fe8 22 b6 cxb6 23 ..txb6 J:d7 24 'i'd3! ..tb7 25 d6 gives White a clear advantage.

2) 19 c5! (even more forcing) l 9 ... ..i.xf5 (19...0-0 20 d6 wins a piece) 20 11Vxf5 :Xd5 21 'l'c8+and after 2l.....td8 2211fxa6 or 2I... l: d8 22 J:xd8+ ..i.xd8 23 l:ld l 'ife7 24 1!fxa6 White wins a pawn while re. taining a positional advantage.

19 lbh6! White could exchange on e7, but then Black's king could castle or move ton and he would have fair de· fensive chances. White's qu.enside majority is an asset, but it will not win the game by itself because the c-pawn is tied to the defence of d5. Instead, I wanted to keep Black's king on e8, while I broke through on the c- and d-files. 19

'fig7

Intending ... f5, when the knighl might be in trouble.

20 'l'g3?! This move, introducing lbf5 ideas, is not so strong as I imagined during the game. Sometimes, when you

ANAND - AGDESTE/N, BAGU/0 Crrr 1987

have a good position, the temptation is just to play easy, comfortable moves and wait for the position to win it self. The correct move was 20 cxb5!, when 20...axb5 fails to 21 :a7. Dur ing the game I rejected it because of 20...f5 21 bxa6 .i.a8, with the threat of .. .f4. However, with ten years' hindsight I don't see Black's com pensation for the two pawns. In par ticular, once White has played a7 the bishop on a8 will effectively be dead, since taking on d5 will always allow a combination involving the promo tion of the a-pawn. One line is 22 'tlh3! f4 23 .i.d2 .i.g5 24ll:lg4 h5 25 �xe5 and wins. It is worth noting that 20 h4 was playable. After 20... .ic8 we trans pose into the game, but White has saved a couple of moves. 20 ... .i.c8 Threatening ... g5, so White's next move is forced. .id6 (D) 21 h4 If Black attempts to play actively by 2I...f5 22 .i.g5! f4 then: I) 23 'i'c3 b4 24 'ilfd2 (24 '6'f3 .txg5 25 hxg5 'fle7 26 ll:lg4 '6'xg5 27 �xe5 0-0! is unclear) 24 ... .txg5 25 hxg5 'i'e7 26 .l:tel �f8! and Black has counterplay. 2) 23 •h2!. A paradoxical move which nails down Black's kingside. Now White simply threatens :el followed by doubling or even g3 (mee ting .. .f3 by g4). However Black continues_ his e5-pawn will come

19

under fire and his king is trapped in the centre. The point of .wt-.2 is that after 23 ... .i.xg5 24 hxg5 '*le7 White can defend the g5-pawn and main tain his kingside bind.

w

22 '*if3 Other moves are inferior, for ex ample 22 c5? .txc5 or 22 lLcl e4 23 .tf4 '*ixh6! 24 .txh6 .txg3 25 fxg3. In this latter line White keeps a slight edge as the opposite-coloured bishops (which normally have a drawish influence) make Black's de fence a bit more difficult, when there are still a fair number of major pieces on the board. However, I thought that keeping the queens on offered even more. The move 'lin is mainly to pre empt the threat of ... e4. Now that White has got the knight firmly en trenched on h6, he can proceed with :aci followed by c5 and d6. The manoeuvre '6'f3-g3-f3 may appear odd, but Black has also wasted time

V!SHY ANAND: MY BEST GAMES OF CHESS

20

with the manoeuvres ... iLb7-c8 and ...iLf8-e7-d6. 22 iLe7 Black would like to play ..J:I.f8, but the immediate 22 ...l:l.f8 allows 23 c5, because after 23...iLxc5 24 i.xc5 the rook on f8 is hanging. So Black returns to e7, still preventing c5 and getting ready to play ...l:l.f8 next move. The net effect of both players' oscillations has been to add the moves h4 and ...iLcS, which benefits White. At this stage I felt that my posi tion was very comfortable, but I had (and still have) a great deal of re spect for Agdestein and I wasn't counting on victory yet.

23 l:l.acl Retaining the option of either cxb5 or c5 followed by d6. 23 bxc4 Agdestein finally decides to remove the cxb5 option. 24 bxc4 :t8 •••

25 c5 f5 26 iLgS iLxgS 'ii'e7 27 hxg5 28 'l'g3! (D)

White had a more complex alter native in 28 d6 'ii'xg5 29 'l'c6+ i.d7 (29 ...l:l.d7 30 'ii'a8! l:l.d8 31 :tel should win for White) 30 'ii'xc7 'l'xh6 31 c6. This would also have been quite promising, as Black would have to return the piece for one pawn, still leaving White with a dan gerous passed pawn. However, given

that an effective, solid alternative existed, I preferred to play safe.

In a way it is quite strange that White is not winning already, since Black's king is irrevocably since in the centre - not only call it not castle, but even f7 is denied to it. However, the reason is the knight on h6. It is of course doing a wonderful job, but when it comes to landing a killing blow in the centre, White is effectively a piece down. 28 f4 29 'ii'h4 e4 'ii'eS! 30 d6 The best chance. After 30...cxd6 31 cxd6 'ii'e6 (3 l ...'l'e5? 32 llxcS!) 32 l:l.c7 e3 (32 ...iLd7 33 �g4) White can continue 33 fxe3 fxe3 (after. 33...'1'xe3+ 34 �h l there is node· fence against 35 :te l ) 34 'l'c4!l:l.f2 35 'ii'xe6+ iLxe6 36 l:l.e7+ �f8 37 l:l.xe6 with an extra piece.

31 dxc7 llxdl+ 32 :Xdl (D)

ANAND - AGDESI"EIN, BAGUIO CITY 1987

32 e3? Black decides to counterattack, but now White's win is fairly straight forward. Black's only chance was 32 ... Wxc7, when we can see that it is not so easy for White because his knight is on h6. If it were on any nor mal square then, for example, lZ\c3 or �4. heading for d5 or d6, would be decisive. Nevertheless, after 33 ll:lg4 (heading for f6) 33 ... i.xg4 34 Wxg4 :tf5 35 b4 ! (White needs to pause for this move; it strengthens c5 and indirectly supports :td6; after

21

35 'l1Ve2lhc5 36 'liV:u4+ Wt7 White's attack has got a bit stuck) White has a large advantage. He intends 11'e2 and :td6, taking aim at e4 and a6, when Black's exposed king causes continuing problems. lf 35 ... e3, then 36 fxe3 fxe3 37 11Fe4+ picks up the e3-pawn (37 ....:.es 3S 'IlVaS+ �7 39 'iiVhS is even worse). 'lie7 33 l:td8+ lhg8 34 ltlg8+ 35 lhg8! ..te6 Or 35 ...e2 36 11'xh7+ 'lie6 37 .l:l.eS+ and wins. 36 c811' 36 'l1Vxh7+ J..f7 37 .l:l.eS+
the theory, but didn't really go be yond that. After lO...:ds I suddenly didn't feel very happy with my posi. tion and couldn't fmd a continuation I felt comfortable with. Then I sud denly brightened up, because I saw a little trick after 11 q;,bI. 11 ciS?! (D) If Black plays ll ...a6, then 12 .i.e3 Wfc7 13 'ilf2 and White gains time owing to the threat of i.b6, so q;,b1 is really to provoke . ..a6. Later on it was discovered that this doesn't really matter, because Black's coun terplay consists of ...a6, ...lOfl and ...b5 in any case, but we didn't know that in 1 989! After 11 Wbl Benjamin looked surprised, bKause he didn't under stand the point of the move. Perhaps he was thinking 'Vishy doesn't know that Black's threat is ... d5'. , when he played ... d5 I checked my idea carefully, although there isn't much choice because after anything else White is clearly worse. •••

... everybody plays 10 'l'b3, but he had found a very strong idea: 10 b3!. The point is that after I O.. . :ds White can play 1 1 .llL a3 :Xdl+ 1 2 J:l.xd1 'ilt'c7 13 �b5 trapping the queen. I was very impressed by this line, which I had never seen before. He explained that this was the reason why ...'ilt'c7 was not good in this par ticular line of the Catalan, but was good in the similar lines in which Black plays . ...llLb4 and later retreats the bishop to e7 in response to a3. The reason, of course, is that the pawn on a3 prevents the move i.a3. A nice idea, but apparently not much use to me as I didn't play the Cata lan. I hope Chucky will forgive me for revealing this piece of analysis! Returning to the Benjamin game, at this time I didn't really study the openings too deeply. I looked at all

ANAND

12 .hr6

-

BENJAMIN, WIJK AAN ZEE 1989

dxe4?

Benjamin falls for it hook, line and sinker. He could still have bailed out by 12 .i.xf6 13 exd5 i.xc3 14 •xc3 exd5, although after 15 'il'c5 or 15 i.d3 White has some positional ..

advantage. However, as he admitted after the game, he simply hadn't seen the idea at all.

13 i.xe7 Not 13 i.d4 .fud4 14 �d4 e5. 13 :Xd2 14 lilxd2! (D) •.•

25

After the game Benjamin said that he wanted to resign at this point, but decided to play a few more moves; however, I then staned to play so badly that he couldn't bring himself to resign any more.

15 gill? Here's the bad move. Later I real ized that I5lilc4! would have won on the spot. 15...'1ff2 loses to I6lile4, and after 15 ...'1fc7 16 �d6 fxg2 17 �xg2'1Fd818�g3 '1Fe719l:l.hel all White's pieces are active and his knights are going on a queenside rampage (lilb5 or llld5, coupled with ltld6). The fact that White has a lost a pawn is irrelevant.

15 e5 16 �h4?! (D) •••

Another mistake. 16 �a3 would have been much better, keeping con trol of key squares such as c5 and d6. In this case White should still win in the long run, although thanks to White's previous error it is likely to be a laborious process.

14

exf3

After 14...lilxe7? White wins by 15 lllc4 'ilc7 16 lllb 5 and Black's queen is lost almost exactly as in Iv anhuk's Catalan idea. It isn't trapped here as it was in the Catalan, but the threat of mate on d8 means that it amounts to the same thing. At the next tournament where I met Ivan chuk, he came up to me and said "I see you used my idea in the Cata lan!".


26

16 ... 17 lMe4

.te6

White already has to take care: not 17 .i.c4? .i.xc4 1 8ltJxc4 'iWb4.

17

lM4 (D)

Black wins) 22... exd4 23 bxc3 dxc3 24 q;>a1 11te2! (24...'itb625 l:lbl 'iff2

26 .i.fl 11txc2 27 .i.c4+ followed by :Xb7 wins for White) 25 .l:hgt11txc2

26.1:bl1ltd2 27 a3 and Black is even slightly better.

20 21 fxeS (D)

fxe4

B

18 .i.g2?! After this, the position becomes rather murky, although it is possible that White can still retain an advan tage by accurate play. 18 .i.f2 was a much safer way to prove that White is better.

18

•••

.l:c8

Suddenly I couldn't find a line that worked for White. The threat is . ..f5 followed by ....l:xc3, and it isn't easy to find a good defence. Finally I found a line that seemed to work for White but I was very nervous be cause Black has all his pieces aimed at White's queenside.

19 .i.f2 20 f4!

fS!

Not 20 ltJg5? .l:xc3 21 ltJxe6 1Wxe6 22 .i.xd4 (22 bxc3? 1Wb6 + and

21

•••

:C4

2 l ....l:d8! would have made life much harder for White: 1) 22 ltJe2? .i.xa2+ 23 �xa2 'li'a6+ wins for Black. 2) 22 .l:he1 ?! .i.g4! 23 .l:d2 '1116! 24 .i.e3 (24 .l:xd4 .l:xd4 25 .i.xd4 'Wd2 favours Black) 24...Wh4 25 .i.f2 with a draw by repetition. 3) 22 .l:d2! .i.f5 (not 22... ltJb3? 23 axb3 and White wins) 23 .i.e3! 'ilrg6 24 :hd 1 and, surprisingly, there is little Black can do to prevention followed by taking on d4. While 2I. ...:I.d8 might not have been any better than the text-roove against perfect play, 22l:td2! and 23

ANAND - BENJAMIN, WIJK AAN ZEE 1989 .A.e3! aren't easy moves to find over lhe board.

22 l:tbel? (D)

Missing 22 &2! l:l.a4 (Black's sacrificial attempts fail, for example 22 ...'l'xb2+ 23 �xb2 l:txc2+ 24 �al �xe2 25 i.el or 22 ... l:l.xc2 23 bd4 'il'c6 24 �4 and White wins in both cases) 23 b3! l:txa2 (if 23....1xb3, then simply 24 axb3) 24 .1xd4 and wins.

27

It would also have been good to play 23 b3!, which looks a bit para doxical as Black has so many pieces ready to sacrifice on b3. However, after 23....i.xb3 24 axb3 l:txb3+ 25 c l White should win. 23 ... i.g4 If 23...lt:lb3+ then 24 axb3 1Wxf2 25 lld8+ �f7 26 :n picks up the queen. 24 .!bdS 'ilt'cS

25 lt:lxb4 .i.xdl 26 �xdl! (D) Not 26 l:l.xdl? �e2+ and Black wins, nor 26 l:txe4lt'lb3+! 27 xdl 'ilt'xf2 28 axb3 'ilt'xg2 29 l:te2 and only Black can be better. After the text-move it suddenly dawned on me that I was completely winning. I had been struggling to contain Black's queenside initiative for so many moves that the realiza tion caught me by surprise!

B

22

•••

.11b4?

Benjamin was in time-trouble by now, and commits another mistake. The best line was 22 ... .ig4! 23 .!:d2 ( not 23 l:txd4? l:txd4 24lt:lxe4 l:txe4 25 .1xb6 l:txel#) 23...'fih6! 24lt:lxe4 (or 24 :Xd4 l:txd4 25 i.xd4 'ilt'd2) 24...�6 and Black has avoided los ing a piece. Despite Black's slight material advantage, I don't think White is orse, since B ack' k fairly exposed and his pieces dis jointed.

23 '.tel!

26

e3

26...'ili'xb41oses to 27 l:txe4.

28

VISHY ANAND: MY BEST GAMES OF CHESS r1 lhe3

28 �dS+

lMS

An important intermezzo. 28 .l:tf3 is a mistake because of 28...'i!fxb4 29 :Xf5 W'g4+. � 28

Forced; 28...Wh8 fails to 29 l:l.c3 'il'xb4 29 .:tf3

30 .:txfS+ 31 e6

WeB 1-0 After 31...11Vxb2 32 �c5 it is all

over.

Before the last round I was in a tie for fiCSt place with Nikolic, Ribli and Sax. I had the feeling that a draw in the last round would be enough to main tain the status quo, and indeed when my game with Douven ended in a draw my feeling turned out to be justified, as the other leaders also drew.Thus we ended up in a four-way tie for first. It was my first success in one of the world's major international events. In 1989, Bessel Kok, the chairman of SWIFf and a great chess benefactor, organized a Youth vs Veterans event in Cannes not long after Wijk aan Zee.lt was held in conjunction with the annual Cannes Games Festival and was a very enjoyable event. The veterans were Tal, Spassky, Andersson, Csom and Larsen; the youth team consisted of Lautier, Renet, Adams, Miralles and my self. As the only GM in the youth team, I was acconunodated in an excellent hotel; indeed, the conditions at this event were the best I had experienced un til then.

Game 5

M . Tal - V. Anand Youth vs Veterans, Cannes 1 989 English I met Misha Tal for the first time when I visited the World Cup tournament in Brussels in 1988. He was the most popular player by far, captivating every one with his personality and his brilliant chess. This was my first game against my childhood hero and I was obviously quite excited.

1 c4 2 ltl£3 3 00

cS lt:\c6 lt:\d4

How do you explain a move that violates the rule not to move the same piece twice in the opening? Well, I can't really find a general principle that justifies it, but it does seem to work! One possible expla nation isthat when White recaptures on f3 with his queen, he has lost con trol of the important d4-square. Then Black can bring out his other knight via h6 and f5 to fight for d4. In any case, 3... �4 is a provoca tive move which leads to a more un balanced type of position than is usual in the Symmetrical English.

4 e3 S 'i'xf3

lt:\xf3+ g6 (D)

6 b3 Or 6 d4 .i.g7 7 dxc5 (after 7 'Wd 1 �f6 White will have to play d5 and then lose a tempo with e3-e4 in order to get his customary space advan tage) and now:

1) 7... 'i'a5 8 e4! 'i'xc5 9 lt:\d5! (stronger than 9 .i.d3 .i.xc3+ 10 bxc3 d6) with a slight advantage for White. 2) 7 ... .i.xc3 +!? 8 bxc3 11fa5 9 e4 11fxc5 10 .i.d3 d6. Normally Black should not give up his bishop like this in an 'Indian structure', but due to White's doubled c-pawns this po sition should be compared with the Nimzo-Indian rather than the King's Indian Defence. Admittedly Black has already played ... g6, but it's not clear how White can exploit this.


30

6 7 .i.b2 8 g3 9 .i.g2 Two years later, I beat Karpov with 9... llli'6 ; the tactical justifica tion is that 1 0 liJd5 .i.g4! equalizes immediately. Actually, it is much more natural than 9. ltJh6. Whatever can be said about the objective mer its of 3...liJd4, I scored 212 against Tal and Karpov with it! 0-0 10 'ild1 1 1 0-0 .i.d7 To support the ... b5 advance. 1 2 a4 After 12 d4?! Black's plan of ex erting pressure·on d4 comes to frui tion: 12 ...cxd4 13 exd4 llli'5 ! 14 d5 (14 liJd5 b5! gives Black the edge) 14... b5 ! with good counterplay. 12 .i.c6 .i.xg2 13 d4 14 �g2 (D) ..

After 14...cxd4 15 exd4 ltJf5 16 d5 a6 17 l:l.bl ! the position is slightly better for White. He has a space ad vantage and a weak black e- pawn to

play against On the other hand, his pieces on the queenside are awk wardly placlld. 1 5 'ild3?! Tal later mentioned the possibility of 1 5 d5 ! and this move does seem to offer White a stable if minuscule edge. Black will hardly be able to achieve ...b5 and playing ... c7-e6 would create weak pawns on e6 and d6. ad4 15 lllrs 16 exd4 Now Black is fine. 17 d5 (D) After 17 lDe2 d5 18 c5 a5 Black is slightly better. White's queenside pawns are crippled and the pawn on d4 is weak. White's best line was probably 17 �d5! e6 18 ltle3, just playing for the exchange of knights -

and equality.

B B

14

l:l.c8

TAL - ANAND, CANNES 1989

1fb6

17

The reason why 'ifd3 was bad b3 is undefended.

18 t0d1 i.xb2 19 g1 'ifc6 is dead lost) 28_ .'i'a6+ 29 l'Z.e2 'il'c6 and Black should win. 2b) 26 .i.e3? lilxf3+ wins. 2c) 26 l'Z.e3 (D) and now:

'il'c6+ 39 �e5 and this exciting line ends in a draw by perpetual check. 2c22) 29 lilc5 lilh2+ 30 �e2 'il'xc5 3 1 l'Z.xd8+ l'Z.xd8 32 .i.xf6 gxf6 33 1i'g1 + �h8 34 'il'xh2 'il'c l i s unclear. The conclusion is that White may be able to hold the balance by ac cepting the sacrifice, but it would have been very difficult for Karpov to find all this at the board ! 'il'c1 (D) 23 If we look at the total effect of the last five moves, White has played .i.d2, 'ifbl and a3, while Black has achieved ...1i'c7. Thus White's queen and bishop have been pushed back, while Black has improved his queen position and now controls e5 Black's manoeuvre can be counted a success. Now Black is slightly better be cause he can expand on the queen side, while in the meantime White's pieces are only crawling back to their earlier positions. •••

2c l) 26...1i'f4?! 27 l'Z.d3 ! lilxf3+ 28 �g2 lilh4+ (28 ... lilxd2 29 l'Z.1 xd2 'i'gS+ 30 �fl 1i'xd2 3 1 l'Z.xd2 l'Z.xd2 gives White an edge) 29 �fl 'il'h2 30 .tg5 ! (30 .i.c3 lild5 31 .i.xd5 l'Z.xd5 32 lilc5 is unclear) 30 ... l'Z.xd3 31 'i'xd3 'il'g2+ 32 �e2 lilg6 33 l'g3 favours White. 2c2) 26 ... 1i'c6 27 .i.c3 .!l'lxf3+ 28 �fl b5 with a final branch : 2c2 1 ) 29 l'Z.xd8+ l'Z.xd8 30 .i.d1 IOd4 (30...lild2+ 3 1 .i.xd2 l'Z.xd2 32 .tn defends, while 30 ...lilh4 31 .txf6 gxf6 32 l'Z.g3+ �h8 33 .!l'lc3 'i'h I+ 34 �e2 lilf5 35 l'Z.d3 lild4+ 36 �d2 is at least equal for White) 3 1 i.xd4 l'Z.xd4 32 lilc3 1i'h1 + 3 3 �e2 lllh5 34 J:f3 1i'h2 35 .i.c2 lilf4+ 36 �3 lilg2+ 37 Wxd4 1i'd6+ 38 �e4

61

62


24 �a2 It's hard to say what this move is for. Perhaps he was worried that af ter ... j_cs, there might be a threat of ...j_xf2+ and ...'l'b6+, but it's only a guess.

24 25 j_eJ •.•

a6 b5

White's 24th move is revealed as a mistake. It may have solved one problem, but now the bishop has to return in order to meet ...'l'b7 by j_c2. 26 j_b3 27 .:tel

j_b7 'l'e7 (D)

I was very proud of this game, be cause I felt that I had outplayed Kar pov in the manoeuvring phase of the game. The idea now is . .�7 fol lowed by either .. .lll cS or ...lLldeS heading for c4. .

similar to those in the note to White's 23rd move, while 30 exd6 'l'xd6 attacks the bishop on b6 so there is no win of a piece.

29 30 l:.cdl ·-

�7

Over the last few moves White has only been moving his pieces backwards and forwards, simply re sponding to Black's various threats, while Black has gained space on the queenside and created an outpost at c4. Nevertheless, the symmetrical nature of the position exerts a draw ish tendency. Black's position is more comfortable and easier to play, but one cannot say more than that 30

31 liJxeS

liJgeS lillce5 (D)

32 liJe2?

28 .1b6 29 .1d4

l:.dc8

Now 29 e5 .ixf3 is good for Black,

as 30 exf6 1i'xf6 leads to variations

An error, overlooking the reply.

32 33 f4 •••

1i'h4

After 33 lt:lc3 Black continues 33 ... lllf3+ 34 gxf3 1i'xh3 35 l:.d3

KARPOV - ANAND, BRUSSEU CANDIDKI'ES 1991 .A.h2+ 36 �hl .i.£4+ 37 'iil g l :tc6, and the possibility of playing ...e5 and switching the rook to the king side gives Black an easy win. The al ternative 33 lLlg3 is similar; then 33 ..f2 was more accurate, when Black has a long way to go to create a passed pawn on the kingside.

58

59 60

axbS �2? (D)

.i.c6 axbS

This was White's last chance to play 60 fxe5 l::txe5+ 61 'it>f2.

B

65

Another bad move. White should have tried 6 l ll'lc3. 'it>e6

61 62 l:la3 •••

l:lc2 Now Black is winning. 63

fxe5 fxe5 64 l:la6 The only line I needed to calcu

late was 64 l:lc3 l:lxc3+ 65 ll'lxc3 'it>d6 66 b4 'it>e6 67 �d3 'it>£5 68 �e3 �g4 69 �f2 e4 70 ll'ldI 'it>£5 71 �e3 �e5 72 ll'lc3 g6 (but not 72 ... g5? 73 hxg5 hxg5 74 g4 and White escapes with a draw) 73 g4 g5 74 h5 .i.d7 and Black wins.

64

65

�d6

•••

b4

65 l:la7 l:lxb2 66 l::txg7 b4 is also an easy win.

60

f6!

Now Black retains control of the key dark squares d4 and f4, and the white knight will feel a lack of good squares.

61 :b3?

65 66 i:ia7 67 l:la6+ 68 l:lg6 69 l:ld6 70 l:ldS

:C4 .i.d7 �7 �7 .i.g4 0-1

l:lc2

As the knight is trapped after 7 1 ll'lgl l:lg2.

This game was finished after the conclusion of the fifth game; the two ad journament were played on the same day.Unfortunately , in the adjourment of the fifth game I first made a simple win rather complicated and then, when I need to calculate a long forced line in order to win , I made a mistake that allowed him to gain a tempo.The game ended in a draw. Here Karpov's expe rience also played a part. He had two lost positions (games five and six), but he concentrated all his efforts on finding resources in game five (where had a better chance to save the game) and eventually managed to salvage a half-point

66


I missed a forced win in the seventh game and then he won the eighth game to take the match. Cenainly he defended very well in this match, but he didn't demonstrate the form which would have taken him to the world champion ship, and he subsequently lost to Short in the semi-finals. The two matches I played in this Candidates cycle were virtually the first matches I had ever played. Before, I had only played a not especially serious four-game match with Levitt. When the next Candidates cycle came around, the experience of match play that I gained against Dreev and Karpov turned out to be very useful. The 1991 Tilburg tournament was a double-round event. Prior to this tour nament I had only played Kasparov once, the game ending in a draw. In the first cycle at Tilburg I lost, but gained my revenge in the game immediately following. I won again in Reggio Emilia (see Game 1 3) but, to date, that was the last I saw of a plus score against him!

Game 12

V. Anand - G. Kasparov Tilburg 1991 Sicilian, Scheveningen This was quite a pleasing game.ln fact, I hadn't really bothered to pre pare for this game - I decided that whatever I did, it would be inade quate. He'd played this line so many times I couldn't hope to out-prepare him, so I preferred to concentrate on keeping a clear head for the game. Although the strategy worked well on this occasion, it would be easy to

while, during which I saw that it was not so easy.

8 0-0 9 �e3

Vb6 11'xb2

Here I realized that I had to sacri fice on b5, or else I would just be a pawn down for nothing.

10 llldbS (D)

1 0 'ii'd2 ti)g4 is clearly better for Black.

exaggerate its advantages!

1 e4

2 �3 3 d4 4 �d4 s ltlc3 6 f4 7 i.d3

cS d6 cxd4 �6 a6 e6 lllbd7

1 later discovered that Kasparov

and Nikitin's book on the Scheven inge gives 'The position after 8 0-0

'l'b6 9 �e3 'i'xb2 10 lllcb5 axb5 1 1 �xb5 J:ta5 is interesting for analy sis' , but during the game I wasn't aware of this. At the board I was considering 8 0-0, and my analysis ran '8 0-0 'i'b6 9 �e3 'ii'xb2 and there must be something strong.' Af ter 1 played 8 0-0, he instantly flashed out 8• . 'i'b6 and I thought for a

10 11 lllxbS •••

axbS :as

The line which had convinced me to play 10 llldb5 was 1 1 ...'ii'b4 1 2 lllc7+ �d8 1 3 lllxa8 'ii'a5 1 4 lllb6 lllxb6 15 'ife1 ! 'ifa7 16 a4 lllg4 1 7 a 5 and White wins. However, Black can improve on this by 12 ... �e7! 1 3

68


�xa8 'iVa5 which leads, just like the game, to a complex and unclear po sition. Other moves are bad, for example 1 1 .. .\t>dS? 12 a3! (threatening 1 3 �d4) 1 2. . .lh4 ( 1 2 ... d5 1 3 l:.b1 -.a2 1 4 l:tb3! followed by �3) 13 c4! and wins, or 1 1.. .l:.b8? 12 l:l.b1 'iVxa2 1 3 l:tal 1rh2 1 4 �d4 1rb4 1 5 c 3 trap ping the queen.

12 l:.b1

Better than 12 a4 l:txb5 (12...d5 13 l:.b1 'i'a2 14 l:tal is a draw) 13 axb5 'iVc3, which is better for Black, e.g. 14 l:taS �e7 15 'iVel 'iVc7 and 16 b6 �xb6 17 ..llxb6 fails because Black takes on b6 with check.

12

•••

lhbS

was still analysis as he was playing very fast. l:tb6 14 Not 14 ...l:.b4? 1 5 'ifc3 and wins. 15 �xb6 �xb6 16 'iVc3 (D) This move was the product of long thought. I realized that any other move would allow Black to re group his b6-knight to c5. Then it is hard to judge whether the queen or the three minor pieces would be bet ter, but Black's solid pawn structure gives him a head start. I therefore de cided that it was necessary to keep the knight fixed on b6 as a target, and force the other knight to occupy d7. ...

Not 12 ...'i1Vxa2? 13 �c3 'iVa3 14 l:l.b3 and Black does not get enough for the queen. 13 l:txb2 lhb2 (D)

16 Alternatively:

14 'i1Va1 I was quite surprised that Kasparov went in for this, but I was sure it

i&.e7

1 ) 16...�d8 17 'ii'a5 �d7 18 llbl and now: Ia) 1 8...�c7 1 9 ..1lb5 �b8 (White wins after l9 ... �c5? 20 i.e8) 20 ..llxd7 �xd7 21 'ii'dS ffJ (2 l...d5 22

69

ANAND - KAsPAROV, TtLBURG 1991

� dxe4 23 l:tb3 ta:5 24 l:lc3 is Now that Black cannot castle, he again winning) 22 <Jth l ! i.g7 23 finds it hard to coordinate his pieces. 19 'i'b6 (D) 'fle7 '/;c7 24 l:ldl and White is clearly better. lb) 1 8...d5 19 exd5 exd5 20 i.f5 i.c5+ 21 �fl �7 22 i.xd7 lill.d7 23 'tc7 ffi 24 lldl d4 25 c3 also fa vours White. 2) 16 .. lilld7 17 l:lbl d5? (Black can transpose into the game by 17 ...i.e7) 18 l:lxb6 and White wins after 18 ....ic5+ 19 <Jtfl d4 20 'i'c4 or 18...�xb6 19 'i' c7. .

17 l:tbl (D) 19

17

li::Jfd7

Black can get castled at the cost of his d-pawnby 1 7 ... i.d8 1 8 'i'd4 �7 (18 ...�fd7 19 'ii'xd6 also fa vours White) 19 'ii'xd6 i.e? 20 'ii'c7 0.0 21 �fl . but White retains a slight advantage. 18 'ii'xg7 Now 18 'ii'c7 fails to 1 8...0-0! 19 llxb6? .idS 20 'l'xc8 i.xb6+.

18

i.f6

.••

�e7

The alternative is 19 ...l:lg8 20 e5 dxe5 and now: 1 ) 21 i.xh7 with two lines: Ia) 2 I ...l:lh8 22 l:lxb6 lbxb6 (if 22 ... e4, then 23 llb4 �e7 24 llc4 wins) 23 'ifxf6 l:lxh7 24 'ii'xe5 lbd5 25 c4 lbe7 26 a4 with the plan of 'ifc7, c5-c6 and pushing the a-pawn forward to queen. Of course, matters are not so simple as this, but White has the advantage. lb) 2 I . . .llg4! 22 llxb6 llh4 23 llxe6+ fxe6 24 'ifg6+ �e7 25 i.g8 llxf4 26 'ii'f7+ �d8 27 'ii'xe6 is un clear. 2) 2 1 llxb6! e4 22 llb4 (22 i.b5 i.d4+ 23 �fl i.xb6 24 'ifxh7 <Jtf8 25 'ii'xe4 is unclear, but 22 llxe6+ fxe6 23 i.xe4 should be slightly bet ter for White) 22 ... exd3 23 'ii'xh7 with advantage to White.

70


20 i.bS? Missing a stronger possibility: 20 g4 ! (while not winning, this gives White an advantage) 20 ...l:.g8 (not 20 ... i.d4+? 21 ..t>n tas 22 l:.b4, nor 20 ...�c5? 21 e5 dxe5 22 g5 and White wins in both lines) 2 1 g5 il.. g7 (2l ... .id4+ 22 'it>fl lt)f8 is possible, but still better for White) 22 1i'h4 (D) (not 22 'i'xh7?? .id4+ 23 'it>fl !::th8 and Black wins) and now:

I) 22...h6 23 �fl and now both 23 ...hxg5 24 'ilfxg5+ and 23.. .�a4 24 e5! dxe5 25 fxe5 favour White. 2) 22...�a4 23 �hl (23 l:.b4 �ac5 24 'ilfxh7 �f8 25 'ilfh4 is also good for White since he has the e4pawn well supported) 23 ...�ac5 24 g6+ (24 'i'xh7 �f8 25 'i'h4 l:.h8 26 1Wg3 b6 is only slightly better for White) 24... il.. f6 25 gxh7 l:.h8 26 'i'h6! (now the manoeuvre l:gl-g8 will also introduce the possibility of 'ilff8+) 26 ... e5 (26...�xd3 27 cxd3 �f8 28 e5 dxe5 29 fxe5 .ixe5 30

'ilt'g5+ i.f6 31 11fc5+ �d8 32 'l'd6+ �d7 33 .l:l.gl is very unpleasant for Black) 27 l:.gl (27 l:.fl �f8 28 fxe5 i.xe5 is less clear) 27 ...exf4 28 ltg8 �e6 29 11fxf6+! �xf6 30 .!Z.xh8 and wins. 3) 22 ... e5 23 'it>hl exf4 and now: 3a) 24 g6+ .if6 25 gxh7 1th8 26 'ifb5 .ie5! 27 11fg5+ �f6 28 :Xb6 1txh7 29 ltb5! (29 .ie2 f3 30 i.xf3 l:.xh2+ 3 1 '1t>gl lbc2 is not easy for White - Black's pieces are Vf:I'J ac tive) 29 ... l:.h5 30 l:.xe5+ dxe5 31 'ifgl i.d7 3 2 .ie2 (32 'ifc5+ 'ite8 33 .ib5 hb5 34 1Wxb5+ �f8 35 'lxb7 '1t>g7 is less clear as Black has coun terplay with ...�g4 or with his f pawn) followed by either t!fc5+ or 'i'g5, with advantage to White. 3b) 24 e5! (also strong) and now: 3b1 ) 24... dxe5 25 g6+ .if6 26 gxh7 lth8 (26...l:tf8 27 'l"h6 lLld5 28 l:.gl i.h8 29 l:.g8 �ffi 30 l:txf8 �xf8 31 'ifg5 �g6 32 .ixg6 fxg6 33 '6'xe5+ wins) 27 '6'h5 (27 '6'h6�d5 28 l:.gl is also promising for White. 27...�4 (27...�5 28 i.c4 liJe3 29 '6'xn + Wd6 30 l:.b6+ is winning) 28 llgl �ac5 29 .ic4 � 30 i.xe61 '1fi>xe6 31 ltg8 and White should win 3b2) 24 ... .ixe5 25 g6+ .if6 (the line 25 ... We8 26 gxh7 l:.h8 27 ltb5 !' �a4 28 llxe5+ dxe5 29 'ifg5 is deci· sive) 26 gxh7 llh8 27 '6'h6, again in· tending llgl -g8, and Black faces serious problems. Kasparov pointed out many of these variations after the game. My

ANAND - KASPAROV, TILBURG 1991

inaccuracy arose because I failed to appreiate that this was really a criti cal position in which White had to continue very precisely, and not just play natural-looking moves. ZO llg8?! (D) Missing a simple chance: after 20...e5! (not 20...li:lc5? 2 1 e5 dxe5 22 fxe5 i.xe5 23 'ifg5+ �d6 24 J:ldl+ lDd5 25 o4 and wins) 2 1 llfl (after 21 f5 li:lc5 Black has wrested control of some dark squares; 2 1 a4 � 22 a5 li:lbd7 is also fine for Black) 2 1 ...llg8 22 fxe5 .i..xe5 23 •xh7 J:lg7 24 1Wh4+ li:lf6 Black has regrouped his pieces with a solid po sition.

21 lldl!

eS?!

After 2 l ...li:lc5 White can gain the advantage: 1) 22 J:lxd6?! is inferior after 22 .. J:Ig6 23 'l'h.S ! ll:lxe4! (23...�xd6 24 e5+ �c7 25 exf6 li:lbd7 26 'i'xh7 lhf6 27 g3 is slightly better for White ) 24 lld3 li:ld5 and Black's .

71

active pieces provide him with suffi cient counterplay. 2) 22 e5 ! dxe5 23 fxe5 ..txe5 24 1We3 and now 24 .....td6 25 'i'd4 .l:td8 (25 ...li:ld5 26 c4 wins for White) 26 'i'h4+ f6 27 'i'xh7+ �f8 28 'i'h8+ �7 29 1lg7# is mate, so Black must play 24...li:lbd7 25 �xd7 li:lxd7 26 .:.Xd7+ �xd7 27 11fxe5 �c6 28 g3, when White has fair winning pros pects. The best move is 2 1 ...llg4! (D), which was Kasparov 's original in tention, but when he was about to play it, he saw a hole in his analysis. However, it appears that the move is playable after all:

I) 22 g3? e5! 23 a4 exf4 24 a5 fxg3 25 axb6 gxh2+ 26 �hi .ie5 fa vours Blade - the h2-pawn is very strong. 2) 22 e5 dxe5 23 'ifh3 .:.Xf4 24 'i'a3+ �e8 (not 24...�d8? 25 'i'f8+ �c7 26 'i'd6+) 25 'ifc5 .i..d8 26 a4 and now:


72

2a) 26 .. J:I.f5? 27 l:l.f! l:l.g5 (White wins after 27 .. Jhfl+ 28 �xfl as Black cannot defend against a5) 28 h4! is very good for White. 2b) 26... e4 27 l:lfl ! (now not 27 a5? llf5 28 � 00 29 'ifc4 fi'Je7 and Black is better) 27 ...l:l.g4! 28 h4! (28 a5 .l:l.g5 29 'iff2 f6, intending 30 c4 fi'Ja8, is slightly better for Black) and now Kasparov goes into some spectacular lines, but he missed 28 ... e3 !, which looks fine for Black, e.g. 29 a5 (29 'ifxe3 lDd5 is very good for Black) 29...e2! 30 l:l.el .if6 3 1 c3 �d8! with advantage to Black. 3) 22 .ie2 !? (probably objec tively best) 22...l:l.g8 and White may have nothing better than to repeat moves.

22 rs (DJ

8

complicated. The analysis runs 23 g4 fi'Jc5 (23 .. .1lg8 24 h3 is a simple win) 24 g5 fi'Jxe4 (not 24. ...th8? 25 f6+) 25 gxf6+ fi'Jxf6 (Kasparov ana lysed this in excruciating detail and decided it favoure White; however, when you go for your best practical chance, you shouldn't be too fussy!) 26 'ife3! (26 c4?! .l:l.g8+ 27 �I .ixf5 28 c5 dxc5 29 11t'e3 fi'Jbd7 and 26 l:l.fl .l:l.g8+ 27 �hi l:l.g4! are less clear; Black has real counterplay in both cases) 26 ...fi'Jbd5 (26 ...�bd7 27 'ifa7 ! fi'Jc5 28 llxd6! :.gS+ 29 �I �d6 30 'ifb6+ wins) 27 'lb3 fi'Jc7 ! (27 ...fi'Jf4 28 'ifc4 heading for c7) 28 'ifc4 fi'Jxb5 29 'ft'xb5 ltg8+ and Black can play on, but White has excellent winning chances. Other 22nd moves are bad, for ex ample 22 ... l:l.g4? 23 "ifd2 dS 24 .ixd7 fi'Jxd7 (24 ... .ixd7 25 'lb4+ and 24... �xd7 25 'ife2 are also win· ning for White) 25 'ifxd5 wins, or 22 ...fi'Ja8 23 .ixd7! .ixd7 24 ltxd6 .ig5 (24 ... �xd6 25 'ifxf6+ �c7 26 'l'xf7) 25 'ifxh7 and White wins. 23 l:l.xd6! Black's position crumbles. 23 .tgS 23...�xd6 loses to24 'ifxf6+�c7 25 'ifxe5+. 24 'ifxb7 Now all the tactics work out for White. •••

22 It is now too late for this move. I was rather relieved when he didn 't play 22... l:l.d8 !, after which White is still better, but the position remains

fi'Jxe4 24 Or 24 ... �xd6 25 'il'xg8 .ie3+ •••

(25 ...fi'Jxe4 26 'ifxO and wins) 26

ANAND - KA.SPAROV, TILBURG 1991

73

�I �xe4 (26...CI ! is very good for White after 32.. .'1"a7 33 'iVe l or 32 ...'lic7

•••

34 gxf6 35 1!rh6

85

exf5 gxf6 fxeS

After 35 ...'i'h8 White wins by 36 e6+ i.xe6 37 lbe5+ !.

36 37 38 39

1Wxh7+

'16116+

�6 <M7

il:lgS+ �e7 �d6 1Wg7+ 'l;c7 40 il:lf7+ 41 il:lxeS (D)

33 !5.

32 f5 33 &5 (D)

'fle8

Not 33 exf6 gxf6 34 fxe6+?!

.he6 35 lilxe6 'i'xe6 36 'i'xe6+ �xe6 37 o&l4+ �e5 38 �b5 \i>r4 with a likely draw. When you have such an advantage, simplifying eve rything just to win a pawn is insane. However, White could also have maintained the pressure by 33 �fl , &epping out of the way of some checks.

B

White has established complete dominance and should win without difficulty. On top of all his other ad vantages, he has an outside passed pawn.

41 42 il:lxbS+ 43 il:ld4 44 il:ldf3 45 �2 46 ile7 •••

lLlb6 �b8 'l"bS+ i.e8 f4

Threatening 47 b5 .i.x b5 (or else lLlc6+) 48 ilc5.

46

lLlc8

86

VISHY ANAND: MY BEST GAMES OF CHESS 47 'i'f6 48 'iVxf4 49 lDg5 so �g3 51 'i'f3 52 lDgf7

�b7 'l!i'h8 'i'h6 lDd6 �c6 lD:d7

If 52 . .1Wg7+, then 53 'M2. .

53 'lfxf7+ 54 11f4 55 hS 56 ST6!

�b6 ire6

�b7

t-O

A neat finish.

Bareev subsequently recovered and had a very good tournament. The above game was played in round three. Over the next few rounds I had a number of sharp draws, including a very exciting one against Shirov,and then in round seven I faced Hubner.

Game 1 5

V. Ana nd - R. Hubner Dortmund 1 992 Petroff Defence 1 e4 2 ltlf3

eS ll:\f6

Round !bout this time I was very well prepared against the Petroff, be ca� I had played the opening myself fa-many years, so I was quite happy with HUbner's choice. I had many interesting ideas stored up for White and was hoping that I would be able to use one of them. 3 d4 ll:\xe4

4 5 6 7

.td3

dS

ll:\xeS li:Jxd7

ll:\d7 �xd7 11'h4

0-0 8 c4 9 c5

1 2 b4 ll:lh5 1 3 b5 and White gained the advantage, but presumably there was an improvement somewhere. 11 11'f6 Perhaps this is the point behind 9 .. .g6; with the pawn on g5 this re treat would not be possible. •.•

12 �e3 (D)

0-0-0 g6

An unusual move instead of the

normal 9...g5. HUbner had played it once before, in 1983, but I had never seriously looked at it. One reason 12 was that Hiibner had annotated the �fS? earlier game in lnformator, and had Black should have attempted to spent about two pages explaining make use of the fact that g5 is free by playing 1 2 ... ll:\g5!?. Then White can why the move was really lousy! For the moment I decided to con try : tinue as if Black had played 9. .. g5. 1 ) 13 ll:lxd5 ll:lh3+ (if 13.. .�c6, .tg7 then 14 1l'g4+ wins) 1 4 �g2 ( 14 � J 10 lOc3 �c6 1 5 11'g4+ 11'e6 and Black wins) ll g3 14...�c6 15 11'g4+ ( 1 5 �xh3 �xd5 The earlier game, Timman-HUbner, Tilburg 198 3 , had gone 1 1 ll:\e2 li:Jf6 leaves the king miserably placed)

BB

V/SHY ANAND: MY BEST GAMES OF CHESS

15 ...�b8 1 6 11'xh3 :xd5 and Black is much better. 2) 1 3 �e2 �h3 14 :e1 l0e6 is unclear. 3) 1 3 f4 and now: 3a) 13 ...ll:le6? 1 4 lt:lxd5 wins. 3b) 13 ...lt:lh3+ (a difficult move to make; of course the knight is rather annoying for White, but it has no way out) 14 �g2 :he8 ( 1 4...h5? 1 5 f5 ! is very good for White) 1 5 ...d2 with an unclear and double-edged position. 3c) 13 ......e6! 14 lle1 ll:le4 1 5 �xe4 dxe4 1 6 d5 is another unclear line. Black can try to develop light squared counterplay, while White can use his pawn-mass for attacking purposes. The text-move is a clear mistake. I didn't realize this immediately, be cause I was trying to imagine what this position would be like with the pawn on g5. Suddenly I noticed that lt:lb5 was very strong, precisely be cause with the pawn on g6 my bishop has access to f4.

13 lt:lbS!

�h3

After 13 ... a6 White continues 14 lt:lxc7! �xc7 (14 . . ....c6 1 5 lt:la8! and the knight escapes via b6) 15 �4+ �c8 16 �e5 ...c6 (16...11'e6 is the same) 1 7 �xg7 llhg8 1 8 �e5 f6 1 9 �f4 g 5 2 0 �e3 with a safe exira pawn and an attack by b4-b5.

14 lt:lxa7+! �b8 15 lt:lbS �xfl 16 �xfl (D)

I didn't think long about this ex change sacrifice or even bother to calculate variations; it's clear that without the black a-pawn, White's own a-pawn can just run all the way through.

8

16 More or less forced, to meet if4 by ... :e7.

17 ...a4 18 W'b4

...a6

...aS White wins after 1 8 ...11fc6 19'ila5 f5 ( ......a6 is no longer possible be cause c7 is also attacked) 20 if4 :e7 2 1 lt:lxc7 :Xc7 22 �b5.

19 a4! Intending to tuck in her majesty with a5-a6.

19

g5

Black even has to spend a tempo preventing �f4+ before he can play ...c6. 20 aS c6 lt:lxc3 21 lt:lc3

22 bxc3 (D)

ANAND - HOBNER, DOKTMUND 1992

89

Forcing the g-pawn forwards and so gaining f4 for the dark-squared bishop.

26

27 w 28 ..td3 29 ..tf4

g4

�d7

�e6 l:tf7

I was tempted to toss in ..tb8, but it isn't rea!Iy necessary!

30 'IVcl 31 '1Ve2+ Black is dead lost

22 23 a6 24 ..th3 25 a7+ 26 '6bl

h6 rs

:rs �c8

..trs 1-0

White finishes off by 31 ... �6 32 'ife5+ �g6 33 'ife6+ llf6 (33...'it>g7 34 ..te5+ 'it>g8 35 hf5 l:te8 36 ..th7+! mates) 34 ..txf5+ 'it>g7 35 ..te5 and mate in three more moves. A nice crisp win, though Black's 1 2th move made it easy for me.

The above two games were my only two wins from Dortmund and I fin ished fourth with a score of 5/9 - not one of my most memorable results.

In July 1992 we had the GMA 'farewell party'. The organization had fallen into difficult times and with the failure of the second World Cup cycle it was recognized that its tournament-organizing days were over. SWIFT sponsored a final rapid-play knock-out event held in Brussels. It was su perly organized.

Game 16

V. Anand - I . Sokolov Brussels S WIFT rapid 1 992 Sicil ian, Scheveningen This was the second game o f a two game mini-match. I had won the first game and so only needed a draw to go through to the next round.

1 e4 �f3 3 d4 4 �xd4 5 �c3 6 a4 7 .te2 2

c5 e6

cxd4 a6 d6 �6 �bd7

I found this move a bit strange, but 7 ... �6 would have transposed into one of the main lines of the Scheveningen and I suppose Sok olov wanted something a bit sharper.

8 0-0

9 .tr3 10 g3 11 .tg2

•••

14 e5

dxe5

Forced, since 14 ...�fd7 15 exd6

.txd6 (or 1 5 ... 'li'xd6 16 b4) 16 1txib5 wins. 15 fxe5 tiJrd7 (D) 1 5 ...'li'xe5 1oses to 16 .tf4.

�c5 .te7 0-0

In a sense White has lost time with this bishop manoeuvre, but on the other hand the e4-pawn is well defended and so the knight on c5 isn't doing much. Moreover, Black cannot play ... b6 easily and ... .td7 is met by b4, so he is going to have a lot of trouble developing his queen side.

11

12 .te3 I think that White already has a significant advantage. 12 J:lb8 13 f4 J:le8 Here I was about to play the stan dard plan g4-g5, when I noticed that it wasn't reaDy necessary as White can break through right away.

'ifc7

16 l:.xf7!

A very common tactic when the rook is on e 8 and the f-file opens.

ANAND

16 ...

-

I. SOKOWV, BRUSSE� SWIFT RAPID 1992

91

�xf7

If Black tries to decline the sacri fice by 16...l0xe5 then 17 ..tf4 'llfd6

(17...�xf7 1 8 'iflh5+ �f8 19 �xe5 wins) and now: I) 18�hl l0cd7 1 9 l:txe7 and af ter 19...lhe7 20 l0f3 'llfxdl + 21 .:txdl ilhl3 22 ..ixb8 .l:lf7 or 19 ... '1i'xe7 20 'l'e2 �c6 21 l0xc6 bxc6 22 �xb8 lill.b8 White has a positional advan tage. 2) 18 .l:lxe7 ! (an even stronger move) 18 ...%be7 19 l0db5 'li'xdl+ :ll niD I axb5 (20 .. .lll cd7 2 1 �xe5 lill.e5 22 :!d8+ <J;f7 23 l0d6+ wins) 21 i.xe5 l:ta8 22 �d6 .l:ld7 23 �xc5 lhd l + 24 lllxdl .l:lxa4 25 l0e3 .l:la2 26 .1d4 with a winning endgame. After the text-move the attack crashes home . . 17 'i'h5+ �f8 18 .l:lfl+ lLlr6 ..txf6 19 exf6 20 tOdbS axbS

21 tOxbS

21 .1xc5+ .l:le7 22 l0xb5 also wins. 21 'i'd7 (D)

22 'li'xb7 A nice move. White can take the c5-knight with check in two different ways, but ignores it. White threatens 23 .l:lxf6+ gxf6 24 �h6+, so Black has to waste more time.

22 23 .l:lxf6+ 24 ..ixcS+ 25 1Vh8+

26 �d6+

'li'e7 'i'xf6

.l:te7 �f7 1-0

I was eliminated by Adams in the semi-finals, so the above game was the highlight of the tournament for me.

In September I played a match with Ivanchuk in Linares. It was not part of any cycle, but simply a one-off event arranged by Rentero (the organizer of the Linares tournament) who wanted to hold an event in addition to the an nual super-tournament. Ivanchuk and I were his first choice for the players, and we each had our own reasons for wanting to participate. Ivanchuk wanted to erase the memory of the loss to Yusupov in the Candidates quarter-finals in Brussels, and I wanted to keep my match experience going between world championship cycles. Subsequently, he organized two more matches: Ljubojevic-IIIescas and Lautier-Karpov.

Game 17

V. lvanchuk - V. Anand Match (1), Linares 1 992 Sici l ian, Richter- Ra uzer 1 e4 2 lin

3 4 5 6 7 8

d4 lL!xd4 ltJc3 .i.g5 '6'd2 0-0-0

c5 d6 cxd4 lL!f6 lL!c6 e6 a6 h6

12

13 i.eJ 14 �b1

eS .i.e6 i.e7 (D)

I had prepared this variation spe cially for the match. I hadn't played it before so I could hardly imagine Ivanchuk having prepared it deeply. Nevertheless, lvanchuk blitzed out his next few moves and in fact played the whole game at high speed!

9 .i.e3 10 hd4 ll f3

lL!xd4 b5

I I �bl is more promising. lvan chuk played it in the fifth game of the match and gained the advantage, although the game finally ended in a draw. 11 '6'a5 12 &3 A new and quite good move. 12 �b1 was played in earlier games, while 12 'ilff2 b4 13 .i.b6 'ilfgS+ 1 4 i.e3 'ilfa5 is a popular variation for players who feel like an early din ner! ..•

15 g4?! Playing lL!dS is an option which is available to White at virtually every move. However, without any knights White can hardly expect to oo any· thing against Black's slightly weak· ened queenside, so playing lLldS is an admission that White can no longer hope to gain the advantage. 11te problem with Ivanchuk's move is that he is soon forced to play 00 in any case, when the move g4 not only fails to benefit White but can even prove a weakening of his king· side.

IVANCHUK - ANAND, MATCH (1), LINARES 1992 After 15 h4 llb8 l 6 lDd5 'I'xd2 17 /bxf6+ gxf6 18 llxd2 f5 the conse quenceswould not be so serious for White as h4 does much less damage to White's kingside.

15

.••

llb8

15 ...b4!? was an interesting alter native: I) 16 lDPe6 and White's pawns on e4 and g4 are so weak that he might easily lose both of them. 2) 28 exf5 e4 29 l:te3 (29 ltc3? il.f6) 29... d5 and Black has strong pressure. ..

23 ... 24 g5 (D)

�d7

24 ...

�e6

25 gxf6 26 .td2

26 l:tef2 makes no sense as after 26 ... ..i.e7 White has to attend to his attacked bishop.

26

.••

..bf6

..i.e7!

Simplest and best. The alterna tives 26 .. ih4 27 ..i.b4 and 26.'.Jlg8 27 l:tef2 .i.e? 28 l:txf7 l:tg4 allow White more counter-chances.

27 ..i.el

28 ..i.g3

f6

White has finally defended the weak h2-pawn, but Black has time for ...d5. dS 28 ... 28 ... l:td8!? was also possible, al though in this case Black would have to worry about 29 c4. I pre ferred to play ...d5 immediately.

29 exd5+

Now this is good as White does not have an exchange sacrifice (see note to Black's 22nd move).

95

�xdS (D)

30 lUS! A good defence, forcing Black to lose some time. 30 ... �c6 A forced move, as 30... �e6? 3 1 ..i.xe5 l:te8 3 2 lhf6+ and 30...J:lb7?

96


3 1 �xe5 �e6 (3 I .. .fxe5 32 l:tfxe5+ �d6 33 l:te6+ 'iti>d5 34 .l:xe7 is no better) 32 �xf6+ �xf5 33 �xe7 would lead to a draw.

31 l:tef2? 3 1 l:tf3 ! would have made life far harder for Black as White threatens both 32 �xe5 and 32 .l:c3+ followed by 33 he5. There would be noth ing better than 3 I ...l:th7 32 l:tc3+ �b7 (not 32...�d7 33 l:td2+ �6 34 .l:cd3 :l.b6 35 �f2 l:tc6 36 ..ltc5), but this would represent a success for White. The black king belongs on e6 and while the connected passed pawns guarantee Black an advan tage, he would have a hard technical task ahead. After the text-move White has a large disadvantage. l:th6 (D) 31 ... Not 3 1 ...�d5 32 l:txf6 �xf6 33 l:txf6 and White has complicated matters. The text-move prevents any sacrifice on f6.

32 �b2 33 l:te2 34 lU3

'iti>d7 �d6 llc8!

Very precise. 34 ... �e6 would al· low 35 l:tc3, intending llc6, and again White has some counterplay. 35 �el �e6 Mission accomplished! 36 l:td3 (D)

36 37 l:tg3

l:th7

40 h4 41 .tf2 42 l:tg3

l:tdl .td6 e4!

� Black doesn't even have to push the pawns immediately. He can play to improve the position of his pieces, or try to exchange a pair of rooks to reduce the chances d a blockade. 38 � l:td7 39 :cJ :CC7 39...l:td 1 ? 40 �f2 �xf2 4 1 :.XeS �d4 doesn 't mate after 42 c3.

After all the fuss about Black's connected passed pawns, he gives

lvANCHUK - ANAND, MATCH (1), LINARES 1992 one of them up! However, it does win the exchange.

43 lbe4+

43 llgl llxgl 44 i. xgl f5 wins

easily.

43

i.eS

97

44 lbe5+

Or 44 c3 :d2+ 45 �bl llxf2 win ning.

44 45 �b2

rxeS

lld2

0-1

This match was an important point in my career as I gained a great deal of

confidence as a result of beating Ivanchuk 5-3. He was the first really strong opponent I had beaten in a match and I took this as a promising sign for the

next world championship cycle. In November I took part in a very strong (and enjoyable) tournament in Moscow. I think it was only the second tournament to reach category 18, al though this had been achieved by having only eight players. I lost the first game to Gelfand after allowing myself to be swindled in a favourable posi tion, and after losing the first game in a seven-round event I couldn't really expect thatl would win. However, Moscow turned out to be one of my more succesful tournaments. I scored 4•h out of my remaining six games and shared first place with Gelfand. The following game is from the second round and was the first step towards recovering from my first-round defeat

Game 18

V. Anand - G. Kamsky Alekhine Memorial, Moscow 1 992 Ruy Lopez, Worral l Attack 1 2 3 4 5 6

e4

eS

ttJf3 .i.bS .i.a4 0-0 'ife2

�c6

a6 ttJf6 .i.e7

I played this move because I had beaten Kamsky with the same move the previous year in Tilburg, and I just decided to repeat it.

6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

.i.b3 c3

d4 .l:l.d1 cxd4 eS a4 (D)

bS 0-0 d6 .i.g4 exd4 dS

before the Short-Karpov match. I played the Queen's Gambit Accepted against Karpov, tried out something very unusual and drew without any difficulty. I had no idea that Nigel had prepared the QGA fer Karpov until Nigel revealed the fact after my game!

8

ltJe4

A couple of months before Short's semi-final Candidates match vs Kar pov (which was in April 1992), he asked if I would like to come to Ath ens to work with him. This visit was just a one-off arrangement and I wasn't Nigel's second. We analysed the 'ire2 Ruy Lopez during the week I stayed there, but I had no part in some of the other openings Nigel played in the Karpov match. A strange coincidence occurred in the Linares tournament shortly

13 l:tb8 One of the points of 13 a4 is the line Short showed against Karpov : 13. . .bxa4 1 4 .i.xa4 �b4 15 h3 ih5 16 �c3 .i.g6 17 .i.e3 .l:l.b8 18 �a2 This last move is one of the discov eries we made during our anaytical week in Athens: it is much more im portant to eliminate the knight on b4 than the one on e4. The reason is that •••

ANAND

-

KAMSKY, MOSCOW 1992

99

Supporting the weak third rank and the knight on e4 is only potentially threatening (e.g if Black plays ... c5 the c6-knight in particular. 17 ... llld8 and cxd4) while the knight on b4 is was an alternative. critica;,as it stops White invading lllb4 18 lllcJ After 18 ... lllxc3 19 llxc3 White on c6. Karnsky, not surprisingly, does not has a small advantage. 19 l:ta7 lllgS repeat the line that Jed to a Joss for Again the correct choice. After Karpov axbS 19... .1:g6 ( 1 9...lllc6? loses after 20 14 axbS ..thS lllxd5 lllxa7 2 1 .l:xc7) White replies 15 b3 simply 20 �h2 and Black has to deal 16 ..te3 (D) with the threats of 21 'l'xb5, 2 1 lllxb5 and 2 1 .l:xc7 (20...lllc6 fails to 2 1 lllxd5 !). ...

..txgS 20 ..bgS 21 l:tca1?! (D)

I intended the exchange sacrifice given in the next note, but I had mis calculated one variation, so the solid 21 .l:d1 would have been better.

B 'l'd7 Not 16 ...lllg5 1 7 ..txg5 ..txg5 1 8 � 3 �b4 1 9 g4, winning the d5pawn i7 .l:cl

16

•••

17 liX:3 would have been interest ing, e.g. 17 .. .lbb4 !? ( 1 7 ...lllxc3 1 8 bxc3 b4 1 9 c4 dxc4 20 ..txc4 is un clear) 18 .1f4 'l'f5 ( 1 8 ... ..tg6!? is also possible )and now both 19 lllxd5 lll d5 20 ..txd5 lllxf2 and 19 'l'e3 lll xc3 20 bxc3 lllc2 2 1 ..txc2 'l'xc2 are utnclear. .l:b6 17

21

..tf4?

2 1 ...lll c6! was the right move: 1 ) 22 -Ua8? lllxd4 23 .l:xf8+ �xf8 24 l:ta8+ ..td8! and Black wins, but not 24 .. .'�e7? 25 lllxd4 ..txe2 26


100

ll:lxd5+ 'l'xd5 ZJ .txd5 .tc4 28 .tc6! winning. 2) 22 �xd5 �xd4! (this is the move I had missed; after 22 ...�xa7 23 .l:l.xa7 White has good compensa lion for the exchange) 23 'ilfd3 �+ 24 gxf3 'ilfxh3 and Black is better. 3) 22 'l'd3 .txf3 (22...�xa7 23 ..l:l.xa7 wins the d-pawn and is prom ising for White) 23 1fxf3 �d4 24 'l'xd5 'l'xd5 25 .1xd5 c6 26 .l:l.dl (26 .te4 is also equal) 26....tf4 27 l:xd4 .txe5 leads to a draw.

Wh8 29 'iie3 11rxe3 30 fxe3 gives White a clear extra pawn. .txeS 24 11rxf3

25 dxeS

liJb4 (D)

w

22 IL!xd5! This gives White a large advan tage in every line.

22 23 'l'e4 (D) •••

�xdS

26 ...e3?! After the game Gelfand pointed out a much simpler (and quicker!) win by 26 ..l:l.aS! ..l:l.bbS (or 26...1ilc6 27 e6) 27 .l:l.xbS lhbS 28 la8!. 1fc8 26 Or 26......d3 27 .txf1+ lxn 28 .l:l.a8+ .l:l.f8 29 1hf8+ Wxf8 30 'lc5+ and White wins. •••

27 'li'e4

.txf3?! Now White is winning. Black could still have continued the f_\ ght by 23. .. 1Lle7! 24 'ilrxf4 lLJg6 25 '1Ve3 .txf3 26'i'xf3 'i'xd4 27 .l:l.xc7 1Llxe5 , but now either 28 .l:l.xf7 IL!xf3+ 29 l:.xf3+ 'iic4 30 .l:l.c3 or 28 .txf7+

Once again missing an esdier win, this time by 27 e6 fxe6 28 .l:l.cl, for example 28 ••..l:l.f7 29 'l'xb6, 28.../ila6 29 'iixb6 cxb6 30 .l:l.xc8 1Jtc8 31 .txe6+ or 28 ...1Lld5 29 .txd5 exd5 30 .I:I.cxc7.

27

•••

tba6

After 27 ... 1Llc6 28 .l:l.a8 'l'xa& 29 .l:l.xa8 .l:l.xa8 30 e6 fxe6 31 .ixe6+

Wh8 32 .td5 White wins material. 28 .tdS c6

ANAND

-

KAMSKY, MOSCOW 1 992

101

On 28...ltXS, 29 Wb4 lhd7 30 J:.aS

finishes Black off. l:.b7 29 'i'e3 More or less forced, because af ter 29 . c5 White's bishop is abso lutely dominant, but now White has a forced win. JO hf7+ l:.bxf7 . .

31 J:.7xa6 32 e6 (D) 32

.••

33 e7 34 l:.a8 35 �h2

l:.xf2 l:.xb2 l:.e8 l:.b1+

White must still be careful. After 35 lhbl? Black would slip out by 35 . ..'ii'xa8 36 'i'e6+ �hS 37 l:.fl h6 38 'iWd7 �g8.

35

36 g3 37 �g1 38 lhe8+

'i'c7+ l:.b2+ 'i'd7 1-0

Since 38 ...'il'xe8 39 'il'e6+ �h8 40 l:.fl leaves Black defenceless.

Game 19

V. Anand - V. lvanchuk Linares 1 993 Petroff Defence I e4 2 �fJ 3 d4 4 .td3 S �xeS 6 �xd7 7 0-0 8 c4

�d7 .txd7 'ft4 0-0-0

9 c5

g5

10 ll 12 13

�

g3 �xe4 .txe4

eS ll'lti �xe4 ciS

.tg 7 'ft3 dxe4 .tbS

new idea that I had been waiting to use. 14 .i.g2! After 14 .hg5 lhd4 15 .i.g2 •rs 16 .b3 c6 17 .te3 .hfl 18 bfl, Black can continue 18 ... .1:.hd8! 19 'ifa3 .l:ldl 20 11'xa7 l:bfl+ 21 .hfl .l:ld1 22 •a8+ Wc7 23 .i.d2 'I'xeS 24 .ta5+ b6 25 11'a7+ rJid6 26 hb6 ilb5 27 11rc7+ rJie6 28 Wc8+ � witb a draw. 14 'ilffS Ivanchuk looked surprised, be cause it was well known that 15 dS is bad, but this was not White's idea. IS .i.e3! (D) 15 'irb3 c6 leads nowhere. •••

(D)

This position had been reached umpteen times before the game and the path to equality for Black had been more or Jess worked out after 14 11'b3 and 14 .txg5, but I had a

IS

•••

ANAND - IVANCHUK, LINARES /993

103

16 .btl White intends 'iia4 followed by ldl-d3, swinging the major pieces intothequeenside attack. 1 6 � xfl ?! is inferior as the king is exposed on n.

16 l:the8 Black has several alternatives: 1) 16...i.xd4 (the tactics don't work for Black) 17 .bd4 'l'e4 18 1xh8lb.d1 19 l:l.xdl with too much for the queen. 2) 16 ....!:.xd4 17 i. xd4 l:d8 18 'lhS l:l.xd4 19 i.h3 wins the queen. 3) 16...'i'd7 17 'i'b3 l: he8 18 l:l.dt, intending d5, with a strong ini tiative. 4) 16 . c6 17 'i'a4 h5 18 filxa7 lhd4 19 l:l.el l:l.hd8 20 i.xd4 1-0 Kharlov-T.Christensen, NlilrreSWldby Open 1993 was an abrupt finish. S) 16...�b8 17 'i'a4 c6 18 l:l.dl l:l.d7 19 l:l.d3 l:l.hd8 20 l:l.a3, Zar nicki -Howell, Capablanca Memorial, Matanzas 1993, with fine compen sation for White. lvanchuk's move is good and al lows him to develop counterplay against d4. �b8 17 'i'a4 White wins after 17 ... l:txe3 1 8 fxe3 'i'e4 (18 ...'i'f3 19 l:tel) 1 9 'i'b3! (not 19 let hd4 and White's queen is threatened) 1 9 ... l:te8 ( 1 9 ... l:txd4 20 ig2 also wins) 20 l:tel i.xd4 21 1g2 i.xe3+ 22 �h 1 and Black's po sition collapses. 18 l:l.d1 (D) . .

White's plan is to use the bishop on fl to support .l:d3-a3, and then to swing the bishop back to g2.

18 ......

c6

After 18 ...l:txe3 19 fxe3 1l'e4 (the line 1 9 ... 'i'f3 20 l:l.d3 is similar) 20 l:l.d3 White consolidates his extra pawn.

19 l:td3

19 i. g2 is premature since after 1 9...l:te7 ! 20 d5 cxd5 21 c6 d4 the position is unclear.

19 20 l:ta3 ·-·

11'e4

In view of Black's improvement at move 2 1 , an interesting alternative here is 20 'i'd l !?, intending either i.g2 followed by d5, or simply b4, a4 and b5. The queen on dl over protects d4, preventing a counter sacrifice by Black on that square. a6 20 21 i.d3 (D) After 21 i.xa6 l:txd4! Black gains enough counterplay to hold the bal ance: 22 i.xd4 i.xd4 (22 ...11'xd4 is •••

104


also viable) 23 i.fl i.xc5 (but not 23 ... i.xb2? 24 "ira7+ �c7 25 l:tb3 and wins) 24 "ira8+ �c7 25 "ira5+ i.b6 26 'li'xg5 l:te5 ! andthe pressure on f2 gives Black enough for the pawn.

2c) 23 i.xd4 l:el+ (23 ... I' d4 24 l:txb7+ �xb7 25 "irxa6+ � 26 Wfb6+ �aS 27 •xc6+ �b8 leads to perpetual check) 24 .if! "i'xd4 25 l:txb7+ (25 WVxc6? l:txfl+ 26 �fl 'li'dl + 27 �g2 loses after 27... 'l'xb3) 25...�xb7 26 "irxa6+ �7 (26. . �b8 27 1Vh6+ is a draw) 27 "i'a5+ �d7 28 Wfxe 1 1rxc5 and Black is slightly better. 3 ) 22 i.xa6 i.xd4 23 hb7 (23 l:tb3 is line 2b above) 23 ... hcS!! (D) (an amazing defence that I spor· ted whi 1e waiting for his reply; not 23... i.xe3 24 Wfa7+ �7 25 b6# nor 23 ...�xb7 24 'li'b4+ �c8 25 l:ta7 winning) and now: .

21 "irg4? This move loses because it leaves the c6-square weak. During the game, I realized that 2 1 . .."ird5 ! probably saves Black: I ) 22 i.c4 "ire4 will be a repeti tion. 2) 22 l:tb3?! i.xd4 and now: 2a) 23 l:txb7+? �xb7 24 1rxa6+ �b8 25 "irb6+ �c8 26 "ira? (after 26 i.f5+ l:td7 27 i.xd7+ "irxd7 28 i.xd4 "irxd4 White has � o perpetual check) 26...l:td7 27 "ira8+ �c7 28 1rxe8 i.xe3 and Black wins. 2b) 23 i.xa6 l:te7 ! 24 l:td3 (24 i.xd4 Wfxd4 25 1rxc6? "irdl + 26 �g2 WVxb3 wins) 24 .. .l:te4 25 l:tb3 l:td7 and White's attack runs out of steam.

3a) 24 l:tb3? Wfd l+25 �g2llxe3 26 "ira8+ (or 26 fxe3 l:td2+ 27 �h3 Wfh5+ and wins) 26...�c7 27'ia5+ �d7 28 fxe3 "ire2+ 29 � 'if!+ 30 �g4 f5+ and Black mates. 3b) 24 ..a8+ �c7 25 'lra5+�xb7 26 i.xc5 ..d l + 27 �g2 •d5+ and White cannot gain the advantage :

105

ANAND - IVANCHUK, LINARES 1993 3bl) 28 f3? ::le2+ 29 �h3 'i'e6+ and Black wins. 3b2) 28 ::tf3 :as 29 Wb4+ (29 9b&+ "'c8 and White is lost because of the doomed rook on f3) 29···"'c8 is unclear, but White cannot have the advantage. 3b3) 28 "'h3 'i'f5+ is a draw. 3b4) 28 "'gl 'i'd l + is also a draw 3c) 24 .txc6 (best) 24...'i'd l + 25 ri>g2 'i'xa4 26 ::lxa4 ::lxe3 27 fxe3 :d2+ 28 � (28 "'h3 ::lxb2 is just a draw)28 ...::lxb2 with slight winning chances for White. A subsequent game Gi.Hemandez-Howel , Cap blanca Memorial, Matanzas 1993 ended in a draw. It's certainly possi ble to repeat this and try to play for a win in the ending, but White's ad vantage isn't that great 22 ::lb3! .txd4? (D) This loses immediately, but the alternatives are not much better: 1) 22 .. .::td7 23 .ba6 (not 23 ::lb4? ::le3 24 fxe3 'ilt'f3 and Black wins) 23. .. .bd4 24 'l'xc6 'I'd 1 + 25 "'g2 •xb3 26 'i'xd7 and wins. 2) 22... ::le7 is relatively best, but after 23 ::lb4!, threatening both 24 .ba6 and 24 d5, White has a clear advantage in any case.

23 lhb7+!!

"'xb7

25 'ilfb6+ 26 11Vxc6+ 27 'ilfb6+ 28 .i.bS

"'a8 �b8 "'a8 1-0

24 'lfxa6+

�b8

Because 28...::lc8 29 .tc6+ ::lxc6 30 'i'xc6+ "'a7 3 1 'i'xe8 'i'dl + 32 �g2 .txe3 33 'i'xe3 leaves White three pawns ahead. Gurevich and I had the final posi tion on the board during our work in 1 99 1 - an unusual experience for me! I consider myself reasonably well-prepared, but to have worked out the whole game in advance is rare. It is also quite unusual to catch Ivanchuk out in opening prepara tion. Several players later asked me: "Gee, you out-prepared Ivanchuk?"

If it hadn't been for the following game, which I played a couple of days later,I would have considered this my best game from Linares 1993.

Game 20

B. Gelfand - V. Anand Linares 1993 Queen's Gambit Accepted 1 2 3 4 5

d4 c4 e4

dS lDc3

dS dxc4 cS l0£6 bS

I had prepared this line for my match against Ivanchuk the previous year, when I was analysing with Wolff, but as Ivanchuk played 1 e4 throughout the match, I had to wait a year before it came up. During the interim I had realized there were some holes in the earlier analysis, but I hadn't really looked at it thor oughly, so to some extent the spe cific line played in this game was improvisation at the board.

6 .i.f4 7 eS 8 li:lge2

but only with the idea of taking the rook on h1 (see the note to Black's 1 1 th move). After the Beliavsky game I looked at 9 .. .li:lb4 again, and discovered the move 1 1...g6! !. I did'nt imagine that I would face this line again, but a few days later Gelfand confidently went down the same variation. I was quite happy as I felt sure that he would not have seen l l ...g6 ! ! .

'i'aS �4 lila6!

9 f3

After 9 a3 .i.b7 10 f3 li:lxc3 1 1 li:lxc3 li:lc7 ! Black is slightly better because the d5-pawn is weak. li:lb4! (D) 9 In the second round I played 9 ... li:lxc3 10 li:lxc3 .i.f5 against Be liavsky, but he responded very accu rately: 1 1 g4 i.g6 12 a4 ! and White gained the advantage. In my earlier analysis I had considered 9 ...lilb4,

lt:ld3+ g6!! (D) I played this and got up from the board. Gelfand sank into lenghtly thought, during which time he seems to have convinced himself that he was completely lost. This is an

10 fxe4 11 �d2

GElFAND - ANAND, LINARES 1993

exaggeration, but I think that Black is already slightly better. White's best lines lead to positions in which Black has something like two pawns and a dangerous attack for the piece. 1 1...1Df2?! 12 'irel ltlxh 1 is com pletely wrong. The knight will be tmpped after 13 g3 and Black has surrendered all his pressure. After the text-move Black's im mediate compensation lies in the paralysing effect of his knight. How ever, in the longer term Black may play ...i.g7 and ... ltlxe5, when the queenside pawn-mass, supported by the g7-bishop, will become extremely dangerous, especially as White's king will be floating around in the centre.

12 b3?! This is just a mistake. The alterna tives are: I ) 12 a4 b4 1 3 lbbl (13 ltJb5 a6 and the knight is trapped)13 ... i.g7 will fantastic positional compensa tion for the piece.

107

2) 12 d6 exd6 ( 1 2... e6!? is inter esting, taking away the d5-square; Black plans ...i.g7 and ...i.b7 with great play, but maybe the d6-pawn improves White's prospects slightly) 13 a4 and now: 2a) 13 ...1Dxf4 (this was our post mortem analysis, but there is a hole in it!) 14 ltlxf4 i.h6 15 g3 dxe5 16 Wc2! (the line 1 6 axb5 1Wd8+ 17 Wc2 1Wxdl + 1 8 lhdl exf4 favours Black) 16 ...exf4 (16... b4 17 1Wd6! is good for White) 17 'it'd6! (the flaw; after 17 'llt'd5 0-0! 18 'llfxa8 b4 Black has more than enough compensa tion) with an unclear position. One possible line is 17 ... i.e6 1 8 'irc6+ �e7 19 1Wxc5+ Wf6 20 1Wd4+ with a draw by perpetual check. 2b) 1 3 ... b4 14 ltJd5 i.g7 1 5 1Df6+ (15 exd6 0-0 is unclear) 15 ...i.xf6 16 exf6 i.e6 intending ... 0-0-0. Ad mittedly this is all a bit speculative, but Black has real compensation. Both line 2b and 12 ... e6 offer Black good chances against 1 2 d6. 3) 12 g3 i.g7 1 3 i.g2 ltlxe5 and Black continues with his plan. 4) 12 We3 i.g7 1 3 g3 ( 1 3 1Dc1 ? 1Dxf4 1 4 Wxf4 he5+ 1 5 Wxe5 g5 ! leads to mate in six more moves by 16 d6 f6+ 17 Wd5 e6+ 1 8 Wxc5 'iib6+ 19 Wb4 a5+ 20 Wa3 11Fc5+) 13 ... ltJxe5 and again Black has good play. He will continue with ...0-0 and possibly ...f5. 5) 12 i.g3 i.h6+ 13 Wc2 b4! ( 1 3 ...'itb4 is met by 14 'irbl ! with

VlSHY ANAND: MY BEST GAMES OF CHESS

1 08

advantage to White, and not 14 .l:b1 ? 'i!Vb3+! 15 axb3 lDb4#) regain ing the piece. 6) 1 2 �c2 can be met by 1 2 . b4 or 12 ... �g7 13 �b1 0-0, intending . . .l:b8 and . .b4. . .

.

12 13 bxc4 14 lDxf4?

14 cxb5 �xeS 15 'ti'b3 �xe2 16 ..liLxe2 0-0 is excellent for Black, but the text-move loses even more rap idly.

14 IS lDfe2

�xeS b4 (D)

of a knight on e6 would only compli cate the winning process.

19 lLld3

20 g3

�

21 .i.g2 22 cS

h6!

White must try to make something of his pawn-mass, but Black will strike with both a left hook (... .ia6) and a right hook ( ... �h6).

22 l:c 1 l:ac8 23 c5 will be a trans position.

22 23 c6

:acs l:!.fd8

24 .l:!.cl 2S lDef4

�h6+

26 �xd3 27 �c4

eS

27 ... 28 l:!.el

exf4 fxg3

...

w

aS

Black has a decisive material ad vantage, but White still has some po tential counterplay with his central pawns, so the technical phase is still quite interesting.

Threatening 24... �xd3 25 �xd3 .l:!.xc6. 25 lDdf4 e5 26 .i.h3 f5 ! wins for Black. �xd3 2S

16 1Wa4+

White also loses after 16 :C 1 bxc3+ 17 lDxc3 j£4+ or 16 1Wb3 bxc3+ 17 lDxc3 l:b8.

16 17 lDxa4 18 lDxcS

1W:xa4 �xal 0-0!

I thought about 18 ...f5, trying to break up his pawn-chain, but then I realized that after 19 lDf4, the arrival

Again, if 27 .i.h3 then Black re plies 27 ...f5.

Black still has to becaref ul ; if White could obtain theee connected passed pawns then his counterplay could prove troublesome. For this reason 28 .. f6? is inferior since after 29 .l:!.fl ! g5 (29... fxg3 30 :xf6) 30 .

GElFAND - ANAND, LINARES 1993 h4 Black will have to be extremely

29 eS

Now 29 hxg3 f6 1eads to the block ade d the pawns. •••

.U4

33 .i.h3 Now White cannot play 33 d6 be cause his rook is blocking the long diagonal.

34 .l:l.e2

hold back the pawns.

30 hxg3

30 ... 31 .:eJ

.i.xg3 .i.f4! (D)

Such little finesses make life eas ier. After 3l....i.h2 White could play 32 d6.

.l:l.c7 ..tg3 M4 g5 .l:l.e7

33

Here the bishop is well-placed to Or 30 lte4 g5.

.i.h2

32...g5 was also good.

careful.

29

32 .l:l.e4

109

35 .l:l.e3 36 .l:l.e4 37 'ificS

This move wins tacticaUy.

Or

38 �d4

38 d6 .l:l.xe5+ 39 .l:l.xe5 .i.xe5 40 .i.d7 h5! 41 c7 .l:l.fB 42 �d5 (42 .i.e8 .i.xd6+) 42 ....i.f4 (or 42 ....i.xd6 43 �xd6 g4 and after 44 �e7, with the threat of 45 .ie8, Black wins by 44 .. ..l:l.a8!) winning as 43 .i.e8 .l:l.xe8

44 d7 fails to 44 ... .l:l.e5+ 45 �d4 .l:l.e4+ 46 �xe4 .i.xc7.

38 39 d6 40 .l:l.xeS

0-1

fti! .i.xeS+ .l:l.xd6+

I was extremely proud of this game and Gelfand was very sporting; he said that he didn't mind losing such a game and that I would have good chances to win both the best game and best novelty prizes in lnformator (in fact I won neither!). The fOllowing game was played in the penultimate round (round 12). I was on +3 and havinga very good tournament by any standards, but after eight rounds I had been on +4, sharing the lead with Kasparov. However, Kasparov was m even better fonn and beat both myself and Karpov to take the lead; he went on to win the tournament in very convincing style.

Game 2 1

V. Anand - E. Bareev Linares 1 993 French Defence

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

e4 d4 lllc3 eS f4 lllr3 ..te3

e6 dS li:lf6 lllfd7

11 12 lllxd4

cxd4 lllcS (D)

cS

a6 bS

I'm not sure what the point of de laying ... lllc6 is (the same idea was played in Kamsky-Ivanchuk, Tilburg 1992). I just responded with natural moves.

8 'l'd2

..te7

The Kamsky-lvanchuk game con tinued 8 .. ..tb7 9 ..td3 b4 10 llld l lllc6 I I 0-0 cxd4 1 2 lllxd4 ..te7 1 3 :n 0-0 1 4 :h3 g6 1 5 lllf2 and was also won by White. 9 ..td3 g6 This is really asking a bit too much of Black's position. Of course the position is somewhat closed but Black cannot completely neglect his development. .

10 0-0 11 llld 1

..tb7

Forcing Black to commit himself. If White is allowed to play c3 then, having reinforced his centre he will be free to play lllf2 followed by ei ther g4 or lllg4 as appropriate.

13 b4! A similar idea to White's 18th move in Game 14. White locks the queenside pawn structure and in creases his dark -square control on that side of the board, too.

13

•••

llla4

1 3...lllxd3 14 cxd3 liJc6 15 llbl is clearly better for White (see Game 14 for a similar type of position). while after 1 3...llle4 14 'l'el fol lowed by a4, Black's queenside is undermined. Bareev chooses the best plan. which is to manoeuvre his knight to c4.

ANAND

-

BAREEV, LINARES 1993

111

14 c3 l0b6! his development by I 8...lLxl7 1 9 15 i.f2?! �b3 �b6 20 �a5 �bc4, and Probably not the most accurate; White's queenside play has been as we will see, it allows Black a good stymied. White's problem here is chance at move 17. It would hallie poorly placed knight on b2; in been better to play 15 �b2 �c4tl6 game White manages to swap it xg7 23 'ifg6+ �f8 24 'iff6+

16

.•.

117

are hopeless fer Black)

19 gxf6 hf6 20 'ilff4 �xc3 21 l:lxdl and White has an extremely strong attack.

d5 (D)

16 ...iLxd1 17 'it'e4 transposes into the preceding note.

17 fS! Of course White cannot play 1 7 :del c5 18 'l'e5 � 6 and his queen is trapped ,but I always intended to sacrifice the exchange here.

17 ... �xd1 18 lt:lxd1 (D)

This is again a slight inaccuracy. The alternatives are: I) IB:Xd1?'i'b6 1 9 'i'e5 (19 'i'f4 ot\e6! 20 'l'e5 'l'xe3+ ! and Black wins)l9 ... iJ..d6 20 'it'xd6 (20 �xb6 1xeS is lost for White) 20 ... 'ii'xe3+ 21 �bl lCJeB 22 'i'dB (22 'iVb4 'l'xg5 iswinning)22 ...lt:lf6 ! 23 iic7 'it'xg5 24 l'b7 lCJbd7 25 iixc6 and Black has a clear advantage. 2) 18 f6! :txf6! (18 ... gxf6 19 lt:lf5 and l 8... iLxf6 19 gxf6 :Xf6 20 :Xd1

�d6? 18 Black should have hied 18 ... c5! 19 'l1Vg4 ( 1 9 'l'h4 c4 20 f6 cxd3 21 fxe7 l:leB 22 lLlf5 'it'a4! is unclear) 1 9...c4 and now: l ) 20 1Vh5? cxd3 21 g6 h6 22 �xh6 1Va4 ! 23 lDe3 1Vh4 24 �xg7 1Vxh5 (24 ... �xg7?? 25 f6+! wins for White) 25 lDxh5 �g5 ! and Black wins. 2) 20 �2 (it is not very attrac tive to have to retreat the bishop, but White retains a very dangerous at tack) 20 ... �d6 (20 ... �h8 2 1 f6 gxf6 22 lDf5 lDc6 23 g6 wins) 2 1 f6 g6 22 h4 and the position is still very diffi cult fer Black. 19 iih4 Now White's attack is decisive. iDeS 19 ... Alternatively, 19 ... lDd7 20 f6 g6 21 1Vh6 l:lf7 22 �xg6 hxg6 23

118


'fkxg6+ �fB 24 lilf5 and White's at tack breaks through.

20 .i.d4

'fkc7

20 ...c5 loses immediately after 21 .i.xg7 ! lilxg7 22 f6. 21 f6 (D)

21

gxf6

•••

After 2l ...g6 the most convincing line is 22 l:l.el ! (22 hg6 hxg6 23 f7+ �xf7 24 'l1Fh7+ lilg7 is less con vincing) and now: I) 22...'fkf7 23 lile3 1ie6 24 lilgf5! wins. 2) 22 . c5 23 .i.xg6 hxg6 (White also wins after 23 . .cxd4 1A De7 'fixe? 25 fxe7 hxg6 26 exf81i+) 24 f7+�xf7 25 'fkh7+ lilg7 26 1ixg7t. 22 gxlti l:l.f7 �h8 23 l:l.g1 . .

.

24 .i.xh7!

25 f7+ 26 .hg7+

lhh7 li:Jg7

1..0 As 26 �xg7 27 li:Jf5+ �f8 28 'fkxh7 leads to mate. ...

The summer of 1993 was Interzonal time again. I started with two draws, and the following game was played in the third round.

Game 23

V. Anand

-

L. Ftacnik

Biel Interzonal 1993 Sicilian, Najdorf 1 2 3 4 S 6

e4 lbt'3 d4 li}xd4 M ..te3

cS d6 cxd4 lbt'6 a6

I had quite a few interesting ideas in the .te3 line against the Najdorf, but this is a very difficult and com plex variation to analyse. It has taken many years for theory to con verge oo what are now considered 'main lines' . The positions are so tricky that you can never be sure that your ideas are correct; the advantage is that your opponent has the same problem!

6 7 f3 8 g4 9 'i'd2

10 h4 Here Ftal!nik thought for some time and realized that the attempt to transpose to the main line with 10 ... lilbd7 is bad after 1 1 l:lg1, with the immediate threat of g5-g6. 10 •.• b4 (D) After 10...i.e7 1 1 0-0-0 White is slightly better because Black has been forced to spend a tempo on ... 1J..e7, which he can normally avoid in this system.

e6 bS h6 i.b7

This game showed for the first time that 9 . ...tb7 is just a mistake with this move-order. Black has to play 9...ll:lbd7, when we reach the main line (after lO 0-0-0 .tb7). In this case White would have no time for 10 h4 because of lO ... b4 1 1 li.:lce2 d5, and White cannot push his e·pawn since the e5-square is cov ered

11 �el

dS

1 l .. .e5 1 2 'i'xb4! gives White a clear advantage after 12 ...'i'd7 1 3 lDb3 d 5 1 4 lDc5 or 1 2. . .'i'c7 l 3 'i'a4+ lDbd7 14 lDf5.

12 eS

lDfd7

120


13 f4! We have reached a kind of super French position, but in the French Black would not weaken his pawn structure by playing .... h6. ll:lcS 13 14 .i.g 2! (D) Better than 14 ll:lg3 .i.e7 - the knight might go to f4 later. .••

ll:lbd7 14 After 14 ...ll:le4 White can start the attack against e6 with 15 ixe4 dxe4 1 6 f5!, followed by ll:lf4. 15 0·0·0 .i.e7 The alternatives are also favour able for White: 1) 15 ...ll:lb6 16 b3 a5 (16 ... ll:le4 17 .i.xe4 dxe4 18 f5 .i.d5 19 ll:lf4 and again e6 is the weak point) 1 7 f5 a4 1 8 fxe6 axb3 1 9 cxb3 fxe6 20 ll:lf4 'iWc7 21 �b1 is good for White. 2) 15...a5 16 g5 (16 �bl is also possible, with the idea of ll:lb5) 16 ...h5 17 f5 ll:lxe5 1 8 ll:lf4 ll:lc4 19 'l'e2 (a typica1 1ine; the weakness of

e6 proves fatal) 19 .. .e5 20 �xdS .i.xd5 2 1 ll:lc6 1ic7 22 llxd5 win ning. 3) 1 5 ...ll:le4 1 6 ixe4 dxe4 17 f5 ll:lxe5 18 fxe6 ll:lc4 (18...�0 19 exf7+ �xn 20 ll:lxf3 exf3 21 'l'xd8 .:.Xd8 22 .:.xd8 fxe2 23 %ld7+ wins) and now both 19 'I'e1 ll:lxe3 20 'lf2 fxe6 21 '1'xe3 and 19 exf7+ �xf720 'l'el ll:lxe3 21 'l'f2+ �g8 22 'lxe3 are promising for White. 4) 15 ... '1'b6 1 6 g5 h5 17 g6! fxg6 18 .i.h3 with a strong attack. 16 gS! White has the advantage, but he mustn't waste too much time! 16 ... bS (D) Black is distinctly worse after 16 ... hxg5 1 7 hxg5 l:lg8 18 g6! or 16 ... g6 1 7 h5 ! gxh5 18 l:lxh5.

17 fS!

The best way

1o soften up the e6square. After 1 7 g6 fxg6 18 .i.h3 ll:lf8 or 1 7 �bl 'l'b6 18 g6 fxg6 19 .i.h3 ll:lf8 the situation is less clear.

ANAND - FrAtNJK, BIEL INTERZONAL 1993 None of this was home prepara tion. I had been working on the Eng lish Attack with Patrick Wolff, and he mentioned that 9 ... J.b7 is bad be cause of 10 h4, and we left it at that. However, all White's moves appear perfectly natural, so it was not diffi cult to play. In such messy and com plex position, think it is better not to calculate too much - the tree of variations can get enormously dense. I prefer to wait to see what my oppo nent plays, and that immediately re moves a large percentage of possible branches.

17

•..

121

1rxe3 is also good for White) 2I lbf5 (21 J.f4 Wg8 is Jess clear) 2 1 ...llc8 (2l. ..lbxe3 22 lbxe3 and d5 hangs) 22 J.d4 J.xg5+ (or else White has a very strong attack in any case) 23 hxg5 1rxg5+ 24 �bl 1rxg2 25 llgl with a decisive attack. 3) 1 9 ...Wf8 20 1i'el 1i'a5 (White wins the queen after 20... lbxe3 2 1 lbf4 lbxg2 22lbfe6+) 21 Wbl lbxe3 22 lbf4 (D) with the two possibili ties:

lln:eS (D)

Forced, as 17 ...exf5 1oses to 1 8 /i)xfS �xeS 19 lbxg7+.

w

18 lbf4! 18 fxe6! lbc4 (18 .. .fxe6? 1 9 lbf4 wins) 19 exf7+ is also strong, e.g.: I) 19...Wd7 (Fta�nik) 20 J.h3+ Wc7 21 .tf4+ wins. 2) 19 ...Wxf7 20 1Wel lieS (the line 20...�xe3 21 1Wf2+ Wg8 22

3a) 22...�xg2 23 lbg6+ Wxf7 24 'ifxe7+ Wxg6 25 llhfl ! �4 (the lines 25 ...llhe8 26 'l'f7+ Wh7 27 'l'xh5+ Wg8 28 g6 and 25 ...llhf8 26 llxf8 llxf8 27 'ifxf8 are no better) 26 'l'f7+ Wh7 (26 ...wxg5 27 llgl+) 27 'l'xh5+ Wg8 28 'l'f7+ Wh7 29 llhl mating. 3b) 22...�xdl 23 lbg6+ Wxf7 24 'l'xe7+ Wxg6 (24...Wg8 25 �f5 llh7 26 llfl �c3+ 27 bxc3 bxc3 28 'l'f8+ llxf8 29 lbfe7#) 25 'ii'd6+ with a final branch:

122


3bl ) 25...�h7 26 g6+ �g8 (or 26...�h6 27 lllf5#) 27 .bd5+ .ixd5 28 'i'xd5+ �f8 29 'ikf7#. 3b2) 25...�f7 26 g6+ �g8 (mate is also inevitable after 26 ...�e8 27 lllf5) 27 .ixd5+ .ixd5 28 'i'xd5+ �f8 29 'i'f7#.

18

.••

lllc4

18 ... exf5 19 lllxf5 is clearly very good for White. 19 'i'el (D)

'il'aS 19 Going for queenside counterplay. The alternative is 1 9 ... e5: I) 20 lllxd5 and now: I a) 20 ... lllxe3 2 1 lllc 6! (21 1Wxe3 .ixd5 22 lllc6 .ixg2 23 lllxd8 .ixh1 24 'il'xe5 transposes to the unclear line I b below) 21...lllxg2 (2l....ixc6 22 lllf6+ gxf6 23 .ixc6+ �f8 24 .l:l.xd8+ .l:l.xd8 25 'ifxe3 also wins) 22 lllxd8 .l:l.xd8 23 lllxe7 winning. !b) 20... .ixd5 and now: lbl) 21 lllb3 lllxe3 ! (2I ...lllxb3+ 22 axb3 "illa5 23 bxc4 .ixg2 24 .•.

1Wxg2 1t"a1+ 25 'it>d2 l%d8+ 26 �e2 'i'xb2 27 'i'c6+ oMs 28 :xd8+ .ixd8 29 .ic5+ �g8 30 "ille8+wins for White) 22 "illxe3 lllxb3+23 axb3 .ixg2 24 .l:l.xd8+ .!hd8 favours Black I b2) 2 1 lllc6 .ixg2 (2l...fue3 22 .ixd5 1Wc7 23 'ilfxe3 and White wins) 22 lllxd8 (22 .l:l.xd8+ :xd8 23 lllxd8 lll xe3 24 .l:l.el �xd8 25 'l'xe3 .ie4 is also unclear) 22 ...lllxe3! (not 22... .ixh l ? 23 .ixc5) 23 'iWxe3 ixhi 24 'i'xe5 (24 lllxf7 �xf7 25 :xhl is again unclear) 24...f6! (24...llxd8 25 .l:l.xd8+ 'it>xd8 26 'i'b8+ �7 27 "illxh8 g6 28 'ilfh7! should win for White) and the position remains un clear. 2) 20 f6!? gxf6 21 lllxdS .hdS (21...lllxe3 22 lllc6 lllxd5 23 I!Jxd8 .l:l.xd8 24 gxf6 .ixf6 25 'i'c4 and White wins) 22 lllf5 lllxe3 23 1!Jxe3 with advantage to White. 3) 20 lllc6! .ixc6 21 lllxdS (21 'llhc4 dxc4 22 .ixc6+ �8 23 .l:l.xd8+ .l:l.xd8 24 llld5 llld7 is good for Black) 2 1 ...'llra5 22 lllxe7! (after 22 .ixc5 'i'xa2 23 lllc7+ ¢>f8 24 .ixe7+ �xe7 or 22 'ifxc4 .ib5 23 'ikxb5+ axb5 24 lllxe7 llld7 2 5 ixa8 'llfxa8 26 llld5 11Vxa2 Black has the advantage) and now: 3a) 22 ... .ib5 23 .ic6+ .ixc6 (or 23 ... � 24 .ixc5 'i'xa2 25 lllc8+1 and mates) 24 'llfxc4 .ixhl 25 .ixc5 .if3 26 g6! .l:l.f8 27 gxf7+ libn 28 lllc6 and wins. 3b) 22 ... .ixg2 23 'i'xc4! lllb3+ (23 ... .ixh I 24 .ixc5 n-ansposes to

ANAND

-

FrACNIK, BIEL INTERZONAL 1993

line 3 a) 24 cxb3 and White is win ning. 3c) 22... '1'xa2 23 �xc6+ <M8 24 �g6+ �g8 25 'i'xc4 'i'xc4 26 �xa8! wins for White. 20 �bl tt:lxb2 (D) The alternatives are winning for White:

l) 20...tt:la4 21 fxe6 tt:lcxb2 22 exf7+ �f7 23 �d2 with a decisive attack , foc example 23 ... li:lxdl 24 :XdJ IDc3+ 25 �xc3 bxc3 26 'i'e6+ �27 hd5 !. 2)20... e5 21 tt:lxd5 tt:lxe3 (White wins after21...exd4 22 �xd4 �xd5 23 .ixd5) 22 'i'xe3 �xd5 23 �xd5 exd4 24 lbd4! l:tc8 25 f6 finishes Black.

123

2 J ...lilxb3 (2I ...ea3 22 �xc5 li:la4 23 �d4 li:lc3+ 24 �xc3 bxc3 25 li:ld3 wins) 22 axb3 li:lxdl 23 l:txdl 0-0-0 24 fxe6 I would prefer to be White, but in the end 21 fxe6 seemed even stronger! Note that 21 �xb2? is bad in view of 2 l...li:la4+ 22 �c l tt:lc3 23 16'd3 e5.

21 Or: 1 ) 2 1 ...0-0 (Ftaenik) 22 11Vxb5 li:lxdl 23 l:t:xdl tt:la4 24 �d2 li:lc3+ 25 �xc3 bxc3 26 exf7+ l:txf7 27 g6 irb4+ 28 li:lb3 and Black's position collapses. 2) 2 l ...tt:lxdl 22 exf7+ �xf7 (or 22...�d7 23 l:txd l ) 23 l:txdl (D) and now:

w

21 fxe6!! White should just ignore every thing, except mate itself, and just hack away, I was on the verge of playing the reallyamazing move 21 �b3!?, if only because it eliminates all threats to White's king. After

2a) 23 ...tt:le4 24 �xe4 dxe4 25 'llfc4+ �e8 26 �de6 l:tc8 27 tt:lxg7+ �8 28 'Llg6+ �xg7 29 �d4+ leads to mate. 2b) 23...lila4 24 �d2 li:lc3+ 25 �xc3 bxc3 26 'llfe6+ �e8 27 lt:lxd5


124

.i.xdS 28 .txdS 'i'b4+ 29 .i.b3 win ning. 2c) 23 .. .l:af8 24 �xdS winning. 3) 2 l...fxe6 22 �xe6! (22 �xb2 lba4+ 23 �cl �c3 is less clear-cut) 22...�xdl 23 �xg7+ �f7 24 .lhdl with a decisive attack.

2) 28 .tc6 29 exf7 .tbs JO .th3+ �b8 3 1 trd4 also wins. 3) 28 . . ..tas 29 .id4 (29 exf7 'iWb4 30 �b3 Wa3 31 � I 'ib4 re peats moves) 29... 'iWb4 30 hc3 con solidates the extra piece. •.•

�4+ 22 �xb2! b3 (D) 23 �1 23...�c3 24 1Wd3 1Wxa2 25 exf7

wins as Black has no real threats.

29 .td4 30 .teS+

.:.cs

30

�1 (D)

Even the calm 30 exf7 would have been sufficient. 24

�xb3!

Not 24 cxb3? .ta3+ 25 �c2 1fc7+

26 �bl �c3+ and Black wins. 24

.•.

2S �bl

•••

30 ...�a8 loses to 31 fudS.

.ta3+

�3+

Or 25 ... 1Wc3 26 .i.d4. 26 �al Wa4 Black's compensation is inade quate. 21 Wd3 .tb4 �b8 (D) 28 �cl Other lines are also hopeless: I) 28...�xdl 29 llxdl fxe6 30 �xe6 lid? 3 1 .i.d4 winning.

ANAND - FTAtNIK, BIEL iNTERZONAL 1 993

125

J:l.cS 31 'i'e3+ 'i'xc2 32 J:l.d3 32...d4 33 .bd4 'il'xc2 34 .i.xc5+

1-0 37 g6 I spent only about 30-35 minutes on this game. Afterwards, I was very

�aS 35 .i.xb7 'Otxb7 36 J:l.d7+ Wc8 37 'iWd3 wins. ..txc3+ 33 ..bc3 'il'xc3+ 34 J:l.xc3 J:l.xc3 35 'l'xc3 J:l.f8 36 exf7

proud of my cold-bloodedness dur ing the game; I hadn't prepared it at home, but even so I played the critical and best moves with very little ef fort. This game won me the prestig ious Best Game Prize in lnformator.

The following game was played in the very next round, and was part of my best streak of the event.

Game 24

L. 011

-

V. Anand

Biel lnterzonal 1993 Slav Defence

1 2 3 4

d4 c4 lD£3 �3

dS c6

reason for Black to clarify the pawn structure.

a6

9 cxd5 cxd5 10 i.d3 llX:6is equal. 9 .ib4! (D)

llJr6

I played this simply because it was fashionable.

S e3 6 b3

9 .id2

bS

I don't think this is the most dan gerous system for Black as his reply is quite straightforward: he just takes his bishop outside the pawn chain to g4, swaps it off and then plays ... e6. It is difficult for White to make any thing of his two bishops.

6 ... 7 h3

.i.g4

More recently, the refinement 7 'ifc2 has been introduced. White doesn't mind the exchange on f3, and by playing very precisely he may gain a slight advantage.

7 . 8 'ifxf3 ..

.bf3 e6

The alternative is the sharp line 8... bxc4 9 bxc4 e5, but I didn't see the need for such extreme measures. In particular, I didn't like the idea of opening the position by exchanging on c4. White has no particular threats on the queenside, so there seems no

10 'ifdl 10 a3 i.xc3 1 1 i.xc3 bxc4 12 bxc4 �4 13 Acl ll:lxc3 14 llxc3 'ifaS 15 �d2 is certainly not better for White. 0.0 10 ... 11 i.e2 After 1 1 cxd5 ( 1 1 i.d3 dxc4 12 bxc4 c5 ! is also fine for Black l l ...cxd5 12 a4 bxa4 13 1Llxa4 (13 Axa4 a5 is also comfortable for Black) 1 3 ... ll:lc6 14 i.xb4 1Llxb4 15 i.e2 'ifd6 the position is level.

OU - ANAND, BIEL INTERZONAL 1993

11 ... 1l bxc4

bxc4 cS!

At this point I felt that I had equal ized completely. 13 dxcS? After this error White is strug

127

14 exd4 Forced, as 14 llla4 'ifa5 favours Black, while 14 llle4? lllxe4 15 i.xb4 dxe3 is just lost for White.

14 ... 15 ii'c2

'ifxd4

15 J:c 1 lld8 prevents castling and I) 13 0-0 cxd4 14 lllxd5 lllxd5 15 is very awkward for White. lllc6 cxd5 .ixd2 16 'ifxd2 dxe3 17 'ifxe3 15 exd5 18 .if.3 and now 18 ...�c6 19 16 0.0 (D) :ad! fiJe7 20 :Ce1 l:te8 2 1 i.xd5 lZlxd5 22 'l'xe8+ 'ifxe8 23 l:txe8+ l:txe8 24 :xd5 is a dead draw,while !8 .d4!, followed by ... l:ta7-d7, is a possible way foc Black to play for the advantage. 2) 13 cxd5 (the soundest line) 13...cxd4 14 exd4 i.xc3 (14 ... lllxd5 15 fiJxd5 i.xd2+ 16 'Wxd2 exd5 17 0..0 is a little better for White) 1 5 ixc3 fiJxd5 with equality. Even though White has an isolated pawn, the two bishops and the potentially 16 'ifeS weak pawn on a6 will ensure that he is not worse. 1 6... l:tad8 was also good, for ex ample 17 l:tadl 'ife5 1 8 i.d3 i.xc5 d4! (D) 13 or 17 :Cd 1 '1We5 1 8 i.d3 ( 1 8 i.f3 l:txd2!) 18 ...lt:ld4 1 9 ii'b2 i.xc5 with a clear advantage to Black in either case.

gling. The alternatives are:

..

17 1Wa4 Alternatively: I) 17 :Ce1 l:tad8 18 i.f3 ( 18 l:tad I llld4 is also good for Black) 18 ... llld4 ! (not 18 ...l:txd2 19 ii'xd2 .txc3 20 l:txe5) 19 .lhe5 lfu.c2 20 l:td 1 l:txd2 2 1 l:txd2 i.xc3 and Black wins.


128

2) 17 l:tael l:tad8 (the simple 1 7 .. .'ihc5 is also good) 18 i.f3 lbd4 1 9 l:.xe5 lbxc2 20 lbb 1 i.xd2 2 1 l:te2 lbd4 22 l:txd2 lbxf3+ 23 gxf3 l:tc8 with a clearendgame advantage. 3) 17 i.dl ! is relatively best, but Black retains the advantage after 1 7 ...l:tad8 or 1 7 ...lbd4.

17 18 i.e1

l:tad8 lbd4 (D)

19 'l1Vxb4 19 i.d3 i.xc3 20 i.xc3 00+ 21 gxf3 'ibc3 is winning fa Blade, while after 19 i.dl i.xc5, intending ...l£Jf5-g3, White has a miserable pos sition.

19

�el+

•••

20 lbxe2?!

Losing quickly. Tite last chance was 20�hl l:td3 (20 lbe4 21 �xe4 11Fxa1 22 lbd6) 21 l:tdt .lhc322 .hc3 lbxc3, when Black is much better although the passed c-pawn offer some hope of counterplay. .••

20

21 lbc3 22 1WaS

23 11'xa6

24 1i'd6

'i"xal 'i"cl! .4 :as 'i"xc4

0·1

As White will soon lose the c5pawn. In the fifth round I won against Khalifman, and was in joint first place Then I lost recklessly against Gelfand; had I defended well I could have held the position, but I was careless and suddenly it was all over. This put me on +2, below the level necessary for qualifying. I tried very hard to improve me score but despite reaching a number of winning positions I failed to score the full point in any of them. I had given up hope when I met Korchnoi in round 12. In this game Korchnoi completely outplayed me and I felt a huge weight off my shoulders. It was suddenly clear that I wasn't going to qualify and I felt enormously relieved at the lifting of the burden. Then Korchnoi started to have difficulty winning and I began to regain my interest in drawing the game. Korchnoi gradually went completely awry and even lost the game. Suddenly I had moved from absolutely nowhere to having a theoretical chance of qualifying. A win in the last round would have guaranteed qualification, but I could only draw with Epishin. Then it required five different games to have the

BIEL INTERZIJNAL 1993

129

right result for me to qualify.ln the end everything work out perfectly; all the people with worse tie-break than me fi.nished level with me on+3 and all the people withbetter tie-breaks ended up on +2. It wasn't very convincing, but at least I had reached the Candidates again. The following game is from the final European Clubs Cup,in which I was playing for Lyons.Curiously,the only French player in Lyons team was Lautier. Micheal had horrible event; he lostall three game (ofwhich this was the first).He then went to Gronigen for the PCA Qualifier and almost lost the first game there. However, he salvage a draw and, typically for Micheal,then went on to win the tournament!

Game 25

M . Adams - V. Anand European Clubs Cup Final, Hilversum 1993 Sicilian, Kan 1 e4 2 lDc3 3 m

cS e6

While White gains some advan tages with this move-order, it allows Black to adopt a system in which ... ll:\f6 is delayed.

3 4 5 6 7

d4 ll:\xd4 £4

..td3

a6 cxd4 d6 bS .b7

Thanks to the omission of ... ll:\f6, Black is able to accelerate his queen side development.

the advance of the g-pawn doesn't fit in with kingside castling) I de cided to play ... ll:\f6. Black canstill tinker with his move-older by 8... ll:\d7!?, but after 9 �1 (1101 9f5? 1lrb6!) he probably bas nothing bet ter than 9...ll:\gf6.

9 a3

Meeting Black's threat to the e pawn, but after this loss r:i tempo Black has no problems.

9 10 'i'b1 •••

li:Jbd7

i.e7 (D) IO... .Zlc8 and 10...g6 are playabl e

alternatives.

8 0-0 One advantage of Black's system is that 8 1i'f3?! doesn't really work when Black hasn't played ...ll:\f6 since g4-g5 threatens nothing! The game Anand-Wojtkiewicz, Manila Olympiad 1992 continued 8...ll:\d7 9 J.e3l:[ c8 10 g4 ll:\c5 1 1 g5 lt\e7 1 2 ll:\b3 ll:\a4 1 3 ll:\xa4 bxa4 1 4 lLld2 d5 and Black was slightly better. If White wants to adopt the 1i'f3 and g4-g5 system then he shouldn't play 2 ll:\c3.

8 ...

l0t'6

Now that White has effectively abandoned the 1i'f3 system (because

11 b4?! 1bis plan can be effective, but only when Black's knight has been

ADAMS - ANAND, HILVERSI.IM 1993 developed to c6. Here Black has a ready counter in the fonn of ... .l:l.c8 and ...liJb6-c4.

11 12 i.b2 13 'i'e2

0-0

13

lDb6! (D)

•.•

l:1c8!

Preparing e5, which Black meets by providi ng the f6-knight with a well supported square on d5.

131

ifh5+ 'itrg8 24 11'xn+ �h8 25 .l:l.f6 lDe4 (25 ...hg2+ 26 'ifrxg2 irc6+ 27 'ifrh3 lDe4 28 i.h6! and White wins) 26 i.h6 lDf2+ 27 ..l:l.xf2 gxh6 (27 ...l:.g8 28 lfh5! g6 29 ifh4 wins)

with a likely draw. lc) 19...�d7 20 lDg5 i.xg5 2 1 i.xg5 l:.f8 22 i.f4 i s unclear. 2) 18...�d5! 19 lDxd5 bd5 is fine for Black.

14 ... 15 fxeS

dxeS lDrdS! (D)

Not i 5 . ..Wxd4?? 1 6 exf6 i.xf6 17 �4! ( 1 7 � I ? ifh4! 1 8 i.xf6 gxf6 favours Black) 1 7 ...11'd8 1 8 hf6

w

gxf6 1 9 �xb6 11'xb6 20 •h5 f5 2 1 1l'g5+ �h8 22 11'f6+ �g8 2 3 ..l:l.xf5 and White wins.

14 eS?

If White tries gueenside pla)' by 14 a4 lt:lc4 15 i:c 1 'i'b6 16 lDf3

:fd8, then Black has a promising position; he has played normal moves but White has done disgusting things on the quee nside. The con tinuation might be 17 axb5 axb5 1 8 e5 and now: I) 18 ... dxe5?! 19 fxe5: Ia) 19 ...i.xb4 20 lDa2 i.xf3 2 1 .l:l.xf3 00 22 lllxb4 lllxb4 23 bh7+ �xh7 24 .l:l. h3 + �g8 25 'llfh5 wins for ,White

1b) \9 . ..liJd5 20 li:lg5 i.xg5 21

i.xg5 1tlxc3 22 i.xh7+ �xh7 23

16 �xdS I spent a long time on the alterna

tives, but I eventually decided that they were not worrying for Black:

I ) 16 lDxe6 fxe6 17 1Wh5 .l:l.f5! (17 ... g6 18 i.xg6 hxg6 19 11'xg6+ �h8 20 11'h6+ �g8 21 11'xe6+ is

132


only dangerous for Black) 18 l:!.xf5 g6! 19 l:!.g5 .bg5 20 .bg6 l:!.c7 ! would be winning for Black. 2) 16 �e4 and now: 2a) 16 ... �a4?! 17 "ifh5 with a further branch: 2al) 17 ... h6?! 18 i.c l with very dangerous threats. 2a2) 17...�xb2? ! 18 �g5 ! ( 1 8 �f6+ �xf6 1 9 exf6 �xd3 wins for Black) 18 ...h6 (D) and now:

2a3) 17 ... g6! 18 i'h6 li:lxb2 19 :Z.f3 �f4 ! 20 irxf4 (20 lhf4 i.xe4 21 :Xe4 �xd3 22 cxd3 i.gS with a clear advantage foc Black) 20... li:lxd3 2 1 cxd3 i.xe4 and Black has the same type of advantage as in the game. 2b) 1 6 ..lDc4! (even stronger than line 2a3 above) 17 'ifh5 (17 i.xc4 :Xc4 followed by ...'i'a8 gives Black strong pressure) 17 ... h6! (17... tJ 18 11Fh6�xb2 is line 2a3) 18i.cl �de3! with a large advantage fer Black. .bdS 16 ...

Now Black has a safe advantage.

The exchange ofknights has extin· guished White's hopes of a success ful kingside attack, and his position is sncturally much worse. 17 :1ae1 i.c4 (D)

2a2 1 ) 19 l:!.xf7 �4 20 l:txg7+ �xg7 21 �gxe6+ �g8 22 "ifxh6 i.xg2+ 23 �gl "ifxd4+ 24 �xd4 �bxd3 25 cxd3 i.d5 is unclear. 2a22) 19 i.h7+ �h8 20 �xf7+ :Z.xf7 2 1 :Z.xf7 �4 22 :1xf4 �xh7 and Black defends. 2a23) 19 �xf7 l:!.xf7 (but not 19 ..."ife8 20 i.g6 and now 20..."ifd7 2 1 �xh6+ gxh6 22 i.f7+ :Z.xf7 23 :Z.xf7 �4 24 l:!.xf4 i.g5 25 "irg6+ "ifg7 26 "ifxe6+ wins for White) 20 "ifxf7+ �h8 2 1 �xe6 "ifg8 22 "ifg6 �xd3 with a murky position.

18 00 The sacrifice 18 i.xh7+? 'i>xh7 19 "ifh5+ �g8 is not dangerous: 1 ) 20 :Z.f3 g6 21 l:lg3 �g7 22.:fl (22 �f5+ exf5 23 e6+ i.f6 24 e7

ADAMS - ANAND. HILVERSUM 1993 1l'd6 25 exf8'i'+ lbf8 consolidating the extra material)22 ... 11'e8 23 J:lf6 J:l b8 24 'lg5 li:ld7 and Black wins. 2) 20 lZe3! forces a:: curate de fence: 2a) 20...g6? 21 J:lg3 'ireS (the line 2I...ixfl 221lxg6+ also draws) 22 J:lxf7 (22 :C6 �g7) 22 ... 11'xf7 23 J:lxg6 'lxg6 24 'l'xg6+ �h8 with a draw. 2b) 20... ig5? 21 J:lh3 .lth6 22 lf6! with a dangerous attack. 2c) 20 ... ixfl ! 2 1 J:lh3 .ltxg2+! 22 'i>xg2 'l'd5+ 23 �gl f5 ! (utiliz!he pin) 24 'l'h7+ �7 25 J:lg3 (25 'l'h5+ g6 26 'ilfh7+ �e8 27 'ilfxg6+ �d7 and the king escapes) 25...'i>e8 26 lbg7 J:lc7 is hopeless roc White. 18 .ltxdJ 19 cxdJ (DJ

19 li:ldS? A clear error. Black has too many pieces wanting to occupy d5, but whereas the queen does not have a

133

good alternative post, the knight would also be well-placed on a4. Therefore the correct arrangement is queen on d5 and knight on a4, which Black could have achieved by either 19 ... 11'd5! or 19 ... li:la4!, with a dis tinct advantage. 20 1l'd2! Now I realized my error. I consid ered 20...a5 ! ? 21 bxa5 b4, but after 22 J:lal I decided that the complete dissolution of the queenside would not help Black's winning chances. However, this line might have been objectively best in that Black would preserve a slight edge. 20 J:la8 Perhaps 20...li:lb6!? is best, re verting to the correct plan, although this would be psychologically diffi cult to play. 21 lL!d4 .ltgS 22 'irr2 (DJ •.•

22 23 g3

.lth4


134

This may prove to be weakening in the future, but one cannot pretend that it is a serious matter.

23

24 h4

25 �h2

it.gS it.h6 llc8

26 ..li.cl?? (D) But this is a serious mistake. 26 lle4? is also bad after 26 ... f5! 27 exf6 (27 l::.e2 "it'd? should also win for Black, because 28 .. .f4 is a threat) 27 ...tt:lxf6, but 26 tt:lb3! is the correct move. White has a good outpost on c5 and this compensates for Black's theoretical structural advantage; the position would be roughly equal.

26 27 llxcl 28 Wh3?

llxcl! tt:le3

28 tt:lc6! was the best chance: 1) 28 ..."it'xd3 29 "it'f3 ! (not 29 "it'xf7+ .:l.xf7 30 tt:le7+ Wf8 ! nor 29 tt:le7+ Wh8 30 "it'xf7 lllxfl+, as Black wins in both cases) 29.. ."ifd2+ (29 ... tt:lxfl + 30 .:l.xfl "it'xf3 3 1 :Xf3

is only slightly better for Black) 30 h3 tt:lxfl 31 .l:l.xfl and White has defensive chances. 2) 28 ...tt:lg4+ 29 �g2 (forced,has 29 Wg1 'lrxd3 wins) 29...wrxd3 (not 29...tt:lxf2? 30 ti:lxd8 liUt.d3 31 lL:B! defending) 30 'llrf3 and again the win for B lack is not guaranteed The text-move plays fer a trap, but if Black avoids this the games is over.

28

•••

ti:lxfl!

Avoiding 28 ... 'ilrxd4?? 29 "l'xflt .l:l.xf7 30 .l:tc8+ lUI! 3 I l:tfld'B#. 29 lhrt 11fd5! (D)

A dream position for Black.White has several weak pawns,an exposed king and passeively placed pieces. Black only needs kJ bring his rook into play and White will start shed· ding pawns.

30 31 32 33

g4 .:tel ti:lfJ gs

g6

llc8 llc3

.trs

ADAMS - ANAND, HILVERSUM 1993

34 35 36 37 38

J:l.e3 d4 'ilbe3

�g3 �f4

:xa3 :xe3 ..bb4 aS a4

'ii'cl 40 'ifbl

135 'l'c4

39

a3

0-1

The finish might be 41 'l'e4 a2 42 iVaB+ �fB.

I haven't played much club chess, the total being the one year I played for Lyons. That year was quite pleasant because I just turned out for the big matches.However, I wasn't especially excited by club chess,so I wasn't too dissapointed when the club just folded up - at least I didn't have to resign from the team! I might play for a club again in the future, but there is no im mediate prospect of this.

The next game is from the PCA Qualifier event held in Groningen during December 1993.

Game 26

V. Anand - A. Beliavsky PCA Qualifier, Groningen 1 993 Sicilian, Najdorf 1 e4 cS 2 �f3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 �xd4 �6 S M a6 Round about this time Beliavsky had started playing the Najdorf and it was quite clear why - he had been one of Kasparov's seconds for his match against Short. Since Short was one of the players who popularized 6 .i.e3, they must have looked at it very deeply. Unfortunately, I didn't have anything else against the Naj dorf, so I decided to play it in any case. e6 6 .i.e3 7 f3 bS h6 8 g4 9 'ird2 �bd7 Beliavsky doesn't repeat Ftafnik's imprecise move-order - see Game

12 ...d5 on the board, Ijust decided to gamble. 13 .i.b3!? White is committed because quite play doesn't work, fc:r example 13 exd5 �xd5 14 �4 �e3 15 'ltxe3 'ilt'b6 16 .i.c4 0-0-0 1 7 ll'ld3 1fc7 was slightly better fc:r Black in Sax Anand, Philadelphia 1986. 13 dxe4 14 g,5 (D)

23.

10 0-0-0 .i.b7 1 1 h4 b4 dS 12 �ce2 The big question was whether to play 13 .i.h3 or 13 .!Llg3. The former seemed rather foolhardy, as it in volves various pawn sacrifices. How ever, when we had the position after

14 hxgS Beliavsky played all these moves more or less instantaneously. text-move is the best move-order, as after 14 ... exf3 the reply 15 gxf6! fxe2 16 'irxe2 is very dangerous for Black, for example 16. .. i.xhl 17 '"

ANAND - BEUAVSKY, PCA QUAUFIER, GRONINGEN 1993 137

ifue6 or l6...'i'xf6 17 l:thfl. Prepa ration foca World Championship match needs to be extremely thor ough one must not only take the existing theory a little bit further, but in fact almost reinvent the lines you eJqJett to use since it must withstand several months of scrutiny by a team of grandmasters. I had noticed this linle detail when I looked at the line, but didn't expect that players such as Kasparov and Beliavsky would have missed something like this when preparing for a world championship match! exfJ 15 hxgS 16 �4 Now 16 gxf6 fxe2 17 'i'xe2 'i'xf6 18 :hfl 'l'e5 ! is fine for Black, as the bishop on h3 is hanging. 16 �g3 is a major alternative, but in this book I am avoiding getting embroiled in opening theory. 16 � 17 'i'e1 (D) -

8

This was all theory and I was wondering when his novelty was go ing to appear. f2 17 This was it. but it became clear the following year that it was not best. The alternative 17 ...ll'lxg5? is bad: 1 8 ll'ldxe6! fxe6 1 9 ll'lxe6! ( 19 .ixe6 is also possible: 1 9... ll'lxe6 20 l:txh8 'i'f6 2 1 l:td6! 0-0-0 22 ll'lxe6 l:te8 23 "ifxb4 f2 24 "ifc4+ �b8 25 "ifc7+ �aS 26 :Xa6+ 1-0 Romero Holmes Tukmakov, Wijk aan Zee 1991) 19 ...ll'lxe6 20 .be6 :Xhl 2 1 'i'xhl ll'lr6 (2l..."ifa5 22 .ixd7+ � 23 "ifh2 is clearly winning for White) 22 l:txd8+ l:txd8 23 'i' gl and White has a clear advantage. After my success in the Beliavsky game, I continued playing the line as I felt that if I had won against Kaspa rov's preparation, it must be good for White. However, the following year I played the variation once too often and Ljubojevic brilliantly re futed White's play by 17 ... :Xh3! 1 8 ll'lxh3 e5 1 9 ll'lb3 ( 1 9 ll'lf5? "ifa5 20 �b1 .ids 2 1 a3 l:tb8, threatening 22 ... ll'lc3+, and 19 ll'!xf3? "ifa5 20 �b1 ll'lc3+ 21 bxc3 .ixf3 are both very good for Black) 1 9...a5 with a clear advantage for Black, Anand Ljubojevic, Sicilian theme tourna ment. Buenos Aires 1994. I won this game anyway, but only due to Ljubo's blunders in time pressure. At the present time the line remains unplayable for White. •••

138


Actually the Ljubo near-disaster was the result of a lapse of memory on my part. Ljubo had come to Gron ingen and after the Beliavsky game he mentioned 17 ... l:lxh3 ! to me, but later I imagined that it was Van Wely who suggested it. I therefore felt it was safe to play the line against Ljubo several months later, but not surprisingly Ljubo was baffled as to why I had played the line against him when he had already told me the refutation. These days I note down not only the ideas, but also who told them to me! 18 .bf2 'ifxgS Not 1 8 ...lt.lxf2? and White has a pleasant choice: I) 19 .i.xe6! fxe6 (19 ... l:lxhl ? 20 ..11Lxf7+! �xf7 21 'iVe6#) 20 il.ldxe6 'We7 2 1 lhh8 lt.lxdl 22 lt.lg6 win ning. 2) 19 lt.ldxe6 fxe6 20 'l!lxe6+ 'l!le7 2 1 'l!lg6+ �d8 22 l:lxd7+ 'ii'xd7 23 'l!lb6+ �e7 24 lt.lg6+ is also decisive. 19 .l1Le3 .h4 After 17 ... f2 I was of course wor ried about my preparation, as if this was indeed part of Kasparov's world championship preparation, then I could expect that it would be very well analysed. However, this move really surprised me, because I saw that I could reply 20 lL\dxe6. The more I looked at it, the better it seemed, and it appears that the Kasparov

team must have overlooked some thing in their analysis. 19 ...1Ve7 20 il.ldxe6 l:l.xh3 21 lt.lxg7+ .i.xg7 22 .l:.xh3 was a possi ble alternative, with an unclear po tion. 20 �e6! (D) Not 20 'l!le2 lt.lg3!.

20

'libel!

•••

Beliavsky played this move very quickly. The alternative is 20.. fxe6 21 .i.xe6 'ifxhl (2L'irxel 22 hd7+ �n 23 iLe6+! should win for While after 23...�6 24 .i.d4+ IPg5 25 llhxel �xf4 26 l:tfl+ IPg5 27 l:l.f5+ or 23 ...�e8 24 l:lhxel) 22 .ixd7+ �f7 (22...�d8 23 .i.b6+ 1Pe7 24 W'xb4+ and 22 ...�e7 23 'i'xb4+ are hopeless for Black) and now: I ) 23 W'xhl l:lxhl 24 1hhl �5 25 l:ld I l:ld8 is unclear. 2) 23 .i.e6+ and now: 2a) 23...�f6 24 .i.d4+ lttgS 25 'il'e3 1Wxdl + (25 . l:l.h2 26 lLldS+ �h5 27 .i.xg7! 'ifxd I+ 28 lftxdl ..

ANAND - BEllAVSKY, PCA QUAliFIER. GRONINGEN 1993 139

llhl+ 29 �e2 and White wins) 26 'ifadl :hl + 27 'itte2 llh2+ 28 lLlg2+

'ittg6 29 �f5+ 'ittxf5 30 'ili'f4+fol lowed by 3 1 'l'xh2, winning. 2b) 23...�e8 24 'ili'xhl l:txhl 25 :xhl is slightly better for White. 3) 23 'i'e2! and now: 3a) 23..."ii'h 6 24 'illc4+ 'itte7 25 lc7 wins.

3b) 23...�d6 24 'ii'c4+ 'itte7 25 lilg6+ �xd7 26lLle5+ 'ittd8 27 �b6+ �e8 28 Wif7#. 3c) 23 ... 'i'xd1+ 24 'ili'xdl �d6 25 If! ! and the two rooks are not a match for White's queen, for exam ple 25 ... ..txf4 26 'ili'xf4+ 'itte7 27 �h3 with a very strong attack. 21 lLlxg7+! Not 21 lLlc7+? 'ittd8 22 :hxel

22 llhxel! After 22 �b6+?! 'itte7! 23 lLlf5+ (23 llhxe1 lLlxb6 wins for Black) 23 ... 'ittf6 (not 23 ...'itte8 24 llhxe l lLlxb6 25 �g2 and White retains some advantage) 24 �d4+ 'ittg5 25 lldxe1 llxh3 26 lLlxh3+ 'itt xf3 27 l:thfl + 'ittg6 28 llg 1 + the position re solves to perpetual check. 22 llxh3 23 lLlxh3 �xg7 24 lLlgS! (D) Now I was really happy - White is going to get Black's last kingside pawn and as a result can play for a win at absolutely no risk. Did Beliav sky miss that 24 ... lLlxg5 is met by 25 �b6+?

.:xh3, which favours Black after 23 lilxa8 :Xe3 ! 24 llxe3 �xa8 or 23 1b6 :h6. 21 �d8 (D) 2l...i.xg7 22 �xd7+ �f8 23 .:hxel leads to a slightly better end ing foc White. •••

�e8? (D) 24 Not the best square for the king. The alternatives are: 1) 24...lLlxg5?? 25 �b6+ �c8 26 lle8#. 2) 24 ... �e7?? 25 lLlxe4 .i.xe4 26 �g5+ wins. •••


140

3) 24...�6 25 �xf7+ rj;c7 26 ..if4+ Wb6 27 lte6+ is clearly better for White. 4) 24... Wc8! 25 �xf7 a5 was the correct choice, with just a minimal advantage for White. Black should draw but White can still poke around for a few moves.

25 �! Now I felt that I was going to win this game. Black is in considerable difficulties. �e5 25 Here the alternatives make grim reading: 1) 25 ... ltc8? 26 �6+ �xd6 27 lbd6 wins. 2) 25 . .Wxf7 26 ltxd7+ is also hopeless for Black. 3) 25 ... ..tf8 26 �g5 �df6 27 �xe4 �xe4 28 ltd4 ..ie7 29 ..if4 �f6 30 ..id6 �g8 3 1 l:.xb4 ..ic6 32 l:.g4 with excellent winning chances for White, much as occurs in the game.

4) 25...�6 26 �6+ lDxd6 27 .:.Xd6 and White has a clear plus. 26 �d6+! lbxd6 'itnl?! (D) 27 :xd6 Or: 1) 27...'it;>f7? 28 ..td4 :e8 (White wins after 28...�f3 '19 :d7+) 29 ..ixe5 ..ixe5 (or 29...1lxe5 30 :XeS ..ixe5 3 1 l:ld7+) 30 l:td7+ �6 31 l:lfl +! We6 32 .:.Xb7 and wins. 2) 27 ...�f3? 28 l:e2is very good for White. 3) 27 ... ltd8! (probably Black's best chance) 28 l:lb6 gives White distinct advantage.

•••

.

28 ..ih6! Very strong. IfWhite can exchange bishops and win the b-pawn, then Black will be facing defeat, since Black's king willbe too far away to defend the queenside. 28 .i.d41 is less accurate on account of28 .... l:.e8. 28

•••

.i.xb6+

28 ...l:le8 loses to 29 ltf6+ �g8 30 ltgl l:le7 3 l llb6.

ANAND - BEUA VSKY, PCA QUAUFJER. GRONINGEN 1993

29 :xh6 Ci'Jf7 30 l:.b6 il.dS 31 l:.xb4 l:.c8 3 1...a5 might have made things slightly more difficult, but would not fundamentally change the position. aS 32 l:.b6 32 ...l:.c6 33 l:.xc6 il.xc6 34 �d2 is a simple win. 33 a4! (D) Not 33 l:.b5? .ba2 34 b3 a4 35 �b2 axb3 36 cxb3 il.xb3 drawing.

33

141

�c6 il.d7?! b3 Once again Black could have dragged the game out by defending more accurately with 34... lt:ld8, but in view of White's material advan tage and Black's poorly placed king. White should win in the long run. I was just going to play quietly with 35 �b2, but White still has to break Black's resistance. 35 �b2 l:l.cS 35 ...lt:ld8 36 l:.f6+ drives the king even further away. 36 .l:lbB+ �g7 37 l:l.b7 il.cB Or 37 ...il.f5 (Black also loses af ter 37 ....1:ld5 38 .l:le7 and 37 . �c6 38 .l:lc7) 38 c4 �6 39 .l:lb5 lt:le5 40 �c3 lt:ld7 41 �d4 and the queenside pawns will decide. 38 l:l.bS 1-0

34

•••

. .

The importance of this game, which was played in round five, cannot be overestimated; it was the encounter which put me on the road to qualification for the PCA Candidates. Before it, Beliavsky was on +4 and I was on +2. This win propelled me towards the lead while Beliavsky, who had managed a

fantastic start,subsequently collapsed and failed to qualify. The following game was played the round after the Beliavsky game.

Game 27

J . Benjamin

-

V. Anand

PCA Qualifier, Groningen 1 993 Sicili an, Richter-Rauzer c5 1 e4 2 �f3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 .fud4 liJr6 5 li)c3 llk6 6 j_gs e6 7 'i!Vd2 j,e7 8 0-0-0 0-0 'MI6 9 .'Llb3 I had prepared the Classical Sicil ian to be my main defence for this tournament, and in view of Game 4 in this book, it was ironic that we en tered the same variation, but with colours reversed. l:td8 10 f3 11 �b1 (D)

An interesting move which forces White to decide how he is going to prevent ... d5. 12 .hr6! When Benjamin took on f6 I just couldn't believe it - I hadn't consid ered this move at all, believing that nobody would voluntarily give up the dark-squared bishop! However, it is a reasonable move; in return for surrendering an important minor piece, White gains time to push his kingside pawns. There are a number of alternatives, for example 12 1Llb5, 12 j,£4 or 1 2 h4, but we will leave the relative merits of these to a book on opening theory. .hr6 12 13 g4 g6 This is a critical moment for Black There is an argument for 13 . g5, for example 14 h4 h6 1 5 hxg5 hxg5 16 l:th5 fle7, followed by ... 1Lle5-g6, dominating the dark squares on the kingside. However, this involves a certain amount of risk, as if the posi tion opens up. the exposed state of Black's king may be more important than control of a few dark squares. Black can continue with 13. ..a6!? 14 g5 j,e7, but after 1 5 f4White ..•

..

11

flc7

BENJAMIN - ANAND, PCA QUAliFIER, GRONINGEN 1993

prpbably has a slight advantage I preffered the text-move because it seemed to me that Black's queen side attack, supported by the bishop on the long diagonal, would be very dangerous. I still hadn't taken Ben jamin's idea seriously, but the next few moves show that it is not so easy for Black. a6 14 h4 1S gS! Now 15 h5?! would be bad, as 15 ... g5! 16 h6 'ile7 seizes the dark squares without opening the h-file. 15 i..g7 16 hS bS hxg6 (D) 17 hxg6 •

143

The text-move threatens 19 f5, which would win as Black cannot reply 19 ...exf5 because of 20 li)d5. Thus Black is forced to drive the knight away from c3. 18 b4 1 9 �4! (D) A very comfonable square for the knight, blocking Black's queenside attack. 19 li)e2 a5! would be much weaker. ••.

19 :b8 After 1 9...e5 20 fxe5 ! (20 i..c4 exf4 21 'l'xf4 lbe5 22 i..d5 i..b7 is unclear) 20... li)xe5 (both 20...dxe5 2 1 i..d3 and 20...i..xe5 21 i.. c 4! fa vour White) 21 11fxb4 Black has in sufficient compensation, but at least 18 f4! After 18 i..d3 lbe5 19 f4 lbxd3 ! he doesn't have to worry about his (not 19....!2x4 20 i..xc4 'l'xc4 21 'l'h2 king ! In fact this drastic remedy with a dangerous attack) 20 cxd3 (20 might be necessary; I just hadn't re lxd3 b4! 2 1 li)e2 a5 is similar) alized how critical my position was. 20 .. b4 2l lbe2 a5 the position is un 20 1fb2 This is one way to build up on the clear,with both sides having attack h-file, but it was also very dangerous ing chances· ...

.

144

VISHY ANAND: MY BESI' GAMES OF CHESS

to play 20 i.d3 !?, followed by J:[h4, 'ifh2 and J:[b I . The queen on h2 i s not only effec tive down the h-file; in some lines it can act along the h2-b8 diagonal, for example by f5 followed by lLlac5. 20 WfS (D) Time to get the king out! The al ternatives are: I) 20... e5? 21 f5 gxf5 22 'l'h7+ �f8 23 exf5 and White wins. 2) 20...i.d7 21 l:l.d3 lLle77 (the best move is 2 l ...�f8, transposing to the following note) 22 l:l.h3 �f8 23 l:l.h7 ! lLlg8 24 f5 !? (24 l:l.xg7 �xg7 25 'l'h8+ �8 26 l:l.h7 is less clear after 26 ...�e7) and now: 2a) 24 ... i.e5 25 J:[xf7+ �xf7 26 ..h7+ i.g7 27 fxg6+ � 28 i.d3 with a decisive attack. 2b) 24 ... i.xa4 25 l:l.xg7 �xg7 26 'ilfh8+ �8 27 l:l.h7 i.e8 28 f6 forc ing mate. 2c) 24 ...exf5 25 lLlac5 i.c8 26 l:l.xg7 �xg7 27 'iWh8+ �8 28 l:l.h7 winning for White.

21 l:l.d3

eS

2 l ... i.d7 was also possible, for ex ample 22 l:l.h3 (22 f5 exf5 23 liJacS is unclear) 22 .. .'�e7 ! 23 'l'e2 (23 l:l.h7 l:l.h8 24 'l'f2 lh-lh Landen bergue-Georges, Swiss Team Cham pionship 1994) 23 ...e5! (23...h7 25 liJxg5+ 'lxgS 26 liJg4 and the f6-square is a horri ble weakness) 25 'ifxf6+ �6 26 liJxg5 hxg5 27 axb5 axb5 28 :as with a very promising ending for White. 2) 23 ...1l'f6 24 liJg4! •xal 25 11Vxh6+ �g8 26 e5) (D) and now:

Threatening tllg4.

23 hS This weakens the kingside but the alternative defences also favour White: 1 ) 23 ... liJg5 and now: 1a) 24 lbxg5 hxg5 (24 ... 'ihg5 25 axb5 axb5 26 f4! is very promising for White) 25 axb5 axb5 26 .:ta5 ! 'Wc7 27 .:ta7 when Black is in trou ble: 1al) 27 ...'ilfh6 28 lDf5+ gxf5 29 'it'xg5+ � 30 'Wh6+ �e7 (30... �g8 3 1 .:te3 f4 32 e5 wins) 3 1 e5 ! with a winning attack. 1 a2) 27 ... .:ta8 28 lDf5+! gxf5 (White also wins after 28 ... �6 29 .:txb7 'Wxb7 30 lbxd6) 29 'Wxg5+ �f8 30 'il'h6+ �e7 3 1 e5! �d8 32 exd6! .:txel+ 33 �h2 is an attractive finish. •••

2a) 26 ...1l'c3 27 .hg6 (not 27 liJg5? 'ffxel + 28 �h2 'llfxe5+ 19 liJxe5 liJxg5 30 liJxg6 f6 and Black defends) 27 ...fxg6 28 lili6+! 10xf6 29 11Vxg6+ �f8 30 'Wxf6+ �g8 31 .:te4 ! winning for White. 2b) 26...dxe5 27 liJg5 llc7 28 lbxh7 also wins. 2c) 26 ...lbxd5 27 .ixg6 'l'xel+ 28 liJxel fxg6 29 'ifxg6+ �h8 30 lDh6 .:tf8 3 1 iDn+ .:txf7 32 'l'xf7 with a clear advantage foc White. 2d) 26 ...:Xe5 27 l/)gxe5 ! (not 27 .:txe5? dxe5! 28 liJg5 'llfxbl+ 29 �h2 11Vf5) 27 . dxe5 28 .ixg6 'l'xel+ 29 liJxel fxg6 30 'ffxg6+ strongly . .

ANAND - KAMSKY, PCA CAND. (9), LAS PMMAS 1995 favours White. The queen and passed pawns are more effective than Black's scattered forces. 24 "i'd2!? White starts to play against the knight on b4. One idea is to play lll d4 at some stage,and if ...exd4 then l'xd4+ and 'ii'xb4. 24 �g8 Simply stepping off the danger ous long diagonal. After 24 ...•f6 25 :aJ bxa4 26 lha4 or 24 ... bxa4 !? 25 lba4 White has a positional advan tage, while 24...lt:lf6 meets with the tactical refutation 25 axb5 axb5 26 IL\r5t! gxf5 27 'ii'g5+ �h8 28 e5 and now: 1) 28...�h7 29 •xh5 f6 30 .ixf5 1xd5 31 �4! 'fin 32 lllg6+ �g7 33 e6 1xe6 34 .i.xe6 J:l.xe6 35 J:l.xe6 'i'xe6 36 J:l.a7+, winning. 2) 28 ... dxe5 29 J:l.xe5 'fkd6 30 'ih6t i>g8 31 J:l.xf5 lt:le4 32 J:l.g5+ �xg5 33 "i'xd6 with a decisive ma terial advantage.

25 axbS

167

26 llld l !! I spent a long time on this move, because if White delays then Black can play . . .J:I.a8 and relieve the pres sure. My main problem against Kam sky has always been messing up winning positions (as in the Sanghi Nagar match), so I put a special ef fort into being precise. The point of the move is both to prevent ... lt:lg5 and to prepare lt:lc3, striking at the weak b5-pawn. It turns out that to save the pawn Black has to retreat his knight from b4, but then his most active piece disap pears.

26

•••

lt:la6

Or 26 .. .1:1&8 (26 ...ll:lf6 27 lt:lc3 is very awkward for Black) 27 J:l.xa8 J:l.xa8 28 lt:lc3 •d7 29 e5 dxe5 30 lt:lxe5 •d6 31 "i'f4 "i'f6 32 'li'xf6 lt:lxf6 33 d6 with a clear endgame advantage for White.

27 lLlc3

axbS (D)

28 lt:lb5

b4 (D)

VTSHY ANAND: MY BEST GAMES OF CHESS

1 68

28 lba4!?, followed by �b6-c4, is also very strong.

28 ...

l:Oc7

30 ..ltxbS 31 ..ltc:4!

:eds

After 28 ... :b8 29 'l'f4 l:.ed8 30 ..id3 White again consolidates his positional advantage. �xbS 29 ..id3

Most Benoni players would have fainted by this point! White has a dream position: the bishop on c4 supports d5 in preparation for e4-e5, Black's minor pieces are ineffective and his kingside is weak. 31 ... �f6 (D) Trying to bring the knight back into play.

Black has no time for 32... :a8 (32...�xe4 33 :a2! wins) owing to 33 :xa8 :xa8 34 e5 ltlh7 (34... dxe5 35 d6 'l'f8 36 'l'xg6+ and 34...� xd5 35 �g5 are dead lost for Black) 35 e6 driving a wedge into Black's po sition. 33 'l'gS 1l'g7 33...�7 34 'l'f4 and 33 . . ."1'e7 34 :a7 ! are no better for Black.

34 :S1 (D)

8

34

32 'il'h6! This creates the tactical threat of e5, followed by d6 and 'il'xg6+, so Black is forced to retreat his queen. The effect is that White activates his queen with gain of tempo. 'l'fB 32

:c:7

There is no defence: 34. .. :117 (if 34... ..ia8, then 35 e5 �h7 36 lg3 puts Black's position under intoler able presswe) 35 e5 lt:\e8 (35 .../2lxd5 36 ..ltxd5 and 35 ...dxe5 36 d8 19 tllg3 (19 tllc5 l:te8!) 19 .. ."l'g5!. AI· though Black needs to play a whole .

ANAND - GElFAND, WIJK AAN ZEE 1996

sning of 'only' moves, I didn' t doubt that Boris would find the cor rect path. In the end I settled for the more modest text-move, but this has the defect that Black can gain time against White's rook. 12 g7 22h5 i.xg5 23 �g5 liltS (23 ...1!6'f6 24 hxg6 .l:th8+ 25 �gl wins a pawn with a good posi lion) 24 l:txg6+ 'MS (24... fxg6? 25

195

3d3) 23 . ..11Vb4 24 fi)xf7 ! i.g7 25 .l:te4 'ife7 26 fi)d6 l:txf5 27 fi)xf5 and again White wins.

21 ltlxe6 (D)

'ifxg6+ wins) 25 .l:tg5 and again White has a clear pawn more. 3b) 21. ..-t>hS 22 h5 exf5 (the line 22....bg5 23 .:lxg5 is very good for White) 23 l:txe7 fi)xe7 24 fi)xf7+ lbf7 25 i.xf7 i.g7 26 'ifg5 and

White wins. 3c) 2L.i.xg5 22 .l:txg5 ot>g7 23 h5 is line 3a. 3d) 2I ... c4!?22 i.xc4 b5 23 i.b3 (D) (23 i.d5 l:ta7 24 h5 1!6'c7! is less clear-cut) and now:

21

3dl) 23 .. .'it'h8 24h5 exf5 25 l:txe7 fi)xe7 26 fi)xf7+ :Xf7 27 i.xf7 and White wins. 3d2) 23. .. i.b7 24 h5 'i'b4 (White also wins after 24 ...exf5 25 fi)xe726 lbxf7+ 'it>h7 27 fi)xh6) 25 hxg6 exf5 26 i.xf7+ l:txf7 27 gxf7 + �f8 (or 27...Wg7 28 l:te8) 28 .l:te6 is winning for White.

f:xe6??

Up to here Black has found the correct defence time after time, but now he goes down without a fight. 2l.. ..l:te8! was the right defence: 1) 22 l:r.efl was my original in tention. During the post-mortem we agreed that after 22... i.xe6 23 i.xe6 'ifxe6 24 l:r.xf6 White has enough compensation. Later Gelfand sent me an e-mail pointing out that 22 ... i.h4! is very good for Black. 2) 22 'iff3 i.h4 (22. ..fi)h4 23 'i'g4+ fi)g6 24 'iff3 is a likely draw, but not 22 ... i.e5? 23 .l:txf7 ! 'ifh4 24 l:txe5 i.xe6 25 .l:txe6 .l:txe6 26 'iffl .l:ttie8 27 l:r.f6 and White wins) 23 .l:txf7 'ifxf7 24 'ifxf7+ �xf7 25 ltlc7+ i.e6 26 .l:txe6 l:lxe6 27 i.xe6+ �e7 28 fi)xa8 �xe6 29 fi)b6 and the ending slightly favours Black.


196

3) 22 l:ffl .be6 (22 ... fxe6 23 'l'xg6+ Ji..g7 24 l:tf6! 'l'xf6 25 'l'xe8+ 'ft'f8 26 ii..xe6+ ii..xe6 27 'li'xe6+ 'l'f7 28 'l'b6 is unclear) 23 ii..xe6 fxe6 24 'l'xg6+ i.g7 25 l:tf3 l:tf8 with advantage for Black. 4) 22 l:te4! i.xe6 23 i.xe6 fxe6 24 'l'xg6+ Ji..g7 and after 25 li.f3 or 25 l:th5 'l'f6 26 'l'xf6 hf6 27 l:txc5

White still should be able to make a draw owing to the reduced material. However, whatever winning chances there are lie with Black.

22 lbe6! (D)

A deadly blow. Not 22 i.xe6+? ii..xe6 23 l:txe6 'l'g7! and Black is better, nor 22 'ilhg6+? 'i'g7 (how ever, 22. . .Ji..g7? 23 l:txe6 wins for White) 23 'i'h5 leading only to a draw.

22 ...

�g7

Or 22...he6 23 'ffxg6+ 'i'g7 (if 23 ...Ji..g7, then 24 ii..xe6+) 24 he6+ l:tf7 (24 ...�h8 25 l:th5+ mates) 25

Ji..xf7+ �f8 26 'fl'xf6 and White wins. i.xe7 23 lbe7+

24 lbf8 Ji..xfB White's large excess of pawns would be enough to win in any case, but in fact Black doesn't even get a

chance to bring his queenside pieces into play.

25 h4!

1-0

In view of25...�h726h5 �7 27 'l'f3 i.f5 28 'i'xb7.

The Wijk aan Zee tournament went well in general, although the lililed brilliancy against Sokolov was an unnecessary loss. At fust I thought tha t my loss to Topalov was also unnecessary, but it turned out later that he had seen much more than I had. In the last round I beat Tiviakov in a game lasting 107 moves, gaining revenge for a loss I had suffered against him in 1989. 1n fact i have only lost once to him at a normal time-limit, but he has written about it so often that most people think I have a huge negative score against him! My score of 8/13 was sufficient for second place behind Ivanchuk. In April I participated in the ann ual Amber tournament in Monaco, which consists of a mixture of blindfold and rapid games. At the start I played a number of difficult opponents, but in these early rounds managed l 'h-'h against Karpov and Lautier and 2-0 against Nikolic. However, Kramnik had

5TH AMBER RAPID, MONTE CARLO 1996

197

raced into the lead and I was never able to catch up with him. Half-way through I had a bad patch with six draws and two losses from eight games (I was even a bit lucky to achieve this meagre total). Finally I came to the end of the bad patch beat Xie J un 2-0 and then met Judit in the following round. In the blindfold game she had the advantage but then played some strange move and after hard a fight I won. Then we met in the rapid game.

Game 36

V. Anand - J. Polgar 5th Amber Rapid, Monte Carlo 1 996 Pirc Defence 1 e4 My win in the earlier blindfold game had been tiring - after getting a position where she could barely move a piece, I allowed myself to be swindled and had to win the game several times. Surely the rapid game (with my eyes open! ) would be more relaxing? 1 g6 I didn't expect ...g6 and was quite surprised that she played it. 2 d4 �g7 3 lbc3 d6 c6 4 �e3 S ..d2 bS 6 f4 I couldn't really remember what to play here, but in a rapid game you shouldn't worry too much about mi nor details. By now the exertions of the first game had faded away, at the prospect of a good hackfest! Some how, I couldn't bring myself to be solid, especially after three wins in a row. ltlr6 6 ... 7 �d3 Not 7 e5? b4!. eS 7 8 lbr3 exd4

9 �xd4 0.0 10 0-0 At first I was quite happy with my position as all White's pieces are de veloped to reasonable squares. How ever, after her next two moves !real ized that my opening had not been very successful. 10 b4 lbbd7 11 lbe2 12 �h1 cS i.b7 13 �g1 ..c7 14 ibg3 15 b3 l:l.ae8 l:l.e7 (D) 16 l:l.ae1

Now 17 l:l.e2 l:l.fe8 1 8 l:l.fe l leads to a horribly passive position, and 1 8 .. .lbg4 intending 19 ... i.c3 would

ANAND

-

J. POLGAR. MONTE CARW RAPID 1996

be very unpleasant. Therefore, I de

cihl kl throw caution to the winds and swing my queen over. :rea 11 rs

18 'l'r4

&s (DJ

18...h6!? is also possible: after 1 9 fxg6 fxg6 20 l:e2! (direct attempts like 20 i.c4+ don't work) the posi tion is quite messy. Understandably, Judit tries some thing else.

19 20

'i!t'h4

i.e3 21 gd3

'ifd8

�xf3

'i!Vb6

22 i.f4 To meet ...d5 with e5. Neverthe less,Biack must play ... d5 as other wise White would have time for l:te2-g2. d5 22 ...

23 eS

24 fxg6 (D)

c4

Not 24 bxc4? dxc4 25 fxg6 hxg6! ( byincluding the exchange on c4, Whitehas forced Black to recapture

199

with ... hxg6, since 25 . . .fxg6? loses to 26 i.e3 !, but he has outfoxed him self, since that mighty b7-bishop is now staring at f3!) 26 �f5 gxf5 27 i.xf5 �d7! (now this works since Black can meet l:gl with ... i. xf3+) and I suspect that Black is already winning. 24 exf6? is also bad as Black can reply 24 . .. l:! xel 25 fxg6 (25 fxg7 cxd3) 25 .. .fxg6!.

24

hxg6 (D)

24 .. .fxg6! is better: 1 ) 25 bxc4 �7 is clearly good for Black. 2) 25 exf6 i.xf6 26 J:be7 i. xe7 ! (26...l:be7? 27 i.g5) is slightly bet ter for Black. 3) 25 �f5 !. We thought in the post-mortem that Black was better after 24 ...fxg6, but later I found this move, which, while not as promising as in the game, still offers White good chances. Besides, White doesn't have much of a choice at this point. I am


200

not sure how to assess the position aside from the usual cop-out of un clear! One possible continuation is 25 ...gxf5 26 ..i.xf5! h6 (26 ... ..i.c8 27 exf6!) 27 llgl with messy complica tions.

29 Wfll Or 29...Wxg7 30 .lth6+! �h8 31 ..i.e3+ Wg8 32 'iWg5+ � 3 3 .ixb6 •••

picking up the queen.

30 'iWh6

l:Z.e2 (D)

w

25 lOrS! Now this is extremely strong and I think White is already winning. 25 ••• gxfS Or 25 ...cxd3 26 lllxg7 ! and wins. 26 ..i.xiS d4 26... llld7 27 'iWh7+ �f8 28 :Z.gl is decisive. 27 :Z.e2 d3 27 .. .llld5 28 11'h7+ wf8 29 :Z.g2 f6 30 .i.h6 and White mates in a few moves. 28 :Z.g2 :Z.xeS 29 :Z.xg7+ Better than the unclear continua tion 29 'iWh6 lllg4 30 ..,h7+ �f8 31 :Xg4 "ilff6 32 .i.xe5 (32 :Xg7 "ilfxg7 ! 33 ..i.xe5 :Z.xe5 is good for Black) 32.. .llxe5.

I

31 bxc4!! am

very proud of this move.

which was the main reason why I se lected this game. Basically, I quickly rejected 3 1 :Z.g6+ followed by 32 llxf6 because of 32...hf3+. Judit had gone much further in this line, but I couldn't be bothered - I W3lted something cleaner. Black's pieces are perfectly placed; indeed the only piece which can be better placed is the e8-rook (aside from the black king, of course!). I noticed l:Z.g2t fol lowed by :Xe2 and I also saw bxc4 in connection with the move cS dis· turbing the black queen. Suddenly I

realized that the d3-pawn could not move ! Bingo! After 3 1 l:.g6+ We7 32 :xf6 Black may play:

ANAND

-

J. POLGAR, MONTE CARLO RAPID 1996

I) 32....i.xf3+ (I had only seen this) 33 l:xf3 l:el + 34 �g2 l:tgl+ 35 �h3 'i'xf6. I stopped here - I was convinced I was winning and didn't want to waste my time making this work. 2) 32 ... l:tg8! (full marks to Judit for noticing this move!) and now I am indebted to Fritz4 for the reply 33 .id6+ ! 'i'xd6 34 .i.xd3! (the only way - White needed to jettison his f4-bishop in order to cover f3 and to lure the enemy queen to d6, from where it no longer eyes the gl square) 34 .. .'i'xf6 35 'i'xf6+ �6 36 .be2 c3! and Black is certainly not worse here. White can also try 3 1 cxd3, with the same idea as in the game, but then Black can limp on with 3 1 ...�e7.

201

d2? 31 After 3 l ...'�e7 32 .i.xd3! l:tf2 White has: l ) 33 l:txf2 'i'xf2 34 l:txf7+ �xf7 35 'i'g6+ (35 .i.g6+ �g8!) 35 ... �e7 (35 ... �e6 36 .i.f5+ �e7 37 1Wg7+ �d8 38 .i.c7#) 36 'i'g7+ �e6. 2) 33 l:txf7+! �xf7 34 'ilfg6+ �e7 (34...�e6 35 :Xf2 is winning for White) 35 1Wg7+ and now either 35 ...�d8 36 l:txf2 l:te1 + (36 ...l:tg8 37 .i.c7+! 'i'xc7 38 'i'xf6+ is deci sive) 37 �g2, or 35 ...�e6 36 l:te1+ lL!e4 (36....i.e4 37 .i.xe4 is winning) 37 .i.xe4, winning for White in both cases. 32 l:tgl+ She had missed this one. Now I win the house. 1-0 •••

Topalov was easily the most successful tournament player in 1996, finish

ing either first or joint first in Amsterdarn, Novgorod, Leon, Madrid, Vienna and Dos Herm as an .I had already lost two games against him in 1996, so I

was looking forward to stopping the sequence.

Game 37

V. Anand

-

V. Topalov

Dortmund 1 996 Sicilian, Scheveningen 1 e4 2 m 3 lbc3

c5 e6 a6

not before I had notched up several wins. 12 .i.f3 llJaS (D)

A slightly unusual move-order, but both of us seemed to have de cided that the game was going to be a .i.e2 Scheveningen regardless of the move-order! The comment in Game 25 about this being an inflexi ble move-order for White only ap plies if White is going to play the aggressive f4 and 'iff3 system. You can play the solid .i.e2 line against almost anything.

4 S 6 7 8 9 10 11

d4 �xd4 .i.e2 0-0 .i.e3 f4 a4 �h1

cxd4 �c6 d6 �6 .i.e7

13 g4!

'ifc7 l:te8 A position on which I had done a

Kasparov played 1 3 .igl against Topalov a month earlier at Dos Her manas, but I decided to be less sub tle. That game conlinued 13 ... 1f8 1 4 'ife 1 l:tb8 1 5 h3 �7 16 .t!alilc6 17 l:td l � xd4 18 :Xd4 b5 19 axbS

lot of work for the Kasparov match. Although I wasn't so successful in the match itself, the analysis paid off over the succeeding months. At the time this game was played, I was still far ahead of other grandmasters in my understanding of this line. Later on they caught up with me, but

axb5 20 e5 with an edge for White. 13 lLld7 13 ...� 4 14 .i.c l e5 l5 l2f5 exf4 16 g5 is good for White. 14 .i.g2 This move reflects one a my discoveries: that when Black plays . . . �7 voluntarily, it may not be

0-0

•••

ANAND

-

203

TOPALOV, Do/U'MUND 1996

necessary to play g5. Of course, you may want to play g5 in the end for attacking purposes, but White can time it much better. One point be hind leaving thepawn on g4 is that an early g5 can be met by ...g6 fol lowed by ... e5. If the pawn is still on g4 it is much easier for White to

Black defends the h7-square by ...g6, ...i.g7 and .. .ltlf8 White again makes use of the position of the pawn on g4 by playing f5, since then ... exf5 can be met by gxf5.

17

•••

li:lc6

Mter l 7 ...li:lc4 1 8 .i.c l g6 19 lld3 White proceeds with his kingside at tack.

meet this manoeuvre by the piece 18 ltlde2! sacrifice lili5, opening the g-file af ter . . .gxf5 gxf5. White must make time for this .i.f8 move as 18 llf3 lets Black free his 14 ... Black has a range of possible position by 18 ... li:lxd4 19 .i.xd4 e5 plans ; foc example he could continue 20 llh3 h6. 18 lC!b4 14 ... b6, but again White plays 'i'el , :d l and any other useful moves he 19 Jtdl (D) find before pushing the g-pawn. 1S ..el b6 After 15 . ./oc4, White plays 1 6 .icl intending b 3 an d .i.b2.

can

16 l:tdl

.ib7 (D)

19

17 'i'h4

White's plan is to move the e3bishop out of the way (possibly to gl) and then to play J:l.d3-h3. After

1f l9 ... d5, then 20 e5 f6 2 1 exf6 lC!xf6 22 .i.d4 gives White a posi tional advantage. The text-move aims to provoke g5. This looks odd unless you have read the earlier dis cussion about the merits of with holding g5!

20 gS

f6 (D)


204

After 20 ... g6 21 l:l.f3 llc8 22 l:h3 h5 23 ll'lg3 a deadly sacrifice on h5 is looming, while 20 ... h6!? 21 'i1Vf2 (21 ll'ld4!? hxg5 22 fxg5 ll'le5 23 l:df2 is also possible) 2 l ...hxg5 22 fxg5 ll'le5 23 g6! fxg6 24 .ixb6 fa vours White. If Black continues quietly by 20... :c8, White ptays 21 .igl fol lowed by l:f3-h3.

very pleasant for White) 26 i.xd5 exd5 and now both 27 lbf3 !? and 27 e6 ll'lxe6 28 ll'lxe6 lhe6 29 i.xb6 give White some advantage. 22 fxgS li)cfi

23 l:dn!

:cs

After 23 ...ll'lxd4 24 .ixd4 lbes Black has finally occupied the e5square, but it's a bit late for this to matter: White continues 2S .ixeS dxe5 26 l:[f7 with an excellent position.

24 ll'lce2!

In order to make sure that White can maintain a knight on d4. M 24 After 24...ll'lde5? White can choose between the quiet 2S b3 illll the sharp 25 ll'lxe6 l:xe6 26 l:xf8+ 1Vxf8 27 l:xf8+ l:hf8 28 lbf4 :eeB 29 ll'ld5, with some advantage for White in either case. .ixc6 25 ll'lxc6 26 lM4 (D) •••

21 ll'ld4!

Returning to exert pressure on the new weakness at e6. 21 fxgS After 2 1...ll'lc6 22 gxf6! Black runs into problems: I ) 22 ... 1Vxf6 23 1Vxf6 ll'lxf6 24 e5 ll'lg4 25 .igl liJa5 26 ll'lb3 .ixg2+ 27 l:xg2 ll'lh6 28 ll'le4 with a clear endgame advantage. 2) 22 ...ll'lxf6 23 e5 (23 ll'lxc6 .ixc6 24e5 .ixg2+ 25 llxg2 ll'ld7 is only equal) 23...ll'ld5 24 1Vxd8 ll'lxd8 25 ll'lxd5 .ixd5 (25...exd5 26 e6! ll'lxe6 27 ll'lxe6 l:xe6 28 .ixb6 is ---

26

.id7

ANAND - TOPALOV, DORTMUND 1996

205

35 b4! 'Wa3 (35 .. .'l'xc2 36 lt:lxf8 wins) 36 .ixh6! and the long-awaitlld sacrifice on h6 finishes Black. 29 lt:lxeS .ixg2+ pawn-grabbing. White would con- 30 :Z.xg2 (D) tinue 27 :0 (threatening 28 l:l.h3; 27 b4 e5 is less clear) and now: I) 27 ... e5 28 ::th3 h6 29 'Wh5! B and White's attack is very strong. 2) 27 ...:c7 28 b4! and now: 2a) 28...ltlb7 29 !Dxe6! :Z.xe6 30 rfJ and White is winning. 2b) 28 ...!Dd7 29 .ih3 !De5 30 g6!! ltlxg6 (30 ... "ii'xh4 3 1 .ixe6+) 31 'lxd8 l:.xd8 32 !Dxe6 and wins. 2c) 28 ... e5 29 bxc5 exd4 30 cxb6 is the critical line. White has the ad vantage but the game is far from The threat is 3I lilg4 followed by over. 27 eS! 32 ltlf6+. :Z.c7 30 The point of Black's previous White's preponderance on the move is to set up latent threats along kingside is simply too great: the c8-h3 diagonal; for example 27 l:lf3 e5 28 ltlr5 g6 29 ::th3 h5! re l ) 30....ie7 3 l ltlg4! and now: la) 3 l...�h8 32 ltlf6 .ixf6 (if futes the attack The text-move ef 32 ... gxf6, then 33 g6) 33 gxf6 gxf6 fectively counters this plan. 27 dxeS (33 ...g6 34 .ig5) 34 :Z.xf6 and the white attack is decisive. After 27 ... d5 28 ::tf3, followed by lb) 3 l ...'Wd5 32 lbf6+ .ixf6 33 :Z.h3, White has an immense attack. 28 lill'3 gxf6 :Z.c7 34 a5! and White is win .ic6 After 28 ..'i'c7 (28 ... .id6 29 l:l.d2 ning, for example 34 ... bxa5 35 f7+ 'Wc7 30 ::tfdl and wins) White con l:l.xf7 36 :Z.xf7 �xf7 37 'l'f2+ picks tinues his attack by 29 g6 h6 30 up a piece. �g5. It looks slow, but White will 2) 30...'Wd5 31 g6 h6 32 .ixh6! gradually use his greater firepower gxh6 (32 ... 'Wxe5 33 .ic l mates) 33 on the kingside: 30... .ie7 (30 ... .ic6 lbg4 lbd7 34 g7 'Wxg2+ 35 �xg2 31 �f7) 31 l:l.f7! .ic6 32 .ixc6 :Z.xc2+ 36 �hl .ixg7 37 lbxh6+ '6'xc6+ 33 �gl .irs 34 ltlh7 'Wxa4 wins. I dat't think either of us looked at 26... .ixa4 for more than one sec ond In such a position you just know that Black cannot afford to go

.

206


�h8 31 ll:lg4 White also wins after 3 l ...e5 32 ltJ£6+ gxf6 33 gxf6+ �h8 34 'l'g3 i.d6 35 .ih6 or 31...'i'd5 32 li)f6+ gxf6 33 gxf6+ .ig7 34 i.h6.

32 'i'h3!

Threatening 33 g6 followed by a sacrifice on h6. 32 'i'dS The continuation 32 ... g6 33 ..tf4 i.d6 34 'i'c3+ J:lg7 35 l:tdl ll)e4 36 'Wc6 is decisive. 33 g6 h6 (D) •..

�e8 39 W'g4 is also very good fiX" White) 35 ... i.xh6 36 11'xh6+ 'if.>g8 37 g7 'l'xg2+ 38 �xg2 lhg7+ 39 �h l ll:lxa4 White should win, but the text-move is instantly deadly.

34

...

gxh6

35 g7+!

35 ll:lxh6 (35 D.xf8+? lhfB 36 g7+ �xg7 37 'ifxh6+ �fl) 35 ... .ixh636 W'xh6+ �g8 transposes to the last note. The order of moves in the game rules out the possibility of ...'ill'xg2+. 35 hg7 Or 35 .. .l:l.xg7 36 l:lxf8+ :Xf8 37 W'xh6+ �g8 38 ll:lf6+ Wfl 39 'flxg7#. ...

36 li)xb6 Threatening 37 ll:lf7++ Wg8 38 W'h8#. W'xgl+ 36 ...

37 'ifxg2

.ixh6

38 'ifg6

1-0

Or 37 .. .'�h7 38 'ifh3 .ixh6 39 l:tf6 �g8 40 J:lxh6 with further rna· terial gains to follow.

34 i.xh6! White has more than one good continuation, but this is the most convincing. After 34 ll:lxh6 gxh6 35 i.xh6! (not 35 g7+? i.xg7 36 .ixh6 �g8, but 35 Lf8+ J:lxf8 36 g7+ �g8 37 gxf8W'++ �xf8 38 i.xh6+

38 ... J:lg8 39 'i'xh6+ l:th7 40 'l'r6+ l:thg7 4 1 W'h4+ l:th7 42 'fld4+ :hg7 43 l:tn wins at least another piece. This was almost a model game, but it is not easy to appreciate unless you are familiar with all the intrica cies of the Scheveningen.

Towards the end of the year I competed in a very strong double-round event in Las Palmas. The other players were Kasparov, Karpov, Topalov, Kramnik and Ivanchuk. I started with two draws, but in the third round my tournament came alive with the following game.

Game 38

V. Anand - V. lvanchuk Las Palmas 1 996 Ruy Lopez This game was played on my birth day. The tournament had begun slowly, with only one decisive result in the first two rounds and there had been a lot of whining amongst the public and press about it. This seems a bit unjustified, given the fighting spirit that prevails these days, but perhaps chess fans are right to worry lhat chess will revert back to the 17move draws prevalent in the 1980s.

1 e4 e5 If anyone doesn't know already, Ivanchuk plays everything. In fact I expected this, but of course couldn't be sure!

2 3 4 5

lDf3 .i.bS h4 0.0

lDc6

a6 lbr6 .i.cS Ivanchuk had already played this move twice during I 996. 5...b5 6

ib3 .i.c5 was all the rage in I 995, but by this time it had been super seded by the text-move. 6 lDxeS 6 c3 b5 7 d4 bxa4 8 dxc5 lbxe4 9 �xe5 1llxe5 10 'l'd5 .i.b7 was played in Short-Ivanchuk, Novgorod 1 996, which ended in a draw. Somehow I didn't feel like repeating this line.

6

7 d4 8 l:tel 9 l:txe4 1 0 c4 11 �

llJxeS lbxe4 .i.e7 lbg6

0-0

d6

If 1 1 ...c6, intending 12 ...b5, then 12 d5 is slightly better for White.

12 llJds

.i.b4

For some reason, this had escaped my attention; the point is that 1 3 g3 is met by 13 ...c6 (this actually hap pened in Smirin-lzeta, Las Palmas 1993). After the text-move I thought for a long time, because if Black drives the knight back with ... c6 then he has solved all his opening prob lems. Then I saw the exchange sacri fice, but I consumed a lot of time before taking the plunge. I didn't want to concede equality too easily on my birthday, but the possibility of just being an exchange down was so bering. Finally I decided that Black wouldn't be able to break White's bind.

13 'iniS!

An innovation.

13 .•• c6 (D) 1 3 ... .i.e6!? is an alternative since 14 lbf4? .i.xc4 15 lbxg6 fails to

208


15 ...�xf2+!. Therefore White is bet

ter advised to play 14 i.c2.

Establishing the bind. 18 :e1? fud4 19 �xd6 �e6 20 i.xb8 lhb8 is even slightly better for Black. 18 W (D) After 18 ...cxd5 1 9 cxd5 lld8 20 ltel linB 21 h3 lDe7 22 g4! Black still has to find a way to untangle. •••

14 .l:.xb4!

Consistent. Otherwise Black is just better. 'il'xb4 14 Not 14 ... lDxh4? 1 5 �g5 with the lines: 1) 1 5 ...'il'a5 1 6 lDe7+ �h8 17 �c2 h6 (17 ...lDg6 18 �xg6 fxg6 19 lDxg6+ and 1 7 ...lDf5 18 lDxf5 �xf5 1 9 �f6! are also hopeless for Black) 1 8 'il'xh6+! gxh6 19 �f6#. 2) 1 5 .. .f6 1 6 �xh4 ! cxd5 17 'il'xd5+ �h8 18 �g3 with excellent compensation for the exchange. ...

15 'iixh4 16 lDb6

lDxh4 ltb8

Trying to keep the material. Black can bail out by playing 16 ...�f5, but the two bishops give White a slight edge. lDCS 17 �f4 Not 17...ltd8? 1 8 �g5. 18 dS

19 � White would like to play 19 g4, but this is impossible because of the reply 19 ...lte4. The text-move, how ever, threatens 20 g4 because White can meet I 9...lte4 by 20 ltel !. Other methods of preparing g4 are less ef fective: 1 ) 19 h3 h5! (19.. :e5 20 :dl and 1 9...lte2 20 g4 :Xb2 21 .ib3 lDd4 22 �xd6 lDxb3 23 axb3 l:txb3 24 c5! favour White) 20 �fl :e4! and White no longer has the move :tel . 2) 1 9 f3? (this stops 19...:e4 and threatens g4, but there is another problem) 19... lte2! 20 g4 ltJd4 21 �I ltxb2 22 �xd6 lDxf3 23 .ixb8 .

ANAND

-

[VANCHUK, LAS PACMAS 1996

ixg4 and there is no defence to mate! It is hardly necessary to mention that the greedy 19 dxc6 bxc6 20 ixc6 releases the bind and gives Black the advantage after 20 ... D.e2 ! .

19

...

h6?

209

20 ... l:td8 21 g4 �4 22 c5 is good for White.

21 .i.h2 Black's problem is that ... h6 has not prevented White's g4, as 19 ... h5 would have done.

21

cxdS (D)

Up

to here Black has defended well, but after this move he gets in serious trouble. The idea of relieving the back rank in order to prevent lle 1 in response to ...lle4 is correct, but he has chosen the wrong pawn move. The alternatives are: I) 19 ...:e4? 20 lle l ! is good for

White.

2) 19 ...f6 20 h3 lle5 2 1 r!di c5 22 ixe5 fxe5 23 g4 lbd4 (23...l0e7 24 :d3 !, followed by llb3, and White will win at least a pawn) 24 f4! is very good for White, since Black's queenside pieces are still immobi lized. If Black continues 24... exf4, then 25 J:tei followed by :le8 wins a

piece. 3) 19... h5!? and now :

Ja) 20 dxc6 (White can always

bail out this way) 20... bxc6 21 .i.xc6 :Xb6! (better than 21 ... J:te7 22 �d5 or 21...l:td8 22 c5!) 22 .i.xe8 J:txb2

and Black should be fine. 3b) 20 l:tdi J:te4! is very unpleas ant for White. 3c) 20 J:te1 llxel + 2 1 �xel f6 is a risky line for White.

10 h3 Now Black is in difficulties. J:te4 10

22 g4 White's threat is not so much 23 gxf5 as 23 .i.c2. Black is obliged to surrender material in the hope of ob taining three pawns for a piece.

22

23 ltlxc4

lhc4 dxc4

24 llel This intermezzo does the trick White succeeds in exchanging rooks. After 24 ll dl .i.e6! (but not 24 ... b5 25 .i.c2 �h4 26 .i.xd6 llb7 27 .i.g3 threatening both mate and the h4knight) 25 gxf5 .i.xf5 Black avoids the rook-swap. .i.e6 24 ••• Or 24...ltld4 25 lle8+ �h7 26 .i.xd6 lla8 27 .i.e5 b5 (27...�c6 28

2/0


�c2+ f5 29 f4! is hopeless; the threat is 30 llxcS, and if Black exchanges on e5 the passed pawn will decide) 28 �d1 lLlc6 29 �c2+ f5 30 l:.xcS llxc8 3 1 �xf5+ g6 32 �xc8 lLlxe5 33 ha6 b4 34 �e2 and the minorpiece ending is won for White. �xr5 25 gxf5

26 27 28 29

�xd6

�g1

lle8+ �xe8

31 aS

Now there is only the kingside to worry about.

<j;g7 �g6

After 33 �c2+ �f5 34 �1 �e4 Black's bishop takes up its optimum square. 33 �d5

34 �c2+ 35 JJ..c7

�6

Stopping 35 ... h5 because of the reply 36 �d8+. �e6 35 ••.

36 �h7

�f3

37 38 �c2!

�

B

�xh3+ lldB llxeB �e6

Black has three pawns for the bishop, but the pawns are far back and Black has only one passed pawn, so White should win, although care is required. 30 a4! g5

31 32 �a4 33 �d1

36 37 �b2 (DJ

Now White prevents .. .f5. Black is gradually running out of active moves, when it will be time for the white king to advance.

•••

Not 38 �g3? �e4. It is still too early to allow the exchange of bishops.

38 39 �d1 40 �e2 41 �b6+

.i.e4

�4 �d3

The two bishops form an effective team.

41 42 43 44 45

�d5

�d1

�g3

�c5 �b5

fS

�eS �6

f4+ Or 45 ...�g7 46 � �h7 47 �f7, followed by �d5, and one of Black's queenside pawns falls.

46 �b2

1-0

The pawns are blockaded and White will soon win one by eilher �f3 or �f8.

Game39

V. Anand - A. Karpov Las Palmas 1 996 Queen's Gambit Accepted In round 6 I slid back to 50% after a horrible loss to Kramnik in which I failed to put up any resistance. I spent the evening disgusted with my play and decided to adopt an uncom promising style the next day against Karpov. The result was my best game of the tournament.

1 �3

There was no way I could face a boring Caro-Kann and trying to deal with an improvement on move 45 leading to a difficult ending, etc. I felt that it would be better to go down in style than to do something like that. Now, how does a move like I llli3 allow me to get interesting positions? Well, to be honest, I llli"3 can lead to positions even more bor ing than after 1 e4 c6, but at least they would be unfamiliar boring po sitions!

1

:z d4 3 c4

6 axbS 7 b3

cxbS

He had already started thinking a lot and I knew that he wasn't famil iar with this opening - not that there is a great deal of theory on it.

7 8 bxc4 9 cxbS 10 .ie2

.b7 .ixe4 �6

I 0 .id3 has b.en played more fre quently. 10 11 0-0

h7 0-0 (D)

dS e6

dxc4

4 e4

I played this without hesitation as I wanted to liven things up immedi ately.

4

•••

s a4

bS c6

12 lbc3 The game Lutz-P.Schlosser, Ber lin 1989 continued 1 2 lbbd2 .ib7 1 3 lbc4 a6 1 4 b6 lbc6 15 .id2 lL!dS

212


with an obscure position - it isn't clear whether the b6-pawn will be weak or strong. Developing the hi knight to c3 appears more natural as it exerts some influence over the im portant d5-square.

12 13 lDeS ••.

i.b7 a6

After 13 ... i.b4 14 i.b2 i.xc3 (or 14...a6 15 i.f3) 15 i.xc3 a6 (15 ...'i!t"d5 1 6 tt:lf3 is also a little better for White) 16 i.f3! (better than 16 i.a5 'i!t"d5 ! 17 i.f3 'i!t"xb5 and White can not profit from the b-fi.le line-up) White has an edge.

14 ..U3 (D)

After 16 'Wb3 axb5 17 l:txa8 .b.a8 18 'Wxb5 White has an edge,but fac ing Karpov's defensive skills I pre ferred to aim for a large advantage!

16 17 i.e2!! ...

'i'b6

I decided that the bishop had noth ing more to do on f3 and the best plan was to relocate it to d3. axbS 17 There is no choice; both 17 . aS and 17 ...f6 18 i.e3! a5 19 00 00 20 i.f3 would leave White with a very strong passed b-pawn. 1kc7 18 lbbS i.d6 19 i.r4 20 i.d3 h6 (D) After 20... i.c6 2 1 J:1b3, the white pieces are ominously aimed at the black kingside. ...

..

14

Karpov finds the safest solution, leaving himself with only a slight disadvantage. Black can also try 14 ... i.xf3 15 'Wxf3 'i!t"xd4 16 'l'xa8 'i'xc3 17 i.f4, when again White has a slight edge.

15 tt:\xdS 16 l:tbl!

exdS

21 i.xh7+! Here, I spent a few seconds look· ing at 2 1 .:xd5, which leaves White with a clear extra pawn, but as I mentioned earlier I couldn't face

ANAND

-

KARPOV, LAS PALMAS 1996

long, technical game. In many lines Blackcan exchange on e5, leaving a position with 4 vs 3 on one side. De pending on which pieces are left, this might or might not be a win, but the game would certainly continue for a long time. Then I saw ..txh7+ and didn't waste any more time on lhd5. I spent some time analysing the sacrifice, and didn' t see a de fence foc Black. By now I was too excited to analyse and decided that I would simply play it. Karpov had hardly any time left and I was sure he wouldn't find a defence. Perhaps this decision was some what reckless but I wasn't punished for it- indeed, I was rewarded with a nice win.

21 22 'l'hS+

213

alternatives that would have offered Black more defensive chances, al though White retains a very danger ous attack in every line. Certainly it would be a monumental task to de fend this position over the board, es pecially taking into account Black's time shortage. The alternatives are: I) 23 ... ..tc8 24 l'l.g3 and now: Ia) 24 ... l'l.a3 (this move was suggested by a New in Chess reader, Maarten de Zeeuw) (D) with a fur ther branch:

�7

�8

23 l'l.b3 (D)

2J ..txeS? After this error there is no saving Blade's position. There were two

lal) 25 l'l.xg7+ �xg7 26 ..th6+ �6 27 l'l.el l'l.g8 28 'ifh4+ (28 �g6 l'l.xg6 29 'irh4+ �5 30 'irh5+ is per petual check, while 28 f4 is unclear, but could also be a draw) 28...�e6 29 �g4+ �d7 30 �6+ �c6 3 1 ::.C I + �b7 3 2 l'l.xc7+ ..txc7 looks unclear. l a2) 25 f3 'ile7 and White has various attacking ideas: la21) 26 ..th6 ..txe5 27 dxe5 g6 28 ..txf8 'ira?+ 29 �h l l'l.al 30

214

VTSHY ANAND: MY BEST GAMES OF CHESS

l:bg6+ fxg6 3 1 'it'xg6+ leads to a draw. 1a22) 26 J.g5 f6 (26 ...'it'e6 27 .l:th3) 27 lLlg6 'l'e8 and White has no effective way to proceed. 1a23) 26 llc1 ! 'iWf6 27 J.h6 (27 J.g5 J.xe5 28 hf6 hf6 29 'iWxd5 J:td3 is a likely draw) 27 ...J.xe5 (if Black allows White to take on g7 then White should have the advan tage) 28 dxe5 "i1Vh6+ 29 Wh1 g6 30 J.xf8 .l:tc3 3 1 'it'h6 .l:txc 1 + 3 2 'it'xc 1 and White wins. 1b) 24... 'it'e7 (D) and now:

1b1) 25 J.g5 and now Black should play 25 ...f6 26 lLlg6 'lieS, with an unclear position, rather than 25 ...'it'e6, when 26 .l:th3 'iWxh3 27 gxh3 f6 28 lLlg6 fxg5 29 'iWh8+ Wf7 30 lLlxf8 J.xf8 3 1 f4 g4 32 'iWh5+ is very promising for White. 1b2) 25 J.h6! i.xe5 26 dxe5 g6 27 e6! i.xe6 (27 ... 'iWxe6 28 i.xf8 wins material) 28 'it'e5 f6 29 .l:txg6+ and White wins.

2) 23 ..16! 24 .l:th3 fxe5 (24.....ixe5 25 dxe5 transposes to the game) 25 dxe5 'lfc4! (25 ....1:txf4 26 e6 � 27 'iWhS+ We7 28 1Wxg7+ �xe6 29 l:te1+ .l:te4 30 D.h6+ furces mate) and now: 2a) 26 1Wh7+ � 27 e6t �6 (27 ...Wxe6 28 l:le1+! wins focWhite and 27...We8 28 1Wg6+ �d8 29 i.g5+ 'ili'c8 30 .l:tc I is clearly better for White) with another fork: 2a1) 28 .J:[h6+? gxh6 29 •xh6f �5 (29...We7 30 i.g5+ mates) 30 g4+ We4 3 1 l:te1+ 1i'e2! (3l...�d3 32 'it' g6+ Wd4 33 i.xd6 probably fa vours White, but is extremely messy; I didn't bother to analyse this line deeply as the strength of 3 L'I'e2! made it irrelevant) 32 :Xe2+ i.xe2 33 i.xd6 .l:tal+ 34 Wg2 i.fl-+- 35 Wg3 l:tf3+ 36 Wh4 .l:th3+ and Blade wins. 2a2) 28 i.g5+ 'ili'xe6 29 :CI+ Wd7 (not 29... i.e5 30 :Xe5+ �d6 31 .l:tel lLlc6 32 1Wg6+ �7 JJ •xg7+ Wb6 34l:tb1 + i.b5 35 l:thbJ winning for White) 30 ..xg7+ �c6 3 1 .l:tc3 lLld7 32 .l:txc4+ hc4 with an unclear position. White has a lot of pawns on the kingside, but since Black's king is now safe he can acti· vate his pieces. 2b) 26 .l:tel ! (cutting off the en· emy Icing's escape route) 26...i'xf4 27 'iWh7+ Wf7 28 exd6 and now: 2bl ) 28 ....1:te8 29 _.h5+ g6 30 l:te7+! ! .l:txe7 (30... Wffi 31 i'fJ! is an unexpected win) 3 1 'i'h7+ Wf6

ANAND

-

KARPOV, LAS PALMAS 1996

(31...Tf8 32 dxe7+ We8 33 'i'xg6+ Wxe7 34 llh7+ mates )32 'i'xe7+ Wf5 33 'i'f8+ We5 34 lte3+ with a decisive advantage for White. 2b2) 28...ll:lc6 29 ltf3 'i'xf3 30 gxf3 .1c4 3 1 Wh l. White has the ad vantage because of his d-pawn and persisting attack, but this was Black's best chance.

24 :b3 25 dxeS

f6 '¥iie7

25 . '1'c4 26 ltel 'ifxf4 27 '¥iih7+ �n28e6+We8 29 'illg6+ is also no help for Bli!.!xg2 is strong (not 23 ..ih6 'iWh2 !).

21 .ig6!! (D)

219

2) 2 1 ...1Wf6 22 ..ixf7+ ilxf7 23 l:lxf7 ll'lxe3 24 ilxd8+! (24 'iWe2 ll'ld I + 25 'ili>xg2 'ili>xf7 is less clear, although White remains much better after 26 1!Ve4) 24... 'ili>xd8 25 ..ixe3 ..ih3 26 D.xa7 lle8 27 l:l.xh7 and Black loses several pawns, followed by his bishop! 3) The key variation is 2 I ...ilxdi 22 D.xe6+ 'ili>f8 23 ..ixh6+ �g8 24 ..ixf7#.

22 11Vxd4 23 lld3!

llxd4

There is no nlllld to bother with 23 D.xe6 lld7 when the text-move wins effortlessly.

23

24 lhd8+

21

•••

liJe7

There is no way out: I) 2 I ...'i'xe3+ 22 ..ixe3 fxg6 23 J.c5 wins.

25 ..id3!

lld8 �d8 1-0

Because after 25 ... -th I 26 ..ib2 l:l.e8 27 ..if6 Black will soon be in zugzwang and have to surrender at least a piece.

Biel l997 is a tournament that I remember very fondly. Biel was and still is a superbly organized tournament, with very comfortable conditions for the players and pleasant walks by the lake. I felt very happy there and this was re flected in my chess. The first game against Lautier (Game 40) was a game I could be proud of and I also won a nice game against Gelfand. After a further win against Pelletier, I faced Lautier for the second time.

Game 41

J . Lautier - V. Anand Bie/ 1 99 7 Sicilian, Najdorf 1 e4 A minor surprise - Joel does play both first moves, but at the time 1 d4 was his main weapon. Earlier in 1997, at Ubeda, he played I e4 four times in six games and I suppose that he was in the process of enlarging his opening repertoire.

1 ... cS It is often tempting to look for something offbeat against people who vary from their 'normal' rou tine, but this can backfire unless you know what you are doing! Caught by surprise, I decided to stick to something I knew.

2 3 4 S 6

'Llf3 d4 'Llxd4 'Llc3 .ic4

d6 cxd4 lt::lf6 a6

8 0-0

b4

9 lt::la4

.td7

Once again, 8 ....te7 9 'i'f3 would lead to a large body of theory. I had studied the slightly offbeat 8...b4 before the last VSB tournament in Amsterdam 1996 and found t to be surprisingly interesting. White is obliged to place his knight offside on a4, but the defect is that Black gets a weak pawn on b4. This was my first opportunity to try the idea out. 9...lt::lxe4?! 10 f4 transposes to the famous Fischer-Tal game from the Candidates in 1959.

10 f4

The next surprise. I had no idea what line Joel would choose, but since he had a lot of experience play ing on the black side of 6 .te2 and 6 .te3, I thought he might go for one of those.

6 ... 7 .ib3

e6 bS

One of the main lines is 7 ... 'Llbd7, but I had something else in mind.

11 .teJ

lLlc6 (D)

LA UTIER - ANAND, BIEL 1997 I I f5 is the sharpest tty. After ll . ..e5 ( l i ...lLixd4? 1 2 'iWxd4 e5 13 l'xb4 d5 14 'We i ! favours White) 12 �6 (asso often in the Najdorf, there is no turning back; White has a badly placed knight on a4 and a weak pawn on e4, so he must throw caution to the winds) 12 .. .fxe6 13 fxe6 �c8 14 1g5 Black can play: 1) 14...h5 1 5 �xf6 gxf6 16 �d5 1b7 17 c3 ( 17 a3 is a possible alter native) and now Kalegin and Dvoirys just stop, saying that White has com pensation, but is that true? White certainly has a lot of trumps - pawn on e6, the open f-file and Black's ex posed king, but Black has an extra piece and when White plays cxb4 to rescue the stranded knight, Black's knight gains access to the d4-square. 2) 14...�e7 15 �xf6 bf6 16 J:xf6 'i'xf6 17 'Wxd6 lLld4 1 8 lLlb6 (D) and now:

21 'iWd5+ is interesting) 19...lLle2+ 20 �h 1 lLlg3+ led to a draw in Kale gin-Dvoirys, USSR 1988. Interested readers can find the relevant game and analysis in lnformator45 (game 282). 2b) 18 ...lLle2+ 19 �hl lLlg3+ 20 hxg3 'Wh6+ 21 �gl 'We3+ 22 �fl J:f8+ 23 'Wxf8+ �xf8 24 e7+ �e8 25 �a4+ �d7 26 �xd7+ �f7 27 lLlxa8 �xe7 28 .:Z.dl was a line given by Kalegin and Dvoirys; they con tinued 28 ...'1Vxe4 and assessed the resulting position as clearly better for White. However, after the im provement 28...11t'xg3! (Vujadinovic Novak, e-mail 1999) the removal of the g3-pawn makes it very hard for White to avoid the coming checks.

11

•••

.:Z.b8

Not l l ....i.e7? 1 2 f5 lLlxd4 ( 1 2...e5 1 3 lLle6 fxe6 14 fxe6 .i.c8 15 �b6 traps the qu.en) 13 1Wxd4 e5 14 1Wxb4 and White stands very well.

12 c3 13 e5?!

2a) 18. ..�xe6 19 lLlxa8 (the alter native 19 he6 J:d8 20 �d7 + �f7

221

�e7

13 cxb4 .:Z.xb4 14 lLlc3 0-0 leads to equality, so White tries for more. However, in my preparations I had already come to the conclusion that the text-move is dubious because sacrificing the exchange gives Black a big advantage. Fritz is not con vinced because it finds a very convo luted way for White to keep the extra exchange, but I took one look and decided that Black must be better. The main problem for White, besides his


222

poorly placed a4-knight, is his king side. Without his e- and f-pawns, his king is quite vulnerable, and every one of Black's minor pieces is well positioned to join the attack. White's Sozio bishop on b3 is totally misplaced in this situation, since it cannot defend the kingside. Despite all these factors, I was surprised at how quickly White's position went downhill.

13 14 15 16 17

fxeS .i.f4 i.xb8 cxb4

dxeS lL!xeS lL!g6! 1Vxb8 i.xb4 (D)

w

18 l:lcl After 1 8 lLlf3, Black gains the ad vantage by 18 ... i.b5 ! 1 9 l:lf2 lL!g4.

18 19 �1 (D) •••

0-0

Since this move loses material, one might expect there to be some thing better. However, it may well be that White is practically lost already.

The alternatives for White are not very attractive: 1 ) 19 lL!c5? i.xc5 20 l:xc5 'lb6 and Black wins material due to the pin; for example, 21 'ii'c2 lLle4 22 l:lc4 lbd6 23 l:lc5 e5!. 2) 1 9 lLlf3 and now: 2a) 1 9 ... l:ld8?! 20 'ii'c2 l:c8 21 'ii'f2! (21 lL!c3 loses material after either 2 I . ..lL!g4 or 21 ...i.bS) and the position is not so clear. 2b) 1 9 ... i.d6! 20 lLlc3 .ic6! (the immediate 20...lL!g4 also looks good) and White is in serious trouble: 2bl) 21 'ii'e2 lL!g4! 22 h3 (22 g3 i.c5+ 23 �hi lLl6e5 24 lLle4 ibS wins for Black) 22...i.xf3 23 gxf3 (23 lhf3 i.c5+ is also winning for Black) 23 ...lLJf4 with a decisive at tack. 2b2) After 21 lbe2 i.xf3 22M i.xh2+ 23 Whl i.e5 Black stands very well. He has two pawns for the exchange, and while his own king is completely safe, White's is seriously exposed.

LAUTIER - ANAND, 8/EL 1997

19 l:ld8 Over the board, I wasn't totally ...

223

the white king, which is very inse cure thanks to its scanty pawn-cover.

sure that this natural move won ma 23 ••• .IteR .i.xc6 24 �c6 terial,but in fact White must already a5 return the exchange due to the threats 25 J:xc6 along the d-file. The rest of the game is fairly sim20 li)cS (D) ple - White's king is too exposed.

26 27 28 29

'ilf2 b3 J:tc5 ife3

�g7 J:td7 'i'd8

J:td3 (D)

.txc5 ldidn 't want to allow unnecessary complications. Still, 20... .tb5 was also good; for example, 21 �xe6 (White should prefer 21 J:txf6 gxf6 22 'ill'g l, which will transpose to the game as I don't really see a better

move than 22 ... .txc5) 2 1.. .fxe6 22 �xe6 :xd l 23 l:tfxd l .lta5! and Black wins. 21 :xeS 22 :xt'6

23 'i'gl

.tb5

gxf6

White frees himself from the d file,pin but at a heav)Price. Instead of being material up, he is now a clear pawn down.Moreover, Black has good attacking chances against

White is gradually driven back and Black moves in to occupy the centre.

'i'd4

30 'irel

Black can give up the a-pawn, since the game will be decided by a direct attack against the white king.

31 :Xa5 32 'li'cl

lle3 11i'e4

Threatening 33 ...1lxh3+.

33 �h2 34

'it>g1

0-1

11i'f4+ 'ilfg3

After 35 <Jolfl {i)f4, White has to surrender his queen (for a start).

224


After this second excellent win against Lautier, I was euphoric. Evidently this sensation went rather to my head because the very next day I lost to Mid lov. However, l went on to win the tournament in any case, half a point ahead of Karpov. The following game was played under entirely different circumstances lost to Lautier in the first round at Belgrade, and then had the unpleasent prospect of facing Kramnik with Black the following day. It seems as if the tournament might not get off to a good start. ..

Game 42

V. Kramnik - V. Anand Belgrade 1 99 7 Semi-Slav 1 m 2 c:4

lDr6

3 &3 4 d4

dS c6

e6

I decided to play the Semi-Slav, although this was quite a risky choice as at the time it was one of Kramnik's favourite openings. Playing one of your opponent's preferred openings is an accepted strategy, and it can be quite successful. For example, Kiril Georgiev, who was one of the world's leading experts on the Dragon, has nevertheless lost a number of games on the white side. It is not easy to re

w

Krarnnik wasn't convinced by this and decided to 'improve' it with a oriantate yourself to the other side of preliminary a4, trying to provoke board and you can even end up in the Black into replying l l ... a6. How situation of 'knowing too much ', ever, it turns out that Black has sev and be unable to decide which line to eral good alternatives to pushing his play. Having said that, it is a double a-pawn, so the critical line is 1 1 edge sttategy and in this game I was lllxg5 lllxg3 1 2 lllxf7 �xf7 1 3 fxg3, and now: in big trouble right in the opening. 5 ..tgS h6 1) 1 3...�g8 14 0-0 and now: dxc4 Ia) 14 ... llla6?. In my original 6 ..th4 7 e4 gS notes, I stopped here with the com 8 ..tg3 b5 ment that ...lllc7 would defend the 9 � ..tb7 weakness on e6. In fact, this is irrele 10 eS lObS (D) vant and White wins by 15 llle4 ..tg7 11 a4?! 16 ..th5, when I don't see any de White should probably have tried fence. A sample line is 16 ...J:lh7 1 7 the immediate 1 1 lllxg5. Apparently llld 6 'i1Fb6 1 8 ..tg6 ..txe5 19 ..txh7+

226


�xh7 20 'ilfc2+ 'ili>g8 21 'ilfg6+ .i.g7 22 l:!.ad l ! with decisive threats. lb) 14 ... l:!.h7 (this is often a use ful move) 15 .i.g4 �h8 (15 ... 'iWe8 1 6 .!Lle4 and 1 5... l:!.e7 1 6 .i.xe6+! are good for White) 1 6 .i.xe6 and I sus pect that White's compensation is more than enough. lc) 14 ...�d7 (just as in the game) 15 .i.g4 (15 .i.xc4 bxc4 16 'iWg4+ .i.g7 17 'i!he6+ �h7 is a perpetual check if White wants it, but he can not achieve more; e.g., 18 l:!.f7 l:!.f8 ! 19 l:!.xd7 .i.c8 20 l:!.xd8 .i.xe6 and the two bishops are potentially dan gerous) 15 ...'ilfe7 and now: l e i ) 16 �e4 (D) is less of a prob lem for Black than it is with a4 and ...a6 included. He can try:

'iWe4! 'ilxg7 26 'ilfd5+ �h7 27 l:!.fl (27 .i.f5+ lbg6 28 .i.xg6+ 'ilfxg6 29 1Vb7+ is also a draw) 27... 'ilfxg4 28 l:!.fl+ lii>g6 29 l:lf6+ with a draw. l c 1 12) 19 1Vb l ! �xg6 20 �6+ �g7 2 1 .i.h5 'ilfxf6 22 exf6+ � looks unclear to me. l c l 2) 16... l:!.h7! 17 ed6 :b8 18 a4 and now instead of transposing to the game with 1 8 ... a6, Black can play 1 8 ... c5! 19 axb5 cxd4 20 I'xd4 .i.d5 2 1 l:!.xa7 'ilfd8. White has some compensation for the piece, but Black has defended the e6-square and cer tainly has chances in the battle to come. lc2) 1 6 'ilfc2 ! and in this line I don't see any significant difference from the situation with a4 and ...a6 (see the note to White's 17th move). 2) 13... �e8 1 4 (}.() �a6 aims to run with the black king 10 the queen side. My hunch is that White has compensation, but it would take us too far afield to analyse this position exhaustively. It is clear that the early sacrifice on g5, while dangerous, entails a de gree of risk for White as well. Now let's get back to the game.

11

J e l l ) 16 ...c5 1 7 l:!.f6 (the best idea) 17 ... .i.d5 18 l:!.g6+ �h7 with a final fork in the path: l c l l l ) 19 'ilfc2 cxd4 20 l:!.xe6 ! .i.xe6 21 �g5+ �g7 22 �xe6+ �g8 23 1i'g6+ .i.g7 24 �xg7 �f8 25

•.•

a6?

White's plan works! To be honest �xg5xf7 had crossed my mind, but I dido 't fully believe it. Meanwhile I made this 'automatic' move. Black

should have played l l ...b4 12 .!Lle4, when he has a choice of good alter· natives:

227

KRAMNIK - ANAND, BELGRADE 1997 1 ) 12 ... cS is a solid continuation: Ia) After 13 �xeS .ixcS 1 4 dxcS 'fxd1+ 1S J:xd1 �d7 Black has a very comfonable ending, V.Popov Dreev, Russian Team Championship, Kazan 199S. lb) 13 �d2 and then: 1bl) 13 ... "ii'xd4?! 1 4 .ixhS .ixe4 15 /Llxe4 W'xe4+ 16 q;,n and now 16 1'b7 fails to 17 'irf3 ! �c6 1 8 ixf7+, so Black would have to find 16 .g4 17 .ixg4 11Vb7 18 'i'f3 �c6 19 ih5 0-0-0 20 .ixf7 �d4 with an unclear position. !b2) 13...�g3 is simpler: lb2 1 ) 14 hxg3 "ii'xd4 1S .if3 li:kl7! kills the line for White; e.g., 16 liJd6+ .ixd6 17 .ixb7 �xeS !. lb22) 1 4 �f6+ 11e7 1S hxg3 'fxd4 16 �xc4 .ig7 and White might have some compensation, but one certainly cannot say more than that. 2) 1 2 ...g4 and now: 2a) 13 �d2 "ii'xd4 1 4 .ixc4 li.lxg3 1S hxg3 �7 16 "ii'xg4 "ii'xb2 17 l:.b1 'l'xeS 18 l:thS �f6! is fine for Black. 2b) 13 �4 cS 14 �xeS .ixcS 1S dxc5 'l'xd 1 + 16 J:xd1 lt:lxg3 17 hxg3 h5 (17 ...�d7 is also possible) 18 ixc4 �e7 ! leaves White with a sad-looking knight on h4. 2c) 13 .th4 "ii'd5 14 �d2 (14 ott"6+ �f6 l S .ixf6 J:g8 is clearly better for Black) 14 ... c3 also looks reasonable for Black. Note that l l...�xg3 is less effec tive, because 12 hxg3 .ib4 1 3 �fl. ...

..

intending �e4, gives White quite good compensation. 12 �xgS! Now this is very strong. 12 �g3

13 �'Kf7 14 fxg3

�

1;g8 After 1 4...1Je8 lS 0-0 Black sorely misses the defence ...�a6-c7, and 1S ...1Jd7 1 6 .ig4 gives White a strong attack. 15 0..0 �d7 16 .tg4 11e7 (D)

17 ll)e4 1 7 "ii'c2 is a dangerous alternative. The critical line runs 17 ...l:th7 1 8 W'g6+ �h8 1 9 .ixe6 liVgS 20 'i'e4 l:te7!, and now: l ) 2 1 axbS l:txe6 (not 2 l ...axbS? 22 J:xa8 .ixa8 23 .ixd7) 22 J:f7 lLlf6 (22 ... .ig7? 23 h4 1ih5 24 l:xd7 axbS 2S :n .ta6 26 J:fS 1IVg6 27 h5 "ii'xg3 28 �e2 wins for White) 23 1if3 (23 1if4 cS is slightly better for Black) and now:

KRAMNIK - ANAND, BELGRADE 1997

:xh6 cxd4 27 e6 1V.xh6 (27...�e7

loses to 28 .l:tff6 dxc3 29 .l:.fg6) 28 i'xh6 .l:.h7 29 1Vg5+ .l:.g7 30 1Ve5 dxc3 3 1 bxc3 �e7 32 axb5 axb5 33 'i'xb5 .l:.d8 34 h4 favours White. 2b) 21...1Vd2 (D) and now:

2bl) 22 .1:.f2 'l'd3 2Hfg4 .1:.g7 24 lh4 c5 25 d5 �e5 is fine for Black. 2b2) 22 .l:.d1 1Vxb2 and now both 23 ixd7 1Vxc3 and 2 3 .l:.dn 1Vxc3 24 ixd7 �g7 favour Black. 2b3) 22 axb5 is interesting, but Black can defend: 2b3 1) 22 ...1Vxb2?! 23 :an with another branch: 2b311) 23 ...1Vxc3 24 �xd7 .l:.xd7 25 e6 'i'xd4+ (25 ... .1:.dd8 26 .:.n .tg7 27 .l:.xg7 'l'xd4+ 28 'l'xd4 .:.Xd4 29 llff7! and White wins) 26 1Vxd4+ Ld4 27 .l:.xf8+ .l:.xf8 28 .l:.xf8+ �g7 29 e7 wins for White. 2b3 12) 23 ....1:.xe6 24 .:.n �g7 25 Ld7 'i'xc3 26 'i'g4 .l:.g8 (26... 1Ve3+ 27 �h1 .l:.g_8 28 'i'xe6 �c8 29 bxc6 c3 30 'i'c4 �xd7 31 cxd7 and White

229

is clearly better; e.g., 3 1 ..."1'g5 3 2 1Fxc3 1Vg4 33 'l'c6 .l:.d8 34 e6 '1We2 35 .l:.a1 a5 36 1Vd5 a4 37 h3 win ning) 27 '1Wxe6 �c8 28 bxc6 �xd7 29 1Vxd7 1Ve3+ 30 �hi c3 3 1 c7 '1We2 32 .l:.g 1 'l'c4 33 h3 c2 34 .l:.c1 1Vc3 35 'l'd8 'l'c4 36 e6 'l'xe6 37 d5 and White is winning. 2b32) 22.. ..1:.xe6! 23 .l:.d I 'l'xb2 (23 ... cxb5 is also possible, with un clear play after 24 1Vxb7 1Ve3+ 25 'it>hl .l:.d8 26 'l'c7.l:.ee8 27 .:.n ltlxe5 28 .l:.h7+ �g8 29 .:.n ltld7 30 .l:.xd7 .l:.xd7 3 1 'l'xd7 'l'f2 32 'l'd5+ �h8 33 'iVo) 24 .:.n ltlf6! (24...�g7 25 .l:.xd7 .l:.f8 26 ltle2 �c8 27 .l:.c7 'l'b3 28 .l:.al is only equal) 25 1Vf5 cxb5 and Black is better. 2b4) 22 .:.an is the critical line: 2b41) 22...�g7 23 .1:.5f2 1Vd3 24 1Vg4! (24 .l:.f7 .l:.xf7 25 .:.Xf7 ltlf8 is less dangerous) and now: 2b41 1 ) 24....1:.d8 25 1Vh4 .l:.ee8 26 �f7 .l:.f8 27 ltle2, heading for g6, leaves White better. 2b412) 24 ... .:.Xe6 25 1Vxe6 1Vxd4 26 1Ve7 ltlc5 (26...�xe5 27 .l:.d I and 26 . ..�f8 27 'iVn ltlc5 28 ltle2 1Ve3 29ltlf4 �g7 30 �hi are winning for White) 27 e6 .l:.f8 28 ltle2 (again the ltle2-f4-g6 manoeuvre looks good) 28 ...1Ve3 29 ltlf4 .l:.g8 30 �hi with a clear advantage for White. 2b42) 22 ... .1:.xe6 23 .l:.f7 �g7 (if 23 ...1Vd3, then 24 .l:.xd7 is promising for White) 24 1Vg4 (24 .1:.xd7 .l:.xe5 is fine for Black) 24 ....1:.g8 25 1Vxe6 (25 .1:.7f2? �xeS 26 1Vxg8+ �xg8

228


I a) 23 ... 1Vg4 24 'Wf2 (24 "l'xg4 �xg4 25 l:txb7 is unclear, while 24 exf6 'l'xd4+ 25 �h1 axb5 26 l:tf1 �g8 27 l:txb7 l:txf6 definitely fa vours Black) 24 ...cxb5 (24 ... c5 25 d5 .bd5 26 �xd5 �xd5 27 l:txf8+ l:txf8 28 1Vxf8+ �h7 29 .1:!.fl 1Vg8 30 'l'xc5 'l'd8 3 1 bxa6 l:txa6 32 'l'xc4 is good for White) 25 l:txb7 b4 26 exf6 bxc3 27 bxc3 with an edge for White. 1b) 23 ... ..ie7 24 .l:!.xe7 l:txe7 25 bxc6 �g4 26 cxb7 l:txb7 27 �h1 l:tab8 28 h3 �xeS 29 dxe5 'i'xe5 30 l:txa6 l:tb6 3 1 l:txb6 .l:!.xb6 should be a draw. 2) 2 1 l:tf5 ! (D) and now:

2a) 2 1 ...1Vg7 leads to a further branch: 2a 1) 22 .l:!.afl �c5 23 dxc5 l:txe6 24 1Ve3 ..ie7 25 �e4 l:tf8 ! and now Black can defend: 2a1 1) 26 �d6 .:txf5 27 l:txf5 ..ixd6 28 cxd6 ..ic8 29 'i'f3 and Black is holding on after 29 ...�g8

30 'i'xc6 ..id7 or 29...l:te8 30 :t"6 'i'a7+ 3 1 �fl 'l'g7 32 'i'xc6..id7 33 'i'O bxa4 34 "iff4 c3!. 2a12) 26 'i'd4 l1d8! 27ll'ld6 i.xd6 28 cxd6 l:texd6 29 l:tf8+ .l:!.xf8 30 l:txf8+ 'i'xf8 3 1 exd6+ �g8 and White has to be satisfied with adraw. 2a2) 22 ..ixd7! l:txd7 23 l:tafl and now: 2a2 1 ) 23 ... c5 24 d5 b4 25 e6 :C7 (25 ...l:tdd8 26 �e2 is also good fer White) 26 �e2 l:td8 27 1Vxc4 with a clear plus for White. 2a22) 23 .....ib4 forces White Ill play accurately: 2a22 1 ) 24 'i'e3? .l:!.f8 ! 25 � l:txf5 26 l:txf5 ..ie7! (26...c5 27 "lf4 cxd4 28 e6 is satisfactory foc White) and White is slruggling foc compen sation. 2a222) 24 l:th5 ! creates greater problems: 2a222 1) 24 .....ie7 loses to 25 lll7 1Vxf7 26 l:txh6+ �g8 27 e6 'i'g7 28 l:tg6. 2a2222) 24.. .�g8 25 :C6 c5 26 1Vf5 l:tf7 27 1Ve6 .i.c8 28 'i'e8+ :18 (28 ... 1Vf8 29 l:tg6+ l:tg7 30 lhg7+ �xg7 3 1 'i'c6 and White wins) 29 'i'c6 l:txf6 30 exf6 .i.b7 31 'l'e6+ 1Vf7 32 'i'g4+ �h7 33 0.e4 is again winning for White. 2a2223) 24 ... l:tf8 25 11f6 l:txf6 26 exf6 1Wf8 27 g4 and White has a clear advantage. 2a2224) 24 ... c5 25 'i'h4 �g8 (or 25...l:txd4 26 l:txh6+ �g8 27 'lh5 l:td2 28 l:th8+ 1Wxh8 29 'i'f7t) 26


230

27 l:l.xd2 .i.g7 gives Black a clear advantage) 25 ... 'ilfxd4+ 26 Wh l ltJc5 27 'ife7 ! 'ife3! (Black's best try, the point being to have ... 'ilfel + available and prevent ltJe2-f4; the alternatives 27 ... .i.c8 28 l:l.xg7 l:l.xg7 29 l:l.f8+ Wh7 30 'ilfe8, 27 ... b4 28 l:l.xg7 l:l.xg7 29 l:l.f8+ �h7 30 'ife8 and 27 ...'ilfxe5 28 l:l.xg7 'ilfxg7 29 'ilfxc5 offer B lack little hope) 28 lM 1 'ifd4 (after 28 ...'lWxe5 29 .l:txg7 'Wxg7 30 'ifxc5 White is better due to Black's exposed king) and now: 2b42 1 ) 29 e6 .i.c8 30 l:l.xg7 (30 l:l.7f4 liJe4 3 1 1fh4 1fd3 32 e7 liJg5 is also unclear) 30... l:l.xg7 3 1 1ff8+ �h7 32 1fxc8 1fe4! and Black has counterplay. 2b422) 29 h3 ! 'lWxe5 30 l:l.xg7 'ilxg7 3 1 'lWxc5 'lWxg3 32 liJe3 and although White has lost the g3-pawn, his king is still safer and Black can not equalize; for example, 32...'i'g7 (or 32 ... .i.c8 33 l:l.f6) 33 'i'd6 .i.c8 (33 ...c5 34 ltJg4 .i.e4 35 l:l.f6 also fa vours White) 34 l:l.f6 �h7 35 'i'f4 ! and White is clearly better. Thus 17 'i'c2 would have been good for White, but there is no rea son to criticize the text-move.

17

l:l.h7

The immediate attempt to break out by 17 ... c5 (D) is also inadequate: 1) 18 liJd6 was discussed in the post-mortem, but in fact Black can defend here: Ia) 18 ... cxd4 19 l:l.f7 ! (19 ltJxb7 ltJxe5 20 'i'xd4 .i.g7 21 'iVe4 ltJxg4

w

22 'i'xg4 'i'xb7 23 'i'xe6+ Wh7 24 l:l.f7 'i'c8 is equal) 19...'i'xf7 20 /fut7 �xf7 2 1 .i.f3! .i.d5 22 hd5 exd5 23 'i'f3+ � (23...�e7 24 'i'xd5) 24 lUI and White's attack is too strong. lb) 1 8 ... .i.d5 19 .i.f3! and now: I bl ) 1 9...cxd4 20 .i.xd5 exd5 21 'i'g4+ .i.g7 22 l:l.f7 'i'xe5 23 'l'xd7 .i.f6 (23 ... d3 24 l:l.e7 'iVd4+ 25 �hi d2 26 l:l.dl and White wins) 2A :XC6 'i'xf6 25 l:l.fl l:l.h7! (25 ...'1'g6 26 ltJc8! is decisive) 26 1fxh7+ �xh7 27 l:l.xf6 d3 28 �f2 should win foc White. lb2) 19 ... .i.g7 20 lLif5 'i'e8 21 .i.h5 'i'd8 22 ltJxg7 �xg7 23 :t7+ �g8 24 h4 l:l.h7 25 'iVg4+ 'iPhB 26 l:l.xh7+ �xh7 27 'i'g6+ Wh8 28 'iVxh6+ �g8 29 .i.f7+! Wxf7 30 l:l.fl+ �g8 31 'i'g6+ Wh8 32 .llf7 is again a win for White. lb3) 19 ...l:l.h7 ! 20 .i.xd5 (after 20 dxc5 .i.xf3 2 1 'i'xf3 l:lb8 Black defends) 20 ... exd5 21 'l'g4+ .llg7! (not 2 l ...�h8 22 'ifg6 l:lg7 23 li:Jf7+ �g8 24 ltJxh6+ �h8 25 'l'c6 and

231

KRAMNIK - ANAND, BEWRADE 1997 White is better) 22 'l'h3 :h7 and White seems to have nothing better than to repeat moves. 2) 18 :C6 ! .i.d5 (the only move as White can't be allowed to take on e6) 19 l:l.g6+ �h7 (19 ...Wf7 1oses to 20 .ih5, while 19 ....i.g7 20 lt:lf6+ is very good for White) 20 'llt'b l (20 lc2 cxd4 !) 20 ... q..xg6 21 lLlf6+ �g7 22 .ih5 'I'xf6 23 exf6+ q..xf6 24 lg6+ q..e7 25 axb5 ! when White should stand better.

18 lLld6

l:tb8 (D)

surprise faded, I realized that unless Black takes drastic action he is go ing to be squashed. Incidentally, it is difficult to imagine that this pawn move is going to be the cause of White's defeat! White should have continued 19 axb5! cxb5 20 lLlxb7 J:l.xb7 2 1 J:l.xa6 l:tb6 22 l:txb6 lt:lxb6 23 J:l.f6, win ning the e6-pawn, after which it's curtains for Black. Ward-Grabliaus kas, Copenhagen 1998 tested this assessment and White duly won.

19

.••

hS!

If White is allowed to play .i.h5, Black would hardly have a move left.

20 .i.h3

20 W h4 21 g4 .i.h6 and 20 ..i.xh5 11fg5, followed by ....i.xd6, are fine for Black. .i.h6! 20 ...

Vladimir now sank into thought for a long time, apparently trying to decide which of several promising continuations to go for. As it turned out, he spent a long time on many lines. and didn't find anything con vincing. Then he saw a move that discourages Black's 'only' resource (...c5) and decided to go for it.

19 b4?

What on earth is this move ? I hadn't even considered it. After the

21 ..ti>h1 .i.gS Taking some vital squares from White's fl -rook. He can't play :C4 or l:tf6 any more, so eventually Black will be able to play . . . lLlf8. What a

relief it was to get one bishop out! Now, if only the other one could es cape... 22 11fc2 Here I saw that he wanted to 'tri angulate' his queen to e4. I then saw a variation which led to White playing 26 lLlxg5. I didn't see a defence to this and was about to play 22 ... lt:lf8 when a crazy idea occurred to me was it actually possible to allow his


232

knight to take one of my pieces on g5 and then ignore it? I spent some time checking the idea and con vinced myself that it worked. After 22 .lb3 c5! 23 dxc5 (the al ternatives 23 li:lxb7 cxb4 and 23 bxc5 �d5 are also good for Black) 23.. .�d5 24 axb5 axb5 25 �f5 :g7 ! 26 :a7 :t8 the extra piece should tell eventually.

22

••.

:g7

We both played the next few moves quickly. 22 ...li:lf8 is also pos sible, but I wanted to keep f8 free for a rook swap with ... :f8. �a8! 23 "ire2 Not 23 ... :h7? 24 1re4!, when White is better.

24 "irxbS 25 lDe4

lU8

Or 25 axb5 cxb5! and Black con solidates with ... �d5. 25 cSI 26 li:lxgS (D)

After 26...:xg5? 27 �xe6+ Wg7 28 1Fh4 I couldn't find a way out during the game and afterWards I confirmed that Wbite is winning; e.g., 28 ...cxd4 29 �xd7 :Xfl+ 30 :xn :xe5 3 1 1rxd4. After the text-move, the bishop fi nally gets out Unbelievably, Black is already better. Vladimir was shott of time and now missed his last chance.

27 ffi?

27l:xfl!+?! li:lxf8 28 Le6+ � is also excellent for Black, so White should have tried 27 �xe6+! .be6 28 Jhfl!+ fuf8 29li»4 l:l.h7 30 .dl (30 'i1Ve2 cxd4 is similar) 30...l:l.xh2+! 31 �xh2 "irh7+ 32 Wgl 'l"xi4. Black has a clear advantage but White is not quite dead. 27 ... cxb4 Capturing the pawn which ad vanced so audaciously on move 19. White is already lost - the bishop on h3 is dead and the passed pawns on the queenside will decide the issue.

28 axbS 29 �h4

axbS 'l'gS

In his hurry, Vladimir had over looked this and now it's over. 0..t8 30 Jbf8+ l:l.f7 31 'l'e8 Stopping :n. "irg6! 32 ffi Not 32 ... '1'e3? 33 ,i.g4!.

26

�dS!!

33 'l'xbS 34 lU1 35 ��·

b3 "ird3

1We3+


232

knight to take one of my pieces on g5 and then ignore it? I spent some time checking the idea and con vinced myself that it worked. After 22 .lb3 c5! 23 dxc5 (the al ternatives 23 li:lxb7 cxb4 and 23 bxc5 �d5 are also good for Black) 23.. .�d5 24 axb5 axb5 25 �f5 :g7 ! 26 :a7 :t8 the extra piece should tell eventually.

22

••.

:g7

We both played the next few moves quickly. 22 ...li:lf8 is also pos sible, but I wanted to keep f8 free for a rook swap with ... :f8. �a8! 23 "ire2 Not 23 ... :h7? 24 1re4!, when White is better.

24 "irxbS 25 lDe4

lU8

Or 25 axb5 cxb5! and Black con solidates with ... �d5. 25 cSI 26 li:lxgS (D)

After 26...:xg5? 27 �xe6+ Wg7 28 1Fh4 I couldn't find a way out during the game and afterWards I confirmed that Wbite is winning; e.g., 28 ...cxd4 29 �xd7 :Xfl+ 30 :xn :xe5 3 1 1rxd4. After the text-move, the bishop fi nally gets out Unbelievably, Black is already better. Vladimir was shott of time and now missed his last chance.

27 ffi?

27l:xfl!+?! li:lxf8 28 Le6+ � is also excellent for Black, so White should have tried 27 �xe6+! .be6 28 Jhfl!+ fuf8 29li»4 l:l.h7 30 .dl (30 'i1Ve2 cxd4 is similar) 30...l:l.xh2+! 31 �xh2 "irh7+ 32 Wgl 'l"xi4. Black has a clear advantage but White is not quite dead. 27 ... cxb4 Capturing the pawn which ad vanced so audaciously on move 19. White is already lost - the bishop on h3 is dead and the passed pawns on the queenside will decide the issue.

28 axbS 29 �h4

axbS 'l'gS

In his hurry, Vladimir had over looked this and now it's over. 0..t8 30 Jbf8+ l:l.f7 31 'l'e8 Stopping :n. "irg6! 32 ffi Not 32 ... '1'e3? 33 ,i.g4!.

26

�dS!!

33 'l'xbS 34 lU1 35 ��·

b3 "ird3

1We3+

KRAMNIK

-

ANAND, BELGRADE 1997

36 �bl (D)

211

37 ..i.xe6!? I thanked my intuition for choos ing 36...c3 over 36...l:.b7 and contin ued...

37 38 d5 39 gxf3

..i.xe6 J:.xf3

An unusual situation with seven passed pawns on the board. 39 1lxf3 c2 40 11'fl 11'xf3 41 gxf3 b2 is also winning for Black.

39 40 1Wc4 •••

36 .•. c3 I considered playing 36 ... l:.b7??, but smelt a rat and decided to stick with 36...c3. In fact 36 .. 11b7?? loses to37 ..txe6+!.

Either pawn move wins, but why go for something pretty on move 40?

�b7 41 11Vg4+ 42 e6 lQg6 0-1

This game had the same effect on me as the win against Lautier at Biel (Game 41 ), but this time the euphoria affected me positively. I finished joint fust with Ivanchuk at Belgrade, and went on to the FIDE World Champion ship at Groningen in a really good mood. There hadn't been a FIDE World Championship for a while, and I regarded this tournament as an important event I was highly motivated for it and I spent the whole ofOctober training. During this time I worked intensively on the Semi-Slav, so my choice of opening in the above game wasn't based en tirely on ignorance. After the Belgrade event (in which the previous game was played) there was onJy a two-week gap before the World Championship,

not enough for any additional preparation, and I spent this time resting. Earlier in the year, at Linares, I had lost to Nikolic in a game in which I equalized with Black straight out of the opening. I could have forced a draw immediately,but I became too ambitious and unjustifiably tried to stir up complications. The resulting ending proved worse for me and Nikolicplayed win. to convert his advanta ge into a win. lbis time I deciced to be moreca

ful.

Game 43

P. N ikolic

-

V. Anand

FIDE World Championship, Groningen 1 997 Semi-Slav 1 d4 2 c:4

3 �c3 4 �3 5 i.g5

d5 c6 �6 e6 h6

B

The so-called Moscow Variation, which makes a change from the enor mous complexities of the Botvinnik System (5 ...dxc4).

6 i.xf6

White's traditional reply, gaining time at the cost of conceding the two bishops. These days there is more interest in the pawn sacrifice 6 .th4 (see Game 42, Kramnik-Anand).

6

7

8 9

10 11

'ifxf6

e3 i.d3 .bc4 0-0 b4

12 :tel

13 'it'b3 (D)

�d7

dxc4 g6 i.g7 0-0 'it'e7

Up to this point, it had all been played many times before. White controls more space and has a lead in development, but Black's posi tion is solid and in the long term the two bishops might pose a danger to White. �b6 13

A slightly unusual move. 13 . b6 has been played most often, with pretty good results, while 13 . :ds is another option. ..

. .

14 i.d3

14 �e4 ! ? is an interesting idea. After 14 ...�xc4 (14... li)d5 15 b5) 15 'it'xc4 Black has two bishops against two knights, but he cannot easily free himself; e.g., 15 ...b6 16 "Wxc6 i.b7 fails to 17 'it'd6!.

14 15 � 16 a3

l:l.d8 �

After 1 6 b5 i.d7 Black is able 10 complete his development. 16 i.d7

17 lL!c5

NJKOUt - ANAND, FIDE WORLD CH., GRONINGEN 1997 235

White usually concentrates on re straining Black and only later goes for his own plan (for example, e4e5). A typical continuation is 17 1:lc2 ie8 18 llb1 , fortifying the queen side pawns. After 1 8 ... J:Idb8 19 lt:\ed2 Oonov-Andreev, St Petersburg 1998), for example Black has a solid but passive position. ,

17

..ie8

For the moment Black must be

content with quiet play.

18 ..ib1?! This slip allows Black to take over

the initiative on the queenside. 1 8

JUdi was better, intending ..ifl.

18 19 lt:\d3 ..•

b6 aS! (D)

1t becomes clear that the bishop is

well placed on b1 . Not only is it blocked in by the d3-knight, which has to stay in place to defend b4, but it also obstructs the first rank, and so prevents White from meeting ... ..if8 by :bl . not

20 :C4

White finds another way to de fend his b4-pawn, but it is clear that the rook is clumsily placed on c4.

20 21 axb4 •••

axb4 1:ldb8!

Black makes use ofthe opposition of queen and rook to threaten 22...c5. 22 e4 22 llfc1 is met by 22...c5!, and now: I) 23 dxc5 ..ia4 and Black wins the exchange. 2) 23 bxc5 bxc5 24 'ird1 cxd4 25 lt:\xd4 (Black has the two bishops and White's pieces are awkwardly placed, but Black needs to be very accurate all the pawns are on one side and if White can regroup then it's just a draw) 25 ... e5! and Black keeps the initiative: 2a) 26 lt:\c6 ..ixc6 27 J:lxc6 e4 28 lt:\el (28 lt:\f4 lt:\xf4 29 exf4 e3 30 fxe3 'irxe3+ 31 �h i 'ifxf4 gives Black a safe extra pawn) 28 ...J:Id8 29 'ife2 (29 'ifg4 lt:\c3! 30 J:I6xc3 ..ixc3 31 'ifxe4 'iff6 is good for Black) 29 ... 'ifa3 is awkward for White. 2b) 26 lt:\e2 lidS (26... ..ib5 27 J:lc5 'ire6 28 e4 is OK for White) 27 e4 lt:\f4 28 lt:\exf4 exf4 and the two bishops give Black an edge. 3) 23 e4! ..ia4 (23 ...lt:\c7?24 bxc5 bxc5 25 'ird I favours White) 24 'ifb2 .ib5 25 exd5 .ixc4 26 J:lxc4 exd5 27 J:lcl 'ird6 28 lt:\de5 c4 29 ..ic2 b5. Black will play ... iH8 and then dou ble on the a-file, so I would say that -

236


it's slightly better for Black, but not more.

22

•••

0Jc7

The knight is heading to b5, to step up the pressure against d4.

23 Mel 24 0JdeS

0Jb5 ltd8

25 0Jxc6? White decides to liquidate, but this decision was mistaken since in the ensuing position Black's bishop is far more active than White's. 25 'ifb2! was correct, keeping an eye on b4 and d4. Then the position would be roughly equal.

25 26 l:.xc6 •••

.i.xc6 l:.aJ! (D)

Black makes use of a tactical point to activate his rook with gain of tempo. The alternative 26...l0xd4 27 l0xd4 .i.xd4 gives Black a smaller advantage.

27 'ifc4 27 'ifb2? loses immediately to 27 ... l:.xf3 28 gxf3 0Jxd4, while 27

'ifdJ 0Jxd4 28 l0Jtd4 :Xd4 White the b4-pawn.

27 28 0Jxd4 •••

COSIS

liJxd4 l:txd4

White is in trouble. His bishop is badly placed on b l , where it serves no other function than to look at the e4-pawn. By contrast, Black's bishop is active and will take part in the at tack against White's two main weak spots: b4 and f2.

29 :ell+ 30 'ifc6 (D)

�b7

30

:d2!

After 3 0 'ifc7 'ilxc7 (stronger than 30...'ilf6 3 1 'ifxb6 or 30.. .:117 31 'ilxb6 .i.d4 32 'ifb8 11'f6 33 ll8c2) 31 l:.8xc7 .:.Xb4 32 e5 �g8 Black sim ply plays his bishop to c5, with a large advantage.

•••

Black is not interested in captur· ing the b4-pawn, which would give White time to mount a counterattack against f7, but goes for bigger game: the f2-pawn and White's king.

NIKOUC - ANAND, FIDE WORLD CH., GRONINGEN 1997 237

31 l:tc7

"i'd8

White's weak back rank costs him

tempo. 32 g3 There is no good way to counter the back-rank threat. The text-move alows Black's other rook to join the attack, but 32 l:tfl loses to

a

32. .l:Xf2! when both 33 'iii>xf2 ld4+ 34 \ii>e l l:te3+ and 33 l:txf2 ldl+ 34 l:tfl �d4+ 35 �hl 1Wxfl# lead to mate. 32 h3 l:tdl + 33 �h2 1e5+ is also hopeless for White.

32

.••

l:tf3

Defending f7 and attacking f2. 33 l:tf1 (D)

33 l:tdxf2 Black has a choice of wins; for ex

ample, 33 ... 1Wd4 34 ...c4 l:tfxf2 ! leads to a quick mate.

B

34

l:txf2

Now Black forces mate in seven.

34

1Vdl+ l:txf2+ �d4+

35 �gl 36 �2

0-1 In view of 37 'iL'g2 1We2+ 38 �h3 'iffl + 39 �g4 h5+ 40 �h4 �f6#.

It was an indication of my good form at the time that despite a rather drawish position, I was able to concentrate on exploiting my advantages and gained a surprisingly easy win as a reward. The FIDE World Championship was my first knockout event for quite a

while. Sometimes the nervous tension of this type of event can affect the players, and indeed a number of top seeds fell by the wayside at a relatively early stage. Fortunately, I managed to avoid this fate - perhaps I had learned some lessons from Tilburg 1992, where I had been eliminated by Tiviakov early on. In a knockout event, it is important to be aware that the odds are against any particular player winning, so you should not have expectations that are too high. You just have to play each match as it comes, and do your best to maintain your concentration. At Groningen I managed to achieve this, at least in the first half. Some players seem better suited to the tensions of the knockout format than others, and I would single out Khalifman and Adams as being in this category. 11le following game was my best achievement at Groningen, and from it You can see that I was still in peak form.

Game 44

V. Anand - A. Shirov FIDE World Championship, Groningen 1997 Ruy Lopez, M0ller 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

e4

eS

lff3 .i.b5 .i.a4 0-0 .i.b3 a4

lbc6 a6 lff6 b5 .i.c5 .:tb8 d6 .i.b6 0-0 axb5 .i.g4

c3 d4 lba3 axb5 lbxb5

For the alternative 12 ... exd4, see Game 49 (Anand-011). 13 .b3 Later, it became clear that Black's previous move is an inaccuracy that can best be exploited by 1 3 l:z.el !.

13 14 cxd4 (DJ 14

exd4 'l'e8

Here, too, theory has advanced since this game was played. The im provement 14 ...lbxe4 ! was played in Nijboer-Piket, Wijk aan Zee 1 998. This is based on the tactical point 1 5 .i.d5 'l'e8 16 'l'c2 (Nijboer-Piket continued 16 h3 .i.f5 17 l:z.el lbb4 18 .i.c4 c6 19 lba3 and although White went on to win the game, here Black is more comfortable) 16 ....i.xf3 17

.i.xc6 (17 gxf3 lbb4 18 'l'xe4 ._xb5 favours Black) 17 ... '1'e6and now 18 gxf3 fails to 1 8...'l'g6+.

15 h3! 15 lbc3 lbxe4 16 h3 .i.xf3 17 'l'xf3 lbxd4 18 .i.xd4 li:ld2 19 'lf4 lbxb3 and White has nothing better than to force a draw by 20 .i.xg7.

15

•••

.i.d7

There is nothing better. 15 ... ih5 16 .i.a4 "ifxe4 17 lbc3 .i.xf3 18 cfue4 .i.xd I 19 lbxf6+ gxf6 20 bc6 fa vours White owing to Black's weak pawns and the inactive b6-bishop.lf instead 1 5 ....i.xf3?! 16 'lWxf3 lZlxe4. then 17 .i.d5 lbe7 18 lbxc7 .i.xc7 19 .i.xe4 l:Z.xb2 20 .i.g5 and Black's po sition looks quite unpleasant.

ANAND

-

SHIROV, FIDE WORLD CH., GRONINGEN 1997 239

16 llk3 Black must act now or remain a pawn down. lbxe4 16 .••

17 :e1

lbxc3

!7 .. .i.f5 loses material to 1 8 i.a4, while after 17 ...lba5 1 8 i.c2 lbxc3 19 bxc3 'i'c8 White plays 20 c4! in any case, since Black cannot take on c4. 18 bxc3 (D)

Black has regained the sacrificed

pawn, but he cannot equalize. White

controls more space and Black has problems with the b6-bishop, which is exposed to attack by c4-c5. Whilst the poorly placed bishop might ap pear relatively insignificant, it turns out to be a crucial factor in the game. 'i'c8 18 ...

19 c4!

i.t'S

Activating the bishop and avoid ing the tactical point mentioned in the next note.

20 :e2

Thanks to Black's ... i.f5, White cannot hunt the bishop down by 20 cS i.a5 21 d5 since after 2 l . ..i.xel 22 dxc6 there is no en prise bishop on d7. After the text-move, however, this is a genuine threat. 20 .•• llJaS Black takes drastic action to res cue the b6-bishop, but the result is two misplaced minor pieces. h would probably have been better to play 20... :d8 21 i.a4 lbb4 (2l ...lba5 22 :c I is slightly better for White) 22 i.g5 (22 .:a3, followed by doubling on thee-file, is a safe route to a slight advantage) 22...f6 23 i.d2 c5 and now: I ) 24 :a3 is an interesting idea which leads to some nice variations, but it falls short: I a) 24... i.d3 25 .:e7 hc4 (not 25 .. .'�ffi? 26 hb4 and now 26... cxb4 27 'i'xd3 �xe7 28 'i'xh7 wins for White, while 26...hc4 27 :ae3 cxb4 28 'i'bl ! gives White a dangerous at tack) 26 i.xb4 cxb4 27 b3 'i'a6 (27 ...:b7 loses to 28 :e8+ �7 29 lbe5+ fxeS 30 'i'f3+) 28 liJh4 is good for White. 1 b) 24 ...d5! looks fine for Black. 2) 24 i.xb4 cxb4 25 :b2 is a bet ter idea, with a slight advantage for White.

21 h2 22 dS! (D)

cS

Now both the b6Cbishop and the aS-knight are poorly placed. The bishop might eventually emerge via

240

VISHY ANAND: MY BEST GAMES OF CHESS White has definitely prevented i.f6 and has a clear advantages.

25 -

li'lb7

The knight drops back, not so much in the hope of achieving any activity itself, but more to let the d8-bisbop out via a5.

26 'li'dl!

d8 and f6 although, as the sequel shows, achieving this is no easy task. However, the plight of the knight is more or less permanent. Even if it manages to grovel back to b7 and d8, it would still have little fu ture. King's Indian players will be only too familiar with the problems posed by an offside knight on a5 ! 22 ... i.d8

23 i.d2

Preventing ... i.f6 and thus giving White time to switch his bishop to c3.

23

•••

24 'li'a4

27 i.b2

.i.b4? (D)

Black should hunker down wilb 27 ...l:l.ae8, although after 28 .ib3 followed by i.a4 his position is un enviable.

11'a6

White cannot play the immediate 24 i.c3 due to 24...lt:lxc4 25 i.bJ (25 i.bl 'i'xal !) 25 ... 'i'b5, but the queen move pins the dB-bishop down for another move. 24 ... :as Not 24 ... i.d3 25 l:l.e3 i.xc4? 26 i.xc4 'ifxc4 27 i.xa5 l:l.b l + 28 i.el and White wins a piece.

25 .i.cJ

White keeps queens on, as the lack of enemy pieces on the kingside wiD give White good attacking chances there. .taS?! 26 The bishop emerges, but it has no effective role on the a5-el diagonal. 26 ...11b6 was a better chance; al though White retains a clear advan tage, at least the dB-bishop controls g5 and h4.

lS �4!

ANAND - SHIROV, FIDE WORLD CH., GRONINGEN 1997 241 Now White's advantage reaches decisive proportions.

28

�g6

The alternatives also lose: 28 ...J..d7 29 l:le7 ! wins material, as 29 ....:.ad8 fails to 30 �bl 'lWb6 31 �xh7+ �xh7

32 "lb5+ �g8 33 .!i::lg6 and mate next move,while 28 ... J..c8 29 'ird3 ! givesWhite a ferocious kingside at

tack

29 C4 (D)

.!i::lh5 to come, leaves Black with no defence.

30 31 rs •••

l:ba4

:CaS

3 L.i.h5 32 g4 wins for White.

32 :e7! Not 32 fxg6? hxg6 33 .!i::lf3 (after 33 J::l.e7 J::l.xa2 White no longer has a back-rank mate - this is why he must delay capturing on g6), which pre vents 33 ... .:.Xa2 owing to 34 .:.Xa2 J::l.xa2 35 J::l.e8+ �h7 36 .!i::lg5+ followed by mate, but after 33 ... f6! White is suddenly unable to save the a2-bishop. 32 ... .i.b5 (D) 1be only chance, as after 32....!i::las 33 fxg6 White wins a piece in per fect safety.

To save the bishop, Black will have to weaken his kingside. 29 ... 'ira4

After 29 .. .f6 30 .!i::lxg6 hxg6 3 1 'l'd3 'i>f7 32 �bl White wins at once.

30 'irxa4?!

There is nothing seriously wrong with this move, because White stili liquidates to a winning ending. How ever, he could have decided matters by a direct attack: 30 �b3 ! 'ird7 3 1 :as l:lxa8 3 2 f5 ! ..txf5 33 i.a4! :xa4 34 .!i::lxf5 l:la8 35 .!i::lxg7, with

33 g4! Just as before, White must not grab material too soon. 33 :xb7? f6 leaves White with the familiar prob lem regarding his a2-bishop.

33

f6


242

Black's reply is again forced, since otherwise he drops a piece.

34 gxh5

w

Now, however, this liquidation leads to a forced win.

34

35 bl

:Xa2 bl (D)

w With the time-control passed, I took time to get up from the board and relax, just as the old Soviet trainers used to advise. This turned out to be time well spent, because it enabled to me to find an accurate move and avoid a potential pitfall in the position.

36 h6!

41 l:l.h8!

White's b2-bishop is doomed, but before it finally dies, it helps seal Black's fate.

36

.•.

:Xbl

36 ... gxh6 37 .i..xf6 ll:ld8 38 ll:lg6! leads to a quick mate.

37 :Xg7+ 38 :Xb7

�h8

Not only is Black a pawn down, but his king is also in terrible trou ble.

38 39 l1d7 40 l1d8+

.i..cl �g8

It is not the d6-pawn that White wants, but the one on h7. 40 'M1 (D)

41 ll:lg6? is flashy, but would al low Black unnecessary chances after 4 I .....Ild4+ 42�hl (or 42 'it>fl llf2+, followed by ... llxf5) 42 ... llbl+ 43 �g2 llb2+ 44 �f3 l1f2+ 45 �g4 llg2+ 46 �4 J:f2+ 47 'it>e4 hxg6 48 h7 gxf5+ 49 �d3 Iif3+ 50 �d2 .:r.xh3, when matters are far from clear.

.i..d4+

41 42 � •••

Black's situation is hopeless. As soon as the checks run out, White wins by l:Z.xh7+ followed by li:lg6 (or l:Z.g7+ first, if Black meets l1xh7+ by ...�g8).

1-0

ANAND

-

SHIROV, FIDE WORW CH., GRONINGEN 1997 243

Sometimes you get topsy-turvy games which go first one way and then an

other, but here White's play creates a seamless impression from beginning to end one could almost imagine Capablanca playing a game like this. Had I found 30 .i. b3, then I think it would have been a virtually flawless game. However, even this inaccuracy is not a serious defect because White was also winning after the game continuation, although it required a second bout of accurate play to wrap up the full point. -

After the Shirov match, tiredness started to set in. Against Gelfand, I was still playing well, but against Adams you could see that exhaustion was af fecting both players. Then we come 1D the match against Karpov in the final. The following game was played when I was 3-2 down, with one game still to play. I can't say that it is a particularly good game, but it shows something of my character that I was still able to pull off a win. At one time I probably couldn't have achieved this, but over the years I have become tougher, espe cially in critical situations. The difference between a good performance and an extra-special one is often not to be found in the technical aspects of the

game, but in sporting characteristics such as will-power and resilience under pressure.

Game 45

V. Anand - A. Karpov FIDE World Championship Final (6), Lausanne 1 998 Trom powsky I needed to win this game to stay in the match. What should I do? I re called my previous match against Karpov at Brussels 1991. Trailing by one point after four games, I played calm chess and still got winning po sitions in both the fifth and sixth games. I also derived some hope from the 24th game between Kasp arov and Karpov in Seville 1987 when Karpov was in the same situa tion. Kasparov avoided a theoretical battle and got no advantage. Karpov, however, was too eager to draw and soon got himself into hot water. With these thoughts in mind, I de cided to play

1 d4 2 �gS

li)f6

the Trompowsky! I couldn't really bring myself to play some thing like Kasparov's Reti, so this seemed a good compromise. On the one hand, it offers interesting posi tions. Since the theory consists mostly of Hodgson games, there are no long forced lines leading to draws (yet!), but lots of fascinating and creative chess. Perfect, I thought, for this critical game.

2

3 e4 4 .bf6

s li)c3 6 'ilt'dl

e6 h6 'l'xf6 d6

gS

Black wants to prevent White from expanding with f4. Since Black is going to castle queenside, the weak ening of the kingside pawn-structure is not especially serious.

7 �c4!? My team was looking for some thing off the beaten track, but with some venom. Eventually �supov came up with this idea. White is g� ing to castle kingside, as opposed to the normal queenside castling in this variation. The g 1 -knight should go to e2 (on f3, it would be harassed by .. g4) and so the idea arose to de velop the bishop first. The knight also has ideas like li)ge2-g3-h5. .

7 8 li)ge2 9 :d1 10 0-0

ll)c6

�

�d7

0-0-0 (D}

10 ... 0-0 1 1 'l'e3 ( 1 1 f4 gxf4 12 :xf4 'l'g5 is slightly awkward for White) offers White chances based on f4 or li)g3-h5 .

ANAND - KARPOV, FIDE WORLD CH., LAUSANNE 1998 245

14 l:!.xf3

_.e7

Black's two bishops and possible g-file play balance the weak f-pawn. 15 cJ h5 lldf8 16 .l:ldfl

17 b4

11 lllbS! Black will ignore any queenside thrust like b4-b5 by simply playing his knight to a5, so White must first provoke weaknesses and only then prepare b4. For example, the imme diate I I b4 g4 1 2 b5 llla5 13 ..i.d3 h5 (13...�b8 is also possible) 14 liJd5 exd5 15 •xa5 �b8 ! (safer than 15 . ..dxe4 1 6 ..i.xe4) 16 exd5 ( 1 6 lllc3 'lxd4 17 ll\xd5 ..c5 gets White no where) 16 ... h4 gives Black enough compensation for the pawn. 11 ... 12 liJa3

a6

Intending to set a queenside at tack in motion by c3 and b4.

12

g4

�1 (D)

This is not a bad move, but it per haps shows an over-developed sense of danger.

18 lllc2 19 _.e1 20 ..i.d3

..i.h6 �b8 ..i.c6!

Black has played this phase well; his two bishops and the open g-file give him counterplay.

21 lllr4

J:fg8

After 21 ... e5 White can bravely take the pawn with 22 lllxh5 !.

Subsequently, I found some games 22 d5 where Black went for .. .f5 immedi Now 22 lllxh5 f5 ! gives Black too ately. Indeed, 12 .....g6 13 f3 f5 ap pbmch play. pears more effective than the ..i.e8 (D) 22 Karpov chose. After 22 ... ..i.xf4 23 dxc6! (23 .lbf4 13 r4 exd5 24 l:!.xf7 _.g5 is excellent for 13 b4?! ..g5! is fine for Black. 13 Black) 23 ... ..i.xh2+ (23 ...e5 24 cxb7 gxr3 •••

246


breaks open the defences to Black's king) 24 �h2 ll:\xc6 25 llh3 (not 25 l:lxn 'ifg5! 26 'ife2 lL\e5 T7 ll7f3 ll:lxf3+ 28 llxf3 1We5+ 29 �hl h4, which is slightly better for Black) 25 ...ll:\e5 26 i.e2 "flg5 27 ll:le3 h4 (after 27 ... ll:\g4+ 28 i.xg4 hxg4 29 llxh8 llxh8+ 30 �gl White keeps a slight edge) 28 "flf2 White can slowly consolidate.

27 b5 and 26 ....td7 27 b5 axb5 28 cxb5 ll:lxb5 29 'iVb4 are also promis ing for White) 27 b5 and White's at tack develops quite fast. 2b) 24 ... .txf4! 25 :txf4 fxe4! (25 ...1Wh7 forces 26 h4, but I can't see a follow-up for Black) 26 .be4 (after 26 11fxe4 i.g6 Black wins a piece) 26 ... exd5 27 i.f5 (27 .bd5 'irh7 28 h3 'Mhc2 29 hg8 Jhg8 30 lllf2 'irg6 3 1 .l:l.f8 lL!c8 and Black consolidates) 27 .. .'1/g7 28 .l:l.g4 i'h6 looks fine for Black. 23 ... .tgr Or 23 ...h4 24 ll:\d4 bf4! (after 24 ... i.d7, 25 ll:\h5 favours White as his knight is heading for f6) 25lW4 and White has a slight advantage af ter 25 ... ll:\c8 26 c4 oc 25... l:g7 26 'iff3 llhg8 27 llf2.

24 ll:\d4 (D)

23 'iff2 If White grabs the pawn by 23 ll:\xh5 Black can choose between: l ) 23 ...'irg5 gives Black enough compensation in the case of 24 ll:\g3 i.g7, but 24 lLif4 is better, since the knight is well-placed on f4. Then 24 ... e5 doesn't work due to 25 .l:l.g3, so White should have the advantage. 2) 23 .. .f5 !? 24 lL\f4 and now: 2a) 24 ...e5 25 ll:\e6 f4 26 c4! (White is perfectly willing to give up the exchange on f3; his knight on e6 would be secure and he could play on the queenside) 26 ... 'ifh7 (26... i.h5

.td7 24 The first slight slip. Black should not have missed the oppoltunity to swap the a7-knight by 24... 1i:\b5.

ANAND - KARPOV, FIDE WORW CH., LA USANNE 1998 Then 25 dxe6 li:lxd4 26 cxd4 fxe6 is

OK for Black. 25 dxe6 26 cxd4 1:1 eS

.bd4 fxe6 .i.c6

29 30 lilf7 •••

247

.i.xf'3

'l'h4

After some thought he came up with this move, which is the best practical chance, but really White only has to play carefully to rake in the point. 30....i.xg2 3I lilxd8 .i.e4+ 32 11Fg3 l:l.xg3+ 33 hxg3 .i.xd3 34 ltf8 ! wins for White. 31 11Fxf'3 Not 3 1 11Fxh4?? ltxg2+ 32 �hl ltf2+ and Black draws. 31 11Fxd4+

28 lilg6 (D)

28 l:tg3 is met by 28 ... h4.

•••

32 �h1

d5

H Black could save his h-pawn, matters could still get complicated due to my stranded f7-knight.

33 .l:l.dl! (D)

28

'l'd8??

As soon as he made this move, I saw a grimace on his face. It turned out that he hadn't seen 29 ...lilc8 in the line below and so went for the al ternative, but saw 30 lilf7 too late. He should have played 28 .. l:l.xg6 29 .bg6 (29 l:l.f8+? lilc8 ! 30 .i.xg6 l:l.xf8 31 'l'xf8 1l'g5 wins for Black) 29 . bf3 30 11Fxf3 dxe5 3 1 dxe5 11'xb4 (31...lilc6 32 11Ff6 gives White an edge) 32 11Ff6, with an unclear po

8

.

.. .

sition.

29 lilxh8 Suddenly I was back in the match. I tried my best to calm down, as I re alized that 3-3 was now a matter of technique.

The b-pawn is not important; what is crucial is to capture the h5-pawn. 34 .l:l.b1

'l'xb4 'l'a4

35 'l'xhS 36 'l'e2 37 'l'rl+

b6

33

•••

lilc6

�a7


248

Intending . . . �b4 with some slight counterplay. �b7 38 :ci! 39 h3! White has made all the necessary precautionary moves and can now go for the e6-pawn. 39 J:l.c8 40 'Wf6 lbcl4 (D)

w

.••

41 lbcl8+! I saw that 41 �6+ won as well (after 41 ...cxd6 42 'ire7+ �bS 43 :xeS+ �xeS 44 exd6 'i'c6 45 'i'f8+ �d7 46 'i'g7+ �xd6 47 'i'xd4), but Karpov has swindled far too many points from me over the years, so I looked for something less compli l:ated. �b8 41

1-0 42 �xe6 Here he resigned, since 42. . .'i'al 43 :dl is hopeless for Black. I had drawn the match! The game itself was not of the highest quality, but I was extremely proud to have pulled it off in a must-win situation.

After this game I botched the tie-break, but that is history now. I regard Groningen as a great success and in a way consider that I 'won' the tourna ment, since the conditions for the final were so unequal that I can hardly count it as part of the event. When Topalov came on to the scene (he started playing at the highest level round about 1 993), many players, myself included, found it difficult to cope with his style. His unadulterated aggression, backed up by absolutely superb preparation, proved a handful for almost everybody. The very top players meet each other across the chessboard quite frequently, so that the style of each player gradually becomes familiar and you know more or less what 1D expect. Topalov was a 'new kid on the block', with a new style which was f� a time very successful. However, the impact of his excellent preparation was obvious and it stimulated the leading players to raise the level of their owo preparation in order to combat him. I was pleased with the following game because Topalov had been a very difficult opponent for me. By winning this I came back to a level score with him. Although the excitement all takes place within the space of a few moves, it is nevertheless an attractive game.

Game 46

V. Anand - V. Topalov Wijk aan lee 1 998 Ruy Lopez, M111 1 1er 1 e4 2 �3 3 .tbS

4 .ta4 5 0-0 6 .tb3

eS ltlc6 a6 lLlf6

bS .tcS At the time of this game, Topalov and Shirov had already been playing the MBI.Ier Variation for two years and had been responsible for its growth in popularity. As with all topical lines, the theory developed rapidly. I beat Shirov in Groningen 1 997, but in the bird round at Wijk aan Zee 1998, Piket had shown an improve ment over Shirov's play. This game was played in round five, when the ball was back in White's court. I was attracted to a plan that Topalov used against Shirov at Madrid 1 997, and decided to give it a shot. 7 a4 l:l.b8

8 c3 d6 9 d4 .tb6 10 axbS The main line is 10 ltla3, but for a

shon time in 1998 the continuation 10 axb5 axb5 I I h3 held centte stage.

10 11 b3 12 l:l.e1 (D)

axbS 0-0

12

l:l.e8!?

Topalov prefers to leave the bishop on c8 and pressurize e4. The alterna tive is 12 ....tb7 1 3 ltla3 exd4 14 cxd4 ltla5 15 .tc2 b4 1 6 ltlbl c5 17 .tg5 h6 1 8 ..i.h4, and now: I ) 1 8 ... g5? 1 9 ltlxg5 hxg5 20 ..i.xg5 b3 and then: Ia) 21 ..i.d3 c4 was played in Top alov-Shirov, Madrid 1997. I feel that White should be better even here, but this is a moot point since line ' l b' looks so strong. lb) 21 .txb3 ! is very good. It is surprising that White should go after a measly pawn, but in fact it's the third rank he wants. After 2 l ...cxd4 22 l:l.a3 ! White was clearly better in


250

the game Hraeek-Shirov, Bundes liga 1997/8. 2) 1 8 ... cxd4! is an improvement. I faced this in the last round at Wijk aan Zee (against Shirov) and didn't really get any advantage. However, it's time to leave theory and go back to the game !

13 llJa3

B

b4!

The next few moves all appear forced.

14 llk4

Better than 14 dxe5 bxa3! (the al ternative 14 ...dxe5 1 5 lDc4 is slightly better for White) 15 exf6 axb2 and now White has to allow easy equal ity after 16 .ixb2 1Wxf6, because 1 6 .ixf7+ �xf7 17 Wd5+ .ie6 1 8 tt:lg5+ �g8 1 9 f7+ ( 1 9 tt:lxe6 Wxf6) fails to 19 ...�h8 ! ! 20 tt:lxe6 bxal "ii' 21 tt:lxd8 l:texd8 and Black has turned the tables.

14 15 bxc3 16 tt:lxb6

bxc3 exd4

White must eliminate this bishop because 16 cxd4? may be answered by 16 ...tt:lxd4 !.

16 17 cxd4 •••

l:txb6 tt:lxe4

Or else White has the two bishops combined with an imposing centre. Not 1 7 ...l:txe4? 1 8 J.xf7+ ! , when White is clearly better.

18 19 20 21

�xf7 .ixf7+ l:txe4 l:txe4 tt:lgS+ �g8 tt:lxe4 (D)

Black has simplified the position and even forced bishops of opposite colours. Nevertheless, he still has to be careful. His pieces is misplaced - the rook on b6 and even the knight on c6 are vulnerable in some lines. Black's king is slightly exposed, not only because it has just two defen sive pawns, but because of vague threats of l:ta8, etc. 21 ids tt:le7 22 tt:lgS! Black's first slip. 22 ... h6! is a more accurate defence,although af ter 23 Wf3 Black must continue pre cisely: 1) 23 ...tt:le7? 24 l:ta8 l:tb8 (or 24 ... .1c8 25 1if7+ �h8 26 Wxe7!) 25 Wb3+! and White wins. 2) 23...Wc8 24 Wd5+ �h8 2S tt:lf7+ �h7 26 tt:lxh6! tt:le7 (Black is lost after 26 ... gxh6 27 1Wf7+ �h8 28 l:ta3) 27 11t"a2! (more accurate than 27 Wf7 11t"e6) 27 ....ie6 28 'lc2+ tt:lg6 29 .l:la7 ! and White has a clear advantage. ...

ANAND

-

251

TOPALOV, WIJK AAN ZEE 1998

3) 23 ... 1ff6! 24 'l'd5+ � (not 24 ... �h8? 25 W'xc6!) and Black ap pears to be surviving. i.g6 23 g4! 23 ... i.d7 fails to 24 'Wf3 !. 24 &6 (D)

(not 30...�d7? 31 1We4! llJxd5 32 1Wxh7 and White is better) 31 :Xc1 � (3I...i.xd5 32 D.e1 'iltb3 33 1Wh8+ �d7 34 1fxh7 is unclear) 32 1rh8+ i.g8 33 1Wf6+ i.f7 with a draw by perpetual check. 2) 26 i.g5 llJg6 and Black can defend after 27 lLldB ll:le5, 27 i.e3 llb5 or 27 1Vd4 llJe5. 3) 26 1i'd4 he6 27 dxe6 D.bl 28 llxbl 'ii'xbl 29 'ii'f4 h6 (29 ... 'ii'g6 30 'ii'a4 gives White an edge) 30 1ff7+ �h7 3 1 'ii'xe7 1fxcl + 32 �g2 'ii'c6+ 33 �h2 1Vd5! 34 1Vd7 (34 1Vf7 c5 and the pin stops White from ad vancing his passed pawn) 34 . .'ii'e5+ and it is doubtful if White has any more than a draw. 2S dS! 24 1fc8? I don't see a defence for Black afAfter the game, we concluded that ter this. 2s ..tn 22...i0e7 was a big mistake, but in Or 25 ...c5 26 lla7! llb7 27 llxb7 fact it is only 24... 1fc8? that proves fatai.At home I found the defence 1fxb7 28 'ii'f 3! 1Vc8 (28 ... i.f7 29 24...'i'b8, trying to stop l:ta 7, and 1Vxf7+! and 28 . ..�h8 29 i.h6! are also hopeless) 29 11Vc3 and White have been unable to find anything really convincing against it. Maybe wins. White is still better, but he doesn' t 26 ll:lxg7! �xg7 seem able to prove a serious advan There isn't really much else, as tage. The analysisruns 25 d5 (25 26... i.xd5 and 26 ... ll:lxd5 both fail lf3 d5) 25 .....tf7! (the difference is to 27 ll:lf5. that Black has ...l:tb1 in many lines; 27 11Vd4+ � 25 .. c5 is bad in view of26 i.g5) and 27 ... �g8 loses to 28 i.h6, but now: 27 ...�g6 is the most tricky line. White wins after 28 11'e4+ �f6 (28 ...ll:lf5 I) 26 li:Jxg7 �xg7 27 'Wd4+ � 28 ih6+ (28 'Wh8+ lLlg8 29 i.h6+ 29 lla3! is decisive) 29 i.h6! (this �e8 30 l:te l + �d7 favours Black) was my intention during the game; 28 �e8 29 l:tel l:tb1 ! 30 i.e 1 l:txc1 at the time I thought that 29 g5+ .

••.

.

252


�g7 ?n 'ill'xe7 'ill'f5 3 1 ll:a8! 'iii'g6 might not be so easy, but later Fritz showed that this wins too after 32 ..,f8! 'ill'xh3 33 lta3! - still, this isn't the easiest line around) and now: 1) 29 ... .i.xd5 30 'i'xh7 lDf5 3 1 ll:el fuh6 3 2 f4 lDf7 3 3 g5+ lDxg5 34 ..,e7+ is a nice finish. 2) 29 ... .i.g6 30 'ill'd4+ 'J;f7 3 1 ..,g7+ �e8 3 2 .i.g5 'i'd8 3 3 lta8 wins for White. 3) 29...lDf5 30 gxf5 'i'xf5 (or 30... 'ill'g8+ 31 �h2 .i.xd5 32 ..,h4+ 'iii>xf5 33 'ill'h5+ �6 34 ltgl and White wins) 31 'ill'h4+ 'J;g6 (3 l ...�e5 32 ltd l ! .i.xd5 33 ire7+ is no im provement for Black) 32 �h2 is winning for White. 28 .i.h6+ �e8

29 llel

1-0

The position is hopeless f\>b7 l:lxcS 43 �xeS �d6 (43 ... f5 44 gxf6+ gxf6 45 b4 �d6 46 �b7 f5 47 b5 f4 4S b6 t3 49 �cS f2 50 b7 f!'f 51 bS11r+ also draws) 44 b4 �c6 45 b5+ �xb5 46 �d7 and the king and pawn ending is a draw. ...

la2) 35 �f2 !! l:lf3+ 36 �xf3 l:lxb3+ 37 �e4 .l:tb4+ 3S �d3 and White wins. lb) 32 ... cxd6 33 'ifxd6! (33 .td5 1xf3+ 34 .txf3 .l:txb2+ is less clear) 33. .. hf3+ 34 �f2 l:lbe4 35 .td5 :e2+ 36 �g3! (36 �xf3 l:l2e3+ leads to a draw) 36 ....1:teS 37 �xf3 �b2 3S 'iWd7 l:tf8 39 h4 g6 (Black can't allow h5 since that would give White mating threats after a future h6 or g6; however, White now has a neat trick) 40 h5 ! gxh5 41 g6! hxg6 42 'fd6 :tbs (42...l:tb5 43 'ifxg6+ �h8 44 .txf7) 43 'ifxg6+ �hS 44 'l'xh5+ >\>g7 45 'l'xf7+ �h6 46 i.e4 :Zb6 47 �4 gives White a decisive attack. 2) 27 ..tc2 2S .txc2 and now: 2a) 2S ..."ifb6 29 .i.xb4 'ifxb4 30 �c3 'l'xb2 3 1 'ifd3 and White keeps a slight edge. 2b) 2S ...hg5 29 ll:lxg5 (alterna tively, 29 .txg5 transposes to line '3' below) 29 ...ll:lxc2 30 'il'xc2 .l:tfeS 3 1 'l'xc7 'i'a6 looks OK for Black as White has poor pieces coordination. 3) 27 .. .txg5 2S .txg5 .tc2 29 .txc 2 'i'b6 is Black's best line. It is ..

.

very difficult to assess due to the un usual material balance, but I think that it's about equal. ll:ld3 28 �xb3

29 'iWal!

Luckily, White can defend both bishops from the a3-square. ll:lxf2+ 29 :tfe8! 30 �g2 White wins after 30...l:lxb3 3 1 .txfS �xfS 32 'ifaS+ �e7 33 lbed4. 31 'iWa3 lbd3 (D) •••

Materially White is doing fine, but his pieces aren't coordinating very well. 32 �cJ?

Mter this mistake White's pieces get into a real mess. The correct line was 32 .ta4!, and now: 1) 32....tc5 33 hc5 l:lxe2+ 34 �g3 .l:texb2 (during the game, I stopped my analysis after 34 ..1:tbxb2, but I only had to see one move fur ther: 35 .tc2! wins) 35 .ta7 should win for White. ..

266


2) 32...:txb2 33 "i'xb2 ll)xb2 34 ..ixe8 and White has a clear plus. 32 .•. ..id! 33 ll)dl The knight had been looking for ward to some heroic duty, but now it is forced back to defend a measly pawn.

33 34 ..ia4 •••

..ie4!

34 �g3 .if4+ 35 �g4 is a critical line, but Black has a range of reason able options: 1) 35 ... h5+ 36 gxh6 f5+ 37 �h3 ..ixf3 38 d6+ with a complete mess. 2) 35 ...:xe7 36 11fxe7 (White is genuinely threatening the e4-bishop because the d !-knight covers the f2square) 36 ... ..ixf3+ 37 �xf3 ..id6 and after Black wins the bishop on b3 it looks about equal. 3) 35 ... l:l.a8 ! (to deflect the bishop from b3) 36 ..ia4 (D) and now:

3a) 36 ... h5+ was my first idea, but this tears open Black's kingside

and with an enemy queen and pair of bishops, it is perhaps not the wisest course of action. The main line runs 3 7 gxh6 f5+ 38 �h3 ..ixf3 39 d6 (39 'i'xd3 ..ig4+ 40 �g2 l:l.xe7 41 d6 l:l.e2+ 42 ll)f2 ..ie3 43 'i'd5+ 't>h7 44 11fxa8 cxd6 45 hxg7 �xg7 is a draw) and now: 3al) 39 ... ..ig4+ 40 �g2 .ixdl (after 40... ll)el + 41 �fl liJO 42 d7 l:l.eb8 43 hxg7 Black looks to be in danger due to his expOSid king) 41 d7 l:l.eb8 42 1i'xd3 ..ixa4 43 'l'd5+ �h8 44 d81i'+ l:l.xd8 45 ..ixd8 and again White seems to be better. 3a2) 39 ...ll)el 40 M cxd6 41 lLixf5 is totally unclear. 3b) 36...l:l.eb8! is more solid be cause Black's king remains safe. Af. ter 37 d6 (37 b4 h5+ 38 gxh6 :b6!) 37 ... cxd6 (37 ...l:l.a5 38 Ql tiS+ 39 �h4 ..ixd7 40 "i'xd3 .ba4 41 b4 l:l.aa8 42 lLic3 favours White) 38 ..ixd6 ..ixd6! (38 ...lba4 39 'l'xa4 ..ixf3+40 �xf3 ..ixd6 41 'i'd4 � 42 �g2 ..ic7 43 "i'c5 offers White winning chances) 39 "i'xd6 .id3+ 40 �xf3 lLixb2 41 .fub2 (41 .ic6 ll)xdl 42 ..ixa8 l:l.xa8 43 'i'xdl is a draw) 4l...:lxb2 the result is a draw. In contrast to line 'I b' of the note to Black's 27th move, here there is no h-pawn and White cannot break through with only the bishop and queen. 34 ••• lLieS 34 ... l:l.a8 is also possible. Then 35 �g3 ..if4+ 36 �g4 transposes to the

ANAND - Oil., EUROPEAN CWBS CUP, BELGRADE 1999 267 previous note, while 35 �xe8 :ctxa3 36 bxa3 �e5 37 �c3 �xf3+ 38 � is unclear;White is a pawn down but

easily creates a forkess with queen vs rook and pawns. 2) 38 ...�f4 39 d6 c6 40 �xc6 has a dangerous a-pawn. Although it (40 'i'd4 lZ.xb5 41 'ilfxf4 �g4 leads is not easy to evaluate this line, it is to a surprising fortress) 40. .. �e2+ (an amazing move; 40... �g4? 4 1 clear that White is in no danger. 35 �xeS (D) 'ilfd4 favours White) 4 1 � g l (after 4 1 �xe2 lZ.xb2+ White's king can't escape the net) 4 l ...lZ.b3! (suddenly Black has counterplay against the white king) and now: 2a) 42 'ilfa5 lZ.g3+ 43 �f2 �c4! (not 43...�d3 44 ifa8+ liih7 45 �!) gives Black awkward threats against White's king. 2b) 42 d7 (to deflect the knight) 42 .. .c�:Jxd7 43 iff5 �e3+ 44 lith l �g4 45 'i'c2 �e6 and Black has rea sonable compensation. If White takes on d7 Black forces perpetual check: l:xe8? 46 �xd7 �d5+ 47 �h2 M4+ 48 This error cost Lembit the game. �gl lZ.g3+ 49 �fl lZ.f3+ 50 �e2 After 35 ... �xf3+ he would have l:e3+ 5 1 �fl li:f3+. been very much in the game: 36 �fl 36 �g3! (D) �xdl 37 �b5 h5 ! (Black's king needs some air) 38 'i'c5, and now: 1) 38...�xb2 (White is left with very few pawns and therefore Black has some drawing chances) 39 d6 c6 (39.. .cxd6? loses to 40 �xd6 �a3 41 'lxe5 �xd6 42 'ilfxd6 l:xb5 43 ld8+ �h7 44 'ilfd3+) 40 �xc6 �g4 and it is doubtful if White can win. For instance, after 41 g6 fxg6 42 d7 �xd7 43 .i.xd7 �xd7 44 'i'd5+ �h7 45 'lxd7 .tel ! (intending ... �h6, when I don't see how White can ever break through) 46 'ilfc7 :cte8 Black 36

268


Or 36...lLlxf3 37 'i'a4 and White wins. 37 'i'cJ .bdl 37 ...:xe7 38 d6 :es 39 dxc7 :cs 40 'i'xe5 i.xdl 41 'i'd5 ! i.xg5 42 'i'xg5 is also decisive. 38 'i'xeS ..b4

39 b4! The final finesse, since now Black can't reach an ending with 'i' vs .1:1.+8s. Both bishops will be lost, one for the d-pawn and one foc the b pawn, so Lembit resigned. 1-0

Despite this effort, my team lost the match and was eliminated. After Belgrade, my next event was Wijk aan Zee which turned out to be my most successful tournament of 1999. I always try to play in the top tour naments whenever possible, and there is no doubt that Wijk aan Zee, Linares and Dortmund are the leading traditional events, while Frankfurt is the out standing rapid event. Thus I have a regular routine for at least part of the year, which is only broken under exceptional circumstances; for example, in 2001 I was touring India after my World Championship success and had to miss Linares. I feel that if a leading player doesn't want to play in one of these top tournaments, then he may be having a problem with his motivation. The fol lowing were my two best games from Wijk aan Zee ,

.

Game 50

D. Reinderman - V. Anand Wijk aan lee 1 999 Sici l ian, Najdorf 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

e4 liJI'3 d4 tllxd4 ltlc3 .ic4 .ib3 0-0 9 ltla4

c5

d6 cxd4 tllr6 a6 e6

bS b4

.id7

The same slightly unusual varia tion as was played in Game 41 (Lau tiee-Anand).

10 f4 lllc6 11 f5 e5 12 lllf3?! (D)

Somehow this doesn't seem con sistent with the aggressive f5. 1 2 oOe6 is the critical continuation, for which see the notes to Game 41.

12

•••

h6

After 1 2....ie7 I was afraid that White could seize control of d5 by 1 3 .ig5. Nevertheless, the d5-square doesn't mean much in itself (if the knight on a4 could land there, it would be a different story!), so this was a playable alternative. The continua tion might be 13 ...'1rc7 ( 1 3 ... lllxe4? is impossible due to 14 'ird5 lllxg5 1 5 lllxg5, when White wins) 14 'lrd3 llla5 ! (14 . . .0-0 15 :ad1) 15 .ixf6 .ixf6 16 llfd 1 .ie7 and White has no follow-up since 17 .ixf7+ is in sufficient in view of 17 .. .'�xf7 1 8 'ird5+ �6 1 9 g4 h6 20 h4 g5.

13 Wei 14 'iWg3?!

.ie7

This seems to gain time, because Black cannot meet the attack on g7 by castling, but after Black's reply White is reminded of the weakness of the e4-pawn.

14

�!

Now the move 'lrg3 does not serve any real purpose, and White has to spend a tempo dealing with the at tack on e4. Even if Black ends up playing .. .'�g8-h7, he has not lost any time.

15 'iWel


270

If 1 5 %:tel , then 1 5 ... ll:la5 followed by . .. .lic6 steps up Black's pressure against e4, so White prefers to retract his previous move. Black already has a slight advantage owing to the awkward position of the knight on a4 and the weakness of the e4-pawn.

llb8

15

Black seeks to exploit the a4knight by ... 'ii'e8 followed by a move of the c6-knight, but first he must stop the knight escaping via b6.

16 .lid2 Or 16 a3 lLia5 (not 16 ... a5 due to 17 axb4 axb4 1 8 ..tc4, intending to reinforce the a4-knight by b3; if 18 ...lLia5, then 19 ..td3 is fine for White) 1 7 axb4 ll:lxb3 1 8 cxb3 i.b5 ( 18 ... ..tc6 19 lLic3 l:txb4 20 l:txa6 ..txe4 21 ll:lxe4 l:txe4 is just slightly better for Black) 19 l:tf2 i.d3 20 l:td2 ..txe4 21 ll:lxe5 'ilc7 22 ll:ld3 ..txf5 and Black has a large advantage.

16

•••

'ile8!

White is now forced to take action to avoid losing the a4-knight.

17 a3

a5 (D)

Black needs to recapture with a pawn on b4 to stop the knight jump ing to c3 and d5. After the text-move, Black intends to play ...�g8-h7, im proving his position while leaving White handicapped by his vulner able knight.

18 �h1 19 l:tg1?

�g8

White prepares to meet ...�h7 with the advance g4-g5, but this

move is artificial and gives Black the chance to seize the initiative. Note that in this position White is unable to support his knight by 19 axb4 axb4 20 i.c4 followe by b3, because 20 ll:la5! attacks both c4 ...

and a4. The best try is probably 19 h3, but after 19... �h7 20 axb4 axb4 White 's problems remain.

19

bxa3!

A forcing solution, but Black coo1d have also tried the quieter 19...�h7!?, playing to keep all the advantages of his position.Then White's intended attack 20 g4 (Black meets 20 'i'h4 by 20 ... l:tf8) can be met by 20. ..lild4 21 ll:lxd4 exd4 22 g5 hxg5 23 :xg5! �g8! (not 23 ... i.c6? 24 'i'h4+ �g8 25 l:txg7+ and White wins) and now 24 :Xg7+ �xg7 25 "ifg3+ � 26 l:lg l fails to 26 ...ll:lg4 (26. .�d8? 27 "ifg7+ �e7 28 l:tg6! wins for White) 27 'ilxg4 ..tf6 and Black defends. .

20 :Xa3

li:ld4!

Black aims to exploit the weak nesses at a4 and e4; the exchange on

REINDERMAN - ANAND, WIJK AAN ZEE 1999

271

After 23 e5 dxe5 24 'ilfxe5 � 25 i.el J:l.b5 (25 ...d37! 26 i.d5 i.xa4 27 lha4 dxc2 28 J:l.c4! is not so clear) 26 'ilrxd4 J:l.xf5 Black is doing very well - the e 1-bishop can't go 21 li:lxd4 anywhere due to ...lt:Jg3+ and he can After 2 l lt:lc3 lt:lxb3 22 cxb3 i.d8, still continue his attack by ...h5-h4. fue4 followed by ... i.c6, White is in very 23 Threatening, amongst other ideas, bad shape. exd4 (DJ ... i.g5-e3 . 21

d4 doubles Black's pawns, but open up new lines of attack such as the e-file 20. .. d5 is wrong since 2 1 exd5 i.xa3 2 2 dxc6 i.xc6 2 3 lt:Jxe5 favours White.

.••

24 :n

The pawn on b4 has disappeared, but the one on d4 does an equally good job of confining the a4-knight. The immediate threat is 22 . . .d5.

bS! (DJ

It turns out that Black need not free his rook with ... 'it>h7 as he can use it actively on its original square. The advance of the h-pawn, together with Black's pressure on the long light-square diagonal, signals the start of a direct attack on White's king. With all White's minor pieces stranded on the queenside, he is in no position to repel Black's threats.

n :at The rook has to retreat, but now Black turns his attention to the e4pawn. n .i.c6 22 ...i.f8 is the wrong plan. Black tries to stop e5, but it's too slow and 25 l!Jb6 23 .ixa5 l0xe4 24 :n .i.c6 25 l0b6 Trying to block the dangerous di should enable White to generate suf agonal by occupying d5 . ficient counterplay 25 h4 23 i.xaS ...


272

26 �dS Or 26 !MS �gS 27 l0f'4 (this doesn't help, but 27 f6 �xdS 28 �xd5 ttlg3+ is also lost for White) 27 ... h3 with an enormous attack.

26

�gS Now there is a threat of 27 ...l0g3+ 28 hxg3 hxg3+ 29 �gl �e3+.

27 l:tr3

27 �xc6 does not stop 27 ...l0g3+, while 27 'llfxe4 'llfxe4 28 �xe4 he4 29 h3 �xc2 gives Black a winning ending.

27

h3! (D)

The pressure on the long diago nal reaches its zenith. 27 ... lixb6? is wrong because of 28 'ilfxe4!.

30 ��1 30 l::txf4 lll g3+ 3 1 hxg3 hxg2++ 32 �gl .l:lh l + 33 �2 :xal also wins for Black. 30 h3+ --·

31 �h1

Black's advantage is so large that he has several ways to win. 31 ... :es Threatening 32 ...M4 or 32...ll)g:; . 3 l ...hxg2+ 3 2 '11Vxg2 l::th5 followed by . . .l::tg5 would also I!Jve won.

32 11Fc4 33 l::txf2

lllf2+

34 l0xc4

bf2 l::te2 �! (D)

'ilfxc4

Another way to win is 33 ...'1!fe4 34 l::tf3 hxg2+ 35 �xg2 1bh2+ 36 �xh2 'llfxf3.

35 l0xd6 36 b4

28 �xc6 28 g3 l::txb6! wins for Black.

28 29 'ilfe2 •••

'ilfxc6 �f4!

Threatening to take on g2 and then h2. White has no defence.

A cruel finishing blow.

37 gxb3

hd6

0·1

Game 5 1

V. Anand

-

J. Piket

Wijk aan lee 1 999 Ruy Lopez, Chigorin 1 e4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

. �f3 ..

..tbS

h4 0..0 :e1 ..tb3

8 c3

h6

15 ...

Jeroen has a fondness for the Ruy Lopez as Black and has played al most all its subvariations at one time or another. So I sat wondering which one it would be this time.

e5 �c6

a6 �6 ..te7 b5 d6 0..0 ll:\aS

15 ...a4 1 6 hb5 1ib6 17 ..txc6 'lfxc6 1 8 �bd2 is known to be better for White. 16 dS �b4 11 ..tn (DJ 17 �xa5? is premature, since af ter 1 7 ...�xd3 (17 .. '1fxa5 1 8 ..td2 'lfa4 1 9 b3 'il'a3 20 ..tcl 'lfa5 2I ..td2 is a draw) 1 8 �6 �xel 19 �xd8 �xf3+ Black has too much material for the queen. .

9 h3 Later in the tournament he went for the Breyer, but today he wanted something else. 10 ..tc2 cS

lM7 11 d4 An old favourite of Keres. 12 �bd2 cxd4 13 cxd4 �c6 14 �b3

14 �fl �xd4 15 �d4 exd4 gives White nothing.

14 15 ..td3! .••

aS

Stronger than the more commonly played 15 ..te3; after the text-move Black has serious problems to solve.

17 ...

a4

The point of White's play is that 17 ...:c8 may now be answered by 18 �xa5!: I ) 18...lLJc2 19 �c6 is very good for White.

274


2) 1 8 ...l:l.xcl 19 l:l.xc l ( 1 9 'i'xc l 'i'xa5 20 a3 is also very good for White) 19 ...'i'xa5 20 a3 lba2 2 l l:l.al and White wins. 3) 18 ...'i'xa5 19 i.d2 and Black cannot stop a3, regaining the piece with a clear advantage for White. 4) 1 8 ... lbb8 and now: 4a) 19 lte2? 1Vxa5 20 i.d2 'i'a4 favours Black. 4b) 19 ltbl lbc2 ( 1 9 ...'i'xa5 20 i.d2 'i'xa2 21 i.xb4 'i'a4 22 'i'd2 is good for White) 20 lbc6 (20 J:!.e2 'i'xa5 2 l l:l.xc2 'i'xa2 leads to equal ity) 20...l:l.xc6 2 l l:l.e2 lbd4 22 dxc6 lbxe2+ 23 i.xe2 and White has a slight advantage. 4c) 19 a4! is strongest; for example, 1 9... lbc2 ( 1 9... bxa4 20 l:l.xa4 and 19 ... 'iWxa5 20 i.d2! are also unsatisfactory for Black) 20 axb5 lbxal (20 ...i.xb5 loses to 21 i.xb5 lbxal 22 lbc6 lbxc6 23 i.xc6) 21 bxa6 'i'xa5 22 i.d2 'i'b6 23 'i'xal with fantastic compensation for the ex change.

theory considers to give White some advantage, but I think it is too little to provide real winning chances.

18 19 a3

exd4 lbxdS The alternative is 19. . .lbc5 20 •••

axb4 lbb3 2 l l:l.bl i.f6 (21 ...'iWb6 22 i.f4 is also clearly better for White) 22 i.f4 l:l.e8, but White can just play for i.d3-c2. The pawn-structure is just awful for Black, since d6, d4 and b3 are all weak, while Black cannot achieve .. .f5 any time soon.

20 exdS

21 lbxd4 (D)

i.f6

8

18 lbbd4!

This is still theory. I knew that it was an idea of Shamkovich (later I found it was played in Shamkovich Benjamin, USA 1976). Jeroen knew of it as well, but we both thought it led only to a slight advantage for White. After the game (and perhaps because of it!) we agreed that Black's task was incredibly unpleasant. The alternative is 1 8 a3 lbxd5 19 'iWxd5 lbb6 20 'i'd l axb3 21 'l'xb3, which

White has regained his pawn. If Black could activate his light-squared bishop he would be fine, but this is impossible since b5 is so weak. 21 h8 33

'ilt'e4 with a decisive attack. lle8 31 32 llxe8+? .••

This doesn't spoil anything, but White could have finished the game at once with 32 �b8 !.

'li'xe8 32 33 i.e7! (D)

35 'li'e4 is winning for White) 34 .i.xf6 'li'el + 35 \t>h2 'li'xt2 (35 ..ltlf3+ 36 \t>g3 and 35 ... gxf6 36 li:Je7+ �h8 37 111h4 'li'e5+ 38 f4 are decisive) 36 �e7+ 'it>h8 37 �g6+'it>h7 38 li:Je5+ lt>g8 39 'fle7 with an easy win foc White. 34 'fle4 g6 .

35 i.b4!

White could try to finish the game with a mating attack, but this is sim plest - Black loses all his queenside pawns.

B

35 36 he4

'l'xe4

36 37 d6 38 i.d3! 39 ltlb8! 40 hb5 41 ha4

.if6 i.c8 ..td7 i.e6 � 1-0

•••

Black's pieces must rush back to stop the d-pawn.

Threatening 34

33

'li'e4. ..tb2

Black cannot save himself; e.g., 33...�2 (33 ... .i.xe7 34 ltlxe7+ lt>h8

lbis game secured my second public prize of the tournament foc the best game of the day.

I managed to make +6, which turned out only to be sufficient foc second place, as Kasparov made an amazing +7. Although I did not win the tourna ment, it was a great success for me, measured not only by the score but also by my standard of play; foc example, I won four public prizes. At the beginning of 1999, I was still luxuriating in a run of almost uninter rupted success which had started with the Krarnnik game frocn Belgrade 1997 (see Game 42). However, all good things must come to an end, and foc me the tide turned during Linares 1999. I started the tournament with five draws, and then won the foUowing game.

Game 52

V. Anand

-

P. Svidler

Linares 1 999 G runfeld Defence 1 2 3 4 5

d4 c4 � rn

'ii'b3

llJr6 g6 d5 .i.g7

11 e6

c4 (D)

The Russian System, in which White expends time with his queen in order to build up a strong centre, but Black has a lead in development to compensate. Play is usually very sharp in this line and the current game was no exception.

5 6 'ifxc4 7 e4

dxc4 0-0 a6

Svidler repeats the so-called Hun garian system, which he had played against Kasparov a month or so be fore this game. 1 . .lDa6 and 7 . . .i.g4 are alternatives.

8 e5 9 'iWb3 10 b4

b5 llJrd7

Kasparov played 1 0 e6 and went on to win, but I assumed that Sv idler

I had briefly acquainted myself with the theory of this move, but had concentrated on Black's alternatives. Now I had to check my memory of theory.

12 13 14 15 16

1i'd1 exf7+ b5

bxg6 .i.e3

bxg6

This is all theory. The main move had an improvement ready over that is 16 . . . .i.g4, but Svidler had some game. I myself had a new idea ready thing else in mind. .i.fS! (D) in one line, but Peter pre-empted me 16 ... by playing adifferent a sub-variation Svidler said that he was surprised this natural move had hardly ever 0 I...c4). c5 been played. 10 ...

278

VISHY ANAND: MY BEST GAMES OF CHESS However, with accurate play Black should be OK. l'mi 17 After 17 ...tLlxd4 Black seems to gain sufficient compensation for the exchange; for instance, 18 fiJxfT � 19 .:tc 1 e5 (the later game Sash ikiran-Ahmad, Vung Tau City 1999 went 19 .. .lla7 20 g4 ..tc8 21 i.g2 ltd7 22 ..te4 l:.d6 23 <MI and White --

17 tLlgS

Obviously, this possibility is the key difference between 1 6.....tf5 and 1 6 ... i.g4. Here I could have trans posed into the game Lputian-I.Sok olov, Sarajevo 1 998 by playing 17 ..te2 tLlb4 (the move-order of Lput ian-Sokolov was 1 6 ..te2 ..tf5 17 .i.e3 tLlb4) 18 l:.c l , when Sokolov continued 1 8 ... tLl6d5. However, I thought it would be better not to fol low Lputian-Sokolov blindly, so when I saw the alternative plan of 17 tLlg5, I decided to go for it. Of course, at tacking without developing all your pieces is risky, but this system calls for some aggression ! Later I discov ered that Sokolov's play had been improved by 18 ... e5 ! in Kroeze-Van Haastert, Wijk aan Zee 1998 (no, not Hoogovens, but Sonnevanck!). I haven't checked everything, but it looks good for Black. The text-move isn't totally illogi cal. White wants to play g4 and ..tg2 instead of placing the bishop on e2.

won, but at this point it's quite un clear) 20 g4 .i.e6 21 ..tg2 L7 with active play. 18 g4 ..tefi! The bishop heads for d5. 18....td7 19 ..tg2 gives White an edge.

19 llJce4

1 9 i..g2 i..d5 20 liJxd5 tLlxd5 slightly better for Black. .ids 19

is

...

20 'ird2 (D)

20 tLlxf6+ exf6 21 tLlf3 gives Black too much compensation after 2 1 . ..1i'd7 or 2 I . ..lba4.

20

ltd6?

ANAND - SVIDLER, LINARES 1999 White's attack on the h-file more than compensates for the weak pawn on d4 and in fact Black never man ages to capture this pawn. Black should have played 20.. ."ifd7 !, as Svidler suggested after the game. The idea is that Black can now meet 21 f3 with 2 l ...�xf3. It would take us too far afield to analyse this in de tail , but it's clear that this was a bet than 20... l:td6.

21 f3! Now the rook will be sorely missed on the f-file.

21

.••

�xe4

2l...ltlxd4? 22 hd4 he4 loses to either 23 "ifh2 or 23 �xg7 J:txd2 24 i.e5.

22 fxe4 (D)

22

ltld7

22 ...ltlxd4 is a critical alterna tive : I) 23 'l'h2? was a move I consid ered during the game. White intends 24.ixc4+ ltlxc4 25 "ifh7+ �8 26

279

hd4 l:txd4 27 0-0+, but Black ap pears able to defend by 23 ...e5: Ia) 24 0-0-0 ile7 25 'irh7+ (25 l:!.d2 �f6 26 llJIJ7 �g7 is a draw, while 25 �g2 is met by 25 ... �f6) 25 .. .'itf8 26 l:td2 �e8 defends. lb) 24 �d3 clears the fl-square, but doesn't allow the knight to come to c4 with tempo. However, it isn't check, so Black can ignore it by 24... �f6!, when White has no follow up. !c) 24 hc4+ ltlxc4 25 'irh7+ Wf8 26 0-0+ J:tf6 27 lbf6+ (after 27 'irxg6 �g8 28 'irh7+ �f8 the inter polation of1ixg6 doesn't help White; for example, after 29 J:txf6+ 'irxf6 30 �xd4 'lrxg5 3 1 l:tfl + �e7 the black queen defends the g7-bishop) 27 ... 'ifxf6 28 �xd4 'irxg5 and there is nothing clear. One continuation is 29 :n + �f6 30 �c5+ �e8 3 1 'lrg8+ �d7 3 2 'irxa8 'lrxg4+ 33 �hi "ifh3+ with a draw. 2) 23 �xd4! is the right move: 2a) 23...�xd4 24 'lfh2 �g7 (or 24 ... �8 25 e5 winning) 25 e5 ! l:tc6 26 �e2 and White wins. 2b) 23 ...l:txd4 24 'lff2! (after 24 'lfh2 'ifd6! 25 �xc4+ltlxc4 26 "ifh7+ Wf8 White has nothing) 24...'lff8 (24... �6 25 l:th8+! and 24... 'IreS 25 11'h4 are also decisive) 25 'lrh4 'iff6 26 �e2! and Black seems to have no defence against 27 'lfh7+ followed by 28 :n. 23 'ifhl (D)

13

l"flf8

280

VISHY ANAND: MY BEST GAMES OF CHESS 26...'1'b6 1oses to 27 lllxg7.

If White gets 'l'h7+ in, then it's usually all over; e.g., 23 ...'Wb6 24 �xc4+ bxc4 25 'l'h7+ � 26 0-0+ �6 27 'l'xg6 (27 J:l.ae 1, intending 28 e5, is also good) 27 ... �g8 (27 .. .l2:le5 loses to 28 dxe5 'l'xe3+ 29 �h1) 28 'l'f7+ �h8 29 l:tf3 lllxg4 30 l:th3+ lllh6 (30 ...J:I.h6 3 1 J:l.xh6+ lllxh6 32 'l'g6 �g8 33 l:tfl mates) 3 1 'l'f5 �g8 32 'l'h7+ �f8 33 J:l.fl+ and White wins after 33...�e8 34 'l'xg7 or 33 ... J:I.f6 34 llle6+.

24 eS!

24 d5 llle5 allows Black to keep fighting.

J:l.d7 24... J:I.xd4 fails to 25 'l'f2 'l'a5+ 24

...

26 �e2.

25 llle6! 'I'aS+ Or 25 ...lllxe6 26 �xc4! (a recur

ring theme) 26 ... '1'a5+ (26 ... bxc4 loses to 27 'l'h7+ �f7 28 0-0+) 27 .id2 'l'xd2+ 28 �xd2 l:txd4+ 29 �e3 bxc4 30 'l'h7+ �f7 3 1 J:l.afl+ and White has too much material.

26 �d2

lllxeS! (D)

27 �e2?

Missing a clear win by 27 i.g2! which, like .ie2, covers the f3-square but also attacks the aS-rook; after 27 ... c3 (27...fug4 28 baS ltlxh2 29 .ixa8 is hopeless for Black) 28 bxc3 lllxg4 29 'l'h3 the game is over. On the other hand, 27 i.xa5? isn't so clear since 27.. lllo+ 28 � lllxh2 29 lllxfB J:l.xf8 30 J:l.xh2 i.xd4 3 1 J:l.bl gives Black has a fair amount of play for the piece. .

27

...

c3 (D)

27 ...'Wb6 requires an accurate re sponse: I ) 28 lllxf8? only complicates matters after 28 ... J:I.xd4. Black is fighting on after either 29 i.c3 J:l.xl8 or 29 llle6 'l'xe6 30 'l'h7+ � 31 :n + �6 32 o-o-o llln 33 l:l.xf6 '1'xt6 34 :n 'l'xfl+ 35 .bn. 2) 28 lllxg7! is a clean kill; after 28 ... lllf7 29 �5 gxf5 30 gxf5 there is no defence to 3 1 :SI+.

ANAND - SVJDLER, LINARES 1999

281

'M1 (D)

28 .bc3?! A slight slip. 28 bxc3 ! li:Jf7 29 &g7 �xg7 is better, as the d4-pawn is more secure than in the game.

28

•..

l9 l2Jxg7

b4

bxc3?

Svidler thought he was already lost and didn't find his last chance: 29...li:Jf7! 30 .td2 �xg7. Then the open h·file and two bishops promise White some advantage, but White has to watch the d4-pawn so Black is still fighting.

A last joke. 31 0-0+ The reason why Peter continued so long is that he wanted to play a

game where White wins with 0-0+. Unfortunately, the game was pub lished on the Internet as continuing '3l llfl + 1-0' and it took a while for this to be corrected. So, for the rec ord, 31 0-0+ was the move played. 1-0

After another three draws, I faced Kasparov with the white pieces. Round about this time there had been a lot of talk about a possible title match against Kasparov. I think this started to affect me during 1999; instead of simply playing freely and easily, my mind was on other matters - making a good im pression for the match, and so on. I think that I have now learned to shut these extraneous matters out of my mind, but at the time I wasn't able to do this. The game against Kasparov therefore assumed a particular importance, since it could not only decide the destination of first prize at Linares, but also influ ence our morale before a potential match. The game proved remarkable enough. I ran straight into some very deep opening preparation by Kasparov. Although I had analysed the same line, it was soon clear that my preparation had been lacking. In the critical position, I had analysed several continuations,

282


but missed the one which he actually played, which forced White to find a very narrow path to a draw. I missed it, and was driven into a very bad end game. However, I then started to defend well and, aided by some inaccura cies from Kasparov, I managed to reach a drawn position. Unfortunately,just at this moment I started looking for too clean a forced draw and I made a falal blunder. If I had salvaged this game, then 1 999 might have been a very different year for both Kasparov and myself. I would have been given a huge psycho logical boost by saving a game against an important rival Kasparov, on the other hand, would have known that he had failed to score a full point despite being handed a winning position from the opening. As it happened, our ca reers went in opposite directions: he went on to have one of the best years of his life while I went on to have one of the lousiest years of mine. Despite the disappointment against Kasparov, I still managed to win an other nice game in the tournament, against Topalov.

Game 53

V. Topalov

-

V. Ana nd

Linares 1 999 Caro- Ka nn Defence 1 2 3 4

e4 d4 eS ltlc:3

c:6 dS ..trs

4 5 g4 6 ltlge2

e6 ..tg6 ltle7

4 00 had been the main line for some time, but Black had been doing OK against that. It was inevitable that White would return to 4 ltlc3.

The old main line was 6... c5, but by the time this game was played 6...l1Je7 had become equally popu lar.

This allows Black to set up a strong pawn-front on the kingside 7 ltlr4 and also misplaces White's knighi. c5 c:xd4 8 h4 1 3 ...e5 is inferior due to 14 ltlg2! 9 ltlbS 'Wxd6 IS fxe4 dxe4 16 ltle3; the ltlec:6 10 hS ..te4 knight is very much in the game and 11 f3 (D) so Black doesn 't have enough com All this is familiar theory. In pre pensation for the piece. vious games, Black had now played 14 ltlh3 ll.....ixf3 and got a whole mass of 14 ltlg2 makes no sense with for pawns for the piece, but in return Black's pawn on gS. h6 14 White got a strong attack with gS and h6. My trainer Ubilava and I won 15 fxe4 dxe4 rs 16 ..tg2 dered if Black could get these moves 17 0-0 0-0! (D) in himself. It looks safer not to 'castle into it', a6! 11 but after 17 ... llf8 18 gxfS exfS 19 12 ltld6+ bd6 ..ixe4 fxe4 20 llxf8+ �xf8 21 .ixgS gS! 13 exd6

284


hxg5 22 'ii'g4 White's attack is quite dangerous. By castling, Black is able to recapture on f8 with his queen.

22 cxd4 lDb6, followed by ...�. Black has good compensation for the piece.

20 21 he4

�h8

21 ... 22 :xt8+

fxe4 9ixf8 (D)

-·

White finally sacrifices the piece. However, the alternatives 21 11'xb7 lDd7 22 1Vb3 lDde5 and 21 cxd4 lDxd4 22 1Vc3 lDbc6 are also good for Black.

18 c3?

White may already need to take drastic measures and force a draw, since the game continuation looks quite convincing for Black. There fore the correct line is 1 8 gxf5 exf5 19 he4 (19 i.xg5 hxg5 20 he4 'ii'xd6! gives Black chances of an advantage) 19 .. 1xe4 20 i.xg5 ! (20 :xrs+ 'ii'xf8 !) 20 ...llxf1+ (20...hxg5 21 'ii'g4 is more dangerous for Black) 21 'ii'xfl hxg5 22 'ii'f5 'ii'd7 (22 ...'ii'f8 is also a draw) 23 'ii'g6+ (23 'ii'xe4 'ii'xh3 24 'ii'g6+ �h8 is another draw) 23 ... 'ii'g7 24 'ii'e8+ 'ii'fS with perpetual check. This draw has since occurred in at least four games ! 18 1Vxd6 19

gxfs

exrs

20 1Vb3+ After 20 i.e3 'M7 ! 21 i.xd4 (21 cxd4 lDb6 favours Black) 2I ...lDxd4

23 1Ve6!

Black is two pawns up but still has to find a way to develop his queen· side. White threatens simply 24 i.xg5 followed by 25 llfl .

23

lbd7!

Funnily enough, Black has to t<ES back the piece that he just recovered. Honestly speaking, this was a fairly intuitive sacrifice, but I felt that Black was better and didn't see any other way to get more than a draw. Note that 23 ... e3? fails to 24 i.xe3!

TOPALOV

-

ANAND, LINARES 1999

0d7 25 :n 'I'g7 26 :n lOts 21 'lfS and White wins. 24 'l'xd7 24 .1xg5? hxg5 25 'l'xd7 l:td8! 26 'le6 :e8 27 'I'g6 lLle5 wins for Black.

24

285

1fg4+ 33 �hi 'it'h3+ 34 �gl e3 35 'iie4! 'l'g3+ (D) and now:

.:td8 (D)

Ia) 36 �hi? and then: lal) 36... .:tf6 37 'it'xd4 (37 'ife8+? �g7 38 1!t'd7+ �h6 39 1!t'xd4 1!t'f3+ 40 �h2 exd2 ! is winning for Black) 37...'it'f3+ 38 �h2 'it'f2+ 39 �h 1 exd2 40 1!Vxf2 .:txf2 41 �gl ! and 25 'l'g4! Topalov chooses the correct de White draws. l a2) 36. . .exd2! 37 'ifxd4+ �h7 fence. In a practical game it is hard to play amove such as 25 'i'xb7, af 38 1!t'd7+ (38 1!t'xd2 .:th8! wins for ter which Black has a sure draw and Black) 38...�g6 39 'it'e6+ �h5! chances to try for more. Indeed, it (39...�g7 40 1!t'd7+ .:tf7? 41 1!t'xd2 turns out to favour Black: is a draw) 40 'ife2+ 'i'g4! 41 'ifh2+ I) 25...'1'f3 (it was when I real (41 '6'xg4+ �xg4 42 �g2 .:td8 43 lized that ithis move gives Black at .:tdl �f4 is decisive) 4 l...�g6 42 least a forced draw that I decidet to 1i'd6+ .:t6 43 1i'xd2 .:n wins for play 23 ... lLld7; however, it is not the Black. best move) 26 lLlxg5 hxg5 27 'i'xc6 lb) 36 'it'g2 'it'xg2+ 37 �xg2 1g4+ 28 �h2 'i'xh5+ 29 �g2 'i'g4+ .:tf2+ 38 �g3 .:txd2 39 cxd4 .:txb2 30 'i>h2 'ilih4+ 31 �gl (31 �g2? and now: loses to 3\,.:f8!) 3 I . ...:tf8 (the allbl) 40 �g4? e2 41 �xg5 l:txa2 ternative 31...'i'g3+ 32 'ito>h I 'ilth3+ 42 .:tel �g7 (42 ... a5? 43 �6 �g8 33 'i>gl .:tf8 34 .i.d2! transposes to 44 �e7 is a draw) 43 <M4 a5 44 �e3 the main line of this note) 32.1d2 a4 45 <M2 a3 and Black wins.

286


lb2) 40 .l:el ! e2 41 a4 �g7 42 �f2! draws. 2) 25 ... 'iid6! 26 �g2 (D) with two possibilities for Black:

2a) 26 ... e3 27 cxd4 (27 'iixa6? loses to 27 ... g4!) and now: 2al) 27 ...'iid5+ 28 �h2 'iif3 !? 29 'iic7 (29 .be3 .l:b8 30 'iid7 is also playable) 29 ... .1:xd4 (29 ... g4 30 'iif4 'iixh3+ 3 1 �gl is roughly equal) 30 'iic8+ .l:d8 31 'iie6 'iie2+ 32 �g3 'iiel+ 33 �g2 with a draw. 2a2) 27 ... g4!? causes White more trouble: 2a21) 28 ..txe3? just seems to lose on the spot to 28 ... gxh3+; e.g., 29 �xh3 'iie6+ 30 �h2 'iixe3 31 'iixc6 'iif4+ 32 �hl .l:g8. 2a22) 28 �g5 hxg5 29 ..txe3 'iVd5+ (White seems to be fine after 29 ... .1:b8 30 'iin .l:xb2+ 3 1 �fl) 30 �gl 'iif3 with another branch: 2a221) 31 ..txg5 �xd4! wins. 2a222) 3 1 .l:el 'iig3+ 32 �fl 'ii h3+ and White is losing after 33

�gl g3! or 33 �e2 'l'f3+! 34 i>d2 �xd4. 2a223) 31 'iib3 'iig3+ (Black has nothing after 3 l ... .l:e8?! 32 .if2) 32 �hl 'iih3+ 33�gl g3 34 'iic2 g235 llel 'iVh 1 + 36 �2 ID"8+ (36 .. .loe5? 37 'iif5! is fine for White) 37 �2 l:lfl (37.../t)e5 38 dxe5 'iif1+39�1 .l:d8+ 40 'iid2 "i'f3+ 41 �cl lxd2 42 �xd2 'i!rd5+ favours Black, but is less effective than the text-move) 38 'iic3 /t)e7! (38...gl'i!V? 39 hgl Wg2+ 40�dl 'iVxg1 41 d5+ lLlli4 42 •c8+ �h7 43 'iVb7+! �h8 is a draw) 39 d5+ �h7 40 h6 �5 41 "i'c7+ i>xh6 42 'iic6+ �h5 43 'iie8+ � with a winning position for Black. 2a23) 28 �gl 'iie6! (28... •d5+ 29�g3 and theredoesn't seem to be more than a draw) 29 'fic7 'fie4+ 30 �g3 e2 gives Black a large advan tage. 2b) 26... 'iif6! (this is even more effective) 27 cxd4 leads to arDher branch: 2bl) 27....1:£8? 28 �h2 (28 l'xa6? 'iif3+ 29 �h2 g4 30 0f4 g3+ 31 �h3 g2+ 32 �h2 'l'fl 33 li:lg6+ �g8 wins for Black) 28 ...'i'd6+ 'B �g2 .l:f3 30 'iic8+ �g7 31 'l'g4 'iixd4 is unclear. 2b2) 27 ... 'iif3+! 28 �h2 li:le5! (28 ...g4? 29 "ifxc6! g3+ 30�gl "i'dl+ is a draw) 29 'iic7 (29 dxe5 'l'e2+) 29...�g4+ 30 �gl 'fidl+ 31 i>g2 .l:f8 ! and Black wins.

2S 26 b3

eJ (D}

TOPALOV - ANAND, UNARES 1999

Once again, White had a plausible alternative, namely 26 cxd4 l:txd4 27 'l'e2, and now: I) 27.. 'i'd6 28 1he3 (28 �g2? loses after 28 ... 1i'd5+ 29 �h2 l:td l ) 28 :g4+ (28 . .l:tdi + 29 �g2 l0e5 30 'l'e4 �3 is unclear) 29 �fl ldi+30Wt"21lfc2+ 31 ..td2 l:td4 32 :dl l'xd l 33 16'e8+ �g7 34 ..tc3 with a murky position. 2) 27... l:h4 and now: 2a) 28 �xg5? 16'f4! is winning for Black. 2b) 28 ..txe3 l:txh3 29 �g2 l:th4 30 if2 l:tf4 31 ..tg3 :.n and White has some compensation due to the exposed black king. 3) 27... 1ff5 and now: 3a) 28 .i.xe3 l:tg4+ 29 �h2 1i'e5+ 30 �hi l:tg3 ! 31 1i'fl 1i'e6!! (Fritz suggest this;31 ...:.Xe3 32 1ff8+ �h733 'i'f7+ 16'g7 34 1i'f5+ �h8 is better for Black but not winning) 32 lOg! l:xe3 and wins. .

...

.

·

3b) 28 1i'xe3 is a tough nut to

crack:

287

3bl) 28 .. .l:td1 + 29 �g2 (29 �h2? loses to 29 ... l0e5 !) 29 ... 1i'd5+ 30 1i'f3! (30 �f2? l0e5 31 16'c3 l:ld3 32 1i'c8+ �g7 33 1i'c7+ Wf6! 34 1i'b6+ �f5 is decisive) 30 ... g4 31 16'xd5 gxh3+ 32 �xh3 l:txd5 33 b3 with a draw. 3b2) 28 ...l:te4 29 16'c3+ (White loses after 29 1i'f2? 1i'g4+ 30 16'g2 l:tel+ 31 �h2 l:te2 32 l0f2 16'h4+) 29 ... l0d4! 30 l0f2 (the only move) 30.. .l:tel + ! 3 1 �g2 (3 1 1i'xe1 ? �+ 32 �fl t0xe1 33 �xe1 g4! gives Black a clear advantage) 31 ... 11'd5+ 32 �h3 leads to a draw. 3b3) 28 ...l:tg4+ 29 �h2l0e5 (not 29...l:te4? 30 1i'f2 1i'e5+ 31 �h1 l:th4 with a draw) gives Black a very strong attack, but as a final test I turned on Fritz to see whether it could defend. It found 30 1i'b6! (30 lOg! loses on the spot to 30 ...l:te4! 3 1 16'c3 l:tc4 !) 30. . .l0f3+ 31 �h i, but Black still wins by 3 1...1i'd5 ! (this is the key - Black sets up a mating bat tery) 32 1i'xh6+ �g8 33 1i'g6+ �f8 34 1i'f6+ �e8 35 1i'h8+ �d7 36 1i'h7+ �c8 37 1i'c2+ �b8 38 1i'b3 l:tc4 ! 39 ..tf4+ gxf4 40 t0xf4 16'e4 and White has no defence. Thus 26 cxd4 is inferior to the text-move.

26 27 1i'e4 28 �g2? I was a bit confused when I saw this, but then I saw what to do. The alternative was 28 ..ta3 !, and now:

288


1) 28 ...dxc3 29 llfl •e6 30 l:tf5 (30 �b4 c2! 3 1 �c3 l:tdl 32 'i'xc2 l:txfl+ 33 �xfl ...xh3+ 34 �gl 'i'g4+ 35 'i'g2 'ifdl + 36 �h2 'i'xh5+ 37 �gl is a draw) and now: Ia) 30... l:ld 1 + is the obvious con tinuation, but White can defend by 31 �g2 e2 32 l:txe5 el• 33 l:txe6 l:td2+ 34 �3 'i'fl+ 35 �g3 l:td3+ 36 'i'xd3 ...xd3+ 37 �h2 �g7 38 l:te7+ �6 39 lLlf2 'i'f3 (39 ... 'i'd240 �g3 'i'f4+ 41 �g2 'i'd4 42 lLle4+ �5 43 lLlg3+ �f6 draws, while 39 ...'i'c2? 40 �g3 �5 4 l lLlg4 even wins for White) 40 ll:,e4+ �5 41 lLlg3+ �6 42 lLle4+ with another draw. lb) 30...l:td5 ! 3 1 �fl (31 �hl e2 !, 31 �g2 'ilfc6 32 �g3 e2 and 31 �b4 e2 32 �xc3 l:tdl+ 33 �g2 e1'i' favour Black) 31...'ilfc6! 32 l:tfll + �g7 33 lLlxg5 l:tdl + 34 �e2 l:td2+ 35 �xe3 'ilfb6+ 36 �4 hxg5+ 37 �xe5 is a draw. 2) 28 ... d3 29 l:tfl 'ilfe6 30 'ilfxe3 •g4+ 31 �2 (3 1 �h l? 'ilfe2! wins

for Black) 31 ......5+ 32 �g2 Wg4+ 33 �f2 is a draw. 3) 28 ... lLlf3+! is the best chance, and now: 3a) 29 �hi lLld2 ! (29... Wc6 30 •xc6 bxc6 31 cxd4 e2 32 i.b4 de fends) 30 •xb7 (30 1fg6 'i'xg6 31 hxg6 d3 is also very good for Black) 30 ...'Wf5 ! 31 'i'g2 d3 and White is in serious trouble. 3b) 29 �g2! ltld2 30 'i'g6 (not 30 'Wxb7? ¥f5 with a large advan tage for Black) 30...'ifxg6 31 lug6 d3 (3 l ... dxc3 32 �e7 l:tc8 33 i.f6r �g8 34 l:tcl c2 35 .i.b2 defends) 32 �c 1 lDxb3 33 axb3 d2 34 .ixd2 l:txd2+ and Black is slightly better, although a draw is more likely than a win for Black.

28

29 .i.xgS

e2! (D)

White is in serious difficulties, whatever he plays: l ) 29 9xe2 d3! 30 'i'f2 'i'c6+ 3 1 �g3 ¥e6! 32lDgl d2 33 .i.xd2 •g4+

TOPALOV - ANAND, LINARES 1999

289

34 �h2 'i'xh5+ 35 �g3 �g4 ! wins

for Black.

2) 29 J..b 2 :C8 30 1rxe2 dxc3 3 1

..ia3 (31 J..c l 'i'c6+ 32 �h2 'ire6 33

'i>g2 'i'd5+ 34 �gl %lf3 is winning for Black) 3 1...'i'c6+ 32 �h2 �f3+ 33 �hl l:td8 34 'i'fl (34 'irg2 g4)

34 ....1:1.d2 with a decisive attack for Black. 3) 29 J..d2 l:tf8! (29 ... d3 30 c4 �f3 31 1rxf3 'i'xal 32 �f2 is less clear) 30 �gl (30 1rxe2 1rc6+, 30 lxd4 l:td8! 31 'i'e3 l:txd2! and 30 cxd4 'ilffl+ 3 1 �h2 �f3+ 32 �g3 �d2 are all hopeless for White) 30...d3 (30...1rf2+ 3 1 �hl �f3 32 �xf3 'ilfxf3+ 33 1rxf3 l:txf3 34 l:tel dxc3 35 J:be2 cxd2 36 l:txd2 gives Black an extra pawn in a rook end ing, but White can probably draw) 3l .l:l.e1 (31 'l'd4 �h7 ! is awkward, as 32 'i'e4+ �g8 33 Wd5+ l:tf7 only helps Black) 3 1 ...'ii'f2+ 32 �hl 'ii'g3 33 'i'g2 'ii'h4+ 34 'ii'h2 'ii'e4+ 35 'l'g2 �f3 36 �xf3 l:txf3 37 �gl 'ii'f5 wins for Black. hxgS (D) l9 30 cxd4 31 dS

'i'c6

The alternative 3 1 'ii'xc6 �xc6 32 �gl .l:l.e8 33l:tel �xd4 also wins for Black. 'ii'xdS 31 3l. ..l:l.xd5 32 l:te1 doesn't lead •••

.

any where for Black. 32

'i'xd5 33 l:te1 34 <M2!

l:txd5 l:td2 l:txa2

35 .l:txel?! This makes life easy for Black, but 35 �e3 m 36 l:txe2 (36 �f2 �g7 37 l:txe2 l:txe2+ 38 �xe2 �h6 also wins for Black) 36 ... l:txe2+ 37 �xe2 �g7 38 �f3 �h6 39 �g4 a5 40 l!:lf2 b5 41 lLle4 a4 42 bxa4 bxa4 43 lllc3 a3 is also decisive. l!:ld3+ 35 l:txe2+ 36 �e3 37 �xe2 g4! (D) A nice intermezzo, avoiding the trap 37 ... lllf4+?? 38 lllxf4 gxf4 39 �3 with a draw. •••

290

VISHY ANAND: MY BEST GAMES OF CHESS 38 itJgS 39 �e3

itJc1+ itJxb3 (D)

40 h6 41 Wf4

aS

41

llJd4!

42 �g4 43 �bS

a4

41 �e4 g3! is also lost foc White. Taking away the f5-square.

Or 43 lDe4 a3 44 itJc3 b5. 43 ltX6 ...

It's still not toolate to be careless - after 43...a3?? 44 'it>g6 White would even win. However, after the text move 44 �g6 ltle5+ 45 'it>f5 a3! 46 �xeS a2 wraps it up.

0-1

In Linares I made heavy weather ofmost of my games, and the Svidler and Topalov encounters were no more than isolated flashes of brilliance. In some events the moves just flow, but at Linares everything seemed an uphill strog gle. After this mediocre result, I went on to play in Dos Hermanas, which was an unmitigated disaster. Matters did not improve much during the rest of 1 999, though it has to be said that I played relatively little. However,matters then took a tum for the better. During 1999, I had spent a month and a half preparing for Kasparov, and this work proved a useful foundation foc my play in 2000 . In general, I have found that work you do always pays off in the end, although perhaps not in the game you want or the tournament you want. The new year started with an immediate success - I won the world blitz championship in Warsaw. After this I went on to the traditional tournament at Wijk aan Zee. Although I perhaps made too many draws in this tournament I was still quite satisfied with my joint second place, especially after the trou bles of the previous year. The following game was my best of the event, and is an object lesson in how to play against the Stonewall Dutch.

Game 54

V. Anand

-

P. Nikolic

Wijk aan lee 2000 Dutch Defence 1 d4 2 g3

rs

2 3 .i.g2 4 c4

li::l£6 e6 dS

In the Dutch Defence, it's quite handy to delay developing the g) knight because it can be advanta geously placed on h3 in some lines. .••

Predrag goes straight for the Stonewall, a line in which the knight is indeed best placed on h3.

s li::lh3

c6

Black's aim is to set up a solid chain of pawns in the centre. While it is not easy for White to break this down, Black's pawn-structure is rather inflexible.

6 7 8 9

0-0 ,..c2 li::ld2 li::lr3

.i.d6 0-0 .i.d7 .i.e8 (D)

A standard idea in the Stonewall this bishop hopes to emerge via h5.

10 .i.£4!

I had seen various games where

White goes li::lf4-d3 followed by .i.f4 and wondered why he couldn't save time by developing the bishop di rectly.

10

h6

Black intends to take advantage of the position of the knight on h3 by pushing his g-pawn.

11 'Wb3! White forces Black to make as many concessions as possible in or der to develop his pieces. 11 b6 Black must weaken his queenside. If he plays I l ... lln then he allows li::le5 with gain of tempo (before or after .i.xd6 ). Also, defending the pawn from f7 means that Black can't develop with ... lC!bd7. l l ...g5 is an interesting try. After 1 2 .i.xd6 'Wxd6 White can continue: I) 1 3 lC!e5 enables White to keep a safe edge.

292


2) 13 'i'xb7 is more ambitious, but also more double-edged. After 1 3 ...g4 White has: 2a) 14 liJf4? gxf3 15 exf3 (15 .ixf3 .if? 16 'i'xa8 'i'c7 1 7 cxd5 exd5 and the queen does not escape) 1 5 ... .if7 ! ( 1 5 ... .id7 16 c5!) 16 'i'xa8 ( 1 6 c5 'I'd? 1 7 'ifxa8 liJa6 also fa vours Black) 16 ... 'i'c7 1 7 cxd5 exd5 1 8 l:acl liJfd7 followed by 19 ... liJb6 winning the queen. 2b) 14 'i'xa8 gxh3 and now: 2bl ) 1 5 .ixh3 file? (again it's a bit tricky - how does White extricate his queen?) 1 6 llfcl (after 16 a4 liJbd7 17 cxd5 liJxd5 the white queen is doomed) 1 6 ... �d7, followed by ...liJa6, and White will have to sur render his queen. 2b2) 15 'ifxa7 ! (it is more impor tant to save the queen than the g2bishop) 15 ...hxg2 16 llfc l gives White the advantage. He has consid erable pressure on the queenside and a rook and two pawns for a bishop and a knight - and that is being gen erous in counting the g2-pawn as a 'live' pawn. Therefore White has the pleasant choice between line ' 1 ' and line '2b2'.

12 mct A classic case of the problem of which rook to play to a particular file. With hindsight, l:lacl would have increased the force of a later f4 to such an extent that Black might not even have gone in for ...g5.

12 �e7 (D) 12 ...g5 1 3 �xd6 1Wxd6 14 liJe5 gives White a clear advantage. ...

13 cxdS!

This is the accurate moment to

take on d5, when Black can't recap ture ... cxd5.

13

...

liJxdS

13 . . .cxd5? loses to 14 !i.e?, while 1 3 ... exd5 14 liJe5 prevents the de velopment of the b8-knight

14 !i..d2

White can already speak of a clear advantage since the 'Stonewall' has been breached.

14

...

g5

Sealing the h3-knight out of play, but potentially weakening Black's kingside. IS liJeS aS! A good move. The weaknessofc6 makes ...�d7 impossible, so Black has to find another way to activate his rook. 16 e4

ANAND

-

NIKOUt, WJJK AAN ZEE 2000

Opening up lines and chipping away at the pawn-wall in front of Black's king. 16 fxe4 17 .be4 (D)

293

Further eroding the enemy king's defences.

18 19 �b1 ...

gxf4

Since Black can hardly take on g3 (19... fxg3?20 'ifxg3+ �h8 2 1 ll:lg6+ gives White a decisive attack), White keeps his options open as to how to recapture on f4.

19

.tf6

Clearing the way for the rook to switch to the g-file in case White plays gxf4.

20 ll:lxr4

Therefore White takes the chance to activate the h3-knight. 20 'ild6 (D)

17

D.a7

17 ...a4 is a more active possibil ity. After 18 'iid3 a3 19 b3 the criti cal line is 19 ...ll:la6 20 ll:lxc6 (if White wants to avoid complications then 20 'ife2 is safe and strong) 20 . bc6 21 l:l.xc6 ll:lab4 22 .txb4 ltlxb4 23 'ifc4 l:l.f6, and now: 1) 24 l:l.xe6? b5 25 l:l.a6+ bxc4 26 l:txa8 'ifxa8 27 .txa8 cxb3 28 axb3 :a6 and the a-pawn is too dangerous. 2) 24 l:l.c7 b5 25 'ifc3 is not very clear as the attack on a2 makes it hard todevelop the a1-rook. 3) 24 l:l.xb6! l:l.c8 25 l:l.xb4 l:l.xc4 26l:l.xc4 is promising for White even though the knight is out of play for the moment; e.g., 26 ... 'ifaS 27 l:l.d1 or 26... .td6 27 f3, followed by ll:lf2. .. .

18 f4!

21 ll:lrg6 Forcing the exchange of a defensive bishop. 21 .bg6 22 ll:lxg6 l:l.fT7 23 .tf4! Black must take the bishop, but this both opens the g-file and ties

194


Black down to the defence of the c6pawn. 23 �4 .i.g1 (D) 24 gxl'4 The greedy 24....i.xd4 25 'ilfh3 .i.xb2 is punished by 26 l:tdl ! .i.d4 27 1rxh6, when White has too many threats against the poorly defended kingside.

•.•

l:t'6

26 l:tc3!

Playing 26 l:!.c3, followed by l:tgl and l:tcg3, doubles rooks just as quickly as 26 l:tgl , followed by l:!.g3 and l:!.ag I , but it fixes the knight on b8 longer.

26

·-

28 ...

b5

29 :gJ 30 ltJeS

'fka7 l:te7 (D)

There is little Black can do.

31 'fid2

25 'li'h3 Moving the rook to gl should come later, in order to keep the en emy knight fixed on b8.

25

Threatening 28... 'I'd I+, so 28 Zlg3 would now be a blunder. 28 l:tgl White's major pieces slot neatly into place on the g-file.

Wfxd4

Black grabs a pawn, but the game will be decided by White's attack along the g-file. 27 11Fg2 l:td7

White has a choice of winning lines. The text-move aims to pene trate along the d-file; 31 Zlg6 is also sufficient, while 31 .i.xc6 foUowed by 32 .i.d7 is perhaps most brutal.

31 32 l:td3 ...

1lc7

The rest is fairly simple. lle8 32 cS 33 :d6 33 ... �h8 loses to 34 'i'g2!, fol· lowed by 35 �g6+. ...

34 lDg4 35 ltlxh6+ 36 ltlg4

:m

lilh8 :l.d8

ANAND - NIKOUt, WIJK AAN ZEE 2000

:r1 'i'g2

38 'ii'b3+ 39 'i'h7+ 40 ..ig6+

l:!.xd6 �g8 'M7 1-0

295

As usual at Wijk aan Zee, the pub lic were able to vote on the best game of the day. This game won the public prize for round 2.

During 2000, in addition to traditional events at Wijk aan Zee, Linares and Dortmund, I played in some rapid events and took part in an 'advanced chess' tournament at Leon, in which the players could use a computer during the games. Adding in blitz and blindfold events, 2000 offered quite a variety of chess activities. All these forms of chess present different challenges, and they add the spice of variety to what would otherwise be a somewhat mo notonous progression of tournaments. For professional players, it is very im portant to keep the creative juices flowing, and playing different forms of chess is a good way to achieve this. An additional point is that these different forms of chess add to the popularity of the game. You could argue that if Frankfurt, for example, didn't organize a rapid event then they might organ ize a classical tournament, but I think it is the other way around - if they didn't organize a rapid tournament then they wouldn't have a chess tourna ment at all. I think that if you can sell a particular type of event to a sponsor, then you should just do it, even if the result if a proliferation ofdifferent types of chess. Playing against computers is a more marginal case. At Dortmund 2000, a computer took part in the top event and scored 50%. It is, of course, possible to use the same argument - that having a computer in a tournament might at tract sponsor and enable an event to take place which would otherwise be impossible. However, I have some reservations about this and I think that mixed human/computer events should be solely human vs computer events in other words, the players shouldn't be expected to play a human one day and a computer the next. Humans can't switch their styles this way, and with out wishing to sound too much like making excuses, I think that an event such as Dortmund will automatically create good results for the computer. Also, I think that it is necessary to look at the rules for human vs computer games. It can't be right that a computer can access a vast opening database at the boars.Since the computer also has an array of endgame databases at its disposal, the battleground has essentially been narrowed to the middlegame, which makes it very tough for the human player. It may well be that in I 0 years the computer will win regardless of any rules or reslrictions, but just at the moment, when human vs computer contests are still interesting, we have

196


to ask whether the rules are really fair. The problem is that the current line are a hangover from the days when humans could beat computers with their eyes shut, and at that time nobody cared whether the computer had an open ings book. Now the situation is very different, and the rules deserves a further look. If they wanted to, humans could probably improve their results against computers with three or four months of special training. Your though processes need to be completely different when playing computers; you have to be much more alert and focussed tactically, while at the same time you can take a more relaxed approach to strategic matters. However, at the moment the infrequency of such events would hardly justify such an expenditure of time. Linares 2000 was another disappointment However, soon after this it be came clear that the match with Kasparov wouldn't happen, since we were m able to agree terms for the contract.l was disappointed, but at least the uncertainty had gone. I felt quite motivated to do well in the tournaments that followed and two months of rest (April and May) had the required effect My play started to show the old freshness again. The recovery in my play gath ered pace throughout the year, and you could see it not only in terms of re sults but also in the style of the games. During my best years, 1998 and 2000, my games had a creativity and vigour which was generally lacking in my games from 1999. As 2000 progressed the successes mounted - I won the ad vanced chess event in Leon and the Frankfurt rapid, and I was joint first at Dortmund. In August I won the FIDE World Cup in Shenyang, and the fol lowing game from this event saw me entering the Najdorf labyrinth again

Game 55

V. Anand - A. Khalifman FIDE World Cup, Shenyang 2000 Sicilian, Najdorf 1 e4

c5

A surprise. However, since the Najdorf was so topical in the qualifi cation tournament at Polanica Zdroj, it was to be expected that some other players might want to join the dis

cussion. 2 3 4 S 6

it:lf3 d4 it:lxd4 it:lc3 i.e3

11 12 13 14

h4 lDa4 b3 a3 (D)

b4 'i'aS it:lcS

d6 cxd4 it:\r6 a6 e6

This line is all the rage now. Loek

van Wely is, as always, leading the charge, but Gelfand has joined in.

7 f3

7 g4 was played a lot at Polanica Black had no problems theoretically speaking and Shirov's win over Van Wely was decided in the middlegame.

7

...

bS

8 g4 Both of us are heading straight for the main line. It is very difficult for of us side to deviate, so I guess both of us were already thinking about move 16. h6 8

9 'i'd2 10 0-0.0

it:lbd7 i.b7

14 l:tc8 This move was introduced in the game Anand-Gelfand, Amber rapid, Monaco 2000. Previously 14 ...lDxa4 1 5 axb4 'ilc7 1 6 bxa4 had been played, but the practical results from this position until then had favoured White. A few months later, Gelfand went on to resuscitate that line as well! 15 'i'xb4 'i'c7

16 �bl!

16 lDxc5 has been tried a few times, but without too much success.

298


My second Ubilava and I spent some time looking for alternatives and pretty soon we discovered 1 6 �b I .

li:lcd7

16

Khalifman played this after a long thinJc. There are various other possi bilities for Black. After 16 ...d5 1 7 li:lxc5 .ixc5 18 1Va4+ li:ld7 1 9 b4 the position is unclear, while in a later game de Ia Riva-Van Wely, Zonal tournament, Mondariz 2000 Black played 16 ...li:lfd7 and went on to win.

17 1i'd2

After 1 7 'ifc4 d5 1 8 'ifxc7 lb.c7 1 9 exd5 li:lxd5 Black regains his pawn, since 20 .te l is answered by 20...e7 (D) with an other branch:

2a) 29 tbf8 and now: 2a1) 29...l:l.xd8? 1oses to 30 'I'a7+ Wd6 3 1 l:l.d l +. 2a2) 29 ... .i.xc2+ 30 'iti>a2 tbxf8 (30... l:l.xf8?! 3 1 l:l.fxf8 favours White, while 30 ... l:l.xd8 31 1i'b7+ 'iti>d6 32 'i'xa6+ is perpetual check) 3 1 l:l.xc8 tod7 32 'l'xa6 l:l.xc8 33 'I'xeS .i.xb3+ 34 Wxb3 'in>5+ 35 Wxa3 'l'xfl 36 tbc3 with a drawn ending. 2a3) 29 ... tb xf8! 30 l:l.xc8 tbd7 31 'i'xa6 l:l.xc8 32 'l'xc8 'l' b5! 33 'ilfc4

'iWxc4 34 bxc4 with the better ending for Black. 2b) 29 'ilfa7+ l:l.c7 30 tbxc7 (after 30 l:l.e8+, 30...Wxe8 31 liJxc7+ �d8 transposes to variation '2b2',while 30. ..l:l.xe8 31 tbxc7 .i.xc2+ 32 �a2 l:l.f8 33 tbb5+ Wd8 34 'i'a8+ We7 is perpetual check) and now: 2bl) 30... l:l.xd8 3 1 liJd5+ �e6 32 'iWn+ Wd6 33 '6'c7+ ltixd5 (33. . .� loses to 34 'i'c6+ 'i'd6 35 liJc7+ �e7 36 'i'xe4+ tbe5 37 l:l.f5) 34 liJb6+ 'iti>d4 35 'ilfxd8+ and Black will lose his queen. 2b2) 30...Wxd8 3 1 l:l.d1+ .id6 with a further branch: 2b2 1 ) 3 2 tbxa6? l:l.h l ! (the tempt ing 32 .. . 1Lxc2+ 33 �xc2 l:l.h2+ 34 'iti> b1 'ilfe4+ 35 � a1 l:l.d2 36 1rb6T �e7 37 l:l.xd2 'i'e 1 + 38 Wa2 'l'xd2+ 39 tbb2 is a draw, but 32.. .:b2 is also good for Black) and the attack collapses since Black's centralized pieces control too many squares. 2b22) 3 2 liJe6+ 'lfxe6 33 liX:5 .i.xc2+ 34 �xc2 'iVf5+ 35 �I � 36 l:l.xd6 l:l.h1+ 37 l:l.d1 will be a draw. 2b23) 32 lbc5 .i.xc2+ (32. ...if5? 33 tbb5 ! axb5 34 tbb7+ We7 35 tbxd6+ favours White after 35....id7 36 tOeS+ or 35... �6 36 'fin+ �g5 37 fuf5) 33 Wa2 .i.xb3+ (33. ...if5 34 l:l.xd6+ 1fxd6 35 liJb7+ Wxc7 36 tbxd6+ 'iti>xd6 37 •xg7 is another draw, while 33 ... .i.xd1 34 liJ7 e6+ 'ilfxe6 35 ltlxe6+ 'iti>c8 36 lild4 is about equal) 34 'iti>xb3 (34 �a3?

ANAND - KHAUFMAN, WORW CUP, SHENYANG 2000

i.xdl ! wins fey Black) 34...1lh3+ 35 �a4 llh4+ 36 �b3! (36 � a5? ilc3+ is winning for Black) and the com plications peter out to perpetual check. 27 'ii'b6! (D)

301

ltlb5+ and the c6-knight falls, with a winning position for White.

28 lldB+

Not 28 ltlxf8 llc6 29 ltlg6 llxb6 30 ltlxe7 lte6, which only leads to a draw.

28 29 llJc7+ •••

lhd8 'fllxc7

29... �d7? loses immediately to 30 'ii'xb7. 30 11xc7 lld7 (D)

Now White breaks through. ltlf8 27

Or: I) 27 ...l:th6 28 l:!.d8+ llxd8 29

lix7+ 'ffxc7 (29 .. .'�d7 30 'ii'xb7 �d6 31 'l'b6+ 'it>d7 32 l:!.dl+ wins since 32... �c8 33 'ffxa6+ �xc7 34 'i!Va7+ mates) 30 1!hc7 lld7 3 1 'i!Vb8+ �e7 32 1'g8 and White wins. 2) 27 ... ltle5 28 l:td8+ llxd8 29 ltlc7+ �d7 30 'ffxb7 'i!fg5 3 1 ltlb6+ (better than 3 1 ltlxa6+ �e8 32 ltlc7+, when 32 ... 'it>e7 hangs on for a draw) 31...�d6 32 ltlbd5! ltlc6 (32 ... 'ii'g6 33 �b5+ mates, while 32 ...1lh6 33 'i!Vxa6+ �d7 34 •xa3 also wins for White)33 'ifxa6 il..c5 (if White is al lowed to take the bishop,then he has a crushing attack for no sacrifice) 34

31 1l'b8+

3 1 11t'e5+ is also strong; fey exam ple, 3 1 ...�d8 (after 31 ... il..e7 32 ltlc5 White wins material straight away) il 5+ c7 (a 32 ltlb6 i.d d6 33 33 ... 1le7 34 lldl White picks up the bishop) 34 'i!Va5 and Black must sur render material. After the text-move, the queen is extremely powerful and Black must also contend with the possibility of ltlb6. �e7 31 •.•

32 1ifeS+

ltle6

302


33 .:tgl

'lif7

The main alternative is 33 ... :.gs, and now: J) 34 lbb6 ..id6 (after 34 ... :.d6? 35 lbc4 �b4 36 .l:g6 White should win) 35 'i'f5 (35 'i'h5 is unclear after 35 ...l:tdd8 36 lb d5+ ..ixd5 37 exd5 lbf4, but not 35 ...�c5? when 36 :.n is s•ong) 35 ... g6 (35 .....ih2? loses to 36 l:tg6!) 36 l:lxg6 l:txg6 37 'i'xg6 :.c7 and Black is hanging on. 2) 34 l:tg6! l:td6 35 'lia2 (35 lbc3 'lid7 36 lbd5 �xd5 37 exd5 lbc7 38 lbg7+ l:txg7 39 'i'xg7+ 'ilrc8 is only a draw) 35 ... �c1 (D) (the only move) and now:

2a) 36 lbc5 �c8 37 lbxe6 �xe6 38 'irc5 'lid7 39 e5 �xb3+ 40 cxb3 :.xg6 41 'l"d5+ 'lie7 42 'irxg8 �h6 looks like a draw. 2b) 36 :Xe6+ :Xe6 37 'irc7+ �6 38 'i'xb7 is unpleasant for Black. The vulnerable black king means that White's queen has the edge over Black's rooks.

2c) 36 &3 ..if4 (36... 'ilrd7 37 lbd5 and 36... �c6 37 lbd5+ 'ilrd7 38 c4 are winning for White) 37 lhe6+ l:l.xe6 38 'irxf4 :.c8! 39 'irg4! (not39 'lib2 'lieS and now White can't play 40 lbd5 because of 40....ixd5 41 exd5 lle2 1atching on to the c2-pawn) 39... 'ilrf7 40 1Vf5+ 'ilre7 41 �5+. followed by 42 c4, with a large ad vantage for White. In view of Black's exposed king, his rooks will have a hard time against the queen and ac tively placed knight. If Black ex changes on d5, then White obtains two connected passed pawns. muiB 34 lbbei 35 'ilra2 (D) I didn't want to allow ...l:ld1+, but 35 1Vf5+ 'lie7 36 :.g6 :.dl + 37 �a2 J:l.8d6 38 lbc4 should also win.

35 36 �d7

.if8

36

:Xd7

•••

36 1Vf5+ 'ilre7 37 l:tfl would have been more precise, with a quick win.

ANAND - KHAUFMAN, WORW CUP, SHENYANG 2000

37 'i'fS+ By now White has a choice of good lines; for example, 37 l:l.fl + <j;e7 38 l:l.xf8 �xf8 39 'l'xe6 is also decisive.

37

rl;e7

38 :n 39 fff7+ 40 e5+

303

�c8 �d6 1-0

Afler 40 ..<j;d5 41 lld l + White wins a piece, so Black resigned. .

Afrer Shenyang, I won a rapid event in Corsica and I came to the FIDE World Championship very motivated. To play 21 games in an event of this strength without a single loss says it all - I was on top form. Apart from a scare against Khalifman, my play was convincing throughout. A pattern de veloped where I would win with White and draw with Black.While there is probably an element of coincidence here, I think my black openings have be come more solid over the past few years.

Game 56

V. Anand - M . Adams FIDE World Championship, New Delhi 2000 Ruy Lopez, M0ller 1 e4

eS

2 3 4 s 6 7 8 9

�6 a6 �f6

�f3

�bS

�a4 o-o c3 �c2 a4 h3

10 d3 1 1 �bd2

�Q bS

d6

�g4 �hS

0-0

b4

After 1 l ...d5 12 axb5 axb5 1 3 l:l.xa8 'irxa8 1 4 exd5 �xd5 15 ll'le4 �b6 16 ll'lg3 �g6 17 ll'lh4 White was slightly better in Gild.Garcia Benjamin, Toronto 1998. 12 aS l:l.b8 (D)

13 g4!?

White wants to bury the bishop on g6. but I spent some lime looking at the sacrifice on g4. The alternative is 1 3 l:l.el 'ireS 14 ll'lfl b3 15 .ibl l:l.b5, with an edge for White, as played in Adams-Benjamin, World Team Championship, Lucerne 1997. �g6 13 The sacrifice leads to complex play: 1 3...�xg4 14 hxg4 bg4 and now: I ) 15 �b3 and here: Ia) 15 ... f5 with two lines: I a ! ) 1 6 ll'lxc5? and now: ! a l l ) 1 6 ... dxc5 17 �b3+ �h8 1 8 �d5 ( 1 8 �e6 'ireS wins for Black) 18 ... l:l.f6 19 �xc6 l:l.xc6 20 exf5 (20 �xe5 �xdl 2 I ll'lf7+ �g8 22 ll'lxd8 l:tg6+ 23 �h2 .if3 is very good for Black) 20.. .' ti'f6 21 Ael 'irxf5 22 ltJh4 'irh5 is good ffJ l:l.hl+ 35 <j;>e2 Wh5+ 36 <j;>d2 wins ff) and Black loses.

ANAND

-

ADAMS, FIDE WORLD CH., NEW DELRI 2000 309

2a3) 28... ltJh3+ 29 �g2! (not 29 'ii>h l? l:txf2 30 'ire3 'irf8 with prob lems for White) 29 .. .l:txf2+ 30 'ifxf2 l2Jxf2 (White has only a rook for a queen, but remarkably he still wins) 31 l:b8! h6 (forced, as after 3L.h5 32 ttlb6 �h7 33 l:xc8 'ire7 34 ltJd7 White wins on the spot) 32 ltJb6 �h7 33 J:xc8 'ire7 34 ltJd7! (White cannot pause to capture the knight on f2, since after 34 �f2 hxg5 Black's queen slips out, when it will be im possible to avoid perpetual check) 34 .. hxg5 35 ltJf8+ �h6 36 ltJe6 ! ! (the remarkable point) 3 6. . .�h5 (the only move) 37 �xf2! (now is the correct time to take the knight; 37 l:h8+?? is a mistake because Black wins after 37... �g4 38 �xf2 'irf6+!) 37 . .' 1'f6+ (37... �g4 38 R.dl+ �h3 39 hxg5 ! and 37 ... 'ifxe6 38 R.dl+ are also winning for White) 38 �g2 'lxe6 39 R.dl+! (and not 39 l:lh8+?? �g4 40 R.dl+ �4 since here e3 Isn't covered)and White wins the queen

2b) 26 l:lb8 is a simpler win: 26... ltJf4 27 ltJxf4 exf4 (27 ...'ifxg5+ 28 ltJhg2 exf4 29 R. d7! is decisive) 28 'irxf4 (a clearer continuation than 28 ltJg2 f3 29 ltJh4 ilc7 30 l:lb2) 28 ...'irc7 (28 ...1Wxa5 loses after 29 '1Vxd6!) and now: 2bl ) 29 l:lbl 'ii xa5 30 R.c6?! (30 R.d7 'ifc7 3 1 R.g4 would still be good for White) 30 ...ifc7 3 1 R.d5 ltJe7 32 ltJxg6+ ltJxg6 (32 ...hxg6 33 R.xf7!) 33 'ilfg3 l:lb8 34 l:txb8+ 'ilfxb8 35 R.xf7 a5 and the a-pawn gives Black counterplay. 2b2) 29 l:la8! is simple and crush ing, since White can meet 29 ...'1Vb7 by 30 'ilfxd6 !.

'l'xg5+ 25 lLlxf4 25 ... l:lxbl+ 26 l:lxbl 'ilfxg5+ 27 ltJhg2 exf4 28 'irxf4 'l'd8 29 l:lb6! leaves White with a clear advantage.

26 ltJhgl (D)

.

.

26

•••

exf4?!

After this White has an intermezzo that allows him to keep both rooks.


310

Black could still have exchanged on bl.

27 J:.b6! Occupation of the outpost brings Black's a- and d-pawns under fire.

J:.bd8 27 28 'i'xC4 (D) ••.

28 29 l:lab1 •.•

W'r6 32 'fig3 l'i:Je7 3 3 it:lf4 34 'it>g2! (D)

34 l:lxe7? ! ilxe7 35 'i'xg6 l:lb8 is unnecessarily complicated.

'fie7 34

There is no rush to take the pawn on a6.

29 30 J:.b7

ltX:8

31 'figS

h6

••.

3 l ...'i'e5 32 h4 and 3 l ....xh3 32 iilf4 'fih6 33 'i'xh6 gxh6 34 l:lc7 are also hopeless for Black.

'fie6 By now there are many ways to win.

•••

35 lMS 36 i.dl!

1-0

There is no defence to the threats of 37 i.g4 and 37 l:l lb6, because 36... lt:lf6 runs into 37 l:le7. There fore Michael resigned, giving me the lead in our semi-final match.

Game 57

V. Anand - A. Shirov FIDE World Championship Final (4), Teheran 2000 French Defence 1 e4 Needing only one point from three games to become World Champion, I decided just to play normally and forget about the score. There was a rest day after the third game, which I spent checking all the openings Al exei plays. 1 e6 During 2000, Alexei and I played a lot of French Defences. Now he tries it again, based on an improve ment he had found over our game in Frankfurt. .•.

2 d4 3 �c3 4 e5

d5 l0f6

4 5 �el

l0fd7

Against 6 c3 cxd4 7 cxd4, Black can tty to blast White's centre imme diately with 7 .f6. 8 f4 is a possible reply, but this contains a lot of dan ger for White. � 6 ... Played fairly quickly. Black can go for 6 ... cxd4, but Alexei was head ing for his prepared improvement, so he saw no reason to enter a side line. ..

7 c3 8 �f3 (D)

....,6

In Sydney, 1 went for 4 i.gS, but didn't get much out of the opening. ...

During 2000, I used this variation quite successfully, gaining two wins against Shirov in Leon and Frank furt. In contrast, against Bareev in Shenyang I didn't get much from the opening. However, I included this variation in my preparations for New Delli. am felt ready to use it again.

5 6 f4

cS

f6 8 He played 8... i.e7 in Frankfurt, but we soon transpose in any case. One can already make out the con tours of the battle; White is trying to ...

311


maintain his pawn wedge in the cen (d4 and e5) while Black will try to breach it ( ...f6, ... c5). iJ..e7 9 a3 tre

10 h4 11 l:th3

0-0 aS!

The earlier game went I I . .. lll a5? 1 2 b4 cxb4 1 3 axb4 lll c4 14 lllg3 and now that the pressure on the cen tre has disappeared, White can direct his pieces to the kingside (Anand Shirov, Frankfurt Rapid 2000) . The text-move is much stronger, since by not allowing b4, Black is able to maintain the tension in the centre.

12 b3 Or 12 lllg3 cxd4 (Black tries to open the centre as much as possible) 1 3 cxd4 fxe5, and now: 1 ) 14 dxe5 lllc5 1 5 lllg5 (15 iJ..d3 lllxd3+ 16 'l'xd3 iJ..d7 17 lllg5 'l'g l + 18 lll fl :C5 is good for Black) 15 ... lllb3 16 'l'd3 (16 iJ..d3 h6 fa vours Black) 16 ... iJ..xg5 (not 16 ... g6 1 7 lllxh7) 1 7 hxg5 g6 1 8 l:tb1 lllx cl 1 9 J:txcl J:txf4 defends. 2) 14 fxe5 :Xf3! (a typical ex change sacrifice) 15 gxf3 lllxd4 (the alternative 15 ...'1'xd4 16 f4 lllc5 also gives Black lots of play for the exchange) 16 f4 lllb3 and Black has enough compensation. 'l'c7 12 There are two games featuring 1 2 . . .'l'd8, but this move looks much better; for a start, there are possibili ties of ... 'l'c3+ in some lines. 13 l0eg1 (D)

13

a4?

Alexei wants to sacrifice a piece to blast open the centre, but his idea falls short. There was no need to take such drastic measures, since Black can simply try to swap light-squared bishops by l 3 ...b6!, and now: 1 ) 1 4 iJ.. d 3?! cxd4 15 cxd4 (15 iJ..xh7+? �xh7 16 lllg5+ fxg5 17 hxg5+ �g8 and Black defends after 18 l:th8+ �xh8 19 'l'h5+ �g8 20 g6 iJ..h4+ 21 'l'xh4 lllf6 or 18 Wb5 llldxe5 19 fxe5 'l'xe5+ 20 lt)e2 i.a6) 15 ... fxe5 1 6 fxe5 ( l 6 dxe5 lllcxe5 17 fxe5 'l'c3+ 18 �e2 'l'xa1 19 'l'c2 iJ..a6 again defends) 16...lllxd4 is very good for Black. 2) 14 iJ..e3 iJ..a6 15 iJ..xa6 :Xa6 looks about equal.

14 b4

fxeS

1 4... b6 no longer works since 15 iJ..e3 iJ..a6 is met by 16 b5.

15 rxeS

lLldxeS

In this position, drastic measures are necessary. If White can consoli date his centre, then his kingside

ANAND

-

SHIROV, FIDE WORW CH., TEHERAN 2()()()

attack will be overwhelming; for ex ample, 15 ...cxd4 16 cxd4 liJdxe5 17 dxe5 liJxe5 18 .ltb2.

16 dxe5 17 liJxe5!

liJxe5

The best move. White's knights would keep tripping over each other's toes, so it's useful to exchange one of them.

17 18 '�Vel •••

one of the main lines of the Slav, where White also has a piece for three pawns (I d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 liJc3 liJf6 4 liJf3 dxc4 5 a4 .ltf5 6 liJe5 e6 7 f3 .ltb4 8 e4 .ltxe4 9 fxe4 liJxe4 10 .ltd2 1fxd4 l l liJxe4 '1Vxe4+ 12 'IVe2 .ltxd2+ 13 �xd2, etc.). In the cur rent position, Black's centre would be too loose.

20 �f3!

'IVxeS+

.ltxh4+? He played this quite fast, but it's an error. Mter 18 ... '1Vc7! Black fol lows up with ...e5, which should give him some play. Still, the extra piece should favour White after 19 .lg5. 19 Wd1 ! (D)

313

'Wxc3?!

20 ... g5 2 l liJxh4 'IVxfl+ 22 'IVxfl lbfl + 23 �e2 J:l.xcl 24 J:l.xc I gxh4 25 .l::txh4 is very good for White, as his rooks have all the open files they need!

21 .ltb2 Now White wins a second piece.

21 22 �cl ...

11b3+ e5 (D)

The only move - otherwise lLie5 wins the queen.

w

Now Black has to swap queens or make some other concession. '1Vf6? 19 ... Mter 19 ...'1Vxe2+ 20 .ltxe2 .ltf2 21 .i.e3 e5 22 .ltxf2 J:l.xf2 23 J:l.g3 White has a comfortable edge in the ending. The situation reminds me of

23 J:l.xb4 Obviously a pleasant choice - to win Black's queen or be two pieces up. I saw that after the text-move I

314


could swap queens and decided not to bother with the alternative. How ever, taking the queen would have finished it earlier: 23 ll:ld2 .i.xh3 24 ll:lxb3 :t2 (after 24 ... .i.g4 25 'ifxg4 .=:xn + 26 �c2 axb3+ 27 �xb3 c4+ 28 �a2 White just collects all the pawns) 25 'il'b5! .i.g5+ (25 ....i.d7 also loses, to 26 'il'xd7 .=:xn + 27 �c2 axb3+ 28 �xb3) 26 �bl .i.f5+ 27 .i.d3 axb3 28 bf5 l::txf5 29 bxc5 is winning for White. 23 .i.f5 e4 24 'il'd1 ••.

25 111xb3 26 ll:ld2

axb3

Harvesting all Black's central pawns is going to take a while, but basically the evaluation of the posi tion is clear - White is winning.

26

•••

e3

26 .. c4 27 .i.d4 wins for White. .

27 llJr3

27 o!llxb3 .i.g6 28 .i.e2 :n 29 �dl l::txg2 30 l:g4 is also sufficient.

27

l:ae8 (DJ

28 �1?!

28 bxc5 e2 29 �d2 exn• 30 l:xfl wins as well, but there is no reason to return material. However, 28 .i.e2! would have gained a tempo; after 28 ...c4 (28 ...d4 29 .i.c4+ �h8 30 bxc5 d3 3 1 .i.c3 keeps everytbing under control) 29 .i.d4 White can play �b2 immediately.

28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35

c4

.i.e2

.i.e4

�1 .i.cJ .1:112

1lg6

hd3 �b2 �xb3

l:e6

.i.d3

ad3 d2

By now there are alternative routes to victory; e.g., 35 .=:dt e2 36 l:xd2 :Xf3 37 l::txe2 or 35 .i.xd2 exd2 36 ltd! .

35 36 �b2

:g3

36

g5 (D)

•••

Yes, 36 �c2 is quicker. I guess I was getting nervous!

ANAND

37 �c2

-

SHIROV, FIDE WORW CH., TEHERAN 2000

ltc8

White also wins after 37 ... g4 38 .ie5(38 li)d4 l:lf2 39 l:ldl e2 40 li:\xe2 J:be2 41 l:bd2 is also good) 38 ... gxf3 39 i.xg3 f2 40 l:lh4 l:lf5 (40 l:lc8+ loses to 4 1 'it>d3 l:lc l 42 :h i) 4 1 :l.g4+ �f7 42 i.xf2 :l.xf2

115

Avoiding Black's last trick in the position: 41 li)d4?? d lli'+! 42 l:lxdl l:ld2+!, which only works because the move ll'ld4 cuts off the bishop's guard of the rook on a I .

...

43 �d3.

38 39 40 41

�d3 i.eS

:l.h1

lLlli4

g4

:l.cl l:lxg2

After the text-move, I left the stage. The situation is hopeless for Black, so when I carne back Alexei graciously congratulated me on be coming World Champion.

1-0

Winning the world championship was the highlight of my career so far.

The knockout format used in the FIDE championship is relatively new, but I think that it is a legitimate format and anyone who wins this event deserves

the title of World Champion. The impact of my victory in the world championship was extraordinary. Chess has become steadily more popular in India over the past few years, and the media coverage of the world championship was excellent even during the New Delhi segment, but it reached a whole new level after I won the final On my return from Teheran to Delhi, I was met at the airport by thousands of people and had a motorcade through the city, with banners hanging every where. In Chennai (Madras), my hometown, I was taken in a horse-carriage through the city and also honoured by the State Government. The publicity was not confined to India; there was also plenty of press coverage in other Asian countries such as Malaysia, while on my return to Spain I was, for the f1rst time, met by a media corps. I think the game can only benefit from the developmentof chess in India and other countries which are not currently considered major chess nations. I am sure that chess will continue to make progress in India and we may well see a new generation of players emerging there. Having won the world title I feel content with what I have achieved on the chessboard and look forward to new challenges in the future.

Combinations

A. Hamed - V. Anand

V. Tukmakov - V. Anand

Thessaloniki Olympiad 1984

Delhi 1986

Although White's king is in an awkward situation, for the moment the bishop on g2 is providing an ade quate defence. How did Black press home his attack?

White's bishop is horribly placed and Black is effectively a piece up on the rest of the board, but does he have anything better than simply ex changing on f2?

COMBINA110NS

317

5 B

J. Gdanski - V. Anand

World Junior Championship, Baguio City 1987 White chose to meet the attack on his queen by 31 .:td2 (3 1 'lre2 would have been a better chance). How did Black finish the game at a stroke?

J. Levitt V. Anand -

Match (3), London 1987 White is threatening to make fur ther progress on the queenside with 29 l:lcc6. How did Black pre-empt this with a kingside strike?

Although Black's protected passed pawn on a2 is very dangerous, White has an extra pawn and threatens to start eliminating the queenside pawns by li'ld4+ and lLlxb3. How did Black make use of his advanced pawns? Note that it is not Black's first move but his fourth which is the difficult one!

318


V. Anand - M. Adams Uoyds Bank, London 1987

Black has just played 14 ..ll:lf6. dS, preparing to answer 15 b5 by .

1 5 ...ll:lxc3 followed by 1 6 ... �xb5. What is the flaw in this plan which allowed White to score a quick win?

7 B

V. Anand - P.

Thipsay

Coimbatore 1987 Anand had gone into this ending deliberately, even though his king is now far away from the action. Is the position a win?

This was a lucky escape for An· and. White has sacrificed a piece for an enormous attack, and now he could have won by 35 '1'116+ Wg8 36 J:e6, when there is no answer to the threat of 37 'il'g5+ W f8 38 J:f6. In stead, he rushed in with 35 J:e6, but Black replied ... what?

COMBINATIONS

319

9 B

V. Anand - R. Gerber Bie/ 1988

After 44 �e3, confining White's king, Black has good drawing pros pects, for example 45 tDd6 Wc7 46 li)xf7 (46 tDf5 �cl) 46...Wxc6 47 h6 .i.d4 48 h7 Wd5 49h8W' �xh8 50 ft:lxh8 Wd4 51 ft:lf7 Wd3 52 tDe5+ "'c2. However, Black was impatient to attack the b2-pawn and played 44 �g7. Why was this a mistake? ...

D. Campora - V. Anand Thessaloniki Olympiad 1988 Black has a formidable line-up along the g-file, but White is threat ening to force exchanges by 1i'fl. How did Black make use of the ag gressively posted rook on g2?

...

V. Ivanchuk - V. Anand Reggio Emilia 1988/9 Ivanchuk now played the serious error 17 Whl? (instead 17 M4 would have been very good for White). How did Black then win?

120


V. Ruban - V. Anand Palma de Mal/orca GMA 1989 Material is equal, but White has several threats. If Black does not have something special, then he will be in big trouble. What did Anand play?

V. Anand - Ye Rongguang Manila 1nterzonal 1990 White would like to advance his pawn, but at the moment this would leave his rook undefended Is 5 1 l:tc2+ followed by 52 b6 the right way to proceed?

V. Anand - A. Dreev

Candidmes match (2), Chennai (Madras) 1991 The position seems to be rather awkward for White as his king is in serious danger. Not only does the possibility of a back-rank mate mean that White's queen has restricted mobility, but Black is also threaten ing to win the h2-pawn, after which his own h-pawn will become very dangerous. If White defends it by 42 "irg l , then 42 ... :tg2 will drive the queen away. Can you see a clear-cut way for White to save the game?

COMBINATIONS

321

V. Anand - J. Tilnman

A. Beliavsky V. Anand

Linares 1991

Reggio Emilia 199112

White has an extra pawn, but he will have to work hard to exploit it. However, the Dutch grandmaster made the awful blunder 27 ...'l'd7??. Why was this so bad?

Black has an advantage, but it ap pears that considerable work will be needed to win. Anand made it look easy by winning a vital pawn. How?

-

L.

Ljubojevic - V. Anand

Roquebrune Rapid 1992 16 ...l:td8 17 'i'f3 and 16 ... l:te8 17 f4 are winning for White, so Sa1ov decided to give up the exchange by 16...d6. What happened next?

A truly chaotic position. Black can reach a favourable ending by playing 29 . . . 'ifxg5 30 'ifxg5 l:txg5 31 �xfl lbd3, but how did Anand win far more convincingly?

322


V. Anand - M. IUescas

V. Anand K. Robatsch

Linares 1992

Manila Olympiad 1992

In this position one might expect protracted strategic manoeuvring by White, but Anand was able to utilize his queenside pressure to launch an explosive combination. How?

-

In return for the sacrificed paw

White has a large lead in develo]

ment. How did he use it to launch deadly attack? The detailed vari tions are quite complex, but the rna point is to get the basic idea right!

C. Garcia Palenno - V. Anand

Manila Olympiad 1992

White's king is very exposed, b he has a knight ready to hop into d How did Black win material?

COMBINATIONS

121

L. van Wely - V. Anand Tilburg 1992

V. Anand - A- Khalifman

White is a pawn up and he is at tacking Black's rook, but even so An and found a combination leaving him with a clear advantage. What was it?

White's h-file attack is certainly dangerous, but Black's queen has just leapt into White's position and is attacking the b2-rook and c3-pawn. How did White proceed with his at tack?

White has very strong threats on the kingside in return for the piece, but first of all he has to deal with the attack on his rook. Which move is correct: 42 f6 or 42 .i.f6?

Las Palmas 1993


124

V. Anand - M. Adams

V. Anand - B. Gel'and

PCA Candidates match (1), Linares 1994

Dos Hermanas 1996

White has a slight advantage as Black's e-pawn is slightly weak and his bishop is more active than the enemy knight. On the other hand, Black's doubled rooks on the d-file could be useful. Adams now continued with 31 'iff7. Why was this a mistake? ...

White has a decisive positional advantage in that he is a pawn up and his knights dominate the centre. Gel fand therefore decided to stake eve rything on a last gamble by 40 ...ixh3 41 gxh3 l:txf3. How did Anand re fute this last desperate attack? •

COMBINATIONS

325

V. Anand - J. Polgar Dos Hemwnas 1997 Material is equal, but White has a dangerous passed pawn . How did Anand utilize this pawn to win

game?

Despite material equality, White is winning due to the imprisoned bishop on h2. What is the most effi cient method of finishing the game?

V. Anand - V. lvanchuk 6th Amber Rapid, Monaco 1997 White is already a pawn up, but Black will gain a Iitle counterplay if he has time for . etJc5, attacking b3 and opening the d-file. How did An and finish the game vigorously? .

.

In this innocuous-looking posi tion, White found a way to win a pawn. How?

Sol utions 1) 42...llld1!

Threatening to win the queen with 43 ...lllf2+ and thus forcing White's reply.

43l:a2 J:al!

White will soon lose the d5-pawn, when he will be two pawns down fh l 'li'n.

47...hxg4 Thanks to the position of the king on h 1 , Black has greater attacking possibilities down the h-file.

48 'i!Fxb4 Wh7! 49 'ifc4 'i!Fe7 SO 'ilfdS l%e3 51 .ixg4 'i'h4+ 52 .ih3 'i'el+ 53 �h2 'ifg3+ 0-1

straightforward

35 ll'lb6 'liVeS 36 ll'lc4 .ibl 37 'i'b2 .td3 38 ll'ld6 'i'c3 0-1 White is losing more material.

2244

.%lf3!

Threatening both 45 ...lt'Jg4+ and 45. . . h4. Note that the alternatives 44 ... ll'lf3+? 45 gxf3 :Xf3 46 'i'g5 and 44. .. h4 45 .ixfl hxg3+ 46 Wh 1 'i'xa5 47 'i'el are unsound.

23)

42 .if6!

42 f6 is certainly tempting, but Black can reply 42 ...ll'lce3 ! 43 fxe3 (43 hxg4 is also met by 43 ... '1i'c3) 43 ...'1i'c3 44 'ifxc3 (44 'li'fl 'li'xe3+) 44 ...dxc3 45 hxg4 c2 (the bishop on g7 may not be well placed if White cannot actually give mate) 46 l%c7 ltal + 47 Wf2 cl 'IIV 48 %lxcl l:xcl with a drawn ending.

332


42 \t>rs ..•

42...0d2 43 l:.g7+ 'it>f8 44 .i.e7+ wins White's queen.

43 hxg4 'ii'd2 44 'ifxd2 Not 44 11Vxc4? J:l.al + 45 'it>h2 'iVh6+ 46 'it>g3 'iVf4+ 47 'it>h3 l:.hl#.

44 �xd2 45 J:.d7 l:laS 46 f3 &4 47 g5 l:.al+ 48 'it>h2 l:.a6 49 J:l.c7 49 g4 would have been simpler as Black's pawns cannot move at the momen.t. . 49 't)e) SO .i.g7+ 'it>g8 Sl .i.xeS . • •

d3 52 ..tcJ

White must not try to be too clever: 52 f6 d2 53 g6 hxg6 54 f7+ 'it>f8 55 .i.f4 g5! 56 .i.xe3 J:l.h6+ 57 'it>g3 dl 'iV 58 .i.c5+ l:.d6 would be embarrassing for White. 52... d2 53 .i.xd2 li)fi+ 54 'it>h3

li)xd2 55 f6

White wins this ending fairly easily thanks to the poor position of Black's knight.

SS...l:.al 56 'it>g4 l:.gl 57 'it>g3 l:.hl 58 'it>r4 J:.h4+ 59 'it>CS l:la4 60 l:.g7+ 'it>f8 61 l:.xb7 1-0 24) 23 J:I.xa2!

The first sacrifice defuses Black's counterplay... 23...'ifxa2 24 li)xh7! ... and the second breaks through on the kingside. 24...li)xb7 25 'ifxg6+ 'it>f8 26

J:.xb7 J:.xb7 27 'ifxh7

The liquidation has left White with a large advantage. Black's king is

permanently exposed while White has sufficient pawns nearby to be relatively safe. White must try to bring his knight up to support his queen.

27 'tfg8 •••

After 27 ...11Vxa4 28 li)g4 1!t'al + 29 'it>f2 'iVa2+ 30 'it>gl 'iVf7 3 1 11Vh8+ 'it>e7 32 'ifxe5+ 'it>£8 33 11t'xa5 White has enough material to win, while 27 ... 11Va l + 28 li)dl 11t'xa4 29 � 'ifal + 30 'it>f2 gives White a decisive attack. 28 'lfh4 lbd7 29 lLlg4 'i!fb3 30 11Vh6+ 'it>e7 31 'ifxc6 'ifbl+ 32 �

'ifb2+

The alternative was 32 ...'ifb6+ 33

'iVxb6 lLlxb6 34 .i.b5 J:lc8 35 lL!xe5 'it>d6 36 f4 l:.xc3 37 g4, although this ending should be a win, for example 3 7 ... 'it>c5 38 g5 'it>d4 39 g6 'it>xe4 40 g7 J:l.c8 41 .i.d3+! 'it>d4 42 .ib7 li)xa4 43 lLld7, followed by ltlf8.

33 .tel l:.b8 34 ltlxeS! ltlxeS 35 'ifcS+ 'it>e6 36 11Vd5+ 'M6 37 'it'd6+ 'it>r7 38 'ifxeS 'ifb6+ 3IJ 'ifd4 'ifxd4+ 40 cxd4 l:.b4 41 .i.bS! llxd4 Or 4I ...l:.xb5 42 axb5 'it>e7 43 'it>e3.

42 'it>e3 l:.b4 43 g4 'it>e6 44 gS l:.b3+ 45 'it>(4 J:l.b4 45 ...l:.xb5 46 axb5 a4 47 b6 'it>d7

48 g6 a3 49 b7 'it>c7 50 g7 will pro mote with check. 46 .i.c6 'it>d6 47 .i.dSl:lbl 48 �

lt>e7 49 f4 llal SO 'it>g6 llxa4 51 'it>g7 :at sz rs m 53 r6+ 'it>d6 54 g6 1-0

111

SOLUTIONS

25) 32 �dS!

60 .Jlxd7 61 ltJr6+ Wg6 62 liJxd7 ..tr7 63 'iii>d2 'iii>e6 64 liJb6 hS 65 h4 f4 66 hxgS g8 2S 'if:xh7+ � 26 'ifh8+ rooks makes the win easy. lii>e7 27 'ifh4+ gS 3S lDe7 36 %:txe6 fxg4 37 'iWh4 J:d7 38 :tbe1 1ii>rs 39 fS 1·0 27 . .lii>fS 28 axb5 leaves White well ahead on material, position and After 39 ... liJxf5 40 :tf6+ %:tf7 41 lhf5 %:txf5 42 'ifd8+ lii>f7 43 lle7+ attack! Black loses his queen. 28 'ifxgS+ f6 28 ...liJf6 29 :tf3 is deadly. 29 llh7+ 'iii>d6 30 'ifd2+ lii>c7 31 26) By far the simplest solution is 42 cxbS 1-0 .!Llef6+! gxf6 43 :g4+ 1-0, as White 3 l ...�xe4 32 be4 1i'xe4 33 l:tcl+ will be a clear rook up. lii>b 8 34 l:txd7 is devastating. .••

•••

••.

.

27)

56 l:td1 liJcS 57 d7 Winning a piece, after which the remaining task is purely technical. 57 ...liJe6 58 d8'6' liJxd8 59 :Xd8

gS 60 l%d7

A neat echo of the earlier combi nation. The exchange of rooks makes the task simpler.

29) 45 1i'xe6 1-0, since 45 ...l:txe6 al lows mate, while 45 .. .fxe6 46 l:txh7 lii>xh7 47 l:thl wins the bishop in perfect safety.

30) 14 liJxd4! �xg2 15 liJfS 'ife6 16 1VgS


114

Defending the knight on f5 with gain of tempo.

16 ltJe8 17 'ittxg2 h6 18 'ii'g4 �f6 19 'ii'f3 •••

The extra pawn has been consoli dated and, as a bonus, the bishop on

b2 has been activated. The rest is straightforward. 19 .e4 20 dxe4 �e4 21 :Cell 'itth7 22 bxcS bxcS 23 l:tdS �f6 24 ••

.hf6 �6 25 :XeS lhb8 26 l:td1 l:tb2 27 ll:ld4 fie7 28 l:tbS 1-0

Index of Opponents Numbers refer to pages. A bold number indicates that Anand was White. Adams 1 30, 318, 304, 324 Agdestein 16 Andersson 325 Bareev 81, 110 Beliavsky 54, 136, 32 1 Benjamin 23, 142 Campora 3 1 9 Dreev 320 Fta�nik 119 Garcia Palermo 322 Gdanski 3 1 7 Gelfand 106, 189, 324 Gerber 319 Gil 3 1 7 Hamed 316 Hiibner 87 lllescas 322 lnkiov 7 lvanchuk 92, 102, 207, 253, 3 1 9, 325 Izeta 115 Kamsky 98, 148, 157, 164, 171 Karpov 59, 211, 244 Kasparov 67, 74, 184 Khalifman 297, 323 Kramnik 225, 257 325 Kuijf, M. 40 ,

Lautier 216, 220 Levitt 3 1 7 Ljubojevic 321 Morovic Fernandez 49 Nikolic 234, 291 Ninov 12 Oll l26, 262 Petursson 43 Piket 273, 323 Polgar, I. 153, 198, 325 Reinderrnann 269 Robatsch 322 Ruban 320 Salov 321 Shirov 238 , 311 Sokolov, I. 90 Spassky 34 Svid1er 277 Tal 29 Thipsay 318 Timrnan 176, 321 Tomczak 3 1 8 Topa1ov 202, 249, 283 Tukmakov 3 1 6 Van Wely 323 Ye Rongguang 320

Index of Openings Numbers refer to pages. A bold number indicates that Anand was White. Caro-Kann Defence 283 Dutch Defence 291 English 29 French Defence 74, 81, 110, 311 Griinfeld Defence 277 Petroff Defence 87, 102, 257 Pirc Defence 54, 115, 198 Ponziani Opening 40 Queen's Gambit Queen's Gambit Accepted 106,

211 Semi-Slav 59, 225, 234 Slav Defence 126 Queen's Pawn 43 Ruy Lopez 16, 207 Arkhangelsk 157

Breyer 34 Chigorin 273 Flohr-Zaitsev 164 MBIIer 238, 249, 262, 314 Worrall Attack 98, 176 Scandinavian Defence 216 Sicilian Grand Prix Attack 189 Kan 12, 130 Maroczy Bind 49 Najdorf 119, 136, 148, 153,

171, 220, 269, 297 Richter-Rauzer 7, 23, 92,

Scheveningen 67, 90, 184, 202 Trompowsky 244

Sym bols + ++ # !!

? ??

Check Double check Mate Good move Excellent move Bad move Blunder

142,

253

!? ?!

Interesting move Dubious move 1 -0 White wins 0-1 Black wins 1h-1h Draw nth match game (n) (D) Diagram follows

Vishy Anand: My Best Games of Chess

My Best Games Of Chess 1908-1923

My Best Games of Chess: 1935-1957

My Best Games of Chess - 1935-1957

My Best Games of Chess 1938-1945

My Best Games (Progress in Chess)

Nezhmetdinov's Best Games of Chess

Tarrasch's Best Games of Chess

My Best Games

1000 Best Short Games of Chess

Keres' Best Games of Chess 1931-1948

My One Hundred Best Games

Vishy Anand: El Supertalento del Ajedrez (Caissa) Spanish

Capablanca's Best Chess Endings: 60 Complete Games

500 Master Games of Chess

Copyright on Chess Games

Memorable Chess Games

Bobby Fischer's Chess Games

Capablanca's Best Chess Endings

Korchnoi's Chess Games

Capablanca Best Chess Endings

Korchnoi's 400 Best Games

Tal's 100 Best Games

Korchnoi's 400 Best Games

My Book of Alphabet Games

My Chess Career

Chess Sparks - Short and Bright Games of Chess

My 60 Memorable Games

My 60 Memorable Games

My 60 Memorable Games

Vishy Anand: My Best Games of Chess

My Best Games Of Chess 1908-1923

My Best Games of Chess: 1935-1957

My Best Games of Chess - 1935-1957

My Best Games of Chess 1938-1945

My Best Games (Progress in Chess)

Nezhmetdinov's Best Games of Chess

Tarrasch's Best Games of Chess

My Best Games

1000 Best Short Games of Chess

Keres' Best Games of Chess 1931-1948

My One Hundred Best Games

Vishy Anand: El Supertalento del Ajedrez (Caissa) Spanish

Capablanca's Best Chess Endings: 60 Complete Games

500 Master Games of Chess

Copyright on Chess Games

Memorable Chess Games

Bobby Fischer's Chess Games

Capablanca's Best Chess Endings

Korchnoi's Chess Games

Capablanca Best Chess Endings

Korchnoi's 400 Best Games

Tal's 100 Best Games

Korchnoi's 400 Best Games

My Book of Alphabet Games

My Chess Career

Chess Sparks - Short and Bright Games of Chess

My 60 Memorable Games

My 60 Memorable Games

My 60 Memorable Games

Recommend Documents